UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

Not sure if you looking for this but....

https://skepticalinquirer.org/2018/05/navy_pilots_2004_ufo_a_comedy_of_errors/

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And thus little green men, right?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

To be clear, "cannot be identified as a familiar object" is not synonymous with "therefore exotic".

There is plenty of room for mundane objects simply unidentifiable as such due to poor observing circumstances.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hmmm...mysterious non-exotic objects? I don't think so. These are metallic discs, black triangles, rotating tops, and 40 ft long tic tacs. Everything about them says exotic.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Yes.

That's kind of the thing about unidentified. If they're unidentified then they might easily be non-exotic things that aren't observed in a way that makes them identifiable.

They appear to be shaped like triangles or tic tacs under very poor observing conditions. Since they're not identified, they have not been identified as triangles or tic tacs.

A radar silhouette leaves a lot of room for ambiguity.

 

No...they appear as those under poor and excellent observing conditions, as in the broad daylight of the Navy encounters. Observing conditions have no bearing in how they appear.

 

Show me this clear, unambiguous close-up, multi-angle, multi-witness video of these tic tacs.
Oh that's right, it's a radar silhouette, lasting a few seconds, with a very poor viewing angle.

 

LOL! Radar and FLIR video and multiple eyewitnesses not good enough now..Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

 

Was it enough to identify the object No? Then by definition it wasn't good enough.

 

Good enough to identify it as a UAP, of which there have been many other sightings, including by multiple Navy pilots on the east coast in 2014-2015.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/navy-pilots-ufo-reports-confirmed-new-york-times-military-

"According to The Times, the Navy recently set out new classified guidance for how to report "unexplained aerial phenomena."

According to the report, the pilots who reported the aerial phenomena "speculated that the objects were part of some classified and extremely advanced drone program." In another instance, one pilot told Lt. Graves that he "almost hit one of those things" and that he described it as looking "like a sphere encasing a cube."

Lt. Graves and his fellow pilots told the newspaper that "the video showed objects accelerating to hypersonic speed, making sudden stops and instantaneous turns — something beyond the physical limits of a human crew."

 

False. By definition, things that are Unidentified are not identified. That's a classification, not an identification.

 

It's an unexplained aerial phenomenon, displaying specific performance and structural traits. That makes it something more than a "could be anything."

 

Yup. Not identified.

Appearing to display...

Your "analyses" are quite sloppy, full of wishful-thinking and embellishment, a hallmark of UFO hysteria.

 

He's embarrassed to say "Little Green Men" but that's really all he says. Doesn't have the courage of his convictions.

 

Last ditch ad homs won't help you in the face of all this extraordinary recent evidence we have for ufos/uaps.

 

Interesting:

"In any event, this brings us to the video in question, which shows an object’s rapid acceleration to the left and disappearance from the video screen. What we see on the video is probably a trick of optics, according to Major McGaha. He believes the sudden leftward-zooming of the object resulted from the camera having momentarily reached the limit of its panning ability, at which time the F-18 was banking. This created the onscreen illusion that the object suddenly shot away. As corroboration, McGaha notes that the angle of the object’s moving off the screen is correlated to the bank angle of the F-18. What was no longer viewed was presumed to have disappeared at a tremendous speed.

As it happened, this was Fravor’s “first military assignment as a pilot for the U.S. Navy’s F-18 Super Hornet.” It obviously rattled him."


So, this being his first assignment in an F-18 (and it was a training assignment), it is forgiveable if he didn't know to interpret the sudden movement of the bogey as an artifact of the camera system.

 

Your use of the term "ad hom" is as wrong as your use of the term "identified". Maybe stick to what you know.

 

I'm not sure a non-moving bogey is any less mysterious than a suddenly moving one. The uap was witnessed by him and another pilot as a 40 ft long tic tac flying around like a pin pong ball against a wall. Ofcourse that's left out of this account.

Also it's unlikely Fravor wouldn't already be well acquainted with the effect of camera movement from flying other jets. He had years of experience with equipment like this.

 

For all that it may be unlikely in your baseless personal opinion, it's still way more likely than alien spacecraft.

 

Noone's proposed alien spacecraft here--just ufos/uaps.