Do you believe in UFOs & flying saucers ?

I dunno, are the Americans sandbagging? I find this hard to swallow. Is there anything similar from other governments?

Someday we'll see a really clear 4k photo......then again maybe not.

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I dunno, dude. You come across as aggressive and defensive if anyone doesn’t fall in behind your Fortean science views on these unidentified “objects”.

I, personally, would be waiting to learn a lot more and see less grainy footage, or blurry photographs, before I made up my mind on any of these things. You seem to know, for certain, what’s going on based on these but it just doesn’t “wash” with me, I’m afraid.

If I come across as aggressive I'm sorry about that. It's certainly not my intention or not how I want to contribute to the debate here.

One thing I would say though is that often my view is misrepresented (not directing this exclusively at you). An example of this is when you state "I seem to know". That's wrong.

True, there are people saying these are definitely aliens. I have my own personal beliefs about what these could be. These are not based on evidence for what they are but rather evidence to the contrary for what they're not. I am not someone who is saying these are definitely aliens but I don't think they're anything built by humans. I have my beliefs about that but right now my beliefs are BS without evidence.

What we do have is evidence that these things aren't balloons, planes or anything the most advanced military in the world is familiar with. This and only this is the theory I am a proponent of. There are things in our airspace operating with capabilities far in advance of our own and that no theories put forward are credible to me.

Where I do get strident is when people are making claims that aren't based on science. I think the sceptics movement is actually full of examples of armchair sceptics shouting down people qualified to make observations. To me that is insulting to the scientists, pilots and engineers who are telling us otherwise.

I am really sorry if I come across as aggressive. As I have repeated ad nauseum here I am a scientist here and I have had horrendous experiences with sceptics. A bit of our research made the news a few years back. Sceptics with no scientific training tried to ridicule our claim and shout down our observations made on hard data. We were proved right but it was tough dealing with these people.

I'll end by saying that it generally isn't the people supporting these claims who are doing the ridiculing here. It's the people who are claiming to be sceptics who are making jokes and attacking those who think this is worth exploring.

JackTC wrote: »

The first video is a bird or possibly a balloon. The apparent speed is due to parallax.

The second triangular one is a camera effect called Bokeh.

The rest I don't know.

But without evidence that's no different from saying the object in this video is an alien.

I haven't included all of the evidence here previously but there has actually been detailed scientific analysis on the videos and accompanying radar data. There's an excellent peer reviewed article on these encounters. Here's an analysis of the incident you describe as a bird\balloon. The paper is here "Estimating Flight Characteristics of Anomalous Unidentified Aerial Vehicles".

I don't think either should be saying "this is a" without reference to the evidence".

An analysis of Senior Chief Day’s radar observations. (A). The posterior probability indicates
the maximum likelihood estimate of the acceleration to be 5600 +2270
−1190 g. (B). The accelerations obtained
by sampling resulted in the most probable acceleration of 5370 +1430
−820 g while the mean acceleration is
5950 g (black dotted line). (C). The power output of the UAP, assumed to have a mass of 1000 kg, as a
function of time indicates a peak power of about 1100 GW

If the governments & military have blatantly lied about these for years by saying they where not real why would you believe them now?

What has changed that all of a sudden they would tell the truth without even one decent picture or video?

If these things are military & they have mastered a new technology then they would be flying them more often than before and more chance of them being seen and pictured, so bwst way to kept it hidden is to also pretend thet have no idea what they are

Males no sense for them to suddenly tell everyone one the exists for no reason after years of lying,

Again surely thet would have something in place to get a better picture with todays technology

JackTC wrote: »

The first video is a bird or possibly a balloon. The apparent speed is due to parallax.

The second triangular one is a camera effect called Bokeh.

The rest I don't know.

You think the two pilots yeehaawing in that first clip are tracking a bird/balloon and dont realise it? Wouldnt want them as your air support so.

Maybe some of those objects might not be metal based or any material we know of. Or possibly coated in a field or force that doesn't allow us to photograph it easily.

Maybe they don't want us to photograph it easily. Hence no concise clear photo

That's worth considering.

Pre New York Times article back in 2017, I would of thought people claiming UFO as real phenomenon were nothing short of fruitcakes. The paradigm has definitely shifted for me as far as keeping an open mind goes. Anyways, I’ll always root for the dreamers now... skepticism is boring and the Universe is big.

PokeHerKing wrote: »

So you think its a reverse cover up?

Yes I do ,
Its got harder for them to ignore it so its easier to say, " god ye we see that thing to & like you we have no idea what it is "

flanna01 wrote: »

What if.....

