Topic: Ewe Effing Ohhhs!

[Andy @ Allerton!]

I think she’s saying: “I am off my fucking trolley...” she’s saying that those pictures of birds, that look like birds... and are birds... aren’t birds but are extra-terrestrials who are disguising their spaceships as birds...

These are the people you are aligning yourself with Andy - fucking  space cadets...

Not aligning with anyone to be fair mate.

But I still don't understand why top officials and people in positions of power are willing to jepordise their lives and careers by coming forward with this stuff.

[Riquende]

Not aligning with anyone to be fair mate.

But I still don't understand why top officials and people in positions of power are willing to jepordise their lives and careers by coming forward with this stuff.

Do you have an example of a top official who did this and what they came forward with?

[Djozer]

Where's Andy Hunter when you need him? I'd love to know what Chris Jericho would make of all this boundless scepticism.

[S]

As a general rule I don't believe in the supernatural or unexplained. I like to think of myself as the calm, rational type. That changed two summers ago when I was taking my evening walk. I live in rural Cornwall and on certain footpaths you can walk for miles without seeing another human. All of a sudden when I was out that night I heard this faint humming sound coming from behind me. The hairs raised on the back of my neck, I spun round and there it was, hovering just above me. A circular, orb type aircraft. The likes of which I've never seen before. It just sat there for a few seconds and then just as quickly as it arrived, it flew away. When I got home I scribbled down some notes about the encounter, sweat pouring off my face. Here's what I remember.

1. It had a glowing beam of red light trailing behind it.

2. There was a strange inscription on one side, it looked like it said "SHARP VIEWCAM"

3. Just before it accelerated away, I caught sight of two people in the cockpit. They both turned and stared at me for a few seconds, and then sped off into the night. One was an old man, late seventies I'd say. He was chewing rapidly and had this strange purple coloured nose. The other was a man with greying hair. He was wearing all black athletic gear and had a whistle in his mouth.

[El Lobo]

Sounds like one of the infamous hard shoulder shitting extra terrestrials

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Do you have an example of a top official who did this and what they came forward with?

There is a film on at the moment on Netflix called 'Unacknowledged' - there seemed to be a fair few US High-ups throughout, including the ones at the start.

Give it watch and see what you think.

I'm not convinced myself, but I can't see why these people are doing what they are doing unless they are either a) Convinced of it or b) Making a shit load of money off it.


I suspect b) might very well be the reason.

The US is very different than the UK though, I'd imagine that any politician in the UK that talked about UFOs would be laughed out of office and ridiculed (Like Icke - I've read his books out of curisosity and they are pretty 'out there' and not in a good way) - but the US seems to be different. Wacky ideas over there seem almost accepted.


Give it a watch anyway if you're bored. I found it quite interesting, but didn't see any direct proof throughout. It's all personal experience, hearsay, rumour and speculation which are hard to prove at the best of times. Though there is quite a lot of documentation. But again you have to question where that documentation came from, who created it and for what reason before you can accept it.

[[new username under construction]]

There is a film on at the moment on Netflix called 'Unacknowledged' - there seemed to be a fair few US High-ups throughout, including the ones at the start.

Give it watch and see what you think.

I'm not convinced myself, but I can't see why these people are doing what they are doing unless they are either a) Convinced of it or b) Making a shit load of money off it.


I suspect b) might very well be the reason.

The US is very different than the UK though, I'd imagine that any politician in the UK that talked about UFOs would be laughed out of office and ridiculed (Like Icke - I've read his books out of curisosity and they are pretty 'out there' and not in a good way) - but the US seems to be different. Wacky ideas over there seem almost accepted.


Give it a watch anyway if you're bored. I found it quite interesting, but didn't see any direct proof throughout. It's all personal experience, hearsay, rumour and speculation which are hard to prove at the best of times. Though there is quite a lot of documentation. But again you have to question where that documentation came from, who created it and for what reason before you can accept it.

