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 0
Fila

Redefining the term 'UFO'

28 posts in this topic

Don't we all just hate that word? And this argument seems to come up a lot.

UFOs are Unidentified Flying Objects, however this is relative to the observer. Technically a cloud could be a UFO to some people.Some assume UFO means ETV.

For me personally.., a UFO is something I cannot identify myself. I assume every individual's would be the same with a few differences (trained observer compared to general knowledge, compared to limited knowledge of astronomy, aircraft etc)

After many years.., you guys have seen it all. So much, that you could probably write a detailed list of events that were not ETV (drone, bird, the moon)

But then there's this scenario. Someone will visit this site and post an image of a UFO asking us for advice. They also have their own comprehension of what UFOs are. So now we have my version of what UFOs are.., yours.., and the witness asking for advice. That's 3 different versions of what the term 'UFO' could potentially mean.

It can change again, depending on context. Talking about 'UFO' reports will get someone fired up, stating UFO does not mean aliens. When that's just what they are called.

 

Is there a way to make this less ambiguous?

How about we either come up with a new term (UAP, unknowns etc) we are all comfortable with.

Or.., perhaps we do create a list of events shown to not be UFOs (swamp gas, jets, meteors etc)

What do you think?

Edited by Fila
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFL 200-5 dated April 29th 1952 gives the UFO definition as "any airborne object which by performance, aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual features, does not conform to any presently known aircraft or missile type.” This was the original Project Blue Book definition of UFO.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a Pet Peeve of mine. I was just discussing this very issue here, and here in this post.

Edited by lost_shaman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/12/2017 at 10:30 PM, lost_shaman said:

This is a Pet Peeve of mine. I was just discussing this very issue here, and here in this post.

I had it happen twice in 1 thread. I ended up referred to UFOs as "the remaining 10% of unexplained cases" . I'm guessing that would be the standard for the Airforce, NICAP or MUFON.

They would receive UFO reports (UFO defined by the witness).., but if they determined it was a star for example.., then it would be a solved (IFO)

But NICAP/MUFON/USAF, would still have the remaining cases of advanced flying machines that are unsolved (UFO).., so for them UFOs are unsolved objects reported, that are unconventional aircraft / objects.*

I guess we cannot adopt this "UFO list" approach.., because as soon as a new member comes asking for advice about a UFO picture they took.., they would be barraged with comments saying "Its not a UFO" 

There will always be the personal meaning of the word.

 

* (metallic/polished metal, sometimes glowing or with lights, the size of cars or planes.., with no sound, exhaust, fuselage..,  an object that does not stay stationary like a star, or move too rapid like a meteorite, does not fly like a bird, float like a balloon going with wind, does not fly or sound like planes, jets or helicopters, is not slow like a drone, and moves faster than anything man-made etc..).

Edited by Fila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fila said:

I had it happen twice in 1 thread. I ended up referred to UFOs as "the remaining 10% of unexplained cases" . I'm guessing that would be the standard for the Airforce, NICAP or MUFON.

They would receive UFO reports (UFO defined by the witness).., but if they determined it was a star for example.., then it would be a solved (IFO)

But NICAP/MUFON/USAF, would still have the remaining cases of advanced flying machines that are unsolved (UFO).., so for them UFOs are unsolved objects reported, that are unconventional aircraft / objects.*

I guess we cannot adopt this "UFO list" approach.., because as soon as a new member comes asking for advice about a UFO picture they took.., they would be barraged with comments saying "Its not a UFO" 

There will always be the personal meaning of the word.

 

* (metallic/polished metal, sometimes glowing or with lights, the size of cars or planes.., with no sound, exhaust, fuselage..,  an object that does not stay stationary like a star, or move too rapid like a meteorite, does not fly like a bird, float like a balloon going with wind, does not fly or sound like planes, jets or helicopters, is not slow like a drone, and moves faster than anything man-made etc..).

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I don't see a problem with the term ufo it is a descriptor of an unknown. That said if people choose to make what is known into and unknown because they do not accept the explained it is not the fault of the term, somewhat similar to a person complaining that a left hand skill saw is flawed because a right handed person uses it with their right hand instead of the left hand which it was designed for.

