Slashdot Mirror


IBM Targets UFOs, Ghosts, and Goblins With Search Tool

coondoggie writes "IBM wants to help you find out if UFOs are real. Well, sort of. With UFO sightings seemingly on the rise, Big Blue is teaming with The Anomalies Network to offer UFO Crawler, a new search engine specifically tuned to search for information about the paranormal, unexplained or just plain bizarre. The search tool employs IBM's OmniFind Yahoo! Edition enterprise search software and the UFO Crawler should help users precisely target and gather information from relevant sources, including thousands of documents and files collected in the vast Anomalies Network archive, as well as multiple global resources across the Web on topics such as such as ghosts, conspiracy theories and extraterrestrials."

33 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. Military projects by electrosoccertux · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Presumably the most stealthy plane form is a saucer. The idea of many is that these flying saucer sightings are nothing but X-projects. I don't see why this isn't likely to be the case.

    1. Re:Military projects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It only takes one incident to be extra-terrestrial to be some huge bombshell that shakes up our perception...

      There are probably a lot of sightings of stuff that are really just exotic aircraft and military projects. And then 80% of the reported UFOs are probably easily explainable as common stuff. I'm picking that number out of my ass but it's IIRC from some of the UFO documentaries I've seen.

      I think it is highly plausible that if there was some sort of contact with not-of-this earth beings and technology that the government would hide it, and try to take whatever they could for military advantage. Some of the reports I've read about secret budgets and groups seems highly plausible to me.

      I know there is so much noise and disinfo in this field that it is a nightmare to try and figure out what is going on. And I think it is intentional. It attracts the crazies. Then people who want to keep things secret or hidden (whether alien or military tech or whatever), run interference. Then most of the documentaries that hit History/Discover/Sci-Fi channel skip over some of the more hardcore info that can be found if one digs.

      I hate to say I disagree with the "mainstream" of this fringe group of UFO sorts. I don't really believe in spacemen from other planets visiting use in their saucer shaped tin cans at this point. I'm more for interdimensional entities, and something that is much more difficult to nail down with any definitive language. But then again maybe there are spacemen hanging out in some secret underground base. Maybe we are a genetic experiment conducted and managed by aliens. Maybe we are a genetic alien hybrid race seeded here and monitored. Etc etc. So many theories. I do think SETI is kind of wasting their time. I think contact has already been made, but I'm still not certain if the world is ready to know about it. One way or the other pressure seems to be building and this stuff seems to be getting more mainstream...

      Oh yeah and after the silly "terrorists are gonna get yah" nonsense for the sake of fear and control, next it's gonna be, "the ETs are gonna get us, we must defend planet earth". So of course we need a central one world government and space based weapons that will presumably be an effective defense against beings that could be millions or billions of years ahead of us technologically. Uhm yeah... : ) Back to our regular missile reseach program.. ahem *cough*

      PS: How about them alien moon bases and the censored NASA photos eh?

    2. Re:Military projects by eln · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Conspiracy theories don't work like that. Conspiracy theories employ a sort of reverse Occam's Razor: do not accept the simplest logical explanation if a needlessly complicated conspiracy can be made to fit the same facts.

    3. Re:Military projects by eln · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow man, it's a good thing you aren't one of those "crazies" that you talk about or you would have posted some bizarre rant about one world government and interdimensional beings instead of this well-thought-out rational discourse.

    4. Re:Military projects by thrawn_aj · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Somehow, the idea of "top-secret" government projects (called X-projects for some strange reason *roll*) that can do the things that people claim they do seems as much of a conspiracy theory as the whole UFO paranoia. I think people are taking that old bromide about there being a kernel of truth inside every legend a little too seriously :P. People are foolish enough, or attention-starved enough or diseased enough, or naive enough to get there on their own. One can summarize this lunacy in a simple (albeit fuzzy) equation: Search for meaning + lack of scientific tools = significance junkie (religious or pseudoscientific). Of course, I personally encourage the UFO nuts to continue with their fairly harmless obsession. Keeps them out of trouble. I mean, really, it's no different from collecting stamps is it?

    5. Re:Military projects by db32 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I typically hear them refered to as black projects, and skunkworks type stuff, and the only place I have seen X anything is in regards to eXpierimental aircraft. The X-2 for example was the 1st plane to break the sound barrier, X-15 is in that realm of sound barrier breaking research as well, the X-35 is just the Joint Strike Fighter thats all the rage in the news.

      Aside from that, I have often wondered if the 'conspiracy' is government supplied. Think about this, you are doing top secret research during the cold war era, spies everywhere. Something bad happens, there is a mishap, and now there are a bunch of people that saw it, and even more people (important ones, not just your average paranoid schmuck) that are terribly terribly interested in what you were doing. So you tell a weak story and then sow the seeds of alien/UFO conspiracy. Almost any form of HUMINT is going to be completely and utterly worthless as every man, woman, and child is talking about the alien spacecraft and not a top secret research project mishap.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    6. Re:Military projects by eln · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem with conspiracy theorists is they insist on sticking to their theory even when several aspects of it are empirically shown to be false. The 9/11 conspiracy theories are a great example of this.

      For example: you say the hijackers were uneducated, but that's demonstrably false. Mohammed Atta, for example, had a Master's degree.

      Also, the Boeing 747 is quite a bit larger than the Boeing 757.

      As for the Pentagon hit, there was tons of debris, and they DID hit plenty of other things on the way in, including several fences, cars, and a generator.

      As for the crack about the "most secure nation on Earth," maybe you missed all the news stories for years after 9/11 about how most of our highest value targets (power plants, water treatment, etc, etc) are still completely open and vulnerable to attack.

      So in this case, it's not a conspiracy that can be made to fit the facts, it's a conspiracy that will fit the "facts" that were made up to fit the theory.

    7. Re:Military projects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Where to begin with the errors in this post. Let's start with:

      "12 uneducated Muslim extremists"

      Uneducated? Is that what you called Mohamed Atta with his Architecture degree from Cairo Univeristy and his Masters degree obtained in Germany? Or Abdulaziz al-Omari, also with a University degree? Many of the hijackers were educated. Not that all of them needed to be to wield a box cutter and cut up a few flight crew members in order to execute someone elses well-conceived hijack plan.

      "They were able to fly the aircraft with pinpoint precision with only commercial pilot licenses at best (airline transport licenses really are required for this level of precision"

      Wrong. ATP certificates are required to act as pilot in command of an airliner, but most flights you can take on an airline are flown 50% or more by the First Officers (copilot) who only have commercial pilots certificate. They will frequently fly one entire leg of a flight from takeoff to landing and let the captain fly the next leg. This is how they build the flight time to become an ATP. You must have already demonstrated proficiency in precision instrument flying and high performance manuevers to get your commercial certificate. There are no additional "precision" maneuvers learned for an ATP cert. It is only a matter of hours (1500 PIC) and an additional flight and written test. As a licensed Private Pilot, I have to say you sound like you know little about the subject. It is more difficult to fly precision manuevers in a Cessna 172 than in the airliners flown by these pilots, which are far more stable and easy to manuever, particulary when already in flight and trimmed for cruise. Nothing but throttle, yolk, and rudder were needed to accomplish the 9/11 hijackers task, which are the most elementary flight controls. Most home 'pilots' flying a computer flight simulator at 100% realism settings can accomplish the same feat with ease after a little practice. The hijacker pilots had real flight training by comparison. Now if you want difficuly, try shooting an ILS approach in a Cessna 172 in IFR conditions with winds gusting and moderate to heavy turbulance. Once you can do that, then you can discuss this with me from a position of authority.

      "Further, they managed to vaporize all but a supposed APU wheel. "

      Yeah, that and the other few thousand other pieces of wreckage, including the landing struts, engine sections, larger pieces of fuselage, etc. I guess you missed the photos of the other parts, so that means they don't exist, right? I mean if a website you found says there was only one piece of wreckage and has a picture of it, that must be right, huh? By the way, you don't have to melt aluminum or titanium in a high speed collision with reinforced concrete. It will mostly atomize into dust upon impact, as can be see in decades old military crash test videos found all over the net.

