Comment by snowwrestler | Hacker News Reader

Comment by snowwrestler | Hacker News Reader

> On a clear night in March 1967, Woodward was stargazing on the rooftop of Pensión Santa Cruz, a hotel in the heart of Seville, in Spain.... As Woodward gazed up from atop his Spanish hotel, he saw a speck of light arcing across the sky and mentally calculated its path. But as he watched the satellite, it began deviating from its expected trajectory—first by a little and then by a lot.

> Everything Woodward knew about satellites told him that what he was seeing should be impossible. It would take too much energy for a satellite to change its orbit like that, and most satellites weren’t able to shift more than a couple of degrees. And yet, he had just seen a satellite double back with his own eyes. He didn't conclude that engineers at NASA or in the Soviet Union must have secretly achieved a breakthrough in satellite propulsion. Instead, he believes he saw a spacecraft of extraterrestrial origin.

Seems more likely he spotted a reconnaissance aircraft at very high altitude. I think the U2, A-12, and SR-71 were all operational in 1967.

Or a bird. Less high up, nice white tummy, reflects the light.

Do you honestly think that somebody trained in astronomy could mistake a bird for satellite? Have you seen how satellites move? They traverse the sky in a perfectly straight and constant-motion fashion that is utterly unlike any bird.

Even a high-altitude plane such as the U-2 would be fairly difficult to misidentify as a satellite. For obvious reasons, U-2s and SR-71s and such didn't employ lights while operating at altitude; therefore the only way to see them would be via reflected light. It would need to be reasonably long after sunset, or else the sky isn't dark enough to credibly see a satellite -- but not so long after sunset that the plane would be in the earth's shadow. Satellites have a similar window of observability -- but it's much longer, because they're much higher. A high-altitude plane would have a very small window. Moreover, it would need to execute that turn without crossing the terminator: as soon as any reflecting object crosses the terminator, that reveals its altitude.

That he made a mistake is much more plausible than that it was aliens.

That he was hallucinating is much more plausible than that it was aliens.

That he was lying or had a false memory is much more plausible than that it was aliens.

Pretty much any mundane explanation is much more plausible than that it was aliens.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

> Do you honestly think that somebody trained in astronomy could mistake a bird for satellite?

Yes.

> Have you seen how satellites move?

Yes.

> They traverse the sky in a perfectly straight and constant-motion fashion that is utterly unlike any bird.

That's exactly like any migrating bird. Like a goose. Well, until they suddenly switch direction and continue at a constant speed and height till they go over the horizon. Have you ever seen birds migrating?

Also, if lights in the sky that look like meteors but suddenly switch direction are aliens, then I've seen them hundreds of times walking home from the pub (no streetlights here). Never yet been offered a lift!

Absolutely, I think that it's much more likely that an astronomer made an observation error than he saw an alien spacecraft.

Extraordinary claims, etc.

The SR-71 cruised on afterburners, which produce light. Not sure if it was bright enough to be seen on the ground, though.

> Have you seen how satellites move? They traverse the sky in a perfectly straight and constant-motion fashion

Except this one didn't.

Would a satellite on a low-altitude Highly Elliptical Orbit be a possibility? From Earth, the apogee would make an HEO satellite go in one direction then suddenly change course. With a low enough altitude, this could seem fast enough.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com