A List Of Hard To Deny, Ufo Sightings

[Aethelwulf]

I've seen all sorts of strange things in the sky....granted that was back when I was dropping acid, smoking and drinking heavily......

 

I find it odd that extraterrestrials have nothing better to do than travel light years from home to freak out (and occasionally probe) a primitive, mentally inferior race of beings.

 

 

 

Probably best not to take abduction cases too seriously. I never have.

 

Mind you, I have seen three UFO's in a single night and that is without the acid involved.

[Aethelwulf]

Craig

 

''Given Kaku’s well-known interest in future spaceflight technology, especially “exotic” possibilities like Alcubere “warp” drive, statements like these are expected and understandable. I think, however, that they show a lack of imagination by assuming that interstellar travel is impossible unless trip duration doesn’t exceed what humans can endure.

 

It’s not especially difficult for well versed SF readers and the like to imagine beings with human-like intelligence that can endure much longer periods of confined travel than humans.''

 

I don't share your optimism craig, lifeforms here on Earth are quite limited. In fact, lifeforms in general, mobile matter that is from the smallest bug to the largest mammal, the body is limited to quite a number of factors. However, if you want to increase the lifespan of a creature, you need to tamper with it's genetics and thereby slowing down the metabolic rate.

 

Of course, this probably wouldn't be impossible for a very advanced race who have got through the morality in their civilization and have been producing genetically-modified beings that could endure much longer periods in space, but still that is limited.

 

However with all that said, all you need is an antimatter propulsion system and travel close to the speed of light, you could make it to the closest star system in a handful of years. I'd imagine an antimatter drive would be the first kind of drive a civilization would consider using. Then you might expect alcubierre drives as a much more... exotic means of transport, assuming that a race can overcome all the mathematical difficulties. Then again, if a race of aliens are millions of years ahead of us, it would be a doddle.

[Aethelwulf]

Sling shot effect, solar sails, antimatter drives... then more exotic cases... Alcubierre drives, if tachyonic matter exists, perhaps even tachyon drives. These are a number of propulsion systems. If judging by certain data of UFO's, they almost certainly fit the description of Alcubierre drives, the ability to warp space around them. It would answer why UFO's can move from one spot to another at speeds which seem incredible... it would just be a matter of how much warping you manipulate the spacetime around your ship.

[CraigD]

The Fermi paradox isn't quite as telling as some believe, in fact detecting "leaking" radio signals from planets around even the nearest star is problematic. The Earth, due to the interference of the interstellar medium, would not be detectable by "us" further than about .5 light years.

It’s a slight misconception that Fermi’s paradox, as the science legend arising from the ca. 1950 lunchtime conversation between Fermi, Emil Konopishku, Edward Teller, Herbert York, and perhaps several others has come to be known, involves searching for radio signals from extraterrestrial civilizations. What Fermi actually asked was “where is everybody?” by which he meant "why was Earth not 'colonized' by ETs long ago?" The fact that the search for ET intelligence is necessary at all, rather than being an uncontroversial part of our history and current society, which reasonable statistical arguments (like Drake’s equation) compellingly suggest that it should be. (Note that Fermi and his lunch mates wouldn’t have known Drake's equation by name, as Giuseppe Cocconi and Philip Morrison didn’t publish the paper that inspired Frank Drake ‘til 1959, and the equation didn’t become well known ‘til around 1961)

 

Eric Jones deserves praise for his science history work in documenting, in 1985, Fermi’s “where is everybody?” discussion. His paper, which includes letters exchanged with Konopinsky, Teller, and York (Fermi died in 1954), is available here. Prior to his work, the event was science legend, prone to the distortions of spoken folk history. Most of these legends, however, are not too far off real events, and the essential “where is everybody?” question remains IMHO an important and perplexing one.

 

BTW I thought the documentary was the best one I had seen, I must have missed the "spiritual" claim....

I too consider UFOs: The Secret History the best documentary on the subject I’ve ever seen.

 

A year after watching it, I don’t recall it in detail, but the few notes I took summarize it as “a decently balanced credulous/skeptical documentary of the subject”, and don’t mention any spiritual claim in it, which I’m fairly sure I would have noted had I seen any.

 

My opinion that

... Cherniack, while far from the least scientific UFOologist, is an epitome of the wrong way to approach the search for ET intelligence, having early in his life abandoned a “hard” scientific approach in favor of a “spiritual” one.

comes from reading personal information about him, such as this brief autobiography, in which he describes being “at loose ends” after getting an undergraduate Physics degree, realizing it “wasn’t going to answer any of my deeper questions,”, changing his studies to filmmaking, and finding personal satisfaction in Buddhism. The last paragraph from this really resonates with me:

As for the content...well, while I've been fortunate to witness and experience many things that have continuously pushed back the borders of what I recognize as reality, I am also, I think, increasingly more aware of the difference between belief and knowledge, shaded as it is by wishful thinking and self-deception. This tends to make what I think I know, increasingly less...and much more provisional in nature. That which I may not have experienced first-hand I tend to put on the shelf if it seems sincere, and to disregard if it doesn't.

I admire Cherniack’s feelings about the “provisional” nature of knowledge, but still suspect he errs, in a philosophically profound way, in his approach to it.

 

I don’t know nor have I even ever spoken to Cherniack, so, of course, I could be wrong in my suspicions. Even if I knew him well and had my suspicions concerned, I could be wrong in my philosophy of knowledge. But, of course, I don’t think I am – if I did, I, like Cherniack, would cast around for one that better satisfied me.

 

To his credit as a documentary filmmaker, I think Cherniack put aside personal beliefs when making UFOsTSH, presenting material in an unbiased way that allowed viewers to learn and make their own speculations and conclusions. As he notes early in it, regarding UFO literature, and legend, "the gold is almost impossible to separate from the dross,” so the best that can often be done is present it openly and without intentional lies, distortions, or obfuscations, and help and encourage the viewer to use their best critical facilities in evaluating it. Little if anything, in my experience, is more dross-making and detrimental to learning than the agenda-driven distortions of “true believers”.

[Moontanman]

I think the 1952 Washington Merry go round is one of the best documented sightings but the Fermi paradox remains a problem to me as well. Some sort of wild life preserve or prime directive dictating that civilizations below a certain threshold Are left alone?

 

In any case as Craig said true believers are a problem but I would like to point out that "true skeptics" are also a problem, from 1200 mph geese to slow moving meteors and comets some of the debunkers explanations are more unlikely than the Actual UFO.

 

It is evident that in the early years of UFOs and the USAF any explanation that didn't involve aliens was a good one...

[Moontanman]

Another puzzling group of sightings by major names in science...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_fireballs

[JMJones0424]

...I would like to point out that "true skeptics" are also a problem, from 1200 mph geese to slow moving meteors and comets some of the debunkers explanations are more unlikely than the Actual UFO.

Perhaps my general ignorance of the subject prevents me from recognizing your reference, but please point me towards the skeptic of fantastical UFO claims that relies on geese traveling better than Mach 1.5

 

It is evident that in the early years of UFOs and the USAF any explanation that didn't involve aliens was a good one...

And it remains evident to this day, at least to me. Yours is the extraordinary claim. I do not have an explanation for any and all unexplained phenomenon. While my ignorance may be pitiful, it is at least honest. However, if you propose an explanation that boils down to, "we don't know therefore 'x'", for all cases of x, whether x is of extraterrestrial, extradimensional, spiritual, or otherwise as of yet untested origin, I will remain resolute in demanding evidence of your assertion.

[Moontanman]

Perhaps my general ignorance of the subject prevents me from recognizing your reference, but please point me towards the skeptic of fantastical UFO claims that relies on geese traveling better than Mach 1.5

 

Actually the "first" flying saucer report by Kenneth Arnold was dismissed as Geese even though they were timed at 1200 mph. A great many UFO sightings have been "explained" by debunkers in ways that are just ludicrous, one of the most famous "skeptics" tried to assign Slow moving meteor and comet to several cases. Do you want a detailed list of pelicanism?

