Slashdot Mirror


Looking For a Link Between Sci-Fi UFOs and UFO Reports

NewsWatcher writes "The BBC has an interesting story about the link between sightings of UFOs and sci-fi films. From the article: 'Documents from the Ministry of Defence released by the National Archives show the department recorded 117 sightings in 1995 and 609 in 1996.' Those years correlate with the screening of the film Independence Day (1996) and when The X-Files was at the height of its popularity in the UK (1995). 'The more that alien life is covered in films or television documentaries, the more people look up at the sky and don't look down at their feet,' said an expert on UFO sightings based at Sheffield Hallam University."

202 comments

  1. Just my imagination? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Tell that to my ass.

    1. Re:Just my imagination? by Larry+Lightbulb · · Score: 1

      Is it shiney and metal?

    2. Re:Just my imagination? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Your ass said he wants his hat back.

    3. Re:Just my imagination? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would, but I'm having trouble telling which end is which.

    4. Re:Just my imagination? by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      While I have no doubt that you've been rectally probed, I strongly doubt an alien was responsible.

      Well, maybe if it happened in Tijuana, but still...

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    5. Re:Just my imagination? by EchaniDrgn · · Score: 1

      Well, maybe if it happened in Tijuana, but still...

      They're not aliens if they're in their own country. :-P

    6. Re:Just my imagination? by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "They're not aliens if they're in their own country. :-P"

      Can we really say that a donkey is a citizen?

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    7. Re:Just my imagination? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your ass said he wants his hat back.

      Then it must be an tinfoil hat I guess?

  2. i wonder ... by neonprimetime · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... if there is also a link then between Government Conspiracy Theories & shows like the x-files?

    1. Re:i wonder ... by mwvdlee · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why? You suspect a conspiracy that government pushes TV shows about conspiracy theories to cover up real conspiracies?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:i wonder ... by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the government has buried that research. I already have quite proof for that. You can read about that in my newsletter.

    3. Re:i wonder ... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course! Don't you realize that Wormhole X-treme! is just a coverup for the secret government Stargate project?

    4. Re:i wonder ... by koolfy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you look closely, you will learn that most of X-Files episodes are based on real cases and mysteries.
      While this includes people's imagination being debunked by FBI's investigation, it also includes references to "top secret" projects only known by early "conspiracy theorists" and some of them were sometimes revaled true a few years later.

      That's why it got that sucessful (besides the quality of the show itself) : it mixed mystic theories, unbelievable myth, and real theories about government and UFO's that were sometimes factual.

      I don't have much examples in mind right now, but I remember hearing much words like "aurora" "blackbird" or theories about UFO's when I was kid, and later, discover that those were based on real reports of people claiming to have experienced those things.

      --
      Segmentation Fault in "Life, Universe and Everything" at line 42. Don't Panic.
    5. Re:i wonder ... by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 1

      Sir I like your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    6. Re:i wonder ... by jeffasselin · · Score: 1

      In the same way Hollywood movies are based on history? Like, take as an example "Shakespeare in love", based on the (possibly) real, historical playwright. Doesn't mean the movie had anything to do with historical reality.

      It's not because something is based on true events that it reflects those in any way that's historically accurate.

      Conspiracy theories are almost always lunatic inventions of people with little rational thinking ability. Also, reality is usually a lot more complex than the simplistic plots those people contrive, but less conspiratorial. Very often people will do things for their own selfish reasons that may appear in hindsight to be planned or orchestrated, but is really a coincidence.

      --
      If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
    7. Re:i wonder ... by hesiod · · Score: 1

      Duh, why do you think the production company was called "Double Secret"? They said it right out loud to make you not believe!

    8. Re:i wonder ... by koolfy · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying that X-Files is to be trusted and accurate, it's not the purpose. :)

      "Trust no one" !

      --
      Segmentation Fault in "Life, Universe and Everything" at line 42. Don't Panic.
    9. Re:i wonder ... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      According to a show I saw on the History Channel, those were more than theories. Almost all UFO sightings are natural phenomena, and the rest, according to THC, were US government experimental aircraft. They had photos of flying saucers with USAF logos on them; they were allegedly the first attempts at stealth aircraft.

    10. Re:i wonder ... by OctaviusIII · · Score: 2, Funny

      Psh, don't you realize that Wormhole X-treme is just a cover-up of the fact that Stargate is a cover-up for the real Stargate program?

      --
      What's this? Another weblog? On transit?
    11. Re:i wonder ... by dicobalt · · Score: 0

      I thought I was the only one who realized this!

    12. Re:i wonder ... by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      Why? You suspect a conspiracy that government pushes TV shows about conspiracy theories to cover up real conspiracies?

      Remember that character on X Files that kept dying from unusual drug use? Once from inhaling methane, once after licking a toad...

      well... http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2000/01/13/drugs/print.html

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    13. Re:i wonder ... by dugrrr · · Score: 1

      But they would know that we are intelligent enough to know that Wormhole X-treme! is a fictional cover-up of the real cover-up. Ergo, they would attempt to mislead us by defrauding the actual cover-up with the actual truth which is that Wormhole X-treme! is the real program!

    14. Re:i wonder ... by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      >t also includes references to "top secret" projects only known by early "conspiracy theorists" and some of them were sometimes revaled true a few years later.

      How about a few dozen cites? I have a ton of proof the other way: conspiracy theories spouting bullshit.

      >like "aurora" "blackbird" or theories about UFO's when I was kid

      In other words one rumored experimental plane and another real one (SR77). I dont think anyone doubts the government has experimental aircraft. Everyone doubts that this involves anything non-terrestrial. Yes, the xfiles writers did look into the UFO community. Big deal. Thats like saying Anne Rice looked into vampire legend. Its all still silly fantasy.

    15. Re:i wonder ... by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      Well, there *is* a link between government conspiracy theories and X-Files *spin-off* shows. The pilot episode of Lone Gunman featured in its plot hijacking of a plane that was flown remotely into World Trade Center Towers.

      Of course, this is a case where correlation is not causation. The pilot episode of Lone Gunman aired some 6 months before the 9/11 attacks! <weird X-file theme music />

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    16. Re:i wonder ... by lennier · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, exactly. The X-Files was the first TV show I saw which 'got' the vibe of the conspiracy underground and managed to portray the strange mix of fact, conjecture, truth, outright lies, paranoia and contradiction which you get from doing serious study of the UFO phenomenon and related subjects. The show was at its best when it made no attempt to make anything make sense or add up and just generated a 'wtf' SF anthology feel. 'WHAT IF ALL the freaky things you've ever read in zines or on Usenet were, in fact, real...'

      Remember, the MJ-12 papers (of dubious provenance) and Whitley Streiber's Communion surfaced in the 1980s. Moore's Philadelphia Experiment in the late 70s. Stan Deyo's Cosmic Conspiracy in 1978, just after Close Encounters. Lots of other stories had been circulating for some time. David Hatcher Childress' 'The Antigravity Handbook', for instance.

      But for the most part, in the 80s, you couldn't really talk about the 'alien conspiracy' mythos even in entertainment without a snigger, or at least without a gung-ho humans-vs-aliens war movie feel. X-Files was the first show to really play the Area 51 underground vibe straight - and to a great extent, the only one to really even try to get it sort of halfway right.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    17. Re:i wonder ... by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 1

      Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

      --
      [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
    18. Re:i wonder ... by net28573 · · Score: 1

      Conspiracy theories dont fall from the sky! They may be a slightly bent truth but a truth none the less. Your claim that conspiracies are the lunatic inventions of people with little rational thinking ability is arogantly wrong. People follow conspiracy theories because they bring about a potential truth which is important FOR A LOGICAL MINDED PERSON. fringe scientists base their research on what has been discovered but doubted and some of what they work on can be extremely usefull!

      --
      RIP TRICERATOPS, YOU NEVER EXISTED
    19. Re:i wonder ... by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      The parent is right. Having held a TS security clearance in Australia for more than a decade (with all the letters on the card, some red, some black, plus a few others), it's pretty safe to say that the truly delusional are also a fairly loud minority. A handful of these people latch on to a few scraps here and there, the result being huge chunks of the population now have these oddball theories bubbling up.

      While there might be a conspiracy or two from time to time, there are no secrets for long. Humans are woefully bad at keeping anything secret. The most classified of secrets I ever had access to were passed around either purely verbally, or 'pass by hand' Australian eyes only - and you know what, not even these stayed secret for long. Politicians leak. Executives within the intelligence community leak. Newspapers have their paid up sources who leak. Plenty of people with security clearances will tell their families what they do, families leak to friends. All of this results in a few snippets landing at the feet of some imaginative souls who then fill in the blanks with their own theories.

      An example. A very large (in its day) satellite dish being transported from one particular country to Australia on a military transport aircraft - this aircraft lands in a large city, a few curtains are erected to prevent onlookers from getting too detailed a view as the parts are removed and loaded on to trucks. The conspiracy nuts went mad and figured we were shipping UFO's to some underground base in the area. If we had nothing to hide then why erect the shrouds? Well, we did have something to hide, that being exactly where the dish came from which would have been obvious if people were able to see it.

    20. Re:i wonder ... by dave420 · · Score: 1

      [citation needed]. Seriously.

