10 principles for investigating UFO reports

[river]

No..all those known things have been ruled out, hence meriting it the name UFO. Do I need to start quoting those UFO definitions again?

"An unidentified flying object, or UFO, in its most general definition, is any apparent anomaly in the sky that is not identifiable as a known object or phenomenon."---https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_flying_object

Here's the difference in how a ufologist uses the term UFO and a skeptic uses it. For a skeptic an object is a ufo before the investigation of it and could be anything. For a ufologist an object is a ufo only AFTER the investigation, after all known causes have been eliminated. At that point it becomes a true unknown and unidentified object, matching thousands of other sightings of such mysterious anomalies.

MR.

The key is investigation ; of which almost none do. Except us few .

 

[billvon]

No..all those known things have been ruled out, hence meriting it the name UFO.

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.

 

[river]

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.

Is this a real example billvon ?

 

[DaveC426913]

Is this a real example billvon ?

How can that possibly matter? It's a typical enough example to make the point.

That middle phase can last minutes, months or years.

 

[billvon]

Is this a real example billvon ?

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

 

[river]

How can that possibly matter? It's a typical enough example to make the point.

That middle phase can last minutes, months or years.

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 .

 

[DaveC426913]

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

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.

 

[river]

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 .

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 .

 

[paddoboy]

There is , the evidence is irrefutable . Thousands of evidence has been collected .

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.

MR.

The key is investigation ; of which almost none do. Except us few

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.

 

[Magical Realist]

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 .

What would "irrefutable evidence" for a UFO/flying saucer look like?

 

[Magical Realist]

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

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

 

[paddoboy]

What would "irrefutable evidence" for a UFO/flying saucer look like?

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.

 

[paddoboy]

It only becomes an unidentified flying object after all that other stuff is ruled out. That's the accepted definition of ufo.

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.

 

[river]

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.

Do the investigation pad .

 

[paddoboy]

Do the investigation pad .

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 .

 

[Magical Realist]

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.

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

 

[river]

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 .

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 .

 

[paddoboy]

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 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.

 

[river]

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 .

 

[paddoboy]

Hynek was converted from ignorance to ;

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.