UAP - Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon

luke511 said:
I think it’s enough accounts to consider them actually experiencing electromagnetic effects as a possibility.
Click to expand...

That's not what I asked. If you don't believe that all of those 81 people are correct, then you obviously don't think it's irresponsible or disrespectful to disbelieve some of them. I'm wondering which pilots it's disrespectful and irresponsible to not believe, and which pilots it's respectful and responsible to not believe.
 
Last edited:
NotThatSoph said:
That's not what I asked. If you don't believe that all of those 81 people are correct, then you obviously don't think it's irresponsible or disrespectful to disbelieve some of them. I'm wondering which pilots it's disrespectful and irresponsible to not believe, and which pilots it's respectful and responsible to not believe.
Click to expand...
I said all of it can't be brushed off as confusion or being drunk. There are cases backed up with radar from the ground that identified the UFO(s), are the radar operators confused or drunk too?
 
nimic said:
But if the 81 pilots cannot be explained with lying or being mistaken, then how would you explain the many more trained health care professionals who believe that homeopathy works? Either it works, or they are lying or being mistaken.
Click to expand...
That's an argument against science, this isn't.
 
luke511 said:
I said all of it can't be brushed off as confusion or being drunk. There are cases backed up with radar from the ground that identified the UFO(s), are the radar operators confused or drunk too?
Click to expand...

You said that it was disrespectful to suggest dishonesty. You now seem to be saying something different.

Of the 81 how many could you *respectfully* consider to be mistaken, confused, lying, etc, without being disrespectful to the whole group?
 
luke511 said:
I said all of it can't be brushed off as confusion or being drunk. There are cases backed up with radar from the ground that identified the UFO(s), are the radar operators confused or drunk too?
Click to expand...

But some of it can be brushed off? I don't understand why you're comfortable with brushing some pilots off, but not others. Is it respectful to say that 79 pilots are wrong, but disrespectful to say that 81 are? What's so special about the last two?
 
nimic said:
How seriously are you taking reports of people speaking directly with God (and that God speaks back)? Or who claim to have seen fairies (like Arthur Conan Doyle did), or that magic is real, or that homeopathy works, or that vaccines don't work? There are many of all of those, and all of the groups also include many intelligent, otherwise rational and trustworthy people. Why can't it be taken more seriously?
Click to expand...
Are you just trusting the science? So if scientists one day come out and say it's real, then you'll change your tune?
 
NotThatSoph said:
But some of it can be brushed off? I don't understand why you're comfortable with brushing some pilots off, but not others. Is it respectful to say that 79 pilots are wrong, but disrespectful to say that 81 are? What's so special about the last two?
Click to expand...
NicolaSacco said:
You said that it was disrespectful to suggest dishonesty. You now seem to be saying something different.

Of the 81 how many could you *respectfully* consider to be mistaken, confused, lying, etc, without being disrespectful to the whole group?
Click to expand...
The point was that It would be disrespectful not to take the individual pilot accounts seriously, given that they are very skilled professionals and there's a high number of them stretched across 80 years reporting similar accounts of unconventional behaviour and activity.
 
luke511 said:
The point was that It would be disrespectful not to take the individual pilot accounts seriously, given that they are very skilled professionals and there's a high number of them stretched across 80 years reporting unconventional behaviour and activity.
Click to expand...

Yes, your point was very clear, which is why I asked specifically how many of those pilots you actually believe saw what they say they saw.
 
luke511 said:
The point was that It would be disrespectful not to take the individual pilot accounts seriously, given that they are very skilled professionals and there's a high number of them stretched across 80 years reporting similar accounts of unconventional behaviour and activity.
Click to expand...

It shouldn’t be a difficult question to answer. Unless you believe *all* of them are honest, credible and infallible then you are suggesting that some of them aren’t. What’s an acceptable percentage to doubt?
 
NicolaSacco said:
It shouldn’t be a difficult question to answer. Unless you believe *all* of them are honest, credible and infallible then you are suggesting that some of them aren’t. What’s an acceptable percentage to doubt?
Click to expand...
It varies from case to case, context is important. The stronger the case, the more respect it deserves. This is not specified to the 81 cases, my original point was -

There's enough bizarre cases now, stretching back to the 1940s, that you can't just brush it off as them all being potentially confused or drunk.
Click to expand...

