saac

Now that is interesting, I think I may be able to make use of that in school - thanks for sharing it Chris. I like the wiki animations, very clear and easy to understand. 

Jim  

59 minutes ago, Barry Fitz-Gerald said:

I recommend  UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record by Leslie Kean, the same journalist responsible for the 2017 NYT story. It is an old book now, but the accounts by extremely credible witnesses of structured craft in close proximity are compelling, and show the uninformed opinions of the likes of Dylan O'Donnell to be just that, uninformed.  Unfortunately it does not include the accounts by the likes of Gordon Cooper, Deke Slayton, Clyde Tombaugh or Kelly Johnson (the chap behind the blackest of black projects at Lockheed and designer of the U2 and SR71) - individuals who reported sightings despite the clear threat to their credibility posed by such revelations. Again, based on credibility, technical knowledge and experience I know who's accounts I would tend towards.

 

You may find this a slightly more comprehensive analysis as most of the rubbish you find on the internet is inaccurate: 

https://www.explorescu.org/post/2004-uss-nimitz-strike-navy-group-incident-report

.........this incident is also worth considering as an example of intelligent control:

https://enigmalabs.io/library/10e25512-d52e-4ea2-97dc-7a93eecd4cd9

...........make of them what you will.

 

Yes, it does leave you wondering whether British Leyland had a hand in the fabrication of some of these things, but then again if UFO's don't exist, they cannot crash and the whole problem goes away.

 

 

 

 

Again there is no doubt/debate regarding the inability of an individual to identify an object, that happens all the time and is perfectly normal. What is being dismissed is the claim that these things are piloted or crewed by extraterrestrial beings nor have extraterrestrial origins.  It is a small thing to ask for evidence, only then does the problem go away.

Jim 

7 minutes ago, Peter Drew said:

I think most agree that such sightings have been reported since the 1950's and that no verifiable contacts have been made with aliens in the 70 odd years since.  This suggests to me that, if aliens exist, they prefer to remain anonymous and out of touch.  If so, why would they blatantly advertise their presence by displaying easily observable lighting systems?     🤔  

Because they are highly incompetent. While they have developed unimaginable technology to circumvent the laws of physics by traversing unassailable distances and maneuvering in atmosphere at accelerations which would crush a neutron star, they are incapable of evading detection by simple electromagnetic spectrum detectors.  Makes you wonder who authorised their design programme. 

Jim 

14 minutes ago, Barry Fitz-Gerald said:

Well, as I have said before UFO's are one thing and Aliens are another  - as we do not know what UFO's are in the first place, speculating on who or what is piloting them is a tad premature.

 

On that we are in violent agreement, although I'd be hesitant on the use of the word "piloting" for that assumes a certain conclusion without supporting evidence.  I like Hitchen's razor which I think is applicable here  "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence". 

Jim 

2 hours ago, Barry Fitz-Gerald said:

Who said anything about aliens?

 

David Grusch  "former US intelligence official" while giving his statement to the recent congressional committee together with the army of adherents and the commercial industry which has blossomed around the belief (claim) that  UFO/UAP are the result of alien visitations. 

Former US Intelligence Official Claims We Have Found Alien Remains At Crash Sites

Jim 

12 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Skeptical or dismissive of what exactly?

I don't think that anyone here is either skeptical or dismissive of the fact that people see things that they can't explain at that particular moment (or for that matter things that escape explanation up until present day).

Yes, such things happen - you see something that you can't explain. Some lights, something in the sky.

Who has seen actual alien? I'm yet to hear of credible source that claims to have seen actual alien.

I completely agree with vlaiv on this.  You cannot be skeptical of being unable to identify something you see; you can either see it or you cannot, you can either identify it or you cannot. 

If there is any skepticism/dismissiveness in this discussion it is of those who claim the presence of extra terrestrial life as the origin of such sightings.  It has been asked before, and will be asked again of those who make such claims (as before the congressional committee) -  bring forth the evidence. In all honesty, that is not being dismissive, that is common sense. 

Jim 

On 05/08/2023 at 12:28, maw lod qan said:

So, how about a question on this subject that seems to have been avoided.

Have you personally or have you ever spoken with someone who HAS, seen something you cant explain?

 

Yes and on many occasions - aircraft, projectiles, weather, planets, drones (more recently) and optical illusions.  Personally, I have found that it is simply not always possible to identify what is being looked at, nor is there any easy method of confirmation in real time.  What I don't do however is make the unfounded connection or claim that the cause of my inability to identify something must lead to an extra terrestrial origin. 

Jim

37 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Can we discuss faith?

Surely, most of the science relies on faith.

I for one have faith that I'll wake up tomorrow and earth will still be orbiting the Sun and laws of nature will still be the same. Heck, even if I don't wake up tomorrow, I have the faith that the same will happen.

