Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 4 votes

Festive UFO thread.


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#46    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,760 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 23 December 2010 - 05:48 PM

Hey BooNyzarC, you make some interesting points there about headscratcher UFO incidents but I also think it's the case that a person has to be highly sceptical of some the 'official' government UFO explanations - theres a thread with case examples here and many of the 'USAF debunks' look to be spurious, contrived or just plain ridiculous - here's what the senior physicist at the Institute for Atmospheric Physics had to say about them:



Quote

"As a result of several trips to project Bluebook,Ive had an opportunity to examine quite carefully and in detail the types of reports that are made by Bluebook personnel.In most cases, I have found that theres almost no correlation between so-called "evaluations and explanations" that are made by Bluebook and the facts of the case...
There are hundreds of good cases in the Air Force files that should have led to top-level scientific scrutiny of this problem,years ago,yet these cases have been swept under the rug in a most disturbing way by Project Bluebook investigators and their consultants."

Dr James McDonald -Senior physicist at the Institute for Atmospheric Physics and professor in the Department of Meteorology at the University of Arizona


Cheers.


#47    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 23 December 2010 - 06:54 PM

Hey Karl, I agree with you that some explanations that have been offered on particular cases are laughable.  That doesn't mean that there couldn't some other prosaic explanation for the sighting or case though.

For example, a recent "head scratcher" case was the Silver Surfer UFO earlier this month.  There were several videos of this odd sighting from different angles and different times.  It was downright weird and I was puzzled.  Bill Nye offered a possible explanation that the images look a lot like sea monkeys, so it could potentially be a hoax, a faked video.  To be honest, when I watched the videos originally I drew a similar comparison but didn't mention it because I thought it would be unlikely that all of these videos could be easily faked.

Later we discovered that it was a couple of sky divers with flares.  Very simple explanation, but the preposterous one that the science guy offered as a possibility now makes him look like a debunker.  Hynek received a similar bum image with his swamp gas explanation, I'm sure you recall.  And other skeptical attempts at explaining have resulted in the person proposing the possibility being painted in a negative debunker light.

These people who offer possible explanations, even if they later turn out to be something else, never seem to be able to live down their error; even if they openly admit that the newer explanation makes much more sense.  I find that a bit odd, but I my opinion about why they get this bum wrap is in itself an effort by the believer crowd to blanketly discredit them in the hopes that any future suggestions they might offer as explanation aren't even considered.

I'm not saying you do this, of course, but just commenting in general about how biased the believer side becomes against critical inquirers if they've made a mistake.

I think I've unintentionally gone off on a side tangent though... :unsure2:   Sorry for the slightly off topic rant, just had a thought and ran with it.


Back to your response, most definitely it is important on both sides to make every possible effort to be as objective as possible.  The list of differences you posted between UFO skeptics and UFO cynics can be applied to both sides.  I'll quote the cynics side of things here with a few emboldened additions to illustrate what I mean.

Quote

Pseudo-skeptics / closed-minded cynics / and don't forget blindly devoted believers...


*Automatically dismisses and denies all claims that contradict materialism and orthodoxy or their beliefs

*Is not interested in truth, evidence or facts, only in defending orthodoxy and the status quo or their beliefs

*Ignores anything that doesn't fit their a priori beliefs and assumptions

*Scoffs and ridicules their targets instead of providing solid arguments and giving honest consideration

*Has a know-it-all-attitude, never asks questions about things they don't understand, never admits that they don't know something

*Insists that everything unknown and unexplained must have a conventional materialistic explanation or is an alien

*Is judgmental and quick to draw conclusions about things they know little or nothing about

*Uses semantics and word games with their own rules of logic to try to win arguments

*Is unable to adapt and update their paradigms to new evidence
There is more than one person I can think of that fits into this list as a believer, matching just about everything to a T.

Objectivity is key in this UFO thing, in my opinion.  And contrary to some opinions about my intention, that is exactly how I try to address this phenomena.

Cheers mate, as always excellent info you've presented. :tu:


#48    archernyc

archernyc

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Joined:26 May 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:isn't it obvious?

  • Respectful of believers and skeptics alike.

Posted 23 December 2010 - 07:11 PM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 23 December 2010 - 04:29 PM, said:

Speaking from a skeptical point of view about several of these cases that Karl has posted about, some of them are simply "head-scratchers."  In that, I mean, we don't really have a lot to go on for some of them beyond the information presented, and as interesting as that information often is, it still seems to remain inconclusive.  Perhaps that is why there isn't much of a skeptical response to them?
Did you ever buy Leslie Kean's book (UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record).  I thought there were some very good examples there of real headscratchers.  What did you think?

