UFOs and Aliens

[Jetflag]

Concerning the "evidence releases" by the pentagon, governments etc. i'm going to be an annoying skeptical cinic and go with my good old buddy Occam and his manual philips lady shave.

either 1:

there has been a big conspiratorial attempt by the whole world to suppress the existence of extra terrestrials who arrived here in the mid 50's (around which time coïncidently scifi novels/pop culture and the possiblity of alien life had been trending in philosophical, popcultural and scientific fields) who came here via god'esq Clark tech that pretty much defies every axiom of known math, physics and logic, to make sure the public doesn't go banana's or *insert reason here.... and anno now decides to come clean and release the top classified footage out of the...kindness of their collective hearts?..or *insert reason here. (in a time where a second space race seems to be looming along with all the financial and political consequences attached to that)

or 2:

government does what government does.

the simpler explanation is usually the correct one.

That being said.. Genuinly wouldn't mind being properly proven wrong. if only for the reasons below:

 

[Julian Del Agranda]

Pff, that video makes me a little sad.

 

[Jetflag]

@Magnevi @0.54

 

[Julian Del Agranda]

Rofl, that video makes me rather happy.

Thanks.

 

[TwinSilo]

dmgtz9 you talk of conducting a peer reviewed studies? That requires results to be reproduced in a controlled environment, which is not possible with rare and random occurring aerial phenomenon. All you can do is acquire information and remove/confirm hypothesis by process of elimination.

That said, there has been a detailed study on the subject, the was done in France called the COMETA report (1999). It analyzed some of the best UFO encounters from around the world (including ones with radar and photo evidence). It was conducted by the following committee of individuals;

• General Denis Letty (Air Force General, 2nd Section, AA)
• General Bernard Norlain (Air Defense Commander of the French Airforce, Military Adviser to Prime Ministers Jacques) (
• Pierre Bescond, Weapons Engineer General, 2nd Section, AA
• Denis Blancber, Chief of Police, Police Nationale, Ministry of the Interior
• Bruno Le Moine, Air Force General, 2nd Section, AA
• Marc Merlo, Admiral, 2nd Section
• Alain Orszag, Doctor of Physical Sciences, Weapons Engineer General, 2nd Section.
• Jean Dunglas, Doctor of Engineering, Honorary Engineer General,
• Christian Mftrchal, Chief Mining Engineer, Research Director at ONERA

Testimonies and contributors to the study were;

• Jean-Jacques Velasco, Head of SEPRA at CNES (CNES is French NASA)
• Francois Louange, Chief Executive Officer of Fleximage (Data Science Organization)
• Jean-Charles Duboc, Jean-Pierre Fartek, Rene Giraud, (civilian and military pilots)
• Edmond Campagnac, former technical director of Air France at Antananarivo
• Michel Perrier, Squadron Commander, Gendarmerie Nationale
• Joseph Domange, Air Force General, Auditors Association delegate general.

What was the conclusion? A journalist from the New Yorker covering it sums it up well

Objects observed at close range by military and commercial pilots seemed to defy the laws of physics; the authors noted their “easily supersonic speed with no sonic boom” and “electromagnetic effects that interfere with the operation of nearby radio or electrical apparatus.” The vast majority of the sightings could be traced to meteorological or earthly origins, or could not be studied, owing to paltry evidence, but a small percentage of them appeared to involve, as the report put it, “completely unknown flying machines with exceptional performances that are guided by a natural or artificial intelligence.” cometa had resolved, through the process of elimination, that “the extraterrestrial hypothesis” was the most logical explanation.

You cannot get a more credible and expert group of individuals than what I listed. Their findings from 1999 mimic exactly what is being said by the US in 2021. So the explanations I can see in thread would be ‘they are all lying’? Based on what exactly? What evidence would you put forward for that?

 

[Archon]

peer reviewed studies? That requires results to be reproduced in a controlled environment

Not quite.

In any case, what that report is missing is some photographic/video evidence. If you can forward me to it, I would be grateful.

 

[Katadunkass]

you can save yourself the trouble anyhoozle: the earth is, scientifically and factually, flat depending on the observer, (and by observer i don't mean an "observing fundamentalist young earth creationist")

all you need is
1: an instance of redshifting galaxy fuctioning as the observer in this instance
2: half a dose of Einsteins special relativity
3: a snipped of Lorenz contraction

eh voila.

Been watching a bit of VSauce, eh?

 

[dmgtz96]

dmgtz9 you talk of conducting a peer reviewed studies? That requires results to be reproduced in a controlled environment, which is not possible with rare and random occurring aerial phenomenon. All you can do is acquire information and remove/confirm hypothesis by process of elimination.


You cannot get a more credible and expert group of individuals than what I listed. Their findings from 1999 mimic exactly what is being said by the US in 2021. So the explanations I can see in thread would be ‘they are all lying’? Based on what exactly? What evidence would you put forward for that?

Okay, but how does that hypothesis lead to "aliens"? And why is no reputable scientist/industry leader pursuing this? Why is it always military or someone getting money from the military?

 

[Jetflag]

Been watching a bit of VSauce, eh?

 

[Jetflag]

You cannot get a more credible and expert group of individuals than what I listed. Their findings from 1999 mimic exactly what is being said by the US in 2021. So the explanations I can see in thread would be ‘they are all lying’? Based on what exactly? What evidence would you put forward for that?

ab auctoritate, Also i fail to see how a mining engineer is any credible expert in the field of avionics and/or extra terrestrial life. What, on the other hand, is not an absolute nofkyo is that governments and certain shall we say "security institutions" lie all the time or at the very least spread half truths, so to assume that over "must be extraterrestrial" is taking a fairly mundane claim over an extra ordinary one.

A lot of people don't understand/appreciate how extremely far fetched the claim "visiting aliens" is in this context, given what we so far know about the universe at a fundamental level.

its slightly lower but still up there with the "therefor must be an angel" claim.

 

[TwinSilo]

In any case, what that report is missing is some photographic/video evidence. If you can forward me to it, I would be grateful.

There was some photos I posted previously. You either believe they are real images or you don’t. You also saw the 3 pentagon videos, but also believed the data and testimonials on those cases to be lies from all involved. If I showed you a video right now of a UFO flying above New York and the Pentagon saying ‘that’s not within our inventory and not within human technology’ I would assume that your position would be the same, ‘it’s lies’. So how would images or videos be relevant in this debate to you? You’re asking for evidence you would never accept. I think that’s fair enough actually, as images and videos in isolation are not enough.

Okay, but how does that hypothesis lead to "aliens"? And why is no reputable scientist/industry leader pursuing this? Why is it always military or someone getting money from the military?

That’s incorrect. You can find many cases/evidence from things like domestic airlines and its pilots, space agencies, world governments and sometimes 1000’s of civilian individuals at the same time who see the same thing. As stated the report above contains those aforementioned types of people.

Either way It’s the military and gov testimonials that hold the most weight, due to the integrity of character and the positions they hold, hence the tendency to see that shared more often. They also are in the position to distinguish between types of aircraft, have the equipment to capture the best video, have the equipment to measure movements and have the official channels to release that information. This feels pretty obvious.

The COMETA report arrived at the alien hypothesis because all other hypothesis are high unlikely, if not impossible. Humans can withstand 9 to 11gs before blackout. These aircraft are maneuvering at 100’s of g’s. So either someone out there has invented a propulsion system which defies the laws of physics or we are not alone in the universe. Unless you have a different hypothesis?

Also i fail to see how a mining engineer is any credible expert in the field of avionics and/or extra terrestrial life.

So your position is then; if it’s testimonial by individuals from military and government they are all liars, if it’s testimonials outside of military and government they are all irrelevant. Haha you are making it difficult for me . Can I ask whose opinion you would pay attention to, or take seriously?

Either way I must not have copied his full credentials because paper lists it also as ‘Research Director at ONERA [National Aerospace Study and Research Office], which would appear to be relevant.

 

[Archon]

There was some photos I posted previously. You either believe they are real images or you don’t. You also saw the 3 pentagon videos, but also believed the data and testimonials on those cases to be lies from all involved. If I showed you a video right now of a UFO flying above New York and the Pentagon saying ‘that’s not within our inventory and not within human technology’ I would assume that your position would be the same, ‘it’s lies’. So how would images or videos be relevant in this debate to you? You’re asking for evidence you would never accept. I think that’s fair enough actually, as images and videos in isolation are not enough.

Those Pentagon videos showed very little, it wasn't really discernible what those things were.

In any case, yeah, you have a point, but combined with that report which I would read and the evidence they analyzed, I would ultimately want to decide for myself. Videos are actually preferable.

 

[Jetflag]

So your position is then; if it’s testimonial by individuals from military and government they are all liars, if it’s testimonials outside of military and government they are all irrelevant. Haha you are making it difficult for me . Can I ask whose opinion you would pay attention to, or take seriously?

Either way I must not have copied his full credentials because paper lists it also as ‘Research Director at ONERA [National Aerospace Study and Research Office], which would appear to be relevant.

well its certainly been a long time since i've seen such a strawman build from one of my responses... so my compliments on that for starters

but no: my position(s) is/ are

1, Extraordinairy claims require extraordinairy (strong) evidence, and testimonial evidence from (* insert person or group here) is far to weak or insufficient to meet that demand. Same goes for video's or photo's or Crop circles "evidence" by the way: Since its still far more plausible (and easy) that these things are manufactured as opposed to the plausibility of say: Gravity being broken or hacked.

A personal testimony or anekdote from a mining engineer does lend the concept of Alien Ufo's on earth any more credbility, similarly that the testimony from a succesfull stock broker on "being visited by Sariel at night" doesn't lend the concept of Archangels any credibility.

i'm not even calling the individuals liars perse. Lying is a deliberate (malicious) act...Someone can genuinly believe he saw an alien UFO or an Angel. Doesn't mean it therefor was actually an Alien UFO or an Angel. Humans are pattern recongizing creatures by evolution, this means we often see things that aren't actually there.

