Emyr Thy King
Posts: 2153
Joined: 13/4/2006
From: The Grid
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sharkboy
quote:
ab·surd /ębˈsɜrd, -ˈzɜrd/ Show Spelled[ab-surd, -zurd]
adjective
1.
utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish
Nope, seems about right to me!
What I was trying to say originally was in the same way theoretical science seeks to explain the 'unknown' (albeit with a greater volume of data), postulating about the ETH is based on the same rationale -- attempting to explain phenomena we don't yet fully understand -- but without any concrete proof. Of course I got my terminology mixed up a little but that was the gyst of what I was saying. So when I read "absurd" it's a more charged term than if you simply said "inaccurate/false" - again in a David Starkey "GOSH!! What's the matter with you! Are you insane?!" as he sort of did the last time he was on Question Time! I just took it to be a bit more personal, perhaps I'm wrong. Hopefully I won't get 'tattooed' with it next time  .
quote:
ORIGINAL: BigKovacs
The problem is UFOs are just that, unidentified. It doesn't matter how many strange radar reports we get or what calibre of witness accounts are brought forward, unless they actually record something confirming that the UFOs are alien then it's just assumption until evidence is found.
Sure and I can't really dispute that position and it was an error in denotation on my part for not clearly making enough of a distinction among theories, hypotheses, assumptions and so forth. However, whilst the only 'empirical' data I can think of would be radar and perhaps certain videographical footage such as high-resolution FLIR cameras (1); I don't think we should discount all eyewitness evidence on that basis. It cannot be tested sure, and considering the nature of the phenomenon which cannot be 'induced' or re-created in a lab and happens completely randomly then there is limited scope here at the moment. Again I don't put forward the idea that eyewitness testimony provides proof or hard evidence of the ETH. I think some at least are compelling that may suggest it has happened and is still happening. The performance envelope of these alleged objects as reported by various pilot testimony would suggest a craft(s) with incredible performance capabilities. And if they're not embellishing, exaggerating nor fabricating such accounts and are accurate in their observations. Then we're either dealing with quite a leap forward in aviation technology or it's not of this Earth. I really can't think of what else it could be if these reports are genuine and accurate.
1. Radar can malfunction and there are such things as spurious contacts. Not to mention ECM or ELINT which can 'fool' enemy radars. In addition, visual effects technology has advanced to a level where practically anything can be created on video or indeed photographically. So it's a very difficult area to navigate and clearly there are a number of caveats to consider.
Dpp1978, some great points there  . I willingly admit that deep down I "want" to see something unusual which may have the inference of being of E.T in origin, I think most would. Although I think that's born from a frustration with a lack of serious investigation into the phenomenon and the assumption by some that the fringe element speaks for all that are at least open to the ETH. You may have heard of the Condon Report? The report or committee was chaired by the physicist Edward Condon. I think the study took place between 1966-1968, which looked at cases from Project Blue Book and elsewhere. About a year or so before the report was due to be published. He had publicly said that he thought it was a waste of time and that the whole subject was ridiculous. Almost predetermining the outcome of the report before it had been fully completed. Even though approximately 29% of the cases remained unexplained. There was actually a thorough investigation done in the report but its chair seemingly didn't want to acknowledge or recognise the percentage of unexplained cases. Now of course that isn't proof of E.T visitation. But to be so dismissive of the subject without further objective inquiry is surely equally as harmful to the subject? This is something that isn't really touched upon. And instead the sole focus is on those who make outlandish claims (i.e. "I went up in their spaceship for an orgy") or who adopt a dogmatic "E.T only" answer fits. Yet we can see this behaviour on the other side of the argument. So we're only addressing one half of the problem.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Chief
quote:
ORIGINAL: Emyr Thy King
As for the Belgian 1990 case. As I've said before. There is a possibility that it was some sort of experimental UAV/UCAV. There may have been radar jamming which can create spurious contacts and electromagnetic interference had been considered. But to jam numerous radars over a large area would require one powerful jammer. Furthermore, there were numerous witnesses both Gendarmerie (police) and civilians who had seen unknown triangular craft exhibiting unusual behaviour. In addition to seeing lights near the F-16s which were moving around erratically. Now, you can utterly dismiss eyewitness testimony as being unreliable or false. But I would have to wonder about a country's police force if a number of their officers admitting to seeing large triangular hovering craft, shooting down beams of lights and sending out a floating red ball.
This is the bit that gets me. You'd rather believe it was aliens than something developed to fool 70 year old tech.
No, a bit of grapeshot there. I'm simply addressing some caveats about it being a UAV/UCAV or test aircraft. As there are certain peculiarities.
I've said this previously:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Emyr Thy King
Experimental military aircraft would be the likeliest explanation. I wonder how we would have made such a leap in technologly given the aircraft's reported/purported flight characteristics. Accelerating from 150 to 500 knots in a few seconds, in addition to at one point travelling at 1010 knots is an incredible development in aviation technology. As I said before, it could've been some radar defect or atmospheric anomaly but there's countless eye witnesses in addition to ground radar stations which tracked the alleged object. Also the craft responded to radar lock-ons which is unusual and would suggest that it wasn't some technical error or atmospheric anomaly.
Link
I'm merely proposing that we be open to the idea that it could've been E.T.
ECM/ELINT, a subset of that being radar jamming has been around since the Second World War, so it's nothing new. My point not being whether radar jamming is possible (we again used it at least once in the Falklands War with the Operation Black Buck raids) but whether one could simultaneously jam the radars of two F-16s and two other ground radar stations (CRC at Glons and Traffic Control at Semmerzake). With multiple craft it would be possible and at least one report by the Gendarmerie on the ground stated they could see a second triangular craft at one point. But if this was to test these black triangular craft against the latest NATO radars and fighter aircraft. Why over the open skies of Belgium and not in a far more controlled and secure setting? The police officers who claimed they had a sighting probably didn't have enough time to drive to Amsterdam, have a few tokes of a 'spliff' then make their way back, if they were hallucinating or lying. There are a number of other reports by civilians which corroborate the shape and behaviour of the craft. Still, it's unexplained.
There's a few interesting documentaries I've come across:
Out of the Blue (James Fox)
Dpp and anyone else who's interested, vis-ą-vis the Condon Report fast-forward to 1:13:11.
I Know What I Saw (James Fox)
It's a follow-on from OutB and it does use some of the same stories and footage but it also features other cases, some of them fairly recent. They're both well worth a watch.
I think this may be of interest too:
UFOEncounters-J.Alan Hynek
It encompasses the 'UFO phenomenon' with regards to alleged alien abductions. Whether you put any stock in them or not. It takes an interesting look at the power of suggestion, hypnosis and human psychology.
The following two may be of particular interest:
Britian's Closest Encounters - Berwyn Mountain Incident (Channel 5) (aka "Roswelsh" )
The following documentary is pretty much a counter-argument to the above documentary:
The Berwyn UFO Cover Up Exposed
< Message edited by Emyr Thy King -- 10/5/2012 12:27:03 AM >
_____________________________
"This whole imbroglio is epiphenomenal"...."demigogic faux egalitarianism" - Will Self
|
Printable Version
RE: UFO and the media - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread