Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: What Is Your View On UFO Sightings?

dryriver writes: UFOs sightings have been reported in the tens of thousands over the last decades. In the past, some have seen flying cigar-shaped craft (blimps?), some flying triangles, some more rounded-looking flying saucers. Often the apparent spacecraft does something improbable like standing completely still in the sky and then shooting off to somewhere at an incredible speed. Some sightings are just lights or light formations flying around or dancing around in the night sky -- which could be military aircraft like helicopters and F16s training at night. There seem to be people who genuinely see stuff that is hard to explain, people who fake UFO sightings, photos and videos for profit to keep the "UFO industry" of websites, radio shows and magazines afloat, and yet others that think a regular airplane flying at night with its lights on is a UFO. What is your view on all this? Are we being visited from outer space? Is it prototype aircraft that look like UFOs to the untrained eye? Was some 190 IQ inventor-prankster having fun with quadcopter drones with colored lights four decades before quadcopters became a thing (hey, tons of people have created fake crop-circles in the past)? Where do all these supposed UFO sightings and reports come from? Did events like the famous "Battle Of Los Angeles" actually happen? And do you find any UFO reports credible at all?

384 comments

  1. why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    go away and watch tv

    1. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'll answer "dryriver":

      U.F.O. is an initialism which stands for Unidentified Flying Object. That is any object which is aloft and which cannot be identified is a U.F.O. A flying saucer is not a U.F.O. because you have identified what it is.

      Does alien life exist in the universe? Probably. Have any of those aliens somehow found our tiny speck of dust among all of the stars and galaxies throughout the vastness of the universe (or beyond) and decided that they really needed to visit? Probably not.

    2. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Maritz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Tell me, when your toast lands butter side down, do you curse the blasted millennials? Their dark hand is everywhere is it not?

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    3. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      is it pronounced oo-foe?

    4. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Tell me, when your toast lands butter side down, do you curse the blasted millennials? Their dark hand is everywhere is it not?

      The parents point is not lost, no matter how much sarcasm you try and throw at it.

      Hype is what is valued today, not merely boring news. It enables the masses to take part in slinging their own version of the truth is the information game we now play in society. And liars are having a fucking field day with that; an instant gratification delivery schedule allows for zero fact checking. UFO discussions fit that "click" model rather perfectly.

      That kind of market is primarily supported by GenY/Z who feeds that shit. The older generation isn't nearly as addicted to basing their lives off how many virtual friends click on my feed and like my Insta-life/tweets/YouTube vids. The worst part about that addiction is it's become such the norm in younger generations that no one dares to label it a problem. That would be blasphemy on par with suggesting a Starbucks addiction is bad for your health and budget.

      Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to work to support the twenty-something Ritalin generation who swears they're gonna be Insta-rich making viral videos about my lawn.

    5. Re: why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "their "dark hand" really sells that line. FYI

    6. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      lol no. Sheesh. Acronyms are pronounced as words. Initialisms are not.

    7. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1
      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    8. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Careful dude. Saying that sort of thing around here is inviting an attack by pedants.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    9. Re: why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Anything is a UFO, if you are dumb enough.

    10. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, an acronym is a very specific type of initialism - one that is spoken as if it was a word itself rather than having the letters spelled out. So FBI is an initialism, while HAARP is an acronym. Just because most people don't understand the distinction doesn't mean there isn't one.

    11. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are incorrect sir. His use of the word was perfectly correct and yours was questionable.

      http://lmgtfy.com/?q=acronym+vs+initialism

    12. Re: why is this shit even on slashdot? by DThorne · · Score: 2

      You might want to cut those cursed millenials a little slack. It's not so much about clicks, although sure, that plays a role everywhere nowadays - it's called economics. I think the reality is that to many of them it's still a potential mystery. I'm not totally ashamed to say that when I was a teen I wondered about all of the "proof" out there, I looked up in wonder after walking out of my first screening of CE3K, and there was a distinct hot summer when I was absolutely convinced of the veracity of Chariots of the Gods.

      So sure, with everyone and their mother walking around with cameras in their pockets that would put the best portable camera from the 70s to shame, we still have not one single believable piece of real evidence of ghosts, Bigfoot or alien life amongst us, just claims and easily fake able footage wielded by the usual collection of attention whores, troubled losers and idiots raised on Punked.
      So perhaps think of this topic as an opportunity to educate rather than another sign that all the things you love are dying.

    13. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hype is what is valued today, not merely boring news. It enables the masses to take part in slinging their own version of the truth is the information game we now play in society. And liars are having a fucking field day with that; an instant gratification delivery schedule allows for zero fact checking. UFO discussions fit that "click" model rather perfectly.

      The X-Files was a popular show when most millenials were still in grade school, and it pretty much embodies this paragraph. Hype fixation wasn't invented recently, or even in our lifetimes.

      People want to believe in something amazing and inexplicable, if for no other reason than it gives them hope: reality is just too boring and depressing. Religion is failing us, the stories and legends sound increasingly unlikely and unreal as time and education advances, so something else is filling the void. UFOs for those looking for the unworldy, scandals for those looking for the carnal, social media for those who like a good fight.

      There are good reasons to hate millenials: ex. skinny jeans. But this isn't one.

    14. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Millennials may fix the internet eventually. It might just take some more time before they figure out it is busted.

      On the topic of UFOs. How can I know whether they exist or not?

      So I neither believe or disbelieve.

    15. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In true millennial fashion, you are easily offended and try to make a mountain out of a molehill. I guess you're so used to constant external stimuli that you need to fabricate drama when there is none. After all, controversy drives traffic and you need traffic if you are going to launch your YouTube/Twitch/Patreon video game playing and screaming career.

    16. Re: why is this shit even on slashdot? by pseudoanalog · · Score: 1

      The best answer to this crude comment I can think of is because it's a credible theory. In honors antropology in college we were taught that one of the three top theories to life on earth and the Out of Africa theory of Homo-Sapian-Sapian is alien seeding. Wake up dude, just because Vampire Bat Boy on the Weekly World News is insane doesn't make credible theories any less sane.

    17. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Cyberpunk+Reality · · Score: 1

      I have to agree. This isn't news for nerds. It isn't stuff that matters. It's the sort of crap I used to see on the "History" channel.

      Thank you, slashdot editors, for the reminder that this site has jumped the shark and I should not be wasting my time here.

      --
      Rule 35 of the internet: "If it can be hacked, it will be". - Charles Stross
    18. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Holi · · Score: 1

      So it's today that hype is valued?

      You mean all that time leading up to now, hype was nothing? Tthis is the problem I see, everyone trashes on the new young generation for doing the same damn things they did. Why is it more noticeable? That is probably the fault of social media and the younger generations larger population there.

      But the idea that people from earlier generations were somehow better is ridiculous, we just didn't have cameras everywhere catching our stupidity.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    19. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And "initialism" is what people say when they can't remember the word "acronym".

      And attempting to correct someone with misinformation is what people do when they are uneducated morons.

      initialism

    20. Re: why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alien seeding of life on Earth, if by alien you mean intelligent purposeful actors from some other planet, is not a sane theory in any way.

    21. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by gnick · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A flying saucer is not a U.F.O. because you have identified what it is.

      Can you not have an unidentified flying saucer?

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    22. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      How can I know whether they exist or not?

      It's a tautology. It's flying, you haven't identified it. It exists. How could you NOT know that it exists? Obviously, by not seeing it. This logic could swirl around indefinitely.

    23. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      You can have an unidentified flock of sparrows. Flying around.

      Wooo-ah-wooo! We need a documentary about this on 'The History Channel' because real history is boring and people won't stick around to watch the commercials.

    24. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To the same extent that you can have an unidentified airplane. UFO encompasses anything that is flying and unidentified. Air traffic control deals with them regularly and nobody freaks out because "aliens". Most likely some dumbass with a drone or a redneck in a lawn chair attached to balloons.

    25. Re: why is this shit even on slashdot? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      It's probably a credible theory if you went to an Undergraduate School and got your degree, but instead of doing the normal thing and leaving campus to go out and live your life, you continue taking more and more courses until there aren't any left, and then get a job teaching courses on campus.

      Then you can become a wholesale dealer in 'top theories' about which you only know what you read in academic circles, and what you can discern from the window of your office on campus.

    26. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      They are trying to get rid of the real nerds, because we're known to be resilient against advertising and other forms of malware and mal-content that this site has refocused on delivering.

    27. Re: why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In this instances do I curse the millennials? Not at the moment but thanks for the suggestion for future occurrences.

    28. Re: why is this shit even on slashdot? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why anyone would even mention it in the same sentence as Out-of-Africa theory, or even the same book (unless that book was "The complete history of life from planetary genesis to modern day nation-states"), and I certainly wouldn't consider it a "top theory" without any shred of evidence (not that I'd expect to find any even if it were true)

      But as for not being sane, why ever not? Natural life-seeding is generally accepted as at least theoretically possible, especially within a solar system (for example we almost certainly exchange impact ejecta with Mars, Venus, etc. on a fairly regular basis), and an intelligence that wanted to do so intentionally could do so far more effectively. Launch a tiny probe with a teaspoon of freeze-dried "terraforming microbes" with enough genetic instability to evolve rapidly as they transformed their world, and just enough smarts to hit a target planet without sterilizing the payload. We're almost at the point of being able to do that already, and plenty of people right here at home find the idea of bringing life to a desert appealing. Especially if biogenesis were in fact very rare even on hospitable worlds.

      Imagine if, 8 billion years or so ago a species like modern humans ventured out to the stars and discovered *nothing*. A galaxy full of lifeless rocks, many of which could have harbored life, but never did. Heck, a few million years worth of sub-light undergrad projects could have seeded the entire galaxy. In a few centuries we may well be capable of doing the job ourselves with a few decades of "Green the galaxy" sentiment - just send great gobs of cheap drones streaking out into the void, with enough shielding to protect their payload for a billion years.

      Likely? Not especially. But hardly insane.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    29. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by syn3rg · · Score: 1

      What Is Your View On UFO Sightings?

      Of the stars. From the ground, looking up.

      --
      The contents of this message have been doubly encrypted by ROT13
    30. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by painandgreed · · Score: 2

      People want to believe in something amazing and inexplicable, if for no other reason than it gives them hope: reality is just too boring and depressing. Religion is failing us, the stories and legends sound increasingly unlikely and unreal as time and education advances, so something else is filling the void. UFOs for those looking for the unworldy, scandals for those looking for the carnal, social media for those who like a good fight.

      Funny you should bring up religion. There is actually a lot of current thought that these are actually the same phenomenon. Historical sightings of angels, saints, and miracles often have the same descriptions that more modern UFO sightings have: disks and sphere flying through the sky, often described as moving in a tumbling or skipping motion, bright lights, and even abductions with transport to another place or missing time. From there, you get into different camps as to what is going on. Either people of old mistook aliens visitations for angelic beings, or mistaking supernatural creatures as aliens. If you look up "aliester crowley lam" you'll get a picture of the spirit he is said to have contacted though magic ritual in 1918 and you'll see a pretty classic alien grey type figure with large head and almond eyes. Then you have others that say that this is just a bit of human psychology and people are seeing things but just adding in their own interpretations to them that match their current belief system. Then their are those who suggest the choice is not one of actually being visited by something or delusions, but options for anything in between.

    31. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The parents point is not lost, no matter how much sarcasm you try and throw at it.

      His sarcasm was way better than the stupid generalizations I just read about them millennials. Face it: someone said "UFO" so you thought there was a stupidity contest, and so you tried to win.

      Hype is what is valued today

      Value it all you want, but quit trying to sell it here, or even more stupidly: quit trying to sell the idea that it's new. Sure.. Mark Antony came to bury Ceaser, not praise him. Uh huh. So fucking new.

      You can cherry-pick as much hype, propaganda, lies etc as examples of any particular group being intellectually lazy/dishonest, but as long as you play the anecdote game, the other players can cherry-pick too. If you wanna claim that Nazis invented hype, someone else will prove that black slaves invented it. Wanna try the "edgy" blame-the-classic-repressed-group game too (you're pissed that I picked black slaves last sentence, aren't you?), and say that Jews invented propaganda? No problem, your opponent will simply one-up you by proving that women invented it first. Once you realize that you always get your ass kicked in the one-up stupid anecdote game, you'll play it safe by claiming the ad industry invents this stuff. Trying to gracefully save face, I see. But then someone else will still one-up you by proving that politicians invented it in 2500 BC. Then a biologist will one-up him and tell everyone about an island of birds that have been doing it for at least 5 million years.Then a biochemist will one-up him by another couple orders of magnitude...

      (And we haven't even gotten to millennials' most powerful and stunning invention that they invented, not even yet existing a mere ten years ago: religion. Or the other recent inventions of theirs that they totally invented for themselves, and where they also invented the additions: drugs, video games, television, the web, sex, radio, newspapers, scifi novels, movies! Yes, millennials invented all these ways for people to retreat into fantasy.)

      You're making a stupid "argument," except it's less than an argument, and heavier on the stupid.

      Here is how to stop sounding as stupid as your comment above: instead of saying that "millennials" are the people who have suddenly programmed society (and you) to buy whatever gets the most clicks, why not just try to be accurate and tell it like it is?

      We the currently-alive people have bad taste, we all realize whenever we take a moment to reflect on our own impulsive choices. Some are young, some are old, and on average, we're all disappointingly gullible, and horrifically sloppy in drawing inferences and knowing how we know what we think we know.

      See? That was easy. And I didn't even have to tell the whole world that I'm just as stupid as the people I'm calling stupid, by blowing my credibility by pointing my finger at some totally-arbitrary group who doesn't correllate any more or less than average, with my criticism. It's almost as though by not setting out to be a fucking liar, I didn't stupidly trip over myself while telling a lie. You should try it.

    32. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Buttered toast tied to the back of a cat powers UFOs

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    33. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, maybe what we need is a click-worthy meme of a baby addicted to a cat addicted to the internet....

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    34. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Besides, they're only available to crash land our our planet and heal a peasant girl once every 700 years.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    35. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      Looks like somebody is about to miss the latest mermaid news.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    36. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 0

      I remember being a kid in a dark room in a strange house, and I saw something that looked like glowing eyes, and they seemed to be moving or hovering in the air. I was petrified, I screamed. My parents came into the room and turned on the lights and it was just a toy car sitting on a desk by the window. Then they leave, turn the lights off, and I can no longer unsee the toy car, I know what it is, and the movement was nothing more than power lines outside distorting the streetlight and making a weird reflection. I remember feeling disappointed.

      But for the moment before the illusion was dispelled I saw glowing eyes, moving in the dark, and there was no other explanation. I am generally a rational person, if pressed I could have come up with dozens of explanations other than some weird monster. I *wanted* to believe it was a monster, even if that meant my life was in peril. The older I get, the harder it is for me to see those things, but when I do there's no one there to turn the light on for me. Very likely I will believe in that monster and start posting grainy pictures of it on Facebook.

    37. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Tell me, when your toast lands butter side down, do you curse the blasted millennials?

      If it's artisan toast, then yes.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    38. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have repeated sightings alone - don't wait longer, run and check in at the closest Cuckoo's Nest Spa & Resort.
      If it happens surrounded by other people, preferably unknown and they confirm your observations then go together to the closest
      police station and report it.

    39. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Just watched that last night. It's a good one, even if the parables are a bit unsubtle.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    40. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    41. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Ya, the closest I come was obviously a night terror because it was a classic night terror of waking up and not being able to move, and because it was the same thing described to me by a friend a few nights before in his experience that I had been dwelling on. Another friend saw a UFO as in a hovering object about a yard long that he said the best way to describe it was a flourescent light with rounded ends and the top half was silver. He said it floated about 30 feet away in a tree, moved around a bit, oriented itself to point towards him, then reoriented and few away. I know it was during the day time and he was awake because I was there when it happened. I remember him looking up and staring off into the distance but didn't think anything about it till his brother told us all about it. His brother also says he knows when his brother is lying or not and he thinks he is telling the truth this time, and didn't even want to tell us, the other kids who were there because we'd thin he was crazy. Sit down in a group and probably half have some some supernatural or UFO story that happened to them. Many are long and drawn out and not even a single instance that might be explained by turning on a light. I don't doubt that people are actually seeing something, probably have been throughout history, and it might be common enough to build a common base behind it. If given that the typical tunnel of light and hearing relatives near death experience actually happens, that alone could form a great deal of the basis of religion. Probably doesn't take more than a few people for that to happen to and be convinced that something else exists.

    42. Re: why is this shit even on slashdot? by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      As an amateur astronomer, this is the exact answer I give every time I am asked.

      My telescope is small, there are lots of objects that I just can't identify.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    43. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by slash.jit · · Score: 1

      He probably did before posting.. Must have seen Ancient Aliens on TV !

    44. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      lol no. Sheesh. Acronyms are pronounced as words. Initialisms are not.

      "UFO" is both an initialism and an acronym. It is an initialism because, you know, it is formed from the initials of its constituent words. Just like your wrongfully lower-cased "LOL".

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    45. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "IDE" is an initialism. "SCSI" is an acronym. "SQL" switches between being an acronym and an initialism depending on who you talk to (generally database experts say "sequel", while database novices say "ess kyoo ell").

