UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

Yeah. Unshielded sparks can wreak havoc on nearby systems. Not enough to fry them, but enough to discombobulate them. There are laws that specify how much radio noise any given electronic device is allowed to emit. That doesn't apply to streetcar lines.

The point here (the relevance, for Q-reeus' benefit) is that, even things that seem very spooky and spontaneous, can easily have perfectly mundane causes. That's why UFO/UAP analysis is not kid stuff. You can't know you've ruled out mundane causes. This incident is a cautionary tale that applies to every analysis of every single incident in this 5141+ post thread.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

As an example:::

A nabor of mine told me that somtimes when he comes home his new remote control TV will be on even tho hes certan that he turned it off befor he left... an it never turns on by itself when hes home.!!!
He knows that no one has entered while hes gone cause he has rigged the door so he can tell if its been opened.!!!
He has tried to use his remote control outside when the door is closed an it will not turn the TV set on.!!!

I wont say spooky... just kinda ghosty

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

My TV likes to randomly turn on the described video. "A man enters the room," is a annoying when you can see it happening. If I throw the damn thing out the window, somebody will think it's a UFO.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I will go so far out on a limb to say that the cause is somptin mundane.!!!

Like:::
When he jingles his keys... the noise made the TV come on... not Polterguise... LOL.!!!

 

In the past, we owned a couple of insanely designed electronic devices (including a television), which -- if the household power fluctuated even briefly, they would turn themselves on automatically.

By sustained coincidence, the power just doesn't blip for a second or two when he's at home.

Not unlike me intermittently hearing or seeing a word like "sesquipedalian" repeated over the course of a week on the radio, in internet news, a television show, a conversation, a newspaper column, etc. It may seem mad that probability could be responsible for a long-running streak of the absence or presence of _X_ under special conditions (like when he's gone), but it is.

 

Well... the occurance bein at random times day or night whether his absense was 5 minutes or 5 houres... an the only patern to it... never happens when hes home.!!!

Im convienced its jinglin keys that hit a tone which was close enuff an strong enuff to turn his new TV set on.!!!

 

Ok... but why are you convienced that "keys" are the cause.???

 

So instead of an infrared clicker, he's still using a pre-1980s SDTV/CRT television with an sound-based remote control? (Hooked up to an HDTV signal converter box?) Must have the world's record for longevity, though wouldn't be a surprising feat for a deep freeze manufactured decades ago.

OTOH, I recall an old hoarder who had stored appliances still in their boxes from the 1950s to 1970s -- never opened. So maybe this is the result of that type of suspended animation rather than the TV set literally having functioned over an extraordinarily lengthy period. (Or can parts be found on Ebay to repair any random relic model, even an unused or barely used picture tube?)

 

The guy came upstares an told me an a couple of buddys that he figered it out... an we went down to see him demonstrate that his keys coud turn the set on... thats why

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Nah... much simpler that all that... this hapened in 1971

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

A dead neighbor still reliving 1971 is what would be the spooky issue, then.

And one that's still alive and complaining about it -- as if it were today -- is just plain dangerous.

 

There was a half-hour cooking show on TV the other day. I happened to notice the word/prefix "super" the fourth time she used it, so I started counting, almost subconsciously. At six, I decided to stop counting because I only have so many fingers. While I was deciding she used it a seventh time, so I turned the TV off. She was just way to excitable for me.

 

"It's Syooper Fyantyastic!"

 

What utter nonsense. There is actually no useful 'benefit' in such an expected anecdotal utterly disconnected to the events associated with UFO induced total electrical failures of automobiles - going back to times when auto electrics were very simple affairs.
As an interlude - here's another spooky event. Just as I was preparing a response to your then freshly posted #5138, my internet failed. And only just got it back up now. An obscure setting on my modem had mysteriously managed to untick it's box somehow. Creepy!