    21. Re:i wonder ... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      Do you have any idea how uncomfortable it is to see someone use the phrase "when I was a kid" in reference to the X-Files? That show ran, what, all of five years ago?

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    22. Re:i wonder ... by koolfy · · Score: 1

      "The X-Files Le guide non officiel" (french for "non official guide")
      N.E Genge
      ISBN: 2-258-04504-5

      (that, and some research about topics discussed in X-Files, like Spontaneous Combustion, UFO sightings, Roswell case, etc. They might be all lies, but thoses phenomenons where investigated or reported from time to time, and most people never heard of them before X-Files)

      --
      Segmentation Fault in "Life, Universe and Everything" at line 42. Don't Panic.
    23. Re:i wonder ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're welcome.

      Best regards,

      American citizen

  3. Of course by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    people see what they have been thinking about.

    For example: when you buy a new car, all of a sudden you see that same model car everywhere.

    Add to that peoples inability to think critically, and you get UFO's.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have never seen a Limited Edition Deep Plumb PT Cruiser until I bought one for my girlfriend. After that, I saw other people driving them practically every day.

    2. Re:Of course by maxume · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My favorite is when the serious conspiracy theorists trot out the fact that the Air Force had an officer making reports about UFO sightings to the president. Of course, this was during a period when the United States was developing a variety of secret aircraft, so it stands to reason that the Air Force was keeping track of people who saw unidentified flying objects.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For your Girlfriend?

      Sucker!

      You won't be getting it back after she dumps your sucker ass.

    4. Re:Of course by TheSoepkip · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wonder how and if it relates to priming ...

      Any psychologists around ?

    5. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would he want it back? A purple PT Cruiser doesn't exactly scream "Hey, ladies!"

    6. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UFO = Unidentified Flying Object. Are you saying that a critical thinker would, when seeing something a new flying phenomenon, immediately jump to identify it with something familiar. Wouldn't the critical thinker be the one saying "I don't know what that is yet"?
      .
      Your type "critical" thinking is what holds back knowledge.

    7. Re:Of course by Golddess · · Score: 1

      Exactly, people forget that UFO doesn't necessarily mean of alien origin, only that the Flying Object is as of yet Unidentified.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    8. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When, all of a sudden, you see the same model everywhere, you are actually seeing that model--not something your brain is telling you is that model but is really not. All your analogy tells me is that people notice flying saucers more often after having seen them on TV. But, it if flies and is saucer-shaped, what else would you call it? Must you immediately call them all uncritical thinkers and say that they are imagining things a priori? Is this what you call "critical" thinking? All I see is sloppy thinking and faulty analogies.

    9. Re:Of course by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Also, the government was actually covertly trying to make people think they were space aliens. If you saw a top secret experimental aircraft, they'd rather you think it was Martians than realise it was a secret aircraft design.

      There was a real conspiracy; but the real conspiracy wasn't that they were covering up extraterrestrial visits. The real conspiracy was exactly the opposite.

    10. Re:Of course by Ron_Fitzgerald · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wholly agree but will look at that from another perspective. I was raised in Boston and moved to northern New Hampshire, I have never seen a moose or a deer in the wild. Being here for 17 years now I am able to pick them out in a wooded field driving down the road or highway at 65 mph just by a glance. Because I am used to seeing these things they are easier to spot. Being able to tell what type of creature is far ahead of me by how it is moving across the road. Take that into account with any media type and you have people that may be used to spotting irregular shapes and movement in the skies. I have never seen a UFO or even known a person who has claimed that they have and as much as I would like to believe that 'we are not alone' in this universe, that is only speculation and I really need to see it for myself. I also have to believe that statistically speaking, out of all the reports and sightings, at least one of them has to be real.

      --
      ~ Ron Fitzgerald
    11. Re:Of course by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Once again, there are remarkably few sightings of the Virgin Mary in areas with no Catholics.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    12. Re:Of course by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It always cracks me up that none of these conspiracy theorists, with all their reams of "secret information" never make the obvious connection that most of these sightings of strange aircraft at night were around secretive air force bases at the height of the Cold War. It takes a unique mindset to jump over the obvious conclusion of this evidence and to go right to "alien visitors from across interstellar space!" I guess it's cooler to think of "Men in Black" as aliens rather than boring old FBI and NSA agents in their ugly-ass generic suits. And why assume the military is covering up mere military secrets when you can go with the much more impressive "They're hiding little green men, dude!"

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    13. Re:Of course by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

      The Air Force discovered that drunks and stoners who live near airports spot a lot of UFOs.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    14. Re:Of course by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      It's clearly not really a unique mindset. Odd, certainly.

    15. Re:Of course by cetialphav · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it is more than just the mindset. When I have seen these claims, the people are usually saying that the UFO did some odd aerobatic maneuver that is impossible for conventional aircraft. They really seem to believe this. To them, the only explanation is that the aircraft they see must not be man made.

      The true fallacy that they make is believing too much in their eyes. They are completely unqualified to determine whether the high performance, experimental aircraft(s) flying miles away is doing something impossible. Decades of research has shown that people are notoriously bad eye witnesses and that they overestimate their own accuracy. Combine that with a real desire to discover alien life and a general distrust of government (both of which are normal and prevalent in the wider society) and you can see where people can fool themselves.
      I can see where even highly intelligent, rational people could fool themselves in the right circumstances.

      The only people that I think are delusional are the people that put all of their faith in these eyewitnesses.

    16. Re:Of course by cetialphav · · Score: 1

      I also have to believe that statistically speaking, out of all the reports and sightings, at least one of them has to be real.

      The answer is clear, then. We need more MiB movies, and X-Files episodes. We need lots and lots more UFO entertainment. If we do that, we will get lots more UFO sightings. By relying on the statistics, we can see that this will mean that we will get more visits from aliens. I didn't realize that this was just a numbers game and that if we just get enough UFO reports some of them must be real.

    17. Re:Of course by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Once again, there are remarkably few sightings of the Virgin Mary in areas with no Catholics.

      Or maybe there are plenty of sightings, but no one thinks she's any different than anyone else.
      In the GP's example, the cars are real. They've been there the whole time, but are largely ignored. Once the mind is thinking about those cars, POW, they're all standing out from the crowd.

    18. Re:Of course by SigmaTao · · Score: 1
    19. Re:Of course by mqduck · · Score: 1

      For example: when you buy a new car, all of a sudden you see that same model car everywhere.

      Add to that peoples inability to think critically, and you get UFO's.

      Actually, your example would indicate that shows like the X-Files caused people to notice UFOs that they previously missed.

      --
      Property is theft.
    20. Re:Of course by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > statistically speaking, out of all the reports and
      > sightings, at least one of them has to be real.

      Statistically speaking, that doesn't make any sense. (I am a math geek.) The number of sightings has absolutely no impact on the probability that any of them are real. If 99% of them can be bogus, or 50% of them for that matter, then they can just as easily all be bogus.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    21. Re:Of course by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      When I have seen these claims, the people are usually saying that the UFO did some odd aerobatic maneuver that is impossible for conventional aircraft. They really seem to believe this. To them, the only explanation is that the aircraft they see must not be man made.

      The problem is when these objects ( or whatever they are ) are witnessed by multiple credible witnesses ( pilot and co-pilot, air force personnel and officers, ground crewm etc ) and also tracked on radar.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    22. Re:Of course by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Not every pilot (or even high-ranking commander) had clearance on, or knowledge of, every classified project. The Cold War was an extremely paranoid era (especially in regards to spy, weapon, and aircraft technology).

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    23. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "They're hiding little green men, dude!"

      They're not green, DUMBASS!

    24. Re:Of course by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      So you're claiming that, since the cold war, the US, the USSR, and possibly other countries have been testing experimental aircraft that, for example, are about a mile long and cigar shaped, with no other distinguishing features, such as wings, etc., or can accelerate in a moment from 100s of miles per hour to 1000s of miles per hour, execute maneuvers such as 90 degree turns while going 1000s of miles per hour, or are even capable of "flight" in deep ocean water and able to emerge and fly in the sky?

      All of these phenomena ( and more! ) have been reported by multiple credible witnesses, in multiple vessels and craft ( aircraft, boats, submarines ), and tracked on radar.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    25. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, the government was actually covertly trying to make people think they were space aliens. If you saw a top secret experimental aircraft, they'd rather you think it was Martians than realise it was a secret aircraft design.

      There was a real conspiracy; but the real conspiracy wasn't that they were covering up extraterrestrial visits. The real conspiracy was exactly the opposite.

      Actually, "they" were sure that anybody trying to pretend that the UFOs were extraterrestrial instead of the much more obvious secret Soviet planes was a Communist agitator. In this case "they" == FBI.

  4. A slip? by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 4, Funny

    The more that alien life is covered in films or television documentaries, the more people look up at the sky and don't look down at their feet,' said an expert on UFO sightings based at Sheffield Hallam University.

    Which means that they are seeing something.

    UFOs have been observed since ancient times. The apostle John saw one. The Egyptians inscribed a UFO in their hieroglyphics. And the ancient Hebrews recorded the interactions of aliens and humans as the Nephilim.

    I think there's more than the authorities are willing to divulge. It's interesting to see leaks like the quote above confirm what some of us have believed for a long time.

    1. Re:A slip? by Beelzebud · · Score: 3, Informative

      The apostle John also talked to god. The Egyptians do NOT have a UFO in hieroglyphs, no matter what new age internet sites claim, and the Hebrews weren't talking about off-planet aliens when discussing the Nephilim, they're talking about children of fallen angels...

      If you honestly think there is a "leak" in that quote you mentioned, then WOW...

    2. Re:A slip? by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the Hebrews weren't talking about off-planet aliens when discussing the Nephilim, they're talking about children of fallen angels...

      How, exactly, are angels, fallen or otherwise, not off planet aliens (aside from the belief that their off-planet origin is supernatural in nature rather than mundane, which, one would note, would apply equally to the ancient Hebrews conception of human origins.)

    3. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      UFOs have been observed since ancient times. The apostle John saw one. The Egyptians inscribed a UFO in their hieroglyphics..

      Back in those days, pretty much everything except birds and clouds could be counted as an unidentified flying object.

      Other then that, I don't see any reason why it should be more true because it's more old. People have a weird fascination with old stuff, in the sense that they believe that something is somehow a better source of knowledge just because it comes from an era where the existence of god was considered an undeniable fact. Obviously, when you think about it, that notion exists on the grounds between "Stupid" and "Absurd".

    4. Re:A slip? by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The more that alien life is covered in films or television documentaries, the more people look up at the sky and don't look down at their feet,' said an expert on UFO sightings based at Sheffield Hallam University.

      Which means that they are seeing something.

      UFOs have been observed since ancient times. The apostle John saw one. The Egyptians inscribed a UFO in their hieroglyphics. And the ancient Hebrews recorded the interactions of aliens and humans as the Nephilim.

      I think there's more than the authorities are willing to divulge. It's interesting to see leaks like the quote above confirm what some of us have believed for a long time.

      [citations desperately needed]

      Ahhh, the human imagination and psyche. Full of so much wonderful things as the ability to conjure up grand imaginations and interactions ... as well as post a third hand account of several unrelated occurrences thousands of years ago in one paragraph.

      I wish the article had gone back further to War of the Worlds time or the old classic 50s black and white abduction movies. Note the first abduction didn't happen until it had already been in pulps and film. And, from my own personal savior, Carl Sagan:

      In The Demon-Haunted World astronomer Carl Sagan points out that the alien abduction experience is remarkably similar to tales of demon abduction common throughout history. "...most of the central elements of the alien abduction account are present, including sexually obsessive non-humans who live in the sky, walk through walls, communicate telepathically, and perform breeding experiments on the human species. Unless we believe that demons really exist, how can we understand so strange a belief system, embraced by the whole Western world (including those considered the wisest among us), reinforced by personal experience in every generation, and taught by Church and State? Is there any real alternative besides a shared delusion based on common brain wiring and chemistry?" (Sagan 1996 124)

      It's fun stuff to read about and write tall tales about ... and nothing more.

      --
      My work here is dung.
    5. Re:A slip? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can't conceive of "off-planet aliens" when you haven't yet conceived of *planets*.

    6. Re:A slip? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How, exactly, are angels, fallen or otherwise, not off planet aliens?

      Maybe we've been watching too much Stargate? Just saying... And one more question if I might:

      You're statement implies that there are 'on-planet aliens'. Just curious as to whom you're referring to.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    7. Re:A slip? by scorp1us · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Lets think critically about this for a minute.
      You believe they spoke to a super natural being whose influence is not scientifically documented? Whose stongest interactions were taking place before digital recording and scientific reasoning?
      You believe in "angels" more than "life evolving on a[nother] planet"?

      WOW.

      --
      Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    8. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      He's referring to ILLEGAL aliens!

    9. Re:A slip? by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 0

      "...most of the central elements of the alien abduction account are present, including sexually obsessive non-humans who live in the sky, walk through walls, communicate telepathically, and perform breeding experiments on the human species. Unless we believe that demons really exist, how can we understand so strange a belief system, embraced by the whole Western world (including those considered the wisest among us), reinforced by personal experience in every generation, and taught by Church and State? Is there any real alternative besides a shared delusion based on common brain wiring and chemistry?"

      Yes, there is a real alternative. One that has a purely physical basis. Alien encounters.

      It's cute how Sagan compares alien abductions to demonic abductions then claims to debunk both by showing how they both somehow rely on the belief in supernatural demons.

    10. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THe ONLY thing our governments are able to keep secret are things of their own doing, their own programs, own creations.

      UFO = Unidentified Flying Object, meaning it was in the sky and the dumbass observer couldn't make it out. If you're nearsighted, the object will be "unidentified". Its a dumb leap to assume "oh, its too far, or blurry to make out, therefore it MUST be SPAAAAACCE ALIEEEENNNSSSS!!!!" Ridiculous that grown adults think this way.

      Governments are too inept to cover up anything that far out and uncontrollable.

    11. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nephilim? That just means "fallen ones" (and even that translation isn't particularly clear). You have half a verse in Genesis. Everything else about these people is from people making shit up many centuries later. How the Hell did you get "aliens" from so few words?

    12. Re:A slip? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      You mean peopel have seen things they can't explain! Stop the presses~

      Educated people make mistakes about Venus and the moon, what do you think about people before modern scientific training would think?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    13. Re:A slip? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      As a nit pic, Angels would be aliens for all intents and purposes, as would God.

      I am an atheist, so don't construe this as defending someone imaginary man in the sky, or Santa Clause.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    14. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow you should change your name to BadLogicGuy

    15. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't conceive of "off-planet aliens" when you haven't yet conceived of *planets*.

      citation?: http://images.google.com/images?q=sumerian+solar+system

    16. Re:A slip? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      You can't conceive of "off-planet aliens" when you haven't yet conceived of *planets*.

      The ancient Hebrews (and many other ancient people) had both a conception of the Earth as a distinct place within creation and a conception of beings which were not from that distinct place.

    17. Re:A slip? by jeffasselin · · Score: 1

      The sumerians are not the hebrews. These theories are also pure speculation. Finally, having a reasonably accurate astronomical model of the solar system doesn't mean thinking that those other celestial bodies are similar to the earth.

      --
      If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
    18. Re:A slip? by catbertscousin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a nit pic, Angels would be aliens for all intents and purposes, as would God.

      I am an atheist, so don't construe this as defending someone imaginary man in the sky, or Santa Clause.

      I dunno . . . I think it depends on your concept of the universe. I would think beings from another planet within the physical universe would be aliens, while beings from outside of (apart from, however you want to put it) the physical universe would be something else.

      --
      No good deed goes unpunished. - Avon, Blake's 7
    19. Re:A slip? by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      The Hebrews of the time were still polytheistic actually.

    20. Re:A slip? by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      Wait, no that's not Nephilim, that's the objection to Rael's interpretation of Elohim (some have claimed it's a majesty plural, but the truth is judaism as we know it is only about as old as christianity)

    21. Re:A slip? by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      Note the first abduction didn't happen until it had already been in pulps and film.

      I was really into UFOs when I was a kid in the 1970s. Back then, people saw all sorts of different aliens: tall ones, short ones, reptilian ones, green-skinned humanoids, and so on. It's interesting how, since Close Encounters of the Third Kind came out, pretty much everyone sees those short, anime-eyed Grays.

      It's fun stuff to read about and write tall tales about ... and nothing more.

      Oh, definitely something more: studying UFOs and similar phenomena can tell us a lot about how human minds assemble reality.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    22. Re:A slip? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      You're statement implies that there are 'on-planet aliens'.

      1) "Your", not "you're";
      2) The phrase was used to reflect the post it was responding to;
      3) "aliens" has several senses, "off-planet aliens" distinguishes the intended sense from the more general sense of a foreigner.

    23. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are one of those people with the most dreadfully literalist mind ever, and I somehow get the impression you'd evhemerize every single myth of history into somehow happening. We have no traces of most of these events happening except 3rd hand recountings from politically motivated sources and religious myths, knock off the new age shit.

    24. Re:A slip? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but where's the bad analogy? ;)

      On topic, did you ever consider that if in fact there are aliens, that they're not space aliens but time aliens? Humans have only been on the planet for 100,00 years. What will humans look like a million years from now? I don't believe the UFOs are from space OR the future, but I doubt that they come from outer space more than I doubt they come from the future. Who knows what technology will come about in the next 100,000 years? Whay we have now would have been magic just a hundred years ago. Future humans (or whatever humans evolve into) will surely have anthropologists and archaeologists.

      On the other hand, look at how diverse Earth life is. I think the chances of any space aliens resembling us in any way, shape, or form are so small to be laughable. They're almost certain to not look like Area 51 aliens or Klingons, although our descendants might.

    25. Re:A slip? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      [Your] statement implies that there are 'on-planet aliens'. Just curious as to whom you're referring to

      Well, the ISS has offplanet aliens. Japanese, Russian... all sorts of aliens. My current girlfriend's ex husband is an alien.

    26. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UFOs are seen by people all the time, including by thousands over the nation's capital in 1952: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952_Washington_D.C._UFO_incident
      However, they soon disappear down the memory hole and self-styled "skeptics" rush to downplay anything that doesn't fit their idea of how the univeres should function...

