OK, New York Times reporting on it actually makes my pause and actually think on this one. I mean it looks not man made, moves insanely, but is there another plausible explanation? I can't think of one. Does seem shady to me to not make a bigger deal out of this!
BobtheInquisitor wrote: It feels like everyone is waiting for someone else to either refute it or openly accept it as genuine. Has anyone come out with an explanation?
U.S.S. Princeton, the ship that first tagged it, has some very high end gear. The planes are no slouches either. If they said something was there, then something was there. What it was....?
BobtheInquisitor wrote: It feels like everyone is waiting for someone else to either refute it or openly accept it as genuine. Has anyone come out with an explanation?
About the only thing that this tidbit tells us is that the U.S. Government has been BSing everybody since Blue Book shut down in 1970. However, as those interested in such things already knew, the Federal Government has maintained an interest in UFO reports (off the public radar) between the end of Blue Book and the start of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program in 2007.
Declassified documents produced DoD incident reports sent to the White House after two alleged encounters between military aircraft, and unidentified flying objects (Tehran in 1976 and Peru in 1980, where the pilot actually fired on the object). And I doubt it was purely the result of Carter's personal interest in U.F.O.s. after a personal sighting during his time as Georgia's Governor.
Many of these things are real mysteries. I've seen one myself, and contrary to what professional debunkers like James Oberg and the CSI might say, it wasn't anything conventional. On the other hand, unlike the true believers, I do realize that a good many of these reports are probably mis-identification and a few hoaxes. The point is, based on my own readings on the subject, my personal experience, and stories told to me by my late Pops (who served in the USAF from 1968 to 1977), that this is something worthy of study.
And apparently, so does the United States Government. I don't believe for a minute, despite private backing after 2012, that the DoD and intelligence agencies don't have at least a couple of fingers in the pie.
The most likely explanation is some secret aircraft testing by some government, like the US, which other aircraft inadvertently encounter.
Area 51 is where stealth aircraft were originally tested, and account for the UFO sightings in the area. It's likely that this was just some new stealth craft being tested in secret and everybody being kept in the dark. Mistaken identities as a UFO makes for a convenient cover story so it gets left at that.
Thats my bet. These guys encountered some new stealth aircraft while it was being tested and it confused the heck out of their sensors.
Grey Templar wrote: The most likely explanation is some secret aircraft testing by some government, like the US, which other aircraft inadvertently encounter.
Area 51 is where stealth aircraft were originally tested, and account for the UFO sightings in the area. It's likely that this was just some new stealth craft being tested in secret and everybody being kept in the dark. Mistaken identities as a UFO makes for a convenient cover story so it gets left at that.
Thats my bet. These guys encountered some new stealth aircraft while it was being tested and it confused the heck out of their sensors.
UFO makes a great cover story for that kind of thing. Especially if a more extreme design like the B2 or night hawk.
UFO makes a great cover story for that kind of thing. Especially if a more extreme design like the B2 or night hawk.
Neither of which being extreme designs, the flying wing having been around since at least the Ho 229 in WW2. Based on the Princeton's reported readings, these are not a conventional aircraft of any known type. Unless someone has invented rocket blimps or some sort of land speeder of the 40k variety with a ceiling over 10k.
Grey Templar wrote: The most likely explanation is some secret aircraft testing by some government, like the US, which other aircraft inadvertently encounter.
Area 51 is where stealth aircraft were originally tested, and account for the UFO sightings in the area. It's likely that this was just some new stealth craft being tested in secret and everybody being kept in the dark. Mistaken identities as a UFO makes for a convenient cover story so it gets left at that.
Thats my bet. These guys encountered some new stealth aircraft while it was being tested and it confused the heck out of their sensors.
Its my understanding that the whole UFO phenomenon was begun by the US intelligence service right? Having captured German prototypes in WWII they spread the rumour of UFOs rather than have the public (and the Soviets) knowing what they really were. Those German prototypes look a hell of a lot like flying saucers (though the Germans themselves didn't hold much weight in their idea, and found helicopters were more effective overall). A friend has a book on German helicopter prototypes from before and during war and there were loads of discs in there (besides conventional designs).
UFO makes a great cover story for that kind of thing. Especially if a more extreme design like the B2 or night hawk.
Neither of which being extreme designs, the flying wing having been around since at least the Ho 229 in WW2. Based on the Princeton's reported readings, these are not a conventional aircraft of any known type. Unless someone has invented rocket blimps or some sort of land speeder of the 40k variety with a ceiling over 10k.
Flying wings predate the Ho 229. The US flew a prototype N-1M in 1940 and there were several designs from other countries predate even that.
Because if it's the pilot, he's got a steadier head than me....
I was thinking the same thing, for a general HUD view of the plane's field of view this seems ridiculously steady on-target. If it's some separate lock-on-target camera, I can imagine it might be quite steady, but even then everything seems a bit..static.
Because if it's the pilot, he's got a steadier head than me....
I was thinking the same thing, for a general HUD view of the plane's field of view this seems ridiculously steady on-target. If it's some separate lock-on-target camera, I can imagine it might be quite steady, but even then everything seems a bit..static.
I think the way the camera is behaving is totally plausible if it's done by a computer; the device in the center of the screen (though it rotates) doesn't do many exciting maneuvers or anything and the computers can probably predict a straight-line course well enough to keep steady-on.
My question is "what did it look like to the pilot" because I've heard of air eddies and whatnot that are particularly strong (especially in 120mph winds that are mentioned in the video) and I could see that distorting sensor returns somehow. But this would have to be super bizarre indeed.
One other question: How fast is the jet travelling? Did he fly past the device somehow? I can't visualize the courses of the jet and the UFO in my head, unless one is chasing another, but only kind of, because the other is also moving laterally...
Flying wings and lifting bodies are old designs, if you know where to look. UFOs predate Military intelligence and WWII, as you can find stories of mysterious airships from before the age of powered flight. Stranger still are their inclusion in some classical art. What does it all mean? Knowbody knows, but the truth is out there.
The title made me think of something way cooler. You know guys, just because it is an UFO doesn't mean it is an 'alien invader'. It might as well be an unknown natural phenomenon.
Because if it's the pilot, he's got a steadier head than me....
I was thinking the same thing, for a general HUD view of the plane's field of view this seems ridiculously steady on-target. If it's some separate lock-on-target camera, I can imagine it might be quite steady, but even then everything seems a bit..static.
Well, for all the tech and ridiculous amount of money they spend on fighter jets, I would hope that they at least figured out a way to keep a camera steady in-flight. I don't find the footage static. The camera moves as you would expect an aircraft to move.
Grey Templar wrote: The most likely explanation is some secret aircraft testing by some government, like the US, which other aircraft inadvertently encounter.
Area 51 is where stealth aircraft were originally tested, and account for the UFO sightings in the area. It's likely that this was just some new stealth craft being tested in secret and everybody being kept in the dark. Mistaken identities as a UFO makes for a convenient cover story so it gets left at that.
Thats my bet. These guys encountered some new stealth aircraft while it was being tested and it confused the heck out of their sensors.
Its my understanding that the whole UFO phenomenon was begun by the US intelligence service right? Having captured German prototypes in WWII they spread the rumour of UFOs rather than have the public (and the Soviets) knowing what they really were. Those German prototypes look a hell of a lot like flying saucers (though the Germans themselves didn't hold much weight in their idea, and found helicopters were more effective overall). A friend has a book on German helicopter prototypes from before and during war and there were loads of discs in there (besides conventional designs).
There are many historical references to wheels, shields and crosses appearing in the sky, but since they were recorded centuries ago almost no one takes them seriously today.
Grey Templar wrote: The most likely explanation is some secret aircraft testing by some government, like the US, which other aircraft inadvertently encounter.
Area 51 is where stealth aircraft were originally tested, and account for the UFO sightings in the area. It's likely that this was just some new stealth craft being tested in secret and everybody being kept in the dark. Mistaken identities as a UFO makes for a convenient cover story so it gets left at that.
Thats my bet. These guys encountered some new stealth aircraft while it was being tested and it confused the heck out of their sensors.
Its my understanding that the whole UFO phenomenon was begun by the US intelligence service right? Having captured German prototypes in WWII they spread the rumour of UFOs rather than have the public (and the Soviets) knowing what they really were. Those German prototypes look a hell of a lot like flying saucers (though the Germans themselves didn't hold much weight in their idea, and found helicopters were more effective overall). A friend has a book on German helicopter prototypes from before and during war and there were loads of discs in there (besides conventional designs).
There are many historical references to wheels, shields and crosses appearing in the sky, but since they were recorded centuries ago almost no one takes them seriously today.
Grey Templar wrote: The most likely explanation is some secret aircraft testing by some government, like the US, which other aircraft inadvertently encounter.
Area 51 is where stealth aircraft were originally tested, and account for the UFO sightings in the area. It's likely that this was just some new stealth craft being tested in secret and everybody being kept in the dark. Mistaken identities as a UFO makes for a convenient cover story so it gets left at that.