      Let's see if you can count more than one piece of wreckage here:

      http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm

      And learn what happens when jets meet reinforced concrete walls, like those in the Pentagon:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--_RGM4Abv8

  2. While... by Icarus1919 · · Score: 4, Funny

    While I understand that this is probably good for pageviews and thus revenue, do we really have to encourage these people?

  3. Don't click the link! by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's what they want you to do!

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  4. Is this really a good use of resources? by Tokimasa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sure, it might be interesting. But why isn't IBM devoting resources to actual space research? Or even something more earth based?

    --
    --Thomas J. Owens
    1. Re:Is this really a good use of resources? by MyLongNickName · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is called capitalism. IBM has a service for "tuned" search engines. Some organization was willing to pay IBM to tune it for paranormal searches. IBM took their cash.

      I;'d argue it is a wonderful allocation of resources. Idiots gave their money away. Intelligent people will then get to use it for something more purposeful. What is wrong with that?

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  5. Mulder would have been happy.... by rd · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm sitting here on the couch watching X Files thinking that this may have made Mulder and Scully's job a bit easier...

    1. Re:Mulder would have been happy.... by BendingSpoons · · Score: 2, Funny

      Scully, I've received another report of spontaneous human combustion. Quick - to the IBM's OmniFind Yahoo! Edition enterprise search software with UFO Crawler!

      With any luck, we'll find a few geocities pages documenting this bizarre phenomenon. If we're extremely lucky, we might even come across a few poorly animated gifs of the combustion process.

      --
      For all we know the moon may be as conscious as a poet or a realtor, and extremely weary of its monotonous round. - HLM
  6. ufologist by BigHungryJoe · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm a trained Ufologist and I'm thinking I would NEVER trust a search engine from IBM - that would be like giving me a UFO search engine written by the US gov't. I *KNOW* where the files I need to see are - they are in gov't bldgs at Area 51 and I don't need a search engine to tell me that.

  7. UFO's, Ghosts . . . Meteor Freaks? by e_armadillo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hmmmmm, a searchable "Wall of Weird", cool.

  8. Re:How many people really believe in these things? by morsdeus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think the distinction is that while intelligent, civilization-forming extraterrestrial life may be not only real but abundant on cosmic scales, the likelihood that any intelligent lifeform smart enough to develop an economical method of traveling interstellar distances within a reasonable timeframe would have any desire to come to Earth is exceedingly low. And even if they did, it further stands to reason that they would either interfere with us outright, or be completely undetectable, that any experiments they performed would not be half-assed jobs that left people running around with partial memories chatting about it, and they would certainly not be allied with, much less occasionally overpowered by, the US government/military.

  9. Correction by ravenspear · · Score: 4, Insightful

    UFOs exist, that is a fact. A UFO is by definition an unidentified flying object. Hundreds of cases of aerial objects that can't be immediately identified have been reliably documented (and by qualified observers).

    What you choose to "believe" or not believe is what UFOs represent. If your position is that it would be irrational to assume these represent alien spacecraft, then the correct statement would be "you always had to be a real "YAHOO!" to believe UFOs were alien spacecraft."

  10. Re:Nothing New - A Real Yahoo! by JohnnyLocust · · Score: 5, Funny

    Maybe we could use it to find Duke Nukem Forever

  11. Re:How many people really believe in these things? by bladesjester · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Disclaimer: I'm just continuing the logical argument and not expressing my own beliefs.

    By the same token, you could consider our wildlife tagging and study methods to be half-assed. I mean, after all, we aren't undetectable to the animals in question. The people doing the studies just don't think the animals are intelligent enough to be phased by the actions being performed on them.

    Who says we aren't experiencing the same thing from the animal's point of view?

    --
    Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
  12. Re:How many people really believe in these things? by eln · · Score: 4, Funny

    If it was shot down, it would also lose the F, and it would just be an O.

  13. Thank you everyone. by bigwhatever · · Score: 2, Funny

    My faith in humanity is restored, temporarily.

    For the first time in my life, I'm seeing a crowd that doesn't wonder if Egyptian hieroglyphs, crop circles, and the Xbox 360 all have the same origin. (link)

  14. Re:How many people really believe in these things? by bladesjester · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Actually, proving something is possible is a large step on the way to proving something exists. That doesn't cause confusion unless you don't realize that the two are in fact, connected.