    27. Re:A slip? by WheelDweller · · Score: 1

      Carl Sagan isn't one to quote for the reality of Christianity. He's known to have said, "Either life on this planet is super-abundant elsewhere, or we're on one really special planet." (Paraphrasing, of course)

      The truth is, there's something VERY special about this planet, and to some of us it's spectacularly clear. We've looked for decades for other planets similar to ours without finding them. (No,like us plus 15G gravity doesn't count.) And of the stars in the sky only 10 percent or less even have _land_ much less similar planets.

      I know 99% of you guys want us to grow into a Star Trek/Star Wars reality (the other 1% hoping for B5!) but it's not gonna happen. Space is, other than commodities stored in places, worthless. Dangerous. And all but .00001% of it out of reach.

      --
      --- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
    28. Re:A slip? by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

      As a lurker for many years, a poster has finally managed to push me over the edge and actually register and make my first post. Are you seriously using the Bible in an argument to support that UFOs are scientific fact? The same Bible fraught with so many possible interpretations on spiritual matters alone that it has caused countless fragmentation of belief systems among even it's strongest supporters? Using the Bible to prove the reality of UFOs is really no different than trying to use it prove the existence of dragons, angels, demons, creationism, human flight (either without machines, or with the aid of a chariot), spontaneous combustion of shrubbery, and alchemy. Humans have also seen armies marching in the sky, floating islands, and Flying Dutchmen. Maybe the first aliens visited us flying sailboats? There are countless explanations that are infinitely more likely than assuming all of these random sightings are extraterrestrial: Sundogs, Mirages (such as Fata Morganas and superior images), satellites, meteors, weather balloons, planetary bodies, and even the power of suggestion. These are among the many much more plausible explanations. I believe that there is a chance that life could be out there, and it's even possible that there's intelligent life. However, I don't believe that alien visitors are taking joy rides and buzzing trailer parks in vehicles that they model after our current science fiction movies.

    29. Re:A slip? by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      'on-planet aliens'. Just curious as to whom you're referring to.

      Intraterrestrials (think morlocks, mole people, etc).

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    30. Re:A slip? by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      Note the first abduction didn't happen until it had already been in pulps and film.

      The tales of alien abductions are eerily similar to the old tales of fairy abductions, with similar short humanoids with weird faces and pale skin.

      I once saw a documentary with some neurologist claiming that he could recreate that experience in people by causing a specific kind of neurological event, he said it was a kind of nigh terror, a vivid nightmare.

      Or maybe there is a centuries-old hidden culture of nefarious midgets who drug people and rape them. Hey, sometimes it rains fish, this is a weird world :)

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    31. Re:A slip? by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      Even if there were time aliens, they would also have to be space aliens, because our galaxy/solar system/planet are not static.

      I'll call em Space Time Aliens, or STAs for short.

    32. Re:A slip? by O.W.M · · Score: 1

      Note the first abduction didn't happen until it had already been in pulps and film.

      Actually, that's not really what Wikipedia says.

    33. Re:A slip? by ravenspear · · Score: 1

      We've looked for decades for other planets similar to ours without finding them.

      That really has more to do with the fact that our technology is not capable of finding small planets yet. Even huge gas giants only affect distant stars in such a small way that they are at the limits of our detection threshold.

    34. Re:A slip? by Cold+hard+reality · · Score: 1

      We're only now starting to be capable of detecting earthlike planets, and only in very specific circumstances. It's only to be expected we haven't detected any yet.

      Check again in ten years.

    35. Re:A slip? by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      >As a nit pic, Angels would be aliens for all intents and purposes, as would God.

      No because thats revisionist nonsense. Religious people from the past were just that: religious. They had visions, dreams, etc and no concept of life on other planets, flying machines, outer space, etc. Ufo believers think they can just pretend its the same thing, but its not, but this mentality shows you how much of ufology is really a religious belief in itself.

    36. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno . . . I think it depends on your concept of the universe. I would think beings from another planet within the physical universe would be aliens, while beings from outside of (apart from, however you want to put it) the physical universe would be something else.

      Yes! Exactly, they would be entirely alien to this place, there must be a word for that!

    37. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The more that alien life is covered in films or television documentaries, the more people look up at the sky and don't look down at their feet,' said an expert on UFO sightings based at Sheffield Hallam University.

      Which means that they are seeing something.

      UFOs have been observed since ancient times. The apostle John saw one. The Egyptians inscribed a UFO in their hieroglyphics. And the ancient Hebrews recorded the interactions of aliens and humans as the Nephilim.

      I think there's more than the authorities are willing to divulge. It's interesting to see leaks like the quote above confirm what some of us have believed for a long time.

      [citations desperately needed]

      Ahhh, the human imagination and psyche. Full of so much wonderful things as the ability to conjure up grand imaginations and interactions ... as well as post a third hand account of several unrelated occurrences thousands of years ago in one paragraph.

      I wish the article had gone back further to War of the Worlds time or the old classic 50s black and white abduction movies. Note the first abduction didn't happen until it had already been in pulps and film. And, from my own personal savior, Carl Sagan:

      In The Demon-Haunted World astronomer Carl Sagan points out that the alien abduction experience is remarkably similar to tales of demon abduction common throughout history. "...most of the central elements of the alien abduction account are present, including sexually obsessive non-humans who live in the sky, walk through walls, communicate telepathically, and perform breeding experiments on the human species. Unless we believe that demons really exist, how can we understand so strange a belief system, embraced by the whole Western world (including those considered the wisest among us), reinforced by personal experience in every generation, and taught by Church and State? Is there any real alternative besides a shared delusion based on common brain wiring and chemistry?" (Sagan 1996 124)

      It's fun stuff to read about and write tall tales about ... and nothing more.

      it's a joke.

      wooooooooooooooosh!

    38. Re:A slip? by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      [citations desperately needed]

      Check out the Disclosure Project. Their initial press conference had over two hours of pilots, Air Force personnel, and air traffic controllers talking about incidents of UFOs that were clearly not man-made ( size, speed, manueverability ), and either witnessed by multiple people, or both visually and on radar. No abductees or contactees or anything like that, just person after person saying "Pilots reported an object that we tracked on radar for 10 minutes, at which time it did an 90-degree turn sped away at more than 1,000 miles per hour..." .

      Yeah, the guy who started the project is a Doctor gone of the deep end with Herbal cures, but I don't see how that hurts the credibility of any of the witnesses.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    39. Re:A slip? by cetialphav · · Score: 1

      while beings from outside of (apart from, however you want to put it) the physical universe would be something else.

      But if you can see it, feel it, touch it, smell it, it must be part of this universe. We can only detect things in the universe, so if something appears to you, how do you know if it exists outside of the universe? Basically, there is no way to distinguish a god from a sufficiently advanced alien because a god would have to manifest himself (or herself) in some physical manifestation.

    40. Re:A slip? by catbertscousin · · Score: 1

      Basically, there is no way to distinguish a god from a sufficiently advanced alien because a god would have to manifest himself (or herself) in some physical manifestation.

      A very similar point is made in the book Flatland, where a three-dimensional being interacts with two-dimensional beings who don't have a concept of the third dimension, and in the Stargate TV series. Aliens, however, ultimately prove themselves limited in some way because they have a finite perception of/interaction with the physical universe since they are in fact inside/part of it.

      --
      No good deed goes unpunished. - Avon, Blake's 7
    41. Re:A slip? by hey! · · Score: 1

      Ahhh, the human imagination and psyche.

      Isn't it nice to be above all that?

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    42. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ok i'm confused. if angels fall, which direction do they fall in?

    43. Re:A slip? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      But it's not far fetched either. As soon as the human realized that those bodies flying around up there aren't some sort of gods but planets like ours (well, like... more or less), he started to speculate whether people might be living there. Of course, not openly, after all only we were created by God and all that, but you might remember that there has been a certain speculation whether there's life on Venus or Mars.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    44. Re:A slip? by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > You're statement implies that there are 'on-planet aliens'.
      > Just curious as to whom you're referring to.

      He's probably talking about me.

      HTH.HAND.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    45. Re:A slip? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Good point, but "space aliens" generally infers aliens that originated on some planet besides this one.

    46. Re:A slip? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      You could just as easily reverse that silly logic and ask "How are these 'aliens' that people see today NOT angels?"

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    47. Re:A slip? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      You could just as easily reverse that silly logic and ask "How are these 'aliens' that people see today NOT angels?"

      Well, no; while "angels" are conceived as a kind of living entities that are not native to Earth (and, thus, are within the scope of the phrase "off-planet aliens"), the reverse is not true; just as all New York Yankees players are Major League Baseball players, but all MLB players are Yankees players.

    48. Re:A slip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it could also be that alien abductions were masked as demon abductions before, or that demon abduction are now masked as alien abductions. (Sneaky guy, the devil)

  5. Movies and imagination by Cstryon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sounds to me like Independence Day got a lot of people thinking about aliens. So than, when they look at the sky, and see something they don't recognize, it must be an alien/ufo.

    I want to know why we always have crummy video of some ufo, when everyone has a camera on there cell phones, with fairly good resolution?