Thats my bet. These guys encountered some new stealth aircraft while it was being tested and it confused the heck out of their sensors.
Its my understanding that the whole UFO phenomenon was begun by the US intelligence service right? Having captured German prototypes in WWII they spread the rumour of UFOs rather than have the public (and the Soviets) knowing what they really were. Those German prototypes look a hell of a lot like flying saucers (though the Germans themselves didn't hold much weight in their idea, and found helicopters were more effective overall). A friend has a book on German helicopter prototypes from before and during war and there were loads of discs in there (besides conventional designs).
There are many historical references to wheels, shields and crosses appearing in the sky, but since they were recorded centuries ago almost no one takes them seriously today.
So what you are saying is
Yeah, that's a conclusion people tend to jump to.
Even in the cases that are still mysterious, "I don't know" is a more intellectually honest answer than "ALIENS!".
I'm not saying it's aliens necessarily, but I am saying we will never learn anything about some potentially important unknown phenomenon if our first reaction is always ridicule and minimalizing.
Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
I feel exactly the same way that Disciple of Fate does. Odds are good there are aliens, but bad that they've come all the way over here out of all the infinite vastness of space. I don't think we're quite cool enough to warrant that level of interest.
Luciferian wrote: I feel exactly the same way that Disciple of Fate does. Odds are good there are aliens, but bad that they've come all the way over here out of all the infinite vastness of space. I don't think we're quite cool enough to warrant that level of interest.
And I don't think they are "playing doctor" with country bumpkins.
But then, if they were, would you believe the country bumpkins?
Disciple of Fate wrote: Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
That is supposing aliens (should they exist) actually care about us and are interested in monitoring us though. If these UFO's were alien craft or beings, they could be doing a myriad things flying around Earth.
Until the day the existence of aliens is definitely proven, and we have an idea of what aliens actually are, any discussion about aliens, their nature and their motives is pretty much meaningless. How can we discuss something if we don't even know what we are talking about? It is as useless as arguing about the nature of God or any other unknowable thing.
Just for the record. Personally, given the truly vast, unimaginably huge scale of the universe, I find it statistically highly likely that alien life exists. The probability however that the Human race ever gets to meet them before going extinct? Highly unlikely, even if our species should last for a hundred million years and spreads itself to the far corners of the Milky Way. The universe is just so big, the whole Milky Way is only an insignificant speck in it. And even if aliens were to live relatively close by, within the Milky Way, the time involved is also so unimaginably vast that alien life may have well become extinct before we ever encounter it, or yet to evolve... For us to meet aliens, we need to be very very very close to one another in terms of time and space. I don't know how big that chance is, but I imagine not very big.
Disciple of Fate wrote:Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
Never mind the Universe, the Galaxy alone should suffice!
Iron_Captain wrote:
Disciple of Fate wrote: Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
That is supposing aliens (should they exist) actually care about us and are interested in monitoring us though. If these UFO's were alien craft or beings, they could be doing a myriad things flying around Earth.
Until the day the existence of aliens is definitely proven, and we have an idea of what aliens actually are, any discussion about aliens, their nature and their motives is pretty much meaningless. How can we discuss something if we don't even know what we are talking about? It is as useless as arguing about the nature of God or any other unknowable thing.
Pretty sure those are good reasons to actually HAVE discussions about these kinds of things.
Disciple of Fate wrote:Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
Never mind the Universe, the Galaxy alone should suffice!
Iron_Captain wrote:
Disciple of Fate wrote: Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
That is supposing aliens (should they exist) actually care about us and are interested in monitoring us though. If these UFO's were alien craft or beings, they could be doing a myriad things flying around Earth.
Until the day the existence of aliens is definitely proven, and we have an idea of what aliens actually are, any discussion about aliens, their nature and their motives is pretty much meaningless. How can we discuss something if we don't even know what we are talking about? It is as useless as arguing about the nature of God or any other unknowable thing.
Pretty sure those are good reasons to actually HAVE discussions about these kinds of things.
Well, it is interesting, that is for sure. But I just don't see how any a discussion on aliens could be useful in any way beyond the 'fun factor'. We know nothing, and all we have to offer is our fantasy.
Disciple of Fate wrote: Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
That is supposing aliens (should they exist) actually care about us and are interested in monitoring us though. If these UFO's were alien craft or beings, they could be doing a myriad things flying around Earth.
Until the day the existence of aliens is definitely proven, and we have an idea of what aliens actually are, any discussion about aliens, their nature and their motives is pretty much meaningless. How can we discuss something if we don't even know what we are talking about? It is as useless as arguing about the nature of God or any other unknowable thing.
Just for the record. Personally, given the truly vast, unimaginably huge scale of the universe, I find it statistically highly likely that alien life exists. The probability however that the Human race ever gets to meet them before going extinct? Highly unlikely, even if our species should last for a hundred million years and spreads itself to the far corners of the Milky Way. The universe is just so big, the whole Milky Way is only an insignificant speck in it.
True, but we can question the underlying logic of them just flying about and abducting random yokels. As you might be aware, there is a large amount of debate on the nature of God too Its fun to do, but to us, logically there doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason behind what 'UFOs' are doing here.
Disciple of Fate wrote:Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
Never mind the Universe, the Galaxy alone should suffice!
I already have my towel and guide ready for that part
Disciple of Fate wrote: Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
Just a hundred years? Perhaps throughout human history and beyond. The visible universe is 13 billion years old as far as we can tell, and there's no reason to believe aliens had to evolve in only the most recent hundred million years. I can't even begin to speculate what might motivate members of a civilization that may be any number of eons old with pretense towards accuracy. For all we know they are just amusing themselves at our expense the way toddlers like to chase ducks.
Perhaps the answer to the Fermi Paradox is not that aliens don't exist or don't communicate. It might just be that we dismiss the evidence they do give us as imlausible and discard it.
Assuming these objects are alien in origin. Perhaps they represent some unknown natural phenomenon we've never anticipated.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Why wouldn't UFO's abduct yokels? Are they supposed to drop into the big city unobserved so they can abduct some educated sophisticate?
Also, considering the breadth of people who have reported UFO sightings and even abductions, you are really doing them a disservice by dismissing them all as yokels. Have you read their accounts? Or do you just go by the prevailing wisdom that this is all bunk? Again, you can't study something unknown if you decide you already know what it is and don't care before you even look at it.
Disciple of Fate wrote: Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
Just a hundred years? Perhaps throughout human history and beyond. The visible universe is 13 billion years old as far as we can tell, and there's no reason to believe aliens had to evolve in only the most recent hundred million years. I can't even begin to speculate what might motivate members of a civilization that may be any number of eons old with pretense towards accuracy. For all we know they are just amusing themselves at our expense the way toddlers like to chase ducks.
Perhaps the answer to the Fermi Paradox is not that aliens don't exist or don't communicate. It might just be that we dismiss the evidence they do give us as imlausible and discard it.
Assuming these objects are alien in origin. Perhaps they represent some unknown natural phenomenon we've never anticipated.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Why wouldn't UFO's abduct yokels? Are they supposed to drop into the big city unobserved so they can abduct some educated sophisticate?
Also, considering the breadth of people who have reported UFO sightings and even abductions, you are really doing them a disservice by dismissing them all as yokels. Have you read their accounts? Or do you just go by the prevailing wisdom that this is all bunk? Again, you can't study something unknown if you decide you already know what it is and don't care before you even look at it.
The 100 years was more a reference to the beginning of a larger amount of UFO sightings around the mid 20th century. So to us they seem to have been flying around randomly for a hundred years or so, possibly longer.
Natural phenomenon sounds more logical, but partly because of reasons you outline. The alien approach just feels very illogical to the human brain as it just doesn't seem to make sense. The yokel thing was a joke, but overall the level of kidnap victim does not seem to hold any specific value as far as 'research' would concern, again something seemingly illogical.
I have read a good deal of accounts, some are harder to explain but some just seem completely made up. But again, without any solid evidence or any uniform type of account its harder to believe. Based on the thousands of accounts that are out there, there isn't just a single alien race floating around earth, but dozens if not hundreds going by physical descriptions. It just gets more and more unlikely the more accounts you gather to compare. So for me personally, its more that I haven't seen a convincing case as to thinking it might never ever happen.
If you are referring to my post, then do yourself a favor and read up on the history of U.S. Government investigations into UFOs. Particularly, Project Grudge, the Robertson Panel, and the Condon Committee.
Their is nothing "conspiracy" about it. UFOs were a major headache and security concern (as far as Soviet espionage activities went) during the Cold War. The Air Force (and others) were concerned that public interest in UFOs could be the results of a Soviet destablization campaign designed to undermine national security, and distract U.S. intelligence/military attention from Soviet activities by tying up resources. They pointed to the 1952 UFO "flap" over Washington D.C. and the resulting public response as evidence to support their supposition. Thus, the policy of outright debunking and using respected scientists who were hostile to the idea of UFOs. Even Blue Book, the best and most in-depth study and analysis ever undertaken by the USAF, has it's critics based on the 1955 release of Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14, and the fudging of the number of actual unknowns by the Air Force.