    The words Necessary but not Sufficient come to mind.

    --
    Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
  15. Re:How many people really believe in these things? by Zephyros · · Score: 2, Funny

    When you shoot one down, you tend to lose the "F" as well. Which pretty much just makes it an object.

  16. Targeting Ghosts 'n Goblins? by Pluvius · · Score: 2, Funny

    Good luck, IBM. I don't think even Blue Gene could beat that video game.

    Rob

  17. ohh, look, I can be insightful too! by c6gunner · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Presumably the Flying Spaghetti Monster's appendages are saucer shaped. The idea of many is that these flying saucers are nothing but the ends of his noodly appendages. I don't see why this isn't likely to be the case.

  18. wow, me too! by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm a scientician with a BS in ufology! We should team up!

  19. Re:OK I give up Re:Found on google maps by schnipschnap · · Score: 2, Interesting
    See here

    I recently got DSL ==\^_^/==

  20. Re:How many people really believe in these things? by ShibaInu · · Score: 2, Funny

    To quote the Simpsons: We have reached the limits of what anal probing can teach us!

  21. Re:Nothing New - A Real Yahoo! by Mr2cents · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Want a a business plan?

    1. Attract gullible people around paranormal search engine.
    2. Use advertisement space to sell magnetic healing jewlery, talismans, tin-foil hats and other crap.
    3. Profit!

    --
    "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
  22. Re:We already KNOW there are UFOs by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 3, Interesting

    > it's all fake and made up.

    NASA begs to differ...
    and so do these government and military witnesses

    Google for:
    - Evidence: The Case For NASA UFO's
    - The Disclosure Project

    --
    Why does C++ still suck with this 'short', 'long long', and 'double' garbage??

  23. Naive by spacemanjupiter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The funny thing is, i see people here that laugh at the subject, when they are really the naive ones. I don't live in a box, or bubble. I welcome change, and i'm not afraid of it. Your bad jokes and unhealthy skepticism do not change the facts. These objects are real, and there needs to be a formal study and open discussion about it in the scientific community. It's not about little men from mars, and many people who lack research skills or the desire to solve the greatest mystery in the history of the human race love to categorize it as such. It's about solving the energy problems that are destroying this planet and thousands of lives each year. It's about learning the true history of this planet and of the nature of the human species. It's about turning the military industrial complex on end, and showing people that technology can also be used to further our species by revolutionizing the medical field and energy grid, instead of creating weapons for taking innocent lives and devising unjustifiable wars that only serve to make the government another dollar, and only serve to set our evolution back even more. You sit and watch CNN and debate over petty political problems, when disclosure of this information would solve many of these childish wars and scandals that you love to hear about on the nightly news. I won't touch on the Fisher Price physics that you learn in your public education systems, and the silly notions of comets with frosty tails and labeling stars as a nuclear furnaces. Wake up and smell the cardboard your life is conveniently packed and secured in. Or maybe you enjoy the security of what that cardboard keeps in, or Out of your life.

  24. Re:When ya don't know, you look elsewhere by PhxBlue · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So throw your stones, call me an unenlighted bigot homophobe misanthrope...but these things are true.

    Unenlightened? No. Bigoted? No. Homophobic? No. Misanthropic? No.

    Delusional? Almost certainly, and as equally as the "occult" that you oppose so vehemently.

    I understand that it's a lot easier to turn off the thinking, rational part of your brain and say, "There are demons at work here." It's also throwing away the very same gift of reason that God gave you in the first place. I'm all for chalking something up to "mysteries of the universe," don't get me wrong--but the time for that is after you've exhausted the logical possibilities. Judging from the post you made here, I don't think you've done that.

    For one thing, you never seem to have considered the possibility that you're hearing things. For another, you never gave thought to the possibility that somehow you were creating the noise. Third, you instantly label something "demon" when for all you know it was the Archangel Gabriel.

    People should stay the hell away (no pun intended) from the whole concept of spiritual warfare unless they really know what they're doing. And you don't.

    --
    !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.