    --
    Indoctrinate : to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments Educate : to develop mentally, morally, or aestheti
    1. Re:Movies and imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      congratulations, you saw the point the author was trying to make.

    2. Re:Movies and imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because cell phone cameras often have a fixed focal depth and aren't meant for capturing images that far away?

    3. Re:Movies and imagination by AP31R0N · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you see an OBJECT, that is FLYING, and you can't IDENTIFY it (making it UNIDENTIFIED)... it *is* a UFO (relative to me).

      That blurry, fast moving thing in the sky that i can't recognize is a UFO.

      UFO does not state or imply that the object is or might be alien... that's a leap people make on their own. If i say "i saw a UFO", i am NOT saying i saw something from outer space, just that it was in the air and i don't know what it was. Nothing more, nothing less.

      --
      Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
    4. Re:Movies and imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to know why we always have crummy video of some ufo, when everyone has a camera on there cell phones, with fairly good resolution?

      Because the camera in a typical cellphone is still pretty crappy, despite the number of pixels it contains. It's a tiny sensor, with optics designed for quick, wide angle snapshots in full daylight. In a low-light situations, with a very distant subject, where long exposures are required for a decent image (UFO sighting circumstances), a camera phone just isn't going to cut it. Try taking a photo of the moon some time with your camera phone. Now imagine if it was much smaller and moving. Yeah, the images are crappy for a reason.
       
      Captcha: Arisen

    5. Re:Movies and imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Additionally, if you saw an alien spacecraft in the sky it *wouldn't* be a UFO because you just identified it as an alien spacecraft. Then it's just a FO, right?

    6. Re:Movies and imagination by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 1

      If it's a flying object outside, or a FOO then it deserves our pity

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    7. Re:Movies and imagination by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For all practicality,. when someone says UFO, there talking about aliens.

      Yes, you are technically correct; which is the best kind of correct!

      Why would some call 911 to report a terrestrial airplane in the horizon they can't see ID Numbers on?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:Movies and imagination by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Have you ever taken a picture of something in the sky, even with a good camera? I have a digital camera with 5x zoom. When you look at the moon with your eyes, you can see a lot of detail. Now, during the last lunar eclipse, I tried to take some pictures of the moon. Even at 5x zoom, the moon was only a small percentage of the total image area. And even with a tripod, and the fact that the moon moves much slower than any flying saucer, I was unable to get a really clear picture of the moon. Basically, if you are trying to take a picture of something in the night sky, you are going to need a long exposure time, because the object is too far away for the flash to work, and there is very little ambient light. If you have a long exposure time, and are holding the camera in your hand, and the object is moving, there is almost no chance at all of getting a clear shot. Even if the object is still, the fact that you are holding the camera almost makes it impossible to get a clear shot when you have a slow shutter speed.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    9. Re:Movies and imagination by dbet · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A very common way that people think is "if I can't prove it's something mundane, than the most fantastical explanation is probably right". It's simply more fun to live this way than to live in the real world. This not only explains religions but to some extent politics.

    10. Re:Movies and imagination by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      The main problem I've noticed when photographing the moon with a point-and-shoot is that the moon is too bright. The auto exposure sets itself for the blackness of the sky. End result is that the moon, since it takes up very little of the actual picture, is completely overexposed.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    11. Re:Movies and imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes and hackers are programmers and gay people are just happy.

    12. Re:Movies and imagination by PieSquared · · Score: 1

      This phenomenon is of course compounded by the fact that nobody ever looks at the sky anymore, so even things that *aren't* unusual get stuffed into 'UFO' if they happen to be seen. I mean, if you live in a city there's not really a *point*, it's just a big mostly black dome with the moon in it sometimes. I went on vacation recently and was stunned to realize that nobody in my entire family recognized the freaking milky way. Not one of them. I can only imagine what they would have thought if they'd seen an irridium flare or something.

      A better question then the fuzzy video is why professional astronomers never see UFO's. The answer, of course, is because they're really good at identifying previously unidentified flying objects, and they have the equipment to take a closer look.

      Another question is why an alien spacecraft would have exterior lights if they weren't trying to notify the world of their existence, and if they were trying to notify the world of their existence why they wouldn't just hijack one of our television satellites for five minutes.

      --
      Does a line appended to your comment give your post meaning in and of itself, or only in relation to those without?
    13. Re:Movies and imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why would some call 911 to report a terrestrial airplane in the horizon they can't see ID Numbers on?"

      Well I suppose if they were able to identify it as an airplane, it would not be unidentified now would it?

    14. Re:Movies and imagination by 4D6963 · · Score: 2, Funny

      And for all practicality, when someone says "there talking", they mean "they're talking".

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    15. Re:Movies and imagination by wowbagger · · Score: 1

      "For all practicality,. when someone says UFO, there talking about aliens."

      There is a story about an Air Force officer, who is appointed to the position of Press Liaison (a position he most definitely does NOT want).

      So he goes up in a 2 seater fighter jet, with his usual WSO in the back seat. Presently, he says to his WSO "From here on out, I don't want you to say ANYTHING, except for the answers to my questions, which are to be yes, or no. Understood?"

      The bemused WSO agrees.

      The pilot then says "Do you see, off to our 9 o'clock, a large, glowing object? YES OR NO!"

      To which the WSO responds "Y... Yes?"

      Pilot: "I am turning to intercept. Can you get a radar return off it?"

      WSO: "No"

      Pilot: "I am increasing speed to intercept. Speed now Mach 1.2. Are you able to get a radar fix on the object?"

      WSO: "No."

      Pilot: "Visually, do we appear to be gaining on the object?"

      WSO: "No"

      Pilot: "Terminating pursuit. Resuming sub-sonic flight and returning to base. Turning 180 degrees."

      Pilot: "We have turned 180 degrees. The object appears to be off our tail. Can you confirm visual?"

      WSO: "Yes"

      Pilot: "Attempting to evade. Speed now Mach 1.5. Does the object appear to be falling behind?"

      WSO: "No"

      They later land at the base, and the cockpit voice recorder tapes, as transcribed above, somehow are leaked to the press.

      The headlines the next day: "AIR FORCE JET CHASES UFO!" "AIR FORCE SEES ALIEN SHIP!" - etc.

      Now, in his role as Press Liaison, the pilot faces a press conference, with the WSO in attendance.

      Reporter #1: "Is it true you saw an alien craft?!"

      Pilot: "No."

      Reporter #2: "Is it true you saw a UFO?!"

      Pilot: "No."

      Reporter #3: "BULL! COVERUP! YOU AREN'T TELLING US THE TRUTH!"

      Pilot: "Is that a question? Never mind - here's my Weapon Systems Operator, he was in the back seat of the aircraft. What did you see? What did we chase?"

      WSO: "The sun."

      Needless to say, the Pilot was relieved of his role as Press Liaison.

    16. Re:Movies and imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two points. 1) 1996 was also the time of the 'Mars meteor' and the press were totally overdoing the coverage so every day the papers were full of 'alien'-related stuff which may explain some of the UFO paranoia in that year. 2) It's also funny that now everyone is carrying a cell phone camera we still don't have any footage of the top-secret planes we know the military is spending billions of dollars on. On a smaller cover-up scale Jim Cameron has spent the past few years making the most expensive movie ever involving perhaps many hundreds of people working in several countries. Clips of it have been shown to thousands via comic-con and press showings. Yet how many Internet leaks? Ummm...

    17. Re:Movies and imagination by cetialphav · · Score: 1

      Auto exposures are notoriously stupid because they have a very simplistic algorithm. They try to make the whole image grey. I.e. not too dark, not too bright, not too red, etc. Things like the moon, snow, sand can easily screw this up. The upside is that the algorithm is so simple that it is easy to guess when it will be way off and correct for it. Most cameras have some manual settings you can use to correct the exposure, but I doubt most people know how to use it.

    18. Re:Movies and imagination by mqduck · · Score: 1

      If i say "i saw a UFO", i am NOT saying i saw something from outer space, just that it was in the air and i don't know what it was.

      Maybe that's what *you'd* be saying, but for most people, if they say "I saw a UFO", they mean a craft from outer space.

      --
      Property is theft.
    19. Re:Movies and imagination by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > if they were trying to notify the world of their existence why they
      > wouldn't just hijack one of our television satellites for five minutes.

      That would only work if they'd figured out our communications systems, which would be alien to them. Unlikely.

      However, they could land. Conspiracy theorists notwithstanding, landing would be a VERY effective way to let us all know they're here. Word would get around very quickly, I daresay.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    20. Re:Movies and imagination by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Yeah. The other way to compensate is to let it set itself against something else that's really bright before taking the shot. (Most of the time the auto-focus/auto-exposure sets itself when you press the shutter halfway down, and the camera takes the picture when you press it the rest of the way. This allows you to set the exposure/focus on something other than your actual shot, if you want to.)

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  6. Up at the sky and don't look down at their feet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interestingly, troughs in UFO sitings are associated with peaks in CHUD sitings.

  7. missing tag... by wild_quinine · · Score: 1
    I'm not sure why this hasn't been tagged correlationisnotcausation yet. But I'm pretty sure that the more tenuous a story's facts, the less people bother to read the article. And you know what that means?