      "UFO" is an initialism. Nobody says "uffo" or "oofo" or "yoofo". They say "yoo eff oh", pronouncing each letter.

    46. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by KingBenny · · Score: 1

      dry season ... the newletter needs its quotum
      my opinion on UFOs is "plato and the cave" i once saw a guy talking for 30 minutes straight to his hamburger on acid too (well the hamburger wasnt on acid as far as i know) and two people reach out at the same time for a "ball of light" that came down and hovered in front of them (at the same time ... yes on acid too .. it was a "thing" when i was 20 ...no , i'm 44 now) no peer pressure, just availability
      and quite fun in the right company
      other than that, plato and the cave ... perception is reality, if you got ufos on your mind, anything from a distant flashlight to ball lightning might be one ... which doesnt mean there arent any ... as to why they would come fly over like "HAA HAA here we are, you cant have what we have LAlalala" then make like jack and hit the road ?
      well, who is to say how aliens would reason if there were actually any here ... i'm more inclined toward Sagan and the Dolphettes (-ins, not nazis) that it becomes more unlikely to encounter "intelligence" (lets not call it life i mean the hackers-on-meth are "life" too, so is phoneboy-the-floormanager and that government official dyke who thinks she has power cos a title) lets call it "intelligence" (encompassing all kinds of Q from I- to E- and between and around) its more unlikely the further away from the center of "a" galaxy (or in the homocentric plato and the cave view) "the" galaxy ... which means its more unlikely the further away from the center of "a" universe or (blabla etc...) "the" universe as you get less galaxies per cubic (what would that be ? per cubic lightyear?) so statistically sapients (lets call it earthlings are slightly fucked) living in an old box on a shelf in a forgotten barn at the backside of a trailer park in the far side of the desert of "a" galaxy which doesnt make it impossible reasoning on "alien" reasoning is a waste of time imo, most sapients are quite homocentric in a way such as that they "assume" rules of logic apply (while not even rules of nature might all apply depending on where they're from) "what hooood yuw at ?" so , ufos might be a construct but they dont have to be, alien life might be "drill" the alien in your lightbulb flashing, thinking to itself GODS DAM that homo (sapiens) doesnt understand jack fucking alien morseshyte SO, thats my opinion, part of it (maar dat was niet masjen and no college degree so shut up and do as you're told i suppose) SURE .. (nods and smiles)

      --
      Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
    47. Re:why is this shit even on slashdot? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      We need a documentary about this on 'The History Channel' because real history is boring and people won't stick around to watch the commercials.

      Don't American DVRs come with fast-forward buttons?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. None since the invention of cell phone cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There have been no bigfoot or UFO sightings since the invention of cell phone cameras. I conclude that bigfoot is actually a crashed UFO, and that aliens like bigfoot have cloaking technology that automatically engages in the presence of a cell phones signal.

    The alternative is the more obvious answer that anyone with half a brain can figure out for themselves. :)

    1. Re:None since the invention of cell phone cameras by geantvert · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is quite similar to psychokinetic and telekinetic powers. About 200 years ago, mediums could use the 'power of the mind' to move very heavy objects such as tables or people. And somehow, during the 20th century, the 'movable' size decreased while the ability to detect frauds increased. Nowadays people with powers can barely move teeny weeny objects and only when the conditions are good (aka no expert watching them to detect frauds).

      UFOs are a bit like that. They are still sittings but most of the proofs, usually videos, do not resist a careful analysis by a CGI specialist or anyone with a true critical mind. See for instance the Oskar Jungell videos on YT. https://www.youtube.com/user/O...

      Of course, one could argue that aliens want to remain undetected (e.g. the Star-Trek Prime Directive) and consequently they stopped visiting us when the risk of being caught on camera became too high. That is a reasonable argument but that does not help to prove that aliens really exist and have visited us.

    2. Re:None since the invention of cell phone cameras by CODiNE · · Score: 2

      Personally I find it interesting how the shapes of the crafts have changed over time. Starting with hubcap shapes and gaining more size and details much in line with current at the time sci fi movies.

      My favorite though is the mysterious lack of X-ray tech on UFOs. Why so much probing and prodding as though they were still using medical tech from the 40s? Perhaps they came all this way to learn about MRIs.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    3. Re:None since the invention of cell phone cameras by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 2

      My theory is that some alien species have senses that can detect TV transmissions, and the probing is an equivalent form of revenge. “This is for Seinfeld!”

      More plausible, however, is that it’s CIA agents equipped with aerosol hallucinogens, slightly customized gas masks and dildos creating a cover story for black ops projects (or possibly just having an office party).

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    4. Re:None since the invention of cell phone cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In addition to Bigfoot, I noticed there have also been far fewer sightings of Elvis and the Loch Ness Monster since 9/11, as all the whackadoodles are focused on various 'truther' conspiracies now.

    5. Re:None since the invention of cell phone cameras by Deadstick · · Score: 2
    6. Re:None since the invention of cell phone cameras by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      I've been in groups of people and no one pulls their phone out to record, they are caught up in the moment of whatever is going on.

    7. Re:None since the invention of cell phone cameras by LesFerg · · Score: 1

      Bollocks, there are plenty of UFO recordings made on mobile phones. YT is full of fake vids. The first rule tho, is that you have to wave your hands up and down and never hold the damned phone still, so most of them are too annoying to look at.

      --
      If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
    8. Re:None since the invention of cell phone cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There have been no bigfoot or UFO sightings since the invention of cell phone cameras. I conclude that bigfoot is actually a crashed UFO, and that aliens like bigfoot have cloaking technology that automatically engages in the presence of a cell phones signal.

      The alternative is the more obvious answer that anyone with half a brain can figure out for themselves. :)

      Uh, wrong.
      Search for UFO on youtube and you'll get about 12,000,000 hits.
      I'm not saying that I believe of of them, but to say that the sightings have stopped is absolutely wrong.
      For one thing, this very slashdot article has numerous people telling about their own wtf is that incident.

  3. I have no views by inking · · Score: 0

    on things that have probably never occurred.

    1. Re:I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sightings *have* happened. They may not have been actual UFOs, but people have seen things they don't understand, and he's talking about that.

    2. Re:I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People see things all the time, there's just always some mundane explanation. The increase in flying triangles in the early 80s can largely be attributed to the development flights for the F117 Nighthawk for example.

      The weather can produce some really odd clouds that don't look natural - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenticular_cloud

      These are UFOs to the people that see them, because they don't know what they are!

    3. Re: I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If it is unidentified and appears to be flying, it's an UFO.

      The connection "strange lights in the sky -> it must be advanced ships from another galaxy" is the faulty logic step.

    4. Re: I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but what is unidentifed for someone might not be unindentified for others. That's what I meant when I said that they might not have been UFOs.

    5. Re:I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carl Sagan talked about a need to study UFO sightings. This was not because of some chance of finding aliens or belief that aliens were actually seen, but instead because such sightings still were something that happened and might give insight into psychology.

    6. Re: I have no views by Scarletdown · · Score: 2

      All alone at night
      Bright lights flashing in the sky
      Not the anal probe!

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    7. Re:I have no views by admin7087 · · Score: 1

      Yes, and for some reason the images are always extremely blurry or they were "improved" with known Adobe After Effects packages (thanks Cpt. Disillusion!).

      As for mere sightings, who cares? People also often see pink elephants, Elvis and the Holy Mary.

    8. Re:I have no views by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      there's just always some mundane explanation.

      The explanation is not always mundane. There have been several examples of small plane pilots intentionally spoofing people by flying in formation with weird synchronized lights. That is almost as cool as the guys that faked all crop circles. I really admire these people. Their ingenuity and hard work have made the world a more interesting place.

    9. Re:I have no views by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      They have occurred. People have watched something flying and they were unable to identify what it was. So they saw an Unidentified Flying Object.

      Oh, you mean that people "saw aliens"? No, that never occurred.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re: I have no views by kleinmukka · · Score: 1

      I fully agree. I think there were "UFOs" in the bunkers below Tempelhof airfield but the site has been given up and is now a recreational spot. UFOs are not from outer space but military aircraft to which the public services developed a narrative to encourage citizens to report sightings.

    11. Re: I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen an orange orb shaped craft with strange white alien writing on a field beside a stream - it turned out to be an mobile phone operator blimp "Orange".

      I've also seen a white glowing rectangle remaining stationary in the sky. That turned out to be a construction crane without the company logo.

      Metallic orbs floating above the clouds - saw a child let go of her helium party balloon and it shot up into the sky until it was at cloud height.

    12. Re:I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      synchronized flights of lights = mundane

      actual, material space ship != mundane

    13. Re:I have no views by gtall · · Score: 1

      Come now, many people saw Michael Jackson. Admittedly he wasn't an alien when he started out, but that's what he became.

    14. Re:I have no views by demonlapin · · Score: 2

      I know a guy who caused a few UFO sightings in his day. Army helicopter pilot, training on flying low and fast at night, all lights off, is following the terrain in Oklahoma when he spots a pickup cruising down a lonely road. He settles in for a bit of practice following a target at a consistent distance - and then when it's time to head back base, well, he flips on their multi-million-candlepower search light and banks hard to one side before flipping it back off.

    15. Re:I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is cool, but it is, by the original definition, mundane in that it has an earthly origin or explanation.

    16. Re:I have no views by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Oh please, not the story about alien anal probes, that's so fake!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    17. Re:I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could also be drugs involved and nothing really happened.

      If you see something you can't identify; pics or stfu.
      Everyone have a smartphone these days, film it and let the experts figure out what it was.

    18. Re: I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      When the average moron says it yes, when people in the aviation field say it they mean exactly what they say, it's unidentified.

    19. Re:I have no views by jittles · · Score: 1

      I know a guy who caused a few UFO sightings in his day. Army helicopter pilot, training on flying low and fast at night, all lights off, is following the terrain in Oklahoma when he spots a pickup cruising down a lonely road. He settles in for a bit of practice following a target at a consistent distance - and then when it's time to head back base, well, he flips on their multi-million-candlepower search light and banks hard to one side before flipping it back off.

      How long ago was that? Current regulations do not let them fly without anti-collision lights over US Airspace. I've "watched" a helicopter that doesn't exist fly training missions simply because I was able to see the anti-collision strobes. Otherwise, I would have had no idea where the thing was, it's exhaust vents being designed to scatter sound and make it difficult to track the helicopter by sound.

    20. Re: I have no views by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Ummm. "Until they have been identified...."

    21. Re:I have no views by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Current regulations do not let them fly without anti-collision lights over US Airspace.

      FAA regulations don't apply to military aircraft flying in military airspace.

    22. Re:I have no views by jittles · · Score: 1

      Current regulations do not let them fly without anti-collision lights over US Airspace.

      FAA regulations don't apply to military aircraft flying in military airspace.

      That is not correct at all. Current military regulations requires all military aircraft to follow FAA regulations in US airspace, even when over military bases. They must fly with anti-collision lights over the US, barring extreme circumstances that do not include any sort of training exercise that I've ever watched. And I spent many years watching such exercises, even covert ones.

    23. Re:I have no views by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Actually it is not.
      It is a pretty safe assumption that people reporting thise where sexually abused as children, most likely by close relatives: aliens.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    24. Re:I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      clearly that is a CIA/UN black helicopter.

    25. Re:I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're so smart, yet you forgot the term UFO has a different colloquial meaning.

    26. Re: I have no views by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Not everyone thinks they're advanced ships from another galaxy. I'm certain it's something to do with the Rus$14./'. ;;in m@'
      no carrier

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    27. Re:I have no views by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      It would have been the early nineties or so. He also might have obscured certain details; it may not have happened in US airspace.

    28. Re:I have no views by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1st Battallion Special Forces in Okinawa Japan routinely flew low, fast, and blacked out in 1997-99 while I was there in thier brand spanking new Blackhawks. See rules are for you normals. Green berets don't give a fuck about the FAA (or Japanese equivalent) or your rules. They fucked with us regular Army guys constantly and they got away with every bit of it. What is supposed to happen on paper and what really happens are two different things.

  4. Lots of UFOs out there. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most are mundane, and if any aren't mundane, they probably have a good reason for not letting us all know they are out there. Whether that reason is of concern to us depends on if you think they are scared of our violent nature, or yearning to use us for our tasty innards, as menial labor, or for their own scientific advancement.

    1. Re:Lots of UFOs out there. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scared of our violent nature? Maybe they are like the Thraddash and would greatly admire it.

    2. Re:Lots of UFOs out there. by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

      This Sci Fi story based on 'The Thing' has a great closing line

      http://clarkesworldmagazine.co...

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    3. Re:Lots of UFOs out there. by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      Awesome story! Thanks!

    4. Re:Lots of UFOs out there. by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't imagine them being "scared" of our nature at all... any more than americans are "scared" of chimpanzees. If a species is able to get to earth from several lightyears away... they are hundreds of years ahead of us scientifically... they'd have no reason to be "scared' of something that they can easily use precautions to avoid every possible threat we could pose.

  5. UFO existence by axlash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    UFOs are just that - Unidentified Flying Objects.

    The hoopla around them is just because for *some* people, their existence is more exciting than the boring reality of human existence.

    Personally, the more boring something tends to be (like water, air, gravity), the more grounded in reality I find it to be.

    --
    Deal with reality - the world as it is - rather than ideality - the world as you would like it to be.
    1. Re:UFO existence by Threni · · Score: 1

      > UFOs are just that - Unidentified Flying Objects.

      Naah - that's like saying "hackers are just people who like using computers". Hackers are - in the context of what people people when you say the word hacker - people who break into other people's computers. And UFOs are aliens in flying saucers.

    2. Re:UFO existence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And UFOs are aliens in flying saucers.

      Ok then. I don't believe saucer is a good shape for a spaceship, therefore I don't believe in aliens having flying saucers, therefore I don't believe in UFOs. Better?

    3. Re:UFO existence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "hackers are just people who like using computers"

      Um, no. Hackers are people who perform "hacks", i.e., neat tricks based on unconventional thinking, shortcuts, and using machines in ways they were not intended to. You could even be a hacker without even touching a computer, as in "hardware hacker", although this is admittedly rare. Commissar Colombo was a hacker when he used a piece of wire to get coffee from the coffee vending machine in the police department. Richard Feynman was a hacker.

    4. Re:UFO existence by sg_oneill · · Score: 1

      People are kind of easy to convince. Hell I remember once sitting with a friend watching some lights in the air do some really crazy shit out in a backyard of a friends once.

      It wasn't untill later on I realised, both me and my friend where really really high. All I got proof of , was that my universith years where kinda fun.

      But honestly, for a while there, I was pretty spooked.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    5. Re:UFO existence by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      I'll second that. There are many natural phenomena that look really strange. I once saw a UFO which I then identified, but if I had not been carrying powerful binoculars I would have remained extremely weirded-out. I was with a group of people and we all saw a saucer like object in the sky, which kept fading in and out, pulsing from a solid grey form to near invisibility.

      All of us were amazed and we had no idea what it could be. Was this some alien technology? A cloaking device malfunctioning? As soon as I got my binoculars out the cause was revealed. It was a lens-shaped flock of birds, all turning in synchronisation. When they were head-on they were almost invisible, but as they turned they banked showing a full profile. I still can't explain this weird behaviour, but at least the UFO is now identified as a flock of birds.

    6. Re:UFO existence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And UFOs are aliens in flying saucers.

      Or ball lighting. Or top-secret government technology. Or "I don't know what's going on but the authorities not taking it seriously just makes me more suspicious". There are definitely some other positions besides "It's all bullshit" and "Extraterrestrials have infiltrated".

    7. Re:UFO existence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well hackers are people who like to find the limitations of technology.

      That you associate them with only the subset that breaks into computers and many of those are not actually hackers is mainstream medias fault just like UFO:s

    8. Re:UFO existence by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I was a hacker back in the mid 1980s when I put together a circuit, using TTL gates and wire, to make a stepper motor rotate back and forth.

    9. Re:UFO existence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The unidentified part means for anyone of education $X there exists a quantifiable limit of $Y on objects they can identify. Anything that falls outside that subset of objects, is unidentified to them in that moment. And, unfortunately, folks like to assume unidentified automatically means outside of normal earth standard activity.

      When I was a kid I spent TONS of time on my grandparents farm. We were out one late evening on the porch and saw a big, round light float down, hover a few feet above the ground for a few seconds, then blink out. I thought it was the most amazing thing ever and was certain it was aliens or magic. Until grandpa explained what ball lightning was and that he'd seen it several times over the years in certain weather patterns.

      Still exiciting, but straight up natural phenomenon.

      There's bound to be hundreds of other examples, some of which may even be outside of science's ability to describe simply because it's not common enough to have been observed and studied properly.

  6. Clearly UFOs exist by Harold+Halloway · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But because they are by definition unidentified, it's unreasonable to claim they are of extra-terrestrial origin.

    1. Re:Clearly UFOs exist by mwvdlee · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you identify a UFO as a UFO, is it still a UFO?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:Clearly UFOs exist by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      if you are in a hospital and a John Doe is identified, do you still call him John Doe?

    3. Re:Clearly UFOs exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then it would have been positively identified as unidentifiable, making it a permanent UFO. even if you eventually find out what it is.

    4. Re:Clearly UFOs exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you are in a hospital and a John Doe is identified, do you still call him John Doe?

      Only if he is identified as John Doe.

    5. Re:Clearly UFOs exist by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I would, if he had been identified as John Doe.

      What does being in a hospital have to do with it, btw?

    6. Re:Clearly UFOs exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting. I resolve this by claiming we never 'identify' a UFO as a UFO. We simply classify an object as a UFO. It is never identified, only classified into the 'unidentified object' category.

    7. Re:Clearly UFOs exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, then it's just a UFO.

    8. Re:Clearly UFOs exist by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      It's UFOs all the way down. Er, up. Nvrmnd.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    9. Re:Clearly UFOs exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if it falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, dummy!

    10. Re:Clearly UFOs exist by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      If you identify a UFO as a UFO, is it still a UFO?

      Yeah, it's an Uhdentified Flying Object.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  7. I've actually seen 2 @ once (w/ witnesses) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've actually seen 2 @ once (w/ witnesses) - 1 still alive that would corroborate my story (a cousin). We weren't abducted or "anally probed" or anything like that. We just saw 2 of them in the distance (I was about 10 yrs. old & he's a year older) hovering a good 5 miles away or so in the sky.

    I saw it 1st & pointed @ it yelling to my late Uncle who was on his tractor in the fields haying nearby us. We were just playing by some beehives in a tree fort we were making (lol, or trying to).

    He saw it too & cut the tractor motor & said (in Polish) "psa kref" which means 'son of a bitch' in English (literally translates out to "dog's blood" or "blood of a dog" (descended from a dog I guess)).

    Anyhow/anways:

    They hovered for around 1/2 hour but got smaller as they went going very slowly towards the west. They were INCREBIDLY bright, Silvery-White I'd call it & glowing...

    * I will never forget it.

    APK

    P.S.=> I ran home quickly, not "scared outta my wits" but more like "WoW - I have to tell Mom & Dad about THIS!" (I don't recall their reactions, they did believe me though, especially as I do remember saying "Ask Uncle Stan & Frank about it!")... apk

    1. Re:I've actually seen 2 @ once (w/ witnesses) by pepsikid · · Score: 2

      I've had one certain sighting, where I was outside at night gazing at the night sky. For about 20 minutes I watched a small light which seemed very high up in the air, moving in a tight spiral, then moving over a little and then moving in a spiral again. It eventually faded from view. It was too high up to be a plane in a search pattern and those spirals probably would have been high-G maneuvers.

    2. Re:I've actually seen 2 @ once (w/ witnesses) by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      That's a whole lot of probably's for a "certain sighting".

    3. Re:I've actually seen 2 @ once (w/ witnesses) by Mike+Frett · · Score: 1

      When I was about 10 I saw one. I was laying in bed and was looking out the Window and something white and oval shaped zoomed by at lightning speed. Seconds later it zoomed by again and came to an immediate stop. From lightning fast to dead stop. Then immediately zoomed off again. No slowing down, no gaining speed, all immediate. I lived about 20 miles from an AFB and this was late 80's.

      Just thought I'd share.

    4. Re:I've actually seen 2 @ once (w/ witnesses) by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 2

      Humans are terrible at correctly understanding what they are see when they lack a reference. As, for example, when looking at the sky. Almost all the interpretation done by the brain is related to something it considers known and of a known size. All that goes away when seeing something weird in the sky. So the brain makes a wild-ass guess.

    5. Re: I've actually seen 2 @ once (w/ witnesses) by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Iâ(TM)ve seen those too. I live near an airport. As planes are landing at night they turn on some very bright lights on the nose and on the wings. Looks like 3 orbs, they can appear to be âoespinningâ as the planes wait for a runway pretty high up. Then, depending on angle they appear to either slowly or quickly approach to only slow down/speed up near the end of the âoesightingâ until they go out of view.

      What you consider âoetight circleâ is actually a relatively wide area but at greater distance your eyes cannot distinguish the difference and atmospheric aberrations make it blink. shimmer and the increase the apparent frequency of spinning, you can figure out the trigonometry for yourself as an exercise.

      The lights however are so bright they can be seen far up. Iâ(TM)m not sure if the pilot is supposed to have them on at that time, perhaps they forgot to turn them off. Iâ(TM)ve looked at them for a while too once and then as they approached the city lights illuminated the belly of the plane but even though I thought it was fairly close I couldnâ(TM)t hear it.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  8. My view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Blurry!

  9. Obviously most were fake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most of the monochrome photos from "back in the days" were probably faked. It was the golden age of monochrome photography, and with a bit of creativity people could create UFOs.

    Now that everyone and their dogs have smartphones, the frequency of sightings has dropped considerably, which is the opposite of what one would expect were the sightings real.

    However, there were phenomena which are still not explained, like the 2006 O'Hare Intl UFO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  10. The Galactic Community by pepsikid · · Score: 1

    Intelligent life has had more than enough time to fill every corner of the galaxy, even traveling at sub-light speeds. We're either still-undiscovered, or we're being kept isolated as a sort of nature preserve. Assuming information has become the coin of the galaxy, we are valuable as an untouched phenomena to study.

    It seems likely that most UFOs are optical illusions, affected by the current era's psychological concepts. (There used to be sightings of fantasy airships and flying sailing boats) If some of the UFOs we see are of alien origin, they're most likely just manifestations of remote viewing techniques.

    If aliens are visiting us physically, they are doing so through artificial intelligence. They've sent wisp probes which have multiplied here, constructed more complex machines or even bases. If they've come to colonize, I wouldn't worry about them raining death down upon Earth. They'll likely build orbital colonies among the asteroids and populate them with beings replicated out of faxed DNA.

    1. Re:The Galactic Community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intelligent life has had more than enough time to fill every corner of the galaxy, even traveling at sub-light speeds

      What makes you think that one galaxy can harbour more than one civilization if at all ? What if there is at most 1 civilization per galaxy. Yes there are billions of galaxies and so billions of civilizations. But not all civilizations would have developped at the same time. We can make an hypothesis about how long a civilization exists. Lets say 1 million years. Even traveling at light speed 1 million years is not enough to go from one galaxy to the nearest one. So we could live in a universe with plenty of advanced civilizations and yet never encounter one of them because of distances. I'm going to paraphrase Douglas Adams : the universe is big. So big we can't even begin to comprehend just how fucking big it is.

    2. Re:The Galactic Community by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      I haven't said this thing you challenge me to defend. Your question is like asking what makes me believe there's more than one family in a given continent, and why this same family hasn't gotten to Betelgeuse yet. I don't think you really understand how big a galaxy is and how far apart they are. I don't think you understand that a civilization has a maximum size due to a need for internal communication.

    3. Re:The Galactic Community by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      Intelligent life has had more than enough time to fill every corner of the galaxy, even traveling at sub-light speeds

      Even traveling at light speed 1 million years is not enough to go from one galaxy to the nearest one.

      With the nearest galaxy being about 70,000 light years away, it would take only 70,000 years to get there at the speed of light, not in excess of 1,000,000 years (or 25,000 if the Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy is counted).

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    4. Re:The Galactic Community by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      Traveling at sub-light speeds, say up to 10% the speed of light, intelligent life could have filled the galaxy by now. Especially if originating from multiple points. THE GALAXY. Not the universe. Other galaxies are way way way way out of the scope of my point.

    5. Re:The Galactic Community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't even know for sure if it is even possible to reach another solar system, so it's all speculation. The Voyager spacecrafts are still on the edge of our system and to go into deep space from where it is right now is a long, long voyage.

      Back to aliens - even if they were all around us we will probably not be able to notice them anyways. Do you think the average ant notices you when you look at it ? No - it continues doing whatever it was doing before, it may notice a slight change in its environment due to your presence, but it hardly aknowledges you as another being. And the difference between us and ants is probably smaller than the difference between us and an intergalactic species capable of coming to Earth. Hell, we don't even know what their time frame of reference is. How would you tell they are communicating with you if they send you one word per century ? Or their entire history in a radio burst of few miliseconds ?

    6. Re:The Galactic Community by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Who's to say they haven't filled the galaxy? We couldn't detect it one way or the other. The only possible way we'd know right now (and for the foreseeable future) is if they purposefully announced themselves to us, and there could be any number of reasons why they haven't. Not to mention the silliness in presuming colonizing the galaxy would be a goal pursued by a society advanced enough to do it, especially if it could only be done at sub-light- who's gonna bother expending resources to colonize somewhere you can't even communicate with or get resources back from in 100 lifetimes?

  11. Smartphones by religionofpeas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have noticed that UFO sightings were a lot more common when people weren't carrying smartphones with integrated cameras with them. Now that everybody's got one, the UFOs have disappeared.

    1. Re:Smartphones by Threni · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ah ha - another person who liked xkcd!

      https://xkcd.com/1235/

    2. Re:Smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's because they're all looking down at their phones to read about the latest recycled meme on facebook. The glare of the screens backlight blinds them from the reptilian saucers hovering above, so they never even see them.

    3. Re:Smartphones by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Consider this as a possibility then. The reason there were lots of UFO sightings before is because there were. Now that "everyone has a integrated camera" it's become too risky to keep doing what they were doing. That could mean one of two things: They do exist, and don't want cultural contamination aka culture would inherently think people as nuts(which is okay, everyone is a bit crazy). Or, they never existed in the first place and people were experiencing hallucinations or other it falls into the realm of test vehicles/unknown or rare atmospheric anomalies, and so on.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re:Smartphones by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      I'd venture to suggest that advanced alien technology could probably intercept our cameras and microphones, making physical fly-bys no longer necessary!

    5. Re:Smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nah... the UFO's just activated their cloaking devices.

      Even the United Federation of Planets, had to allow them after everyone got theit hands on a smartphone.

      Picard and I did take a little trip back in time the other day, to have some fun with UFO spotters though. Man did we piss of the timeship Relativity and Braxton, her Captain.

      I'm off to the Delta Quardrant with them, sometime next week.

    6. Re:Smartphones by mentil · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the issue was that film cameras were low-resolution, blurry, and more prone to smudging. So lots of ghost/UFO videos and photos abounded, showing something small and blurry. Digital cameras gave a clearer outline.

      Either that or the film exposure chemicals were extracted from the bodies of dead aliens.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    7. Re:Smartphones by trawg · · Score: 1

      Also literally everyone knows what "photoshopping" is (even if they don't know it's the name of a piece of software).

    8. Re:Smartphones by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      Why continue to play cat and mouse with a civilization which carries cameras and microphones with them everywhere, when you can just tap in and use them to monitor from a safer distance?

    9. Re:Smartphones by xonen · · Score: 1

      Before you jump into conclusions with that observation; an alternate explanation is that those smartphone owners are now looking down to their phone all the time, leaving no moment for their gaze to reach the sky, therefore decimating the chance to spot an UFO.

      Just saying...

      --
      A glitch a day keeps the bugs away.
    10. Re:Smartphones by Quakeulf · · Score: 1

      They're just too busy with their phone apps to notice anything around them.

    11. Re:Smartphones by dave420 · · Score: 2

      Because there's no evidence there are aliens, so it's pointless conjecture? We might as well discuss Bigfoot's favourite flavour of ice cream.

    12. Re:Smartphones by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      As cameras got better so did the mil budget for more isolated and secure bases.
      Governments could fly their new toys at night knowing the risk of a person with the correct film ready, having a really good camera and skills in a small town was low.
      Filming fast moving test flights at night could be detected when person when public with their "evidence".
      All the phone calls to respected UFO and science journalists? Bait publications and magazines with UFO expert contact numbers?
      Invite a trusted expert over to view the film to consider publication and face an offer from the security services.
      Become an informant to trap other people spying on mil test flights. The only way out was to take that offer.

      The smartphones and better prosumer cameras can have streaming and send a clip around the world in near real time.
      Governments don't test over populated areas and have sally ports, fences, a roof over a base. Not much for a new drone, telescope camera looking down over a base to see now. The contractors flying in and out and their flight numbers?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    13. Re:Smartphones by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      film cameras were low-resolution

      Film is higher-resolution than digital: 35mm is about equivalent to 80 megapixels. Larger formats are even better.

    14. Re:Smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The optics rarely give you 80 megapixels with good clarity though. There's plenty of distortion, artifacts, dirt, lens glare etc.

    15. Re:Smartphones by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      The optics rarely give you 80 megapixels with good clarity though. There's plenty of distortion, artifacts, dirt, lens glare etc.

      All of which also affect a real digital camera and are much worse on a smartphone camera.

    16. Re:Smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is also the basis for Neal Stephenson's new book: The Rise and Fall of D.O.D.O.

    17. Re:Smartphones by Ferretman · · Score: 1

      > We might as well discuss Bigfoot's favourite flavour of ice cream.

      I always took Bigfoot as a Rocky Road kind of guy...

      Ferret

      --
      Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
    18. Re:Smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      places like mexico and other south american countries have UFO's on the news all the time. It's a myth that there aren't as many sightings. It's a myth that people aren't filming them. If you look for the evidence, outside of the mainstream, you'll find loads of video evidence!

    19. Re:Smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      smartphones have software built-in to digitally remove images of aliens and bigfoot like creatures. people take plenty of pictures, but are then disappointed their "object" didn't show up, then just shrug it off as obviously their eyes were playing tricks on them.

    20. Re:Smartphones by Solandri · · Score: 1

      UFO is just a catchall term for unidentified flying object. It doesn't automatically mean alien spacecraft.

      The prevalence of smartphones means more UFOs are captured on video, not less as you're implying. But getting it on video allows the person to review and show the object to others. This increases the chances of identifying the object, at which point it ceases to be a UFO and stops the story of the incident from spreading. So it's not that people aren't getting video of UFOs on their smartphones. It's that the video helps determine what they are so they're no longer UFOs. (The online services which show plane routes and times also help, as you can conclusively prove that the time and location of the unidentified lights corresponds exactly with a certain airliner flight.)

      In the old days all you had was eyewitness testimony, so it was more difficult to turn a UFO into an IFO. People weren't deliberately reporting alien spacecraft more frequently. It was just harder to identify the UFO, so they'd keep telling their story.

    21. Re:Smartphones by mentil · · Score: 1

      I was referring to VHS camcorders which are more like 320x200.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    22. Re:Smartphones by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      VHS is not "film". If that's what you meant, you should have said "tape" or "videotape".

  12. What's next on nerd news? by bmimatt · · Score: 4, Funny

    A few propositions for new article titles for the editors: - How would you rate your most recent encounter with chupacabra? - Is Yeti a good Xmas house guest? - Bigfoot - what to serve for breakfast... is tea OK? - Why are gargoyles unhappy with their medieval portraits? Looking at you BeauHD... but not only you.

    1. Re:What's next on nerd news? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      BeauHD is probably a disgruntled, neglected cryptid

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:What's next on nerd news? by asylumx · · Score: 1

      Most ancient astronaut theorists agree... BeauHD is an alien.

    3. Re:What's next on nerd news? by JBMcB · · Score: 1

      - Bigfoot - what to serve for breakfast... is tea OK?

      Well, that's obvious:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      (Sifl & Olly)

      --
      My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    4. Re:What's next on nerd news? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      My money's on zxchim being a chupacabra, the famous Mexican Goatsucker.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    5. Re:What's next on nerd news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A few propositions for new article titles for the editors:

      - How would you rate your most recent encounter with chupacabra?
      None

      - Is Yeti a good Xmas house guest?
      Depends on the type

      - Bigfoot - what to serve for breakfast... is tea OK?
      Mostly raw nuts and fresh fruit. Tea warm, If it's fruit scented with sugar.

      - Why are gargoyles unhappy with their medieval portraits?
      ?
      Looking at you BeauHD... but not only you.

    6. Re:What's next on nerd news? by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      Have you ever known somebody who was into UFOs and all that other paranormal stuff? They do in fact tend to be among the biggest "nerds" I've known. As a lifelong computer nerd (but not UFO believer) I think I know a nerd when I see one! (They are NOT unidentified.)

  13. Famous UFO Sighting Video by Snarf+You · · Score: 2

    Here is one of the most famous videos of a UFO sighting. It's not your typical shaky shot of some light(s) off in the distance; the quality is quite good and at around 33 seconds you can actually see some detail of the alleged UFO.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  14. Just remember the US Air Force investigated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The US Air Force had Projects Sign, Grudge and Bluebook and they still had cases that under the most stringent investigation still could not be explained.
    Those that could not be explained away were not insignificant numbers, even when Project Grudge was doing its best to bury them.
    The fact that military forces all over the world had had incidents and trained observers can't explain the Who, Why or How means there must be at some point a recognition by any intelligent person that there has to be vehicles not originating from Earth.
    After all, if we were the only intelligent species, wouldn't it be a giant waste of space?

    1. Re:Just remember the US Air Force investigated by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      Nah, they were just doing research to help understand how to test secret aircraft more stealthily.

    2. Re:Just remember the US Air Force investigated by Falconhell · · Score: 1

      Yeh, heard about the one that so stealthy, they still cant find it?
      Its like the best camo clothing, cant find that either.

  15. simple by polar+red · · Score: 1

    Sometimes there are flying things we don't know what they are. studying them usually identify them.

    --
    Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
  16. Guff... by kkoo · · Score: 1

    I don't believe in ghosts, gods, goblins or little green men.

    1. Re:Guff... by gtall · · Score: 2

      I believe in little green women...oh, the forbidden pleasure!!

    2. Re:Guff... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All hail the leprechaun god-spirits of Betelgeuse.

  17. The biggest unique resource we have by Z80a · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's our media in general.
    Water, oxygen etc must be easy for space traveling civilizations to come by, but can be safely assumed that music, art etc is quite unique on every planet.
    Which means the visitors are probably just pointing their advanced downloading devices to our planet and copying up EVERYTHING to some database that gets shared/sold later on.

    And there's not a damn thing esa/riaa/mpaa can do to stop the space pirates.
    Our "powerful encryptions and digital locks" probably falls in mere seconds on their advanced computers and cracking techniques.

    1. Re:The biggest unique resource we have by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      There could be a web of communications links sharing science and history.

    2. Re:The biggest unique resource we have by Z80a · · Score: 3, Funny

      Of course, where else would you put the "Whole.contents.of.earth.S2017M4.UNIPAK-Zarbulians.spacetorrent" ?

    3. Re:The biggest unique resource we have by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      I played that. You unpack it and they nuke themselves out of existence after a couple of zooplars. That Trump guy is funny though.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    4. Re:The biggest unique resource we have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you are saying that aliens are pirating all content? But the content industry loses at least ten dollars for every act of piracy!

      There's surely at least a trillion acts of alien piracy every year, and that means tens of trillions of dollar losses from the movie, software, and music industries. Much more than the total value of those companies. They are all bankrupt, and they don't even know it!

    5. Re:The biggest unique resource we have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Dear god, it's full of porn."

    6. Re:The biggest unique resource we have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I was good at theoretical physics and was serious at SETI, I'd been trying to discover the physics that allows a galactic faster-than-light Internet to work, and set out trying to detect signals from a network like this in operation.

  18. US and Soviet/Russian tests by AHuxley · · Score: 4, Informative

    Everyone had something to test. People saw all kinds of post ww2 Operation Paperclip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... evaluations.
    The Christofilos effect, Project 137 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    SR-71 and D-21 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... testing.
    Then the stealth work. Now its MAV and Modular Advanced Armed Robotic System.
    People have seen a lot of mil work been done and had to be dissuaded from talking. UFO was the perfect cover to bait and infiltrate any people, groups watching for mil/gov work.
    Their results when seeing mil projects could be covered up with the mention of been a UFO enthusiast.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:US and Soviet/Russian tests by Major+Blud · · Score: 1

      I always felt that the initial news release about the crash at Roswell being a saucer was a deliberate ploy by the U.S. Army to distract people away from the work being done on Project Mogul. When that news ended up attracting more attention than they expected, the Army changed the narrative to a weather balloon.

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    2. Re:US and Soviet/Russian tests by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      And combine that with popular entertainment slipping images of flying saucers into people's brains, and you get the same effect that people experienced when it was OLDER popular entertainment filling their heads with angels or the like. Carl Sagan did a really good job of exploring that topic in "Demon Haunted World," which is still worth a read quite a few years after it was published.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  19. Re:Interesting but I think they look @ us like... by pepsikid · · Score: 1

    Well AC, I suppose any alien species seem "insane" to each other, and experienced explorers will simply watch us calmly from a safe distance.
    And our pipsqueak atom bombs haven't produced any gamma ray bursts that could possibly be seen over the glare of the Sun and all other natural phenomena.
    It doesn't make sense for aliens to secretly contact our governments unless it is to give time to prepare for their imminent coming. And nothing our governments are doing seem to be with that in mind. Aliens are more likely to avoid us until we have our shit together. If they're responsible for triggering world unrest, then they're screwups.

  20. I don't doubt it & know what else? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    See subject: I read thru a few posts here & I know what I saw was no 'weather balloon' etc. as some here are saying + I am SURE you feel the same what with your description of what would have busted an airframe design of our aircraft.

    I also see a lot of folks saying "Well how come all these cellphone & digital cameras aren't catching more" - Heck, go up on YouTube, see how MUCH OF THIS DOES GET CAUGHT (even on legit news channels from TV in cities - I am NOT joking about it)...

    * One thing you said I note strongly - People do NOT LOOK UP generally (you do apparently). How do I know this? By performing an 'experiment' on a girlfriend long ago in my 20's when she wanted a key to my apartment. What did I do for this 'test'? I taped it onto the ceiling & played "hot & cold" w/ her (you know "you're getting 'warmer'" as the person is closer etc.) & when she was DEAD-UP RIGHT UNDER IT? I said "You're BLAZING HOT!" & she was pissed saying I was lying (I told her to LOOK UP, & she felt like a fool - lol!).

    APK

    P.S.=> Perhaps folks should LOOK TO THE SKIES more often - in our cases? They don't KNOW what they're missing, right?? apk

    1. Re:I don't doubt it & know what else? by admin7087 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Most of the stuff on Youtube is fake. Check out Captain Disillusion's channel. After you've seen a few videos, you won't trust many videos on Youtube any longer. He easily spots indicators that I would never recognize. It's just a pity that he can't produce more - the production quality of his videos is very, very high, so it takes a lot of time to make them.

      That being said, among the more legit sources such as multiple recordings from TV channels, these are very rare and I've never seen anything that wasn't easily explained as an airplane, laser-show or reflection of headlights in the sky. The latter seems to be the most common phenomenon. They are also described by eye witnesses very often. When you see some blurry illuminated objects in the sky that are static or in slow uniform motion and then suddenly accelerate extremely fast, maybe changing their course rapidly, then chances are very, very high that you've seen the reflections of lights of some vehicle on ground.

      All of that is not to say that you haven't seen a UFO, APK. I'm just pointing out that most of the sightings are not very credible. (Why did I write this? UFOs and possible life on extrasolar planets are among my long-term interests and I'm writing science fiction novels in my spare time.)

    2. Re:I don't doubt it & know what else? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Car headlights do not reflect off of clouds. That is the dumbest shit I've heard lately. Maybe some fog, but clouds are simply too high for some weak ass halogen bulbs. HIDs and LEDs won't even shine that far. There's a reason they rent those giant spot lamps for parties n such. You need millions of candlepower to hit the cloud level, not a 55W lamp. Next thing you'll tell me is it was a ball of swamp gas reflecting the light of Venus....

  21. Re:Interesting but I think they look @ us like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is egotistical to assume we're special, even in a bad way. Maybe there are aliens that have a culture and development that has avoided war. But if intelligent life is not exceptionally rare, there is probably many other cultures that had problems with wars more or less like we do.

  22. Re:Interesting but I think they look @ us like... by pepsikid · · Score: 1

    What's your point? Who said we were special? I didn't.

  23. I just wish they'd stop with the anal probes by Munich+Munchkin · · Score: 1

    Seriously aliens, who needs it ?

    1. Re:I just wish they'd stop with the anal probes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. That was the fussiest and most particular probing job I've ever been subjected to.

  24. Ignorance does not equal aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You see something and you don't have a clue what it was, therefore it was obviously aliens! Doesn't take a genius to spot a fallacy in that one, but when did logic ever get in the way of a good story? That's what UFO sightings are, a good story. I've seen weirdly behaving light in the sky myself, it was pretty surreal at the time and I didn't recognize what it was on spot. Could have gone with "Aliens!" and it would have made a good story, but instead went through a list of everything that flies and glows and was left with a tea candle balloon, hardly anyone ever sends these things up around here and I can't remember ever seeing one before, so no wonder I didn't recognize it on the spot.

  25. What is this shit? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    This seems to be a deliberate feeding of the conspiracy theorists that are so out of touch with reality that they take InfoWars seriously. I for one am not looking to indulge those people in the fantasies of secret shadow government conspiracies that are beyond improbable and firmly in the realm of the absurd. If you are interested in conspiracies then you need look no further than our own President's election campaign.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:What is this shit? by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Like those crazy conspiracy theorists that thought the NSA was watching everything you do online?

    2. Re:What is this shit? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      If you are interested in conspiracies then you need look no further than our own President's election campaign.

      Exactly. The fantasists who see conspiracies there are quite imaginative. Which is important if you're trying really hard to distract from the actual ones (which, happily, didn't return their intended results back in November).

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  26. The LA battle definitely happened by istartedi · · Score: 1

    There's a whole wiki article on it. It definitely wasn't aliens though, or even Japanese aircraft. In the early days of WW2, panic makes perfect sense. News reports back then were even harder to get than now. Many people at that time, even in the military, wouldn't know what the Japanese were going to attack next. Once a few shots were fired, tracers became targets that generated more tracers that generated more targets. That really does seem like the most reasonable explanation.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  27. Debunker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://debunker.com/ufo.html

  28. Occam's Razor by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

    I'd have to think that any civilization advanced enough to have interstellar travel would at least be able to match our own ability at stealthing atmospheric craft (including basic things like turning off the running lights and not flying during the daytime when they'd be easily seen). I also know how easy it is for people to get confused about what they're seeing when they know what they're seeing, let alone when they don't. And I can't see any motivation for extraterrestrial visitors to let themselves be seen without making their presence irrefutably known.

    Conclusion: people were misinterpreting perfectly ordinary things for UFOs.

    NB: this doesn't preclude us having extraterrestrial visitors. It just says that if you're not one of the ones they've decided to deal with directly then you're not going to see any hint that they're around.

    1. Re:Occam's Razor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if their technology was so advanced, they simply don't give a shit if you do see them.

      Or perhaps they so intellectually superior to humans that whatever goes through our primitive brains is of little interest to them -- do you spend your time wondering what birds think about you?

      Do you hide from raccoons and squirrels if you decide to walk into the woods?

      They could be superior in physical and intellectual ways that humans could never comprehend. If they can travel light years, they probably have self-engineered for many millennia. Humans are not fast, not physically capable compared to any other animal and not very sophisticated in thought speed nor depth -- which is why we must use databases and computers.

    2. Re:Occam's Razor by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      I, personally don't care about what's going on in bird's brains. But thousands of highly-trained ornithologists do. And they glean lots of useful information about the environment, evolution, archeology, and geology. Oh, and there are people who examine those little bacteria too. Perhaps there are pompous little bacteria out there who scoff at other bacteria who claim The Great Eye is there to watch them and see what happens.

    3. Re:Occam's Razor by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      You make my point for me. If they don't care whether we see them or not, then why are the only hints we get of them vague and ambiguous sightings at a distance? You'd think we'd get clear looks at them all the time like we do airliners.

      And no, we're not very impressive-looking as a species. But name one predator on this planet which successfully makes humans it's primary prey. Don't worry, I'll wait.

  29. Typical sighting of some planets. by robbak · · Score: 2

    This has all the hallmarks of a standard sighting of a couple of planets. Planets are much brighter than people expect them, and 'bright, silvery-white, almost glowing' sounds about right. Two of them appear close together (a conjunction, in astronomical terms) rarely enough for people to be surprised by them. By the way, your eyes can't determine distances, at all, above a few hundred meters away - from there you are guessing based on things like brightness.

    Planets are often seen as 'getting closer' and 'zooming further away' because they change in brightness as light cloud moves across them. 'Fading' and 'drifting west' sounds about right, as the planets would be setting.

    --
    Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
    1. Re:Typical sighting of some planets. by pepsikid · · Score: 3, Informative

      Heh, no. Planets do not make little spirals and then spurt around in random directions to spiral around again.

    2. Re:Typical sighting of some planets. by robbak · · Score: 1

      No they don't - but people regularly feel that they do. Atmospherics are part of it, and the other is that people use mobile reference points for that movement. Often the person is moving, and as they are interpreting something millions of kilometers away as being a few hundred meters away, they see it as moving at high speed. Relative motions between the planet and clouds is also misinterpreted as motion of the mysterious light.

      Of course, unlike the case I replied to, I cannot be sure what your apparently spiraling items were. But long experience has taught me that the answer lies in the vagueries of the human eye and brain, not the heavens

      --
      Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
    3. Re:Typical sighting of some planets. by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      Your hand-waving might be slightly more credible if I were a person who has never since then laid on his back looking at the night sky watching for satellites. Bye.

    4. Re:Typical sighting of some planets. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Planets do not make little spirals and then spurt around in random directions to spiral around again.

      This one did.

  30. Aliens Lost Credibility by mentil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Once you exclude the UFOs that can be confirmed as something mundane, then what else a UFO could be is effectively unfalsifiable. Either it's classified, or a one-off unrecorded meteorological/optical phenomenon laymen are ignorant of, or something 'new to science'. Completely new macroscopic phenomena are very rare nowadays, because anything that conspicuous was likely to have been noticed thousands of years ago, and thoroughly explained hundreds of years ago. Every now and then a legend is confirmed real, but sometimes is debunked (Loch Ness monster.)

    More relevantly, aliens are passe in American culture now. They've lost credibility as a trope in media, having been replaced by Zombies and Vampires, who more closely resemble our current cultural anxieties. Xenophobia led to broad fear of space aliens, and the cold war Red Scare led to general fear of invasion. The fall of the USSR was accompanied by a shift in anxieties to fear of the internal moral collapse of one's society. Vampires represent the hidden minority slowly corrupting society, whereas Zombies represent a foolish majority clamoring for society's downfall.
    In a society that promotes coexisting with other ethnicities, or even pluralism, it's difficult to take "nuke the little green men because they're all evil!" seriously.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:Aliens Lost Credibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zombies and vampires aren't around because American culture has changed. They're around because Hollywood saw a business opportunity and proceeded to milk every last cent out of it.

  31. Self-contradictory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it's too high up to be a plane, those spirals were huge, and thus not high-G.

    If they were high-G , they would have been tight turns and then not too high up to be a plane.

    Another thing, when you get past a certain distance, human eyes are not separated enough to tell the distance, so our perception of size depends on the size of the object compared to the expected size (objects that are further away appear smaller). What's the expected size of a UFO?

    (Answer: Depends on whether you've been watching Independence Day or reading the Douglas Adams story where the entire alien fleet accidentally got swallowed by a dog)

    1. Re:Self-contradictory by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      The light was moving in those spiral paths QUICKLY. Thus they were high-G. I'm not going to debate the rest with you. I truly don't care if you believe that people can't tell if something is far away.

    2. Re:Self-contradictory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      and this is how wackadoodles are born.

      No matter how much explanation is given to show how you were mistaken your going to ignore it, do you happen to have your fingers in your ears while going "la la la la la"?

    3. Re:Self-contradictory by michelcolman · · Score: 2

      Bigger spirals at the same rate of turn are higher G, not lower.

    4. Re:Self-contradictory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Might have been rockets having a malfunction, this type of spirals are commin on those events... maybe it had a short trajectory correction between the spirals.
      Do you know how far they have been away? did you see some combustions-gas , some sort of halo around the spiral?

    5. Re:Self-contradictory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you possibly know that if you don't even know how far away it was.

    6. Re:Self-contradictory by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      AC, your "solution" doesn't match the experience I described. You're ignoring parts and inserting convenient parts of your own. And you're an ass. That's why you're not being accepted as a credible explainer.

  32. Richard Feynman gives his preferred explanation of by Zappy · · Score: 1

    Go have a look:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
    Aligns perfectly with my opinion about it btw.

  33. Are planets "frisbee shaped"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject (I was going to crash but I had to reply to you): They were both like tilted frisbees in 'paired flight' not ovoid or round & they were, @ 1st, NOT very far off + pretty defined (not hazy @ all etc.). Put it this way: I am not a professional distance judge, but they were BIGGER than what you see passenger jets in the sky as, bigtime (@ first).

    I've no reason to b.s. you & I don't know for sure if they were "alien spacecraft" (it's not like I say 'martians with antenna in the portholes' etc. after all) but I can say with certainty they were not 'weather balloons' type stuff or planets - but I suppose folks are skeptical attempting to 'set me straight' & all that (you're entitled to it & no offense taken) - I wish I could get ahold of my cousin (last I knew of he was in jail but I am sure he'd say what I did to the letter))

    APK

    P.S.=> Anyways - I have to catch some "ZZZzzzzz's", so "signing off/g'nite folks"... too bad. I actually ENJOY reading others' thoughts on this topic (generally I am into the 'computer geek' side here mostly) - However - I will definitely, God Willing, come in here tomorrow to see what else has been said though... apk

  34. Norway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Norway has a pretty extensive database of every UFO sighting reported. A couple of years ago, someone from the US air force looked through the database, cross checking the dates and directions.

    He marked about half of them, and wrote simply "U2".

    When the now de-classified U2 spy plane flew over the Soviet Union, they would come in over Norway early in the evening, when it was dark but the plane being high up was still being hit by sunlight, which would make a bright dot in the sky (The same effect as when you can see the International Space Station from the ground just by going outside at the right time and looking in the right direction). By the time the plane reached the Soviet Union, it would be out of the sunlight.

    1. Re:Norway by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      Well, that pretty much wraps up Norway for a period of several years. Glad the whole world-wide mystery is solved in your mind!

  35. Swamp gas⦠by De_Boswachter · · Score: 4, Funny

    What Is Your View On UFO Sightings?

    Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

    1. Re:Swamp gas⦠by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that weak-ass story's the best you can come up with?

  36. Light in sky == UFO? by Freischutz · · Score: 1

    I have noticed that UFO sightings were a lot more common when people weren't carrying smartphones with integrated cameras with them. Now that everybody's got one, the UFOs have disappeared.

    I don't really have issues with the basic idea of UFOs as long as you manage to treat them as just that, Unknown Flying Objects and manage to restrain your imagination and maintain critical thinking when evaluating a sighting. I have issues with people who default to the assumption that UFOs are alien spacecraft and often get angry when you point out an alternative explanation or raise questions. Something like 99% of UFOs are known natural phenomenons of some kind, or caused by mundane man made objects. Of the remainder something like 0.9999...% are more interesting things, like military aircraft of some kind, possibly (if you are lucky) military prototypes or some kind of rare or (if you are REALLY lucky) unknown natural phenomenon. The remainder are things that might possibly be Aliens but the overwhelming odds are that on closer examination they belong to they are one of the former two groups.

  37. A lot of UFO organisations are dying. by Maritz · · Score: 1

    Simple reason: we have high definition cameras everywhere now. The tactic of the "UFOs are aliens" crank is to take blurry, low res photos that invite pareidolia.

    A lot of former UFO enthusiasts are packing it in for this very reason. If we were being visited by aliens, we absolutely should have concrete evidence. And we don't.

    Are aliens up there in space? Yeah, probably. I reckon probably NOT in our galaxy, and possibly NOT in our hubble volume (observable universe). If we were a competent species that would be a good thing because we could spread through the galaxy before we're absorbed by a more advanced culture.

    But in any case, we're not a competent species so it doesn't matter. We'll almost certainly be extinct in the next century or so. Maybe a few smart individuals could get away and learn to live in space, but it's not looking very likely.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    1. Re:A lot of UFO organisations are dying. by pepsikid · · Score: 1

      It's too obvious, I don't know why I have to explain it. Aliens don't have to swoop over our cities any more. They record and photograph us through our own cameras.

    2. Re:A lot of UFO organisations are dying. by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Aw damn man... You just blew my mind...!!!

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    3. Re:A lot of UFO organisations are dying. by gtall · · Score: 1

      They used to come for our women. But now pornography is so pervasive, "They record and photograph us through our own cameras".

    4. Re:A lot of UFO organisations are dying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They used to come and anal probe our hillbillies. But now goatse is readily available
      "They record and photograph us through our own cameras".

    5. Re:A lot of UFO organisations are dying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the distance between our stars and the power/energy needed to travel those distances.

      There are other critters out there, we're all just too far away from each other.

      Unless aliens possess magical spaceships, there will be no probing of anyone tonight.

  38. My experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When I was a child (about 5 or 6 years old) I saw an UFO, weird experience but fascinating. I was living in San Luis, Argentina at the moment and I saw it first hand with a lot of other people as well. What I saw was a blueish circle, right above us beyond the clouds, it was lightly clouded and you can see the translucent clouds moving below the object, it stood there for a couple of minutes and then it was as if it turned off the light and suddenly it wasn't there anymore.
    As if what I saw was alien in nature, I cannot tell. I sure hope there are more species living out there. And for what I think about most of the videos I've seen about UFOs I think most (if not all) are fake, specially since pretty much anyone carries a decent quality camera today and every video is just about a dot in the sky or with such a bad quality you cannot tell anything from it.

  39. UFOs are echos of future us... by CraigCruden · · Score: 1

    To travel fast through space one of the theories is that we can warp space (and time). Some of these unidentified objects are probably echos or shadows of our future when we start developing advanced space propulsion systems... The rest are likely just delusions of a primitive people (us).

  40. Clearly the TR-3 is real! by Golbez81 · · Score: 0

    It has a wiki article too! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  41. Re:Interesting but I think they look @ us like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope there is intelligent life in space, becuase there is bugger all down here on earth.

  42. Ancient sighting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_Pool_Essays#.22Strange_Happenings.22
    Although it's clear that modern aircraft have huge influence on the number of UFO report now, it is puzzling that there is still many reports dating hundreds of years ago. Not reports with interpretation like those of hieroglyphs drawing, but by true scientists with a rational mind writing facts as they happened.
    There is Shen Kuo writings but also Zhuangzi, Classical of Mountains and Seas, and some others.
    I personally think some UFO are from aliens, or it might be a time travelling machine, but the former is much more probable.

  43. UFOs or Aliens by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    UFOs? Yes. People see things they can't identify, they're flying, thus Unidentified Flying Objects. Most of the time, you'll eventually get a pretty good explanation for them. What's left usually happens near weapon testing sites where governments try out their new toys. And why would governments act strange and keep the alien myth alive? Because it's better to send you on a wild goose chase for aliens and flying saucers, that way you don't want to investigate their much more mundane new stealth bomber.

    There is very little reason to believe it's aliens. For a very simple reason: You want to tell me that these people (or whatever they are) are capable of FTL travel, come here to this rather insignificant marble in a godforsaken corner of a nondescript galaxy... and then crash land because they can't brake in time? Please.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:UFOs or Aliens by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      UFOs? Yes. People see things they can't identify, they're flying, thus Unidentified Flying Objects. Most of the time, you'll eventually get a pretty good explanation for them.

      In addition, people are pretty poor eye witnesses. They interpret what they saw which may not be an accurate depiction of what they actually saw. I've worked with operators in simulators who would swear they saw X, even after the videotape showed they didn't.

      What's left usually happens near weapon testing sites where governments try out their new toys. And why would governments act strange and keep the alien myth alive? Because it's better to send you on a wild goose chase for aliens and flying saucers, that way you don't want to investigate their much more mundane new stealth bomber.

      True, but then you get a Congressional inquiry about the UFO because a nutcase constituent wrote their Cogresscritter about the UFO they saw near base X; and you need to draft a reply and can't say "Your constituent is a nut case, please ignore..."

      There is very little reason to believe it's aliens. For a very simple reason: You want to tell me that these people (or whatever they are) are capable of FTL travel, come here to this rather insignificant marble in a godforsaken corner of a nondescript galaxy... and then crash land because they can't brake in time? Please.

      Maybe their millennial child took their starship for a joyride?

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  44. I didn't say some aren't... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Some are damn obvious but the ones caught on T.V. stations cameras are hard to deny (it's that or we have tech that's way, Way, WAY above what we know about publicly - THIS is a huge possible (lookup Ben Rich of Lockheed Martin for example & see what HE says ala "We now have the technology to take ET home" iirc).

    * I hear & AGREE w/ your point in fact but once you see some of the ones on TV stations (iirc, one's called "The Denver Lights" & another shows a GIGANTIC triangular vessel over a city too).

    Cool hobby/interest on your end (mine's doing freeware nowadays & for decades in software) - I wish you luck in it (big Sci-Fi guy in my early youth in fact). Heck, things going on in the world today ARE the province of Sci-Fi (truth lately imo, IS stranger than fiction).

    In the end? You all got me "into it" on this & KEPT ME AWAKE (I was going to sleep too)... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> All I can tell you is, I have NO reason to lie here (I've seen honestly scarier & WEIRDER things in my life I don't even LIKE talking about (supernatural stuff) that IF anyone thinks I am 'nuts' etc. on THIS? They, FOR SURE, would the other stuff I've seen that @ 1st scared me shitless - until I realized that is what was WANTED of me, put it that way & I immediately felt better knowing that & went to sleep))... apk

    1. Re:I didn't say some aren't... apk by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

      Is it these Denver lights? http://www.thedenverchannel.co...

  45. I've seen things I can't explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've witness a few things at night that are certainly not aircraft and that make a person ask what are they. I also believe most governments know way more about the UFO phenomenon then they tell us. No conspiracy sort of thing, just that they know more then they think we can handle.

  46. Life exists elswhere by andydread · · Score: 1

    Does life exist elsewhere? most likely
    Does intelligent life exist elsewhere? Most likely
    due to the countless amount of stars and planets and galaxies the above is most likely
    Have we been visited by any of them? not likely.
    why? because it would be obvious. If humans travelled to a planet with less intelligent creatures would it not be obvious to them that we have arrived? so why are we so arrogant to believe that other creatures would go out of their way to remain elusive to us upon coming to earth?. Did Columbus try to remain elusive to the Indians?
    If we landed on another planet populated by...let say monkeys for instance would we go out of our way to hide from them or would we just clear land and setup shop?
    So to me the answer is no. we have not been visited by any more advanced creature otherwise it would be blatantly obvious. They would just simply clear land and setup shop most likely ignoring us like we ignore creatures living in the forest when we decide to setup a new subdivision or shopping complex. We simply clear land and setup shop.

    1. Re:Life exists elswhere by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      I agree that the odds look like they favour others living in the neighbourhood. If you select for what we know works - a yellow dwarf star with high metallicity in a relatively low density area that manages to avoid nearby supernovas for a few billion years, and has a wet rock of approximately 1 Earth mass in the stellar Goldilocks zone - well, even with all those qualifiers there are still ~10 billion stars to look at, and we are quickly learning that most stars have planets.

      The problem is the size of the neighbourhood. It seems unlikely we'd have neighbours within range that evidence of their activities wouldn't fade into background noise even if we had a telescope pointed right at them.

      Even our closest neighbour (which is unlikely to have any little green men) is an 80 year trip away by the best tech we could manage right now... and we lack the ability to keep ourselves alive for that long in interstellar space without resupply (and probably even with, but that's another story). Since I believe in the laws of physics, I don't believe aliens can get here significantly faster or for significantly less expense.

      So when people talk about UFOs? I'm totally in agreement that such things exist, I just don't agree that 'unidentified' means 'little green men on a short semi-clandestine visit after spending the equivalent of billions of dollars and a lifetime in transit just to get here'.

    2. Re:Life exists elswhere by fafalone · · Score: 1

      It never stops amusing me how arrogant most humans are, assuming that our current level of understanding of physics, which can't even reconcile QM and relativity, is so absolutely correct that no exceptions could possibly exist we're not aware of that would allow any technology better than what we'll have in the next couple decades. Ruling out all effective FTL methods for societies millions or billions of years more advanced than ours is just delusional, especially given it's not even strictly impossible under our current laws (e.g. an Alcubierre drive.. it may be impossible, or it may not, we don't know, we just figured out simple electricity a couple centuries ago, let's see what our understanding of physics says in million or so years).

    3. Re:Life exists elswhere by andydread · · Score: 1

      FTL travel is within the realm of the laws of physics. There may even be creatures that have mastered FTL travel. I just don't think any of them have ever visited us. Nature is most likely universal so if we were visited by what would obviously be being way more advanced creatures than us then it would be obvious to us that we had visitors. My hypothesis is that they would simply clear land and setup shop while totally ignoring us. Just as we do to other lesser creatures in the forest when we want to setup shop. I think we would simply be insignificant to them as forest dwelling creatures are insignificant to us.

    4. Re:Life exists elswhere by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      >It never stops amusing me how arrogant most humans are

      Which is funny, given that's exactly what you are. You think you know better than all the experts who have looked at this? Somehow I'm confident you don't have any kind of physics education, nor the ability to follow Miguel's math.

      >an Alcubierre drive.. it may be impossible, or it may not, we don't know,

      We know, and no, it isn't possible. This isn't like saying the sound barrier can't be broken, this is a fundamental property of our universe that is backed up by piles of experimental confirmation with absolutely nothing indicating the possibility of being wrong about it and everything indicating that if FTL were possible, pretty much everything else in solidly understood physics would have to be wrong.

      If you actually knew anything about the Alcubierre drive beyond what you might have read in a pop science article, you'd know everyone who can do the math treats it as a fun math problem and none of them believe it actually shows a way to FTL travel. It's a damn thought experiment and a math exercise, that's it.

    5. Re:Life exists elswhere by Baron_Yam · · Score: 0

      You're a credulous and ignorant fool.

      I probably shouldn't have bothered posting that... not because it's mean, but because you're not worth the time.

      Be honoured I took the time to point it out to you. You've wasted the time of someone whose time is much more valuable than yours.

    6. Re:Life exists elswhere by andydread · · Score: 1

      I agree...you probably should not have posted anything. You have contributed nothing to the conversation.

    7. Re:Life exists elswhere by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Which is funny, given that's exactly what you are. You think you know better than all the experts who have looked at this? Somehow I'm confident you don't have any kind of physics education, nor the ability to follow Miguel's math.

      If the experts think their incomplete theories are the final say for all time, they're simply arrogant. Here you are telling me a society that's 100 years past GR, can't reconcile that with QM, doesn't say it's strictly impossible (even if the method proposed by Alcubierre wouldn't be possible to construct, and while I'm not an expert, the people who are can't rule it out 100%, it doesn't change the fundamental principle that spacetime itself is not constrained to c, only motion through it)... any expert that would conclude anything about what absolutely, beyond doubt, is or is not possible in the distant future with unified theories and unimaginable technology, is a fool. I doubt you'd find one single true expert who'd disagree with this point and be absolutely 100% certain; I don't have to be such an expert myself to know what they say about this.

      We know, and no, it isn't possible. This isn't like saying the sound barrier can't be broken, this is a fundamental property of our universe that is backed up by piles of experimental confirmation with absolutely nothing indicating the possibility of being wrong about it and everything indicating that if FTL were possible, pretty much everything else in solidly understood physics would have to be wrong.

      Either you think I'm talking about FTL through conventional spacetime or you're completely off base here. I said effective FTL; do you not know what that was referring to? I'm not suggesting you could accelerate a mass beyond c through normal space.

      It's a damn thought experiment and a math exercise, that's it.

      Yes, that shows effective FTL doesn't inherently violate relativity. I cited it as an example of that principle, not as a practical method to construct such a device. It shows that everything we know to be true doesn't have to be entirely wrong for there to be some possible way to move spacetime itself rather than go through it.

      We don't know. End of story. Our theories of physics are incomplete. A complete theory might rule out any possible way it could be achieved. But we don't have one. There's just no way we can say conclusively; it's the height of arrogance. You're making the same damn mistake. Taking knowledge you know to be incomplete, and talking about what is and is not possible *as we understand things*, and fundamentally, we still have no clue about so many aspects of our universe, how it works, where it came from, what the nature of it is, what the nature of other dimensions might be, if they exist at all... and you're going to tell me we can definitively rule out all possibility of traveling outside conventional spacetime? Bull. Shit. We are absolutely primitive in our knowledge. But no, you know it all, all the answers of the universe, because that's what it would actually take to rule out every conceivable way to get around c.

  47. Have you seen "Offset Spatial Divergence"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & if NOT? Do look it up (allegedly some alien who said that very phrase) & he gets into "to travel is space IS to travel in time" & as I was watching a documentary about 'curved space' vs. 'flat space' theories, the curved one states that the universe is 'bent' like a magnetospherical 'toroid' donut & that light we see from 'distant galaxies' may in fact be our OWN LIGHT or those near us, bent back @ us, albeit @ a different timeframe (coming from way earlier in our timespace continuum still coming @ us from 'then' etc.) - sort of like the original "The Planet of the Apes" Dr. Haslein's "Haslein Curve" idea.

    IF that's the case? It might be possible as to what you, & the 'alien' in the video said - Go far enough you will 'bend back on your trip' albeit @ a later timeframe etc.

    APK

    P.S.=> As an aside from my OTHER posts? LOL, I was going to get some sleep but the conversations here are interesting as all get out... apk

  48. Re:Neither did I but, he has a point... apk by Boutzev · · Score: 1

    Do you really care about how agressive ants are ?

    If an alien civilization has the technology to come all the way to Earth, there is no reason to think they will see us as something much different than ants or wasps. Yes, wasps may be agressive and a nest full of them may even harm a human. However, you only need a can of insecticide to get rid of them. It wont be that much different for an alien civilization that has the advanced technology needed for space travel. They may look at us, study us, but see us as something dangerous ? Not very probable. Try to talk to us ? Not probable either. Do you even try talking to the average wasp ?

  49. The Truth Is Out There by Kneo24 · · Score: 1

    You just need a Fox Mulder to put all of the pieces together.

  50. I've seen two maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One I saw with friends as a teenager, it clearly stopped at a reasonably medium height and seemed to be bigger than regular aircraft (hard to tell scale), and more triangular in shape. The other was just some lights I saw alone.

    Rationally, I suspect the first was either an aircraft I've never seen before that could stop in midair- maybe experimental, maybe a trick of perspective and it didn't really stop- and the second was who knows what, man, there's always lights in the sky if you look for them.

    But I doubt I'll ever really know.

    I've definitely never seen anything that is indisputably alien or anything like that. I've often wondered why that hypothesis gets so much air time.

