UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

Post from Oct 2021 and Yazata is still playing the same old tune.

My reply then.
What's ''argued'' on this thread is the offered ''evidence'' , and not that such ideas are ''outlandish'' and can't be true.
* * * * *
About the thread title, how about 'The Magic Roundabout'

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

When I wrote "Something extraordinary appears to have been happening in multiple instances, and at this point nobody knows what it was", I was speaking about a small set of "UAP" events, particularly what little is publicly known of the "tic tac" sightings.

I don't feel comfortable generalizing that to all "UFO" sightings. I expect that the "skeptics" are right about most of those and that in most cases they reduce to mundane explanations.

Yes, the most fascinating cases do seem to present evidence of what the UAP Preliminary Assessment called "breakthrough" technology.

So what should we think about that?

1. One option is to take the reports more or less at face value and conclude that something new is making its existence known here. That seems to be your approach and I have some sympathy with it. That opens the door to all kinds of sci-fi'ish speculations which is fine I guess, as long as they are labeled speculations. They do set knees jerking though.

2. Another option is to reject the reports on the implicit faith that they simply can't be accurate. It's an interesting question why people start out thinking that. But whatever the answer is to that, the conviction that the reports can't be accurate results in people generating speculative scenarios more acceptable to them that in their estimation might have resulted in the report. These are often highly contrived situations that only address one element of a more complex sighting. (That's where my consilience objection gains traction.) And there's rarely if ever any evidence presented that the special situations upon which these hypothetical "mundane" explanations depend actually existed. (They must have, simply because they lead to more acceptable conclusions!)

3. A third response to the seemingly anomalous event-report is the one that I favor: Withhold judgment. Don't bias your conclusions by how you imagine things should turn out, and seek more information. I'm pleased to see that's the approach that the UAP Task Force has taken, so I think that I'm in good company on that one.

I have no objection to that, as long as the speculations are acknowledged to just be speculations. Everybody is speculating at this point, in the absence of more definitive information. That's as true of the "skeptics" as of the "true believers".

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Like I have said many times, I can speculate just as skeptics speculate about birds or conventional aircraft or camera artifacts. But it doesn't mean I see the UFO as officially identified. It is still unknown as to it's origin. Just as it is in the case of the skeptic. That's why I stick to the descriptors that are given by the eyewitnesses: shape, size, luminosity, color, speed, flight maneuvers. Descriptors that skeptics consistently dismiss as erroneous.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Try control-b before you start typing. That's what I do and it works for me.

 

Thanks!

 

Have you always felt this way, MR? I ask because it seems like others are under the impression that your position isn’t this at all. To me, this point of view is pretty reasonable.

 

Yes...I have repeated this numerous times here. The uaps remain uaps, despite any speculations about what they could possibly be. I have insisted that they are some sort of piloted craft based on their appearance and performance. But that is as far as I am willing to go as to what they are. The unknown in the meantime abounds with the strangest possibilities.

Question: What do you think they are? That is, if you think they can be generalized as the same one thing..

 

Maybe the confusion comes into play in that others here think you're trying to pass your opinion off as fact and attempting to persuade others to see the evidence as you do. That seems to be their general point of view, anyway.

My opinion as to what the image could be in the tic tac video for example, is an unpopular one, here lol …but, I’m thinking it’s some type of advanced technology, whether it be from another country “invading” our air space or an alien space craft. (That said, I’m not clinging to my speculation as the only possibility. There could be a mundane explanation, but not sure what that could be, at this point.) But, I’m leaning towards the former, and I’ve wondered with UFO sightings in general, why don’t we hear reports of our military being ordered to take down these UAP’s? Thought I’d do a little research on that point and apparently pilots during the Cold War were ordered to shoot down what seemed to be a UFO flying erratically in their air space. Just seems odd that if there are all these sightings, why isn’t our military acting out more?

What do you make of that?

 

They may have been ordered to shoot at them. But such incidents may have been kept secret to avoid panic in the public. There is an incident I heard about in which the ammo shot at the ufo was returned to the plane, damaging it. Lots of tales out there. It's just a matter of sifting thru the specious rumors and actual encounters. Eyewitness statements are a good source for reliable information.

Here is an interesting military plane/ufo encounter that took place in 1948 over Fargo, North Dakota. It's called "the Gorman Dogfight". Typically it was dismissed by the Air Force as a lighted weather balloon. Yeah,,,those fast moving and dodgy weather balloons.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorman_dogfight

 

It’s definitely curious as to why there isn’t more military involvement/intervention if UAP’s are appearing in our air space. So, is the military able to discern quickly that it’s something mundane while the general public speculates otherwise? (as to the various videos and pics floating out there in the media) I have questions. -_-

Either all of the UAP sightings/claims by the general public have mundane explanations or there are some that are inconclusive. One could conclude that they’re all mundane occurrences otherwise the military would intervene in some of the cases. Right? I don’t know. Either way, if they weren’t sure what that tic tac image was, are they instructed to react to ''invaders" entering into our airspace only if they recognize the threat? (aircraft types they're familiar with in terms of movement, speed, shape, etc)

Btw, I should add to my above comment that in no way do I expect governments and authorities to perform anything other than the most rigorous investigations, and if they’re not 100% certain that it couldn’t have a mundane explanation, I’d rather they just leave it as “we don’t have enough information to go on” or “we don’t know what it (UAP) could be.” Guessing would be reckless.

You and I are just casually discussing the topic and speculating as to our best uneducated guesses, so I get why the government is perhaps keeping their cards close to the vest. But, it’s a fun topic to chat about.

 

Wow! I've never heard of this happening. It seems like there is much more to this story than weather balloons. (Doubtful weather balloons can top 400 mph)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I'm seeing a pattern with these narratives. lol

 

None of any of the videos, pilot remarks etc are evidence

Not a single UFO report has provided ANY evidence

Intervene they don't. Why? Unable???? Unlikely. While the fighter jets would not have the supposed capabilities of a UFO (plus the pilots would definitely not be capable of surviving the forces involved) the armaments (they carry do

A number of missiles against a lone UFO should be no contest. Only reason I can think of - sort of combination - UFO has not shown any hostility - might be a test flight of ours (or alies equipment) and the U of the Unknown - don't shoot down UNKNOWN anything

I don't think Government could sustain a close to chest position for the period UFOs have been around
Yes fun to speculate but somewhat boring

Personally I would rule out alien visitation due to the physics (light years distances to cover at a comparative snails pace)

I'm equally sure if aliens have overcome that hurdle they would not be fascinated and spend time and effort in probing the
fundamental orifice of hillbillies

The Universe is weird, but not that weird

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

It's the modus operandi of all skeptical approaches--cherry pick a few aspects of the sighting as real, then dismiss all the others as mistaken or mundane. In this case all the observations of the pilot of the uap's extraordinary speeds and midair maneuvers that occurred in the encounter. They are simply dismissed as if they never happened, and the pilot is dismissed as delusional or in the very least incompetent. It's the same thing they did with Commander Fravor and the 40 ft long tic tac. The pilot is "seeing things"---a balloon or a bird. Nothing extraordinary to see here. Move along folks.

Pilot Gorman: "I am convinced that there was definite thought behind its maneuvers. I am further convinced that the object was governed by the laws of inertia because its acceleration was rapid but not immediate and although it was able to turn fairly tight at considerable speed, it still followed a natural curve. When I attempted to turn with the object I blacked out temporarily due to excessive speed. I am in fairly good physical condition and I do not believe that there are many if any pilots who could withstand the turn and speed effected by the object, and remain conscious. The object was not only able to out turn and out speed my aircraft ... but was able to attain a far steeper climb and was able to maintain a constant rate of climb far in excess of my aircraft."

 

Don't know about "dismissed as delusional" but dismissed because no objective evidence to back up his claims

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

:

 

I found this article relating to the tic tac video; seems like these UAP sightings have been going on for a while. We can leave space aliens out of the equation, and it's still curious why the Pentagon's findings were met with such skepticism. To be honest, it should be a matter of national security.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ufo-military-intelligence-60-minutes-2021-05-16/

 

Here's the video segment of the 60 Minutes episode that that is a transcript of (for those of us too lazy to read)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Not necessarily ''higher than I'd like,'' but the bar seems higher based on their own individual, personal biases. If you read this article (link below), it seems odd to me, that the Pentagon dealt with such skepticism on the reports of the tic tac video.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ufo-military-intelligence-60-minutes-2021-05-16/

If trained pilots are confident that what they were observing wasn't like anything they had ever seen before, shouldn't we consider what that may mean for national security? I'm not even talking about space aliens, but it could have been an aircraft of some type from another country.

The bar should be set at ''sufficient evidence'' which in this case would be giving the benefit of the doubt to a few highly experienced pilots observing the same unusual ''UFO'', with no hidden agendas.

I don't really believe that there is an oceanic civilization, but if MR does, maybe he has done some of his own research and has come up with a theory that seems acceptable to him. Interestingly, I've heard that ''theory'' from UFO enthusiasts in the media over the past couple of years, even movies depict UFO's having a ''base'' deep within the ocean floor. But, I kind of think the idea is a bit sensationalized, so I don't personally believe it.

Well, it's difficult for many skeptics to agree that UFO's even exist...let alone alien piloted ones. lol I wonder why that is, to be honest. That's a rhetorical question, not really expecting you to answer it.

Okay.

 

MR is being disingenuous and misleading. It seems he feels the account can't stand on its own merits without his spin on it.

The weather balloon (which was confirmed, by the way) was not "fast moving" or "dodgy". The appearance of motion was an illusion due to the plane's own motion.



Now, in case there is any belief that the pilot was justified in his interpretation of what he was seeing, consider:

By his accoumt, it
- passed within 500 feet
- was 6 to 8 inches in size
- changed velocity and direction multiple times

And by the way, he is talking about an object that appears no bigger to him than a grain of salt held at arm's length.

Thing is, it is impossible to estimate the size of an unknown aerial object without knowing its speed and distance.

And it is impossible to estimate the distance of an unknown aerial object without knowning its speed and size.

One must know two of them reasonably reliably (from other independent clues) to estimate the third.

He knew none of them.

He cannot have made a meaningful estimate. No matter how skilled and professional a pilot one might say he was, he can't defy the math. His own account contradicts itself.

 

It seems a reasonable inference to make based on the numerous accounts of UAPs witnessed entering and exiting bodies of water--called USOs. I already posted a source on this topic from the Popular Mechanics website but it might've had a paywall to view it. I'll look for other sources.

https://www.aetv.com/shows/the-lowe-files/exclusives/lowe-cation-underwater-alien-base
https://www.wwlp.com/news/what-flie...lly-investigating-the-aguadilla-ufo-incident/
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...n-of-so-called-unidentified-submerged-objects

 

The pressure increases about one atmosphere for every 10 meters of water depth. At a depth of 5,000 meters the pressure will be approximately 500 atmospheres or 500 times greater than the pressure at sea level

https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/eoi/nemo1...increases about one,the pressure at sea level.

So now we have flying submarine tic tacs

Look up in the sky
It's a bird
It's a weather balloon

No it's SupertTictTac

Able to soar through the air with no propulsion and with super light weight hull travel at unbelievable speeds without heating, diving into water without causing it to boil, and descend to depths which would implode a normal hull

Be sure to tune into the next episode

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!