I'm not disputing the mathematical possibility of ET's existence, or even visitation (I remember visiting the Greenbank Radio Astronomy Observatory as a kid, and learning about the possibility then), but that still isn't proof.

You could easily say instead of von Neumann probes, the aliens are inconsequential energy beings while in space, and turn solid when they hit our atmosphere. That's the beauty of speculation about unknown (and perhaps unknowable) phenomena. You can ascribe any traits you want to it, and can't be proven wrong.

As for the invisible pink unicorns, who's to say they don't exist?

they aren't identifying alien space crafts, they're identifying "UFO's". What is unknow to them must be unknow to everyone else, thus the exsistance of UFOs

ok ok. i see where youre coming from.
however, astronauts have apparently seen ufos in the sky. as solid unidentified flying objects, out of our atmosphere.

And it's a leap of faith from a solid unidentified flying object, which could be a panel from the booster rocket, or ice, or any number of prosaic things, to an alien from another planet.

i never claimed it was being controlled by ET. however, its Not a leap of faith when the Astronauts are seeing it, and observing it. as opposed to a civillian who would know Nothing about the craft, and whats a panel from the booster rocket and what clearly Isnt.
it just means, youre saying the people we send into space Clearly arent trained well enough, or could be delusional not know a panel from an asteroid. and the fighter pilots in the sky, protecting our country are flying around chasing thier imagination .................
now thats a scary thought.

I would say of course aliens exist because you cant just start something fake and then let AREA 51 be build and the sightings and everything, aliens will eventually reveal themselves.

yeah but area 51 is there to test experimental aircraft. ET or no ET technology. theyve always been working on things there. just regular jets, or high tech spy planes. area 51 wasnt built for ET craft if thats what you were thinking.
but S-4 is where the ufos apparently are there.
(are you typing on a phone or psp? cause its tough to read)

In The Demon-Haunted World by Carl Sagan, there was a chapter entitled "The Dragon in my Garage," which posed the same silly anology as the invisible pink unicorn. An individual claims a fire-breathing dragon lives in his garage. The listener asks for verification and says, "show me." When they arrive at the garage, there is no dragon in sight. The claimant then counters by saying, "She's an invisible dragon." After the skeptic proposes to put flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragons footprints, the believer counters with, "this dragon floats in the air." The skeptic suggests an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire. The believer counters with, "the invisible fire is also heatless." The skeptic proposes spray-painting the dragon to make her visible, but the believer once again has an excuse: "She's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick." Carl Sagan went on to say, "Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there is no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true."

In that sense it is safe to say that the UFO phenomenon does not apply to such senseless arguments. In other words, the invisible pink unicorn and "dragon in my garage" analogies are not applicable. The reason being because UFOs, as one would expect, cause a wide range of physical effects on the surrounding environment in the vicinity of the craft upon close approach or landing. These effects include, electromagnetic effects, vehicle interference, physical trace cases (see Ted Phillips catalogue), radar-visual cases, and a wide range of physiological effects are also noted. Observers sometimes receive ultra-violet eye and skin burns resembling welders burn or sunburn, respectively. Closer observers have even received flesh burn injuries with all the symptoms of radiation poisoning.

A notable quote by Dr. James E. McDonald concerning such physiological effects as part of his statement on UFOs to U.S. House Committee on Science and Aeronatics, 1968 Symposium on UFOs
is worth noting here:

"A person who is almost unaware of the ramifications of the UFO evidence may think it absurd to assert that people have been paralyzed in proximity to UFOs; the skeptic might find it inconceivable that such cases would go unnoticed in press and medical literature. Far from it, I regret to have to say, on the basis of my own investigations. I have encountered cases where severe bodily damage was done, or where evident hazard of damage was involved, yet the witness and his family found ridicule mounting so much faster than sympathy that it was regarded wiser to quietly forget the whole thing."

