UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

To take an example, in the case of the video we have been considering in this thread, there appear to me to be no relevant "anecdotal accounts". It seems that all we have is the video itself. It would be interesting to know who edited it, of course, and why they deliberately chose to leave out the extra footage that would have allowed us to definitely rule out lens flare.

So, the available "evidence itself" here, as far as I can tell, consists solely of the video. If we only have the video to go it, it seems to me that no conclusion can be drawn about the existence of any "technological craft" with "occupants".

Perhaps you are thinking about independent investigations that tend to call into question various pieces of so-called "evidence" for "technological craft". Unlike the typical UFO anecdote, such skeptical investigations are usually well documented and referenced. In principle, relevant experts could be interview to confirm the claims, and various facts could be checked quite independently, often from multiple sources.

 

As I said, I'm interested in looking at any trace evidence for the particular UFO we have been discussing. Why did you ignore my specific questions? Here's my guess: you know of no evidence other than the video itself for this case. Knowing that you have a very weak case, you're desperate to move on to the next shiny bauble. Am I right?

Let us assume for the sake of argument that some UFOs have been observed to have occupants. Does that do anything at all to support the idea that the particular UFO we have been considering had occupants? Wouldn't we need specific evidence of that to make the claim in this case?

Do you think it is reasonable to draw the conclusion that all UFOs have occupants, based on a few dubious reports of occupants in rare cases? I am trying to understand your reasoning process here.

 

I see. So, we need to modify your definition of "UFO" to being a "technological craft" that may or may not have occupants, but which demonstrates "intelligent design and operation". Correct?

So, let's apply this to the particular UFO we are discussing. What evidence is there of intelligent design or operation, here?

Also, I don't understand your grounds for assuming "some sort of conscious pilots". Wouldn't there need to be evidence of intelligent design or operation before any such assumption would be warranted in any individual case?

See, what I don't understand is how you justify generalising from one, or a few, rare cases, to all UFOs. It does not seem to me to automatically follow that just because one UFO is observed (anecdotally) to have occupants, therefore we can safely assume that all UFOs have occupants. As for conscious pilots, I'm not aware of a single confirmed case of a "conscious pilot" of any UFO, as you have defined them. Are you?

It's an issue because I think you're making enormous leaps of faith in drawing your conclusions in individual cases. You admit yourself that you just assume conscious piloting in any new case you come across, before you even examine the evidence. More basically, I know you tend to just assume "technological craft" whenever you see a light in the sky.

I am pointing out that you're not basing your conclusions on evidence at all, but rather on your own biases and unproven assumptions.

Coming back to the case we're examining, as an example, please post your evidence that shows that what we see in the video is an "advanced craft" rather than, say, an artifact caused by lens flare.

I must have missed that total destruction. As I recall, you made yourself look the fool by claiming that it can never occur from car headlights. As you will recall, I showed you numerous examples of exactly the phenomenon that you say doesn't occur.

But you have so much work still to do to establish that what is seen in the previous video is a piloted, technological craft! You've barely made a start on that.

But evidence of what? I mean, in the case we have been examining, there appears to be lots of evidence of lens flare and basically nothing that says technological, piloted craft from Mars. You call this substantial evidence in favour of your fringe fantasies?

 

That's the first we've heard about that.

Where's the evidence of any vapor trail? Or are you just making shit up?

Actually, before we even get to that, where is that evidence that you were going to provide that shows this UFO was actually seen in the sky, and not just on the video? As a basic first step, we'd better confirm that this was a real object and not an optical effect, such as lens flare. What progress have you made so far in establishing this most basic fact? None at all? I thought so.

Horizontally to the ground? What did you do to confirm that? It's not all obvious just from watching the video.

As for the change in direction, in the video the thing - whatever it is - clearly does change direction. But we're still waiting for your explanation about why its direction changes so clearly mirror the direction changes of the car on the road with the bright headlights. Similarly for the variations in brightness that are observed.

These questions were all put to you pages and pages ago now, but you have completely failed to address any of them. Why is that?

The evidence is equally, or more, suggestive of lens flare caused by the headlights of the cars on the road in the video. I think we can safely assume the cars are operated by some intelligence.

Of course, if you can rule out the lens flare and answer the questions previously put to you in regards to that, then you might be making progress into establishing your extraordinary claim that this is a "technological craft" piloted by aliens, time travellers or whatever you assume they are.

We're not looking at "all these cases". We're looking at this single case, for now. We can examine other cases once we're done with this one. Try to focus.

Besides, like I said, even if in some other, unrelated case, somebody reported occupants or a "pilot", we can't just assume that there are occupants or a pilot in this case, without any evidence at all.

It's not very different, as far as I can see. The evidence for it being any kind of piloted technological craft is approximately zero, just as is the case for the vast majority of other UFO sightings.

Yeah. I know that they remain unidentified until somebody can make a positive ID on them. I know not to assume, based on wishful thinking alone.

Indeed. You seem incapable of concentrating for more than a minute to focus on what is important in analysing something like this. You can't or won't answer the most basic questions. As time goes on and your case is exposed as weaker and weaker, you become increasingly desperate to distract attention away to something completely unrelated - preferably some new case when everybody will be expected to start again from scratch.

Clearly you did not learn anything from the many images I posted showing what lens flares can look like. Such a pity. Even when I hand you stuff on a platter, you refuse to engage your mind.

Are you going to even attempt to answer the basic questions that you really should have asked yourself before coming out and proclaiming that the video under discussion shows a "technological craft", or not?

My guess is not, which would be consistent with your usual pattern.

 

Really? That's the best you can do?

I'll take this as an admission from you that you can't make a case for this particular UFO being a "technological craft", then.

I think we're done here. Next!

 

Magical Realist:

Everything looks authentic to you. But what do you mean? Do you mean it's an authentic UFO (alien spaceship, time travellers from the future, or other "technological craft beyond anything humans can produce")? Or just that you don't think the footage has been deliberately faked?

That can be very difficult to tell, especially at first glance.

Would you agree, then, that this is a good example one of your classic unexplainable UFOs, seen all over the world, etc.?

Wrong again.

It's a pity you didn't learn anything.

So, coming back to the new topic of discussion, what investigations have you made into the video so far? Have you established when it was taken, who took it, what the date and time was, whether it was corroborated by anybody else? Did this UFO make the news bulletins?

That helicopter in the video - do we have a statement from the pilot or passengers?

Did the UFO appear on radar? Did anybody else notice it, other than the person taking the video? Have we got any eyewitness testimony, or just the video?

Please give me a quick rundown about what your own investigations into this video have revealed so far.