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

The Colorado mystery drones weren’t real

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 83 posts

Re: The Colorado mystery drones weren’t real

#61

Post by thaumasiotes »

ALittleLight wrote: post #15

This seems unbelievably credulous on the part of Vice. On the one hand, we have 23 sightings a week, across the town, from a variety of people, including a helicopter pilot, over a sustained period of time. On the other hand, we have a government report that all of those sightings were of "stars, planets, or hobbyist drones". The people of this town have never seen a star before? Really? Is the government report real…

> I'd like to know what the usual rate of false drone reports is in a typical town. Is this an average number of reports? More than average, and if so, why?

This is a false premise. You can extend the anthropic principle to observe that, given the existence of an average rate of false reports, either every town has exactly the average rate of false reports, or some have more. But that's a purely logical dichotomy; only the second option is actually possible.

So a higher than average rate of false reports doesn't actually need a "why" behind it.

Re: The Colorado mystery drones weren’t real

#62

Post by goodcanadian »

ALittleLight wrote: post #60
goodcanadian wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people of this town have never seen a star before? Sadly, this is very believable to me . . . not that they haven't seen a star or a planet, but that they don't really know what they are looking at. People don't seem to look up very often nor do they seem to spend much effort understanding what they are seeing. This past week, we had people claiming that the International Space Station was next to the moon (the c…

UFOs are a useful analogy. Let's just consider the "flying saucer" class of UFOs that people sometimes claim to see, but let's imagine we live in a world where Flying Saucers aren't just a figment of the imagination but are also mass produced by many companies, built by hobbyists, owned in large numbers by governments and all manner of organizations. Flying Saucers are regularly flown by all these people for reasons…

I see your point, but I think the fact that drones unequivocally exist makes it more likely that people will mistakenly attribute something they see but don't understand to them, not less.

Ultimately, I make no conclusions on this particular case; I merely state that I find it completely plausible that a large percentage of those 93 people were mistaken and caught up in mass hysteria, especially after reports have been in the media.

Re: The Colorado mystery drones weren’t real

#64

Post by jamisteven »

hnuser123456 wrote: post #53
ALittleLight wrote: post #15

This seems unbelievably credulous on the part of Vice. On the one hand, we have 23 sightings a week, across the town, from a variety of people, including a helicopter pilot, over a sustained period of time. On the other hand, we have a government report that all of those sightings were of "stars, planets, or hobbyist drones". The people of this town have never seen a star before? Really? Is the government report real…

This makes Vice look like state media. If they were capable of being real, independent journalists, they'd say "government says there were no drones", not mindlessly parroting. >CDPS “confirmed no incidents involving criminal activity, nor have investigations substantiated reports of suspicious or illegal drone activity.” In other words, they found nothing. This doesn't say "they found nothing." It says "they found n…

Agreed, Vice is usually good stuff.

Re: The Colorado mystery drones weren’t real

#65

Post by ALittleLight »

goodcanadian wrote: post #62
ALittleLight wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UFOs are a useful analogy. Let's just consider the "flying saucer" class of UFOs that people sometimes claim to see, but let's imagine we live in a world where Flying Saucers aren't just a figment of the imagination but are also mass produced by many companies, built by hobbyists, owned in large numbers by governments and all manner of organizations. Flying Saucers are regularly flown by all these people for reasons…

I see your point, but I think the fact that drones unequivocally exist makes it more likely that people will mistakenly attribute something they see but don't understand to them, not less. Ultimately, I make no conclusions on this particular case; I merely state that I find it completely plausible that a large percentage of those 93 people were mistaken and caught up in mass hysteria, especially after reports have be…

If 92 out of 93 witnesses were wrong that would mean that the strange drones were there to be correctly witnessed.

I agree that nothing is certain about this. I don't completely rule out the mass error or mass hysteria hypothesis either. I just think it's more likely that there were some drones behaving oddly in the area. I doubt the witnesses are exactly right, but I also be doubt they are completely wrong.

