saac

7 minutes ago, Rusted said:

There have never been more cameras in history, in the hands of the masses. Yet the evidence is still underwhelming. Why? I do not believe in "lights in the sky." Not until I see them for myself. Certainly not those recorded by that unique branch of humanity singularly afflicted by Parkinson's. The first time I saw pairs of satellites moving closely together I was simply being mentally prepared. For observing a whole chain of Muskies. Pulling an invisible sled bearing Father Christmas. 😏
 

 

NORAD tracks the big dude in the red suit and his invisible sled every 24 Dec so why are they slacking with regards to our many alien visitors and their overflights. Sorry but questions have to be asked  

Jim 

The physical side of nature certainly appears to have an underlying consistency that mathematics describe beautifully but I am not sure the same can be said of biology. 

Jim 

Looking forward to next week's Congressional Oversight Committee on Flat Earth. 

Jim 

7 hours ago, Rusted said:

Until the "extraordinarily unlikely" flies slowly over your rural garden in the presence of your wife.

Memories cannot be undone. They are indelible and unchanging until you stop breathing. Two witnesses, who see exactly the same thing, have an "extraordinary" problem. Neither can deny, to the other, what they each saw quite clearly.

Witnessing the "extraordinary" is most likely to be dismissed by others. Hence the lack of reports and sneering cynicism. Open acceptance of a new "extraordinary" in society would probably bring down that same society. There are nearly 7 billion skittles. Who must follow society's sacred, local rules, or be damned. It was the same throughout history. The local "authority" can easily suppress anything they do not like the sound of. Suppression of "expert" witness reports continues.

Is there a constantly updated P179277[xyz] which "witnesses" can fill out? Then hand into any local police station around the globe? Why not? Because it might affect "national security?" Or undermine some other belief in the mental straitjackets which keep the local pawns cowed?

Countless trillions are spent on developing armaments which are proving quite worthless in real combat. Throw the "extraordinary" [cheap drone or tic-tac] into the afterburner and the whole pack of cards collapses. Or, much more likely,  leads to the announcement of another explosion in "defence" spending?

Forum rules prevent discussion of the "extraordinary" beliefs of billions. Which have not a jot of "scientific" evidence. Some even believe that sport, or the news media, has some value. Outside of advertising income for the "offshore" obscenely rich.

The greatest barrier against modern acceptance of the "extraordinary" is the jolly band of self-appointed "experts" and even the "whistleblowers." A nice little earner for the "influencer." To to be able to sell their YT sponsor's logos on T-shirts. They should really be printing their fantasies and "theories" straight onto bin bags!

An actual "witness" who doesn't believe all this "UFO nonsense?" Now that is truly "extraordinary," isn't  it?    

 

It has nothing to do with acceptance of the extraordinary for the extraordinary has not been presented for examination. You are missing the most obvious and all to apparently inconvenient point, evidence. Evidence; extraordinary claims have been made, time for these claims to be supported. It has absolutely nothing to do with social conventions or social contracts re "sneering" that is an all too convenient excuse to obfuscate the glaring lack of evidence. It is a simple request to those who are making the claims, they are being asked to do no more than other group before them.  

Jim 

5 hours ago, SwiMatt said:

Hell, with the number of astrophotographers on this forum alone, I would expect very high quality proof regularly

 

That will take one really clever stretch and deconvolution algorithm.  I think a stretch too far  

Jim 

30 minutes ago, Barry Fitz-Gerald said:

There are plenty of accounts from history that refer to anomalous sightings (see Wonders in the Sky: Unexplained Aerial Objects from Antiquity to Modern Times by Chris Aubeck and Jacques Vallee) but deciphering them is fraught with problems, not least being how people described what they saw by attributing a quasi - religious, contemporary or mythical (angles, swords, shields, dragons and so on) aspect to them. And of course, how can one take seriously anything anyone wearing pantaloons and a ruff said. Alternatively some of the accounts recorded by William R. Corliss, particularly those culled from 19^th Century ship's logs are worth looking at as potential precursors of the modern phenomenon. Many of these are probably atmospheric phenomena of some sort or another, but many are, quite frankly bizarre and may have a bearing on contemporary USO sightings. And ships log's tend to be fairly accurately recorded documents. The Modern era has sightings going back to the late 19^th century, which include the 'Airship' phenomena, primarily in the US but not unknown in the UK (many of which were clearly sensational hoaxes perpetrated mainly by the press ).  From 1940 onwards, the 'Foo Fighter' phenomenon emerges, with very many combat aircrew accounts of encounters with anomalous ariel vehicles or devices, recorded in RAF and USAF squadron records and accounts. A literature search will reveal a lot more to anyone who can be bothered to look. So there is plenty of historical material out there, which to me indicates the possibility of a persistent phenomenon, spanning decades or more, and not a modern malaise perpetuated by generations of nutters.