It's also noteworthy that one of the members of the Robertson Panel, J. Allen Hynek, was later one of the biggest critics of the government's methods of dealing with the UFO phenomena.
Yes, Washington had legit concerns during the height of the Cold War, so their actions are understandable. But there is no excuse for the lack of serious studies in the present time period.
Would they really need to be dozens of different races? Or perhaps one or two with advanced cosmetic alterations/swappable bodies/bio drones whatever? We don't have enough information.
Some of the stories are definitely made up. That will always be the case. But there are so many, and they likely started because at least some people believed they had real experiences.
If you are referring to my post, then do yourself a favor and read up on the history of U.S. Government investigations into UFOs. Particularly, Project Grudge, the Robertson Panel, and the Condon Committee.
Their is nothing "conspiracy" about it. UFOs were a major headache and security concern (as far as Soviet espionage activities went) during the Cold War. The Air Force (and others) were concerned that public interest in UFOs could be the results of a Soviet destablization campaign designed to undermine national security, and distract U.S. intelligence/military attention from Soviet activities by tying up resources. They pointed to the 1952 UFO "flap" over Washington D.C. and the resulting public response as evidence to support their supposition. Thus, the policy of outright debunking and using respected scientists who were hostile to the idea of UFOs. Even Blue Book, the best and most in-depth study and analysis ever undertaken by the USAF, has it's critics based on the 1955 release of Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14, and the fudging of the number of actual unknowns by the Air Force.
It's also noteworthy that one of the members of the Robertson Panel, J. Allen Hynek, was later one of the biggest critics of the government's methods of dealing with the UFO phenomena.
Yes, Washington had legit concerns during the height of the Cold War, so their actions are understandable. But there is no excuse for the lack of serious studies in the present time period.
Hah, really? The funny thing is that the Soviets were thinking many of the UFO stories were made up by the US government to distract their citizens from political issues.
I'm a believer of extra-terrestrials visiting us, and that they have been visiting us for some time. Maybe even different species of them over the last thousands of years. I think some sightings or events in history are definitely legit, and I also believe there are many others that are just pranks or explained as another phenomenon. I assume they (aliens) mostly come by to observe, and once and awhile get caught. Is it possible they have abducted and experimented on us and other animals? Sure. Its not like we haven't done something similar on earth.
And you have to imagine, how much time and resources it takes mankind to just go into orbit, let alone another planet, let alone outside of our solar system, and we aren't capable of traveling to the nearest star within a lifetime. If beings from another world have developed technology that allows them to traverse the enormous distances in space, then I am sure they can just as well come up with stealthy ways to mostly remain undetected. But once and awhile they get caught (observed) which is probably due to a mistake or maybe even malfunction. Whatever their intentions, they seem to be going out of their way to not announce they are there.
I think most people out there seem to think if there was advanced life visiting us, they would make themselves known, bring gifts, etc, when in reality we are probably just one of many stops along some interstellar tour. I mean, is it a far stretch that mankind would do something similar? And if we came across some primitive race that are thousands of years behind us, would we reward and trust them with highly sophisticated technology, especially if they are as f***ed up and violent of a species as us? Hell no. So why should they?
The observable universe has some 150-250 billion galaxies. Pick an average of how many stars reside in each, and then the number of planets that might orbit each star. Its mathematically impossible for Earth to be the only planet in the universe with life.
But until we get one to show up on the evening news, this debate will never end.
Honestly its impossible to know if they would even care to share gifts or destroy all humans.
considering they have not made themselves known to all of us means they probably dont want to mess with our civ or otherwise mess with us directly
though a lack of proof doesn't mean no proof exists.
if anything a science based civ of that nature with the ability to deep space travel probably would want to not get involved in our civ and just study it from afar.
BaronIveagh wrote: I find it interesting that proof that UFOs are real, even if not necessarily alien, takes a back seat to the latest Trump debacle.
The media certainly seems to spend all of its time on Trump, but this is always how it goes when the government declassifies something after the fact. In 20 years they could release documents proving they were behind 9/11 and as long as the media doesn't bring it up too much, it would be met with a shrug. The U.S. government has admitted to all kinds of things it's done or covered up in the past which would have been earth-shattering revelations when they happened, but with the passage of time become non-issues to the public.
BaronIveagh wrote: I find it interesting that proof that UFOs are real, even if not necessarily alien, takes a back seat to the latest Trump debacle.
Well, obviously when you see a UFO you see something. So it's real. The question is what is it actually. If it's a weather phenomenon or just some secret aircraft being tested, it's not really worthy of much press. Doesn't help that many people think UFO = Aliens. When it really just means Unidentified Flying Object, which could be anything really. Cause you know, it's "Unidentified". Proof that somebody saw something flying around and they didn't know what it was is not really newsworthy.
I see lights flying around in the sky at night all the time around here. I don't know what they are, so technically they are UFOs. But really they're almost certainly a low flying helicopter or airplane. Nothing newsworthy there.
BaronIveagh wrote: I find it interesting that proof that UFOs are real, even if not necessarily alien, takes a back seat to the latest Trump debacle.
The media certainly seems to spend all of its time on Trump, but this is always how it goes when the government declassifies something after the fact. In 20 years they could release documents proving they were behind 9/11 and as long as the media doesn't bring it up too much, it would be met with a shrug. The U.S. government has admitted to all kinds of things it's done or covered up in the past which would have been earth-shattering revelations when they happened, but with the passage of time become non-issues to the public.
BaronIveagh wrote: I find it interesting that proof that UFOs are real, even if not necessarily alien, takes a back seat to the latest Trump debacle.
The media certainly seems to spend all of its time on Trump, but this is always how it goes when the government declassifies something after the fact. In 20 years they could release documents proving they were behind 9/11 and as long as the media doesn't bring it up too much, it would be met with a shrug. The U.S. government has admitted to all kinds of things it's done or covered up in the past which would have been earth-shattering revelations when they happened, but with the passage of time become non-issues to the public.
Such as?
The Dugway sheep incident, to name one. However, few people have heard of it or remembers it, much less gives a damn. MKULTRA is one of the most famous. It first came to public attention in 1975. But it didn't stick in the public's imagination until the 1990's with the renewed interest in conspiracy theories. The main reason why it took so long to become a household word (the last decade or so) is because most of the documents were destroyed during the Watergate panic among Federal agencies in 1973. Thus, it can never be properly investigated, since only 20,000 or so documents, uncovered in bits and pieces since 1977, don't give enough to go on except a few juicy tidbits here and there.
I think a better example is COINTELPRO. If I told you in 1965 that the FBI smeared the name of a murdered woman to protect a KKK member who helped murder her because the guy was paid by the FBI to be an ultra-violent racist wack job so that the KKK would look bad/disrupt Civil Rights groups I'd be called a conspiracy nut. Hell it sounds pretty nutty right now, but that gak happened and when it eventually came out no one really carried because who cares if the FBI protected a KKK member who killed a "slutty commie who wants the black man to enslave white women" when Watergate is going on?
Seriously though you can't make up some of the gak money gets spent on.
LordofHats wrote: I think a better example is COINTELPRO. If I told you in 1965 that the FBI smeared the name of a murdered woman to protect a KKK member who helped murder her because the guy was paid by the FBI to be an ultra-violent racist wack job so that the KKK would look bad/disrupt Civil Rights groups I'd be called a conspiracy nut. Hell it sounds pretty nutty right now, but that gak happened and when it eventually came out no one really carried because who cares if the FBI protected a KKK member who killed a "slutty commie who wants the black man to enslave white women" when Watergate is going on?
Seriously though you can't make up some of the gak money gets spent on.
It's not nutty at all. In the late 80's and during the 1990's, that crap was still going on. The difference is that the white separatists/supremacists got good a playing "Pick Out The FBI Agent" at gatherings/events. The actual paid informants were a little more circumspect.It was one of these working for the BATF that set the ball rolling that led to the Ruby Ridge standoff.
As for covering for informants, that is common with snitches feeding law enforcement intel on the local drug trade. The department I used to work for caught flak from neighboring agencies for burning their snitches on non-drug related crap. And the little pricks were arrogant, assuming that they were untouchable by police across the County because they were rats for the law.
I think the thing that pushes it to nutty is both the way the informant was employed and how the FBI chose to try and protect him. That kind of stuff wouldn't fly today, which isn't to say shady stuff still doesn't happen but the FBI definitely use to be a lot more wacky than it is today with how it approached "potentially dangerous" groups.
As for covering for informants, that is common with snitches feeding law enforcement intel on the local drug trade. The department I used to work for caught flak from neighboring agencies for burning their snitches on non-drug related crap. And the little pricks were arrogant, assuming that they were untouchable by police across the County because they were rats for the law.
I can't imagine why fingering their snitches might irritate them. It was, after all, how Youngstown police used to murder people who snitched to the Feds. When they finally tripped up, the entire department was charged, along with every member of the local sheriffs department, most of the judges, and the Congressman. Law enforcement was so corrupt they had to try the cases in Cleveland. Too bad the Sheriff was taking bribes on camera, and the brains of the mob got blown out all over the place by morons like Strollo.
