Weird Stuff (tinfoil hat wearing goons only, please) - The Bear and Badger

SpaceGazelle

acemuzzy wrote:

Flight instruments showing stuff flying around fast etc, say, @SG

Ok, hang on.......

acemuzzy

I'm hanging

SpaceGazelle

Just doing a bit of googling.

SpaceGazelle

Right I'm looking at this Most Credible Sightings page because it came up first.

https://www-history-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/ufo-sightings-credible-modern?usqp=mq331AQA&_js_v=0.1

No.1 is lights above New Jersey. In a V shape. Hmmm, what else flies in a V shape? Ducks? Are ducks lights? No, but they do have incredibly reflective bellies. Air traffic say no planes but New York Phenomena Investigators (the NYPI no less ) claim they have data that corroborates the sightings.

Now this is just a rather poor and lazy google search i'll admit, but if that's number 1 then it doesn't bode well for the rest.

Machines have glitches, and people are just plain unreliable, but if they both occur on the same event then presumably there's some sort of investigation, and presumably nothing comes from these investigations of note, other than these things happen from time to time.

Can anyone post what they absolutely consider the most compelling case of something weird going on?

[Deleted User]

bad_hair_day wrote:

This straw man talks about line ups and bullet trajectories, not video, radar and pilot testimonies.

‘Pilot testimonies’ is just a synonym for ‘eye-witness statement’. They’re probably marginally more reliable than most, but still unreliable in terms of recalling a thing they saw in excitement.

Video is also not 100% reliable. The same thing recorded from two different directions can capture two apparently different things happening. Two people watching the same video can see different things.

I know less about radar, but I understand that it, too, is capable of returning false results in certain conditions.

I watched that Nimitz footage. At one point, the black dot moving was ascribed to the tracking equipment, and later the same movement is ascribed to the object disappearing at seemingly impossible speed.

It’s all about as interesting as a food factory producing a malformed item that someone thinks looks like Jesus.

Kow

There's plenty of expert evidence to difficult to explain phenomena. Ascribing it to aliens is a bit of a jump though

SpaceGazelle

Goddammit now my YouTube algo is full of mentals.

djchump

You been radicalised.

Yossarian

SpaceGazelle wrote:

Goddammit now my YouTube algo is full of mentals.

You should know better than to YouTube this stuff outside of an incognito window.

SpaceGazelle

I'll do some god stuff to get rid of it.

SpaceGazelle

MASSIVE SUCCESS.

acemuzzy

So the evidence it's geese is a V shape? I'm glad the burden of proof is symmetric.

"I don't find this interesting" didn't mean others oughtn't.

Kow wrote:

There's plenty of expert evidence to difficult to explain phenomena. Ascribing it to aliens is a bit of a jump though

This, basically.

SpaceGazelle

acemuzzy wrote:

So the evidence it's geese is a V shape? I'm glad the burden of proof is symmetric.

Jfc it's not evidence.

acemuzzy

So there is at least a teeny but of uncertainty over what it is. Right? Some people like to speculate. Some people see evidence you might disagree with. Let them at it, sez I.

acemuzzy

FWIW I think ufo stuff is totes nonsense, but kinda fun, and I don't believe anything is certain except maybe. So there.

bad_hair_day

It's by nature unidentified, what some of them are is the question. Could be sentient versions of our unmanned Voyager, could be geese or perhaps they're ...

Don't quite see the harm like telling kids hell is real, evolution is a lie or obstructing peoples rights.

Vela

Andy wrote:

bad_hair_day wrote:

This straw man talks about line ups and bullet trajectories, not video, radar and pilot testimonies.

‘Pilot testimonies’ is just a synonym for ‘eye-witness statement’. They’re probably marginally more reliable than most, but still unreliable in terms of recalling a thing they saw in excitement. Video is also not 100% reliable. The same thing recorded from two different directions can capture two apparently different things happening. Two people watching the same video can see different things. I know less about radar, but I understand that it, too, is capable of returning false results in certain conditions. I watched that Nimitz footage. At one point, the black dot moving was ascribed to the tracking equipment, and later the same movement is ascribed to the object disappearing at seemingly impossible speed. It’s all about as interesting as a food factory producing a malformed item that someone thinks looks like Jesus.

