Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
karl 12

UFOs 'Escort' Mexican Aircraft -

74 posts in this topic

* SIGH *

So now you are saying that the pilot could have been suffering due to lack of oxygen ? I don’t recall seeing that in any of the reports ?[...]

I think I answered this question in my previous (to this one) post.

[...] Personal opinion is it ? Don’t suppose you can provide a source to back this assumption , medical records of the pilot ?[...]

Not my personal opinion, but someone did brought hypoxia as one of the explanations to pilot's experience. Maybe it was suggested by medical staff, who examined pilot after incident, maybe other pilots, I simply don't know.

[...] What ? Best you go and read up on what it really means My link [...]

But thats exactly my point: explanation "god's hand" does not require assumptions, nor speculations - it simply is.

[...] You assume way too much , It is an explanation of what could have happened but certainly not the only one .[...]

Did I said thats the only one possible explanation? BTW, do, for example, ET explanation requires less assumption than human fallibility, which is proven fact.

[...] All right lets look at this from another angle , If you can prove that the pilot was hallucinating due to high altitude or that the radar (s) were both faulty and the second pilot didn't exist how about you bring it ?

[...]

Well, it can't be proven otherwise, isn't it? (About hallucinations bit later)

BTW, if you see "ghost" on your TV screen, it does not mean your TV set is faulty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...] - what severity of Hypoxia do you think is required before the symptoms can include hallucinations?[...]

Hallucinations were experienced by healthy (with no psychological, nor physiological problems) climbers at the altitudes as low as 3000 m, 4500 m (P.Brugger et al, Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol. 1999 Jan;12(1):67-71.). Was hypoxia only responsible for experience? No. Other stressors did played role as well.

[...]- how long do the effects last?[...]

Few minutes, although stress related may last longer. (Later about that).

Would he have been able to land airplane? Apparently, yes. Others do crash in simpler situations.

[...] also what do you think the SP02 was at?

I have read that 80% or higher (mild) = upto 16500ft

At 15000 feet would be about 85%, although it may wary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hallucinations were experienced by healthy (with no psychological, nor physiological problems) climbers at the altitudes as low as 3000 m, 4500 m (P.Brugger et al, Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol. 1999 Jan;12(1):67-71.). Was hypoxia only responsible for experience? No. Other stressors did played role as well.

I dont see how we can compare climbers who have 'prolonged exposure' , no supplemental oxygen and likely different temperatures. I have looked into the various types of hypoxia and the different stages and symptoms that occur at varying altitudes. Also important to note is the stages that hypoxia goes through prior to reaching the critical stage (or at least the stage at which 'useful consciousness' is dimished significantly..usually at 20kft plus)

Few minutes, although stress related may last longer. (Later about that).

Would he have been able to land airplane? Apparently, yes. Others do crash in simpler situations.

but to do so would mean he had not moved into the critical stage and was still in mild (possibly moderate) stage. hallucinations cannot occur at this stage and definately do not occur prior further symptoms being visiable..

At 15000 feet would be about 85%, although it may wary.

83-100% = mild

I have some good links for you that all indicate similar figures as I have stated regarding the severity of Hypoxia experienced, the severity is used to establish the sypmtoms that can occur at every stage.

In summary if we cant verify any additional pilots witness testimony or the RADAR hits, and all we have is the pilots testimony then I think we would still have trouble making hypoxia a viable explanation. Obviously with either of the corroborating accounts then hypoxia is a non starter anyway, therefore I conclude that the answer is unlikely to be hypoxia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well not exactly, I insist that you cannot dismiss neither based on what we have. To date we have the statement by the controller where he conmfirms the RADAR hit. Ok we dont have the hard data nor do we have a voice recording of 'other' witness, does that mean they dont exist!??[...]

...and the confirmation varies wildly from source to source. Yes, controllers did saw return(s), but that does not mean it reflects true event that actually happened.

[...] well you at least say it was in the mind as opposed to physical so yes to an extent you deny there was anything physically seen. Apologies if I have this wrong.[...]

I don't deny it might have been physical object(s), I'm against statements it was/were physical object(s). See difference?

[...] no i mean that something was there as opposed to figmant of imagination. nuts and bolts is pushing the ET slant again is it not. [...]

And figments of imagination are less possible than other highly speculative explanations?

[...] why would it....logical fallacy I believe....no hard data presented here or to be found on net with basic search does not equal it doesnt exist. And yes too many unknowns but investigations could potentially unravel.[...]

While you are right, but it doesn't mean data survived, either.

[...]I cant put forward an explanation without more facts (and /or hard data :) )

as for my thoughts being what else apart from Et...... :no::no::no: is that what you really think that my thought process is?[...]

Maybe yes, maybe no - I can't crawl into your head.

[...]??? this reponse to my post is misunderstood I believe.

quillius, on 13 February 2012 - 11:20 AM, said:

what I am saying here is that if someone introduces ET as the answer that makes debunking easy doesnt it ? it goes like this:

person a) I think its ET

person B) prove ET exists with scientific evidence

a) I cant

B) haha case closed..

then these participants leave the ride and new people hop on for the merry go round to start again...

Indeed I slightly misunderstood you, thanks for clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and the confirmation varies wildly from source to source. Yes, controllers did saw return(s), but that does not mean it reflects true event that actually happened.

indeed but they are all second hand sources, look at the document posted by Karl from the control centre..then you can have it from the horses mouth so to speak.

I don't deny it might have been physical object(s), I'm against statements it was/were physical object(s). See difference?

I certainly do, hence my avoiding definitive statements such as 'was/were'. Although I think defining what is accpeted as physical may be in order. I use physical in the sense that the opposite is figmant of imagination. Whther weather enduced manifestation or nuts and bolt (both I treat aas physical in this context..the context being the response to 'imagination')

And figments of imagination are less possible than other highly speculative explanations?

I wouldnt know as I havent seen any other speculative explanations let alone defined as 'highly speculative' (not trying to force ET in again are you? secret believer huh?) :P

While you are right, but it doesn't mean data survived, either.

And yes too many unknowns but investigations could potentially unravel

notice I used the word 'potentially' as I agree it may not have survived or may not be accessible.

Maybe yes, maybe no - I can't crawl into your head.

exactly so we did you attempt to do so? (warning if you do find your way, your sanity will be in danger my friend) :devil:

Indeed I slightly misunderstood you, thanks for clarification.

no probs :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont see how we can compare climbers who have 'prolonged exposure' , no supplemental oxygen and likely different temperatures. I have looked into the various types of hypoxia and the different stages and symptoms that occur at varying altitudes. Also important to note is the stages that hypoxia goes through prior to reaching the critical stage (or at least the stage at which 'useful consciousness' is dimished significantly..usually at 20kft plus)[...]

Do all climbers experience hallucinations at 3000m? If not, why?

[...]but to do so would mean he had not moved into the critical stage and was still in mild (possibly moderate) stage. hallucinations cannot occur at this stage and definately do not occur prior further symptoms being visiable.[...]

You seem to stuck on hypoxia only, and only, while in my post I gave a bit more than that. Can hypoxia (up to 15000 feet) alone be the cause? No data could be found. Can hypoxia plus other factors (psychological/physiological stresses) induce hallucinations? Apparently yes.

[...]I have some good links for you that all indicate similar figures as I have stated regarding the severity of Hypoxia experienced, the severity is used to establish the sypmtoms that can occur at every stage.[...]

I have plenty info as well, but again - hypoxia + other things.

[...]In summary if we cant verify any additional pilots witness testimony or the RADAR hits, and all we have is the pilots testimony then I think we would still have trouble making hypoxia a viable explanation. Obviously with either of the corroborating accounts then hypoxia is a non starter anyway, therefore I conclude that the answer is unlikely to be hypoxia.

