761–770 of 978 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you heard of black boxes? I don't think dashboard cams are a limiting factor for airplanes here...
Indeed I have. It's pretty wild that modern FDRs don't include video. There isn't a good justification other than "it's too much effort to make any change", which is a sign of a dangerous system.
Is it more probable that the UAP are extraterrestrials OR is it more probable they are an ancient civilization with advanced technology like Atlantis or Wakanda.
The latter doesn't have to find earth or violate the known laws of physics.
I think its a camera flare fwiw; but as I read through the comments it was an interesting thought that occurred...
- 40,000 to 70,000 Amateur Astronomers, scan the skies every night, with precision instruments capable to distinguish Jupiter atmosphere bands. Hardly any noticed these anomalous phenomena... - About 500 observatories in the world, most of which are located in the Northern hemisphere study nightly stars, galaxies, planets and other celestial objects. Hardly any noticed these anomalous phenomena... - By some rough est…
And not only that. When they do pick up UFOs, they appear to be malfunctioning just for that specific recording, regardless of corroborating radar and visual confirmation.
I wonder if aliens supplied these sensor systems to make them malfunction whenever they're in the area.
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…
I'm not sure why you're speculating on unknowable alien motives. The only thing that matters is agreeing on whether there is something unusual here that requires an explanation. If it turns out to be aliens, then you can speculate on their motives.
> Objects demonstrating extreme capabilities routinely fly over our military facilities and training ranges. We don’t know what they are, and we are unable to mitigate their presence. Occams Razor suggests that if these objects appear almost exclusively over US military facilities and US military training ranges, they're most likely operated by the US military. (Sorry to the Navy pilot whose security clearance is too…
Yeah - also, if something can travel light years and have no major signs of atmospheric entry and exit then they have definitely mastered cloaking. The f35B is pretty close already. There's way to many holes in the 'Alien Theory', to many technological absurdities. If these's truly are aliens, then they are the steam punk kind with awkward technological leaps. The easy explaination is they are advanced military craft…
That's not easy at all given the alleged capabilities of these objects tracked across multiple sensor systems. An easier explanation is actually some kind of active sensor spoofing.
ITT: Multiple fighter pilots (whose sole job is to understand aerial objects by eye and sensors), radar, camera and infrared have seen these. “It’s a glitch, lens flare and/or the pilots are stupid, but me a programmer is an expert in this.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks, I'll read it. I was quite precise in my wording and didn't say what you are responding to. My opinion (and it's just that, I'm unprepared to defend it) is that we've always been [less and less] wrong on everything. And since we can't know what the boundaries of knowledge are, and it could easily be some insane unbounded fractal existence, it seems rash to me to decide that we know enough to say that there can…
Problem is that this technology breaks our understanding of causality. So it isn't a "less wrong" type of situation so much as we have to rewrite everything. Specifically it means things that happen in the future can affect things in the past (communication past the light cone). The discoveries of quantum and relativity didn't break classical mechanics so much as extend it. But to rewrite how a sequence of events hap…
Sure, and that's not a problem so as long as self-consistency is preserved.
> But to rewrite how a sequence of events happens, well that's a big fundamental change.
Depends how you look at it. There are retrocausal explanations of quantum mechanics, for instance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you assume the UAPs have aliens in them, and why would you anthropomorphize aliens in any case to be anything like humans? Why do you assume the origin of such objects would be detectable? You're jumping to a lot of conclusions here, when the only core question being explored is the plausibility of physical objects in Earth's atmostphere demonstrating superhuman technology not created by humans. "Extraordinary…
Why do you assume aliens are here (or their tech) ? The evidence against aliens here is just the entirety of physics and history. I consider it to be extraordinary.
The 'entirety of history' is meaningless since we don't really know what happened in the past.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The trolling hypothesis makes the most sense to me. If these are non-terrestrial that means that getting here is relatively simple given the sheer number and variety that are reported. If that's the case and these things have no interest in colonization, resource extraction, or elimination of a competitor i.e. we are thoroughly beneath them in every way that makes me think the zoo hypothesis is the most likely, thoug…
Hm, I mean I would agree this is the most reasonable explanation assuming the sightings are accurate, but you still have to question why none of them make more effort to communicate... Something I and others like to do when visiting monkeys at a zoo is try to interact with them. You might not be able to have a full conversation with them, but they're still curious and interested in looking at objects and things you m…
If you want a reason to believe in cover ups and the governments actively hiding this stuff just imagine what it was like for the native Americans to come in contact with Europeans for the first time. There might be a good reason for there to be efforts on both sides to prevent contact.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it was real, it would not be called “supernatural”, by literal definition.
Supernatural (adj): (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. Something CAN be real and beyond current scientific understanding.
I think you're reading that wrong. "Beyond scientific understanding" doesn't mean "beyond current scientific understanding", it actually means, "beyond any possible scientific understanding". So a supernatural phenomenon would defeat any possible attempt at characterizing it scientifically.