    Well, nothing. But it deserves further investigation.

    1. Re:missing tag... by mwvdlee · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is a case of "if you look hard enough, you will find". If they looked for evidence that reruns of 70's sitcoms were the cause of UFO sightings, they would have found evidence too.

      TFA mentions an average level when E.T. was released as contradictory (which was noted and, apparently, ignored) and TFS mentions an average level when X-Files was aired as evidence.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  8. Alternatively by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The more that alien life is covered in films or television documentaries, the more people look up at the sky and don't look down at their feet

    Alternatively, the more people see aliens (on TV or whereever), the more people will ... see aliens.

    Or even more controversially: maybe the aliens realy liked the X-Files, Independence Day, and Close Encounters of the Third Kind...

    1. Re:Alternatively by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Alternatively, the more people see aliens (on TV or whereever), the more people will ... see aliens

      I'm a Star Trek fan, and there's an ugly woman at work who must be part Klingon and part Romulan. Poor thing.

    2. Re:Alternatively by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      I'm a Star Trek fan, and there's an ugly woman at work who must be part Klingon and part Romulan. Poor thing.

      So she has pointy ears AND a goatee?

    3. Re:Alternatively by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      No, she looks mostly human but has an EXTREMELY high hairline, as high as (what are their names, ursa and besa? Hevan't seen those episodes in a while) and facial features (sans pointy eyebrows) unflatteringly reminiscant of Romulans.

      At least she doesn't have a Bajoran nose.

      A few years back I joined Parents Without Partners, and there was a woman with (no shit) a Cardassian neck. I stopped attending when she started hitting on me...

  9. Alien Web Profit by emailandthings · · Score: 3, Interesting

    1.- Create not so intelligent creatures

    2.- Have them go at it

    3.- Laugh at their culture, religion's belief, politics, and overall problems

    4.- Sell the broadcast to other aliens

    5.- Profit!

    1. Re:Alien Web Profit by mwvdlee · · Score: 2, Funny

      Alien life must be even more boring than earth life if THAT show were to make a profit. Highly unlikely.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:Alien Web Profit by maxume · · Score: 5, Funny

      Really, the show ended after the Dinosaur Wars, they just didn't bother to tear down the studio.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Alien Web Profit by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I think I've read that book.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:Alien Web Profit by blhack · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or much more likely:

      1: Find a planet full of potentially exploitable resources that can possibly support life
      2: Seed it with basic life
      3: Wait for the life to evolve
      4: Oh, yep, it can support life
      5: Move in
      6: Profit.

      One of the silliest things that humans seem to get stuck in their heads is that other creatures would have the same sort of life expectancy as we do. Animals on our own planet have drastically varying lifespans and we all evolved from the same goop.

      Start thinking about having a lifespan in the hundreds of millions of years (or no lifespan at all...something like...oh, I don't know, a machine/biological hyrbid intelligence) and suddenly those lightyears which seem SOOOOOOOO FAR are not so far any more.

      --
      NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
    5. Re:Alien Web Profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh crap, so you're saying the Vogons really are real...

    6. Re:Alien Web Profit by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      So you've seen the Jimmy Neutron episode with Tim Allen, Vanna White, and Alyssa Milano too?

      God, I think I'm going to weep.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    7. Re:Alien Web Profit by Gospodin · · Score: 1

      The problem with the idea of creatures with lifespans millions of times longer than ours is that they wouldn't have had time to evolve. Or, if they had rapid reproductive cycles (human-scale) but very long lifespans, then (a) you have to wonder how that could have evolved and (b) how come they haven't overpopulated their planet yet? Might make for an interesting science-fiction novel background, but it's not very plausible.

      The cyborg idea is a better one. Although for really long life, I think you'd have to ditch the biological component altogether.

      --
      ...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
    8. Re:Alien Web Profit by blhack · · Score: 1

      Unless they kill each other as a form of population control.

      --
      NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
  10. Don't look down at their own feet? by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Funny

    'The more that alien life is covered in films or television documentaries, the more people look up at the sky and don't look down at their feet,' said an expert on UFO sightings based at Sheffield Hallam University.

    I'll start to believe this might be credible when there is a proven, positive correlation between the prominence of UFOs in film and on TV and the incidence of trip-and-fall accidents.

  11. Evidence of suggestion? by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

    This seems more like evidence of the powers of suggestion and priming. People who are thinking about aliens and such are more likely to see something and say "alien!" rather than "hmm, interesting cloud" or "Neat colored meteor" etc. I doubt this has much to do with where people are looking.

  12. And your word for today is... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 3, Insightful
    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
    1. Re:And your word for today is... by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      How that was modded up blows my mind. If anyone had, like I have, read the first sentence of the linked article, they'd know that pareidolia is about seeing patterns in random stuff. When you see a glowing cigar shaped object flying in the sky at impossible speeds with impossible accelerations, that's not like seeing a face in a cloud or in a toast.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    2. Re:And your word for today is... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but when someone sees a blimp illuminated at night in the distance and thinks it's an alien spaceship, I think pareidolia is a pretty good word to use.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    3. Re:And your word for today is... by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      Not really, in that case I'd rather use the phrase "that guy's a moron" ;-).

      --
      You just got troll'd!
  13. Whatever gets folks to stop looking at their toes by gpronger · · Score: 1

    I guess that if a decent Sci-Fi about aliens gets folks to look up at the night sky for a bit, regardless if they then "see" a UFO (real or imaginary, I'll stay out of that debate) its done us a good thing.

    A bit of wonder of the cosmos will do most people good.

    Greg

  14. Carl Jung on Flying Saucers by Sabathius · · Score: 1

    Carl Jung wrote a book on Flying Saucers based on possible psychological aspects of UFO sightings. Although he was skeptical of UFOs existing at all (this writer is not), I'm sure he was on to something.

  15. That is old news by aepervius · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you look at UFO sighting report from the earliest to the latest you would remark that alien face evolved with time, and surprise surprise, cinematography. There is a web page somewhere which shows that somewhere , too bad I did not bookmark it. Same for alien "saucer" evolution by the way.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:That is old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I think you missed the universal bailout that helped keep stellar motors afloat. The saucer evolution is obviously from new models being released to the market! Thanks to cash for clunkers, I can trade in my 1940's model (rather unreliable and prone to crash) for a new shiny one that can also submerge!


      I believe plastic surgery and genetic manipulation is big with the races of the core worlds which is why so much variance in aliens is seen. Meh, I'll keep my tentacles and brow ridges (all the cool kids are getting big eyes and smooth heads).

    2. Re:That is old news by bocin · · Score: 1

      A fiction no matter how bizarre, if repeated often enough becomes accepted as fact especially if it's reinforced by the voice of some Authority or other.

    3. Re:That is old news by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you look at UFO sighting report from the earliest to the latest you would remark that alien face evolved with time, and surprise surprise, cinematography. There is a web page somewhere which shows that somewhere , too bad I did not bookmark it. Same for alien "saucer" evolution by the way.

      I've looked into this some, and it's not so clear cut. The chicken and egg have fuzzy boarders. For example, (alleged) abduction experts point out that one generally does not recall the abductor's (alien's) face except under hypnosis, and until the Hill case, nobody was bothering to perform hypnosis for such purposes. Thus, there's very little pre-Hill material to compare (and some of it does match).

      As far as the "saucer" shape, there appeared to be an increase in saucer sightings even before the original "saucer" news article came off the press. A weatherman spotted about a dozen disks, for exammple, just before the paper. True, the rate jumped even further after the paper came out, but it's hard to tell whether people are simply looking and/or reporting harder, or whether they are imagining things they read about.

      I've read fairly extensively on the UFO phenom, and generally conclude it's premature to make any conclusions. If it's not a "space mystery", then it certainly is a psychological mystery. We'd have to toss out a lot of court cases and free a lot of "criminals" if eyewitness accounts from UFO-observing professionals such as airline pilots, emergency response, and cops is dismissed because of an alleged propensity to hallucinate based on media exposure.

      Something is really odd, either in the sky or in our heads. It's a fascinating topic regardless of the real answer.

         

    4. Re:That is old news by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Actually, recent DNA testing in many old criminal cases has shown EXACTLY how unreliable eyewitness accounts can be.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    5. Re:That is old news by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      True, but nobody has really studied when and why. Further, eyewitness info does turn out to be useful at times. It used to be believed that "rocks don't fall from the sky", and witnesses were considered superstitious coocks by the scientific community. But one expert decided to study witness accounts and eventually solved the mystery (meteorites). Thus, witnesses being perfect and being useful are not necessarily the same.

  16. Maybe.. by WarpCode · · Score: 1

    Maybe people saw the aliens first and then started watching x-files and/or Independence Day to give them idea's on how to deal with a possible alien threat... Or, perhaps aliens picked up x-files on their space ships and are fans of the show. It being a fox show they of course had to get closer to earth to adjust their antenna for better picture quality.

    1. Re:Maybe.. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It being a fox show they of course had to get closer to earth to adjust their antenna for better picture

      Does anybody remember "My favorite Martian"?

    2. Re:Maybe.. by rts008 · · Score: 1

      Does anybody remember "My favorite Martian"?