I encourage anyone who is interested in the physical effects produced by UFOs to read Unconventional Flying Objects: A Scientific Analysis by former NASA engineer Paul Hill. Another book focusing purely on physical evidence is Peter Sturrocks UFO Enigma. ufophysical.com is also a good source for UFO reports with physical effects.

I also uploaded this brief clip on youtube that summarizes physical trace case evidence from the 1979 documentary "UFOs are Real." The History Channels UFO Files episode entitled "Alien Encounters" dealt with physical trace evidence and is also viewable on youtube. Part one is viewable here.

Here are two example cases concerning only indentations caused apparently by landing gear:

On February 6, 1966, at Aluche, Spain, a suburb of Madrid, Jose Louis Jordan watched a luminous, fiery disk approach, hover momentarily, and land at about 8:00pm. It was reported to have lowered a tripod landing gear which it sat down on. The saucer was reportedly shaped like "two big rimmed pie pans placed rim-to-rim and was estimated to be 10 to 12 meters in diameter. It sat there for a few minutes before retracting its landing gear and shot off into the distance. Jordan was trying to locate other witnesses, but it took off before he could get anyone elses attention. Pressed into the hard soil were three neat indentations evidently from the landing gear pads arranged in an equilateral triangle with each imprint separated from the other by 19.7 feet. The prints were 6 by 12 and 5 inches deep. There was also a raised X-print in the center of the impression. The prints were clear-cut, so there was no question they were made by a heavy or massive vehicle in a verticle landing. (Flying Saucers Over Spain by Antonio Rebera, also referenced in Unconventional Flying Objects by Paul Hill)

A sighting in Quaroble, France at about 10:15 pm on September 10, 1954 involved sighting of a dark object resting on the railroad. The witness also claimed to see humanoids. Associating the beings with the dark object Marius Dewilde, the lone witness, ran to separate the beings from the craft at which time a bright beam from the object stopped him. He later told police that he "could only stand there as if paralyzed. I could not move my arms or legs. I could not yell. I was helpless when that light was on me." This sensational account was investigated by the French Air Force and Department of Territorial Security. Right where Dewilde said the object had rested, five deep indentations were pressed into the wooden crossties of the train tracks. Experts who examined the indentations and the crosstie material estimated the weight of the object to be 30 tons. (Flying Saucers: Serious Business p. 58-59)

Paul Hill estimated the mass to be about 27,200 kilograms of mass. He then divided the mass by the volume (axial-length and cross-diameter estimations were noted in the original report) and got 965 kilograms per cubic meter. He noted, "Since water has a mass density of 1000 kg per cubic meter, the Quaroble UFO was about 96% as dense as water, very close to the density of a submarine. It is several times more dense than a jet aircraft."

Such cases are evidence of the fact that these objects, whatever their origin, are solid and quite obviously manufactured craft. In the famous Soccoro, New Mexico case with Lonny Zamora, it was noted that the landing gear had actually been adjusted, due to the fact that the craft rested on unlevel ground, to stabilize the craft. About 1/6th of these over 4,000 physical trace cases from more than 70 (some sources say over 90) countries also include sightings of humanoids. If we can establish the fact that these craft are solid, manufactured, and intelligently controlled, the question is: Who made them? The most likely hypothesis in such cases, is the ETH. Once again, we do not have proof of origin, but we do have strong evidence of manufacture. From there, you are free to draw your own conclusions as to the origin of these craft.

Considering the objects in question were of intelligently controlled flying machines as opposed to natural phenomena, then natural phenomena, whether known, or unknown, had nothing to do with those objects.

I have to say. For many years i was firmly in the camp that UFOs were part of an age old phenomenon that had it roots in an inter dimensional explanation. I still do, to a large extent. However, the Fast Walker sightings are most fascinating, as they clearly show, solid objects swinging in from deep space, grazing the Earth's atmosphere and travelling back out into space.

The thought does strike me that these might be our old inter dimensional friends on a *wind up*. Their way of saying.."Hi guys we are out here as well", but I am not totally convinced about that as yet.