Anyway, here below is verbatim that now 3-day old prepared reply:

"It's all so clear now. Sparking/arcing streetcar passes by somewhat modern auto with el cheapo engine start remote, at the very same time an already present UFO departs the scene. Everyone associates engine 'spontaneous' restart with UFO departure, instead of using their noggins to pinpoint the sparky streetcar + dodgy-remote-vulnerable-to-stray-HF-emfs as mundane true cause. Problem solved - eureka! Or is it? Hmm....have we hastily neglected a few other salient issues? Like, maybe:

1: Numerous reports of motor vehicle total electrical failures on ARRIVAL of UFO, PRECEEDING miraculous revival of car electricals on UFO departure.
2: Said facts in 1 above occurring generally in areas remote from any possible high enough intensity man-made sources of HF emf electrical induction.
3: Said incidents 1 & 2 above further having a well reported history going back in excess of 70 years - way before the modern black box engine management systems or even transistorized ignition or remote engine startup tech was available. Damm!
4: To emphasize one aspect in 1 - low tension 6 or 12 volt electrics - lights, radio, mysteriously died on UFO arrival. Nothing sparky arcy streetcars could have remotely (pun) effected.

I'd say all in all it's back to the debunker drawing board for one member here. Best advised to stay there for awhile - till things blow over so to speak."

And now the thread has degenerated to discussing trivialities unconnected totally to the actual OP topic (title being James R's malicious twist). Ho hum.

 

The above is a conclusion, not an observation.

If you start with the conclusion you wish for, it is impossible to reach any other conclusion.
So, you end up in a self-reinforcing echo-chamber of your own making.

Whether or not you agree with my arguments , they are at least arguments.
You are not even arguing; you are simply stating your pet beliefs without analysis.

That's not what this forum is about. That's called preaching, and it's against the rules. Please review the rules you agreed to when you signed up.




Point-of-order: Should I read any further into your post than the first sentence? Or is the rest just your usual schoolyard taunts?

I'm not really feeling an obligation to wade through the chaff to get to the wheat, I think the burden should fall on you to organize your own thoughts.

So here's what we'll do.
I'll read your posts and address them in order, and stop when I hit the personal taunt section, with the assumption that you've run out of valid arguments.
For your part, you'll ensure that anything on-topic you have, you'll put above the personal taunt section.
That'll save all readers a lot of time.

 

Not even you believe such mendacity. My quoted observation you misidentify as a conclusion merely echos and summarizes the many reported cases of anecdotal evidence. What I naturally concluded was such incidents had no plausible natural/'technological' explanations. Some of which many reports and investigations are summarized in the article linked to in #5104, that begun this sabotaged early on episode:
https://www.nicap.org/papers/ufointerf.htm
That you were evidently too lazy and/or opinionated to even read. And you must surely have known the actual distinction between observation and conclusion. The rest of your latest post is too stupid to comment on.
My guess is you and the other prime vengeful disaffected here James R swap notes quite often as how to best harass MR and myself with pure made up shit.
It shows. It really does.

 

You explicitly confirm it in your own post:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I don't need to challenge you; I can just sit back and let you contradict yourself.




I did read the article, by the way.

Nevertheless as noted, you acknowledge you've reached the end of your valid arguments. You didn't label it, but I'll just put a section header here:

Section II: Schoolyard Taunts

etc. etc.

 

Sigh. If a list of the occasions you have basically humiliated yourself with gaffes and moral flaws over the years here were drawn up it would be a very extensive one. Ditto for your superior and mentor James R. Hence you both seek revenge but both having become unhinged with internal rage, such efforts invariably fall flat and amount to little more than a display of lunacy in general. Something to be sadly endured as part of the SF landscape. Bye.

 

You did not even complete the thought before lapsing into section II.


Section II: Schoolyard taunts

 

Ah. You have some opinions on how the forum is run.
That's valid - just not here.

I'll report this post to have it moved to the Site Feedback forum where you can discuss it on-topic. Meanwhile, let's just stay-on-topic here please.