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me the current meaning of UFO is sufficient just like the USO definition, its people who keep confusing the term with green man's vessels

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/12/2017 at 2:56 AM, jmccr8 said:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I don't see a problem with the term ufo it is a descriptor of an unknown

My 1st post explains how there can be more than 3 different meanings of the term at one time. This causes confusion almost daily and becomes an issue for most.., but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You are fine with the ambiguity.., but others are not. And that's fine. Thank you for your input.

 

On 14/12/2017 at 2:56 AM, jmccr8 said:

That said if people choose to make what is known into and unknown because they do not accept the explained it is not the fault of the term

Yes, don't we all just loathe biased "believers". I would like to just let you know that all UFO witnesses are not evil / gullible fools out to troll you.

The majority (from what I have read) are legitimate enquires by reputable people. Yes, there are trolls etc.., but this does not mean all UFO reports are trolls.

A large proportion of UFO cases are honest mis-identifications. That's why its not really nice to laugh, mock or look down on people who are just asking questions. (Not saying you do.., but it seems to happen a lot)

Edited by Fila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/12/2017 at 3:24 AM, godnodog said:

For me the current meaning of UFO is sufficient just like the USO definition, its people who keep confusing the term with green man's vessels

I think this logic applies to everyone.., thus why its an issue. The word is context sensitive.

I am happy with my definition. John and Fred are happy with their definition. Everyone is happy with their own definition. But I think this is the cause of the issue. IF we all keep saying "my version is correct" to a context sensitive word.., we are always going to have conflictions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/12/2017 at 3:24 AM, godnodog said:

For me the current meaning of UFO is sufficient just like the USO definition, its people who keep confusing the term with green man's vessels

 

On 14/12/2017 at 2:56 AM, jmccr8 said:

I don't see a problem with the term ufo it is a descriptor of an unknown. That said if people choose to make what is known into and unknown because they do not accept the explained it is not the fault of the term

So for you both.., does UFO simply mean (bird, stars, moon, swamp gas, meteorite) and nothing else?
Are these things Unidentified?

Does a "sceptic" think UFO means Known Objects?

Another question would be. Do you see ambiguity in the word? Do you see ambiguity as a problem? If not, why?

 

Edited by Fila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Fila said:

IF we all keep saying "my version is correct" to a context sensitive word.., we are always going to have conflictions. 

The Acronym UFO has always had a very specific meaning. If you use the phrase  Unidentified Flying Object and just assign your own meaning to that Phrase then you are not talking about the actual UFO Phenomena (UFO being an acronym with a specific and well defined non-arbitrary meaning) any longer. 

Edited by lost_shaman
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer the term --- "foo fighter, USO or UAP" myself --- But I'm trying to remove the term "UFO" from my mental vocabulary...because it has a very dark, evil meaning behind it --- Which would be bad political protocol, if you used the term (two syllables) U-FO and not pronouncing the separate letters U-F-O to a space alien, during a first vocal contact with the alien entity; who might translate from his vocabulary...as meaning -- "You foe/foe's " --- So in the intricacies of first alien contact...I would avoid the term altogether, so as to possibly avoid any chance of intergalactic war.

p.s.: I'm not the first person who has thought about this possible scenario with space alien contact --- The problem has been discussed by others, many years ago.

Besides...it's not a proper term (UFO), when the alien starship is parked on the ground.

Cheers...

Erno

Edited by Erno86
added grammar quote mark
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Erno86 said:

Which would be bad political protocol, if you used the term (two syllables) U-FO and not pronouncing the separate letters U-F-O to a space alien, during a first vocal contact with the alien entity; who might translate from his vocabulary...as meaning -- "You foe/foe's "

Seriously if you ever meet an Alien you will not call it's Space Craft a UFO. You would say it's very nice to meet you can you tell me about your SPACE CRAFT!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true that the explanation is in the eye of the beholder. Whena I was young I saw a video (on TV) from a failed missile launch that was being promoted as "UFO crashes on earth". It was so ufo-ish that I believed it was a real unexplained phenomena but it wasn't. Now I know it was a failed missile launch. That's why they were filming it. 

Secondly, when I joined this forum I presented what it was for me the most believeble proof of UFOs. It was a video from NASA where you can see an object going back and forth in space at what I thought it was amazing speed. Here in this forum, I was schooled and explained that I forgot to add the Z axis to my equation and what I was seeing was something falling to earth instead of something flying across space. Everytime I see something that I can't explain I come to this forum because here there are lots of people who know what they are talking about it.

