UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

[foghorn]

No idiot - it's called use of colorful language.

No, it shows your mental attitude.

No idiot - it's called use of colorful language.

But, why would you (Q-reeus) ''love'' to see someone ''puch the shit out'' of a girl or anyone ?? Would you like to talk about it?

revealing your hand as forum hierarchy approved sock of sweetpea.

What is this obsession you have with Sweetpea.
Q-reeus, you need to show where Sweetpea was ever permanently banned from this site?
And when did Sweetpea last post on this site? Get a mod to help you and maybe your obsession will fade.

Off you go - trawl away hi ho. More 'treasures' await.

''hi ho'', that's so cute, I feel now I can't let you down.
They seek him here. They seek him there. That old Q-reeus seeks him everywhere. Is he in Heaven? Or is he in Hell? That damned, elusive, Sweetpea.

 

[Q-reeus]

No, it shows your mental attitude.

But, why would you (Q-reeus) ''love'' to see someone ''puch the shit out'' of a girl or anyone ?? Would you like to talk about it?


What is this obsession you have with Sweetpea.
Q-reeus, you need to show where Sweetpea was ever permanently banned from this site?
And when did Sweetpea last post on this site? Get a mod to help you and maybe your obsession will fade.

''hi ho'', that's so cute, I feel now I can't let you down.
They seek him here. They seek him there. That old Q-reeus seeks him everywhere. Is he in Heaven? Or is he in Hell? That damned, elusive, Sweetpea.

You surfaced shortly after sweatpea ceased posting. With exactly the same style and obsession with sniping at me every so often. Often via trawling just as sweatpea did. No need to channel Sherlock Holmes on this one. Your sniping/trawling here is a thread derailing tactic, contrary to forum rules/guidelines, that is notionally frowned on by mods. LET IT GO.

 

[foghorn]

Your sniping/trawling here is a thread derailing tactic, contrary to forum rules/guidelines, that is notionally frowned on by mods. LET IT GO.

Classic plank in your own eye, from Q-reeus there ^^.

 

[Q-reeus]

Some predictable fill ahead of the official June disclosure event:
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opini...closure-2021-least-not-government-ncna1269681
The usual 'two camps' dichotomy that ignores a 'third camp' i.e. neither secret US/Chinese/Russian advanced tech or space aliens but rather paranormal in nature. About the only interesting seemingly solid prerelease info is what many already suspected. There will be a two tier disclosure - one full of ambiguities for public consumption - and one 'behind closed doors' for a select audience but likely still full of ambiguities.

 

[wegs]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/15/politics/ufo-report-briefing-pentagon-fighting/index.html

Kinda interesting ^

At the end of the day, maybe all anyone can say is that there could be alien life out there, but we shouldn't leap to believing that it's alien life, simply because we don't understand what we're seeing. My own skepticism when it comes to these sightings being possibly alien life, is that I don't think any ''intelligent'' life is within (reasonable) traveling distance to earth.

 

[Q-reeus]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/15/politics/ufo-report-briefing-pentagon-fighting/index.html

Kinda interesting ^

At the end of the day, maybe all anyone can say is that there could be alien life out there, but we shouldn't leap to believing that it's alien life, simply because we don't understand what we're seeing. My own skepticism when it comes to these sightings being possibly alien life, is that I don't think any ''intelligent'' life is within (reasonable) traveling distance to earth.

So, as a person who believes in a supernatural God, you discount the possibility of supernatural/paranormal beings as the real explanation of nonmundane UFO/UAP/AAP phenomena? But that's not the big issue here for me. You have, after so long, dropped butterflies in your current-as-of June 18 2021 (maybe even earlier!) SF avatar!!! WTF??!!

Regarding the final para in that article:
"The next month, Elizondo claims he was told that the senior-level official was "coming after (him)," at which time he said he decided to hire legal counsel."
The SF scoffers/debunkers/skeptics brigade will take that as 'proof' that the likes of Elizondo are 'paranoid conspiracy theorist UFO nutters'.
Others - myself included - believe him and take that as a typical example of the longstanding repressive, threatening, security paranoia culture prevalent in US military (and elsewhere) circles.

 

[wegs]

So, as a person who believes in a supernatural God, you discount the possibility of supernatural/paranormal beings as the real explanation of nonmundane UFO/UAP/AAP phenomena?

Didn't say that I discount the possibility that alien life exists; we shouldn't leap to that as the only possibility. As an aside, my belief in God and whether or not alien life exists, neither can be proven using science. Since this is a science forum, that's worth mentioning.

But that's not the big issue here for me. You have, after so long, dropped butterflies in your current-as-of June 18 2021 (maybe even earlier!) SF avatar!!! WTF??!!

lol It was earlier than June 18th. *gasp* Yea, think it's time for a change...

Regarding the final para in that article:
"The next month, Elizondo claims he was told that the senior-level official was "coming after (him)," at which time he said he decided to hire legal counsel."
The SF scoffers/debunkers/skeptics brigade will take that as 'proof' that the likes of Elizondo are 'paranoid conspiracy theorist UFO nutters'.
Others - myself included - believe him and take that as a typical example of the longstanding repressive, threatening, security paranoia culture prevalent in US military (and elsewhere) circles.

It's interesting that this topic causes a lot of tension, in-fighting, etc. in the military. In our government. Even on sci forums.

 

[Q-reeus]

Didn't say that I discount the possibility that alien life exists; we shouldn't leap to that as the only possibility. As an aside, my belief in God and whether or not alien life exists, neither can be proven using science. Since this is a science forum, that's worth mentioning.

Nice bit of dodging there wegs. Let me repeat the first question in response to your #4885:
"So, as a person who believes in a supernatural God, you discount the possibility of supernatural/paranormal beings as the real explanation of nonmundane UFO/UAP/AAP phenomena?"
'Alien' is understood by all here to refer to physical entities whether flesh and blood or AI, originating on an interstellar planet or planets. Paranormal/supernatural in the UFO etc. context here is generally understood to refer to inherently non-physical intellingences residing in some transcendent 'other realm of existence'. You aren't required to informatively respond on that particular matter of distinction but it would help to do so - imho.

It's interesting that this topic causes a lot of tension, in-fighting, etc. in the military. In our government. Even on sci forums.

No shit wegs! That's a refreshing new perspective! Ha ha ha ha. Only kidding. The art of appearing to be 'controversial' but actually being as non-controversial and loved by all as possible.
Please pardon my abrasive/confrontational attitude - if that's how you see it. There - I think that covers all bases. Or not.

 

[wegs]

Nice bit of dodging there wegs.

I wasn’t “dodging.” lol

Let me repeat the first question in response to your #4885:
"So, as a person who believes in a supernatural God, you discount the possibility of supernatural/paranormal beings as the real explanation of nonmundane UFO/UAP/AAP phenomena?"
'Alien' is understood by all here to refer to physical entities whether flesh and blood or AI, originating on an interstellar planet or planets. Paranormal/supernatural in the UFO etc. context here is generally understood to refer to inherently non-physical intellingences residing in some transcendent 'other realm of existence'. You aren't required to informatively respond on that particular matter of distinction but it would help to do so - imho.

Well, it is reasonable to think that possibly somewhere in the universe, there exists an environment/planet similar to ours. So, it is also reasonable to ”believe” that life that exists similar to life on Earth might exist somewhere else in the universe. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that there is extraterrestrial life. Is that how you come to your view about alien life? I don’t disagree with this line of thinking...again, and I’ve stated this throughout this and other similar threads - I believe in the possibility of alien life, but every photo that claims to be proof of an alien space craft, needs to be verified and then disproven. (or proven) What should the litmus test be when it comes to verifying alien spacecrafts?

From a faith perspective, I may hold the Bible as “evidence” for example, that Jesus once existed, and that the story of him is true. (based on the NT) There are also independent historians of our time who through research, believe that Jesus existed. Whether or not one thinks he was a prophet, or divine...that is a purely spiritual perspective. How people arrive at their faith beliefs can stem from many things so it’s not quite the same (to me) as viewing random footage of flying objects, and assuming that they must be alien crafts. You may toss aside the Bible as a book of myths and fables, but you’re willing to unequivocally believe that many UFO claims could very well be proof of alien life? That’s fine if you do, but it’s just ironic that your question to me could also be pointed back to you.

No shit wegs! That's a refreshing new perspective! Ha ha ha ha. Only kidding. The art of appearing to be 'controversial' but actually being as non-controversial and loved by all as possible.
Please pardon my abrasive/confrontational attitude - if that's how you see it. There - I think that covers all bases. Or not.

You’re forgiven. ^_^

 

[Michael 345]

For interstellar travel they appear to be very small

Oh that's right there is a mother ship waiting for them

How come we never hear about the mother ship?

 

[Q-reeus]

I wasn’t “dodging.” lol

My apologies. From what you wrote below that's now evident.