My own pet theory is that. The inter dimensional types were a lot happier to mingle, if that is the right word, amongst us quite openly back when mankind was, scientifically naive, but the use of psycho reactive drugs was common place. In those sort of states it is far easier to mentally *process* and come to terms, with weird****.

I have a feeling that, during the early stages of the enlightenment they felt that we had drifted away from being able to *cope* and it is only now, with the advent of quantum theory and its' spin offs like string theory, that they feel we have the knowledge, scientifically, to cope with understanding what they are.

This i will say. It is a real eye opener to chat with those people who still use *other worldly* ritualistic experiences as part of their culture. Their take on the phenomenon is largely disregarded and i think you might well be surprised just how Passée they are about it all and what their understanding of it is.

Thanks! Great post!!!

Case 32 (Minot AFB and the B-52 aircrew interview) and case 40, (1976 Iranian UFO incident) are very interesting cases indeed! I presented the Minot AFB incident not long ago and this was taken from your link.

To clarify for the curious reader, skyeagle was referring to the cases discussed in the article accessible through the electromagnetic effects hyperlink in my previous post. The article was entitled "A Preliminary Study of Sixty Four Pilot Sighting Reports Involving Alleged Electromagnetic Effects on Aircraft Systems" by Richard F. Haines and Dominique F. Weinstein of NARCAP, which was published on May 15, 2001.

I also find the Fast Walker incident fasinating as well. Over the years, engineers from Aerojet, makers of the DSP satelllite, have been revealing documents and data, that UFOs have in fact, been tracked by their own satellites and that their satellite also tracked the 1976 Iranian UFO incident.

I live less than 50 miles from the Aerojet facility and have several friends who are currently employed there.

I've noticed that there are some here who continue to say that time traveling humans and even in one case , pink unicorns!, are equal to the possiblity of advanced ET life here on this world, and yet claim to be scientific in mind. Time travel is a scientific impossibility. Need I even remark on pink unicorns. ET is, as of yet, still possible, and it is still possible that there is advanced ET life, and even the possiblity that they are here. No matter how remote that possibility may be. At least its possible. ( Note the word possible ) . Whatever the intention, to equate the impossible ( time traveling humans ) and the possible ( very advanced ET life ) , it is a misrepresentation of science and even logic itself.

But I will add, that it could very well be humans behind it. Though in some events it does seem very unlikely.

I'd like to take exception to this part in particular. The pro-ET-UFO camp seems to take it for granted that there is a definite cause and effect between UFOs and the physical effects noted above.

I came across a recent Straight Dope article which, on the surface, has nothing to do with the topic at hand (UFOs), but makes my point in this post:

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/080620.html
Read the sentence again: "no one's counting how often vehicles stall in places that aren't railroad crossings." How many cars stall or have problems when UFOs aren't around? How many people notice burns or scratches or other minor injuries and don't ascribe them to UFOs? I myself was at work the other day, and noticed a rather large scratch on my thumb, with no idea whatever how it happened. Does that mean I was abducted and aliens somehow experimented on me?

A question: there's much speculation as to the motivation of these "aliens", and of course without finding out from them firsthand, we have no way of knowing, but we have both extremes of ideas in the pro-UFO camp: They're here to study us but not interfere (which is why they're hiding), and they are here to intervene (which is why they abduct us and fool with our cars). Talk about eating your cake and having it too!

Considering that we're waiting for proof of your statement that intelligently controlled flying machines are the cause, I'd say you're jumping to conclusions.

Why are invisible pink unicorns (or the Flying Spaghetti Monster for that matter) impossible? As believers like to point out so often, look at the rate our technology has changed just over the last 100 years. Who's to say there won't be a breakthrough in physics in the next 100 years, and time travel will be possible?

And again, I'll post that I believe in life on other worlds, and even believe there could be spacefaring civilizations somewhere in our galaxy (or least elsewhere in the universe). I'm just not convinced it's come here.

