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

As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 978 posts

Re: As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

#721

Post by crosen99 »

godelski wrote: post #620
bostonwalker wrote: post #548

Excluding otherworldly forms of speculation about why possible aliens are visiting us, this subject really boils down to four tangible questions about how we arrived at this footage and the eyewitness accounts from Fravor et al: - Is it aliens? - If not, do these sightings represent real unexplainable technological phenomena (advanced propulsion technology)? - If not, are the eyewitness accounts credible? - In any ca…

I don't think people realize how much of our understanding of physics needs to be broken for aliens to be visiting us. Or that these creatures are willing to spend decades or generations away from their planet/home/family. Space is a hell of a lot bigger than people really think. Even several times the speed of light is slow in terms of these interstellar distances.

Our understanding is so incomplete that we have to posit the presence of dark matter and dark energy - comprising the majority of the universe - to explain the parts we think we do understand. With so much we cannot account for, it seems unwise to have firm beliefs like this about what isn’t possible.

Re: As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

#722

Post by Jach »

ActorNightly wrote: post #493
runjake wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Nimitz Incident of 2004(?). Extremely detailed visual and sensor events. Tons of human witnesses. Tons of activity. There was a detailed Reddit thread on the incident from a Seaman many, many years ago long before news of the Tic Tac came out. I’m on mobile but perhaps someone else can paste the thread URL. Could be an elaborate hoax but that’s one heck of a long con game.

The issue with all these reports is that there is a distinct lack of detail surrounding the sighting. At most its visual reports and very blurry IR footage. Zero mention of anything else. Lets take an example of the Tic Tac from the incident, that was supposedly moving very fast. If it had a physical presence, ie could interact with the world, it would seem very likely that pilots would describe the resultant shockwa…

The most plausible explanation that they could be fully invisible but chose not to be I've heard so far is from Robin Hanson, but there are several parts and that alone lowers its probability. Still, fun to think about, and also addresses things like how they could be here/find us at all, why are they here, what do they want to achieve. I'll risk a summary rather than just linking out... First they would be pan-spermia siblings from our stellar nursery, so they evolved in the same galaxy and could find their stellar siblings among all other stars. They're many years more advanced than us but for some reason they have a strong norm against expanding and rearranging our galaxy and beyond to their desires. We're still around so they don't want to wipe us out without reason, but we can guess that if we get ideas and capabilities of becoming grabby, they're here to nip it in the bud. Being sort of impressive but also mysterious can eventually let us know they are there without revealing too much since we could easily collectively find something out about them to hate and think of them as enemies. If we admire them instead we're more likely to try emulation including adopting a norm against spreading out to the stars as fast as we can before even more matter becomes unreachable or some other aliens from farther away galaxies arrive here in several hundred million years.

One benefit of this explanation is it predicts we'll see more of these strange phenomena even as our technology gets better and the possibility of simply being mistaken is driven way further down. If we stop seeing them suspiciously around the same time as big advances in sensor and sensor integration tech, all the more reason to bet on old observations being mistaken/hoaxes/conspiracies than actually aliens.

Re: As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

#723

Post by dghughes »

reso wrote: post #596

Mick West's breakdowns of the Pentagon UAP videos was the nail in the coffin of this era of UFO hype for me. https://youtu.be/Le7Fqbsrrm8?t=665 These were supposed to be the smoking gun evidence. UFO believers inside the DoD and as high up as US Senators fought for years to get them declassified. As soon as they were public, they were all quickly identified as sensor glare, bokeh, or mis-understood perspective. More…

That just proves they were actually unidentified objects. The flying part was missing since they didn't exist in physical form just glare.

UFO fans are already convinced the events are UFOs which to them always means extraterrestrial aliens they just have to prove their point. Like flat Earthers have to prove how they are not wrong.

Re: As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

#724

Post by natch »

BbzzbB wrote: post #629
natch wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fighter jet pilot is a self-avowed prankster and “class clown” (his words). One of the people who wrote the software for that radar system is his good buddy, best man at his wedding, and was on duty nearby on that day. It could all be a big prank. Some of the eyewitnesses saw what they saw on, wait for it, a radar screen. Well technically it was another technology not exactly radar but I forget the name. [edit: FLIR,…

One might think such an elaborate prankster would keep his benign pranks to himself when going on a podcast tour to protect appearances.

Going on a podcast tour to protect appearances? One would think he went on the podcast tour to seek attention, as pranksters are wont to do.

Re: As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

#725

Post by j0057 »

MacsHeadroom wrote: post #537
j0057 wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that too, that's why I asked. Here is an article about it: https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2021/02/08/what-is-b... — this thing is supposed to enable faster than light travel, which needless to say is impossible according to our best understanding of the laws of physics. I suppose that is part as well of the great PSYOP for suppressing the truth.