Well, it is reasonable to think that possibly somewhere in the universe, there exists an environment/planet similar to ours. So, it is also reasonable to ”believe” that life that exists similar to life on Earth might exist somewhere else in the universe. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that there is extraterrestrial life. Is that how you come to your view about alien life? I don’t disagree with this line of thinking...again, and I’ve stated this throughout this and other similar threads - I believe in the possibility of alien life, but every photo that claims to be proof of an alien space craft, needs to be verified and then disproven. (or proven) What should the litmus test be when it comes to verifying alien spacecrafts?

I also believe it's highly likely not just life but intelligent life exists on other planets, and that it's remotely possible a fraction of nonmundane UFOs are of the 'alien spacecraft' type. I severely doubt all stories of downed UFOs found with 'greys' onboard, and 'alien tech' then 'reverse engineered' by US military etc. But you have profoundly misread my question.

Your earlier post with that link to article about infighting, clearly imo bought into the 'dichotomy' - either advanced tech craft of domestic/foreign origin, or craft piloted by space aliens. As everyone here should well know, imo the usually ignored third option is by far the most likely - paranormal/supernatural manifestations of non-material intelligent beings. Just another subset of the wider arena that includes poltergeist activity and suchlike. Try rereading several times my initial query to you. The correct drift should then be clear. Never mind that now.

From a faith perspective, I may hold the Bible as “evidence” for example, that Jesus once existed, and that the story of him is true. (based on the NT) There are also independent historians of our time who through research, believe that Jesus existed. Whether or not one thinks he was a prophet, or divine...that is a purely spiritual perspective. How people arrive at their faith beliefs can stem from many things so it’s not quite the same (to me) as viewing random footage of flying objects, and assuming that they must be alien crafts. You may toss aside the Bible as a book of myths and fables, but you’re willing to unequivocally believe that many UFO claims could very well be proof of alien life? That’s fine if you do, but it’s just ironic that your question to me could also be pointed back to you.

Ha ha ha ha. Continued misunderstanding. See above. There was no intent on drawing you out on belief in the bible etc. I find it odd that folks like Kenneth Miller will militantly oppose any notion of supernatural origins and subsequent guidance of life on Earth, while simultaneously declaring a devout belief in God as Prime Mover. An odd Deism for a self-declared devout Catholic imo. But there are many like that.

You’re forgiven. ^_^

You have no idea how relieved I am to read those gracious words wegs. Have a swell rest of the day!

 

[river]

For interstellar travel they appear to be very small

Oh that's right there is a mother ship waiting for them

How come we never hear about the mother ship?

Highlighted

Because the mother ship can be billions of miles away . Besides the fact that the propulsion technology is silent .

 

[Q-reeus]

Highlighted

Because the mother ship can be billions of miles away . Besides the fact that the propulsion technology is silent .

The primary reason I reject the iconic 'Roswell recovery of downed UFOs with grey humanoids recovered and dissected' story is that the alle4ged downed UFOs were afaik according to 'eyewitness accounts' flimsy small craft with 'incredibly flexible thin foil' remnants. Thus 'logically' scout craft with only reconnaissance capabilities. Making them 'easily downed' by variously lightning strikes or US military 'longitudinal wave weapons' or good old 'high power radar'. Then why did not the logically posited interstellar worthy 'mother-ship' intervene to recover their own? At a speed and technological superiority far surpassing human ability to thwart that intervention ? Roswell believers afaik have never attempted to answer what should be an obvious objection to the standard 'Roswell really happened' believer scenario.

 

[sideshowbob]

Then why did not the logically posited interstellar worthy 'mother-ship' intervene to recover their own?

No man left behind, Blackhawk down, etc.

 

[river]

The primary reason I reject the iconic 'Roswell recovery of downed UFOs with grey humanoids recovered and dissected' story is that the alle4ged downed UFOs were afaik according to 'eyewitness accounts' flimsy small craft with 'incredibly flexible thin foil' remnants. Thus 'logically' scout craft with only reconnaissance capabilities. Making them 'easily downed' by variously lightning strikes or US military 'longitudinal wave weapons' or good old 'high power radar'. Then why did not the logically posited interstellar worthy 'mother-ship' intervene to recover their own? At a speed and technological superiority far surpassing human ability to thwart that intervention ? Roswell believers afaik have never attempted to answer what should be an obvious objection to the standard 'Roswell really happened' believer scenario.

I suggest you dig deeper into it .

Remember the first news paper account is flying saucers . Not a ballon . By the military .

 

[Q-reeus]

I suggest you dig deeper into it .

Remember the first news paper account is flying saucers . Not a ballon . By the military .

An article that seems quite balanced regarding Roswell 1947 incident:
https://www.livescience.com/roswell-ufo-crash-what-really-happened.html

A pro crashed saucer passage:

"In 1978, nuclear physicist, author and UFO researcher Stanton Friedman interviewed Marcel, who said that the discovery made 31 years earlier was not from this world, and that the government had ordered him to keep quiet. Friedman revisited the incident and sought other witnesses, and his work inspired Charles Berlitz and William Moore to write "The Roswell Incident," published in 1980. Their conclusion was simple: There had been a huge cover-up."

A nay passage:

"In June, or possibly early July 1947, William Brazel woke up for a normal day's work on the J.B. Foster ranch in Lincoln County, New Mexico, 75 miles (120 kilometers) north of Roswell, when he made a shocking discovery. He found on the ranch "a large area of bright wreckage made up of rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper and sticks," Brazel said in an article published on July 8, 1947, in the Roswell Daily Record."

It's the latter account by the man who first got to the crash scene that imo sinks the UFO angle just with those highlighted words. Wright brothers era materials in a hyper advanced tech 'saucer'? Not likely is a huge understatement. Add to that my earlier post re failure of any rescue mission by 'mother ship' or other 'scout level' saucers. What callous alien bastards/bitches!

 

[DaveC426913]

It's the latter account by the man who first got to the crash scene that imo sinks the UFO angle just with those highlighted words. Wright brothers era materials in a hyper advanced tech 'saucer'?

Not that I want to add credence to the historical account but ...

You're making a big assumption that this guy managed to correctly identify what this debris was actually made of, as opposed to what it looked like to his untrained eye. Do you think he got close enough to know that it was, indeed, rubber and not any other thin flexible material? - aluminum foil, and not any other extremely thin sheet metal. Same 3ith paper and sticks.

This is an example of a foregone conclusion. You have assumed things about the account that fit your narrative. You didn't question other possibilities before deciding to dismiss the account.

 

[Q-reeus]

Not that I want to add credence to the historical account but ...

You're making a big assumption that this guy managed to correctly identify what this debris was actually made of, as opposed to what it looked like to his untrained eye. Do you think he got close enough to know that it was, indeed, rubber and not any other thin flexible material? - aluminum foil, and not any other extremely thin sheet metal. Same 3ith paper and sticks.

This is an example of a foregone conclusion. You have assumed things about the account that fit your narrative. You didn't question other possibilities before deciding to dismiss the account.

Taking turns with foghorn/sweetpea to harass me with useless nitpicking, or in his case, malicious misrepresentation.
When you stooped to the level of juvenile school yard taunts here:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/in-defence-of-space-aliens.160045/page-244#post-3677582
, it was a sign of desperation. Keep scraping the bottom of the barrel if you like - it only reflects badly on you.

 

[foghorn]

Not that I want to add credence to the historical account but ...

I ditto that.
I'm not saying the following is in anyway related to anything you have said.

No matter how flimsy or weak the the materials at the scene may seem or are, one can 'always' cover this with... they use a protective force field around the ''craft''.
We don't know noting about their technology or their understanding of what 'we' call physics.
Human technology/physics seems to 'assume' a big ship for interstellar travel but that's just our understanding.

Was it in ''The Hitchhikers Guild to the Galaxy'', where a dog just happens to eat an entire alien invasion fleet in one bite thinking nothing of it ??

 

[DaveC426913]

Taking turns with foghorn/sweetpea to harass me with useless nitpicking, or in his case, malicious misrepresentation.
When you stooped to the level of juvenile school yard taunts here:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/in-defence-of-space-aliens.160045/page-244#post-3677582
, it was a sign of desperation. Keep scraping the bottom of the barrel if you like - it only reflects badly on you.

Unexplained phenomena is not a place for the guileless! You're here arguing (emotionally I might add) about unexplained phenomena, and yet you freely - and without and ounce of shame - that you take TV shows at face-value - in fact are quite adamant about it.

And now, here, you're compounding the problem. This time, you read that some guy said "rubber and tinfoil and paper" and you are prepared to dismiss the whole account without even considering the rather certain likelihood that the layperson was simply describing what he saw superficially. (What - it can't be alien unless it's levitating and glowing green?? Aliens can't have aluminum?) **

That's just not how rational analysis is done.

You're actually hurting your own cause by demonstrating just how bad typical UFO buffs are at rational analysis.


** Oh my God. The UFO buffs here are so bad at arguing their case that they need us skeptics to step in and act as Devil's Advocate to argue their case for them!!