  51. My story by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 1

    My parents, who are not pranksters or jokers, saw a UFO in the mid 90s (both are very smart people with high IQ). I never really believed their testimony yet they had exactly zero reasons to lie to me. They described an object in the sky which did imaginable things, like staying still for quite some time, then moving at speeds which are impossible for any human made flying apparatus.

  52. Unless and Until we all become a lot smarter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First, by definition, if we know what something is, then it is not Unidentified.
    Second, the amount of time, data, and expertise required to identify everything we see is prohibitive.
    Third, the Air Force Blue book (back in the 50's-60's) found that the vast majority of reported sightings were reported after days or weeks or months with the implication that dreaming and memory alteration (normal processes) were involved in most "credible" cases. That is, the UFO resulted from a manufactured/distorted memory.
    Finally, I've myself had an UFO sighting. Can't explain it now. Couldn't at the time. But ETs? no way. It was, and is, curious.
    Always the first thing to ask someone claiming to have seen an UFO is about the lag between the sighting and their first documentation of it (and whether they had slept in between (or been otherwise unconscious or in an altered (ie drugged) mental state).

  53. Build a wall... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    JK

  54. Channeling Arthur C. Clarke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any sufficiently advanced psychedelic is indistinguishable from UFOs.

  55. I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by raymorris · · Score: 5, Informative

    I saw a fascinating UFO once, and several friends witnessed it as well. What we saw was an instance of "Often the apparent spacecraft does something improbable like standing completely still in the sky and then shooting off to somewhere at an incredible speed." Being an ultralight and RC pilot, I'm well aware that "standing still" can be when the object is moving toward or away from you, but I couldn't explain the maneuvers this thing was doing. It was night, a light in the sky moving in ways that planes don't. The four or five people watching it were confused and a little bit amazed.

    Then it flew in front of a tree and we all recognized the lightning bug for what it was.

    The whole incident demonstrated several scientific principles. A point of light against the dark sky could be 10 miles away and moving at 1,000 MPH or 300 feet away and moving at 1MPH - your eyes cannot tell the difference. (I don't feel like doing the math to convert arc seconds to MPH, but you get the point). Stereopsis isn't very effective after a hundred feet or so and and stops working at all at a distance of several hundred feet. We thought it was large object, far away moving fast. It was actually a small object, close, moving much slower, and the two are indistinguishable against a dark sky. Only when it flew in front of a tree did we have any way to estimate its true distance and size.

    If this kind of thing interests a person, watch large planes fly around an airport before landing at night. They'll appear to come to a dead stop in midair as they turn to fly toward you. They my also seem to shoot almost straight up, though they are actually losing altitude, because they are coming toward you, to fly over your head. Overhead *seems* higher than being near the horizon, but the apparent altitude is unrelated to the actual altitude.

    1. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I had a similar experience when I was younger, only it was broad daylight. There were bright sometimes triangle-shaped sometimes cigar shaped objects that were dancing about and seeming to move at impossible speeds. They looked metallic. Finally, after many minutes, I finally realized they were birds when they flew under some darker clouds, and were much closer than I thought. The bright sun was catching their feathers and the rest of the bird was hard to see in the bright sky. Really bizarre looking, and very surprising when it turned out to be a couple of birds.

    2. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by davide+marney · · Score: 2

      Same experience here. I was camping near Ocean City, MD and had gotten out of my tent around 2AM to go see a man about a horse. I looked up into the night sky and saw a streak of phosphorescent gas that corkscrewed into a spiral perhaps dozens of miles long. I rushed back to my tent, grabbed a pad of paper and sketched it. Wow! A genuine UFO.

      Um, no. A genuine high altitude rocket launch from the nearby Wallops Island, VA NASA launch site. D'oh.

      --
      "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
    3. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same AC here. I left out an important point.

      If I had not watched for as long, or if the lighting conditions were not right at the end (I was in a car at the time), I would have definitely thought I had seen UFOs and could easily have become a believer. I would not in a million years have believed anyone saying these were just a couple of birds had I not seen it in the end myself. Because of this, I can more easily understand those that think they've seen UFOs, especially back in the day when it was more forefront in our culture.

      Still, a bit of online research now and a subscription to Skeptical Inquirer (scientific investigation into claims of the paranormal) should be able to help anyone who maintain such beliefs.

    4. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also saw such light in Belgium in 1998, some years after the first wave.
      This was before anyone was using modified quadcopters to simulate UFO's.
      I saw several lights, and the proof that they where far away: one light was raising very fast, and some cloud where in an altitude of 500m to 1km, and it was flying above them with very fast and ruptured flightpath .... the G force would have destroyed any man made flying machinery.
      Until today, i found no scientific explanation to these lights.... but i don't speak about it to other people, since there are a lot of morons who's are arguing on a personal level, and not objectively.
      Maybe they where of the same type than the Hessdalen lights, investigated by some universities, even analyzed with stereographic instruments.

    5. Re: I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by airdrummer · · Score: 1

      reminds me of that bit where casteneda sees a spirit dancing in the distance, then don juan grabs the rag fluttering in the breeze from the fence...of course the shrooms had something to do with it;-)

    6. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by bradley13 · · Score: 2

      I like the parent comment's story of the lightning bug. Reminds me of the time I watched the moon being nuked: Standing outside, looking at the moon through hazy clouds. There were points of light on the moon's surface that would grow and shrink - truly, it looked like a huge explosion. One after another after another. Really spooky.

      Obviously, I knew the moon wasn't being nuked, though I can imagine the article some tabloid might have written. It took several minutes for me to understand what I was seeing. There were two layers of hazy clouds at different altitudes, moving in different directions. Probably altocumulus, with relatively few gaps. When gaps in both cloud layers lined up, the full brightness of the moon would shine through: growing as the gaps lined up, and shrinking as they passed each other.

      People see strange things. If they don't take the time to figure out what they are really seeing, it's easy to make something up. It's the same reason the ancients believed Zeus was throwing lightning bolts - lack of a better explanation. For many people, the "Zeus" of weird things seen in the sky is to assign them to UFOs. Plus probably some degree of attention-seeking: "I'm special, I saw a UFO".

      --
      Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    7. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I once saw streak of light moving at high speed horizontally before disappearing. It was a meteor that had sheared off and become flat on one side, which was enough for air resistance to make it appear to be moving horizontally and the disappearing was due to it burning up in the atmosphere.

    8. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's strange that not even one objective witness is reported here here on slashdot, i know so much people having seen lights, who where not scientifically explainable...
      Even my first reply with my own eyewitness never appeared here ....

    9. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, maybe it was a browser problem or a level 8 problem while posting my first reply, so i'll write it again... :)

      I saw some light in 1998, before anyone was using customized quadcopter to record fake ufo footage.
      The lights where moving fast with abrupt flightpath changes.
      They flew in various altitudes, and it was no bug... since one of the lights separated and flew above the clouds (at 500m to 1km high that day)
      No man made machinery could have supported such g force.
      Until now i have no scientific explanation for these lights, maybe they where of the same type as the Hessdalen lights in Norway investigated by some universities...
      And i never mentioned aliens.... i just can't explain the lights...

    10. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by TimSSG · · Score: 1
      You did see an UFO for a short time; but, you later identified it.
      I believe in UFOs; but, I have great doubts about flying alien spaceships are visiting planet Earth in secret.

      UFO means the person seeing the flying object does not know what it is.

      Tim S.

      Same AC here. I left out an important point.

      If I had not watched for as long, or if the lighting conditions were not right at the end (I was in a car at the time), I would have definitely thought I had seen UFOs and could easily have become a believer. I would not in a million years have believed anyone saying these were just a couple of birds had I not seen it in the end myself. Because of this, I can more easily understand those that think they've seen UFOs, especially back in the day when it was more forefront in our culture.

      Still, a bit of online research now and a subscription to Skeptical Inquirer (scientific investigation into claims of the paranormal) should be able to help anyone who maintain such beliefs.

    11. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I've seen a UFO. To this day I don't know what it was. It probably wasn't full of little green aliens, but it was an object, it was flying, and it was unidentified.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    12. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by rgbatduke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mine was much better. We were driving west on I40 and passing west of Winston-Salem when we saw -- my wife and I together -- a light that literally rippled in the sky, lights flashing like they were rolling around on some invisible shape. It flew first to the right of the road, then made an impossible turn and came back diagonally across the road in front of is, then rose and zipped back to the right and came directly towards us, parallel to the road, the lights growing brighter and brighter and with the whole thing literally glittering with rippling sparkles of light. I'm a physicist, she's a physician and at no time did we actually believe we were being visited by aliens following I40 in to attack Winston, but we certainly could not identify what we were seeing -- it was absolutely a Unidentified Flying Object!

      Then it smoothly passed us on the right about a mile away, and we could see that it was a biplane towing an advertising display, heading back for another pass over some stadium where they were apparently playing football. We were barely too far away to see exactly what they were selling, but damn, that display rippled and sparkled in the night JUST LIKE lights spinning around on a flying disk, one that constantly tumbled or changed shape.

      The moral of the story is mixed. Lack of evidence isn't evidence of lack, and one anecdote cannot address every UFO sighting in the history of mankind. However, as I've pointed out to my sons -- who are much more inclined to give credence to the idea that we are constantly being watched by aliens and that their experiences like this one HAVE no natural explanation -- during the 50's through the 80's, the US was more or less constantly under the threat of air attack and ICBM attack from the USSR and to a lesser extent China. SAC had every border lit up with radar that was being watched continuously for "unidentified flying objects" that without question would have been interpreted as an attack by the USSR, not visitation by snoopy space aliens. Every commercial airport was equipped with radar and flight control, (and still is today) and any object not identified by procedure and law would be immediately detected and in all probability investigated, especially post-9/11.

      So sure, space aliens could be masters of stealth AND nefariously snoopy AND could be malevolent (spying us out To Serve Man) or constrained by THEIR laws and customs not to interfere while we rush to destroy each other, waiting to see if we survive long enough to build a peaceful global society. Science fiction novels delight in this kind of stuff. But Bayesian assessments of stacked arguments of this sort are never very convincing. Every special explanation required decreases the probability of the truth of the conclusion. Our governments -- all of them -- have to be members of a global conspiracy to hide "area 51" evidence. Reliable sightings have to be suppressed. The alien stealth has to be almost perfect to hide from civilian radar, or civilian radar has to be part of the conspiracy (which by now has grown to include the entire air force, NASA, the top levels of every government, all of the major intelligence and police services -- worldwide). AND we need psychotic aliens because REAL aliens intent on invasion would have crafted a killer virus long before now and collapsed civilization or would have just fired a few nukes at Russia and the US simultaneously and than sat back snacking on popcorn while we collapsed it for ourselves and left them some simply mopping up to do before they took over the rest of the world without credible opposition, and REAL aliens interested in making friend would have made friends long ago. But Bayesian reasoning is a bit difficult for most folks, sadly, and explosion of premises/priors (a.k.a. common sense, withholding a significant degree of belief in the absence of credible evidence AND a credible, evidence supported explanation) is all too rare.

      After all, roughly 80% of the people on Earth believe in malevolent and beneficent

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    13. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by CanadianRealist · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't believe in aliens, but I'm pretty sure if you spend much time near an airport watching planes at night you are very likely to be "abducted and probed".

    14. Re: I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your original post did appear. This one is a dup.

    15. Re: I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Average American isn't very good at trigonometry and geometry. Would be interesting to see data on number of UFO sightings vs. math grades of the observers.

    16. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by imatter · · Score: 1

      in 1986, Midwest USA, late July around 4 pm CST, I saw a spherical object enter the atmosphere with a big smoke trail, at about half the distance to the horizon. It turned in a big arc 180 degrees, moved back the way it came, maybe a quarter of the distance and exploded. My brother called the airport to report what we saw. the person listened to his description then replied "supernova!" then hung up. I don't think there were any green men involved but it wasn't a fucking supernova.

    17. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw a similar UFO as a kid, through a reflecting telescope. The UFO was clearly an artificial object, shaped like a perfect circle of light with a smaller dark circle and a slot cut out of it, and it had the typical UFO behavior of seeming to hover in one place and then suddenly shooting away at high speed.

      It was, in fact, shaped exactly like the silhouette of the aperture of my reflecting telescope (a circular opening with a smaller circular mirror in the center, held by a strut). And, there were streetlights nearby, causing glare.

    18. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I once saw streak of light moving at high speed horizontally before disappearing. It was a meteor that had sheared off and become flat on one side,

      You have bloody good eyesight sir, to spot the fact that the meteor was flat on one side...

      (Captcha: ablating....).

    19. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It did sort of resemble a stone skipping across water.

    20. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > But Bayesian assessments of stacked arguments of this sort are never very convincing.

      You are making a LOT of assumptions there using faulty human logic.

      > Our governments -- all of them -- have to be members of a global conspiracy to hide "area 51" evidence.
      You DO realize that there are _several_ clearance layers ABOVE then what the President has access to, right?

      > The alien stealth has to be almost perfect
      You are assuming their technology would be "visible" compared to our primitive tech. You really think someone who has the technology to travel around the galaxy would be detectable by us???

      > AND we need psychotic aliens because REAL aliens intent on invasion would have crafted a killer virus
      Why would you contaminate a world only to be forced to clean it up afterwards? Britain didn't do this with her colonies. There is no way in hell they would contaminate one of their colonies' "cosmic liquid gold" aka water.

      > and REAL aliens interested in making friend would have made friends long ago.
      You are assuming they are _allowed_ to. The problem isn't with them -- it is with us. We haven't unilaterally collectively decided we WANT to meet our cosmic neighbors -- so they are respecting our opinion until we change our mind. When your society has been around for a few billion years you'll have a different perspective on primitive life forms.

      > AND a credible, evidence supported explanation) is all too rare.
      Rare, yes, but it is still there. Hell, consider NASA's own footage:

      * Evidence: The Case For NASA UFOs - Part.1 (2004)
      * Evidence: The Case For NASA UFOs - Part.2 (2004)

      --
      First Contact is tentatively scheduled for ~2024. Assuming the USA doesn't nuke N. Korea off the face of the earth.

    21. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by LesFerg · · Score: 1

      My grandmother saw a craft of some kind, I believe this was in the late sixties. She was an intelligent and very rational person, and was accompanied by my uncle at the time, they both saw and recalled the same thing, so I don't think they were mistaken. Back in the last century living in a rural community, there was not much desire to talk about such things, so they stayed quiet for many years.

      When we were talking about the moon landing and rockets etc once, she mentioned that she had seen one of the Russian ships, but sometime later she told me she now didn't think it was Russian at all, and finally gave me more details. Driving on a country road they saw a craft land in the field beside them. They can't recall if the car stopped running or if my uncle parked it. There was a classic saucer shaped craft, with port holes in it, and they believed there were people visible looking out. They both recalled that it was exceptionally silent at the time. The craft flew off in the direction of a remote harbor area which has been the subject of many sightings over the years, a favorite area of author Bruce Cathie. We also discovered later that the farmer who owned that piece of land had called investigators in to look at a burned circular patch in his field.

      I have never seen anything I consider unexplained or unidentifiable myself, but I don't know what to make of my grandmother's recollection of an encounter with a vehicle she was pretty damned sure nobody was supposed to have at the time. I'm also not inclined to blame 'aliens' for anything odd which may be seen flying about in our skies, that is an awfully big jump to make from 'not a technology I believe humans have right now'.

      --
      If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
    22. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      "You are making a LOT of assumptions there using faulty human logic.

      Actually, I'm saying: "If you make a lot of assumptions, the probability that your conclusion is correct goes down to the extent that your assumptions themselves are not certain". Which is, I reiterate, Bayes theorem. The assumptions are called "priors", and one problem with argumentation in general is that one rarely has a sound basis for even assigning a probability TO an assumption like "NASA and the government know there are space aliens but they choose not to release the evidence accompanied by an announcement to that effect". Which is basically what you are asserting, and what the entire movie you offer as "evidence" is asserting.

      You are also asserting that our understanding of the laws of physics, specifically the ones that make interstellar travel almost infinitely unlikely (if our understanding is correct) is INcorrect, in a relevant way that enables interstellar travel in reasonable times and for reasonable costs. The point you miss there is that you have absolutely no basis for believing them to be wrong in such a way. Nobody does. There is no evidence for it. There is no coherent argument for it. That doesn't mean that it isn't possible that we are wrong -- of course it is -- it just means that it is the height of absurdity to assign a GREATER degree of belief, not even in a THEORY of FTL travel (or hell, slower than light travel that doesn't require the combined GDP of the entire world to be spent for several decades to send a single tiny ship that might arrive at the NEAREST star in a time frame of centuries), but to the notion itself that it is possible and the hell with physics and experiment and common sense.

      As for the movie -- ROTFL. Seriously? Complete with patched in clips of rockets taking off, spiral galaxies, and with the bizarre "Ooo-na! Ooo-na-na-na" music played after each clip and sonorous pronouncement. We simply have different standards as to what constitutes "evidence", specifically reliable and reproducible evidence, evidence that verifies actual hypotheses or theories, evidence that permits one to make predictions.

      Again, if you add up all of the assumptions required to believe that space aliens are hanging out in orbit all of the time, but are generally invisible and being hidden from us by BOTH the aliens themselves AND by a mind-numbingly vast trans-world-government conspiracy, where miraculously NOBODY IN THE KNOW has ever outed it (miraculous because truly huge numbers of people would have to be in the know) -- its as silly as believing that the moon landing was done in Hollywood. In fact, the hypothesis that the moon landing WAS done in Hollywood and that we've actually never sent anybody into orbit so that your "evidence" is fake of a fake is probably very slightly more reasonable, and no, I don't believe that either and for the same reasons.

      rgb

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    23. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen two different occasions of UFOs in the desert skies of New Mexico.

      The first was in 1994. It appeared as a blue light, moving slowly and steadily across the sky. It was closer than the Ultralight also in the sky as we watched it's red and green lights pass behind the large blue light. We could also hear the ultra light, but as it flew by the blue light made no noise. Then suddenly it accelerated and moved past the horizon in less than a second. What was it? I still don't know.

      The second was 2007 and could easily have been incredibly well lit prototype quadcopters. But I mean really well lit. Visible from several miles away, as these were also inaudible.

    24. Re:I've seen a UFO, and it demonstrated science by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > our understanding of the laws of physics ... you have absolutely no basis for believing them to be wrong in such a way. Nobody does.

      Typical male ego arrogance of "I don't know this, so no one else can't either."

      You _don't_ know what other people know. Hell, you _don't_ know what is even knowable, let alone un-knowable.

      Stop assuming what other people know -- because you don't have a fucking clue.

      You haven't had my experience; ergo you don't know what I know. And yes, the current understanding of Science is horribly incomplete. The 1st flaw is assuming consciousness arises out of (inorganic) matter. This is completely backwards. Consciousness is THE foundation of reality. Go back to your QM classes until you learn that "Mind Over Matter" aka The Observer Paradox IS the new basis -- and just what that implies. More so, if you actually had a shared OBE you could _begin_ to understand this, and work with this. Lastly, wake me up when Physics begins to includes Consciousness in its equations because they will never reach a greater level of understanding while locked in a myopic physical-only view of reality. I would say "Reductionism/Materialism is for Retards" but that would offend the retards with that level of stupidity.

      > Nobody does. There is no evidence for it.

      Incorrect. YOU have no evidence for it -- and that's OK. But you DON'T speak for everyone.

      What you _should_ be saying is "I find no evidence for it -- at this time"

      > not even in a THEORY of FTL travel (or hell, slower than light travel that doesn't require the combined GDP of the entire world to be spent for several decades to send a single tiny ship that might arrive at the NEAREST star in a time frame of centuries)

      You keep assuming money will solve your problems of ignorance. Your linear thinking is limiting you. You would have greater success if you learnt how to think non-linear. GR already proved that the concept of absolute space-time to be false.

      Ergo,

      * Space is Relative, and thus teleportation is possible,
      * Time is Relative, and thus time travel is possible.

      But keep pretending a theory of FTL is impossible simply because you can't understand how -- /sarcasm because your knowledge determines how physics works, right?

      > As for the movie -- ROTFL. Seriously?

      /sarcasm Let's throw the ENTIRE baby out with the bath water because NASA's footage isn't credible due to the producers spicing up the rest of the video. Because ALL of NASA's footage is obviously faked. Riiight.

      > add up all of the assumptions required to believe that space aliens are hanging out in orbit all of the time

      Experiences trump assumptions. After my wife and I having met an alien 14 years I no longer am interested in other people's assumptions that "__x__ is impossible." I used to be ignorant like you -- but time and time again she has demonstrated to me that very assumption we make about X not being impossible is just that. An assumption based on incomplete data.

      > where miraculously NOBODY IN THE KNOW has ever outed it

      Incorrect. The Disclosure Project back in 2001 tried to get people to listen -- but the time was not (yet) right for man to be allowed to know it. For one thing, you just can't tell a primitive society, such as humans, the truth about cosmic life without causing widespread panic. You must introduce the concept, slowly, over time, in order not to fry the weak-minded that their POV of Reality just snapped. If you want to see the future in 20 - 40 years, the classic barometer are movies -- because they prepare people to accept a new reality "safely."

      Robert, as I alluded to, what you are COMPLETELY failing to under

  56. Grad students by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

    The grad students who were buzzing the Earth as part of the "research" for their theses on primitive cultures have all graduated, and no longer need to waste time in the sticks....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  57. Class with J.Allen Hynek -- some wont vanish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally, I have never seen a UFO. But many years ago I was privileged to be in a program run by Dr. J.Allen Hynek, a principle in the original air force UFO investigation. The last day of class he showed his personal collection of cartoons and pictures. His closing comment was that after looking at thousands of reports, some simply refused to vanish in a puff of logic. Does that mean they are 'real' as in aliens... no, but the logical explanations could not make them go away. So he always carried a camera... just in case.

    Big Universe out there, am sure we are not alone. Is anyone observing us? Maybe... I remain agnostic on the issue. If, as the X-files suggest, aliens are conspiring with our government -- glad someone wants to and has a plan. Not sure we do, would be glad that intelligent life exists somewhere...

  58. They are unidentified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only very few of them are actual FOs (Flying Objects), some are just pixels or stories.

  59. How about ghosts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hear some strange stories people see or think they've seen but they're not actually completely sure. They call such things "ghosts". Then I hear some people have seen alien ships and call such things UFOs but no outsider can say it's an actual alien ship (blurry dot in distance). Too much "noise" in both cases to say these ones are caused by one source.

  60. Been there, Done that by astralan · · Score: 1

    Probably 6th grade, my mother was delivering some food to an ill friend. Told her I was going to wait in the car and look for UFO's. Just as she was heading back to the car, a half-moon object streaked across the North Hollywood sky, did a dead stop and hoovered for a short bit, became a full glowing disc and proceeded to shoot directly up and out into the stratosphere disappearing from site. Next morning KRLA reported the siting as being reported by hundreds of people. Oh, this was in the early 60's.

  61. UFO's are just that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    UFOs are unidentified flying objects. Nothing more.

  62. 190 IQ? by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1

    Really? There's not that many humans, statistically, with that high of an IQ. I think the vast majority of UFO sightings are planets, normal aircraft, or (in specific areas of the world) test military craft. Seriously, we "stupid humans" are only a few decades out from having "invisible" items using metamaterial cloaking. If we could do it, any society advanced enough to travel across the stars should have developed something similar years ago. If anything, any reconnaissance mission craft would be tiny, tiny drones.

  63. Interested by skeptical by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 1

    Some of these sightings such as the Mllstadt sightings are undoubtedly testing of a radar invisible blimp. All that was seen was a slow moving fan powered blimp that exhibited characteristics of traditional blimp flight, could stand still, and move slowly. It was seen by a reputable witness, a police officer.

    The other sightings that involve a stationary craft that then suddenly accelerates to 400 miles per hour is another matter, because obviously a blimp usually does not go 300 miles per hour, but a plane is not stationary. A helicopter does not go very fast either. Several optical illusions would need to be ruled out. If a plane is coming directly towards you, it can appear to be sort of stationary, if it veers off to the left, it can create the illusion of sudden acceleration, when in such acceleration actually occured because the movement is more visible if its headed at a 90 degree angle from you.

    Another possibility for many sightings is a Fata Morgana where a temperature inversion in the atmosphere can transmit images of objects long distances. Some even report images of faraway islands floating in the sky.

    Many reports were a flare technology where a flare is launched which then drifts slowly downward on a ballon or parachute.

    I think that claims deserve interest, though i am a skeptic. The only thing that would rule out a terrestrial origin, is something that exhibits behaviour clearly contradictory to conventional propulsion and flight schemes, such as blimps, helicopters, balloons, parachutes and airplanes, such as an antigravity technology. That would be interesting because if an ET can build a antigravity drive, so can we, and indicate that there are fundamental oversights in our current models and extrapolations of physical laws. There are many that are false reports, many are simply blimps or other traditional aircraft.

    I wouldnt be so quick to rule out the possibility of anti-gravity or artificial gravity technology. Most physical theories we have are based on limited observations of physical behaviour in certain test conditions and contexts, we then extrapolate these observations to apply to all other contexts, even though there has been no testing of these contexts. Thus, you cant really rule out the possibility because there could be an antigravity effect hiding that requires a very unusual arrangement of fields, such as a very particular arrangement of magnets of a certain strength. Its possible that such an arrangement could be one out of a million, and thus would be improbable that it would be found by accident and easy to miss. I'm not saying that this is likely, what I am pointing out is you shouldnt be quite so sure your current theories of physics are complete because there are obviously holes in your data, which have been extrapolated over, an assumption has made that the physical laws behave the same in all contexts even though many of these contexts have not been tested, of course there are billions of possible arrangements of say a magnetic field. So, it cannot be ruled out. There are possibilities for this such as a multidimensional theory, lets say our dimensions exist in a higher dimensional space, maybe there are higher dimensional geometries that can be interacted with only with a very specific geometric code. What drives discovery is imagination and wonder. Many with a more analytical mind however often lack imagination so we end up getting into a box of orthodox thinking. This can keep us from going out and looking for new discoveries and realizing that our understanding is not complete and such new discoveries might be waiting to be found. When some people looked out of an ocean, they thought it was the end of the world, and since they couldnt see any land in the distance, it didnt exist. Other wondered and had imaginations about possible distant lands that might exist on the other side of the ocean.

  64. No reasonable explanation ... ... by gordguide · · Score: 1

    Is there life on other planets? How about *intelligent* life on other planets?

    Given what we know about the size of our own Galaxy, let alone the size of the Universe ... some portion of which is so far away that the light cannot reach us (ie more Light Years than Earth time from the Big Bang), the chances that extra-terrestial life *doesn't* exist is by far the greater likelihood.

    However, that doesn't change the fact that there is no known mechanism for such life to reach Earth. "Space Ships" cannot travel at the speed of light ... some fraction is all that is reasonable. At high near-lightspeeds the mass of the object gets to the point where just arriving at another planet would destroy that planet. We don't see planets being vaporized for no apparent reason.

    So, there is no reasonable explanation as to how an alien spacecraft could reach Earth. Thus UFO sightings must have another explanation, even when that explanation isn't discoverable.

  65. Conspiracy Theories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Conspiracy theories are like this too. People want to believe in very exciting and convoluted conspiracies, whereas the real large conspiracies are largely open secrets and are quite boring (ie: they mostly involve people lining their pockets).

  66. The more things change the more they stay the same by PPalmgren · · Score: 1

    Ten thousand years ago, we looked up at the sun, stars, and moon and didn't understand them, so we made them supernatural deities to rationalize their existence. 70 years ago, we saw military test aircraft with flashing lights in the sky in the western US and didn't understand them, so we made them supernatural entities to rationalize their existence. 20 years ago, we recorded and saw unusual lighting phenomenon in rare circumstances, so we made them supernatural entities to rationalize their existence.

    The common ground is a human being's desire to explain something they don't understand, not the flashing lights in the sky.

  67. Easy: Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing in the historical record says anything about extra terrestrials.

    It's just proof that most people are stupid and highly subject to suggestion.

  68. The Space Aliens Are Not Coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Stephen Hawking once said that if aliens visit us they will most likely not be friendly. Whether or not he is correct is irrelevant because the aliens aren't coming. Ever.

    The idea of aliens coming to earth has been the subject of countless novels, movies and television shows, and even though those stories are entirely fictional, they have greatly influenced the way we think about the idea of encountering beings from other worlds. Unfortunately, our thinking on this subject is very small and limited. If we step back and think a little bigger, we will realize that any aliens with the ability to come visit us almost certainly would not care to.

    Sci-fi stories can ignore the bits that aren't very interesting. Movie aliens rarely get sick or worry about eating. Sci-fi stories rarely mention gravity because, given our limited view, we expect gravity to just work and shooting a movie without it would be a huge pain. So, screw it, all movie aliens and all future civilizations have invented artificial gravity. After all, warp-drive engines and pew-pew energy-blasters are much more fun to think about.

    In the real world, however, science tends to advance in all directions, because advances in one field almost always results in advances in many others. For example, the invention of the computer resulted in many advances in other fields of human science.

    In order for aliens to reach earth, they will have to, at a minimum, perfect faster-than-light travel or perfect a way to travel for thousands of years at sub-light speed, conquer the long term biological effects of space radiation and weightlessness, and master extreme long distance space navigation. All of this just so they can come to earth and . . . what? Say hello? Steal our water?

    That just doesn't make sense.

    So why *WOULD* aliens come to earth?

    Do they really want our water (or minerals or whatever)? That implies an economic model in their decision. By definition, they need those resources and coming here to get them is their most economical choice. Getting them somewhere closer to home or manufacturing them must be more "expensive" (in some sense of the word) than the cost of traveling all the way here, gathering our resources and flying them home.

    While not impossible, that seems unlikely - both technologically and economically. Even we have (expensively) already mastered alchemy. We have the tech to create matter from energy. Imagine that tech in a few hundred years. What would be cheaper and better -- making stuff at home or building a fleet of galactic warships and sending them (along with thousands of soldiers and miners) to some far off planet?

    Currently, we're not even able to get to Proxima Centauri (the closest star outside our solar system) much less get to a place where we think there's an actual planet. Getting us to Proxima Centauri in less than a few hundred years would require technology that is several orders of magnitude beyond what we have now. If getting humans to another star system is a 100 on some "technology ability scale", then we're currently at about 2, which is not far ahead of poodles who are probably at 1.

    What about the idea that aliens might come to Earth to colonize the planet (and maybe vaporize us in the process)? You could argue that terraforming (or maybe aliens would call it xenoforming) could be a technology more advanced than FTL travel. With that assumption, you could imagine an alien race that can travel across the galaxy but not alter planets to suit their biological needs. Coming to colonize Earth could make sense. But this ignores the fact that several other requisite technologies would probably make their need to colonize obsolete.

    Before they had FTL travel, they likely spent many decades traveling at less that light speed and so chances are their ships are quite comfortable. In fact probably more like sailing biodomes than ships - someplace they could live indefinitely. Assuming their other scientists were hard at work while their engi

    1. Re:The Space Aliens Are Not Coming by qbast · · Score: 1

      In order for aliens to reach earth, they will have to, at a minimum, perfect faster-than-light travel or perfect a way to travel for thousands of years at sub-light speed, conquer the long term biological effects of space radiation and weightlessness, and master extreme long distance space navigation. All of this just so they can come to earth and . . . what? Say hello? Steal our water? That just doesn't make sense. So why *WOULD* aliens come to earth?

      ... said native Americans right before conquistadors came and f*** them up.

    2. Re:The Space Aliens Are Not Coming by Immerman · · Score: 2

      You've made a few large assumptions:
      > lacking FTL means it requires millenia to cross between stars
          - only to an outside observer: if you've got the energy to burn you can use relativistic time dilation to make the journey arbitrarily short.

      > FTL would necessarily be extremely advanced technology
        - in fact it could be something well with our own technological grasp, which we've overlooked because our concepts of the universe, and with it our physics theories are based on a fundamentally different set of assumptions. (After all, if FTL is possible, it probably means there's major flaws in our understanding of physics).
        - or they might be able to use one of the techniques we've already postulated, simply because they were lucky enough to find a large deposit of the sort of exotic matter that would make it possible within their solar system
        - or, they may have gained the technology from some other much more advanced space-faring species. After all, if anyone is jetting around the galaxy, sooner or later someone else will get their hands on the technology. And Earth *is* probably several billion years late to the galactic life game.

      >Studying alien life would get boring
      - Biologists have been studying life on Earth for centuries and are still finding interesting things. Completely alien life is liable to be no less interesting, no matter how many worlds your ancestors have explored. The span of potential life is nearly infinite - we need only look at out own geo-history to see how incredibly uncommon life resembling the modern forms is.

      That said, I've got to agree there's very little reason to assume conquest or colonization. Pretty much all the resources available here are more easily available... pretty much anywhere else. Meanwhile alien life is as likely as not to be severely incompatible to the point that terraforming a dead world is probably easier than a living alien one. And If you have to live in self-contained habitats to avoid being poisoned by the local ecology, conquest seems... ill-advised.

      On the other hand I can think of two things Earth offers that might not be common or easily made - a rocky world with a strong magnetosphere (important if you want a stable atmosphere), and a pre-oxidized planet capable of sustaining an oxygen atmosphere. After all, it took oceans teeming with algae billions of years to saturate the oceans with oxygen, and to then oxidize mineral formations on land enough that significant amounts of oxygen could start building up in the atmosphere. Tailored terraforming microbes could probably do the job in a small fraction of the time, but waiting thousands if not millions of years might be less appealing than simply transforming a living world conveniently free of intelligent life.

      If aliens did come here, especially without FTL, it seems the likely reasons are - biology, archaeology (in which case stealth might well be assumed, to avoid interfering with the primitive cultures they're studying), proselytizing (we've usually used it as a tool for conquest, but the missionaries themselves often have "nobler" goals), or broader cultural exchange. Or genocide. Can't rule out that the mere existence of other (intelligent?) life might be intolerable to some - either because of the threat we might eventually pose, or simply because they feel they must defend their position as the only intelligent life in the galaxy.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    3. Re:The Space Aliens Are Not Coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why *WOULD* aliens come to earth?

