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

Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

dni.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 244 posts

Re: Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

#171

Post by DoreenMichele »

lend000 wrote: post #169
DoreenMichele wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it looks intentionally vague and noncommittal, and in classic form, released on a Friday afternoon to minimize coverage. As a guess, they do that both because this is information gathered for security reasons and there are limits to what they can reasonably say without compromising security and because no matter how they write it it turns into wild speculation about aliens by the general public and conspiracy theorie…

"Security reasons" doesn't pass the smell test -- US adversaries are going to see the report regardless of what time it's released, whereas significantly fewer of its own citizens will. > That stuff even creeps into HN discussion in a way and to a degree that is not the norm here. HN discussion isn't some sacred thing, and probably never was. This is an interesting topic (and depending on the true nature of it, argua…

Let me try to say that a little more clearly:

A. Maybe they keep it vague for security reasons knowing that other countries will read it, not just the American public.

B. Maybe they publish it on a Friday in hopes of getting the least amount of nuttiness out of the American public.

When you publish something for all the world to see, you have to take into account both of those dynamics, not just one or the other. They will both occur. Addressing only one or the other will go bad places.

Re: Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

#172

Post by ineedasername »

mkl wrote: post #125
ineedasername wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they knew it was just another normal plane then it would not be unidentified. They actually identify countless objects every day. This report was not about them.

All the things in that list are like that though, "Airborne Clutter", "Natural Atmospheric Phenomena", etc. If they knew it was one of those it wouldn't be unidentified. It is entirely possible for a plane to be detected but not identified as such, so planes should be possible causes too.

I honestly don't know what you mean. If it's a plane, but not detected as such, then by definition they don't know it's a plane to put it into a "normal plane" category.

We know ever recorded flight path of every aircraft. If it is plane-like and isn't one if those planes and we don't know precisely what or whose plane it is, there are two categories in the list that are the most likely explanations.

  -USG or Industry Developmental Programs

  - Foreign Adversary Systems

Re: Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

#173

Post by lovetocode »

codezero wrote: post #84

I’m surprised nobody has suggested that these phenomenon could be an advanced electronic interference platform and that they may be able to interfere with the computing systems of multiple remote sensing systems at once.

Although possible, unless they have figured out how to hack your eye sight then it still leaves some seriously unanswered questions.

Re: Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

#174

Post by 238475235243 »

krferriter wrote: post #152
238475235243 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but not at the same time. The initial two F-18's had two people each.

And they all saw the same object from the same perspective which could have resulted in similar visual effects leading them to misjudge how far away the object was. They reported that it was very far away but the sensor readings in the thermal video and other alternate theories about what the object was suggest that it wasn't as far away as they thought. Which if true would explain why they thought it was moving fast…

> And they all saw the same object from the same perspective

This just isn't true if you listen to their interviews. I'm going to assume you're just the disinformation guy now.

Re: Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

#175

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

lend000 wrote: post #169
DoreenMichele wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it looks intentionally vague and noncommittal, and in classic form, released on a Friday afternoon to minimize coverage. As a guess, they do that both because this is information gathered for security reasons and there are limits to what they can reasonably say without compromising security and because no matter how they write it it turns into wild speculation about aliens by the general public and conspiracy theorie…

"Security reasons" doesn't pass the smell test -- US adversaries are going to see the report regardless of what time it's released, whereas significantly fewer of its own citizens will. > That stuff even creeps into HN discussion in a way and to a degree that is not the norm here. HN discussion isn't some sacred thing, and probably never was. This is an interesting topic (and depending on the true nature of it, argua…

One simple reason to not go into depth on the evidence is it would reveal the capabilities of radars and similar sensors.

Likewise, if they know one of these was say a drone test by a contractor from a grey/black program they're obviously not going to disclose that.

So there's a bunch of banal reasons security could apply here.

Re: Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

#176

Post by mindcrime »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #167
mindcrime wrote: post #137

Some of these steps are resource-intensive and would require additional investment. And there you have it. The "money quote" in both the literal and metaphorical sense. Of course the Military / Espionage / Industrial Complex community is going to try to keep paranoia about "UAP's" and "UFO's" stoked... as long as they can use that to justify more $$$ flowing into their coffers. They have to play a delicate balancing…

You are accusing the government of intentionally "stoking" paranoia for publishing their data. Elsewhere in this same discussion, someone is promoting their theory that publishing it on a Friday is designed to intentionally get as little press coverage as possible. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27636564 Maybe it's just data gathered for security reasons and published in a somewhat sanitized format to satisfy p…

You are accusing the government of intentionally "stoking" paranoia for publishing their data.

