Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report • Hacker News Board

Re: Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report

#21

Post by godtoldmetodoit » Wed, Jun 16, 2021, 4:32 PM UTC

davidhyde wrote: post #12

The media appears to miss that fact that something that happens in physical reality can become corrupted by the time it gets rendered to a computer screen. The complicated military systems are hallucinating now. Or am I missing something? Did multiple pilots see this thing with their own eyes from different angles without any technology in between?

In the tic-tac incident, yes. In the 60 minutes interview two pilots in separate planes reported seeing something causing a disturbance in the ocean, and a "tic-tac" like object about the size of their jets that seemed to notice them and matched one of the planes in a turn.

Re: Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report

#22

Post by heresie-dabord » Wed, Jun 16, 2021, 4:33 PM UTC

blunte wrote: post #6

It is typical human self-centeredness to assume we are the only sentient beings with the ability to move ourselves around a plane or beyond. It is also mathematically silly to assume that of all possible beings over current universe timeline that we are the most technically advanced. We have only existed for a minuscule sliver of that timespan. That’s not to say that we are statistically likely to have been visited,…

The assertion that there is intelligent life elsewhere is often conflated with UFOs being evidence of such life.

The assertion of a high probability of intelligent life existing elsewhere is reasonable.

The presence of testimony is not evidence. People report things for many reasons. Most of the time, it is a silly bid for a moment of fame and/or it just sells news/gathers clicks in an untrustworthy economy on a slow day.

One day, we ourselves may advance our own intelligence sufficiently to achieve civilisation.

Re: Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report

#23

Post by tra3 » Wed, Jun 16, 2021, 4:33 PM UTC

davidhyde wrote: post #12

The media appears to miss that fact that something that happens in physical reality can become corrupted by the time it gets rendered to a computer screen. The complicated military systems are hallucinating now. Or am I missing something? Did multiple pilots see this thing with their own eyes from different angles without any technology in between?

Were the objects not visible with the naked eye?

Re: Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report

#24

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jun 16, 2021, 4:33 PM UTC

strathmeyer wrote: post #2

The picture at the top is an IR plume from a jet. Guess that doesn't make a very good article. Why would this article be in a "science" magazine?

[deleted]

Re: Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report

#25

Post by ConcernedCoder » Wed, Jun 16, 2021, 4:34 PM UTC

blunte wrote: post #6

It is typical human self-centeredness to assume we are the only sentient beings with the ability to move ourselves around a plane or beyond. It is also mathematically silly to assume that of all possible beings over current universe timeline that we are the most technically advanced. We have only existed for a minuscule sliver of that timespan. That’s not to say that we are statistically likely to have been visited,…

For those of us who have seen for ourselves, not some far-off glimpse of something unidentifiable, but an up-close and personal encounter with something unexplainable, it's been more than possible, no matter how improbable, for quite some time now...

Re: Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report

#26

Post by typeformer » Wed, Jun 16, 2021, 4:36 PM UTC

davidhyde wrote: post #12

The media appears to miss that fact that something that happens in physical reality can become corrupted by the time it gets rendered to a computer screen. The complicated military systems are hallucinating now. Or am I missing something? Did multiple pilots see this thing with their own eyes from different angles without any technology in between?

Yes

Re: Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report

#27

Post by wavefunction » Wed, Jun 16, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

typeformer wrote: post #17

The classified version of the UAPTF (Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Task Force) report on government knowledge of real UFO events is being given to select members of the Senate ahead of the unclassified version likely to come next week. The narrative seems to be “soft disclosure” with descriptions of the public report by officials confirming that there are numerous real UFO events, that defy conventional explanations…

Does anyone argue that UFO events are not real? And a UFO is different than an interstellar space craft.

Re: Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report

#28

Post by vorpalhex » Wed, Jun 16, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

godtoldmetodoit wrote: post #21

davidhyde wrote: post #12

The media appears to miss that fact that something that happens in physical reality can become corrupted by the time it gets rendered to a computer screen. The complicated military systems are hallucinating now. Or am I missing something? Did multiple pilots see this thing with their own eyes from different angles without any technology in between?

In the tic-tac incident, yes. In the 60 minutes interview two pilots in separate planes reported seeing something causing a disturbance in the ocean, and a "tic-tac" like object about the size of their jets that seemed to notice them and matched one of the planes in a turn.

Matching the plane makes it seem more like an optical effect than less of one.

Re: Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report

#29

Post by scott_s » Wed, Jun 16, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

tiahura wrote: post #10

Can anyone suggest an analysis by a sensor engineer with their best guess as to what we're seeing?

Mick West over at metabunk.org has covered a lot of these. He has a background in video game programming, which he uses when trying to reconstruct three dimensional spatial relationships from two dimensional videos.

Re: Experts Weigh in on Pentagon UFO Report

#30

Post by typeformer » Wed, Jun 16, 2021, 4:39 PM UTC

tra3 wrote: post #23

davidhyde wrote: post #12

The media appears to miss that fact that something that happens in physical reality can become corrupted by the time it gets rendered to a computer screen. The complicated military systems are hallucinating now. Or am I missing something? Did multiple pilots see this thing with their own eyes from different angles without any technology in between?

Were the objects not visible with the naked eye?

Sometimes they were visible, sometimes not, since distance was at play. The ATFLIR camera pods can see a lot farther than the human eye but these were also witnessed with human eyes by multiple Navy pilots from different angles.