The bizarre and strongest cases come from the skilled professional accounts such as pilots and radar operators, they have nothing to gain and everything to lose from being dishonest or under the influence on the job. I think the 81 cases that involve accounts of planes experiencing electromagnetic effects in close vicinity fall under the strong cases, because of this criteria. So yes, I think their reports are honest and accurate with all factors considered.
 
luke511 said:
It varies from case to case, context is important. The stronger the case, the more respect it deserves. This is not specified to the 81 cases, my original point was -



The bizarre and strongest cases come from the skilled professional accounts such as pilots and radar operators, they have nothing to gain and everything to lose from being dishonest or under the influence on the job. I think the 81 cases that involve accounts of planes experiencing electromagnetic effects in close vicinity fall under the strong cases, because of this criteria. So yes, I think their reports are honest and accurate with all factors considered.
Click to expand...

So, do you believe that every single one of them saw what they've claimed to have seen? Not a single lie, not a single mistake?
 
NotThatSoph said:
So, do you believe that every single one of them saw what they've claimed to have seen? Not a single lie, not a single mistake?
Click to expand...
How incredibly pedantic, I believe they saw what they saw and they weren't drunk.
 
luke511 said:
How incredibly pedantic, I believe they saw what they saw and they weren't drunk.
Click to expand...

Again, everyone see what they see, by definition. Do you believe that every single person is correct about their UFO claims, or do you think that one or more might have been mistaken? It's an extremely simple question, I don't understand why we have to go so many rounds. Is there a possibility that a single person might have been wrong, or is there not?
 
NotThatSoph said:
Again, everyone see what they see, by definition. Do you believe that every single person is correct about their UFO claims, or do you think that one or more might have been mistaken? It's an extremely simple question, I don't understand why we have to go so many rounds. Is there a possibility that a single person might have been wrong, or is there not?
Click to expand...
Obviously there's a possibility they're wrong, where did I say this couldn't the case? I said it would be highly disrespectful given the context. The context being the strongest cases.
 
luke511 said:
Obviously there's a possibility they're wrong, where did I say this couldn't the case? I said it would be highly disrespectful given the context. The context being the strongest cases.
Click to expand...

Are those 81 the strongest cases? If yes, then is there not a possibility that any of the 81 are mistaken?
 
In 2 years time or even 5 years time after these hearings we still wont have seen an Alien or the so called non human biogenics on earth, no govt will have released to the public, access or absolute proof of Alien spaceships on earth. After all the current noise and publicity we will still be where we are now.
 
NotThatSoph said:
What's not specific? You said it was disrespectful and irresponsible to not believe these 81 pilots. Is it possible that one or more of them are mistaken, or is it not possible?
Click to expand...
No I didn't, I said that you can't box all the 81 accounts in as confused, drunk or a liar. The electromagnetic effects involve Weapon System total failure (2), Gun radar failure (2), Radio Lost all frequencies UHF + VHF (17), Radio Interferences (14), Engine stopped and restarted « automatically » (4), General electrical system total failure (radio, lights, ....) (6), General electrical system burned or partially burned (1), Magnetic Compass rapid needle(s) rotation and jamming (8), Magnetic Compass aimed toward UAP (3), Two compasses indicating different direction (2), Compass indicating wrong direction (1), Autopilot system failed to operate normally (3), Radar system inoperative (2).

Would it be disrespectful to say in all of these cases the pilots were either confused, drunk or a liar? I think it would be.
 