And again - hypoxia + other things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do all climbers experience hallucinations at 3000m? If not, why?

we both know why not, point is? and also how do you reconcile these factors in pilots? especially if you include the factors I mentioned previosuly.

http://www.anesthesiaweb.org/images/hypoxia/Brugger-1999.pdf

so again I ask have you any case where a pilot has suffered hallucinations at 15000ft @ under 1hour exposure (for this purpose we will assume no 'supplementary oxygen was present)

You seem to stuck on hypoxia only, and only, while in my post I gave a bit more than that. Can hypoxia (up to 15000 feet) alone be the cause? No data could be found. Can hypoxia plus other factors (psychological/physiological stresses) induce hallucinations? Apparently yes.

what do you mean no data found?

the questions is, can hypoxia plus the other induce hallucinations in a pilot flying at 15000ft for a short period without any other sequential symptoms being portrayed, then managing to regain composure to land the plane? I take it your answer is as above : apparently yes? can you show me anything that supports this notion?>

I have plenty info as well, but again - hypoxia + other things.

And again - hypoxia + other things.

see above

(maybe its time for us both to share info then...unless we want to carry on with raise, re-raise, re-re-raise...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

indeed but they are all second hand sources, look at the document posted by Karl from the control centre..then you can have it from the horses mouth so to speak.[...]

The one that says three objects? Then Diaz must be wrong in his interview, where he says object (singular).

[...]I certainly do, hence my avoiding definitive statements such as 'was/were'. Although I think defining what is accpeted as physical may be in order. I use physical in the sense that the opposite is figmant of imagination. Whther weather enduced manifestation or nuts and bolt (both I treat aas physical in this context..the context being the response to 'imagination')[...]

So, human (you know, we are physical objects, and all processes in our body are governed by the laws of physics) fallibility is off the table, yes? Why then?

I wouldnt know as I havent seen any other speculative explanations let alone defined as 'highly speculative' (not trying to force ET in again are you? secret believer huh?) :P [...]

I can bet my life that most of the believers see only one explanation. BTW, you do fancy inter/extradimentional "thingies", don't you? :rolleyes:

[...] notice I used the word 'potentially' as I agree it may not have survived or may not be accessible.[...]

Fair enough.

[...]exactly so we did you attempt to do so? (warning if you do find your way, your sanity will be in danger my friend) :devil:

[...]

No worries, I'll survive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one that says three objects? Then Diaz must be wrong in his interview, where he says object (singular).

The spanish official report from the control centre...did you translate it yet? :rolleyes:

So, human (you know, we are physical objects, and all processes in our body are governed by the laws of physics) fallibility is off the table, yes? Why then?

??? If RADAR had hits and pilot witnesses something...then whos imagination are we talking about here?

I can bet my life that most of the believers see only one explanation. BTW, you do fancy inter/extradimentional "thingies", don't you? :rolleyes:

really? what constitutes most? what has 'most' have to do with me? I find interdimentional 'thingies' intriguing..yes. where are the highly speculative explanations though you mention, before we get sidetracked?

No worries, I'll survive.

survive without damage though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we both know why not, point is? and also how do you reconcile these factors in pilots? especially if you include the factors I mentioned previosuly.

http://www.anesthesiaweb.org/images/hypoxia/Brugger-1999.pdf

so again I ask have you any case where a pilot has suffered hallucinations at 15000ft @ under 1hour exposure (for this purpose we will assume no 'supplementary oxygen was present)

[...]

No, I don't have examples of "pilot has suffered hallucinations at 15000ft @ under 1hour exposure". As I already mentioned, besides hypoxia there other "things", stress in particular:
Hallucinations are generally considered to be clinical pathological phenomena. It is, however, well known that under exceptional circumstances, normal people also hallucinate, without any link to an organic or a functional psychiatric disorder...

Authors present three cases of such hallucinations. I'll bring just one

S, 18 years old, was mobilised to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and was transferred to the military psychiatric clinic before the basic training course. From his past, there was no evidence of any prominent psychopathology. His academic achievements were the most important issue for him. His parents used to over-protect him, and he grew up in a very protected environment where he did not have to demonstrate his virility or his independence. He was preoccupied with doubts about his ability to serve as a soldier. On his second day in the army, when he was alone in his room, very tense and anxious, preoccupied with thoughts about his fate in the army, he suddenly hallucinated that ants as big as human beings were approaching and climbing on him. These experiences lasted for a few minutes. This hallucinatory phenomenon did not recur during the supportive short-term psychotherapy in our out-patient clinic. He claimed that during the visual and tactile hallucinatory experiences, he had a good sense of reality and looked upon these experiences as a phenomenon that does not belong to the objective of reality.
So, you see how many things come into play even without oxygen deprivation. And I want to note here, that in all three cases hallucinations were experienced when subjects were alone.

