UFO or not

Hi Eh Team commander

I agree with what you write. We have to be more open to strangeness to see the cracks in the edifice of our current world view. They represent the ‘new’ science to come and should be welcomed.

It is too comfortable to place Fortean events into categories we already feel comfortable with. So UFOs can be mis-identified natural phenomena so some people (out of focus dust mites and pollen do look like glowing UFOs on digital cameras in bright light conditions) or we can see them as the nuts-and-bolts spaceship from a nearby planetary system. I personally don’t think they are either.

I DO suspect they are ‘visitors’ from elsewhere because the pilot-reported encounters show their actions are deliberate. Are they a sister race of evolved two-armed, two-legged, single headed beings? (EBEs as Mulder would say.) It is likely that would be their shape given random evolution? Probably not. So to me that suggests their actions and appearance are somehow tailored to our human nature to ‘fit in’ more, maybe? (They are not doing it well, if so.)

I have never seen a UFO while airborne but I have had experiences when ground-bound. The current UFO era has been going now for over 60 years without resolution, partly because science (and ‘intellegent people’) have been set up to consider it a laughing matter. This is the fault of the US Government which instituted the policy of debunking any UFO report sent to Blue Book, especially the significant ones. It also made the subject very secret so they could force military AND civil pilots to keep quiet about any airborne encounters (this is historic fact not my opinion). So the press and the scientific community took thie cue from this dismissive approach by the USAF. What they didn’t know was that the US military were feverishly investigating the many credible pilot-radar encounters of UFOs behind the scenes. Western governments followed suite.

We have been duped and misled about this important subject. As I said before, anyone who is open-minded should read pilot-encounters, especially from the early days after the war before the world wide cover-up began.

What must be the mind blowing trillion to 1 billion chance that this would happen in one go.Exactly we haven’t even solved the one chicken and egg situation so lets not even go there where only Einstein and his like can wander and none of those could solve it either.

In an infinite universe, all things are not only possible – they are inevitable.

Thought the thread was a goner, till I had a quick squint and it just about leapt at me.Some nicely made points V1 and now fully understand the meaning of your avatar when you lift off and have a few words.:)

You more than anyone can speak about this subject just alone in that you may have spent more time in the sky than anyone else in the thread and there for had meetings with like minded crews who may have observed some peculiar activity.

Truth is like a fashion though and when its not in vogue its somewhere out there and needs good people to put it together,a bit like the journalists who cracked the case of the M.Ps exspenses till it finally ran its course and it hit the telly and of course everyone then was aware and the favourite saying of “I knew it all along”was muttered like a frank Sinatra song .

None of us though can look through Einstein’s eyes and see things the way he did as he was the only one but his heart rendering plea about seeing things more clearly because he escaped the system that would have suffocated his thinking is just as endemic today in other cases.

We live in an age where things have to have a label be documented and most of all have some historical substance.I am now waiting for someone to give me this unedited version of the 100 per cent proof book where it has all been written down as conclusive evidence so as we may repeat the new planet earth just as easily as it was done in the first place.:eek::rolleyes::)

Can anyone explain with the chaos theory being the most sound theory we have so far in the genesis of it all in just how come we have so many perfect male and female pairings could be arrived at in such a great number all postulating from a massive explosion.What must be the mind blowing trillion to 1 billion chance that this would happen in one go.Exactly we haven’t even solved the one chicken and egg situation so lets not even go there where only Einstein and his like can wander and none of those could solve it either.

So just like the common cold you know you’ve got it and don’t know where it came from and you cant cure it but you know you believe in it although you cant see it and so it will be with people and there thoughts and ideas about UFOs.Give me proof there isn’t anything out there and I’ll give you the same proof there is.:)

Several members here are pleased to count him among their friends, actually.

I have had the odd run in with PMN, but I am pleased to count him as a jolly good friend. He has helped me out several times.;)
Jim.

Lincoln .7

Vee One –“UFOs are real and not dust-mites. What they are is still uncertain and we will never know until science unblinkers itself and looks honestly at the evidence.”

By definition an unidentified flying object is just that. Unidentified. That means we do not know what it is – perhaps they are genetically enlarged dust-mites – and it will be scientists of the entirely unblinkered variety who will help us to identify them. As to evidence; if there is any evidence it will be analysed in the normal way.

Scientists (not all) say that Global Warming is a fact but I don’t think it is proven. They also say Darwinian Evolution is a fact but it has yet to be scientifically proven and is really still a theory (a impressive one though).

In that case, you may find a little research into the curious case of the peppered moth (Biston betularia) rewarding.

You seem to under a misapprehension as to what a scientific theory actually is, and the way in which it differs from ‘an idea’.

