Semantics. An observation/image/etc of something unidentified is ... something unidentified. Including artefacts of the observation medium/process. For those observations to evidence something new/significant they need to meet criteria like @solderdude described. I'm sure you know that's what he meant.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
All About UFO's
- Thread starter Ron Texas
- Start date
Semantics. An observation/image/etc of something unidentified is ... something unidentified. Including artefacts of the observation medium/process. For those observations to evidence something new/significant they need to meet criteria like @solderdude described. I'm sure you know that's what he meant.
No it isn't about semantics. Whilst it's true that claiming UAPs are alien craft is totally unsupported, there is no question that there is evidence for UAPs.
Is that 'significant'? In my view, yes. There is a mystery to be solved.
Solderdude's conflation of this with someone claiming their £2K power cable makes the sound 'more relaxed' or whatever, does not work since there is no evidence at all to support that claim and there is no mystery to be solved - we know for a fact that it is just cognitive bias.
The overheated semantics of "UAP" aside, they are just observations that don't rise to the level of significance, because they don't signify anything (really).
The mystery is the as yet undiscovered science that explains why power cables sound different/ how little green men can travel faster than light.
Same same
No, the mystery is the identification of the currently unidentified. That is highly unlikely to be little green men travelling FTL. Nevertheless, we still currently have a mystery.
There is no mystery to a power cable.
Not sure why that distinction is hard to grasp.
Posted earlier (by @solderdude):
Unless I'm misunderstanding, you (and some others here) appear to think these observations mean there's a mystery in the physical (and/or metaphysical) world. It's fairly clear that it's really a cultural phenomenon.
kemmler3D
Master Contributor
I've never known her to be other than a click bait slinging crank, frankly.
tell that to people who believe they make a difference and their response is pretty much identical to that from believers in little green men
It is a cultural phenomenon you won't get any arguments there from me.
My comments above were strictly limited to that specific footage from the USN. Not to what Dave and Maisie say they witnessed hovering above their house in 1985, or any other documented 'encounter.'
That is true.
Dr. Sean M. Kirkpatrick's statement, the former Director of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). Furthermore, Dr. Jon Kosloski, the new Director of the AARO, stated that the famous UAP could be a bird species (in the video upthread). I used to think the bird hypothesis was untenable, but little did I know
Last edited:
solderdude
Grand Contributor
A UFO/UAP/USP needs to be verified/identified to be of extraterrestrial origin to be real and shocking (as in 'we are not alone), otherwise it could just be anything 'they' claim it to be.
Just as 'subjective found sound signatures' need to be verified to be real otherwise it could just be anything 'they' claim it to be.
I agree that it would be interesting to know what some of the really weird 'things' are. It would also be interesting to know what kind of real knowledge there is. It would also be interesting to know where funds allocated for UFO research goes to. It would also be interesting to know what the 'knowledge' is in other countries with lots of 'sightings'.
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of all sightings is misinterpreted by the one doing the sighting. It would also be interesting to know what the percentage of 'believers of alien presence' is in the population per country and why that is so high in certain countries.
Alas, I don't think one can ever convince 'believers' that what they believe in is not a reality (both in subjective audio observations as UFO observations).
Last edited:
Out of 12618 alleged sightings Blue Book categorized 701 as remaining unexplained following investigation. So about 5.5 percent.
That ended in 1969 so I'd suggest with the explosion in interest in the subject that came with the internet, the percentage of sightings since then which could not be explained would be much lower.
kemmler3D
Master Contributor
I don't need scientific evidence if a friend tells me there's no parking available near the restaurant. I need scientific evidence to believe anything about the most earth-shattering discovery in human history.
terryforsythe
Major Contributor
It certainly is evidence, but what many of the people participating in this thread think of as evidence is indisputable physical evidence that can be scientifically analyzed. The issue with most videos, etc. is that they are not clear enough to make definitive conclusions and the equipment is not available for analysis by the scientific community (at least that we know of) to rule out measurment problems and/or problems with the equipment.
Another issue I have seen is misunderstanding of the rules of evidence. I have seen some people call all witness testimony hearsay, including first hand witness testimony (e.g., David Fravor's testimony). But, this thread mostly is entertainment and not a legal proceeding, so it doesn't really matter beyond providing subject matter for debate.
The anecdotal evidence for the existance of UAPs is becoming overwhelming at this point. That, combined with the U.S. government's historical documentation on the issue and the way they respond to certain FOIA document requests pertaining to the subject make a compelling case for the UAP subject. But, as of yet, I have not seen indisputable physical evidence, and it is not out of the realm of possibility that much of the anecdotal information has been influenced by misinformation campaigns put out to coverup sensitive weapons development projects. Also, I beleive that much of the anecdotal information is based in misperceptions, misunderstanding, exaggeration and outright lies.
For those reasons I keep an open mind, but as time goes on without indisputable scientific evidence, I find myself moving further away from the NHI hypothesis. Nonetheless, clearly, there are phenomena that we do not understand that are, in my opinion, worthy of scientific investigation.
Last edited:
But there's nothing intrinsically special about something being an 'unidentified aerial phenomenon'. It's simply not always possible to conclusively identify/explain something sighted/recorded, or reported to have been sighted. So the category cannot help but exist. It's pretentious to freight it with more meaning than that...but if nothing else this field is about puffing up knowledge gaps into wild speculation and conspiracy-mongering. God forbid the actual explanation should turn out to be...mundane: a misidentified natural or man-made phenomenon; an unreliable narrator; a mistake. As Occam's razor would predict.
Extraordinary claim , extraordinary evidence blah blah cliche. It's a good rule, though.
terryforsythe
Major Contributor
Also, there are potentially viable allegations that the summary and conclusion for the study were predetermined before the study even took place. That makes sense since the summary does not even address some of the more compelling reports included in the study.
kemmler3D
Master Contributor
Not too put too fine a point on it, but many Catholics, including well educated, clear thinkers, will tell you the exact same about miracles. To non Catholics this doesn't rise to the level of conclusive evidence, or even "real"/ "hard" evidence, either.
I mean in terms of interpreting them as NHI.
Agreed.
terryforsythe
Major Contributor
I tend to agree with the latter. Nonetheless, it is a good analogy. It appears to me that some people on both sides of the debate approach it with religious-like fanaticism.
Similar threads