Isn't there a lot of hoo haa about the Wilson memo? at the moment? Was supposed to be huge in ufo circles and maybe now not true at all?

[Alan_X]

There is a film on at the moment on Netflix called 'Unacknowledged' - there seemed to be a fair few US High-ups throughout, including the ones at the start.

Give it watch and see what you think.

I'm not convinced myself, but I can't see why these people are doing what they are doing unless they are either a) Convinced of it or b) Making a shit load of money off it.


I suspect b) might very well be the reason.

The US is very different than the UK though, I'd imagine that any politician in the UK that talked about UFOs would be laughed out of office and ridiculed (Like Icke - I've read his books out of curisosity and they are pretty 'out there' and not in a good way) - but the US seems to be different. Wacky ideas over there seem almost accepted.


Give it a watch anyway if you're bored. I found it quite interesting, but didn't see any direct proof throughout. It's all personal experience, hearsay, rumour and speculation which are hard to prove at the best of times. Though there is quite a lot of documentation. But again you have to question where that documentation came from, who created it and for what reason before you can accept it.

Someone's position and qualifications are irrelevant if they don't relate to the subject in question. Paul Hellyer is a well-respected politician at a high level who happens to believe in UFOs. He has no expertise that makes that belief any more credible.

This is the website of Dr Steven Greer who hosted the Disclosure Project's Press Conference that opens the 'documentary'.

Steven Greer is another classic example of a 'Doctor' who has qualification in medicine that is irrelevant to his no doubt lucrative career as a ufologist.

This is his website:

https://siriusdisclosure.com/evidence/

I've trawled through some of it and it's the usual guff. The first 'evidence' is the Atacam skeleton which is amazing but is unquestionably human.

In the documents I think this one from a memo dated Sep 24 1952 and titled 'Flying Saucers'.

"The public concern with the phenomena, which is reflected both in the United States press and in the pressure of inquiry upon the Air Force, indicates that a fair proportion of our population is mentally conditioned to the acceptance of the incredible. In this fact lies the potential for the touching-off of mass hysteria and panic."

http://siriusdisclosure.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chadwell-2.pdf

So much of the 'evidence' for flying saucers still goes back to Roswell and cold-war hysteria. The Roswell witnesses he includes are talking 1950s nonsense about saucer shaped craft and little green bug-eyed men. It's from a time when we knew little about our neighbouring planets let alone the wider universe. There was still an assumption that Marsor Venus might be inhabitated by anthropomorphic intelligent life. If your witness is giving second hand testimony about absolute bollocks then it makes no odds what his job or his qualifications are.

Just as a reminder - this is the Roswell memorandum dated July 8 1947, included among the 'best available evidence'.

http://siriusdisclosure.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/roswell.pdf

"...the disc is hexagonal in shape and was suspended from a balloon by a cable , which balloon was approximately twenty feet in diameter...  ...the object found resembles a high altitude weather balloon with a radar reflector..."

This is from the 1994 investigation of Roswell:

"Research revealed that the "Roswell Incident" was not even considered a UFO event until the 1978-1980 time frame. Prior to that, the incident was dismissed because the AAF originally identified the debris recovered as being that of a weather balloon. Subsequently, various authors wrote a number of books claiming that, not only was debris from an alien spacecraft recovered, but also the bodies of the craft's alien occupants. These claims continue to evolve today and the Air Force is now routinely accused of engaging in a "cover-up" of this supposed event."

It's a tale that grew in the telling and one that grew in response to the money to be made selling books and videos to the credulous. 

"Hey, we discovered a non-standard weather balloon..." = $0.00

"Hey, we discovered a UFO and a bunch of little green men and the story we told about the weather balloon was a government cover-up..." ker-ching, ker-ching, ker-ching...