 

 

Sorry but there is nothing authoritative and indisputable in the historical records, if there were we would not be having these discussions now. But aren't we fortunate to live in an age when "non human biologics" have been confirmed by an eye witness. One wonders why the authorities are so coy in bringing forth the evidence. So what exactly is the argument for withholding full disclosure  

Thank God we didn't progress with medical science, engineering, law etc with a similar philosophy of such a low bar of burden of proof/evidence. 

Jim 

43 minutes ago, ONIKKINEN said:

Maybe, but time is a harsh mistress. Almost all of ancient history is lost to us forever so there may well have been a thousand tapestries circulating for hundreds of years only to be lost in the sack of Constantinople (like a major portion of all known history).

Just to be clear my stance on this whole thing is that someone has something to gain from this theater (which is obviously not a revelation that aliens are among us or some other mumbo jumbo). Probably a similar thing as the flat earth movement where gullible people are purposefully lead astray to make money off them. The whole hearing (what little clips i went through) sounds like a typical stiff political hearing where almost nothing actually gets said but with a lot of words.

Or  it  just might not have happened over the many thousands of years of human history and just post 1950! Strange though, that an event so important, so grand, has no mark in our historical records, not even cultural. Personally I think there is a really obvious reason for that. 

Jim 

Just now, ONIKKINEN said:

Back in those days any mysterious unexplained phenomena will have likely been called an act of a deity.

The Romans and the Greeks associated many at the time unknown natural occurrences with acts of the gods (like volcanoes, earthquakes). Today we have scientific explanations for these, but to an ancient person it may have as well been magic.

I'm sure had a "craft" crashed and an "alien" body been recovered then a record of such would have appeared on a tapestry, scroll, or hewn into a lump of rock. But nothing, not even a cave painting.  I guess Plato, Socrates, Anaximander all had better things to do with their time. 

Jim 

7 hours ago, iantaylor2uk said:

It is somewhat suspicious that if anyone has any photos they are generally blurry and low resolution. More or less everyone nowadays have good quality high resolution cameras on their phones, which work irrespective of whether there's any Internet or phone connection, so if aliens are out there (and for some reason they are virtually always in the US rather than anywhere else in the world!) we should expect to start seeing some better quality photographic evidence. 

No sightings from antiquity not even from 1800s, does seem strange. 

Jim 

Yep the truth is definitely out there - you will notice it, it comes with overwhelming evidence. 

Jim 

Prof Cox nailed it in his twitter comment - extraordinary claims but no extraordinary evidence.  All at a time when we have more pressing concerns to deal with. Says it all really. 

Jim 

I haven't watched it but for me I can't get past two obstacles; the unassailable distances and to what point the nonsensical covert nature of  the "visits".  It all seems somewhat improbable. 

Jim 

57 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

When we think of the expanding universe we think of Hubble's observation of the linear relationship between recession velocity and distance to galaxies. We then think of the fact that observers in any of these galaxies will see exactly the same thing under the 'expansion of the universe' hypothesis.

It seems to me, therefore, that every observer in every galaxy feels that they are at rest and will be tempted to attribute any 'motion' to all the others.  None of these observers considers themslelf to be accelerated. It also seems to me that they are right in this view since, if each observer were being accelerated, in what direction would they be accelerated? If they were being accelerated they would have to be accelerated in one direction but not all the others, so violating their equivalent of Hubble's observation. The notion of the expansion of space allows them to remain at rest and yet move away from each other. This allows them to move away from each other at superluminal velocities.

Now, I'm not daft enough to imagine that I have this right but I'd like to know, from those with a proper understanding, what is wrong with my thinking.