Gravity, for example, is a theory.

But do you know of anyone who seriously doubts the existence of gravity?

A peer-reviewed theory represents the current state of scientific knowledge in any given field.

In the absence of evidence that can be verified and observations that can be replicated by others, there is no theory.

A theory is valid for exactly and precisely as long as it takes for someone to produce peer-reviewed and repeatable results to demonstrate that it is false or inaccurate – at which point the new findings themselves become a new theory.

Sorry to go on at such length, but it does irritate me when people use the word ‘theory’ to mean ‘something that has not been proven’.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

This UFO subject has been made a ‘belief’ type one by the disingenuous ‘debunkers’ who claim to be scientific but are in no way scientific in thier approach to on-the-edge-of-science subject. These debunkers (Phillip Klass for example) are true-believers themselves and like religious fanatics, they run campaigns to dirty the facts of the UFO phenomenon. So we end up with an emotive ‘belief’ sysem for those who eithe DO ‘believe’ or DON’T believe these objects are more than mis-identified natural or human objects.

Belief is what we have in most facts of science. I am a believer in scientific ideas because I have to take what scientists say as a matter of faith in the scientific peer-review system. But I don’t ‘know’ they are right.

Scientists (not all) say that Global Warming is a fact but I don’t think it is proven. They also say Darwinian Evolution is a fact but it has yet to be scientifically proven and is really still a theory (a impressive one though).

UFOs are real but it doesn’t follow that they are Alien Spaceships. That is an error of logic and a jump of faith. They surely act like intellegently controlled objects and I am sure that they are that. But does it follow that this means they are visiting spaceships? We are a long way from being able to prove that but it is a valid belief to hold.

Many debunkers say that because UFOs act in ways that seem to go against the laws of nature (right angled high-speed turns, popping in and out of view, etc) this ‘proves’ they are not real, but they are some sort of mental delusion. Well that is unscientific nonsense. What UFOs DO PROVE is that our understanding of natural laws are wrong or in need of updating. 😮

UFOs, like ESP and othe ‘paranormal’ phenomena, is ignored by science and is given NO funding to find scientific evidence or understanding. This is why there is so little scientific evidence out there. Science is blinkered and treats these subject as HERESY just like the Roman Catholic church treated people who held non-Christian views as heretics (and murdered them with the Inquisition).

Scientists don’t murder heretics but they do have an Inquisition: the self-appointed debunkers. These people try to publically murder the reputations of those (often scientists) who talk heresy.:diablo:

This is why these subjects still have so little scientific evidence to bring them out of the range of crank-beliefs. It is why the subject of UFOs is emotive to many (on both sides of the controversy).

UFOs are real and not dust-mites. What they are is still uncertain and we will never know until science unblinkers itself and looks honestly at the evidence. 😡

It is currently popular for those who don’t believe UFOs are anything other than mis-identifications and hoxes to smugly say this belief is a scientific and rational viewpoint. But it is nothing other than another belief based on the belief in the infalibility of science. If scientists are not interested then it cannot be a valid phenomena to investigate, right?

Einstein said that if he had gone through the ‘system’ of scientific education he would never have been able to see reality as clearly as he did when he postulated relativity theory. That says it all as far as a narrow viewpoint of science.

No problem, “Eh”. Thanks for the reply. 🙂

TJ

:D:D

Now that does sound an interesting situation sky high but sadly it happens almost every time I go to Purfleet dock to collect a truck from one of the many ships but without a greeting from them “oh so friendly dockers”.ha,ha:rolleyes::)

Or better still, “Eh”, the craft lands and a sensient being emerges to greet you!;):)

Thanks to sky high and teej both for replying and adding a bit more clarity to their points of view,which were both taken on board while smiling about the whole episode of the thread.:).I will err on the side of things more to do probably because I’ve got such a grotty sensor and its an unending conversation to question about something with so much doubt surrounding it.

Ultimate proof would be some craft with some sort of shape to it other than an orb and this would then depend on its clarity to give it some substance.lots of things have now been taken into account and before I raise some questions when and if there is a next time I,ll have a self made check-list to run through to come to some conclusion in the process of elimination to say yes its that or it isnt..:)cheers..JohnB Ps the little clips were interesting.

My main task now is to clean my sensor and can only thank Teej for pointing this out but still think and will repeat can anyone repeat the same resulting photo as I have done using a dirty sensor or catching some sun flare to repeat the image if its so easily understood how it was explained to me,it must thus be easy to repeat.:):eek::D:)

No problem. Thanks for the reply. All you need it something to fly between the camera and the subject that you are focused on in the sky. In your case you shot at 1/500th shutter speed which is more than ample to freeze the subject even though it might be out of focus. It could be anything, insect, bird, blossom, flying plant seed carried on the wind, etc. All it has to do is pass between your lens and the subject. If it reflects light then it can add to the confusion when captured in that moment of time.