The Military needed a big money injection? What better propaganda than an alien invasion...??

Wait, Hear me out...

You think its beyond Homeland Security and the CIA?? Seriously??

Money talks in this world, and there are plenty of suckers with money and weak minds...

Rock up to the Oval Office in full Millatary clobber, all the whistles and bells, sword hanging off the hip, tell the sitting Prez that you have some ultra secret information to share with him... Looks like we are being swarmed by these super advanced gizzmo's... We need funding to study them and protect the world......

The Prez promises an open cheque book to the Naval Fleet Commander - No questions asked.

Sometimes it pays to think outside of the box.

Well it's interesting but the US military don't need the money really.

flanna01 wrote: »

What if.....

The Military needed a big money injection? What better propaganda than an alien invasion...??

Wait, Hear me out...

You think its beyond Homeland Security and the CIA?? Seriously??

Money talks in this world, and there are plenty of suckers with money and weak minds...

Rock up to the Oval Office in full Millatary clobber, all the whistles and bells, sword hanging off the hip, tell the sitting Prez that you have some ultra secret information to share with him... Looks like we are being swarmed by these super advanced gizzmo's... We need funding to study them and protect the world......

The Prez promises an open cheque book to the Naval Fleet Commander - No questions asked.

Sometimes it pays to think outside of the box.

Probably the least likely explanation IMO, even less likely than Aliens ha. Don’t think the Military have to go the Alien route for some more Dollah Dollah.

This website with a rather anticlimactic answer to what they think is going on with most of the footage seen.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40054/adversary-drones-are-spying-on-the-u-s-and-the-pentagon-acts-like-theyre-ufos

Not convinced by the article or the sheer arrogance that they have it all sewn up.

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Balloon.

Did I miss something ?

It's something some of the sceptics have put forward as theory as to what's in the videos. Mick West, professional sceptic was the patron of the balloon theory. It came about at a time when Mick, professional sceptic told the 6 fighter pilots in the Nimitz incident that they didn't understand their controls and were confusing them with those of a helicopter.

Interestingly the parallax theory was also floated by Mick. It's simply an optical illusion whereby the observed position of an object is influenced by the observer's line of sight. It has previously been used erroneously by sceptics as an explanation for observed speed by forward looking infra red imaging and radar contacts.

This is a good example of dogma in scepticism. I am saying I don't believe these objects are balloons, planes ect and explaining my reasons based on peer reviewed articles and they are starting with a central thesis "it is a balloon" and changing the facts to suit.

The pilot who took the video that some of the balloon sceptics are referring to has referred to this theory in an interview.

I want to ask you some questions based on theories that America’s armchair skeptics have put forward — like whether it was birds, or whether it was some sort of thermal weather event. I mean, I’m sure you have had enough flight time that you’ve seen birds.

Yup. Birds normally fly close to the surface of the ground. So, for example, you’re not going to see birds flying at 5,000 feet. You’re going to see them more down at like 2,000 feet and below, like down to the surface. That’s just kind of how birds normally operate. And they’re typically not alone. So you can you can physically see them, in a flock or whatever. You don’t see birds at 5,000 or 10,000 or 20,000 feet. That’s just not how birds operate. So birds are out of the question.

And just so that I anticipate your next question: There are weather balloons that people launch, but this was not a weather balloon — because a balloon, it just ascends and floats from low to high altitude; it doesn’t behave erratically. I mean, it’s just a damn balloon. So that was out of the question.

It wasn’t — to the best of my knowledge — a cruise missile or any other kind of test aircraft that we possibly may have not known about, just because of the way it was behaving. Like I said, it was just very erratic. It would go from like 50 feet off the ground, which when you’re out in the open ocean, you know, off the coast of San Diego, it looked like it was just hovering over the water. But there was no method of propulsion that was keeping it airborne: no wings, no heat, keeping it airborne or aloft.

JackTC wrote: »

It isn't . The apparent speed is due to parallax. The balloon is travelling at a normal speed.

You honestly think professional pilots and all the other people who've analysed this footage wouldn't have noticed that as well? The footage is 15 years old, if what the americans are saying is true.

I won’t be getting my hopes up about the big “reveal”

They’ll tell the public exactly what they want and nothing further

Actually Jack, you are saying all the professionals who have spent their careers in high powered, high pressure roles, performing at a level most of us could only dream about, cannot tell the difference between a high powered unknown craft, and a ballon.

Some of these pilots fly the most powerful machines on the planet, performing mock dogfights at massive speeds against other high powered machines, and are getting hoodwinked by a balloon???