bad_hair_day wrote:This straw man talks about line ups and bullet trajectories, not video, radar and pilot testimonies.
SpaceGazelle wrote:Goddammit now my YouTube algo is full of mentals.
Kow wrote:There's plenty of expert evidence to difficult to explain phenomena. Ascribing it to aliens is a bit of a jump though
acemuzzy wrote:So the evidence it's geese is a V shape? I'm glad the burden of proof is symmetric.
Andy wrote:‘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.bad_hair_day wrote:This straw man talks about line ups and bullet trajectories, not video, radar and pilot testimonies.
Vela wrote: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.Andy wrote:‘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.bad_hair_day wrote:This straw man talks about line ups and bullet trajectories, not video, radar and pilot testimonies.
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.
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.
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.Andy wrote:What did we ‘discover’ as a result of that? Light refraction wasn’t an unknown prior to that.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.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!