 

 

And it remains evident to this day, at least to me. Yours is the extraordinary claim. I do not have an explanation for any and all unexplained phenomenon. While my ignorance may be pitiful, it is at least honest. However, if you propose an explanation that boils down to, "we don't know therefore 'x'", for all cases of x, whether x is of extraterrestrial, extradimensional, spiritual, or otherwise as of yet untested origin, I will remain resolute in demanding evidence of your assertion.

 

Art no time do i claim these sightings are anything but unexplained, and not due to a lack of data. Your ignorance is not the problem but your obvious hostility to the subject of UFOs is evident... I am a skeptic, but I don't propose answers for things that are more ridiculous than aliens. I am not afraid to say i don't know and there are many cases that hint very strongly to unknown phenomena, not misidentification of known phenomena...

 

Now would you like to discuss this objectively or do you intend to assume a hostile attitude to UFOs for no reason?

 

I suggest you go to the link I provided and discuss this rationally instead of strawmaning me...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952_Washington,_D.C._UFO_incident

Edited March 18, 2014 by Moontanman

[JMJones0424]

I am not constructing a strawman when I respond directly to your statement. A strawman would be if I argued against a claim that you did not make. You stated, "It is evident that in the early years of UFOs and the USAF any explanation that didn't involve aliens was a good one..." and I agreed with this statement. This is not a strawman. Instead, this is recognition of the fact that invoking extraterrestrial agents as an explanation for any observed phenomenon is problematic, specifically because there is as of yet no evidence that such agents exist.

 

As for supersonic geese, I'd have to read up on the situation, but it seems obvious to me that such an explanation is poor. I don't see the utility in enumerating similar explanations, as I am more than willing to throw them out on their face as absurd.

Edited March 20, 2014 by JMJones0424

[Moontanman]

This sighting was dismissed by Philip Klass as a slow meteor....

 

http://www.ufocasebook.com/coyne.html

 

This is the documentary that has been talked about here as being very informative about UFOs and the problems associated with them...

 

 

[JMJones0424]

It begs the question, doesn't it?

 

I tried writing a witty response to show how a contrived explanation for an unexplained phenomenon may be taken to be wholly ludicrous, but my ability as a writer is insufficient to convey my point without unduly insulting your intelligence.

 

This thread is titled, "A List of Hard to Deny UFO Sightings". What about the unknown is hard to deny? What is it in the one hour youtube clip that you've linked to that is supposed to give evidence for a verifiable explanation for these hard to deny sightings? I do not know who Philip Klass is and I'm not sure why I should care what he classifies as a slow meteor, whatever that's supposed to be.

Edited March 20, 2014 by JMJones0424

[Moontanman]

It begs the question, doesn't it?

 

I tried writing a witty response to show how a contrived explanation for an unexplained phenomenon may be taken to be wholly ludicrous, but my ability as a writer is insufficient to convey my point without unduly insulting your intelligence.

 

This thread is titled, "A List of Hard to Deny UFO Sightings". What about the unknown is hard to deny? What is it in the one hour youtube clip that you've linked to that is supposed to give evidence for a verifiable explanation for these hard to deny sightings? I do not know who Philip Klass is and I'm not sure why I should care what he classifies as a slow meteor, whatever that's supposed to be.

 

 

There are some UFO sightings that are difficult to explain in any way but something extraordinary, not because of lack of data but an embarrassment of data. The film I suggested is the best UFO documentary I know of, it covers everything from the ridiculous to the extraordinary in a very matter of fact way. It draws no conclusions and allows the viewer to decide. It is really well worth the time to watch it. What i like about it is that it has no agenda, either for or against, it just represents the facts...

 

Philip klass is one of the major debunkers of UFOs.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_J._Klass

Edited March 20, 2014 by Moontanman