Last edited:
luke511 said:
No I didn't, I said that you can't box all the 81 accounts in as confused, drunk or a liar. The electromagnetic effects involve Weapon System Total failure (2), Gun radar failure (2), Radio Lost all frequencies UHF + VHF (17), Radio Interferences (14), Engine stopped and restarted « automatically » (4), General electrical system Total failure (radio, lights, ....) (6), General electrical system Burned or partially burned (1), Magnetic Compass Rapid needle(s) rotation and jamming (8), Magnetic Compass Aimed toward UAP (3), Two compasses indicating different direction (2), Compass indicating wrong direction (1), Autopilot system Failed to operate normally (3), Radar system Radar system inoperative (2). Would it be disrespectful to say in all of these cases the pilots were confused? Yes. Would it be disrespectful to say in all of these cases the pilots were drunk? Yes. Would it be disrespectful to say in all of these cases the pilots were lying? Yes.
Click to expand...

So we've been doing this for hours, just to conclude that it's perfectly respectful and responsible to think that they're all wrong, as long as we don't think they're wrong because they're confused, drunk, or lying? Without getting an answer on whether it's respectful and responsible to think that 80 or fewer of them are wrong because they're confused, drunk, or lying?

If this isn't the perfect image of why talking about UFOs is a waste of time, then I don't know.
 
Let's ignore rational explanations. I always liked the idea they were von Neumann probes of an already dead or transcendental species. That would be nuts.
 
Denis79 said:
I am 100% sure we aren't the only intelligent life out there but not convinced we have been visited by others.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Actually, I am 99.999999% sure we have not been visited by others. The percentage is not 100% because I don't want to sound dogmatic.

The distances are tremendous. Believing in some mysterious new physics that allows bodies to be transported million light years away without disintegrating, is nothing more than unfounded science fiction (bordering on silly religious mysteries). Tunneling and all such dreams are unfounded "science" for electrons, which are pointlike particles/waves without any internal substructure. Now extrapolating this to complex cells, and further to intelligent beings, is completely pointless. I am not even convinced that humans will ever be able to travel to Mars and come back alive, and Mars is right next to us.
 
luke511 said:
No I didn't, I said that you can't box all the 81 accounts in as confused, drunk or a liar. The electromagnetic effects involve Weapon System total failure (2), Gun radar failure (2), Radio Lost all frequencies UHF + VHF (17), Radio Interferences (14), Engine stopped and restarted « automatically » (4), General electrical system total failure (radio, lights, ....) (6), General electrical system burned or partially burned (1), Magnetic Compass rapid needle(s) rotation and jamming (8), Magnetic Compass aimed toward UAP (3), Two compasses indicating different direction (2), Compass indicating wrong direction (1), Autopilot system failed to operate normally (3), Radar system inoperative (2).

Would it be disrespectful to say in all of these cases the pilots were either confused, drunk or a liar? I think it would be.
Click to expand...


You should also take into account the various psychological problems that people have. For example, 0.5% of the population has schizophrenia. That's over 1.5 million people in the US.

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/schizophrenia

And this is not the only mental disorder that can make you see things that are not there. I have no idea what the percentage is in professionals like air force pilots, but it is certain that in all professions there are some highly functional people with untreated mental disorders.

Then, it is also well known that machinery sometimes also behaves like it has some kind of "schizophrenia". There are all kinds of bugs, both in software and hardware.
 
luke511 said:
Would it be disrespectful to say in all of these cases the pilots were either confused, drunk or a liar? I think it would be.
Click to expand...

If Congress decides to have a hearing about "people who heard the voice of GOD", how many (thousands of) witnesses would they find? Would it be disrespectful to discard them all?

I really don't see any difference. The only difference is that over 60% of people believe in God, so Congress is not going to get involved in that.
 
luke511 said:
Would it be disrespectful to say in all of these cases the pilots were either confused, drunk or a liar? I think it would be.
Click to expand...

It's not at all. If one can be lying, then they all can. Pretty simple logic.

This is a sample size of 81 people out of 10s of thousands right? (maybe more?) It's a tiny percentage. A tiny percentage of any sample of humans can be lunatics. Nothing whatsoever is disrespectful about that statement.
 
frostbite said:
I agree with this. Actually, I am 99.999999% sure we have not been visited by others. The percentage is not 100% because I don't want to sound dogmatic.