      Yeah...at the time, I thought that was the coolest space ship ever portrayed on screen. (it seemed a little too small, though)

      Damn I feel old now!

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    3. Re:Maybe.. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I hate to break it to you, but we ARE old now!

    4. Re:Maybe.. by rts008 · · Score: 1

      Gahhh!
      No!
      How did this happen?!?!?
      I'm not ready for Geritol parties!

      Damn, seems like just yesterday we were inventing dirt...

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    5. Re:Maybe.. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Damn, seems like just yesterday we were inventing dirt...

      We never did get all the bugs out.

  17. Does it have an antenna? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does it have an antenna?

    1. Re:Does it have an antenna? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. But it does have a probe.

    2. Re:Does it have an antenna? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cartman got an anal probe!

  18. Huh - I never thought of that by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    So you're saying the aliens are only here to steal our cars?

  19. you laugh but by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    That's exactly what happened to this guy.

  20. Fools! by oldhack · · Score: 1

    Fools! Plot the sighting with aluminum foil sales!

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  21. This is correct folks by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    Correlation is not causation. The article presents no real evidence that UFO sightings are caused by Sci-Fi popularity. Until they do we must all continue to believe that the cause of UFO sightings is aliens.

  22. Oh please. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

    And your term for the day is. . ,

    argumentum ad ignorantiam.

    -FL

    1. Re:Oh please. by Eudial · · Score: 1

      And your term for the day is ..

      Occam's razor

      --
      GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    2. Re:Oh please. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

      Don't even go there.

      If you cannot see the logical flaw with Occam's Razor, then you aren't thinking. Just because Jodi Foster used the term in a M*O*V*I*E doesn't mean you get to stop thinking.

      Report back when you find the hole. And if you happen to own a truck, you'll be able to pilot right on through without any fear of scratching the paint.

      -FL

  23. I'm looking for the link between by sorak · · Score: 1

    religious movies and Christ-in-food sightings.

  24. Penn & Teller say Bullshi! by Krokz · · Score: 1

    Bullshit covers this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFiDfwsphVs 6:15 onwards. Makes you loose hope in humanity.

    1. Re:Penn & Teller say Bullshi! by hesiod · · Score: 1

      I much preferred the last 1 minute or so.

  25. Other reasons by Zanix · · Score: 1

    Correlation does not imply causation.

    What if the aliens realized it was a period of time where we were most receptive to close encounters of the third kind.

    Or maybe they just realized people would blame it on too much alcohol and a drunk encounter with ID4.

    The aliens are smarter than us, this idea is just us playing right into their hands!

    *Puts on his tinfoil hat*

  26. I saw a UFO this morning. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    It was in the sky and I couldn't tell what it was. Maybe it was a bird; but it was an object, I couldn't identify it, and it was flying.

    I don't think it was aliens, but you never know, it could have been a bird from Mexico or Canada. Or plane. Or...

  27. Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon? by The_mad_linguist · · Score: 1

    Could also be a result of the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon - that is, the thing where after you learn a new word/name/fact, you suddenly start noticing it everywhere.

  28. Interesting documentary by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

    If you are interest or curious about flying saucers, of the form 'made on Earth', then this is an interesting documentary:

    http://www.factualtv.com/documentary/Real-Flying-Saucers

    it covers research done by Coander, the Germans and the Avrocar.

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  29. Insufficient statistics by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    600 UFO sitings is insignificant. That is such a ridiculously small percentage of the population of the U.K. that you can't use it for proving any correlation whatsoever. Just because it jumped in one year from insignificant/6 to insignificant doesn't mean a trend has been established. It's probably the same loon calling 3 time a night instead of once every 3 nights.
    Now show me 100,000 people calling in on one sighting, and I'll sit up and take notice.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  30. Why isn't "god" a UFO sighting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why isn't "GOD" a UFO sighting? Imagine, if you will, that a being arrived in ancient Egypt with ST:NG high tech stuff. Wouldn't that be enough to create a religion and claim you've met God?

    Burning bush - phaser on very low power
    Water into wine - transporter replacement
    Split the Red Sea - force fields, clear aluminum
    Hearing thundering voices - loudspeakers
    Rising from the dead - Dr. McCoy is amazing

    BTW, my father and copilot saw a UFO while flying B-52s. He mentioned it once, never again and his copilot also saw it. They didn't file a report, so their military careers wouldn't be impacted. Jimmy Carter is on record for sighting a UFO.

    UFO doesn't mean anything, just something unidentified. Anything from a strange cloud, to a high altitude balloon, to aircraft or birds flying in formation off in the distance with unusual lighting, to a spot on the windshield with refractive properties can be UFOs. Mix any two of them and it is very easy to thing you see something.

  31. The UFO ATC problem by Animats · · Score: 2, Funny

    Something like 0.2% of the US population claims to have been abducted by a UFO. This means about 16 flights per night for a medium-sized city. Do UFOs coordinate with air traffic control, or what?

    UFO 149A, you are cleared to descend to 6000, turn right heading 240, report when over LAX VOR.

    1. Re:The UFO ATC problem by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and what percentage of the population has certain types of mental disorders? That's something I really love about the anti-UFO arguments, people shooting down the whole thing just because 99% of reports are garbage.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    2. Re:The UFO ATC problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something like 0.2% of the US population claims to have been abducted by a UFO. This means about 16 flights per night for a medium-sized city. Do UFOs coordinate with air traffic control, or what?

      UFO 149A, you are cleared to descend to 6000, turn right heading 240, report when over LAX VOR.

      99% of kids believe to have been visited by Santa Claus. This means he delivers at least 100 shipping containers of presents to a medium-sized city. Does Santa coordinate with the city transit authorities, or what?

  32. Correlation... by migla · · Score: 1

    Maybe the aliens time their visits to correlate with movies and whatever, just so that we'd think people just imagine things... ;)

    --
    Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
  33. Correlation is Obvious ... by muHerdNerd · · Score: 1

    The aliens came to watch the shows and movies.

  34. Aliens are real by A+Pancake · · Score: 1

    Canadians know the truth. You think those delicious timbits are just donut holes? Alien eggs. You don't even want to know what's in a double double.

  35. Jin (djin) by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    As a nit pic, Angels would be aliens for all intents and purposes, as would God.

    I am an atheist, so don't construe this as defending someone imaginary man in the sky, or Santa Clause.

    I dunno . . . I think it depends on your concept of the universe. I would think beings from another planet within the physical universe would be aliens, while beings from outside of (apart from, however you want to put it) the physical universe would be something else.

    Let me teach you about Islam... The Jinn are beings created with free will, living on earth in a world parallel to mankind. The Arabic word Jinn is from the verb 'Janna' which means to hide or conceal.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  36. Is it a bird? A plane? A zeppelin? A helicopter? by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    For all practicality,. when someone says UFO, there talking about aliens.

    Yes, you are technically correct; which is the best kind of correct!

    Why would some call 911 to report a terrestrial airplane in the horizon they can't see ID Numbers on?

    1- Equating UFO with Flying Saucer is common, but stupid, and not to be excused by it's vulgarity, especially in a haven of technically correct people such as slashdot.

    2- Unidentified object!!! If you identify it as an airplane, you don't need to have it's number, you know what kind of object it is.

    Stop enabling the dumbing down of society.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  37. Worth looking at the actual Project SIGN evidence by lennier · · Score: 1

    A lot of documentation of the original 1947-era UFO sightings is now in the public domain.

    This blogger has done a pretty good job of assembling a 1940s timeline, going into excruciating detail of all the military investigations in the early SIGN/GRUDGE era.

    There's some pretty intriguing stuff there. It's by no means an open and shut case what those things were.

    --
    You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
  38. FAQ by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Q: With so many high-quality digital cameras out there in every cell phone, why do we only ever get crappy videos and fuzzy images of UFO's?
    A: Take your cell phone right now and photograph the nearest airplane in the sky. Then come back and ask that question.

    Q: Okay, but what about professional astronomers? Why don't they ever see UFO's?
    A: Who says they haven't?

    Q: If alien life is out there, why don't they just talk to us?
    A: Go to your local factory farm and try opening lines of communication with the livestock. Then come back and ask that question.

    Q: Why would the government want to keep alien life a secret from us?
    A: Go tell your bank manager during your next loan application that you are under the complete domination of a freaky bully who does with you and your family whatever it pleases and that you are utterly powerless to stop it, and that it insists you orchestrate the mass-murder of everybody in the bank and that you fully intend to go along with this plan. Then come back and ask that question.

    Q: But Occam's Razor says that the simplest solution is usually the right one.
    A: Occam didn't take into account that people are conceited to the point where they believe that any idea which hasn't yet occurred to them is less likely to hold validity than those ideas which they have thought of. Example: When Alexander Graham Bell first announced to the world the existence of the Telephone, very smart critics refused to believe it, even going so far as to publish treatises and diagrams in the leading journals of the day, declaring that the physics of sound simply made it impossible that voice could travel any distance through metal tubes (wires) of the diameter described in Bell's experiment; Was it more likely, they asked, that Bell had discovered some New Magical Force or that he was simply lying? --If we only believe in things we already know and understand, then we would never learn anything new.

    Q: Okay, but people are very good at seeing patterns where none exist. People have been fooled before!
    A: Right, and by the same logic, since, "All cows are Animals, all Animals must therefore be Cows."

    Q: Show me proof! All you are doing is offering non-falsifiable arguments! Proof, damn it!
    A: There's tons of it out there. You're simply refusing to look at it. Crop circles are a great place to start because they don't fly away; watch the film, "Crop Circles, Quest for Truth". Also, read Richard Dolan's, "UFO's and the National Security State." After you do some basic research, you won't feel compelled to wave that question around.

    This concludes the FAQ.

    -FL

    1. Re:FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While you're grabbing the above listed fine, fine film & book you might also want to pickup "The Demon-Haunted World" by Carl Sagan and "Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, & Hoaxes" by James Randi. My recommendation would be to first watch/read the items listed above, then read these two, then watch/read the ones listed above a second time to see if your interpretation of the "data" they cite changes at all. Good reading...

    2. Re:FAQ by BurningTyger · · Score: 1

      Q: With so many high-quality digital cameras out there in every cell phone, why do we only ever get crappy videos and fuzzy images of UFO's?
      A: Take your cell phone right now and photograph the nearest airplane in the sky. Then come back and ask that question.

      I know at least a dozen female friends who carries their Canon/Sony/Samsumg digital camera in their purses at all time. Whenever I go camping, there are at least 2 people in the group who'd bring their digital camera along. And your point is ?
      -

      Q: Okay, but what about professional astronomers? Why don't they ever see UFO's?
      A: Who says they haven't?

      Wow, you must love Monty Python's "Argument Clinic" sketch.
      -

      Q: If alien life is out there, why don't they just talk to us?
      A: Go to your local factory farm and try opening lines of communication with the livestock. Then come back and ask that question.

      So you've just proved that we do initiate face-to-face contact with other animals even if we can't communicate with them. And your point on why Alien doesn't just show up is?
      -

      Q: Why would the government want to keep alien life a secret from us?
      A: Go tell your bank manager during your next loan application that you are under the complete domination of a freaky bully who does with you and your family whatever it pleases and that you are utterly powerless to stop it, and that it insists you orchestrate the mass-murder of everybody in the bank and that you fully intend to go along with this plan. Then come back and ask that question.

      This makes absolutely no sense that I don't even know what to say
      -

      Q: But Occam's Razor says that the simplest solution is usually the right one.
      A: Occam didn't take into account that people are conceited to the point where they believe that any idea which hasn't yet occurred to them is less likely to hold validity than those ideas which they have thought of. Example: When Alexander Graham Bell first announced to the world the existence of the Telephone, very smart critics refused to believe it, even going so far as to publish treatises and diagrams in the leading journals of the day, declaring that the physics of sound simply made it impossible that voice could travel any distance through metal tubes (wires) of the diameter described in Bell's experiment; Was it more likely, they asked, that Bell had discovered some New Magical Force or that he was simply lying? --If we only believe in things we already know and understand, then we would never learn anything new.

      And Alexander Bell produced a functioning phone and became a millionaire. Where's your detail photo of UFO? If I have unlimited time, I'd go investigate every claim ever made. But unfortunately I don't. This is why Occam's Razor exist. It doesn't tell you what's real and what's not. Occam's Razor helps you to eliminate outrageous claims and concentrate your limited time and effort on the plausible ones.
      -

      Q: Okay, but people are very good at seeing patterns where none exist. People have been fooled before!
      A: Right, and by the same logic, since, "All cows are Animals, all Animals must therefore be Cows."

      Q: Show me proof! All you are doing is offering non-falsifiable arguments! Proof, damn it!
      A: There's tons of it out there. You're simply refusing to look at it. Crop circles are a great place to start because they don't fly away; watch the film, "Crop Circles, Quest for Truth". Also, read Richard Dolan's, "UFO's and the National Security State." After you do some basic research, you won't feel compelled to wave that question around.

      This concludes the FAQ.

      -FL

      I wasn't sure if you were being sarcastic or being serious in this post. But your second post about "Skeptic/Sceptic" showed that you are actually serious in what you said.

    3. Re:FAQ by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

      Oooh boy. It's going to be one of those days. Well, let's jump into it then. . .

      I know at least a dozen female friends who carries their Canon/Sony/Samsumg digital camera in their purses at all time. Whenever I go camping, there are at least 2 people in the group who'd bring their digital camera along. And your point is ?

      Yes. People have lots of cameras. There is no problem with the availability of cameras. I know this. Everybody here knows this. And clearly, YOU know this. Now, having established that beyond any doubt. . , go and try capturing a video of an airplane flying overhead Right Now. The reason I say Right Now, is in an effort to simulate the un-expectedness of a UFO sighting. You can't plan to sit under a flight path and wait with the correct lenses and tripod set up. You must pull a camera out of your pocket and start shooting with no preparation at all. If you do this, using an airplane as your subject, you will shortly understand why it is so difficult to take pictures which are clear and un-fuzzy of objects which appear without warning in the sky. Get it?

      Wow, you must love Monty Python's "Argument Clinic" sketch.

      Wow. Allow me to simplify: Professional Astronomers have seen UFO's.

      So you've just proved that we do initiate face-to-face contact with other animals even if we can't communicate with them. And your point on why Alien doesn't just show up is?

      Uh huh. You honestly cannot see the point behind that analogy? I can assure you, there IS a point there. Try looking again. Maybe take a nap first and have a good meal with some sugars and nutrients and water first, just to make sure your blood sugars and electrolytes exist in sufficient quantity for a fully effective brain.

      My point is that alien life HAS shown up, but you are too bovine to recognize the implications or the reality of it. It has no interest in communicating with you because you are too stupid and too limited. Heck, I'm human, and I can barely stand communicating with you. If I could extract resources from crushing you into a mulch, I'd put a number on your ear-lobe and send you off to the rendering plant as well. I certainly can't see much value in you otherwise, unless perhaps as a mindless slave. How much plainer do you want this?

      This makes absolutely no sense that I don't even know what to say

      It does make sense, you just have trouble with analogies. Try substituting, "Bank" for "Country" and "Loan" for "Taxes". My point was to try to describe an experience which mirrors in some respects the problems a government official who is aware of what UFO's imply might face when deciding to speak to the public about it. --To be fair, this example did require a little more imagination on the part of the reader than the others.

      And Alexander Bell produced a functioning phone and became a millionaire.

      Phones are non-threatening and useful for managing a population. Broad acceptance of the UFO reality is not. Acceptance or non-acceptance of an idea does not change the fact that Bell's critics were using poor logic to reach false conclusions. You are using the same kind of thinking.

      [...]If I have unlimited time, I'd go investigate every claim ever made. But unfortunately I don't. This is why Occam's Razor exist. It doesn't tell you what's real and what's not. Occam's Razor helps you to eliminate outrageous claims and concentrate your limited time and effort on the plausible ones.

      You understand then a thing which is not understood by most; that Occam's Razor is a rule of thumb and not a hard and fast law. That's the first intelligent thing you've said. However, you are failing to see the point; that Occam's Razor relies on self-referential knowledge to determine what is likely and unlikely. In closed systems where all the possible behavior mechanics are understood, this is fine, but when speculating about new forces, the question might be better put: "Which is more likely? That I know eve

  39. a link between and iPhone application and UFO? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and perhaps also a link between UFO sightings and an iPhone application dedicated to apply UFO objects to images, according to the article on this page

    http://www.eleganceofaliens.com/page8.html

    where an known "authority" in UFOs was caught spreading fake UFO pictures...

  40. Sewage by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

    While you're grabbing the above listed fine, fine film & book you might also want to pickup "The Demon-Haunted World" by Carl Sagan and "Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, & Hoaxes" by James Randi. My recommendation would be to first watch/read the items listed above, then read these two, then watch/read the ones listed above a second time to see if your interpretation of the "data" they cite changes at all. Good reading...

    Uh huh. I'd also study a magician's manual on how to perform a cold reading, which I've also done. Because there are two kinds of skeptic. They even write the word in two different ways!

    The first kind is the Skeptic, and this is a rare sort of person! I am one. I'm the guy who has read the books on both sides of the shelf, remained open and performs analysis based on objective reality without caring who laughs or scowls. It takes courage to be a Skeptic.

    The other kind is the Sceptic, (note how the spelling is shared with the word relating to sewage and toxicity). Sceptics are a dime a dozen. They will read only the books by Sagan and Randi and having done so will then utterly fail to read anything beyond that in order to put those two esteemed writers to the test.

    Which kind are you? Have you followed your own advice?

    -FL

  41. What the hell??? by Puppet+Master · · Score: 1
    ...the more people look up at the sky and don't look down at their feet...

    Why would they look at their feet for a UFO?

    That's like looking up in the sky when someone says "Hey, look at the dead bird!"

    --
    The day Microsoft creates a product that doesn't suck, it will be known as the Microsoft Vaccuum Cleaner!
  42. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    A lot of conspiracy theories out there seem pretty obviously like bullshit, yet I wouldn't doubt that there are actual conspiracy theories out there. However, because of all the junk, it seems impossible to pick out the "real" ones.

    The fake conspiracy theories could still be generated independently of the government though.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.