Actual FTL is impossible according to known physics, but effective FTL is not. Move the space around an object via warp bubble and you can have your cake and eat it too, in theory.

"In theory" is doing a lot of work there -- see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive -- you need to apply a type of matter that we're not even sure actually exists, even if the type of matter exists you would need to find a way to harness it, and even if that's possible, we're not sure if this works in an as of yet hypothetical unification of general relativity and quantum mechanics.

Re: As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

#726

Post by revscat »

Eisenstein wrote: post #591
revscat wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s “no evidence” only if you ignore what has been happening on our skies for the past 70+ years. To be sure SETI has found nothing, nor has Hubble, nor JWT, nor Sloan nor Voyager nor Opportunity. Yet something keeps showing up in our skies, year after year, decade after decade, and that something is widely and roundly ignored.

How is unexplained phenomena 'evidence'? Because 'aliens might exist' is a theory and 'there is stuff that happens in the sky that has not been formally explained' is a fact, why should we connect the two as evidence of one another? 'Cockroaches taste like jellybeans' is a theory. 'Many people waking up in the middle of the night, having heard a rustling, without being able to see put something in their mouth that ta…

Let me rephrase it: “Is there evidence of something unexplained going on in our skies?”

Answer that question before moving on. If your answer is “no” then no further discussion is warranted. If yes then further investigation is needed.

Re: As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

#727

Post by ddalex »

ricardobeat wrote: post #305
nprateem wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how does a gimbal lock simultaneously show up on multiple sensor systems across warships?

Your retort is phrased poorly, but I don’t understand the downvotes here - the footage from this episode was made by fighter jets who were dispatched to investigate a radar signal , and the pilot said they had visual contact. That’s three distinct records and/or a whole lot of marines fucking with us.

I mean there is no denial that SOMETHING was out there. The debunking refers to the performance of the target which is being shown to be safely within the capabilities of contemporary human technology and not requiring "aliens" or "unknown technology" to achieve.

Re: As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

#728

Post by natch »

narrator wrote: post #406
natch wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fighter jet pilot is a self-avowed prankster and “class clown” (his words). One of the people who wrote the software for that radar system is his good buddy, best man at his wedding, and was on duty nearby on that day. It could all be a big prank. Some of the eyewitnesses saw what they saw on, wait for it, a radar screen. Well technically it was another technology not exactly radar but I forget the name. [edit: FLIR,…

Coincidence theory at its finest.

I know, right? Just by coincidence the little green men decided to single out some pranksters to reveal themselves to.

Definitely the most likely explanation. /s

Re: As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

#729

Post by bloak »

deadbeeves wrote: post #375
ethbr0 wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This speaks to both sides of the problem in getting to the truth. On the one hand, we sensationalize events farther than the data supports ("My radar showed extremely high velocity, so there must have been a craft moving at those speeds"). On the other hand, we use sensationalism to dismiss accurate reports ("You said your radar showed extremely high velocity, therefore what are you reporting, a UFO?"). The new appro…

You have to admit, given that resources are finite, the dismissive attitude is warranted. Why is it that alien spaceships (let's call them what people actually think is being discussed, and not just any random flying thing that we don't know what it is) only show up on equipment when you can barely tell what you're looking at, and never clearly and unambiguously from multiple places?

Sorry for the pedantry, but if they are flying around in the earth's atmosphere then they are not "spaceships" even if they are being operated by extraterrestrials. Likewise, NASA's Mars Helicopter is not a spacesheep even though it is operated by extramartians. I think it's good to get that terminology right so as not to confuse naive readers into assuming that the things that are putatively observed as UFOs crossed space to get here: they may have been constructed on earth by aliens that arrived 500 years ago, or whatever.

My personal guess is that there probably are extraterrestrials on the earth observing us but they are competently remaining hidded and have nothing to do with any UFO observation by a human. Of course I don't have any good evidence for that: it's just a hunch.

Re: As a US Navy fighter pilot, I witnessed unidentified anomalous phenomena

#730

Post by Loquebantur »

simonh wrote: post #649
okdood64 wrote: post #637

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they were all quickly identified as sensor glare, bokeh, or mis-understood perspective False, congressional report shows not all of them can be attributed to that. Mick West does good work, but he's not _neccesarily_ right on all accounts. Definitely good armchair expert porn though.

> False, congressional report shows not all of them can be attributed to that. It says it, but does it actually show it? The videos released by the Pentagon that Mick West analysed were also supposed to have been checked by defence analysts.

Why then do you believe Mick West over those professionals?
Post reply on HN