LordofHats wrote:I think the thing that pushes it to nutty is both the way the informant was employed and how the FBI chose to try and protect him. That kind of stuff wouldn't fly today, which isn't to say shady stuff still doesn't happen but the FBI definitely use to be a lot more wacky than it is today with how it approached "potentially dangerous" groups.
Oh, absolutely.
Case in point: J. Edgar and his collection of dirt on everybody and everything that rubbed him the wrong way.
As for covering for informants, that is common with snitches feeding law enforcement intel on the local drug trade. The department I used to work for caught flak from neighboring agencies for burning their snitches on non-drug related crap. And the little pricks were arrogant, assuming that they were untouchable by police across the County because they were rats for the law.
I can't imagine why fingering their snitches might irritate them. It was, after all, how Youngstown police used to murder people who snitched to the Feds. When they finally tripped up, the entire department was charged, along with every member of the local sheriffs department, most of the judges, and the Congressman. Law enforcement was so corrupt they had to try the cases in Cleveland. Too bad the Sheriff was taking bribes on camera, and the brains of the mob got blown out all over the place by morons like Strollo.
Snitches made their jobs a little easier (the reliable ones, that is). Drug busts meant more State and Federal money for their agencies. Of course, we didn't care when their pet rats stirred up in our jurisdiction.
That's one problem I have with the way the War on Drugs has been waged for the last forty years. It's gone from enforcing the drug laws to a revenue raising tool for smaller law enforcement agencies, or larger ones run by misers in the local government. I don't agree with that.
If you are referring to my post, then do yourself a favor and read up on the history of U.S. Government investigations into UFOs. Particularly, Project Grudge, the Robertson Panel, and the Condon Committee.
Their is nothing "conspiracy" about it. UFOs were a major headache and security concern (as far as Soviet espionage activities went) during the Cold War. The Air Force (and others) were concerned that public interest in UFOs could be the results of a Soviet destablization campaign designed to undermine national security, and distract U.S. intelligence/military attention from Soviet activities by tying up resources. They pointed to the 1952 UFO "flap" over Washington D.C. and the resulting public response as evidence to support their supposition. Thus, the policy of outright debunking and using respected scientists who were hostile to the idea of UFOs. Even Blue Book, the best and most in-depth study and analysis ever undertaken by the USAF, has it's critics based on the 1955 release of Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14, and the fudging of the number of actual unknowns by the Air Force.
It's also noteworthy that one of the members of the Robertson Panel, J. Allen Hynek, was later one of the biggest critics of the government's methods of dealing with the UFO phenomena.
Yes, Washington had legit concerns during the height of the Cold War, so their actions are understandable. But there is no excuse for the lack of serious studies in the present time period.
Just waking up and at a glance, I thought you had written "Condom committee"!
LordofHats wrote: I think a better example is COINTELPRO. If I told you in 1965 that the FBI smeared the name of a murdered woman to protect a KKK member who helped murder her because the guy was paid by the FBI to be an ultra-violent racist wack job so that the KKK would look bad/disrupt Civil Rights groups I'd be called a conspiracy nut. Hell it sounds pretty nutty right now, but that gak happened and when it eventually came out no one really carried because who cares if the FBI protected a KKK member who killed a "slutty commie who wants the black man to enslave white women" when Watergate is going on?
Seriously though you can't make up some of the gak money gets spent on.
It's not nutty at all. In the late 80's and during the 1990's, that crap was still going on. The difference is that the white separatists/supremacists got good a playing "Pick Out The FBI Agent" at gatherings/events. The actual paid informants were a little more circumspect.It was one of these working for the BATF that set the ball rolling that led to the Ruby Ridge standoff.
As for covering for informants, that is common with snitches feeding law enforcement intel on the local drug trade. The department I used to work for caught flak from neighboring agencies for burning their snitches on non-drug related crap. And the little pricks were arrogant, assuming that they were untouchable by police across the County because they were rats for the law.
And what a wonderful thing for the government Ruby Ridge turned out to be.
Zognob Gorgoff wrote: It’s it not much more plausible that is was a drone aircraft of us or Russian or Chinese design?
Unless someone has discovered a new super-material or invented Inertial dampeners, it's unlikely. The maneuvers and speeds it took them at would exceed the stress limits of pretty much anything I can think of.
Zognob Gorgoff wrote: Surely that’s the point tho - secret military tech it not something we can think of. It’s new. It’s secret. It’s not automatically aliens.
We don't know what it was, that's what the U is about in UFO. That said, however, if they had the tech to build this, then the US wouldn't be talking about Trump right now, but rather our new Russian or Chinese overlords. Since this would be like having a nuclear weapon during the Roman Empire.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Plus ufo does not equal aliens but you wouldn’t get that reading this thread - anyway it’s more likely to be US craft with the money they spend on this stuff than an enemy craft or maybe just a made up event just meant to gauge public reaction.
Zognob Gorgoff wrote: Surely that’s the point tho - secret military tech it not something we can think of. It’s new. It’s secret. It’s not automatically aliens.
We don't know what it was, that's what the U is about in UFO. That said, however, if they had the tech to build this, then the US wouldn't be talking about Trump right now, but rather our new Russian or Chinese overlords. Since this would be like having a nuclear weapon during the Roman Empire.
Assuming said tech also provided immunity to nukes which it might not. Even if your aircraft would be able to do manouver US planes can't doesn't mean russia wouldn't get obliterated by nukes.
Zognob Gorgoff wrote: Surely that’s the point tho - secret military tech it not something we can think of. It’s new. It’s secret. It’s not automatically aliens.
We don't know what it was, that's what the U is about in UFO. That said, however, if they had the tech to build this, then the US wouldn't be talking about Trump right now, but rather our new Russian or Chinese overlords. Since this would be like having a nuclear weapon during the Roman Empire.
Assuming said tech also provided immunity to nukes which it might not. Even if your aircraft would be able to do manouver US planes can't doesn't mean russia wouldn't get obliterated by nukes.
And also assuming that the tech can be mass-produced. Prototypes are prototypes for a reason.
Yeah. The video has some pretty freaky stuff, but it's not so freaky that missiles suddenly become unable to track it or anything.
It's less like having a nuclear weapon during the Roman Empire, and more like having scythe chariots during the Roman Empire. It's a thing, and it'd be powerful, but not really an 'out of context' problem or anything like some people seem to be implying.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Yeah. The video has some pretty freaky stuff, but it's not so freaky that missiles suddenly become unable to track it or anything.
It's less like having a nuclear weapon during the Roman Empire, and more like having scythe chariots during the Roman Empire. It's a thing, and it'd be powerful, but not really an 'out of context' problem or anything like some people seem to be implying.
Romans dealt reasonably easily with Scythed chariots
be interesting if it was Aliens, but real life does not seem to be that interesting.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Yeah. The video has some pretty freaky stuff, but it's not so freaky that missiles suddenly become unable to track it or anything.
It's less like having a nuclear weapon during the Roman Empire, and more like having scythe chariots during the Roman Empire. It's a thing, and it'd be powerful, but not really an 'out of context' problem or anything like some people seem to be implying.
Romans dealt reasonably easily with Scythed chariots
be interesting if it was Aliens, but real life does not seem to be that interesting.
Right, that's my point. Good tactics and training can overcome that sort of purely technological advantage, especially if said super-tech is very expensive.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Yeah. The video has some pretty freaky stuff, but it's not so freaky that missiles suddenly become unable to track it or anything
Track it, yes, catch it, no. When the Hornets caught up with the two objects detected, one was underwater (????) and the other was only traveling at mach 2 according to radar aboard USS Princeton. It then accelerated away, according to radar, hitting mach 61. By the time the planes reached the second location they were given, the object was long gone.
Just for comparison, some of the fastest air to air and ground to air missiles top out at about 2.5-3km per second. This sucker hit 18km per second in under two seconds. The stress that sort of acceleration would put on the air-frame would be off the chart.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Yeah. The video has some pretty freaky stuff, but it's not so freaky that missiles suddenly become unable to track it or anything.
It's less like having a nuclear weapon during the Roman Empire, and more like having scythe chariots during the Roman Empire. It's a thing, and it'd be powerful, but not really an 'out of context' problem or anything like some people seem to be implying.
Romans dealt reasonably easily with Scythed chariots
be interesting if it was Aliens, but real life does not seem to be that interesting.
Right, that's my point. Good tactics and training can overcome that sort of purely technological advantage, especially if said super-tech is very expensive.
Just a little historical nitpick here. Chariots (both scythed and not) actually were already ancient and largely outdated weapons by the Roman era. Chariots saw their height in bronze age warfare (the battle of Kadesh in 1274 BC for example saw something like 5000 chariots involved), in the iron age they fell largely out of use as warfare shifted to ranks of massed spear-armed infantry (against which chariots are useless), although the Persians, Celtic tribes and others did keep employing them to some degree in a fast skirmishing role until eventually being replaced in that role as well by more agile light cavalry. Also, having a nuke in the Roman era would not be that effective. You could use it to destroy a single city, but that is hardly going to give you victory in a war against a large empire. Using it against non-settled peoples would just be a waste. You also could not use it to threaten or bluff, because no one is going to believe that that funny metal cylinder can destroy an entire city. You would need to demonstrate it first, but that would lose you your nuke. Getting assault rifles and lots of ammo would be more effective than a nuke. Imagine what the world would have looked like if the Roman legions had been armed with assault rifles instead of swords and javelins.
Your point stands though. Tactics, training or sheer numbers can all overcome a technological advantage if used effectively.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Yeah. The video has some pretty freaky stuff, but it's not so freaky that missiles suddenly become unable to track it or anything
Track it, yes, catch it, no. When the Hornets caught up with the two objects detected, one was underwater (????) and the other was only traveling at mach 2 according to radar aboard USS Princeton. It then accelerated away, according to radar, hitting mach 61. By the time the planes reached the second location they were given, the object was long gone.
Just for comparison, some of the fastest air to air and ground to air missiles top out at about 2.5-3km per second. This sucker hit 18km per second in under two seconds. The stress that sort of acceleration would put on the air-frame would be off the chart.
I am more inclined to believe that this thing had something to confuse their sensors than it was actually going that fast.
My guess is its some sort of super-high speed prototype aircraft that is also carrying some new tech to befuddle tracking attempts.
And what better way to test it then to have it fly by some unsuspecting friendlies to see how they can do with it? The pilots likely weren't in on it, maybe not even the people on the Princeton.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Yeah. The video has some pretty freaky stuff, but it's not so freaky that missiles suddenly become unable to track it or anything.
It's less like having a nuclear weapon during the Roman Empire, and more like having scythe chariots during the Roman Empire. It's a thing, and it'd be powerful, but not really an 'out of context' problem or anything like some people seem to be implying.
Romans dealt reasonably easily with Scythed chariots
be interesting if it was Aliens, but real life does not seem to be that interesting.
Right, that's my point. Good tactics and training can overcome that sort of purely technological advantage, especially if said super-tech is very expensive.
Debatable, that really depends on the exact technological level. Speaking of human civilization/history, sure that holds true for the most part.
But once you put actual space-faring aliens (as some would imply) into the mix all bets are off on if training and tactics can still be effective if you can't even scratch the things you're fighting.
Disciple of Fate wrote: Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
Want a weird answer that most people don't bring up? Conservation, as in environment conservation, like we do with wildlife in the USA.
Tell me if this sounds familiar. Individual is tracked through woods from a low flying object. Individual is incapacitated, abducted and then has their vitals tested, noted, and a tracking device fitted, before being dumped in the woods to wake up with no idea how they got there. Sounds like classic Alien abduction right?
Except what I just described is standard procedure for population studies and population restoration of many larger mammal species in North America such as bears, elk, and wolves. You can't do that kind of work with a satellite, it takes boots on the ground and a helicopter. A satellite cannot perform autopsies, plant tracking devices, or even do something as simple as measure your weight. This insane sounding theory even starts to make our abductions make a lot more sense, after all they follow many of the same rough principles.
As to why theyd be doing population studies on us, it could be any number of reasons. We could be some form of nature preserve. Maybe we're some sort of pet project from another race trying to mold us into a vassal species. Maybe they're waiting to see if we're "mature" enough to enter the galactic community. Maybe we're a lab rat equivalent, where they release certain diseases and plagues to see how people react to them. Maybe they're just donkey-caves and we're the alien equivalent of reality TV?
Long story short, the UFO's entering atmosphere to make observations and abduct people was always one of the things that I felt lent credit to UFO's. We quite literally do the same thing in our national parks and if we were to develop proper space travel and find life on another planet, you could bet we'd do the same there too. "Why don't they just talk to us then?" Is like me asking "why don't we just talk to the grizzly bears we want to help?" You don't just make contact with a planet where the primary species decided the best way to keep peace was nuclear weapons unless you really really need to
Disciple of Fate wrote: Sure, aliens exist, that is a pretty safe assumption based on the sheer size of the universe.
Them coming here and just flying about for a hundred years or so? Main counterargument would be a simple "why?" Any sufficiently advanced race must have much better ways of even just 'monitoring' us beyond randomly flying around.
Want a weird answer that most people don't bring up? Conservation, as in environment conservation, like we do with wildlife in the USA.
Tell me if this sounds familiar. Individual is tracked through woods from a low flying object. Individual is incapacitated, abducted and then has their vitals tested, noted, and a tracking device fitted, before being dumped in the woods to wake up with no idea how they got there. Sounds like classic Alien abduction right?
Except what I just described is standard procedure for population studies and population restoration of many larger mammal species in North America such as bears, elk, and wolves. You can't do that kind of work with a satellite, it takes boots on the ground and a helicopter. A satellite cannot perform autopsies, plant tracking devices, or even do something as simple as measure your weight. This insane sounding theory even starts to make our abductions make a lot more sense, after all they follow many of the same rough principles.
As to why theyd be doing population studies on us, it could be any number of reasons. We could be some form of nature preserve. Maybe we're some sort of pet project from another race trying to mold us into a vassal species. Maybe they're waiting to see if we're "mature" enough to enter the galactic community. Maybe we're a lab rat equivalent, where they release certain diseases and plagues to see how people react to them. Maybe they're just donkey-caves and we're the alien equivalent of reality TV?
Long story short, the UFO's entering atmosphere to make observations and abduct people was always one of the things that I felt lent credit to UFO's. We quite literally do the same thing in our national parks and if we were to develop proper space travel and find life on another planet, you could bet we'd do the same there too. "Why don't they just talk to us then?" Is like me asking "why don't we just talk to the grizzly bears we want to help?" You don't just make contact with a planet where the primary species decided the best way to keep peace was nuclear weapons unless you really really need to
Few issues with the conservation theory are reports, method and distance.
First, most of these UFO reports come from Western countries, not the whole world. Its a noticeable difference if looking at worldwide UFO sightings. So either these conservation efforts focus much more on the 'Western human' or its just more embedded in Western culture. Same for alien abduction stories really. So that's my issue with method and reports versus how we do conservation.
As for distance, you say helicopter, which is how we do it. But that helicopter has to go somewhere right? So how come we never really detect the approach or departure of a 'helicopter' even with a lot of eyes in the sky? Military hardware seems to be able to pick 'them' up in atmosphere at least.
On the subject of test subjects, wouldn't it be vastly easier and more cost effective to do that kind of research close to home? Animal testing labs here don't bother going to the chimpanzees or whatever animal they use, they take them to their lab.
As for if we would do that? I don't know but there is a distinct ethical problem linked to that, we once did it to other humans. Are we going to repeat that mistake on extraterrestrial intelligent life if we ever encounter it? Then there is the concept that being the one subjected to first contact is going to be the one worse of on the imperialist kind of note. On the subject of talking, simple, we haven't developed the capacity to converse with a grizzly bear in a significant manner. But with aliens? We have mathematics, images, music, binary code and whatever else you can think of that could be used as a communication method with other intelligent life. And I'm pretty sure they have had technology that was similarly destructive to nuclear weapons.
All in all, location seems to be the biggest argument against a conservation angle in my mind.
Keep in mind I'm mainly doing this as a fun thing, so obviously I'm not doing a ton of research into the logistics of alien abductions
First point, on the whole "mostly Western world reports UFO's, not whole world". It makes sense we mostly hear about it from a western viewpoint. I highly doubtful anyone is going to believe a random tribal in the Amazon or a villager in Ethiopia if they said they saw something strange in the sky. People would say "oh they just saw a plane or something" and move on. Much like how I highly doubt all the wild animal attacks that happen in third world countries are accurately reported. These areas are very poor and most of the world doesn't care about them. In addition, anyone looking to get UFO abduction interviews isnt likely to fly halfway across the world to interview a random Joe shmoe when he's got dozens of cases in his back yard.
On the whole "why don't we pick them up or see them", well, we do, kind of. After all we have eye witness accounts (which if we want to be honest here, best case scenario 90% or so are misidentified normal phenomenon) and supposedly military can pick them up. But let's say you're the US government and you know for a fact that there are UFO's breaking atmosphere and doing tests on human beings. You have no way to stop them. Why on Earth would you tell the general population about it? All that's going to do is spread massive amounts of panic and lead to major lack of faith in the government. So you keep it quiet, downplay it, and label anyone who challenges your viewpoint as crazy or a radical. Sure, some people will believe it, but if you can get the general public to think they're tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists the public will do more work to shut down their arguments than you ever have to. And with the massive improvements in CGI and costume effects, you could theoretically allow actual video of aliens and UFO's out onto the internet tomorrow and most people would just think it's a film student's pet project.
As for distance, there's still major swathes of the Earth that are not properly explored, and of course the oceans as well. Taking a page from XCOM, it wouldn't be surprising if an Alien presence intent on studying us hid small outposts on the planet. We get tons of reports of "underwater UFO's" and if you've got technology to go halfway across the Galaxy building a have underwater is probably child's play. And there are studies done out in the middle of nowhere, it's not unheard of for research crews to work in Backcountry conditions for a few weeks or months at a time.
As for doing the research "at home", unless you're researching a very low intelligence lifeform, like bugs, having an artificial habitat greatly influences animal behavior. Imagine a human for example, you're not going to get much useful information from one locked up in a glass box in outer space. Especially if they're interested in how our behavior works. So you need to go out in the field and view us in our "natural habitat". If we're going to give this theory a serious view, then i think it's safe to say an Alien species probably only really cares about developed countries like America, Russia, and China, major players that can destroy half the planet if they wanted to. If alien life were to contact us, these would be the most likely ambassador nation's, so knowing how we think is very valuable. I would imagine it's this research precisely that would be why no sane aliens have outright talked to us yet
And as for if we would do that, absolutely. We do it every day. Not as much on humans anymore, but we gladly use monkeys and other animals in lab tests for everything from disease and psychology research to cosmetics. Obviously not everyone is this callous, but we absolutely have the potential within us to do it as a species. Think about all the horrible human testing done in WWII by the Nazis and Japanese, that's still within our living memory. And that was against our own species. don't think any of us can be naive enough to think that humans wouldn't do that again, especially to something sentient that actually is another species. Look at modern biology research papers sometime, we do seriously messed up stuff every day in the pursuit of knowledge. At my local college, there was a study done on wolf spiders to see if leg length affected chances of finding a mate. They'd observe each pair, see what happened, then euthanize the spiders to measure them. All for a little bit of knowledge on spider breeding habits. Not every human is like that obviously, but I think it's safe to say that some would.
On the whole "aliens surely have stuff way stronger than a nuke", I'm sure they do. I could buy a rifle that can drop a grizzly from 500 yards, but that doesn't mean I want to be 10 feet away from one when it's mad
So yeah with any theory it has it's holes and issues. Obviously I'm not writing a dissertation on this, I just think that if we were being visited by alien life it's the most likely explanation. Any other one would involve the aliens actually making contact with us, and since that's clearly hasn't happened it cuts down the possibilities a bit. I just think it's a fun mental excercise.
For my actual viewpoint, I believe there is absolutely alien life out there, but more than likely it's things like bacteria and more primitive things like that. The amount of coincidence and luck it took for humanity to become a highly advanced species borders on the realm of a miracle, so I highly doubt there's a species out there so advanced they can not only avoid detection but study us on an active basis. But just because it's highly unlikely doesn't mean it's impossible.
I am more inclined to believe that this thing had something to confuse their sensors than it was actually going that fast.
My guess is its some sort of super-high speed prototype aircraft that is also carrying some new tech to befuddle tracking attempts.
And what better way to test it then to have it fly by some unsuspecting friendlies to see how they can do with it? The pilots likely weren't in on it, maybe not even the people on the Princeton.
Given the sheer number of systems that it befuddled, I have an easier time believing in mach 61. What little data we have suggests that it used some non-standard form of propulsion. You know, what with the lack of wings and all. Something electromagnetic, but you'd still have the issue of inertia.
I am more inclined to believe that this thing had something to confuse their sensors than it was actually going that fast.
My guess is its some sort of super-high speed prototype aircraft that is also carrying some new tech to befuddle tracking attempts.
And what better way to test it then to have it fly by some unsuspecting friendlies to see how they can do with it? The pilots likely weren't in on it, maybe not even the people on the Princeton.
Given the sheer number of systems that it befuddled, I have an easier time believing in mach 61. What little data we have suggests that it used some non-standard form of propulsion. You know, what with the lack of wings and all. Something electromagnetic, but you'd still have the issue of inertia.
We are already doing some experiments with electromagnetic propulsion, so that is still plausible for some secret government project. Likewise, inertial dampeners would also be within the realm of possibility, or some high tech material making it able to endure the stress.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Keep in mind I'm mainly doing this as a fun thing, so obviously I'm not doing a ton of research into the logistics of alien abductions
First point, on the whole "mostly Western world reports UFO's, not whole world". It makes sense we mostly hear about it from a western viewpoint. I highly doubtful anyone is going to believe a random tribal in the Amazon or a villager in Ethiopia if they said they saw something strange in the sky. People would say "oh they just saw a plane or something" and move on. Much like how I highly doubt all the wild animal attacks that happen in third world countries are accurately reported. These areas are very poor and most of the world doesn't care about them. In addition, anyone looking to get UFO abduction interviews isnt likely to fly halfway across the world to interview a random Joe shmoe when he's got dozens of cases in his back yard.
On the whole "why don't we pick them up or see them", well, we do, kind of. After all we have eye witness accounts (which if we want to be honest here, best case scenario 90% or so are misidentified normal phenomenon) and supposedly military can pick them up. But let's say you're the US government and you know for a fact that there are UFO's breaking atmosphere and doing tests on human beings. You have no way to stop them. Why on Earth would you tell the general population about it? All that's going to do is spread massive amounts of panic and lead to major lack of faith in the government. So you keep it quiet, downplay it, and label anyone who challenges your viewpoint as crazy or a radical. Sure, some people will believe it, but if you can get the general public to think they're tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists the public will do more work to shut down their arguments than you ever have to. And with the massive improvements in CGI and costume effects, you could theoretically allow actual video of aliens and UFO's out onto the internet tomorrow and most people would just think it's a film student's pet project.
As for distance, there's still major swathes of the Earth that are not properly explored, and of course the oceans as well. Taking a page from XCOM, it wouldn't be surprising if an Alien presence intent on studying us hid small outposts on the planet. We get tons of reports of "underwater UFO's" and if you've got technology to go halfway across the Galaxy building a have underwater is probably child's play. And there are studies done out in the middle of nowhere, it's not unheard of for research crews to work in Backcountry conditions for a few weeks or months at a time.
As for doing the research "at home", unless you're researching a very low intelligence lifeform, like bugs, having an artificial habitat greatly influences animal behavior. Imagine a human for example, you're not going to get much useful information from one locked up in a glass box in outer space. Especially if they're interested in how our behavior works. So you need to go out in the field and view us in our "natural habitat". If we're going to give this theory a serious view, then i think it's safe to say an Alien species probably only really cares about developed countries like America, Russia, and China, major players that can destroy half the planet if they wanted to. If alien life were to contact us, these would be the most likely ambassador nation's, so knowing how we think is very valuable. I would imagine it's this research precisely that would be why no sane aliens have outright talked to us yet
And as for if we would do that, absolutely. We do it every day. Not as much on humans anymore, but we gladly use monkeys and other animals in lab tests for everything from disease and psychology research to cosmetics. Obviously not everyone is this callous, but we absolutely have the potential within us to do it as a species. Think about all the horrible human testing done in WWII by the Nazis and Japanese, that's still within our living memory. And that was against our own species. don't think any of us can be naive enough to think that humans wouldn't do that again, especially to something sentient that actually is another species. Look at modern biology research papers sometime, we do seriously messed up stuff every day in the pursuit of knowledge. At my local college, there was a study done on wolf spiders to see if leg length affected chances of finding a mate. They'd observe each pair, see what happened, then euthanize the spiders to measure them. All for a little bit of knowledge on spider breeding habits. Not every human is like that obviously, but I think it's safe to say that some would.
On the whole "aliens surely have stuff way stronger than a nuke", I'm sure they do. I could buy a rifle that can drop a grizzly from 500 yards, but that doesn't mean I want to be 10 feet away from one when it's mad
So yeah with any theory it has it's holes and issues. Obviously I'm not writing a dissertation on this, I just think that if we were being visited by alien life it's the most likely explanation. Any other one would involve the aliens actually making contact with us, and since that's clearly hasn't happened it cuts down the possibilities a bit. I just think it's a fun mental excercise.
For my actual viewpoint, I believe there is absolutely alien life out there, but more than likely it's things like bacteria and more primitive things like that. The amount of coincidence and luck it took for humanity to become a highly advanced species borders on the realm of a miracle, so I highly doubt there's a species out there so advanced they can not only avoid detection but study us on an active basis. But just because it's highly unlikely doesn't mean it's impossible.
No, I know its just for fun and so are my musings.
Its not just poor countries though. Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East. All have less, so it tends to come across as a more cultural thing. For the theory to work on it not being reported the reasoning is much more complicated than the answer that there just aren't many.
But the problem with the theory that the government knows (besides the fact they are competent enough to hide it) is why the government then goes and spends millions on researching these sightings. If they already know why bother? Why not just dismiss them? The issue being that the answer is so complicated and almost downright impossible. We would be talking about decades, thousands or tens of thousands of government employees and multiple countries. No one ever blabbed for money or fame? And how do they keep the scientific community that watches the skies so to speak quiet too?
The distance argument was more aimed at them coming from beyond earth/the solar system. So they would have to fly in and supply or go back 'home'. They of course could have bases in the oceans if its aliens, but that still doesn't solve the question of where. While the ocean is not very well known, space around the planet isn't so unknown..
The research at home was more referring to you saying they test diseases on us. Yeah if you want to do natural habitat research of course you keep them there. But when you say knowing how we think combined with developed nations, why don't they seemingly kidnap more experts? Wouldn't they be able to learn much more? Plenty of abduction stories mention the aliens communicating.
Yeah we do, I know, the question is if we can resist the urge based on the moral implications by that time (I assume at least centuries). The shift away from animal testing goes slowly but surely. For the most part testing on animals such as apes, cats, dogs and such are increasingly frowned upon and avoided. Of course that doesn't mean it won't happen anymore, but the trend is that were moving away from it. I would like to believe in a few centuries we have invented better ways of testing than live subjects. When testing on humans in the context of WW2 were talking about some of the most morally bankrupt regimes in history, if aliens are found by a regime like that, live testing is likely the least of their worries.
For the grizzly analogy to work we just have to assume that A. We can hit them with a nuke even from short range and B. That it would do enough damage or even any at all, having no idea on their materials and such.
Problem with most likely is that we have no clue how they think or what the logic behind it might be. Maybe its a preperation for an alien invasion or wiping us out. Nothing points against that either for example depending on how they would approach that. It is a fun excersise though.
As for your actual viewpoint, I think we mostly agree on that. Its likely out there somewhere in some capacity.
I am more inclined to believe that this thing had something to confuse their sensors than it was actually going that fast.
My guess is its some sort of super-high speed prototype aircraft that is also carrying some new tech to befuddle tracking attempts.
And what better way to test it then to have it fly by some unsuspecting friendlies to see how they can do with it? The pilots likely weren't in on it, maybe not even the people on the Princeton.
Given the sheer number of systems that it befuddled, I have an easier time believing in mach 61. What little data we have suggests that it used some non-standard form of propulsion. You know, what with the lack of wings and all. Something electromagnetic, but you'd still have the issue of inertia.
Mach 61 is over 72,000 kilometres per hour. There is zero way an object could travel anyway near 72,000 kilometres per hour in the atmosphere without burning up due to friction and ram pressure. It is not physically possible.
I am more inclined to believe that this thing had something to confuse their sensors than it was actually going that fast.
My guess is its some sort of super-high speed prototype aircraft that is also carrying some new tech to befuddle tracking attempts.
And what better way to test it then to have it fly by some unsuspecting friendlies to see how they can do with it? The pilots likely weren't in on it, maybe not even the people on the Princeton.
Given the sheer number of systems that it befuddled, I have an easier time believing in mach 61. What little data we have suggests that it used some non-standard form of propulsion. You know, what with the lack of wings and all. Something electromagnetic, but you'd still have the issue of inertia.
Mach 61 is over 72,000 kilometres per hour. There is zero way an object could travel anyway near 72,000 kilometres per hour in the atmosphere without burning up due to friction and ram pressure. It is not physically possible.
Insert something about "according to our science" blah blah blah. Insert something else about how aliens have transcended reality.
Conclude with some flourish about how we're all doomed.
Add post-conclusion niggling remark about how our sensors were right 100% and Mach 61 was definitely the speed - if only to reinforce the first two claims.
When I was much younger, I was a devout believer in many of the earthly anomalies - Loch Ness monster, Big Foot, etc. However, with every person (practically) on the planet running around with a camera on their phone, why do we not have any current photographic evidence? Why are the TV shows touting 'searching for bigfoot or the big creature from the deep' a complete waste of time? Well, had something been found, it would have been on the news way before your TV show hit the cable networks. Therefore, I call these purely fantastic lore.
As far as aliens? I can buy into the theories the universe is way too big not to have other habitable planets. I also think nearly all of them would be primitive, yet evolved life. Just look at how many millions of years the dinosaurs were around and they never got really any more smarter than our animals of today. It takes miracles and miracles of accidents to create truly intelligent life.
So, are there some out there, possibly millions of years old with the technology that we cannot ever comprehend? Sure, just look at how long we have been around and where we are today. Where would man be in a few million years, if still around? Give us another 200 and see where we are!
MDSW wrote: When I was much younger, I was a devout believer in many of the earthly anomalies - Loch Ness monster, Big Foot, etc. However, with every person (practically) on the planet running around with a camera on their phone, why do we not have any current photographic evidence? Why are the TV shows touting 'searching for bigfoot or the big creature from the deep' a complete waste of time? Well, had something been found, it would have been on the news way before your TV show hit the cable networks. Therefore, I call these purely fantastic lore.
The very first post in this thread is video taken from a military aircraft that was published in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other reputable news sources.
MDSW wrote: When I was much younger, I was a devout believer in many of the earthly anomalies - Loch Ness monster, Big Foot, etc. However, with every person (practically) on the planet running around with a camera on their phone, why do we not have any current photographic evidence? Why are the TV shows touting 'searching for bigfoot or the big creature from the deep' a complete waste of time? Well, had something been found, it would have been on the news way before your TV show hit the cable networks. Therefore, I call these purely fantastic lore.
The very first post in this thread is video taken from a military aircraft that was published in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other reputable news sources.
Heh, this complaint reminds me of how GW leaks worked for years: shaky, unfocused, poorly lit photos of White Dwarf or codex pages. So, this isn't really unique to alien phenomena.
MDSW wrote: When I was much younger, I was a devout believer in many of the earthly anomalies - Loch Ness monster, Big Foot, etc. However, with every person (practically) on the planet running around with a camera on their phone, why do we not have any current photographic evidence? Why are the TV shows touting 'searching for bigfoot or the big creature from the deep' a complete waste of time? Well, had something been found, it would have been on the news way before your TV show hit the cable networks. Therefore, I call these purely fantastic lore.
The very first post in this thread is video taken from a military aircraft that was published in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other reputable news sources.
I was referring to other common theorists phenomenon, like Big Foot, etc. I tried to speak separately about the UFO issue, which I think is a bit different...
I see. I'd agree with you on those examples. The Loch Ness monster specifically, it's one of those things I want to believe in, but know in my heart, lol, no way bruh.
Ouze wrote: I see. I'd agree with you on those examples. The Loch Ness monster specifically, it's one of those things I want to believe in, but know in my heart, lol, no way bruh.
Gnomes. They are out there! Who do you think steals all the left socks*? They use them for hats I tell you! HATS!
Ouze wrote: I see. I'd agree with you on those examples. The Loch Ness monster specifically, it's one of those things I want to believe in, but know in my heart, lol, no way bruh.
I was so bummed when the Nessie "Surgeon's Photo" turned out to be a hoax in the mid 90's. My inner Mulder died a bit that day.
Ouze wrote: I see. I'd agree with you on those examples. The Loch Ness monster specifically, it's one of those things I want to believe in, but know in my heart, lol, no way bruh.
Gnomes. They are out there! Who do you think steals all the left socks*? They use them for hats I tell you! HATS!
*They are also known for stealing underpants.
It's the Eater of Socks who takes the socks. The Nomes steal food, electricity, control of elevators and the occasional lorry/jcb/plane/telecoms satellite.
Gnomes don't steal anything if you treat them well. Evidently you guys have not been treating your house spirits well. You have to leave regular gifts and offerings for them, and in return they will perform helpful tasks and chores for you around the house. Neglect them and they start stealing to keep themselves alive and they will play pranks on you to vent their anger. It is pretty logical.
Ouze wrote: I see. I'd agree with you on those examples. The Loch Ness monster specifically, it's one of those things I want to believe in, but know in my heart, lol, no way bruh.
I was so bummed when the Nessie "Surgeon's Photo" turned out to be a hoax in the mid 90's. My inner Mulder died a bit that day.
Thats just what the Illuminati want you to think. Clearly the loch Ness monster was a fall guy for the real cryptids, mole people.
Iron_Captain wrote: Gnomes don't steal anything if you treat them well. Evidently you guys have not been treating your house spirits well. You have to leave regular gifts and offerings for them, and in return they will perform helpful tasks and chores for you around the house. Neglect them and they start stealing to keep themselves alive and they will play pranks on you to vent their anger. It is pretty logical.
Americanized Gnomes. They survive on socks and the tears of the sockless, which they drink strained through stolen socks.
Ouze wrote: I see. I'd agree with you on those examples. The Loch Ness monster specifically, it's one of those things I want to believe in, but know in my heart, lol, no way bruh.
Insert something about "according to our science" blah blah blah. Insert something else about how aliens have transcended reality.
Conclude with some flourish about how we're all doomed.
Add post-conclusion niggling remark about how our sensors were right 100% and Mach 61 was definitely the speed - if only to reinforce the first two claims.
According to our science, dakka posters have transcended trollality.
This thread is now doomed.
Our Mod sensors are 100% right all the time. Lock incoming at mach 61.
Mach 61 is over 72,000 kilometres per hour. There is zero way an object could travel anyway near 72,000 kilometres per hour in the atmosphere without burning up due to friction and ram pressure. It is not physically possible.