It continues:

"THE "ROSWELL INCIDENT"--WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY REPORTED IN 1947 The modern preoccupation with what ultimately came to be called Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) actually_began in June, 1947. Although some pro-UFO researchers argue that sightings of UFOs go back to Biblical times, most researchers wil~ not dispute that anything in UFO history can compare with the phenomenon that began in 1947. What was later characterized as "the UFO wave of 1947" began with 16 alleged sightings that occurred between May 17 and July 12, 1947, (although some researchers claim there were as many as 800 sightings during that period). Interestingly, the "Roswell Incident" was not considered one of these 1947 events until the 1978-1980 time frame. There is no dispute, however, that something happened near Roswell in July, 1947, since it was reported in a number of contemporary newspaper articles; the most famous of which were the July 8 and July 9 editions of the Roswell Daily Record.

The July 8 edition reported "RAAF Captures Flying Saucer On Ranch In Roswell Region," while the next day's edition reported, "Ramey Empties Roswell saucer" and "Harassed Rancher Who Located 'Saucer' Sorry He Told About It."

The first story reported that the Intelligence Officer of the 509th Bomb Group, stationed at Roswell AAF, Major Jesse A. Marcel, had recovered a "flying disc" from the range lands of an unidentified rancher in the vicinity of Roswell and that the disc had been "flown to higher headquarters." That same story also reported that a Roswell couple claimed to have seen a large unidentified object fly by their home on July 2, 1947.

The July 9 edition of the paper noted that Brigadier General Roger Ramey, Commander of the Eighth Air Force at Forth Worth, Texas, stated that upon examination the debris recovered by Marcel was determined to be a weather balloon. The wreckage was described as a "..bundle of tinfoil, broken wood beams, and rubber remnants of a balloon....... The additional story of the "harassed rancher" identified him as W.W. Brazel of Lincoln County, New Mexico. He claimed that he and his son, Vernon, found the material on June 14, 1947, when they "came upon a large area of bright wreckage made up of rubber strips, tinfoil, a rather tough paper, and sticks."

He picked up some of the debris on July 4 and "...the next day he first heard about the flying discs and wondered if what he had found might have been the remnants of one of these..." Brazel subsequently went to Roswell on July 7 and contacted the Sheriff, who apparently notified Major Marcel. Major Marcel and "a man in plain clothes" then accompanied Brazel home to pick up the rest of the pieces. The article further related that Brazel thought that the material:

"...might have been as large as a table top. The balloon which held it up, if that is how it worked, must have been about 12 feet long, he felt, measuring the distance by the size of the room in which he sat. The rubber was smoky gray in color and scattered over an area about 200 yards in diameter. When the debris was gathered up the tinfoil, paper, tape, and sticks made a bundle about three feet long and 7 or 8 inches thick, while the rubber made a bundle about 18 or 20 inches long and about 8 inches thick. In all, he estimated, the entire lot would have weighed maybe five pounds. There was no sign of any metal in the area which night have been used for an engine and no sign of any propellers of any kind. Although at least one paper fin had been glued onto some of the tinfoil. There were no words to be found anywhere on the instrument although there were letters on some of the parts. Considerable scotch tape and some tape with flowers printed upon it had been used in the construction. No string or wire were to be found but there were some eyelets in the paper to indicate that some sort of attachment may have been used. Brazel said that he had previously found two weather balloons on the ranch, but that what he found this time did not in any way resemble either of these..."

https://www.nsa.gov/Portals/70/documents/news-features/declassified-documents/ufo/report_af_roswell.pdf

For thirty years the Roswell Incident was what the eye-witnesses described - bits of tinfoil, paper and string attached to a balloon. It was only in the 1970s that it became a crashed alien spacecraft and some of the witnesses changed their stories to cash in.

The Ufologists continue to cling onto Roswell, Atacama Aliens and the rest of that idiocy. Everything else is 'lights in the sky'.

[Riquende]

There is a film on at the moment on Netflix called 'Unacknowledged' - there seemed to be a fair few US High-ups throughout, including the ones at the start.

Give it watch and see what you think.

a) I don't have Netflix

b) I'm not doing your legwork for you. Find an example, and explain what you find compelling about what they've said, what their background is and how it might affect their career

It's easy to give flaky, nebulous statements like "I'm not convinced but", or "this raises questions", but the reason so many people laugh at adherents of these crackpot ideas is that they never move beyond that to anything vaguely rational or even scientific, despite starting their thread with the term in the first few words.

Of course many of the people who do espouse these theories happen to make a decent wedge from the books and speaking events their target saps hand over money for.

[S]

a) I don't have Netflix

b) I'm not doing your legwork for you. Find an example, and explain what you find compelling about what they've said, what their background is and how it might affect their career

It's easy to give flaky, nebulous statements like "I'm not convinced but", or "this raises questions", but the reason so many people laugh at adherents of these crackpot ideas is that they never move beyond that to anything vaguely rational or even scientific, despite starting their thread with the term in the first few words.

Of course many of the people who do espouse these theories happen to make a decent wedge from the books and speaking events their target saps hand over money for.

Got it in one.

[Max_powers]

I have seen a UFO and can totally see why its a persistent phenomenon and a subject of many conspiracy theories.

It was a light that was hovering overhead when I was driving. It appeared to be not moving. I watched it for a couple of minutes maybe and it hovered there. It appeared just like in movies and many amateur videos I have seen.

Kept my eye on it for a bit longer and it just turned out to be passenger jet plane flying in at an approach angle that made it look stationary.

I still think most of these can be explained rationally. I would guess a good 90%+ of sightings are just like mine. Some optical illusion + a plane.

With more flights and more cameras than ever before sure, you are gonna get tonnes of UFO sightings. There maybe be some less understood natural phenomena as well that contribute to it.

It's curious that these sightings only became more common around the time commercial aviation was taking off. How common was this phenomenon in 19th century?  There may have been some odd calls but I don't think it had the same frequency and was this common. If anything such incidences would have been even more shocking and news worthy to people back then.

It would be a weird coincidence that Aliens just dropped by once we developed and introduced planes. 

[CraigDS]

Never has a song fitted you so well Andy mate.

Crazy - Gnarls Barkley?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

I have seen a UFO and can totally see why its a persistent phenomenon and a subject of many conspiracy theories.

It was a light that was hovering overhead when I was driving. It appeared to be not moving. I watched it for a couple of minutes maybe and it hovered there. It appeared just like in movies and many amateur videos I have seen.

Kept my eye on it for a bit longer and it just turned out to be passenger jet plane flying in at an approach angle that made it look stationary.

I still think most of these can be explained rationally. I would guess a good 90%+ of sightings are just like mine. Some optical illusion + a plane.

With more flights and more cameras than ever before sure, you are gonna get tonnes of UFO sightings. There maybe be some less understood natural phenomena as well that contribute to it.

It's curious that these sightings only became more common around the time commercial aviation was taking off. How common was this phenomenon in 19th century?  There may have been some odd calls but I don't think it had the same frequency and was this common. If anything such incidences would have been even more shocking and news worthy to people back then.

It would be a weird coincidence that Aliens just dropped by once we developed and introduced planes. 

According to this, the first recorded one was 1440 BC

Who the fuck was flying a plane then?!



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_reported_UFO_sightings

[Max_powers]

According to this, the first recorded one was 1440 BC

Who the fuck was flying a plane then?!



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_reported_UFO_sightings

I am not saying that it is the only possible explanation but it explains away vast majority of the cases IMO. Even in your list you can see a massive boom in numbers post 1940's.

Could be many other things like meteors's, translation errors in reports or cultural differences, some lightning type phenomenon, mass hysteria or creative story telling/myth making.

Around 18th and 19th century is also when the idea of extraterrestrial creatures was starting to enter popular culture with novels like War of the Worlds.

Its interesting to see how the description of these phenomenon varies so much in those accounts. Mostly in-line with popular culture. Ie. a lot more flying saucer type viewings around the 50's. Mass hysteria is a very very powerful force, it can fool even some very smart people into thinking something false.

Do you know the story of Monkey Man Andy?

[Alan_X]

According to this, the first recorded one was 1440 BC

Who the fuck was flying a plane then?!



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_reported_UFO_sightings

Cherry-picking Andy. If you trawl through ancient documents you can find all sorts of things. I can find references to giants, witches and dragons in old documents. Would that convince you they were true?

At best they are unreliable witnesses, at worst, complete fantasy.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

I am not saying that it is the only possible explanation but it explains away vast majority of the cases IMO. Even in your list you can see a massive boom in numbers post 1940's.

Could be many other things like meteors's, translation errors in reports or cultural differences, some lightning type phenomenon, mass hysteria or creative story telling/myth making.

Around 18th and 19th century is also when the idea of extraterrestrial creatures was starting to enter popular culture with novels like War of the Worlds.

Its interesting to see how the description of these phenomenon varies so much in those accounts. Mostly in-line with popular culture. Ie. a lot more flying saucer type viewings around the 50's. Mass hysteria is a very very powerful force, it can fool even some very smart people into thinking something false.

Do you know the story of Monkey Man Andy?

Not come across that no.

Yeah it's more than a bit fishy that someone comes up with an idea and suddenly everyone starts seeing it all over the shop.

But that's not to say that some aren't true - or more likely some are projected as true.

Maybe we don't know everything that exists in time and space. We think we 'pretty much know everything' - but most of the matter and energy in the universe is a complete mystery to us.

I'd say that 2,000 years down the line our science will be seen as a bit laughable (Assuming we're still around)

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Cherry-picking Andy. If you trawl through ancient documents you can find all sorts of things. I can find references to giants, witches and dragons in old documents. Would that convince you they were true?

At best they are unreliable witnesses, at worst, complete fantasy.

I'm not convinced that anything is true, however, I think that Science should keep an open mind.

I mentioned Dark Matter and Dark Energy before perhaps alternative realities, branes, parallell worlds and other stuff around reality exist that we currently don't understand.

It seems a bit far-fetched that we've only really been doing 'sciency stuff' for maybe 500 years (in the modern sense) and that we've found everything there is to know in that time.

As I said, what will science of today look like in 2,000 years or 200,000 or 200 million years?

You'd assume that with the current exponential growth of knowledge that there will be some mind-bending discoveries to come.

[CraigDS]

I'm not convinced that anything is true, however, I think that Science should keep an open mind.

I mentioned Dark Matter and Dark Energy before perhaps alternative realities, branes, parallell worlds and other stuff around reality exist that we currently don't understand.

It seems a bit far-fetched that we've only really been doing 'sciency stuff' for maybe 500 years (in the modern sense) and that we've found everything there is to know in that time.

As I said, what will science of today look like in 2,000 years or 200,000 or 200 million years?

You'd assume that with the current exponential growth of knowledge that there will be some mind-bending discoveries to come.

Science always has an open mind if evidence is provided to back up a theory.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Science always has an open mind if evidence is provided to back up a theory.

How does that work with Theoretical physics?

For instance, how does that work at the singularity at the centre of a black hole? Doesn't all space/time/physics break down there?

How about theories like Superstring, SuperSymmetry, Branes, Big Bang, Big Crunch and so on.


Genuinally asking. A lot of the books I read seem to postulate ideas and then search for the science later when at the cutting edge.

Even when we had The Theory of Relativity there were major problems where it broke down and, of course, we still the Unified Model and the requirement for 10 or 11 or 15 (or more) dimensions depending on who you speak to for everything to 'fit'

[CraigDS]

How does that work with Theoretical physics?

For instance, how does that work at the singularity at the centre of a black hole? Doesn't all space/time/physics break down there?

How about theories like Superstring, SuperSymmetry, Branes, Big Bang, Big Crunch and so on.


Genuinally asking. A lot of the books I read seem to postulate ideas and then search for the science later when at the cutting edge.

Even when we had The Theory of Relativity there were major problems where it broke down and, of course, we still the Unified Model and the requirement for 10 or 11 or 15 (or more) dimensions depending on who you speak to for everything to 'fit'

I'm not a scientist, but from my understanding those things are normally based on a theory which is backed up by some science, and then further research produces evidence which proves or disproves them.

Hence why scientific papers are peer reviewed to assess the evidence.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

I'm not a scientist, but from my understanding those things are normally based on a theory which is backed up by some science, and then further research produces evidence which proves or disproves them.

Hence why scientific papers are peer reviewed to assess the evidence.

Yeah so that's my understanding on some areas of science and technology.

People have ideas that are 'way out there' compared to all current thinking which means that the actual science or proof is behind the curve.

I'd argue that the greatest advances of humankind have come from 'blue sky thinking' - if you haven't got the idea then you can never have the science (Unless it randomly pops up indirectly - which does sometimes seem to happen)

Look at the Higgs Boson and then finding it!! Amazing step forward.

[CraigDS]

Yeah so that's my understanding on some areas of science and technology.

People have ideas that are 'way out there' compared to all current thinking which means that the actual science or proof is behind the curve.

I'd argue that the greatest advances of humankind have come from 'blue sky thinking' - if you haven't got the idea then you can never have the science (Unless it randomly pops up indirectly - which does sometimes seem to happen)

Look at the Higgs Boson and then finding it!! Amazing step forward.

These don't tend to be ideas plucked from nowhere, or "blue sky thinking" though mate. They are theories based on maths (a lot of the time) to problems - which are then tested to provide (or not) evidence which proves or disprove the theory.

The Higgs Boson originally came about as such a theory could not be backed up by real world evidence so something else must have been correct - hence a new theory was proposed and then real world evidence was looked for.

[Alan_X]

Yeah so that's my understanding on some areas of science and technology.

People have ideas that are 'way out there' compared to all current thinking which means that the actual science or proof is behind the curve.

I'd argue that the greatest advances of humankind have come from 'blue sky thinking' - if you haven't got the idea then you can never have the science (Unless it randomly pops up indirectly - which does sometimes seem to happen)

Look at the Higgs Boson and then finding it!! Amazing step forward.

That's not the way science works and in even if it was then you are demonstrating one of the most basic logical fallacies there is.

"A dog has hair therefore things with hair are dogs..."

Because really creative and intelligent people have seen solutions and inventions that seem far-fetched to the layman doesn't mean that things which are far-fetched are true. 

And the Higgs-Boson wasn't blue-sky thinking. It was a concept that was developed on the back of decades of diligent science and previous discoveries. To quote Isaac Newton in 1675: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."

One other difference between 'ufology' and real science is that science is based on experimentation and experiments have to be falsifiable. When science finds the evidence doesn't fit the theory the theory has to change.

Ufology is essentially a belief system where the evidence is accepted or rejected depending on whether it fits.  Often evidence that is contradictory will be assimilated - if one 'report' describes them as saucer shaped and anorther as cigar shaped that is assimilated as two different types.

And of course anything that might disprove the theory is part of 'the cover up' and therefore indisputable proof that aliens spacecraft really exist.

Scientists stand on the shoulders of giants. Ufologists stand on the shoulders of idiots.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

That's not the way science works and in even if it was then you are demonstrating one of the most basic logical fallacies there is.

"A dog has hair therefore things with hair are dogs..."

Because really creative and intelligent people have seen solutions and inventions that seem far-fetched to the layman doesn't mean that things which are far-fetched are true. 

And the Higgs-Boson wasn't blue-sky thinking. It was a concept that was developed on the back of decades of diligent science and previous discoveries. To quote Isaac Newton in 1675: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."

One other difference between 'ufology' and real science is that science is based on experimentation and experiments have to be falsifiable. When science finds the evidence doesn't fit the theory the theory has to change.

Ufology is essentially a belief system where the evidence is accepted or rejected depending on whether it fits.  Often evidence that is contradictory will be assimilated - if one 'report' describes them as saucer shaped and anorther as cigar shaped that is assimilated as two different types.