No I'm not. I'm accusing the Military / Espionage / Industrial complex of stoking paranoia in order to get other parts of the government to give them more money.

Elsewhere in this same discussion, someone is promoting their theory that publishing it on a Friday is designed to intentionally get as little press coverage as possible.

There's absolutely no reason that both of those things can't be true simultaneously. See above about the "delicate balancing act" that the gomers have to carry out to keep getting more money, without actually providing anything of value.

Maybe it's just data gathered for security reasons and published in a somewhat sanitized format to satisfy public interest in the data while protecting national security.

Sure, and maybe there is a tiny teapot in orbit between Earth and Mars. *shrug*

Re: Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

#177

Post by mindcrime »

jablongo wrote: post #162
mindcrime wrote: post #137

Some of these steps are resource-intensive and would require additional investment. And there you have it. The "money quote" in both the literal and metaphorical sense. Of course the Military / Espionage / Industrial Complex community is going to try to keep paranoia about "UAP's" and "UFO's" stoked... as long as they can use that to justify more $$$ flowing into their coffers. They have to play a delicate balancing…

While I agree w/ you that the Military Industrial Complex as an entity will do almost anything to justify increasing funding, I think this is a cynical take on this particular issue and is attempting to explain something we don't fundamentally understand with something we do - military budget increases. Unless the DoD fabricated the videos, and duped radar operators and pilots, or faked the whole thing in some way, t…

I'm not (necessarily) accusing them of faking the observations. But I wouldn't put it past them to take something that has (mostly or totally) prosaic / boring explanations, and keep the "air of mystery" going just enough to where people never quite get the answers they are looking (hoping?) for, and are willing to keep funding their research as a side effect.

Re: Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

#178

Post by mkl »

ineedasername wrote: post #172
mkl wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the things in that list are like that though, "Airborne Clutter", "Natural Atmospheric Phenomena", etc. If they knew it was one of those it wouldn't be unidentified. It is entirely possible for a plane to be detected but not identified as such, so planes should be possible causes too.

I honestly don't know what you mean. If it's a plane, but not detected as such, then by definition they don't know it's a plane to put it into a "normal plane" category. We know ever recorded flight path of every aircraft. If it is plane-like and isn't one if those planes and we don't know precisely what or whose plane it is, there are two categories in the list that are the most likely explanations. -USG or Industry…

That list is a list of possible causes of UAP. UAPs are things that have not been categorised. None of those listed categories are categories UAPs have been put into. Instead, they are categories that UAPs could be put into in the process of becoming identified aerial phenomena.

We know every recorded flight path, sure, but it would hardly be surprising for some ordinary plane flights not to be recorded (e.g. of small planes with a malfunctioning transponder).

If a small plane without a functioning transponder was detected on radar, without visual or flight path information, it would be a UAP, since it would be unidentified. If someone then sees the plane, or the pilot later says "that was me", it would cease to be a UAP and be put in the "normal plane" category. I.e. "normal plane" should be one of the possible causes of UAP.

Re: Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

#179

Post by King-Aaron »

nescioquid wrote: post #156
echelon wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> seems unlikely there is advanced nonhuman intelligence hiding in our solar system Maybe. I did some Googling, and apparently the human race has produced between 1 and 2 billion cars in the last 100 years [1]. That's an incredible feat! Assuming a post-biology intelligence has started space manufacturing, they probably have the capacity to produce an incredible volume of intelligent probes. Wikipedia claims that the…

What are the time-scales involved in system formation, the evolution of a technologically sophisticated culture capable of doing what you say, sending probes out (at sub-luminal speeds) and reporting back? Isn't that reason enough to estimate that while there may be such advanced alien societies, we will never have the possibility of contact? Or through a vanishingly small chance, happen to find ourselves in a system…

I can't help but wonder that if a non-human post-biology entity has had an extra billion years to develop, they may have solved the distance problem already in ways that we couldn't fathom yet.

Re: Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

#180

Post by 1337biz »

dt3ft wrote: post #8
1337biz wrote: post #4

Are there any plausible theories why this stuff is getting released right now? It looks like there is no immediate reason for action. And no real reason why they wouldn't have gone on for another decade denying it.

Our government expects visitors soon and this was a step towards preparing the public to what is about to come? xD

It sounds a little out there but I consider it even more likely than just some Senator casually sneaking it into a bill.

Would love to know the full story behind why they break now 50+ years of secrecy.

Post reply on HN