Why we don't have plenty of such experiences? One reason is obvious - occurrences are very rare. Second reason somewhat obvious as well - what pilot would want to report that he saw, for example, deers on his wings (especially if it occurs just once in their lifetime)?

What are the sources of the stress in aviation you can find here.

And I want to repeat: I'm not stating pilot hallucinated, I'm just bringing one of the possibilities for his sighting.

[...]

what do you mean no data found?

the questions is, can hypoxia plus the other induce hallucinations in a pilot flying at 15000ft for a short period without any other sequential symptoms being portrayed, then managing to regain composure to land the plane? I take it your answer is as above : apparently yes? can you show me anything that supports this notion?>

[...]

He had plenty of time to calm down circling airport. Look, there are examples when pilots do crash in simpler situations, while others do manage land fully loaded airplane while suffering severe head injuries and making wild maneuvers (FedEx flight 705). Would other crews land safely under the same circumstances? You just can't tell.

The spanish official report from the control centre...did you translate it yet? :rolleyes:[...]

You mean this doc?

224.jpg

... y se observa un eco; aproximadamente 15 millas al sur de Mexico donde se nos <porcio> al contacto radar con el XAU se le volvio a preguntar si ya tenia control de la aeronave, contesto que negativo y unos diez segundos e despues nos informo que lo acababan de abandonar dichos objetos y que se alejaban a la derecha de el con rumbo <este> y que el continuaba su descenso visual al Aeropuerto de Mexico, observa en la pantalla radar aproximadamente a 11 millos al sureste del Aeropuerto un eco bastante rapido a una velocidad aproximada 400 a 450 nudos, con rumbo Este, que efectuo un viraje de 270 hacia la izquierda y se perdio a 20 millas, exactamente donde se inicia la zona del Popocatepetl.

If yes, then I retract my previous comment about it.

[...]

??? If RADAR had hits and pilot witnesses something...then whos imagination are we talking about here?

[...]

Awh...

... There are many other reports of reflections from unidentified objects, many of which are caused by reflections resulting from anomalous propagation (ducting) in certain areas of the world. Air traffic control radars often develop tracks on atmospheric anomalies that do not appear to have been caused by ducting. These are often referred to as “angels” or as “worms” if they can be tracked...
(Radar Design Principles: Signal Processing and the Environment, 2nd ed, F.E.Nathanson, J.P.Reilly, and M.N.Cohen, McGraw-Hill (1999))

In "noisy environment" you always will find something that fits your "profile". For more about radars you can search info posted by badeskov.

[...]

really? what constitutes most? what has 'most' have to do with me? I find interdimentional 'thingies' intriguing..yes. where are the highly speculative explanations though you mention, before we get sidetracked?

[...]

Are you saying you don't tie some UFOs with interdimentional 'thingies'? If you don't, my apologies.

[...]

survive without damage though?

With the gadget, based on B.Cathie's math/harmonics, and interfaced with tin foil hat, I'm invincible.

[...]

(maybe its time for us both to share info then...unless we want to carry on with raise, re-raise, re-re-raise...)

Name place and time...

2735527.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly, we are not alone.... :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"E" is "Echo" not "Extra" and "U" is "Uniform" not "Union" in the ICAO Phonetic alphabet.This is from the reported radio exchange on page 1, I am fairly sure that the ICAO Phonetic Alphabet was adopted prior to 1975 (please correct me if wrong).

On the other hand Mexico City is 7300 feet above sea level (if this is the airport mentioned as "Mexico Central", and assuming the pilot was flying at 2000 feet above this (and he was a local pilot already acclimatised to living at this height) then Apoxia is extremely unlikely.

So... what to make of the event? I do not think the Pilot was hallucinating, the (apparent) recorded radio exchange with an unknown Mexico Central contains serious breaches of flying Protocols, and the reported "UFO's" are sooo small as to possibly contain a Meercat.

We are now looking at an event from some 37 years ago, and it is entirely possible (probable) that the magnetic tapes of this exchange and radar data no longer exists. This leaves us with yet another unsupportable event by todays standards... Disappointing, but finally evidence has got to be available beyond memories of events. The hard data must be presented or else it goes into the same box as the Loch Ness Monster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly, we are not alone.... :ph34r:

Agree but some people have problems with that fact... This event, the first one was clearly a sighting of an unknown craft... Since pilot probably or didn't not expect something strange to fly by. Probably he wasn't so openminded as we are, so only rational thing was an unknown object, and that is all people need... Even sceptic... this is as clear as it can be. Pilot which probably knew airplane types pretty well said unknown object radar confirms that so end of story. If you try to find a rational explanation for this, well i think you'll be in big darkness. Still nothing special... alien craft was flying by airplane Wooow how very interesting... i rather see a fleet of those coming here, would make my day and worlds too :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as the international UFO community wants "hard proof" of UFO's, they rarely go to Mexico to investigate, I lived in Mexico city for a while and now reside in San Luis, and "strange" things happen here all the time, kind of makes you think that the current inhabitants of Mexico are somehow cursed by all the blood spilt by their ancestors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as the international UFO community wants "hard proof" of UFO's, they rarely go to Mexico to investigate, I lived in Mexico city for a while and now reside in San Luis, and "strange" things happen here all the time, kind of makes you think that the current inhabitants of Mexico are somehow cursed by all the blood spilt by their ancestors.

Not from Spain...just post some of the "strange" stuff...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I don't have examples of "pilot has suffered hallucinations at 15000ft @ under 1hour exposure". As I already mentioned, besides hypoxia there other "things", stress in particular:

I didnt think so, I couldnt either.

Authors present three cases of such hallucinations. I'll bring just one So, you see how many things come into play even without oxygen deprivation. And I want to note here, that in all three cases hallucinations were experienced when subjects were alone.

Why we don't have plenty of such experiences? One reason is obvious - occurrences are very rare. Second reason somewhat obvious as well - what pilot would want to report that he saw, for example, deers on his wings (especially if it occurs just once in their lifetime)?

What are the sources of the stress in aviation you can find here.

And I want to repeat: I'm not stating pilot hallucinated, I'm just bringing one of the possibilities for his sighting.

firstly, the stress induced hallucinations are based on 'environmental stress'....the examples are young soldiersthrown into unknown 'environments', I do not see the relevance or correlation you are making here when discussing an experienced pilot making a routine flight.

at least you acknowledge the rareness (even with the correct stress inducing conditions) so this in addition to the RADAR return (ok yes maybe weather related)..but suddenly you are taking a very rare event (not that I think it is relevant anyway) and you must then multiply the odds of such an occurance by the probability of weather related RADAR return (also note not just one blip), this then gives you the odds of said situation happening.

as for what pilot would want to report.....if you are hallucinating and believe what you are seeing is real then why not report it? this pilot did just that anyhow.

He had plenty of time to calm down circling airport. Look, there are examples when pilots do crash in simpler situations, while others do manage land fully loaded airplane while suffering severe head injuries and making wild maneuvers (FedEx flight 705). Would other crews land safely under the same circumstances? You just can't tell.

'plenty of time', this cannot be ascertained unless you have diagnosed his condition. one other quick thing, he apparently did receive a medical straight after and was given the all clear, although I dont have the medical report....

You mean this doc?

If yes, then I retract my previous comment about it.

yes that one, and ok no worries.

Awh...

(Radar Design Principles: Signal Processing and the Environment, 2nd ed, F.E.Nathanson, J.P.Reilly, and M.N.Cohen, McGraw-Hill (1999))

In "noisy environment" you always will find something that fits your "profile". For more about radars you can search info posted by badeskov.

no need to prove RADAR can have false returns...I know this????

Are you saying you don't tie some UFOs with interdimentional 'thingies'? If you don't, my apologies.

