UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    Omg, that's hilarious! Even MR has to laugh on that one.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,608
    I don't know. How much can a slide projector, a screen, and a laser pointer cost?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    I got that far and I truly wondered what was coming next

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    lol! I'd hope the ''independent investigation'' will require more than that...
     
  8. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    True

    Evidence put forward for examination might require some sophisticated equipment

    Then again what evidence is there to put forward?

    Perhaps a slide projector, a screen, and a laser pointer will be all that is needed

    I would put in for a coffee machine and personalised coffee cups with team logo

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,057
    I'm reminded of the front page of the National Enquirer, with a headline that read something like, "Man photographs UFO in his back yard." When you turned to the page, there was a drawing of a man photographing a flying saucer.

    For some people, apparently, the only equipment needed is a pencil.
     
    wegs likes this.
  10. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    "Enquiring minds want to know; intelligent minds just laugh."
    - an old friend, a long time ago
     
    sideshowbob likes this.
  11. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,902
    The article that MR posted says this (highlighting by me): Panel members include "some of the world's leading scientists, data practitioners, artificial intelligence practitioners, aerospace safety experts, all with a specific charge, which is to tell us how to apply the full focus of science and data to UAP," Evans said. The project is expected to cost no more than $100,000.

    It sounds to me like the $100,000 will be spent on forming a committee of prominent individuals, expected to issue a report in just nine months. The committee doesn't sound like it will be the planned examination of the UAP phenomenon, instead it appears to have a more "meta-" purpose, to produce recommendations on how the UAP phenomenon should be examined.

    I don't know how many members their committee will have, or whether it will have any technical or clerical staff, but it sounds to me like the $100,000 might just be for travel and expenses over the nine months. (These individuals will probably continue to be paid by the organizations that lend them, perhaps part-time, to the committee.)

    In other words, this sounds like a very preliminary (but very necessary) initial step in the investigation of UAPs.

    I will say that the committee will inevitably be hamstrung by the absence of philosophers of science in its ranks, given that most of the controversy surrounding this subject are philosophical controversies about evidence, probabilities, confirmation and similar things. So it might be helpful to the committee to have members conversant with such issues.
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2022
    wegs and Magical Realist like this.
  12. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,359
    Good grief, man! No! Just... no! The last thing any committee needs is a bunch of philosophers to spend the entire time arguing about things (and probably only between themselves) at a level beyond what is of practical relevance. Actual scientists from a suitably diverse number of fields should be all that is needed to cover such things.
    If you want a committee to be a waste of time, or of little practical value, by all means invite the philosophers, but otherwise I say to keep them well away!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    C C likes this.
  13. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Or ... Perhaps one of the recommendations they will come up with is "need to include philosophers as part of the search".
     
  14. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,359
    Has a committee ever recommended that??

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    DaveC426913 likes this.
  15. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Heh. I can just see the world's leading scientists, data practitioners, artificial intelligence practitioners, aerospace safety experts saying
    "So, we are agreed then. What this study needs is a lot more people who will ask questions that have no right or wrong answers. Good meeting everyone, go home. See you next month."
     
  16. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,902
    I would prefer to say -

    Intelligent minds are inquiring minds. Inquiring minds want to know more about the many things that they don't already know and probe deeper into the mysteries. It's what motivates both science and philosophy.

    Idiots think that they already know it all (or at least the principles of it all) and abusive idiots just ridicule those who are more intelligent than they are.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2022
  17. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,324
    What's wrong with philosophers?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    The social sciences have pretty much sold-out to reciprocally brown-nosing been uplifted by the output of the bottom dregs cutting-edge of the intellectual class, descended from various developmental trends in French philosophy going back to the 18th-century. (Well, there was that major "German" contribution from that homonym of Groucho's surname, but occasional anomalies are in the norm.)
     
    wegs likes this.
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Not sure if you need to hear this but 'Enquiring minds want to know' is NatEnq's tagline, emblazoned right above the picture of "WWII B-24 Liberator found in crater on Moon!!"
     
  19. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    ^^ To put it more plainly, NatEnqs idea of enquiring minds is people who are not burdened with the curse of rational thinking.
     
  20. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,857
    I'm kind of competitive so if I was put in charge of running the alien investigation team I'd want to win. I could head it up by someone rational but then we'd lose. I think I'd head it up with Magical Realist and I'm pretty sure we would be a winner and conclude that aliens do exist.

    Go Magical Realist!
     
    DaveC426913 likes this.
  21. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,902
    It's probably a bit of unintended irony that participants in the same thread that dismisses philosophy, seem interested in discussing little else.

    This thread is all about what should and shouldn't be considered 'evidence', about how different strands of evidence may or may not converge, about what considerations should or shouldn't constrain our proposed explanatory hypotheses, about how a-priori probability estimates should be assigned to events that are new to our experience, about how best to employ "reason" and "critical thinking", about how "skepticism" should be practiced, or what the concepts of "extraordinary" or "mundane" embrace. About when open-minded agnosticism is most appropriate, and when an attitude of sarcastic dismissal might be.

    Can somebody point me to any science that addresses any of that directly and other than tangentially? Scientists address problems in the ways they learned in graduate school. They follow the lead of earlier scientists that came before them. The smarter and more creative scientists might mix, match and adapt those methods to new problems. That's often done on the basis of common sense or in a flash of insight. What scientists are less likely to do is examine the preconceptions and assumptions that go into what they are doing and what justifies their doing it. Precisely the sort of issues above, that arise with evaluating the UAP phenomenon.

    Certainly physicists and aeronautical engineers might be more relevant in the actual work of any UAP investigation that emerges from this initial study. But this initial study isn't about directly addressing the UAP reports so much as it's trying to determine what kind of data should be included in the UAP data-set, how it might best be collected, and how that data should then be addressed. And those don't seem to me to be entirely scientific questions, though scientists should obviously have lots of input about what they will need to see in a good complete actionable report so as to best pursue their more specialized work in physics, chemistry or biology.
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2022
    C C and wegs like this.
  22. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    Examining UAP “evidence” doesn’t mean that space aliens possibly exist. We’ve moved past attaching space aliens as the only other option when it comes to investigating claims of UAP sightings. It might be just as interesting to learn that some of these UAP’s are advanced technology designed by the US government or other countries.

    Stranger things. . .
     
  23. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    Why do some here feel that philosophy and science need to remain isolated from each other? Maybe I’m misreading, but can’t the two coincide together?
     
    C C likes this.

Share This Page