It is more readily caught with video cameras. Individuals attempt to pass them off as ‘orbs’ ‘rods’ etc. Quite staggering how people can get carried away into the world of fantasy. For example this chap in Canada who films under a busy upper air route in Canada. He believes he is filming fake planes and their interaction with ‘ufo’s’. He simply can’t comprehend that his optics can be affected by atmospheric distortion, light reflection,heat haze, etc and is going to play a huge part in the resulting image. Consequently a distinctive airline livery or aircraft distorted by such factors is passed off as something out of the ordinary. Add to the fact that he interprets anything that passes through the cameras field of view as interacting with the aircraft even though it might only be a few hundred feet above him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNQz4Rvkkx4

His You Tube account.

http://www.youtube.com/user/FakePlane

Other examples where people haven’t got a clue or attempt to decieve people on their YT Channels.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i87qTGdOtQ

‘Rods’ and a Tupolev that he can’t identify or has any knowledge of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT0_woMSty0

TJ

That’s a fair criticism as I did not make the point clearly. I meant to say that if an object has been observed and it is clearly not a speck of dust on a photograph then that UFO exists as an object, albeit unidentified. I then tried to separate that fact, for which no belief is required, from the belief that such objects are alien.

Does that make my point clearer now?:)

Its good to know who this PMN is now, as before I had no idea who or what we were talking about when the initials were mentioned.Its nice to know he has some friends on the site and that his input had he been here would have been a great help as a screener in defining my sensor as being grotty having seen many an example on numerous occasions.

So there was nothing derogatory going on in making an enquiry as to what his relevance was in the thread.I was a bit confused”Sky High” in your reply where you state this matter we are talking about has nothing to do with” belief” but in the next couple of lines down you state it is your” believe” that no aliens have visited or will visit.having said this I am not trying to undermine what you are trying to say as I know religion and UFOs are totally separate issues but you have stated your own personal belief in saying what you said.:)

My main task now is to clean my sensor and can only thank Teej for pointing this out but still think and will repeat can anyone repeat the same resulting photo as I have done using a dirty sensor or catching some sun flare to repeat the image if its so easily understood how it was explained to me,it must thus be easy to repeat.:):eek::D:)

Reading through this thread there seems to be a basic misunderstanding of the terms used. You can neither believe or not believe in UFO’s. If an object has been observed but not identified it is by definition unidentified, but observed. It has nothing to do with belief. Whether or not people believe that UFOs are alien craft is quite another matter.

I have no doubt whatsover that there are thousands of other planets in the universe populated with “beings” of some description. I do not believe that any of these alien beings has visited or is likely to visit our planet in the forseeable future.

PMN, I believe, is a photographic screener on one of the aircraft image databases? In his time as a screener he must have seen all variations of photographic anomalies?

Your sensor is very dirty as you can seen from the version of your image that I have attached. All I did was add a background layer, equalise it and drop the brightness. The result is that all the dust spots, etc are highlighted. With that amount of dirt in your camera all sorts can be going on between shutter activations. Particles can be attracted to the low pass filter or be expelled. Dust on the low pass filter is normally a lot darker, but it doesn’t help presenting such an image when your camera has that level of dirt.

As already suggested it could also anything passing between your lens and the subject? All it takes is something to pass in front of your lens that is not at the focus point and subsequently reflects the light. The result is the same as the people who present the ‘orb’ images when they use flash photography at night or low light.

TJ

Anyway,s what,s this PMN got any relevance in connection with UFOs other than no one knows what he looks like and he might be flying round europe…..

Several members here are pleased to count him among their friends, actually.

Yonks back, I put a footer on asking where PMN is.

Anyway,s what,s this PMN got any relevance in connection with UFOs other than no one knows what he looks like and he might be flying round europe so does this bring him into the unidentified flying object category by his circumstance or have I gone off thread having switched off the mind reading gear I,m not getting many signals as to how that part of the jigsaw helps to build a picture we are on about.:)

I understood your point Kev but was just putting some spin on the same topic to add some light and shade that surrounds the topic of faith and its acceptance as you point out, having nothing to base it on if there is no evidence and anything there to pin it on and therefore it just boils down to a personal choice to have it or not on this basis.

Things may have manifested themselves anyway here on earth that we are totally oblivious too and the concept of a being like a Martian of sorts turns up on the horizon being typical of the stereotype we have endorsed by comic books and cinema on our minds will never happen….maybe:rolleyes::)