Re: The Colorado mystery drones weren’t real

#66

Post by friendlybus »

ALittleLight wrote: post #15

This seems unbelievably credulous on the part of Vice. On the one hand, we have 23 sightings a week, across the town, from a variety of people, including a helicopter pilot, over a sustained period of time. On the other hand, we have a government report that all of those sightings were of "stars, planets, or hobbyist drones". The people of this town have never seen a star before? Really? Is the government report real…

A person is smart, people are dumb panicky animals and you know it. And they panic the most when secrets need to be kept secret.

Re: The Colorado mystery drones weren’t real

#67

Post by c3534l »

The best part of the article, I can't believe no one has mentioned it yet:

The next day, the Yuma County Sheriff T.C. Combs received an email from a man who wanted to get deputized in order to “form a special task force dedicated to the clandestine monitoring, capturing, and prosecution of those responsible for the recent public panic. My team will be dedicated to the liberation of our skies,” he wrote, and would be known as “Team Alpha WarHawk.” He identified the strengths of each team member, including his own (“comic relief”). His second in command was the “culinary expert” and was “great, but not amazing. However he’s what we got.” The third member of the team specialized in “weapons/Ammunition expert” but was also “just an all around great guy.” One “recruitment pool candidate” makes a “mean pot of coffee” while another is “the most charming man I’ve ever met.” The lone member with a name of Hispanic origin was their “linguistics expert.” It went on like this.

Re: The Colorado mystery drones weren’t real

#68

Post by ALittleLight »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #61
ALittleLight wrote: post #15

This seems unbelievably credulous on the part of Vice. On the one hand, we have 23 sightings a week, across the town, from a variety of people, including a helicopter pilot, over a sustained period of time. On the other hand, we have a government report that all of those sightings were of "stars, planets, or hobbyist drones". The people of this town have never seen a star before? Really? Is the government report real…

> I'd like to know what the usual rate of false drone reports is in a typical town. Is this an average number of reports? More than average, and if so, why? This is a false premise. You can extend the anthropic principle to observe that, given the existence of an average rate of false reports, either every town has exactly the average rate of false reports, or some have more. But that's a purely logical dichotomy; on…

This depends on the rate. If the average report rate is X per person with a standard deviation of Y, and this town has X+ZY reports where Z is a big number, then yeah, that kind of would require an explanation.

Knowing the town has an above average rate of drone reports wouldn't be dispositive. Instead, it would be one bit of evidence to help us weigh competing theories and incline us towards one conclusion or another.

Of course, the other thing it could show is evidence of Vice's conclusion. If this town had roughly the average number of false reports or was even a modest outlier, then that would help reinforce the "no such drones" position.

Re: The Colorado mystery drones weren’t real

#69

Post by mikedilger »

ALittleLight wrote: post #15

This seems unbelievably credulous on the part of Vice. On the one hand, we have 23 sightings a week, across the town, from a variety of people, including a helicopter pilot, over a sustained period of time. On the other hand, we have a government report that all of those sightings were of "stars, planets, or hobbyist drones". The people of this town have never seen a star before? Really? Is the government report real…

From the article in brackets to perserve their quoting: [CDPS “confirmed no incidents involving criminal activity, nor have investigations substantiated reports of suspicious or illegal drone activity.” In other words, they found nothing.]

"They found nothing" is not other words for what the article quoted. Maybe the found something that was not criminal, suspicious or illegal, but still more interesting than stars and airplaines, and they aren't telling.

Re: The Colorado mystery drones weren’t real

#70

Post by 333c »

c3534l wrote: post #67

The best part of the article, I can't believe no one has mentioned it yet: The next day, the Yuma County Sheriff T.C. Combs received an email from a man who wanted to get deputized in order to “form a special task force dedicated to the clandestine monitoring, capturing, and prosecution of those responsible for the recent public panic. My team will be dedicated to the liberation of our skies,” he wrote, and would be…

Is this a reference to some movie? Or just a peculiar email?
Post reply on HN