Comon Sky, youv been out of the loop for years, check your "record", its ancient history. You have no "top secret" insight on the UFO mystery being ET related.

Now seems to be the time to check a bunch out.
The Atlantic seems to be red hot right now.
Maybe they are pissed about something.
Who knows?

Sorry Hazard but i think you will find that Sky probably has a similar experience to that i have.

By that i mean. Off the record and in private many people who have never said a word in public confessing just how often these incidents happen.

Through a close friend i have spoken personally to an ex extremely high ranking military officer who firmly believes, given his own experiences, that we are indeed, being visited by nuts and bolts craft that are not man made. When i say high ranking i mean one of the people who had the say so and rank to request a nuclear missile launch while they were on station.

there are times when it is ultimately frustrating to see someone on TV or in the press saying "There is nothing interesting in the phenomenon|" when you know in private that person thinks exactly the opposite but is forced to tow *the party line* becasue of their position being under threat.

That is where the sceptics are, in part to blame for their holier than thou attitude down through the years. It is idiots such as Randi that have made it harder for many people to be upfront and honest about what they actually believe because a third rate conjurer, desperate to keep a career that was going nowhere alive, do so by being happy to pour scorn on those who want to talk about what they have seen and what they know.

The sad truth is, the more vocal sceptics simply cannot be trusted to keep their mouths shut. The upshot of that being that, many who would love to have a quiet word with these people simply avoid them altogether.

And please, don't even think about posting some infantile remark about. "Well you would say that, yet more stuff you cannot prove etc etc"...

I KNOW FOR AN UNASSAILABLE FACT that, virtually every person involved in UFO research would love to name at least one person who has told them, off camera, that UFOs are nothing like as silly a subject as many would have you believe.

This thread is full of the childish insinuations that only *nutters* believe in UFOs and that anyone with any real common-sense does not. It is also full of hypocrisy from the same accusers as when, they are pointed to someone who is far from that sort of person they, more often than not, just immediately ignore it and return to trying to focus on the likes of David Icke.

So there is the truth. One of the chief reasons, you lack some of the evidence you so crave, is because of the infantile actions of some of your fellow sceptics.

The proof has always been undeniable, and radar and ELINT data and other evidence have confirmed that fact, and that is why I have been waiting for you and other UFO debunkers to answer the question about those obviously, intelligently controlled objects in regards to the 1976 Iranian UFO incident:

Were they ours? Or, those of someone else?

Hazzard, you are consistent with getting the facts all wrong and this is just another example. In addition, the aeronautical information that I provided to prove my case, has been updated and current as of 2008, and look what you posted!

Also:



Isn't it amazing how UFO debunkers tend to side-step the evidence after they demanded it?!

Now, once again, Hazzard, were those objects in regards to the 1976 Iranian UFO incident:

Ours? Or, those of someone else?

You must know that if the UFO debunkers don't answer that question soon, I am going to take full advantage of their difficult situation and prove beyond any doubt that the UFO debunkers are just all talk and nothing of substance.

Simply amazing, isn't it?! I have even seen claims of UFO debunkers that the UFOs were "flying monkeys," which is why I have stated the past that one of the biggest mysteries in the universe is the mindset of the typical UFO debunker.

Why not prove beyond any doubt that life exists beyond Earth? That would earn you everlasting fame, fortune, and quite probably a Nobel Prize.

All they have to do is to examine NORAD's data evidence on the ebjects as they approached Earth from deep space, which is similar to the data that Dr.Carl Sagan was seeking from the Air Force in 1968.

Who is going to get the credit? The scientist and engineers at White Sands who documented their data in regards to the flying saucers they observed in space? Or, astronomers? Perhaps. the engineers at Aerojet who have been releasing data and documents at conferences on Fast Walkers?

who the hell said that?

I've been looking around for information on the JAL case, and found an interesting thread on a forum that Bruce Maccabee participated in. I won't say it's open and shut, but in my experience, there's usually more than one cause to a mystery, and if the participants in the thread are to be believed, they've come across those causes (clouds, vapor trails, solar activity, and so on).