To be honest, at slightly higher age, I'm wary of such bald claims. And this is not religious view - it is purely scientific.

Nice philosophical rabbit hole there vlaiv but maybe not. Let's just keep to the spirit of this thread, if people have an appetite to explore something else then they can raise a new thread. 

Jim 

6 minutes ago, Macavity said:

Unfortunately science cannot ignore withdrawl of govt. funding... withdrawl from international e.g. collaboration etc.
(CERN was once "touch & go"!) In theory, there is a lot of exciting stuff going on... re. greater "World" Collaboration? 😎
https://home.cern/news/news/knowledge-sharing/cern-and-nasa-join-forces-commit-research-future-open-and-accessible
But, underpinning it, is (important) "public opinon/support"? (They do believe "maverick" Scientists on Youtube etc.). 😉

The voices that get listened to are not necessarily the ones that shout  the loudest, it is more on content.  I don't think social media drives or influences science overly, not where it matters. 

Jim 

12 minutes ago, Macavity said:

https://www.space.com/interstellar-meteor-avi-loeb-expedition

“It’s most likely a technological gadget with artificial intelligence.” 😮

It may be "ALIEN Spherules"? 😉 But, scepticism seems fair?
It is nice to think these... "might be something", but the greater
likelihood is that they are *probably* not. That's just science? 😉

What constitutes discovery now? What constitutes science?
Whither Peer Review, now it is circumvented by "publishing"
in Newpapers, on Social Media, or writing your own Books... 🤔
 

Surely any scientific claim that circumvents professional scrutiny by  channeling social media/news is just destined to be ignored by those that matter.  I can't see youtube/Twitter/Threads/ or the Sun "wot won it" stumping up funding for a replacement particle collider at CERN!

Jim

The thing is we have not been presented with any evidence that could lead to a satisfactory disclosure.  I go back to the claim made before the committee that we (USA government) has in their possession an extraterrestrial biological body. I make a simple request again, produce the evidence or withdraw the claim.  So here we are, without doubt there are many examples of unidentified flying objects; any ATC at any airfield in the country will pick them up on a daily basis until they are identified and then commence control instructions. Those that are not confirmed as aircraft will in all likelihood remain unidentified.  There is no great problem or challenge from that other than to improve detection techniques and evidential procedures. However the jump from those who claim, without any evidence base, that the probable cause is extraterrestrial and specifically,  extraterrestrial life,  have a burden proof that to date they are spectacularly incapable of advancing. 

Jim  

6 hours ago, Mr H in Yorkshire said:

At the age of about seven I was aware that there wasn't the slightest reason to think that a God, any God, exists, that there are ghosts to be frightened of or anything at all supernatural, or anything as daft as aliens and UFO's. Why would anyone who sees the astonishing wonders of the the natural world, the real world, from a drop of rain on a leaf to a supernova, waste their time on such unnecessary and futile/foolish thinking.  Anyone with any scientific awareness, any awareness of accumulated knowledge and ongoing investigation, of curiosity and rational understanding, will have an existence replete with delight and wonder.  Only a day ago I was with my grandchildren travelling over Greenhow in Yorkshire, a high hill in an open landscape where we could clearly see the cloud base. I put it to them 'why do the clouds form way above us, and what would life be like if they always formed right down to the ground'. They were silent for a short while then with real excitement and insight they started  describing how different life would be under those circumstances. It was a sublime moment.

Best we just be mindful and respectful of the billions of people around the globe, including the scientific community, who are religious and have faith; they to will employ rational understanding and have an existence replete with delight and wonder. Gentle reminder, please let's just stick to the forum's terms and leave God, faith and religion out of this rather delightful UFO thread.  

Jim 

Hello and welcome to this wonderful community that is SGL. 

Jim 

4 hours ago, Paul M said:

Dylan O'Donnell's latest YouTube video says it all:

Good video. The map showing UFO sightings by location says it all, as does reference to the paid UFO circuit. 

JIm

Are they effectively using the gravitational lensing as a telescope !

Jim 

And success - people power   Now we need a freedom to roam bill for England and have it unified across the UK.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66341778

Jim

4 hours ago, Rusted said:

 I start every day by reading the Danish News websites, The BBC News website and Google World News. The BBC News website is absolutely pathetic and unchanging in comparison with the Danish national broadcaster. The latter is constantly updated and presents new stories throughout the day.

 Most of Google's World News website is blocked by paywalls or demands cookies for inside leg measurements. Even if the story is a readily available YouTube video.

 If you had to rely on the BBC website from outside the UK for world news. Then your world view would be limited to the BBC selling its own programmes. PLUS SPORTS ON STEROIDS or sports events and sports celebs "doing stuff." The BBC's main directive is clearly dumbing down the masses and feeding the drooling sports fans with ever more laudanum.