The distances are tremendous. Believing in some mysterious new physics that allows bodies to be transported million light years away without disintegrating, is nothing more than unfounded science fiction (bordering on silly religious mysteries). Tunneling and all such dreams are unfounded "science" for electrons, which are pointlike particles/waves without any internal substructure. Now extrapolating this to complex cells, and further to intelligent beings, is completely pointless. I am not even convinced that humans will ever be able to travel to Mars and come back alive, and Mars is right next to us.
Click to expand...
Humans are obviously at the apex of science. Unless we can figure out a way to travel the vast distances no other sentient civilisation which could have a 1000, 10,000 1,000,000 year headstart on us could.

Also there are many people who are 99.999999% we have been visited at some point. The percentage could be 100% but they dont want to shove that in peoples faces.

If we have never been visited then how do you account for the following:

In 1994, 60 young children at Ariel school in Ruwa, Zimbabwe said they'd seen a 'UFO' and 'aliens with big eyes' in bush land near their school playground. The story was reported around the world.

A BBC crew were among the first on the scene and spoke to pupils and teachers. There were also reports of strange lights and a 'craft' in the sky in other parts of Zimbabwe, as well as in Zambia and South Africa.

They asked the 60 children to draw what they saw and they all drew the same thing. John Mack a Harvard professor of psychiatry flew out to zimbabwe to interview them.

How easy is it to get 60 ypung children to tell the same story and draw the same picture?

Recently some of those kids now much older adults came back to the school to talk about their experience and they are adamt about what they saw and experienced. This is just one example of countless others.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/stories-57749238

 
Last edited:
Stack said:
In 2 years time or even 5 years time after these hearings we still wont have seen an Alien or the so called non human biogenics on earth, no govt will have released to the public, access or absolute proof of Alien spaceships on earth. After all the current noise and publicity we will still be where we are now.
Click to expand...
I agree. If the US came out and said they possessed a alien spacecraft, the entire world would want to see it. The UN would start its rhetoric about how it needs to be shared with all scientists from all countries etc.

Now looking at how the best scientific minds from all over the world helped contribute and get CERN up and running, it would make sense in order to make progress. However with the likez of china constantly stealing tech from US, you could see why the US would want to keep this buried far far away from anyone.

If you accept what comes out from time to time, i.e Admiral Wilson memos that Dr Eric Davis took, then back engineering progress is painfully slow because we dont have a CERN approach to the technology.

One thing thats been mentioned a few times by a few people in this area is that they mothball the tech for 20 years then bring it out to see if materials science has caught up or made advancements. If not it gets mothballed again.

Alledgly BAAS (Bigalow Aerospace) was give back in early 2000s a tiny sample of material said to be off one of these craft. It was also given to TTSA 5 years or so ago for analysis.

MATERIAL OF INTEREST: MAGNESIUM-ZINC-BISMUTH

"...Over the last three months, To The Stars Academy has collected seven pieces of material, from multiple sources, to study for The ADAM Research Project. Each sample represents different elements of potential Unidentified Aerial Phenomena and how they operate.

According to the accompanying provenance documentation, there are two classes of samples: material that was released as the UAP was hovering and material that makes up parts of the structure or systems. Because none of this documentation can be independently verified, TTS Academy’s ADAM testing approach is structured to look for other indicators of unique origin such as:
  • Unusual chemical combinations or alloys
  • Isotope ratios that indicate the material was created outside of our solar system
  • Unusual structural composition
One artifact on loan to TTSA for analysis is a Magnesium-Zinc-Bismuth (MgZn/Bi) sample, which has been the source of discussion and speculation for years. The supplied documentation states that it is from a UAP crash recovery. While this source cannot be verified, this is a particularly interesting sample for several reasons:
  • The material is clearly engineered with distinct layers of MgZn and Bi at structured thicknesses only microns thick
  • There is no precedent for this structured combination of materials
  • It is unclear what fabrication processes allow this combination of materials to form an integrated structural component
  • Theoretical analysis shows that the material acts as a waveguide for terahertz (THz) frequencies
  • Those wavelengths normally would not propagate through this geometry
  • One side of the sample appears to be tooled, having a defined contour
  • There has been an extensive amount of testing on the material, the true purpose or function of the material remains unknown
 
You must log in or register to reply here.