Page 3 (it's only a 3 page thread) is particularly informative. I only offer it as one skeptical resource, and not as an argument from authority.

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=158668

I've also done a little searching on fast walkers, but admit I'm not familiar with it. Can you please elaborate?

1986 was one of the most inactive times for sunspot activity in recent memory...In fact, in the last 20 years i believe there have been just two years with less sunspot activity. Given the Aurora is directly linked to this it is a point worth remebering and one conveniently left out of the data on that page.

http://www.nicap.org/walker.htm fastwalker link...

I always look at what I post, before posting. It has become painfuly obvious that you dont. You believe that what your posts mean something to the rest of us.

We already know that you, and some of the other believers, are sold on this belief.

It doesnt matter how many times you post the same old "evidence" that has you convinced, its not good enough, not for us, not for the rest of the world wide mainstream scientists. Yes!..There are some, no matter what job/education they have, that believes that some of the UFOs are alien crafts, but, do they have the evidence to back their belief??

NO THEY DONT.

Sure, they have enough to convince you, but not the rest of us. Not mainstream.



No it isnt. Your "evidence" is simply non existing.



Iv told you this before, and Ill tell you again...I dont know, and neither do you. For all we know UFOs might be some other phenomenon, such as psychic projections, time travelers from our future, a terrestrial still undiscovered civilization, or life form, or many other similarly bizarre possibilities. There is no way for you, or me, to know for sure!

Could be ET, could be something else!?

At this time we just dont know what some of these UFOs are, or were they come from.

I know that this is important to you Sky! There might be the only thing in your life that matters?! You obviously need this, soooo much to be real, that it clouding your logical thinking ability!

You are lost in your belief.

Like Hoagland, Greer and Friedman, you are a credulous believer. Like them, why not get something from this, like money...

Write a book, or two!

Yes they do. Can we start using the word proof? Evidence we have, proof we do not. You can have evidence without proof, but just because you don't have proof does not mean you don't have evidence. I'm getting tired of having to point that out. It's a bit petty to argue the fact that there is no proof that UFOs are ET in origin because we already know that. We're speaking of evidence, not proof.




Mainstream science hasn't reviewed the evidence.




If you prefer one of those hypotheses over the ETH, then so be it. Although, the ETH certainly appears, at the present time, to be the most plausible. Perhaps we should refer back to use of the term "alien," rather than extraterrestrial. Would that be better?




I'm not a fan of Hoagland, and Greer is about as deranged as David Icke, but Stan I would consider an objective investigator. Although you didn't make the claim that he wasn't, I just thought I'd point that out. Stan has never made a statement he couldn't back up, and never once have I heard him use the word "proof" with the exception of the Cosmic Watergate -- which he can prove. Other than that, his statements are simply that "the evidence is overwhelming..." which appears to be true. He cites large scale scientific studies, and doesn't simply ask you to take his word for it. I'm quite satisfied with his work. But as far as monetary gain, I think you could say the same about Michael Shermer and those in the skeptical community who also write books (more than Stan) as well as lecture. Phill Klass wrote 7 books, Stan has written 4.

Its getting 90 proof in here sometimes.

You might want to check out the rest of the story.


Japan Airlines Encounters Flying Saucers
Reported around the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwvYmIdhUpM&NR=1



Senior FAA official comments on the Japan Airlines UFO Encounter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_w1OPgoR5M&feature=related



More, on the encounter of Japan Airlines Flt 1628

http://www.nicap.org/jal1628.htm



The Japan Airlines inicident ranks up there with this incident.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tYGhZ2X0I0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ9ptKAAwYA...feature=related

It is all very simple, which obviously, you don't understand, and that is, the evidence is very clear and you are ignoring it.

It is very clear the evidence suppots the beleivers, and that is one reason why the UFO denbunkers refuse to take on the questions relating to the 1976 Iranian UFO incident.



"Us, meaning the folks at CSICOP, The Skeptic's Dictionary, THe Skeptical Inquirer, Tim Printy, etc. The same folks who are still claiming that a Project Mogul balloon flight that never was, was responsible for the Roswell incident, in addition to other silly claims that have been proven ridicules.



Once again, the facts, data, and other evidence supports the reality of the objects in question as intelligently controlled flyihg vehicles whose advanced technology exludes our own aircraft.

You can go here.

http://www.anomalies.net/ufo/gov/dsp/dsp-001.ram

Yes, we do!

Are you now willing to tackle the questions relating to the 1976 Iranian UFO dogfight?

When I click that link, it tries to download to my computer with a message that it's an unknown source. I'd rather be more careful and avoid any sort of virus or other potential dangers, so could you please point me to another site? Thanks.

You can also go here.

http://www.nicap.org/walker.htm

Not likely at all, since the data and other evidence confirms the objects as intelligently controlled flying machines and the specifics of evidence proves they are not ours.

_______________________________________________________________________________


Port Lyautey (Morocco) and Dakar (Senegal)

Air Force B-17 UFO Sighting


Witnesses....................................... Description..................................................... Date

crew + passenger................. one disc-shaped object, shining like aluminium....... May 25, 1945


]http://www.ufoevidence.org/newsite/files/WeinsteinPilotCatalog.pdf

__________________________________________________________________________

Notice that the date of the flying disc sighting, which was two years before Kenneth Arnold's sighting, but then again, flying saucers have been reported for centuries around the world.

That link works. Thanks.

Okay, I read the link, and searched a little bit, and came across this post on the BAUT forum. Is this an accurate description of how the DSP works? Because if the DSP does in fact just look down, how was it determined the UFO came from outerspace?

http://www.bautforum.com/life-space/43788-...tml#post1119643

Calling Lilly: Calling Lilly! could help Skyeagle and Hazzard kiss and make up? Please,its clear to me that they both have good commucation skills and very intelligent, but to solve a problem we must look at the big picture and all work together. IMO Skyeagle has done a wonderful job of listing so many actual reports.These dont need to be proven beond the fact that all or most of them by quite skilled and some expert witnesses.It in its self is proof of a sighting of unknown objects.And the U.S. Government has made reffrences to the deep space radar locks on said items. And stated that they are not! ours. But from Deep space. Give Sky some credit,where credit is due Guys! IMO but remember DONTEATUS

Ronald S. Regehr

For the next 25+ years, Regehr was an integral
part of the DSP (Defense Support Program) team,
responsible for developing not only the
specifications of the DSP spy satellite itself,
but also the ground data-processing software
and interfaces.

Interest in UFOs was rekindled through his profession.

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/8827/bio.html

The object passed in front of the sensor field of the DSP. Now, in the video, it stated that the object was tracked for another 9 minutes after passing in front of the sensor field of the DSP satellite and it was also tracked as it approached the Earth at 22,000 mph. The video is not telling the rest of the story, and I have highlighted certain information, so the question is:

What other sensors of NORAD were involved in this incident that are not listed in the video or the information that I posted?

Im not ignoring anything. I want mainstream science to tell me that this is real.

Here, you obviously need to do some homework. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_scientific_method

I agree. Eburacum and Gwiz, from BAUT, talked about that. This is from the link you posted about the Fast Walker incident.

Then, don't ignore this because it is just another piece of a puzzle where scientist have documented the data on flying saucers they were observing.

How Scientist Tracked a Flying Saucer

http://www.nicap.org/true-mc.htm

Eburacum, has known me very well over the years and he was the person who had claimed that temperature inversion was responsible for the 1952 Washington D.C. UFO incidents, that is why I have referenced the Air Force's 1969 report to prove him wrong, which simply means that he is just another UFO debunker who is loose with the facts, and, they are just as loose with the DSP satellite incident as well, and you used him and others like him as your reference???

You should use better references than those who have NO clue as to what is going on.