2, Assuming a government and/or security agencies lying to suit their needs/agenda is a less absurd and fairly mundaine proposition then Alien Ufo's breaking hard proven "reality"rules of physics. So if I had to choose between
A: the CIA is telling us a story to for instance distract from something else in the field (like we've seen with area 51 in the past for example)

and

B: "Aliens are visiting us in shiny metal objects travelling at mach 20 without any air displacement."

I choose A from a rational perspective,

now i would LIKE to choose B, since i'm a massive sci fi geek and that would be awesom... But unfortunatly reality doesn't deal on my desired terms.

 

[Jetflag]

As for your question: Depends on the topic and claim.

I'm perfectly willing to pay attention or even flat out believe say: my father (who coïncidently is also a high school teacher on said subject) when he tells me there's a syntax error in a Frysian poem i wrote for someone's birthday. I see no reason to second guess that.

i'm not willing to believe or pay attention to a claim by say: Elon Musk when he's for example tweeting that he's developing "perpetual motion engines @ tesla labs" (despite his skills, technical knowlege and the fact that I massivly respect the man,) that is something that just breaks to many rules of how our universe works.

so unless he actually shows it to me IRL. i'm not going to believe that. Same goes for Alien UFO claims. Go develop tech to actually capture one and show it to me or the whole world. Actually demonstrate that it can instantly travel @ mach 20 without causing instant nuclear fusion with the air you're displacing and/or turning the pilot into meat pancakes. Untill then, no amount of blurry pictures, video's or "believe me, i saw it!"ism's is going to do it for me.

 

[dmgtz96]

Can I ask whose opinion you would pay attention to, or take seriously?

An aerospace engineering/astrophysics/physics professor from a top-tier university like MIT, Caltech, Stanford that can provide solid, concrete evidence instead of rumors and that is not being funded by the military. This group is consistently skeptical of the "aliens exist" claims from the government and military. These people are experts, and anything that is not the truth will put their career on the line, so confirmation that aliens exist can be taken seriously.

 

[Hot Tuna]

If UFOs can cause interference to communication signals at military bases (coincidence that they're always appearing around military bases), how come organisations like SETI (specifically looking for alien signals) or the many radio telescopes looking into space for other research purposes have never found a thing (that I'm aware of)?

 

[Jetflag]

If UFOs can cause interference to communication signals at military bases (coincidence that they're always appearing around military bases), how come organisations like SETI (specifically looking for alien signals) or the many radio telescopes looking into space for other research purposes have never found a thing (that I'm aware of)?

well the government is covering it up obviously, which is why you can totally trust the government when they tell you UFO's actually exist.



edit* I'm so sorry TwinSilo I couldn't help myself

 

[Hensmon]

An aerospace engineering/astrophysics/physics professor from a top-tier university like MIT, Caltech, Stanford

Wouldn't an astrophysics professor have to work in conjunction with the military in order to make claims like this? How else would they get hold of video footage or UFO material to make analysis? I guess via a private company, but then the 'in it for money' excuses return. Why do you put an academic professor in higher regards than the head of US intelligence? They cant identify aircraft and they don't know the extent of militaries capabilities. They are in a much poorer position to make statements on this stuff.

Having said that there was one opportunity when the object dubbed 'Oumuamua' entered into our system in 2017. A rare and long lasting event which public scientists and professors could indeed study. Avi Loeb, highly acclaimed Harvard Astrophysicist, has come to the conclusion that is was an alien craft, and released a paper on that, with a focus on the speed of the object. Here's an interview with him

If UFOs can cause interference to communication signals at military bases (coincidence that they're always appearing around military bases), how come organisations like SETI (specifically looking for alien signals) or the many radio telescopes looking into space for other research purposes have never found a thing (that I'm aware of)?

UFO sightings are not exclusive to military bases, there are cases in almost every place imaginable, including above cities where 1000's of people see the sane thing at once.

It's also not hard to imagine that an alien vehicle might not give off signals we can detect, or at all...or that pointing randomly into an infinite space hoping for a random signal to appear might actually be as luck based as it sounds.

 

[dmgtz96]

Why do you put an academic professor in higher regards than the head of US intelligence?

I don't trust the American military at all. They're basically the reason the public is so skeptical about UFOs.
I will take a look at the article from the Harvard professor and more about Oumuamua, thanks for sharing.

 

[Hensmon]

I don't trust the American military at all.

How about the two Nasa astronauts testimonials then? They are kind of in that sweet spot between academic professors (degrees to match) but also in the position to have direct contact with the best monitoring equipment and personal experience. Cooper and Mitchell are both deceased now, but remained vocal on alien contact up until their death. What reasons would they have for the lies and the ridicule that accompanies?