And of course anything that might disprove the theory is part of 'the cover up' and therefore indisputable proof that aliens spacecraft really exist.

Scientists stand on the shoulders of giants. Ufologists stand on the shoulders of idiots.

What if a ufologist is also a scientist?


I mean, I've never seen a Scientist look anywhere near as scientisty as this guy

[Riquende]

What if a ufologist is also a scientist?

Then they design a experiment to test their falsifiable hypothesis.

If they can't or won't do that then they're not investigating using the scientific method and are no better than some bloke on a football forum spouting off.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Then they design a experiment to test their falsifiable hypothesis.

If they can't or won't do that then they're not investigating using the scientific method and are no better than some bloke on a football forum spouting off.

Blokes (or women) spouting off on football forums are the bedrock of deep scientific study and progress I'll have you know fella-me-lad.

[El Lobo]

Andy there’s a pretty believable and clear photo of a ufo doing the rounds today.

I won’t post it, because I’m not sure ladbible is an accepted source but...the truth is out there

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Andy there’s a pretty believable and clear photo of a ufo doing the rounds today.

I won’t post it, because I’m not sure ladbible is an accepted source but...the truth is out there

Firstly; I have to point out again that I'm sceptical of UFOs - not because I don't believe that 'Life is Out There' - assuming that there is nothing magical or different about our planet on the spiral arm on a fairly medium-sized spiral arm galaxy among an almost unlimited number of Galaxies each containing billions or trillions or more stars - then Life will exist now, will have existed or will exist one day. The problem with believing that UFOs are visiting us boil down to the following;

1. Distance. Assuming another star system is visiting, the nearest is Proxima Centuri which is about 4 light years away. Assuming that a civillisation hasn't discovered 'Warp Drive' - then let's be charitable and say they've managed to create a device that can travel at high speed, we still have around 1,000 years for Nuclear and maybe 80,000 years for other forms of propulsion.  You also have the problem of distance in regard to detecting their signals (See Time, below)
2. Lack of signals (See Time, below)
3. Lack of evidence (See Time, below)
4. Time. This is the biggest one for me. Life on this planet has evolved in lockstep with the Sun. The sun provides and has provided the energy for life to grow and flourish and this is a particular timing issue as you have several factors. The time for the material to arrive. The time for the accretion disk to form into bodies. The time for the flotsam to finish smashing everything up all the time. The time for the chemical soup to be formed. The time for the first form of life to emerge. The time for the life to evolved. The time for evolved life to gain scientific knowledge to the extent that it can work towards going to the stars. The time for that race not to fuck their planet up or blow themselves up. All these factor mean that there a very random chance of anyone meeting anyone (Assuming they'd want to spend thousands of years travelling). You'd assume that places closest to the big bang had the best chance of having a galaxy and then suns and then planets, so these civillisations (if any) could have been born and died millions of years ago. Similarly once you go past our position in space/time then those galaxies are less likely to be here now, but may be around in a million years or so - and again with the distance that any civillisation could be broadcasting, if they are only around for a few hundred years then we could easily miss the signals (That you have to be spawny to detect anyway) as the time difference along with the distance means that it's a real long-shot



So. Now that's out of the way, UFOs seem unlikely - but it's possible that Space/Time isn't what we think. It's possible that some theoretical physics is right about Branes/Alternate realities/Alternate dimensions and all the other stuff which may mitigate the chances.. But let's somehow assume that they are real and they are here.


This is the problem they have with photos and videos

I've seen some that are as blurry as fuck and could be anything - easily discounted - could be anything

And I've seen some that are very convincing - easily discounted - we've all seen decades of films that have starships that look absolutely real


Basically. Any photo/video evidence that you ever came up with in any circumstance - even if you filmed one perfectly landing outside your house, filmed the aliens, invited them to tea and took seflies - the it would be discounted because everyone would believe it was fake.


You'd need actual physical proof - something that couldn't exist on Earth.


I think that should they be real, then given the problems and timescale issues of travelling from any other star system (Along with the fact that we've seen nothing to suggest thousands of civillisations out there) - IF they existed then they would more likely to be from within the solar system somewhere. This again looks unlikely - for a variety of reasons - but not impossible.

Now. Some people reckon they have had artifacts and that 'Men in Black' or the 'Government' have stolen them. Again - you cannot prove hearsay or things people say.


So unless the UFO believers get something solid, testable and provable then it'll always be a wacko myth..

[Something Worse]

Andy there’s a pretty believable and clear photo of a ufo doing the rounds today.

I won’t post it, because I’m not sure ladbible is an accepted source but...the truth is out there

That's totally a model built on a frisbee and thrown into the air.

[has gone odd]

Nick Pope may know stuff, he worked for the UK government on UFOs, probably a cash in expert these days but will know some stuff. Space cadets like David Icke, a wild conspiracy theorist who latches onto anything for money, the world is full of them. You either want to believe, as the world is a dull and depressing hole at times and something out there would be great, or you don't. Those who furiously dismiss UFOs do so as they upset their centre of the universe feeling, plus scientists don't all agree, though all science does is throw hurdles under the feet saying they will believe when we have physical evidence. Even if evidence came to light it would be swept under a massive black carpet underground. I do believe, if a government came out and said aliens exits, the human race would panic and be cretins, as proved many times before. Hawking was certain that aliens exist, who am I to argue. How they get here is another question.

However, when it comes to mysteries, one of the best is really the pyramids. Not the trick of the light Cydonia ones on Mars but our very own geometric wonders. Why, because they are very fuckin hard to build, even using today's technology. Was a show on TV a few years back and they tried to build a really small one using modern tools, they had a very hard time doing so. Throw in the mysterious hieroglyphs, some looking like modern tech such as helicopters and planes, they are thousands of years old. Ancient civilisation founded by an alien race? Perhaps .. its a good mystery.

[El Lobo]

Yes!!

[The Gulleysucker]

...However, when it comes to mysteries, one of the best is really the pyramids. Not the trick of the light Cydonia ones on Mars but our very own geometric wonders. Why, because they are very fuckin hard to build, even using today's technology. Was a show on TV a few years back and they tried to build a really small one using modern tools, they had a very hard time doing so. Throw in the mysterious hieroglyphs, some looking like modern tech such as helicopters and planes, they are thousands of years old. Ancient civilisation founded by an alien race? Perhaps .. its a good mystery.

Wilhelm scream...

[Snail]

I'm just dipping in to this thread to say the first page discussion reads like some of the scattiest kitchens I've ever had the misfortune to find myself in at 4am on a Saturday morning, and for that reason I love it.

[CraigDS]

I'm just dipping in to this thread to say the first page discussion reads like some of the scattiest kitchens I've ever had the misfortune to find myself in at 4am on a Saturday morning, and for that reason I love it.

I hope I’m the designated driver having to put up with the extremely drunk conversations in that scenario 

[Snail]

I hope I’m the designated driver having to put up with the extremely drunk conversations in that scenario 

Aye

[El Lobo]

It’s exactly the three you’d expect to be involved as well. Two absolute nut jobs and Andy.

[Crosby Nick]

It’s exactly the three you’d expect to be involved as well. Two absolute nut jobs and Andy.

Bit harsh on Alan.

[El Lobo]

Bit harsh on Alan.

I was very careful to check that there was no modding on that first page 

[CraigDS]

 

[Riquende]

all science does is throw hurdles under the feet saying they will believe when we have physical evidence..

a) That's a terrible characterisation of science, a hypothesis can be put forward with no chance of 'physical' evidence, as long as experiments can be designed that could falsify it. The more of these experiments that fail to disprove the hypothesis, the more likely the scientific community will come to accept it.

b) What should the theshold for believing in something be, if not evidence?