I dont tie anything to anything....do I like the idea, yes, do I think it possible, yes....who knows....thats what I am trying to find out.

With the gadget, based on B.Cathie's math/harmonics, and interfaced with tin foil hat, I'm invincible.

very good and very funny....

Name place and time...

2735527.gif

but this is even funnier :lol::tu: ...

Edited by quillius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didnt think so, I couldnt either.

[...]

Yeap, but that doesn't mean there are no such recorded cases, isn't it? :rolleyes:

[...]

firstly, the stress induced hallucinations are based on 'environmental stress'....the examples are young soldiers thrown into unknown 'environments', I do not see the relevance or correlation you are making here when discussing an experienced pilot making a routine flight.

[...]

Examples I posted just to show that healthy people do hallucinate.

[...] when discussing an experienced pilot making a routine flight.

[...]

Experienced in what? Flying plane? Making mistakes/errors? Tying boots in the morning?

And routine flight... Most of the flights ending with fatal crashes started as routine flights.

[...]at least you acknowledge the rareness (even with the correct stress inducing conditions) so this in addition to the RADAR return (ok yes maybe weather related)..but suddenly you are taking a very rare event (not that I think it is relevant anyway) and you must then multiply the odds of such an occurance by the probability of weather related RADAR return (also note not just one blip), this then gives you the odds of said situation happening.[...]

Ok, I'll try to bring analogy: Two friends are on the hiking trip. One of them (Montiel) sees "face" on the distant cliff. He points it to his friend (controller): "Look, here is face!". "Where?" "Right there, between those trees. Do you see?" Friend squints, turns his head left/right: "Ah, yeah, I see now!"

Does this mean cliff resembling "face" was intentionally carved? Would the second guy see this "face" if not pointed to?

[...]

as for what pilot would want to report.....if you are hallucinating and believe what you are seeing is real then why not report it? this pilot did just that anyhow.

[...]

You probably heard that pilots are somewhat shy in reporting UFOs (ridicule, questioning their mental state, etc). Now, imagine someone says "I saw raindeers on the wings"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeap, but that doesn't mean there are no such recorded cases, isn't it? :rolleyes:

no it doesnt, but unless we find a recorded case we cant really use this 'hypothetical' to support anything

Examples I posted just to show that healthy people do hallucinate.

again the 'environmental stress' was the key factor.....If I post examples of people hallucinating on LCD would this suffice? no as it again has no direct resemblance of event we are discussing. 'Potential strawman??'

Experienced in what? Flying plane? Making mistakes/errors? Tying boots in the morning?

And routine flight... Most of the flights ending with fatal crashes started as routine flights.

I thought it was clear...I said 'experienced pilot' so this obviously means experienced at flying.....if I said experienced person' then you could throw the possibilities you have in questioning. And as for routine flight part...where is the environmental stress?

Ok, I'll try to bring analogy: Two friends are on the hiking trip. One of them (Montiel) sees "face" on the distant cliff. He points it to his friend (controller): "Look, here is face!". "Where?" "Right there, between those trees. Do you see?" Friend squints, turns his head left/right: "Ah, yeah, I see now!"

Does this mean cliff resembling "face" was intentionally carved? Would the second guy see this "face" if not pointed to?

really? I see many problems with this analogy, hopefully the bolded gives you an indication of some of the issues.

You probably heard that pilots are somewhat shy in reporting UFOs (ridicule, questioning their mental state, etc). Now, imagine someone says "I saw raindeers on the wings"...

Again strawman. The fact is plain and simple that the pilot DID report what he saw.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...]

again the 'environmental stress' was the key factor.....[...]

Flying alone in fog plus knowledge your plane had problems plus errors/mistakes/misjudgement of the situation made under influence of hypoxia plus (probably) turbulence kicking plane's cojones. Stressful enough?

[...]If I post examples of people hallucinating on LCD would this suffice? no as it again has no direct resemblance of event we are discussing. 'Potential strawman??'[...]

We are not discussing drug abuse.

[...]

I thought it was clear...I said 'experienced pilot' so this obviously means experienced at flying.....if I said experienced person' then you could throw the possibilities you have in questioning. And as for routine flight part...where is the environmental stress?

