131–140 of 229 posts
Have they ruled out software bugs, and literal bugs crawling on the camera lens? If so, what the heck are they seeing out there? Have other country’s militaries reported seeing anything?
(I would like to know the placement of the camera on the jet. Is it exposed to the elements, or protected inside the skin of the craft?)
They exist. They are real. They aren't ours. They aren't an adversary's, because a) the military would never admit it if that were possible and b) if it were the case the adversary would have already taken over the world. There's no evidence they were made by aliens, leprechauns, or ghosts. But there's evidence they were made. Not that they are swamp gas or funny clouds. So lets get past that, and realize there's som…
Co-terrestrial civilization is interesting, but it's difficult to understand how there would be no physical evidence. The ocean would be most likely (subterranean would be much more visible for any access points, by satellite and land-mapping LIDAR, or seismographs detecting underground industrial activity). But we get detritus washing up all the time on shores; for example, Japanese debris from the earthquake landed…
The NY Times Headline is much more informative and interesting: > U.S. Finds No Evidence of Alien Technology in Flying Objects, but Can’t Rule It Out, Either Sub header: > A new report concedes that much about the observed phenomena remains difficult to explain, including their acceleration, as well as ability to change direction and submerge. Those descriptions are a tectonic shift on the topic from the US governmen…
> but Can’t Rule It Out, Either Can't prove a negative.
It would be trivially rejectable if we had any intel it was another country, for example.
They exist. They are real. They aren't ours. They aren't an adversary's, because a) the military would never admit it if that were possible and b) if it were the case the adversary would have already taken over the world. There's no evidence they were made by aliens, leprechauns, or ghosts. But there's evidence they were made. Not that they are swamp gas or funny clouds. So lets get past that, and realize there's som…
The NY Times Headline is much more informative and interesting: > U.S. Finds No Evidence of Alien Technology in Flying Objects, but Can’t Rule It Out, Either Sub header: > A new report concedes that much about the observed phenomena remains difficult to explain, including their acceleration, as well as ability to change direction and submerge. Those descriptions are a tectonic shift on the topic from the US governmen…
"Those descriptions are a tectonic shift on the topic from the US government." Feels like we are being primed for something new to be afraid of and give our treasure to in defense of. Aliens being non-peaceful fails so many logic tests though. I hope the script doesn't go that way.
- The US government has been studying this phenomenon for years and has recently managed to reverse engineer the technology to the degree it has real-world applications. To actually explain how we achieved those feats, it will be necessary for the public to understand where it originated from, since a lie would be obvious.
- There's some really (REALLY) bad news to share, and this is part of a rollout plan needed to be able to deliver that news in the way that would minimize it's net effect on our society. (For example, we're in a zoo. And we've hit some tripwires and are now no longer allowed to develop technology X, Y, or Z.)
Is this really a surprise to anybody? UFO means "unidentified flying object", not "alien".
I've heard a lot of credulous people describing these reports as proof of aliens. To me the idea that aliens exist is unsurprising, but aliens being here would imply FTL is possible, and that would be a huge discovery!
The NY Times Headline is much more informative and interesting: > U.S. Finds No Evidence of Alien Technology in Flying Objects, but Can’t Rule It Out, Either Sub header: > A new report concedes that much about the observed phenomena remains difficult to explain, including their acceleration, as well as ability to change direction and submerge. Those descriptions are a tectonic shift on the topic from the US governmen…
> but Can’t Rule It Out, Either Can't prove a negative.
You might not be able to "prove a negative" in the purely scientific sense, but you can rule out most options to effectively "prove a negative".
If, for example, Russia came out and took credit for these things, and showed working prototypes of these crafts, would that "prove" (in the truest, mathematical sense of the word) that they aren't aliens? No, I suppose Russia could have intercepted alien technology and pass it off as their own, but for any kind of practical purpose that would "prove" they aren't aliens to most rational people, and thus "prove" a negative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Those descriptions are a tectonic shift on the topic from the US government." Feels like we are being primed for something new to be afraid of and give our treasure to in defense of. Aliens being non-peaceful fails so many logic tests though. I hope the script doesn't go that way.
> Aliens being non-peaceful fails so many logic tests though. I've seen this sentiment expressed before, but it's never seemed persuasive. Seems to me that the only inherently peaceful alien race would be the one that never had the evolutionary pressure to compete for resources - and that seems like an impossible occurrence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with the concerns, however as someone who has been kept up a bit with the phenomenon, the main body of stuff to look at are the set of reports which involve: - Multiple expert witnesses, usually pilots or radar operators, getting visual and sensor confirmation from multiple vantage points - Air and ground tracking - High cohesion and consistency (in terms of object size, cardinality, dynamics, and timing) bet…
Don't get me wrong: I am baffled by some of the reports (especially, as you note, those that have multiple witnesses or multiple independent pieces of evidence). But of course alien civilizations—or (non-human?) co-terrestrial civilizations—are such an extraordinary hypothesis that I do not see why they should be treated as more plausible than (as you note) something like shared delusions. Let me expand upon that a b…
Given the amount of evidence released so far, which seems more likely?
- Alien civilization
- Some other form of hyper-advanced technology
- The U.S. Military and/or various U.S. intelligence agencies are perpetrating a hoax in order to further some kind of strategic goal
I know which one I'm picking, barring much more widely acknowledged and damning evidence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah I think it's more likely that it's some kind of experimental propulsion test that is sometimes being noticed. Like they wandered into a room above their clearance level or something. Someone on earth made these.
Can you provide an example of a past technology that was unimagined by mainstream physicists and that was sucessfully implemented in secret and kept secret for decades? I can't think of anything. Fission bombs were widely believed to be physically possible, were developed in secret but used publicly within several years. I do not beleive the military has some secret antigravity, inertia modifying technology or warp d…