Olly

 

My understanding is that the galaxies are not moving through space itself due to the expansion of space rather they move with the space itself. We would need to separate out these two different motions, the local motion caused by gravitational influences (andromeda and Milky Way for example)  and then the metrical expansion motion.  Now here I'm going to go out on a limb; I would have thought that as the metrical expansion is happening in all directions then so too is the acceleration - the acceleration of any galaxy (metrical acceleration)  would appear the same to any observer as it is caused by expansion of space itself. I do however wonder if the expansion is truly uniform or if it influenced by any non uniformity in the distribution of whatever is causing the expansion. Thinking about it is that not what we see in the irregularities in the CMBR- don't know?

Jim 

5 hours ago, Macavity said:

Lew Kowarski (First CERN director) wrote: "A genuine scientist is eager to establish his
reputation amongst those who know his subject;  A mystagogue builds his among those
who do not". Apparently a ref. to G.K.Chesterton: "But the mystagogue hides a thing
in darkness and when you find it, it's a platitude". (The incredulity of Father Brown).

Nothing like a good "Quote" - Appear intellectual... Disarm critics? 😁
 

I like that.  Seems to me that the internet is a breeding ground for science mystagogues all chasing their 15 minutes of fame. 

I used to think the internet was a great democratiser of knowledge with its easy access to publication (I still do really). However, there is definitely an inverse relationship between the ease of publication and the usefulness of the message. Maybe some knowledge should remain hard won. 

Jim 

A few observations on the so called "communicator"  in the youtube video:

How can a theory lie?   As for communication, you would serve your audience better by giving them your undivided attention - ditch the "down with the kids playing a computer game", it doesn't translate.   In simple terms poor manners, and yes these still count. 

Ok rant over.  What I would like to know is, who appointed these "science communicators" and why are they trying to convince us that the "public" had any interest whatsoever in a theory they could not understand, never mind physics/science? Get a proper job, become an influencer 😁

Jim

1 minute ago, Kinch said:

Thanks Jim - appreciated.

You have actually inspired me to have a go at the Eagle with my new Esprit 120.  It will be a difficult target for me though with it being low in the South - I may have to plan a trip out  

Jim 

I hope it doesn't retire  

Jim  

2 hours ago, andrew s said:

Given I was never a main stream SGLer I will still stick around if that's ok.

Regards Andrew 

SGL needs a 2nd Chamber Andrew so you have just been promoted to the SGL House Of Lords,  there is no way we are letting you escape.  Like Stu said, we need somebody who actually knows what they are talking about to keep us straight.  

Jim 

Stunning image.

Jim

Personally,I think the best thing to do is avoid any or as much light as practicably possible.  Even if using red light have it as dim as possible and only on for the minimum of time needed. 

Jim 

27 minutes ago, Elp said:

And here's me looking for the chance to image it just for an hour or so before it disappears for another year. Do you think it'll look anything like this?

A wee bit of post deconvolution an who knows, never say never

Jim

10 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

Hmm not sure I like the old Tak colour scheme - I’ll give it a miss 🤣

Who are you and what have you done with Jeremy? 😆

Jim

4 hours ago, Macavity said:

A bit of a "cop out"? But today's student is far better served re. Textbooks. Less well served, re. "Opinions"? 😅

Totally agree Chris. When you consider the sheer volume and variety of resources that are available it really is a golden age to be be a student. Can you remember how we had to do it - a trip to the uni library and most likely a good few hours desperately searching through dusty old books only to leave less educated than when you started lol    And even now things are changing apace with the arrival of the AI search engines - I'm finding ChatGPT seriously addictive - a common reply from me, "could you break that down a little more" .  Seriously, I'm finding it a  really effective way of learning. 

Jim  

To be honest every time I get on my skateboard I feel like time symmetry is restored, it's 1976 and that long hot summer again! It  invariably doesn't last long, an interaction with a pot-hole has me exchanging something verbal with some unseen particle and I'm travelling backward like a positron through my personal Feynman diagram. I've landed on my ar@e, symmetry broken,  but never my enthusiasm. Back on the board again and 1976 here we come  

Jim  

11 minutes ago, George Jones said:

Our (cosmological) universe does not have time symmetry, but it does have 6 spatial symmetries. At any instant of cosmological time, there is a 3-dimensional space that, roughly, is symmetrical for all spatial rotations and all spatial translations. This is true even when the 3-dimensional spaces are curved.

time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana 

ok hat and coat