Actually that's partially true. DARPA actually floated an idea to manipulate air pressure electromagnetically once as an anti missile system. Basically the idea was to charge the air around the ship, while giving the ship the opposite charge, so that atmospheric pressure rose to the point that extreme high speed anti ship missiles would break apart when hitting it due to the sudden change in air density. It's not an idea without merit, but even a carrier's nuclear plant doesn't have enough output to make it practical.
If you had enough power though, in theory you could give the air in front of the craft the same charge as the craft, effecting a kind of atmospheric supercavitation. So, yes, with a powerful enough compact power source, it is indeed possible.
It wouldn't work. Moving that fast there isn't enough time for the air to move out of the way so it instead gets increasingly compacted, increasing the pressure which then increases the temperature (as per the gas equation). This would result in the air in front of the ship in question getting superheated to the point it would be incandescent, exactly as for meteorites.
The Space Shuttle, IIRC, does a max speed of Mach 25 on re-entry. Mach 61 would obviously be a lot faster, but is it faster enough that a more advanced form of thermal shielding couldn't protect something travelling at mach 61?
AlmightyWalrus wrote: The Space Shuttle, IIRC, does a max speed of Mach 25 on re-entry. Mach 61 would obviously be a lot faster, but is it faster enough that a more advanced form of thermal shielding couldn't protect something travelling at mach 61?
That maximum speed would be on the very edge of the atmosphere. Also, note what happens when the shuttle's heat shield has even a very small fault and comes in at the wrong angle.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: The Space Shuttle, IIRC, does a max speed of Mach 25 on re-entry. Mach 61 would obviously be a lot faster, but is it faster enough that a more advanced form of thermal shielding couldn't protect something travelling at mach 61?
That maximum speed would be on the very edge of the atmosphere. Also, note what happens when the shuttle's heat shield has even a very small fault and comes in at the wrong angle.
Yes, it's pushing the edge, but it's doable, which was my point. Our tech currently isn't capable of making stuff that can handle mach 61, but we can handle mach 25, if only in specific circumstances. Mach 61 would be a lot more advanced than what we have, but is it advanced enough that it's in a whole different league physics-wise? Like, does the property of air change in ways at mach 61 that doesn't apply at mach 25?
A Town Called Malus wrote: It wouldn't work. Moving that fast there isn't enough time for the air to move out of the way so it instead gets increasingly compacted, increasing the pressure which then increases the temperature (as per the gas equation). This would result in the air in front of the ship in question getting superheated to the point it would be incandescent, exactly as for meteorites.
Effectively this works by creating a void of super low pressure that encompasses the object traveling. This vastly reduces friction and allows extreme high speeds with less energy (torpedoes that incorporate this can hit 250 miles an hour while moving through water, a much denser medium than air). You could theoretically pre charge the air as you approach through the use of a laser, so the cavity is already forming before your arrival. This could in theory travel in a straight line at high speeds but would have to decelerate to turn.
Yes, it's pushing the edge, but it's doable, which was my point. Our tech currently isn't capable of making stuff that can handle mach 61, but we can handle mach 25, if only in specific circumstances. Mach 61 would be a lot more advanced than what we have, but is it advanced enough that it's in a whole different league physics-wise? Like, does the property of air change in ways at mach 61 that doesn't apply at mach 25?
I wonder if it'd be easier to just make something look like it's travelling at mach 61.
I wonder if it'd be easier to just make something look like it's travelling at mach 61.
That's the issue. (Sitting around the bunker today, this was the subject of discussion again) The only way to really do it is for something else to travel at mach 61 instead. Something like chaff slows down, and jamming would just have done the radar, not the guys chasing it at mach 2, who's eyeball mark I's were also deceived into believing this thing had absurd maneuverability and acceleration. Further, jamming radar mostly swamps it with noise, is really obvious to the operator, and to be jamming Princeton that far away is unlikely.
A Town Called Malus wrote: It wouldn't work. Moving that fast there isn't enough time for the air to move out of the way so it instead gets increasingly compacted, increasing the pressure which then increases the temperature (as per the gas equation). This would result in the air in front of the ship in question getting superheated to the point it would be incandescent, exactly as for meteorites.
Effectively this works by creating a void of super low pressure that encompasses the object traveling. This vastly reduces friction and allows extreme high speeds with less energy (torpedoes that incorporate this can hit 250 miles an hour while moving through water, a much denser medium than air). You could theoretically pre charge the air as you approach through the use of a laser, so the cavity is already forming before your arrival. This could in theory travel in a straight line at high speeds but would have to decelerate to turn.
Wouldn't work. In order to generate that low pressure bubble, it has to move the molecules making up air out of the way. Those molecules can only move so fast due to them constantly bumping into other molecules and transferring momentum. You still run into the ram pressure issue where your ship ends up travelling in a fireball as it superheats the air in front of it.
As for using a laser to ionise air in front of you, you'd require a laser operating in the ionisation portion of the spectrum, so ultraviolet, x-ray or gamma ray. And then you're hoping your laser is hitting the air molecules and that they aren't just reacting with each other prior to your arrival.
Wouldn't work. In order to generate that low pressure bubble, it has to move the molecules making up air out of the way. Those molecules can only move so fast due to them constantly bumping into other molecules and transferring momentum. You still run into the ram pressure issue where your ship ends up travelling in a fireball as it superheats the air in front of it.
Well, Pop Sci has put out what appears to be a report excerpt, so the 61knts thing is apparently bogus. My bad for repeating what turned out to be a rumor.
Popular Science wrote:
CVW-11 EVENT SUMMARY
14 NOVEMBER 04
EVENT SUMMARY
110/100, 303/305, 401
FAST EAGLES 110/100 UPON TAKE OFF WERE VECTORED BY PRINCETON AND BANGER (1410L) TO INTERCEPT UNID CONTACT AT 160@40NM (N3050.8 W11746.9) (NIMITZ N3129.3 W11752.8). PRINCETON INFORMED FAST EAGLES THAT THE CONTACT WAS MOVING AT 100 KTS @ 25KFT ASL.
FAST EAGLES (110/100) COULD NOT FIND UNID AIRBORNE CONTACT AT LOCATION GIVEN BY PRINCETON. WHILE SEARCHING FOR UNID AIR CONTACT, FAST EAGLES SPOTTED LARGE UNID OBJECT IN WATER AT 1430L. PILOTS SAW STEAM/ SMOKE/CHURNING AROUND OBJECT. PILOT DESCRIBES OBJECT INITIALLY AS RESEMBLING A DOWNED AIRLINER, ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS MUCH LARGER THAN A SUBMARINE.
WHILE DESCENDING FROM 24K FTTO GAIN A BETTER VIEW OF THE UNID CONTACT IN THE WATER, FAST EAGLE 110 SIGHTED AN AIRBORNE CONTACT WHICH APPEARED TO BE CAPSULE SHAPED (WINGLESS, MOBILE, WHITE, OBLONG PILL SHAPED, 25-30 FEET IN LENGTH, NO VISIBLE MARKINGS AND NO GLASS) 5NM WEST FROM POSITION OF UNID OBJECT IN WATER.
CAPSULE (ALT 4K FTAT COURSE 300) PASSED UNDER FAST EAGLE 110 (ALT 16KFT). FAST EAGLE 110 BEGAN TURN TO ACQUIRE CAPSULE. WHILE 110 WAS DESCENDING AND TURNING, CAPSULE BEGAN CLIMBING AND TURNED INSIDE OF FAST EAGLE’S TURN RADIUS. PILOT ESTIMATED THAT CAPSULE ACHIEVED 600-700 KTS. FAST EAGLE 110 COULD NOT KEEP UP WITH THE RATE OF TURN AND THE GAIN OF ALTITUDE BY THE CAPSULE. 110 LOST VISUAL ID OF CAPSULE IN HAZE. LAST VISUAL CONTACT HAD CAPSULE AT 14KFT HEADING DUE EAST.
NEITHER FAST EAGLES 110 OR 100 COULD ACHIEVE RADAR LOCK OR ANY OTHER MEANS OF POSITIVE ID. FAST EAGLE 100 WAS FLYING HIGH COVER AND SAW THE ENGAGEMENT BY FAST EAGLE 110. FAST EAGLE 100 CONFIRMS 110 VISUAL ID; 100 LOST CONTACT IN HAZE AS WELL.
CPA OF ACFT 110 FROM CONTACT 4000-5000 FT.
So now that we have what may be an actual report doc excerpt from the time of the incident, thoughts?
Ouze wrote: I'm not very good at math, but are they saying that the object hit slightly over mach 1? If so, much more plausible to be terrestrial in nature.
In fact that's fairly slow for a military aircraft, considering things like the J-20 can hit mach 2.5 iirc.
According to pop Sci it moved north of 2,400 mph at one point, and given that maneuver of turning inside the Superbug's turn radius and simultaneously out climbing it would put significant power under the hood.
Yeah, that's a conclusion people tend to jump to.
Its fun to do, but to us, logically there doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason behind what 'UFOs' are doing here. 
in our jurisdiction.