[...]

What possible hallucinations have to do with experience?

[...]

really? I see many problems with this analogy, hopefully the bolded gives you an indication of some of the issues.

[...]

There are problems with this analogy, true, but I think you get my point.

[...]

Again strawman. The fact is plain and simple that the pilot DID report what he saw.....

Again, would he report if he would saw raindeers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flying alone in fog plus knowledge your plane had problems plus errors/mistakes/misjudgement of the situation made under influence of hypoxia plus (probably) turbulence kicking plane's cojones. Stressful enough?

knowledge plane had problems? this stress did not induce hallucination as the problems were only apparent after he saw the object. what errors mistakes etc were made? what has indicated hypoxia? was there turbulence? all speculation that has no basis, let alone confirms that any of them would cause stress to this pilot, with even less confirmation that if it was stress it caused hallucination.....clutching at sraws here BMK.

We are not discussing drug abuse.

exactly my point...we are not discussing young soldiers being thrown into hostile environments....my LCD point is as 'irrelevant' as your original point it was countering.

What possible hallucinations have to do with experience?

what hallucinations??

There are problems with this analogy, true, but I think you get my point.

hmmm

Again, would he report if he would saw raindeers?

strawman continues huh. He did not report reindeers, if he had seen reindeers then maybe he would maybe he wouldnt....what we DO know is he saw three objcts (whether physical or in mind) and he DID report it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

knowledge plane had problems? this stress did not induce hallucination as the problems were only apparent after he saw the object. what errors mistakes etc were made? what has indicated hypoxia? was there turbulence? all speculation that has no basis, let alone confirms that any of them would cause stress to this pilot, with even less confirmation that if it was stress it caused hallucination.....clutching at sraws here BMK.[...]

You are overlooking complexity of the problem. Well, before we go any further, answer these questions: Can one strongman lift (Hummer tire deadlift kinda competition) 1.5 tones? Can two strongmen lift same weight (1.5 tones)? Can three strongmen lift same weight (1.5 tones)? Can four strongmen lift same weight (1.5 tones)? (Hint: record is 504 kg)

[...]

what hallucinations??

[...]

The same as probable cause of pilot's sighting.

[...]

strawman continues huh. He did not report reindeers, if he had seen reindeers then maybe he would maybe he wouldnt....what we DO know is he saw three objcts (whether physical or in mind) and he DID report it.

I'm not arguing he did not "saw" "objects", nor he didn't report? This question arose from our discussion why "there are" no "plenty" of such cases reported. That was the point.

edit: spelling

Edited by bmk1245

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are overlooking complexity of the problem. Well, before we go any further, answer these questions: Can one strongman lift (Hummer tire deadlift kinda competition) 1.5 tones? Can two strongmen lift same weight (1.5 tones)? Can three strongmen lift same weight (1.5 tones)? Can four strongmen lift same weight (1.5 tones)? (Hint: record is 504 kg)

I dont think I am. You implied that one of the contributing factors of the 'stress' that induced a hallucination was the faulty plane. I responded questioning how the hallucination could have been induced by stress when the object was seen prior to attempting landing gear. Therefore it cannot be a contributing factor to the 'stress' as it happened after the event (only get out here would be that the pilot and air traffic controller both have their timing of the sequence of events wrong)

The same as probable cause of pilot's sighting.

and how did you arrive at probable when even possible is yet to be determined

I'm not arguing he did not "saw" "objects", nor he didn't report? This question arose from our discussion why "there are" no "plenty" of such cases reported. That was the point.

edit: spelling

and to say that its because they are simply not reported is a fallacy.

edit to add: apologies I didnt answer the first set of questions...lets run with the answer yes to every one.

Edited by quillius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see we reached the point of WhyBCathiesmathisBSifcoloneltookinterestinit, so I'll step away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see we reached the point of WhyBCathiesmathisBSifcoloneltookinterestinit, so I'll step away.

dont worry I knew some of the questions were difficult and you can only avoid them by responding with questions for so long...

shame you are stepping away but yes probably wise to bury this. :rolleyes::ph34r::w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.