Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 287 posts

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#41

Post by wolf550e »

crooked-v wrote: post #29
WaxProlix wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prosaic bits of metal and rock, perhaps, spun to be containing some sort of unknowable potential for unknowable purpose.

There's also "unexplained aerial phenomena" as the generic cover for materials recovered from the secret research programs of other countries.

But come on, if US intelligence agencies recovered metallurgy from Russian hypersonic missiles or something like that, why would they use UFO for cover? And why would they store it outside of AFRL? I think it's just a way to funnel taxpayer money, there is nothing real being investigated. Not extraterrestrial tech, not foreign tech, not even domestic tech.

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#42

Post by rl3 »

>A 2009 Pentagon briefing summary of the program prepared by its director at the time asserted that “what was considered science fiction is now science fact,” and that the United States was incapable of defending itself against some of the technologies discovered.

Except that, if said technologies are of man-made origin, then the United States is—given its rich history with regards to black aerospace programs—the most likely operator.

Maybe Nick Cook was more right than I've been willing to admit:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10957586

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#44

Post by StanislavPetrov »

wolf550e wrote: post #41
crooked-v wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also "unexplained aerial phenomena" as the generic cover for materials recovered from the secret research programs of other countries.

But come on, if US intelligence agencies recovered metallurgy from Russian hypersonic missiles or something like that, why would they use UFO for cover? And why would they store it outside of AFRL? I think it's just a way to funnel taxpayer money, there is nothing real being investigated. Not extraterrestrial tech, not foreign tech, not even domestic tech.

>I think it's just a way to funnel taxpayer money

They only spent $22 million on the whole program. Accounting errors in the Pentagon literally amount to trillions of dollars. $22 million is about 20% of the cost of a single F-35. They have much better ways to funnel taxpayer money - $22 million isn't even pocket change for the Pentagon.

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#45

Post by ianai »

eric_h wrote: post #35
ianai wrote: post #6

Spend more looking for UFOs or, you know, we could invest in, say, cyber security for our elections and infrastructure programs...

Yes - let's criticize the 0.0036% portion of the budget that seems somewhat wasteful ;)

True. There’s lots wrong.

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#46

Post by nkkollaw »

berkut wrote: post #31
nkkollaw wrote: post #5

The video looks fake..?

It's an Infrared camera video, taken from the Super Hornet's IRST system which can slave / gimbal independently of the aircraft's manoeuvring, hence why it's centred.

I see.

I guess I'm just kind of disappointed that never seem to be a good-quality video to look at when we're talking about UFOs.

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#47

Post by michaelcampbell »

neurotech1 wrote: post #26

Cmdr. Dave Fravor was one of the most squared away F/A-18 pilots in the Navy. He is not some conspiracy "nut" and if he says he saw something, I'd believe him. He is held in high regard by those who served with him. Cmdr. Fravor was featured in the PBS Carrier series [0][1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_(documentary) [1] http://www.pbs.org/show/carrier/

> Cmdr. Dave Fravor was one of the most squared away F/A-18 pilots in the Navy. He is not some conspiracy "nut"...

I see no correlation, implication, or relevance between these 2 statements.

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#49

Post by mratzloff »

dwaltrip wrote: post #40

Where is the HD footage that actually shows features of the mysterious "unidentified objects"? Why is all the evidence grainy and obscured? The prospect that life from another star system traveled hundreds of trillions of kilometers, only to hide for the past few decades, peeking out briefly for low-quality photoshoots, is beyond absurd.

I don't know if alien spacecraft have visited Earth or not, but nothing says they would have to be piloted by aliens. If they exist, they could just as easily be robotic drones.

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#50

Post by gfodor »

It's been pretty clear for some time now for those who study the facts that there is a very good chance there are real objects in the sky that maneuver in ways that conventional aircraft are unable to and cannot be explained adequately as other observed phenomenon. The taboo around this subject due to the common hypothesis they are due to extraterrestrials is a shame because there's been plenty of documented evidence that not only has this been going on but that governments around the world take it seriously enough to investigate it.

I found this book to be a good take that avoids hyperbole and tries to stick to the evidence and facts:

https://www.amazon.com/UFOs-Generals-Pilots-Government-Offic...

If you were to ask me to guess, my bet is that current and past government programs to investigate these objects have concluded that a) they are non-threats to US national security and that b) performing further invasive means to investigate them past our current level of understanding is too risky to pursue. So (again if I had to guess) the consensus is, theories of their origin aside, "don't look into it further, and be assured that there will be no harm in not doing so," which is why you can see a program like this shut down without necessarily assuming that it was a waste or a wild goose chase.

Post reply on HN