Summary: I think UFO is a good term and it shouldn't be associated with ets.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, MrBene said:

Summary: I think UFO is a good term and it shouldn't be associated with ets.   

It never officially was. The Extra terrestrial Hypothesis did gain prominence early on but has never been confirmed although the Phenomena has always officially been considered a true Phenomena. Then in the late 1970's and 1980's Berlitz, Moore, Chandera, and Friedman changed the narrative so that UFO's were no longer a mystery in the general populaces minds, but rather E.T.'s that Governments were hiding from Society.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/12/2017 at 8:14 AM, MrBene said:

It's true that the explanation is in the eye of the beholder. Whena I was young I saw a video (on TV) from a failed missile launch that was being promoted as "UFO crashes on earth". It was so ufo-ish that I believed it was a real unexplained phenomena but it wasn't. Now I know it was a failed missile launch. That's why they were filming it. 

Secondly, when I joined this forum I presented what it was for me the most believeble proof of UFOs. It was a video from NASA where you can see an object going back and forth in space at what I thought it was amazing speed. Here in this forum, I was schooled and explained that I forgot to add the Z axis to my equation and what I was seeing was something falling to earth instead of something flying across space. Everytime I see something that I can't explain I come to this forum because here there are lots of people who know what they are talking about it.

Summary: I think UFO is a good term and it shouldn't be associated with ets.   

Thank you for your reply.

Does UFO simply mean (bird, stars, moon, swamp gas, meteorite) and nothing else?
Are these things Unidentified?

Does a "sceptic" think UFO means Known Objects?

Another question would be. Do you see ambiguity in the word? Do you see ambiguity as a problem? If not, why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though I prefer the label "exobiologist" --- I will not castigate anybody who calls themselves a "ufologist" or the study of "ufology" in itself --- Or even "UFO/UFOs" for that matter --- Unless the term ---"UFO" (two syllables) or "ufonaut" is used as language in any kind of space alien contact scenario.

But then the term "ufonaut/u-fonaut" proves a quandary in political protocol --- So I'm tossing that term out of my vocabulary as well; in relation to communication with the otherworlders.

Edited by Erno86
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(1) When I was young.., my brother was into UFOs, X-files and all that. To my brother.., UFO meant ET craft.

(2) I assumed they were all BS stories, druggo's or mis-ID's. So for a "sceptic" (scoffer) UFO meant exactly that. Something someone has confused for something else.., and it can easily be explained one day by someone smart.., mis-IDs, hoaxes (but not ET because of false logic such as.., ETs do not exist.., or could not traverse the distance, or NASA would know, or others would be filming it etc etc) 

(3) Now that I am more rational, and not so up myself.., I will attempt to listen to anyone's claim, and check it myself without being swayed.

So now for me.., UFO still means "something someone has confused for something else.., and it can easily be explained one day by someone smart, mis-IDs, hoaxes ( and potentially an option of ETs also included).

I'm starting to think these 3 loose definitions can probably be categorised into;

1) BIASED BELIEVER - Gullible (my brother younger)

2) BIASED SCEPTIC - Dismissive (scoffer, me younger)

3) TRUE SCEPTIC - Not gullible, but not dismissive (me now)

Edited by Fila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fila said:

Thank you for your reply.

Does UFO simply mean (bird, stars, moon, swamp gas, meteorite) and nothing else?
Are these things Unidentified?

Does a "sceptic" think UFO means Known Objects?

Another question would be. Do you see ambiguity in the word? Do you see ambiguity as a problem? If not, why?

It means unidentified by the observer. 

Sceptics will try to find a logical answer to explain the phenomena. 

I think UFO is a term that only is used at first, once the object is explained it no longer is an ufo. So I don't see why is ambiguous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/12/2017 at 8:52 AM, MrBene said:

It means unidentified by the observer. 

Sceptics will try to find a logical answer to explain the phenomena. 

I think UFO is a term that only is used at first, once the object is explained it no longer is an ufo. So I don't see why is ambiguous.

Because there are still unsolved cases. Not all UFOs are identified. (This is not an opinion)

Edited by Fila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fila -

May I suggest that you do more UFO hunting --- OOP's...I did it again!!!

Erno signing off for the night...