 The world's news media is simply a vast advertising business. Which chooses to have a speciality in (usually) highly biased news stories. Each chooses deliberate filtering and often has a clear, political or nationalist agenda. Or practices denial of service. By hiding behind a paywall or cookie monster.

 Whoever came up with the multiple options for cookies on every website should be hung up high in a cage. In a very public space. Until they rot and turn to dust. For setting back humanity by decades and increasing the wasted time of countless trillions of man hours in making cookie selections. Not to mention the increased load on the Internet. All it needed was for a simple OPT IN button. No other choice, or visitor decision, otherwise required. 

Err, don't read it then !

Jim 

2 minutes ago, Clarkey said:

My dog is really clever and there must be others. The dogs are building flying saucers.😂

Maybe like 'Star Trek' all our visitors follow the 'first directive' to not be seen.😃 More seriously, I believe that there is intelligent life beyond our own planet - but I have no idea why they would want to come here!

Let's get your dog in front of a congressional committee then and get this all straightened up.   

Jim 

2 hours ago, Xsubmariner said:

Principally being an Imager I find this statement disappointing. It implies imagers don’t achieve a personal experience which is rubbish. Every time I capture my first image of a new target I am in awe of the beauty and amazed at the DSO’s detail. Then with Narrowband my experience is enhanced as each specific filter captures different elements of the targets. During post processing I can clean the data and enhance different components with the image to expose the fine structural interaction.

Totally agree. At the end of the day this is done in our down time where we chose what we want to do because that's how we get our kicks.  Do one, the other or even both, whatever appeals. 

Jim 

20 hours ago, VNA said:

Hello, it all depends if you want the "actual" and personal experience or a technological experience?
The second will remove you from the "actual"  experience. If one wants to see images that are better than visual, the internet is full of beautiful images, but the personal experience is gone.

 

Or if you want you could do both!

Jim 

41 minutes ago, Carbon Brush said:

Not antiquity, but a long time ago. A relative told me that in his childhood he saw light shining through a window to put a bright rectangle on a house interior wall. It moved slowly and there was no sound.
The angle from window to wall meant it was coming from the sky.
This was probably 1910 -1920. The location was Sheffield. He was convinced it was a UFO.
Yes WW1 time it may have been a searchlight from a Zeppelin - did they have these? Sheffield steelworks were definitely targetted in WW2.
However, he did not mention others seeing it, or any newspaper reports.
I know that a Zeppelin was sighted by multiple witnesses by natural light (and the story documented) near Retford, about 20 miles east of Sheffield.
This was one night in WW1. No light involved. So this is a possibility.

However, now there are huge numbers of doorbell cameras, vehicle dashcams, security cameras and more that include some sky.
We see in the media these when there has been a decent meteor.
Add to this the astro community who are running all sky or wide angle meteor cameras.
So where are the ET/UFO sightings?

 

 

It is curious isn't it. But aside all of these sightings of "strange" lights we should not forget that it has been claimed in front of the congressional committee and the world that an alien body is in our possession. All that remains to be done is startlingly obvious as it is simple, produce the evidence. It also raises the question why are the likes of NASA currently spending millions in taxpayers money looking for evidence of life off Earth when we apparently already have the answer. Mmmmm. 

Jim

2 hours ago, Macavity said:

Picked up randomly: The APS (American Physical Society)
learned from experience? A really tragic story though... 😟

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22171039

I guess we now just open the internet to all and the bar to be published is set to, well there is no bar !   

Jim 

2 hours ago, Rusted said:

This raises an interesting question. Do we have the capability to reverse engineer anything so advanced? This needs unknown materials, mechanical, heat and radiation shielding, possibly hibernation, navigation and controls. In "down to earth" reality it may be completely impossible to travel through space at higher velocities. Every particle wants to pass right through the ship from nose to tail. The only way is arguably to literally jump from A to B. Without ever actually moving through the fabric of space.
 

Would depend wholly on the materials used and the manufacturing processes involved. Go back say 60 years and we had no way to manufacture single crystal aero engine turbine blades, or say 15 years and any thought of metal 3D printing by Selective Laser Melting or Laser Powder Bed Fusion would be a non starter. Manufacturing pathways open as technology advances in turn allowing design and manufacture of the hitherto non manufacturable. 

Jim 

43 minutes ago, andrew s said:

Interesting,  given your heritage I would have gone for Maxwell and his equations as your choice.

Nurture over Nature?

Regards Andrew 

PS for anyone puzzled by Euler's formula Google Argand diagram and see the light.

Maxwell is personal hero but his equations make my head hurt  

Jim

3 hours ago, andrew s said:

It always seems to me that e^ipi= -1 is pure magic. 

Regards Andrew 

If I was ever asked to name a favourite equation it would be Euler's formula. He was a fascinating individual; his work to develop Newton's laws of motion to rigid bodies literally underpins mechanical engineering - a patron saint to the Mechanical Engineer.  

Jim