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle

#49    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 23 December 2010 - 07:23 PM

View Postarchernyc, on 23 December 2010 - 07:11 PM, said:

Did you ever buy Leslie Kean's book (UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record).  I thought there were some very good examples there of real headscratchers.  What did you think?
I did indeed, shortly after it was released.  It is sitting right in front of me at the moment as a matter of fact.  I found the cases in there to be truly compelling as I read the book and have been going through the cases to try to more fully understand them.

The most recent one that I've gone through is the Rendlesham case.  The differences between the rendition in the book are striking compared to the additional information I've found about the case in just the last few days alone.  This is one of those cases that I no longer rank as one of the top, although I did previously.  I'd even go so far as to say that from my point of view it has been sufficiently explained prosaically and I'm currently convinced that it was essentially a non-event.

There are many in there that I need to go through as well, as time and opportunity allow.  But I've discovered through the Rendlesham investigation that I can't let myself believe the accounts in this book as they are conveyed.  They may be accurate and they may not be accurate, but I'm not going to believe it just because the story is being told by a General, a Pilot, or a Government Official.

I do still like the book though and think it was very well put together. :tu:


#50    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,760 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 23 December 2010 - 08:00 PM

BooNyzarC, can't disagree with anything you've said there mate and you're right about the lack of distinction between UFO cynics and blind believers -perhaps they've got far more in common with each other than they like to think (more 'dogmatic' than 'pragmatic' and all that).

I'd certainly say the UFO subject deserves to be treated far more seriously than it currently is though, especialy by mainstream science - Brad Sparks makes a mighty fine point in this clip and John Alexander's quote below is an interesting one although I'm not too sure on his assertions about origin.


http://video.google....772890288918446


Quote

The undeniable reality is that there are a substantial number of multi-sensor UFO cases backed by thousands of credible witnesses. In the physical domain there are many photos, videos, radar tracking, satellite sensor reports, landing traces including depressions and anomalous residual radiation, electromagnetic interference, and confirmed physiological effects. Personal observations have been made both day and night, often under excellent visibility with some at close range. Included are reports from multiple independent witnesses to the same event. Psychological testing of some observers has confirmed their mentally competence. Why is none of this considered evidence?


There are over 3000 cases reported by pilots, some of which include interference with flight controls. On numerous occasions air traffic controllers and other radar operators have noted unexplained objects on their scopes. So too have several astronomers and other competent scientists reported their personal observations. Many military officials from several countries have confirmed multi-sensor observations of UFOs. The most senior air defense officers of Russia, Brazil, Belgium and recently a former Chief of Naval Operations in Chile all have stated that UFOs are real. These cases and comments are a miniscule fraction of the total body of evidence.


Of course they do not constitute irrefutable proof. However, to state there is no evidence suggestive of intelligent extraterrestrial life simply belies the facts. Decades in duration and global in nature, there are too many hard sensor data-points and millions of eyewitnesses to ignore. We certainly can debate the significance of specific data and question whether or not it establishes a causal relationship between the observations and extraterrestrial life.However, it is only through ignorance or pomposity that one can say no evidence exists.

John B. Alexander,Ph.D.

Cheers.


#51    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,760 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 23 December 2010 - 08:22 PM

View Postarchernyc, on 23 December 2010 - 07:11 PM, said:

Did you ever buy Leslie Kean's book (UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record).  I thought there were some very good examples there of real headscratchers.  What did you think?

Hey Archernyc, I never managed that one but did you ever read 'Clear Intent' by Lawrence Fawcett and Barry Greenwood - that truly is an interesting book and it contains some pretty remarkable UFO descriptions (and government documentation).

I don't know if you've seen it before but this is also a good one by Captain Edward J. Ruppelt on free Ebook format  


Quote

Posted Image


Quote

This is Edward J. Ruppelt's memoir of his role in the seminal US Air Force UFO study projects: Projects Sign, Grudge and Blue Book. According to this account, he coined the acronym 'UFO' and put many of the official procedures for reporting and studying UFOs in place. An enjoyable read, this book captures the feel of working for the mid-20th century US military. He describes the changing attitudes of the USAF about UFOs during the early 1950s: wobbling between denial, ridicule, paranoia, and genuine inquiry.

A key point of this book is to resolve doubts about the military's role. Ruppelt makes a strong case that UFOs weren't a top secret weapons system; the reports were not disinformation by intelligence agencies; nor was there a concerted effort to cover up UFOs by the US government. Ruppelt does recount many times when the brass tried to dismiss reports without investigating them sufficiently. However, this comes across as simply standard-issue military 'cover-your-ass' behavior, not a vast conspiracy.

He gives unique details on some of the most impressive sightings on his watch. These were largely witnessed by highly trained observers such as radar operators, fighter and commercial pilots, astronomers, and other scientists, often during the course of their official duties. The Air Force group that Ruppelt worked for had access to data on top secret balloon launches and test flights, so they were able to sort out which reports could be explained in this way. He consulted with a wide range of scientific specialists, many of whom were in favor of the extraterrestrial hypothesis, and some who were skeptics.