There was a case in Queensland where people kept reporting low-flying lights in the middle of nowhere, hundred or so km from the nearest town. Took a while for people to solve the mystery but it was refraction of lights from trucks on a highway well beyond the horizon (more than 50km away).

Radars can do the same thing, albeit under different conditions and with different sized objects.

Dinostar77

acemuzzy

Vela wrote:

Andy wrote:

bad_hair_day wrote:

This straw man talks about line ups and bullet trajectories, not video, radar and pilot testimonies.

‘Pilot testimonies’ is just a synonym for ‘eye-witness statement’. They’re probably marginally more reliable than most, but still unreliable in terms of recalling a thing they saw in excitement. Video is also not 100% reliable. The same thing recorded from two different directions can capture two apparently different things happening. Two people watching the same video can see different things. I know less about radar, but I understand that it, too, is capable of returning false results in certain conditions. I watched that Nimitz footage. At one point, the black dot moving was ascribed to the tracking equipment, and later the same movement is ascribed to the object disappearing at seemingly impossible speed. It’s all about as interesting as a food factory producing a malformed item that someone thinks looks like Jesus.

There was a case in Queensland where people kept reporting low-flying lights in the middle of nowhere, hundred or so km from the nearest town. Took a while for people to solve the mystery but it was refraction of lights from trucks on a highway well beyond the horizon (more than 50km away). Radars can do the same thing, albeit under different conditions and with different sized objects.

And we'd never discover "weird" stuff like that if people weren't interested in oddities. As I say, let them at it, we'll discover something one way or another I suspect.

SpaceGazelle

acemuzzy wrote:

So there is at least a teeny but of uncertainty over what it is. Right? Some people like to speculate. Some people see evidence you might disagree with. Let them at it, sez I.

No it's fine, but there is a line in the sand between evidential proof and bunkum. Extraordinary claims and all that. My point is that pseudo science is now becoming accepted and normal and this is alarming. There's homeopathy on the NHS ffs.

It's not a far leap to start claiming Mexicans are evil (with proof) when all the leaps are ridiculous.

djchump

Also, let’s not kid ourselves that “ufology” is totally harmless fun - in the same way that the psychics and medium prey on vulnerable people, ufo and abduction “researchers” have abused hypnotherapy a lot in the past to dig up “suppressed/mask memories” and use the ultra-suggestible state to convince people that they’ve suffered all kinds of shit.

acemuzzy

Yeah ok I'm not gonna argue with those last two posts I don't think. I'm not sure this thread necessarily crosses those lines though.

[Deleted User]

acemuzzy wrote:

And we'd never discover "weird" stuff like that if people weren't interested in oddities. As I say, let them at it, we'll discover something one way or another I suspect.

What did we ‘discover’ as a result of that? Light refraction wasn’t an unknown prior to that.

SpaceGazelle

There are all sorts of stuff that still are unknown to science though, but then again science hasn't stopped. It's arguably only just started.

acemuzzy

Andy wrote:

acemuzzy wrote:

And we'd never discover "weird" stuff like that if people weren't interested in oddities. As I say, let them at it, we'll discover something one way or another I suspect.

What did we ‘discover’ as a result of that? Light refraction wasn’t an unknown prior to that.

well maybe I'm overstating things in that case, but I still think an inquisitive mind is better than "duh it's only physics, let's not be intrigued by it". I'm not convinced a ready alternative is for these folk to be hitting science labs and doing cutting edge research.

I fear we're arguing multiple different things though - whether it's interesting, whether it's actually UFOs, whether it's doing harm, whether people should be allowed to have these conversations in peace, whether it's worthwhile, whether it's better/worse than religion, etc., and these arguments keep crossing each other in a somewhat incoherent way, so I'm probably ducking out given me only real point was "it's fairly mindless, let them be intrigued by shit, we all have things that interest us as individuals more than it maybe ought, leave them in peace". Peace out.

LivDiv

Skerret

Divs post has been ABDUCTED

Skerret

woooweeeeooooo

Skerret

weoooooohwuh

Dinostar77

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories