10 principles for investigating UFO reports

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by James R, Dec 31, 2016.

  1. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    MR.

    The key is investigation ; of which almost none do. Except us few .
     
    Magical Realist likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    No, they haven't. Let's use an example:

    IR camera operator: "Hey I see something! It looks strange."
    Pilot: "I don't see anything on radar over there."
    IR camera operator: "That doesn't look like any airplane I've ever seen."

    At that point it is a UFO, even though very few things have been ruled out.

    Ground analyst: "It's the condensation plume from a commercial jet - probably IB6830, which was in the direction you were looking."

    At that point it is no longer a UFO.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Is this a real example billvon ?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    How can that possibly matter? It's a typical enough example to make the point.

    That middle phase can last minutes, months or years.
     
  8. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Yes. See the example posted in this thread. (Quotes are made up of course since I don't speak Spanish - outcome is the same.)
     
  9. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Actually it makes no point , no point at all .

    Investigation ; a through investigation ; in ALL UFO reports is key . And has been done countless times .

    The investigators have been through a whole host of BS, they know BS when they come across it .
     
  10. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Truer words were never spoken.

    And none have produced a shred of extant, irrefutable evidence.

    The investigators have been through a whole host of BS, they know BS when they come across it .[/QUOTE]
    Truer words were never spoken.

    And here we are, without any irrefutable evidence.
     
  11. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Truer words were never spoken.

    And here we are, without any irrefutable evidence.[/QUOTE]

    There is , the evidence is irrefutable . Thousands of evidence has been collected .
     
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    No, that's simply a fairy tale.
    Many many scientists 100% believe we are not alone in this Universe of near infinite extent and content, but as yet we have absolutely no evidence of any other life off this earth.
    These people and myself, would dearly love for that evidence to be forthcoming before most of us kick the bucket. It obviously would be an extraordinary revelation and as such requires extraordinary evidence which so far does not exist.
    Sorry river, you have made that "investigator" claim before, and as yet the evidence of you or MR being any "investigator" of any renown, is non existent.
     
  13. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,608
    What would "irrefutable evidence" for a UFO/flying saucer look like?
     
  14. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,608
    No..it is not a flying object. It is only an image on a camera. It is only a variable at that point---X. It could be a camera glitch or a cloud or a flock of geese or something else. It only becomes an unidentified flying object after all that other stuff is ruled out. That's the accepted definition of ufo:


    "Over the years since we have encountered some steady misunderstandings regarding the
    terms “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena” or UAP and “Unidentified Flying Object” or UFO. One
    of the most common misunderstandings is that either term is in reference to something that
    could not be identified therefore it could be anything. This is exactly not correct. Both terms
    are intended to convey that in cases where there is enough information that an identification
    can be made by those most qualified to do so and yet an identification can not be made the
    phenomenon responsible can be considered “unidentified”. It is the best documented cases
    of unidentified aerial phenomena that remain in the dataset if one adheres to this definition
    and scores cases correctly.

    So when correctly applying the term “UAP” (or UFO) one is saying that the
    incident/phenomenon in question has been documented very well and that data was
    subjected to the most qualified technical scrutiny and that the conclusion of that analysis is
    that the incident/phenomenon can not be identified."===http://www.narcap.org/Blog/definition_of_UAP.html
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2017
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    There is plenty of evidence dor UFO's as generally and logically described and defined by the first letter...Unidentified.
    If you are speaking of evidence of Intelligent control of these sightings and/or apparitions, then, show me some alien artifact, a needle, a body part, alien excreta, anything.
    Thousands and thousands of sightings over many years, and yet still no extraordinary evidence that we have been visited or that life off this earth even exists.
    The impressionables and gullible people out there, that believe these things, probably had more then a healthy dose of the X-Files or Millenium TV shows.
     
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    No wrong again: The point is that even professional investigators and scientists, as opposed to yourself and river, can never rule out all the possible atmospheric anomalies, meteorological possibilities, mirages, apparitions, vivid Imaginations, delusions, illusions, trickery.
    All those possibilites can never be all ruled out, and that's why they remain at best UFO's.
     

    Attached Files:

  17. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Do the investigation pad .
     
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Sorry river, like you and MR, I am not qualified to do the intensive professional investigation required, and I certainly would not waste my time even if I was.
    These things have been investigated by professionals and also impressionable nuts, and not withstanding the impressionable nuts interpretations, they remain as UFO's .

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,608
    Yes they can. Any thorough investigation can rule out all those mundane possibilities, and have done so on numerous occasions. That's why we have hundreds of compelling cases to this day. Because they all show the existence of ufos as anomalous aerial objects that are not identified as any known object or phenomenon.

    http://www.ufoevidence.org/Cases/CaseView.asp?section=multiplewitnesses
     
  20. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Hmmm...I see .

    It seem to me that the nuts are rather those who have an opinion but have NO-IDEA what they talk .

    Hynek was converted from ignorance to ; well I'm wrong .
     
    Magical Realist likes this.
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    1. The U in UFO stands for "Unidentified" not identified as a weather balloon, a meteor, atmospheric effect, helicopter, Venus, swamp gas, hallucination, ghost, goblins, Aliens, time travellers, inter-dimensional beings etc etc etc

      Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

      not withstanding any of the usual desperate obfuscations of course.


    2. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ufo
      any unexplained moving object observed in the sky, especially one assumed by some observers to be of extra terrestrial origin.

      https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/UFO
      a flying object in the sky that some people believe could be a spaceship from another planet

      http://www.thefreedictionary.com/UFO
      unidentified flying object: any unexplained moving object observed in the sky, esp. one assumed to be of extraterrestrial origin.

      highlights by me.
     
  22. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    I reiterate ; my post #97

    Hmmm...I see .

    It seem to me that the nuts are rather those who have an opinion but have NO-IDEA what they talk .

    Hynek was converted from ignorance to ; well I'm wrong .
     
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Hynek like Hoyle were otherwise reputable scientists, and there are a few others.......There will always be an exception in any discipline: That doesn't make them right.
     

Share This Page