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

201–210 of 287 posts

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#201

Post by Tasboo »

Since people are sharing their own anecdotes, I'll share mine. Rather my dad's and my sister's anecdote. They were driving home one summer evening near sunset in Wisconsin when they saw in the perfectly clear sky ahead of them what appeared to be something floating in the sky. They way they described it was it looked like how a school bus might look at night from a distance with it's lights on in the inside except just the upper half of the bus, like a row of closely placed lights on a horizontal object. They say it moved around a bit in the sky, clearly some distance away from them and then slowly shrank and disappeared. These two people are not the type of people to lie about something like this. My dad hates science fiction and has zero imagination. My sister is a goody two shoes who would be hard pressed to adamantly lie about this. They told my mom and I this as soon as they arrived home. They looked like they saw a ghost or something when they told us.

Adding to this, is that like a month or two later, we were talking to a friend of ours in the area and our friend also confirmed seeing the same object except they live about 10 miles east of us. The thing is, our friend just told us this without us bringing the subject up, so it wasn't like she was 'me too'ing our story. The friend was relieved a bit that someone else had seen what she had seen.

Keep in mind, this is the middle of nowhere Wisconsin. Moderately poor area. Just farms, very small towns, and forests for miles. No planes fly this low in the area. No airfields for at least 30 miles, and the nearest airfield is for very small planes only. The only planes you see in in our area are ones way up in the sky.

Googling the description of what they describe comes up with something that people refer to as a 'cigar' shaped ufo (the recent astroid sighting has muddied the google results of this a bit). So it seems at least some other people have seen something similar to this.

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#202

Post by volgo »

frankquist wrote: post #71
volgo wrote: post #56

IMO, the fishy part of the article is the cronyism involved in this program: "The shadowy program — parts of it remain classified — began in 2007, and initially it was largely funded at the request of Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat who was the Senate majority leader at the time and who has long had an interest in space phenomena. Most of the money went to an aerospace research company run by a billionaire entreprene…

Say that you are interested in investigating puzzling phenomena, and you have the money. What more logical step is there than to approach your senate majority leader friend? Such oddball connections are probably the only the way such a program would ever get funded. Edit: well, obviously he didn't have the money. Misspoke. I meant the means (a company with the required infrastructure).

No, the logical step is to stop and think whether or not you should use public money to do this.

If he raised some VC funding, he can go hunt Minotaur for all I care. But this is my money he's using to do this. No thanks

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#203

Post by iankp »

perseusprime11 wrote: post #128
madaxe_again wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s totally anecdotal, and I’m just some guy on the internet, but I’ve seen these, or at least something similar, twice - once above Bath, UK, in 2012 - the first hint something was up was a pair of sonic booms as two typhoons hurtled into the airspace over the city. Needless to say, ran out of the office to gawp, and the fighters were circling a thing hovering at about 20,000 feet - bulky ovular object with greeble…

Before you saw these incidents, what was your belief system in UFOs? I ask this because sometimes we can see what we want to see and sometimes we cannot see what we don't want to see.

I'll share that I had an encounter that seemed unnatural/impossible and I wasn't alone at the time. It also was reported in our local paper the following day. I contentiously (regardless of the experience) have never and do not believe in aliens.

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#204

Post by computerex »

valuearb wrote: post #154
passwordreset wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we (biologists) study other species, we travel long distances to examine them in their habitat. We try to hide so we can see them in their natural state, without our interference. If one suggested that this were 'dumb' or 'grandiose', then they would be ridiculed, as they would have exposed their own ignorance through that comment. The thought that a species might travel far to investigate another species in sit…

Except that biologists always are seen when in the field. Now imagine a biologist traveling to view a species using a vehicle which uses more energy than humankind has ever created. How easy is that to hide, and why would they hide from their equivalent to ants?

Even us "ants" have stringent protocols to prevent interplanetary contamination.

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#205

Post by nl »

r721 wrote: post #198
nl wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a great article called something like 'a biologist's take on the Fermi paradox'. Worth reading because it challenges some core assumptions.

This one? https://praxtime.com/2013/11/25/sagan-syndrome-pay-heed-to-b...

Yes I think so

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#206

Post by nl »

fapjacks wrote: post #168
nl wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who has put in well qualified bids with university consortiums for multiple US government research contracts, including DARPA and other similar groups I can confirm that this is completely false.

As someone who has put in well qualified bids with university consortiums for multiple US government research contracts, including DARPA and other similar groups I can confirm that this is completely false. What is the size of your organization? How are you submitting bids, and where are you getting your solicitations? Does someone in your company network with the government liaisons beyond just the one you've submit…

I was responding to your statement:

For example, if you approach the US government through a solicitation with really any half-reasonable suggestion for processing enormous amounts of data, and you'll get a contract.

Your subsequent comment proves my point: it isn't that easy.

As it happens, we are well qualified, and we've won a number as well. My point is that your original statement is completely wrong (and ironically it appears you agree).

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#207

Post by madaxe_again »

pluto9 wrote: post #135
madaxe_again wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s totally anecdotal, and I’m just some guy on the internet, but I’ve seen these, or at least something similar, twice - once above Bath, UK, in 2012 - the first hint something was up was a pair of sonic booms as two typhoons hurtled into the airspace over the city. Needless to say, ran out of the office to gawp, and the fighters were circling a thing hovering at about 20,000 feet - bulky ovular object with greeble…

> the fighters were circling a thing hovering at about 20,000 feet - bulky ovular object with greebles and lumps How were you able to see such details from 20,000 feet away?

Because whatever it was it was big - hundreds of metres long, and reflecting oddly - as to the range, judged it from the apparent size of the typhoons as they circled it - used to fly, and judging range is one of those things you have to get used to.

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#208

Post by madaxe_again »

perseusprime11 wrote: post #128
madaxe_again wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s totally anecdotal, and I’m just some guy on the internet, but I’ve seen these, or at least something similar, twice - once above Bath, UK, in 2012 - the first hint something was up was a pair of sonic booms as two typhoons hurtled into the airspace over the city. Needless to say, ran out of the office to gawp, and the fighters were circling a thing hovering at about 20,000 feet - bulky ovular object with greeble…

Before you saw these incidents, what was your belief system in UFOs? I ask this because sometimes we can see what we want to see and sometimes we cannot see what we don't want to see.

You mean confirmation bias. I don’t have any belief systems whatsoever - I just tend to err towards “highly improbable until proven impossible” with all things.

And I didn’t want to see something that has made me question my sanity for five years...!

Re: The Pentagon’s U.F.O. Program

#209

Post by kromem »

api wrote: post #77
gfodor wrote: post #50

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…

Part of the problem is all the crazy mythology around the subject. But strip that off and it has always seemed to me that there is an interesting residue of facts. It's not enough to prove anything but it's enough to be intriguing. One possible answer to the Fermi paradox is that they are here but are just not making overt obvious contact. If this were true we'd probably be talking about a "post-singularity" super in…

I never understand why we always assume that it's extra-terrestrial.

For example, let's say time travel will be possible at any given point in the future. Well, if it were possible in the future, we might expect to see it happening across time, including the past and present.

It would of course represent technology thousands of years more advanced than the observers of the phenomenon, but not millions of years away, as might well be the case for civilizations from planets evolving quite differently from our own. It would also represent technology that evolved from our own developmental progress.

It would also address the issue of spatial proximity - of course we don't detect life outside Earth, because the "extra-terrestrials" come from Earth.

I'm not suggesting it is absolutely time travelers, but I'm quite surprised I never see that suggested on a similar frequency with the whole aliens angle when discussing UFOs.

Post reply on HN