Fully a quarter of the reports were still unexplained after this rigorous filtering. Ruppelt is decidedly agnostic, but open-minded, about the reality behind the 'unexplained' sightings.

link

Cheers.


#52    mcrom901

mcrom901

    plasmoid ninja

  • Member
  • 5,684 posts
  • Joined:29 Jan 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:multiverse

  • space debris, decided to evolve and become us!

Posted 23 December 2010 - 08:44 PM

View Postkarl 12, on 21 December 2010 - 06:46 PM, said:

Posted Image

cheers buddy...  :tu:

all the very best wishes to you too... have a great one... ho ho ho  :santa:




#53    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,760 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 23 December 2010 - 10:13 PM

Mcrom - all the best to you and yours matey!


Posted Image


#54    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 23 December 2010 - 10:29 PM

View Postkarl 12, on 23 December 2010 - 10:13 PM, said:

Mcrom - all the best to you and yours matey!


Posted Image
Love this pic Karl, very cool!  All that is missing is a gallows... ;)  Just kidding about the gallows part, of course. :lol:


#55    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,760 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 24 December 2010 - 08:30 AM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 23 December 2010 - 10:29 PM, said:

Love this pic Karl, very cool!  All that is missing is a gallows... ;)  Just kidding about the gallows part, of course. :lol:

BooNyzarC, it is rather a festive one matey -don't know if you've seen it but NARCAP have just released a new study over on this thread about spherical unidentified aerial phenomena -haven't had time to go through all of it but it looks pretty darn interesting:


Spherical UAP and Aviation Safety: A Critical Review


Am off to the pub - have a good one!


#56    Hazzard

Hazzard

    Stellar Black Hole

  • Member
  • 11,758 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside Voyager 1.

  • Being skeptical of the paranormal is a good thing.

Posted 24 December 2010 - 10:59 AM

Merry Christmas everyone.



Posted Image

I still await the compelling Exhibit A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

#57    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,760 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 24 December 2010 - 11:35 AM

View PostHazzard, on 24 December 2010 - 10:59 AM, said:

Merry Christmas everyone.

Hazzard, here's that thread about pilot UFO sightings in case you missed it - there's also a comprehensive report at this link about the UFO jet chase over Brazil in 1986 which involved multiple pilot visuals, radar confirmation and government documentary evidence.

Happy Christmas.

Edited by karl 12, 24 December 2010 - 12:05 PM.


#58    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,760 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 24 December 2010 - 12:59 PM

Two other interesting reports on the UFO/OVNI/UAP subject:


Quote

Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects -Committee on Science and Astronautics - US House of Representatives,1968.


Posted Image


Quote

"Today the House Committee on Science and Astronautics conducts a very special session, a symposium on the subject of unidentified flying objects; the name of which is a reminder to us of our ignorance on this subject and a challenge to acquire more knowledge thereof. We approach the question of unidentified flying objects as purely a scientific problem, one of unanswered questions. Certainly the rigid and exacting discipline of science should be marshaled to explore the nature of phenomena which reliable citizens continue to report"

Link











Quote

UFOs: A NEW LOOK - A Special Report by the The National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP)


Posted Image


Quote

"One of the most significant developments since 1964 has been the increasing concern over the UFO problem demonstrated by professional scientists and engineers. The growing involvement of scientists insisting on a careful review of the evidence decreases the likelihood that the problem could or would be buried or glossed over in the future before a proper evaluation is made".

Link



#59    Lilly

Lilly

    Forum Divinity

  • 17,298 posts
  • Joined:16 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Female

  • "To thine own self be true" William Shakespeare

Posted 24 December 2010 - 02:25 PM

View PostHazzard, on 24 December 2010 - 10:59 AM, said:

Merry Christmas everyone.



Posted Image

Too funny Hazz!  Posted Image

"Ignorance is ignorance. It is a state of mind, not an opinion." ~MID~

Posted Image

#60    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,760 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 24 December 2010 - 02:50 PM

View Postkarl 12, on 23 December 2010 - 10:43 AM, said:

..analysing, speculating about (or even just discussing) the nature of the objects involved in such cases as the Tehran incident, the Coyne incident, the Bariloche incident, the Minot AFB incident(s), the Portage County incident, the RAF Boulmer incident, the Shag Harbour incident etc.. should be what its all about and Ive always found it pretty dubious when 'debunkers' refuse to take into account all the facts surrounding certain cases or abjectly refuse to address specific incidents


Hi Lilly, happy Xmas to you - I just wondered if you had any opinions on the posted statements or nature of the objects involved in the incidents mentioned above.

Cheers.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users