41–50 of 244 posts
"The datasetdescribed in this report is currently limited primarily to U.S. Government reporting of incidents occurring from November 2004 to March 2021." So what happened to observations from before 2004?
Next: A conspiracy theory that the government is covering up the fact that UFOs don't exist.
This seems awfully brief and doesn't have much detail. The tittle says it's a "preliminary" report. Is this the expected UAP report or just a preliminary document about it? I would want to see summary statistics for each reported incident and descriptions of the most compelling phenomenon. This document raises a lot of questions and answers few. The document says they have 21 reports of UAP that "appear to demonstrat…
> I'm also not really impressed by their idea to use "advanced algorithms" and "machine learning". Are UFO encounters so frequent we need to resort to big data? I had that same thought - on first read this report seems to contain summary analysis of 144 UAP incidents. Not the sort of numbers that immediately make me think "I need ML to process those!"
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.
They had to release it. >The report prepared by the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) was required by the Intelligence Authorization Act passed by Congress late last year. The U.S. intelligence community was given 180 days to prepare an unclassified and classified report on what the U.S. government knew about UAPs. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/highly-anticipated-ufo-repor...
[0] Even this category can be divided out into plausible and implausible options. For instance, I'd likely believe another government figured out they could mess with our military sensors over having developed antigravity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Contrary to popular opinion, UFO stands for Unidentified Flying Object, not Aliens From Another Galaxy Visiting Us For Some Damn Reason. Objects that fly and are not readily identifiable totally exist and are a concern for the military as they may be aircraft from another country violating our air space on a spy mission or some such.
That's what the government wants you to believe.
The only thing they left out was swamp gas as a possible explanation (RIP Hynek). Seems like another whitewash, "it can't possibly be happening" report. If you spend some serious effort on this and stay away from the crazies you'll come to the opposite conclusion of this report. A good starting point is Vallee's books.
I don't know about Vallee, but after being briefly in the defense industry, reading much, and having some experience with aerospace everything seems to fit very well into one of three categories 1) known US aircraft activity either simply misinterpreted or kept secret from the public or even most of the military apparatus, sometimes strongly denied either as a way to disseminate vague information to adversaries or mi…
1) This isn't a recent phenomena. People have been seeing discs in the sky for literally thousands of years.
2) Aircraft can't make 90 degree turns or descend from 80,000 feet to the deck approximately instantly.
3) Groups of extremely highly trained military pilots have seen them, and the video and IR data has been released from these encounters. You can't make 4 people in 2 aircraft hallucinate at the same time, and fool all the instrumentation on them (radar, IR...) and also fool the battlespace radars on the cruisers directing them. And if you could, that too would be kind of interesting to look at whatever that is.
You're repeating old points you don't understand because as you acknowledge, you don't know the subject. Please start with Vallee.
This seems awfully brief and doesn't have much detail. The tittle says it's a "preliminary" report. Is this the expected UAP report or just a preliminary document about it? I would want to see summary statistics for each reported incident and descriptions of the most compelling phenomenon. This document raises a lot of questions and answers few. The document says they have 21 reports of UAP that "appear to demonstrat…
> I'm also not really impressed by their idea to use "advanced algorithms" and "machine learning". Are UFO encounters so frequent we need to resort to big data? I had that same thought - on first read this report seems to contain summary analysis of 144 UAP incidents. Not the sort of numbers that immediately make me think "I need ML to process those!"
Later in the report, it says this:
One proposal is to use advanced algorithms to
search historical data captured and stored by radars
"Probably some sort of secret military program" [0]. Cannot find original on youtube any longer.
The only thing they left out was swamp gas as a possible explanation (RIP Hynek). Seems like another whitewash, "it can't possibly be happening" report. If you spend some serious effort on this and stay away from the crazies you'll come to the opposite conclusion of this report. A good starting point is Vallee's books.
I don't know about Vallee, but after being briefly in the defense industry, reading much, and having some experience with aerospace everything seems to fit very well into one of three categories 1) known US aircraft activity either simply misinterpreted or kept secret from the public or even most of the military apparatus, sometimes strongly denied either as a way to disseminate vague information to adversaries or mi…