Cheers

Edited by Erno86
added a name

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/12/2017 at 8:56 AM, Erno86 said:

May I suggest that you do more UFO hunting

I would love to.., but I don't really have the time. Also.., it is kinda fruitless. I think UFO images will never be substantial proof.

I don't believe reviewing (even day old) UFO cases will ever solve the mystery either. Looking at past cases can only provide so much information.., which at best will remain inconclusive.

I believe the way to solving this mystery is by doing anything BUT the current form of "investigating".., whatever that may be.

Edited by Fila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Fila said:

My 1st post explains how there can be more than 3 different meanings of the term at one time. This causes confusion almost daily and becomes an issue for most.., but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You are fine with the ambiguity.., but others are not. And that's fine. Thank you for your input.

 

Yes, don't we all just loathe biased "believers". I would like to just let you know that all UFO witnesses are not evil / gullible fools out to troll you.

The majority (from what I have read) are legitimate enquires by reputable people. Yes, there are trolls etc.., but this does not mean all UFO reports are trolls.

A large proportion of UFO cases are honest mis-identifications. That's why its not really nice to laugh, mock or look down on people who are just asking questions. (Not saying you do.., but it seems to happen a lot)

Boy you really like jumping of a bridge don't. You added a lot into my comment maybe you should just write my posts for me.:angry:

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/12/2017 at 2:29 PM, jmccr8 said:

Boy you really like jumping of a bridge don't. You added a lot into my comment maybe you should just write my posts for me.:angry:

jmccr8

Sorry if that happened. I hate it when it happens to me.

Please point it out, and I will retract my statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2017 at 8:54 PM, Fila said:

 

So for you both.., does UFO simply mean (bird, stars, moon, swamp gas, meteorite) and nothing else?
Are these things Unidentified?

Does a "sceptic" think UFO means Known Objects?

Another question would be. Do you see ambiguity in the word? Do you see ambiguity as a problem? If not, why?

 

UFO for me means Unidentified flying object as I cannot identify it, and sice I cannot identify it it can be a bird or extraterrestial space ship.

There is no ambiguity, you just fail to undestand the basic meaning of unindetified flying object, I am sorry but its as simple as it is, unidentified as in not enough information is available to someone to properly identify something. I'll give you a simple but true example, I saw with a friend an UFO, and it remained an UFO until I found out it was the ISS, it stopped being an ufo. There are other cases people saw ufos even though aviation experts explained it was a very human made aircraft, but the reason they knew it was because they study.....aviation.

Aparently you also dont know the meaning of skepticism otherwise you would not have written "Does a "skeptic" think UFO means Known Objects?"

When it comes to ufo phenome, its scientific skepticism that comes in order, not the traditionl meaning of skepticism.

 

Scientific skepticismEdit

Main article: Skeptical movement § Scientific skepticism

A scientific or empirical skeptic is one who questions beliefs on the basis of scientific understanding.

Scientific skepticism may discard beliefs pertaining to purported phenomena not subject to reliable observation and thus not systematic or testable empirically. Most scientists, being scientific skeptics, test the reliability of certain kinds of claims by subjecting them to a systematic investigation using some type of the scientific method.[16] As a result, a number of claims are considered as "pseudoscience", if they are found to improperly apply or ignore the fundamental aspects of the scientific method.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both terms "UFO" and "aliens" can do better. Ufologist Friedman prefers "flying saucers" over ufos which are an outdated term, but people have adopted it completely. Basically people don't care about it being technically wrong, in practice we associate UFOs with out of this world spacecraft (not any object like a drone, etc). It's one of those things.

Probably UAP would have been a better term to use from the start and more technically correct. Friedman sticks with flying saucers. DoD calls them Aerospace Threats 

On 12/13/2017 at 5:44 PM, Fila said:

I would love to.., but I don't really have the time. Also.., it is kinda fruitless. I think UFO images will never be substantial proof.

I don't believe reviewing (even day old) UFO cases will ever solve the mystery either. Looking at past cases can only provide so much information.., which at best will remain inconclusive.

I believe the way to solving this mystery is by doing anything BUT the current form of "investigating".., whatever that may be.

ufo hunting is a field event not reading and posting threads. one has to be in "hot spots" and have the right equipment. I don't do it, but if I was serious about it I would go this route. ufo proof wearhouse

Edited by Area201

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 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.