      Same reasons human colonists would go to an alien world. You know, to steal their stuff. Or because they don't want to go extinct. Or because they're curious. Or bored. Or because their sleepship detected a signal and then the robot crewman had a secret agenda and realized The Company's bio-weapons division (or gladiatorial entertainment division) could really use some of these intelligent, violent hugh-mons.

      By definition, they need those resources and coming here to get them is their most economical choice.

      It doesn't have to be their most economical choice. It just takes someone thinking that it might be an economical choice that might work out. When you find a twenty-thousand-year-old mummified seal, hundreds of miles inland in Antarctica, you'll realize that such choices get made all the time. They often fail, but they don't always fail. And success doesn't mean profit; it just means that someone survived. You're imagining "wise men" aliens in white coats carefully considering how much fuel and food it takes to get from Vulcan to Earth, and then rejecting the idea as illogical, but it doesn't have to be like that.

      Consider how the Pacific Ocean got colonized. Do you think that what they did, made sense?! Sense didn't keep people in Asia, or on their big islands of Indonesia. It got people to starve to death in the remotest places that any non-space-traveller can imagine, and it also resulted in some of them not starving, too. And those people were as smart as you and I.

      I can't belittle the technical challenges of interstellar travel, but motive and justification? That's easy! You can talk to human space-colony advocates until you're blue in the face, telling them how little sense it makes for us to space travel, but they always come back at you with a few things that are beyond sense.

      Some day, someone will try it. They'll almost certainly die in a sad way. And the next one will almost certainly die too. Almost certainly. Almost.

    4. Re:The Space Aliens Are Not Coming by Reziac · · Score: 1

      My prediction is that any aliens who come clear out here to bumfuck nullspace (cuz Earth's system is kinda out in the middle of nowhere, as stars go) are either looking for something or running from something. Which means most likely 1) the vanguard of a resource-hungry conqueror, or 2) refugees from war or the law, in either case soon to be followed by irate enforcers.

      None of which are likely to be good news.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    5. Re:The Space Aliens Are Not Coming by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Using some very reasonable assumptions, no resources are worth sending between star systems. It would be cheaper to fabricate them at the other end or use something else. It's also not clear that Earth would have the desired resources; perhaps Jupiter would be the best place to mine. The only things worth shipping will have artificial rarity, information, and possibly people.

      Conquerors are possible. It's possible that we're getting to a tech level where it's worth conquering us.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    6. Re:The Space Aliens Are Not Coming by Immerman · · Score: 1

      I'm inclined to agree about resources - other than possibly exotic matter which may not be possible to synthesize by the species involved. Magnetic monopoles, useful strangelets, negative-density unobtanium to enable antigrav or FTL, - the sort of things that might have immense value, and cannot be synthesized from local materials.

      And obviously that could extend into useful organisms, or perhaps even just seed "cell-lines" that could be used to create clonable alien "zygotes" using synthesized "DNA" that can be transmitted later, since it might prove extremely difficult to synthesize an entire living cell based on completely alien biochemistry - perhaps easier to bootstrap the recipient with a tiny bio-culture from which other organisms could be created. Likewise nanotech, or other self-replicating "technology" - things where a comparatively tiny cargo can grow to deliver massively outsized value. Basically information in one sense, but information coupled to physical realization. "Pure" information is likely more easily sent by tightbeam transmission.

      As for raw (elemental) materials - there's probably not a whole lot of interest on Earth - the gas giants have neatly concentrated most of the useful gasses in quantities dwarfing anything available on Earth, and the Oort cloud likely has far more rocky materials than the inner system. Unless some sort of very patient roving planet-eaters venture here with the intent to strip-mine the solar system we're probably okay.

      Though... interstellar "locusts", intelligent or otherwise, are certainly something to consider. If humanity develops the technology to travel to the stars, either personally or in multi-generational world-ships stocked with enough energy to drift leisurely between stars, we might well become just such a species ourselves. After all, if we choose to colonize the outer solar system, our habitats will likely grow to be large and self-sustaining enough that a thousand-year migration to a nearby star would not be overly burdensome.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  69. They certainly exist. by Xyrus · · Score: 1

    They just aren't from another planet. Any alien civilization capable of interstellar travel would have absolutely no reason to fly down to the Earth's surface, let alone be detectable by anything as primitive as our technology. There isn't a reason for any aliens to be aboard said ships either, as at their level of technology full AI automation would be more than enough.

    It makes about as much sense as an "alien invasion". Why the hell would they bother marching themselves down here and risk death when they could easily destroy us a dozen different ways without coming anywhere near Earth. Best case scenario would be an army of AI automatons, but why waste the resources when choosing a random rock from the asteroid belt and chucking at our planet would do the trick just as nicely?

    --
    ~X~
  70. The Battle of LA happened by MikeMo · · Score: 1

    At least, it was real to my Mom. She was about 10 at the time and lived a block from one of the AAA guns that shot at whatever it was. There is also plenty of documentation, and that one picture. There’s no doubt they were shooting at something. The “what” is the question.

  71. They aren't aliens by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    That is my view.

    If they come at all, it isn't going to be individuals riding in a ship. Probably not physical at all.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  72. skeptical by NikeHerc · · Score: 1

    Although Sturgeon's Law ("90 percent of *everything* is crap") is not universally applicable, it does seem to apply when someone is trying to sell you something, especially if you can live without the product. I'm frankly skeptical of UFO programs on tv in spite of having seen a couple of UFOs in my younger years.

    Both UFOs were about the diameter of a quarter at arm's length, slow moving in various directions; each was a featureless perfect circle and glowing as if illuminated from within. Neither was an aircraft, balloon, bird, satellite, or other common artifact.

    The late afternoon UFO was near the northern horizon and eventually moved down and out of sight. The UFO I saw at night was directly overhead; after moving around a bit, the diameter began shrinking slowly and it eventually disappeared within a few minutes. I have no explanation for either event.

    --
    Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
  73. Its Flying. It's not been identified. Duh. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    Of course I believe in UFO sightings. How can people not see something merely because they haven't identified it?

  74. Crackpot theme, not Slashdot theme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How did Slashdot lets this pass post scrutiny?

    What next? Snowman?

    Please go back to "Stuff that matters".

  75. Sirrius Disclosure by MrKaos · · Score: 1

    Watch the Sirrius Disclosure project. All of the witnesses are either Airline Pilots, ex-Military, two former Astronauts and Police talking about their observations UAVs (Unidentified Aerial Vehicle), UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon) . There is over 35 *hours* of testimony from highly trained personnel, retired Generals, Lords of the Admiralty about dozens of incidents in England, the US and all over the world.

    There is the Bentwaters incident, incidents where nuclear missile bases were shut down by unknown entities that by-passed the back-up systems of dozens of missiles. There is the incident of Nuclear missile weapons testing of a UAV circling a nuclear warhead *in-flight* shooting it and deactivating it captured on high-speed film. There is the incident where the US and the USSR almost launched Nuclear Missiles until they both realized it was a UAV.

    Witness testimony from the General in control of the Roswell incident discussing how he released the technology recovered from it into American Industry to be reverse engineered. Reverse engineered craft. The CEO of Lockheed Martin Skunkworks saying "We now have the technology to take ET Home".

    These professionals don't call them "UFOs" and if we trusted these people to handle Billion Dollar budgets, Nuclear missiles, B-52 Bombers, Fighter aircraft, Aircraft carriers, Passenger jets we fly in who are we to discount what they say they have all experienced. I thought UFOs were cover for military operations until I saw what these ex-service men and women had to say. The secrecy may have been a good idea after 'War of the Worlds' broadcast in 1938 but not in the 21st Century.

    The sheer weight of the witness testimony alone tells us there is a lot more going on than we are being told and I have gone from being a complete UFO skeptic to accepting these inevitable conclusions:

    Why haven't they visited us?

    They are already here and they have been here for thousands of years.

    Can they travel FTL?

    Yes, and so can we - apparently.

    Are they Hostile to us?

    Some are.

    Do they mean to harm us?

    No, We'd be dead already. All they would need is to push an asteroid in our way, no Avatar like finale necessary.

    Why don't they just show up?

    Because we are hostile, prejudiced primitive primates. We kill humans that are different. They are 'Intelligent' not 'Stupid'

    What are their motivations

    How would I know? But they haven't destroyed us so we are probably going to stay ok as long as *we* are not hostile.

    Why is it more secret than nuclear weapons

    It disrupts oil and coal's control over the worlds energy markets.

    Even if you do discount all of this witness testimony you have to reason what 8.5 Trillion dollars worth of taxpayer money in Unacknowledged Special Access Projects paid for? Politicians are afraid to go near this subject and the ridiculous belittling of people who come forward to share their experiences is an insular primitive fear response to the unknown, not critical thinking processing the sheer volume of information laid before them.

    The only way to really get to the bottom of this would be to support changes to law that relieve these personnel of secrecy oaths for unacknowledged (and illegal) projects that do not come under congressional control so that more of these people can come forward whilst still protecting the secrecy of the legal projects. It is time to end the secrecy simply because it costs too much to maintain.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  76. Saw something at UIUC by 31415926535897 · · Score: 1

    Was walking home to the dorms at UIUC back around 2001 and saw some lights in the sky. It looked like planes flying in V-formation across the sky--something like the Blue Angels would do. I thought it was pretty cool and kept my eye on it while walking, though as I remember back, none of the lights were blinking, which is what I'd expect for airplanes.

    Then the strangest thing happened. They started moving around, but they didn't move in a way that would be possible for airplanes. They started circling around each other (still while the whole formation was moving). They looked like they were moving around like bugs, but the light still looked like plane or starlight--very far off. Then after about 5 seconds of this bizarre movement, the lights turned off.

    I literally have no idea what to think of it. It didn't have the movement pattern of planes or missiles or drones or balloons. I do not think it was alien ships or anything like that (even that wouldn't make sense...the g-force on those objects if they were distant aircraft would have been incredible). Perhaps the only phenomenon that might make sense, and I stress "might," is ball lightning.

    I wish I had a smart phone to record, but I don't think it would have helped. The lights were too far off that I don't think they have shown well on a phone's large field of view. The other issue is that by the time I saw something interesting worth recording, it would have been gone by the time I got the phone out and turned on. I can't even get the cute moments I see with my kids today--there's no way I would have recorded those lights in time. But they were very memorable.

  77. My view on UFO's... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    ... is that they are things that fly, and are not positively identified at the time of sighting.

    Once it gets identified, it's no longer a UFO... even if it actually *were* an alien spaceship.

    Yes, these two statements are tautologies, but that is about the limits of my brain power I am willing to put into it.

    And for the record, I saw a UFO once... when I was 15. I still don't know exactly what it was. I've long since accepted that I never will.

  78. I have seen things. by hey! · · Score: 1

    First of all, you have to realize not everyone looks up at the sky; it's not like it was a thousand years ago, most modern city dwellers never give it a second glance. Second, with light pollution many wouldn't have much to see if they did.

    But I have seen things. Mysterious things. Things that appear to be impossible to explain as anything other than a fleet of alien spacecraft with propulsion .... unless you know a little astronomy.

    As most people who've gone out to view a meteor shower know, even with a supposedly "major" meteor shower, if you didn't know it was happening you probably wouldn't even notice. Given the levels of light pollution most of us live with you're lucky if you see one or two brief (maybe 200 msec) flashes every ten minutes.

    But sometimes you're out in a place with a dark sky, and you just luck out; you get a meteor shower that really lives up to the name: shower. I mean more meteors than you can count in a minute. And when you find yourself with a good sample like that, you see a lot of things that look impossible for a falling rock. For example you can see a light that descends, hovers in place, and then zooms upward. This is a meteor that is actually falling all the time, but because you can't perceive the horizontal component of its velocity until it is overhead looks like it is falling slowly or hovering. When it passes "up" overhead it is still falling because then you can't perceive the vertical component of velocity.

    People unfamiliar with the sky frequently react to ordinary stuff that is unfamiliar to them with superstitious awe. Here's an example of a news crew mistaking the planet Jupiter for a spacecraft. Just to explain the circumstances, earlier that day a large number of mylar balloons had been accidentally released in New Jersey. They floated east over Manhattan and generated lots of reports as the sun set in the west. The news crew got there too late to photograph that, but the camerman did manage to capture Jupiter being "trailed" by its four Galilean moons.

    It's easy for someone like me who's seen that in a telescope hundreds of times to laugh at these people, but how many New Yorkers could identify Jupiter, even though it's one of the few astronomical bodies visible through the light pollution there? Normal people don't spend their time gazing up at the sky, and so when their attention is brought there they're naturally surprised.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  79. I believe in UFO's and Crop Circles by randomErr · · Score: 2

    Here the deal. I live near a military base, two airports, a fault scar, and a great lake. We tons powerful winds and air traffic. So often we get UFO's making wide turns around densely inhabited areas. The local rumor is that the military is testing unmanned, long range, stealth flight vehicles. The crop circles are presumed to be caused by circular patterns similar to small localized tornadoes. In general there are one or two sightings a year the get documented and doesn't have an easy explanation. And no, I'm not one of those people that has filed one of those unexplained sightings. Still it keeps the dinner table conversations interesting.

    --
    You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
  80. People see shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's your answer.

  81. Promoting the upcoming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...new season of X Files, I see.

  82. Look up "Pye Wacket" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know that nobody is going to see this, but someone talked me into watching a UFO video of an eyewitness account of a guy who saw and described what is now obviously a test of the unusual and formerly highly secret B-70 Valkyrie defense system known as, "Pye Wacket." Check out Encyclopedia Astronautica's superb article on it.

    http://www.astronautix.com/p/pyewacket.html

    I think that some proportion of highly credible sightings will soon be able to be written off as Pyewacket tests. Which is great, because it gives everyone a baseline of credible UFO eyewitness accounts to study. Well, "flying saucer anti-air missiles formerly known as UFOs," anyway.

  83. No Sonic Boom? by RottenJ · · Score: 1

    "Often the apparent spacecraft does something improbable like standing completely still in the sky and then shooting off to somewhere at an incredible speed" is a common theme to sightings but never reports of a sonic boom, which obviously MANY more people would notice. But for fun let’s pretend these sightings are genuine and these objects move at incredible speeds without displacing air, what interesting hypotheses can be dreamed up about how these objects are propelled?

    --
    "It's fun to obey the machine" - Ralph Wiggum
    1. Re: No Sonic Boom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Electromagnetic frequency (EMF). Superconducting electromagnets with fuel cells or nuclear powered generator to use earths magnetic fields to "hover"

      Supposedly Russians crashed one or more in the US after ww2. One craft was loaded with a pair of deformed "human experiment" children/tweens leftover from nazi experiments. (YES, ROSWELL...). Never declassified because of the panic it could cause....

      USA got von braun the rocketeer. Who did the Russians put to work?

      Source: book, Inside Area 51: America's Top Secret Military Base.

      This year, I saw a disk slowly hover into the wind around 5000-10000 ft above Pueblo CO May 6, 2017 11:17 a.m. before flying off Northeast at several hundred miles per hour. Air force trains helicopter pilots in the area almost daily, but this was no helicopter and it was dead silent. It was metallic and clearly round/smooth. Not a bird. There was a UsAF single engine jet flying fast but subsonic after it a couple minutes later

      Russian spy craft, or classified USAF experimental? (Or aliens, HEH). No idea....

  84. It is all made up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is this old show on The Science channel... https://www.sciencechannelgo.com/unexplained-files/ that they just re-released on their website. The latest episode opens with a UFO that is ball shaped and traveling away from the observer. It states that the Chelan army from Chile South America is testing out its new FLIR system on it's new helicopter and is flying around seeing the difference between their regular camera and the FLIR camera when all of a sudden they spot this dot on the FLIR that doesn't show up on the regular camera.

    They start flying towards it as fast as the helicopter can fly but suddenly realize that it is 35 miles off in the distance and the helicopter does not have enough fuel to chase after it. So they call air traffic control to contact it to identify. They state that the object refuses to respond. They do a close up of it on FLIR and notice this long trail of heat given off for about 2 minutes and then stops.

    The show does interviews of all types of pilots, air traffic controllers and air line professionals. Everyone of them state that it is a UFO and nobody could even imagine what it could be.

    I recognized what it was in seconds because I guess I am one of the few people that has ever ridden in a hot air balloon, yet to this day it still remains a mystery to everyone on the show.

    Take a look at the show and see how stupid it actually is.

  85. Some interesting points by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    The distances between planets that may or may not contain intelligent life are vast. So vast I strongly doubt a more advanced civilization can do FTL.

    However I will say, I know in physics time travel is mathematically possible. So what some people might be seeing vis a vis the life forms are likely advanced humans.

  86. I've seen a UFO and would like to know what it was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Back in 2004, I was out in Wyoming on a YMCA camping trip. Our group of 18 had setup camp for the night and were star gazing before going to bed. We saw a UFO that looked just like a regular star, but it was traveling in a manner that couldn't be possible with available spacecraft. It flew all over, making instant 90 and 180 degree turns at random and zigzagging. No discernible pattern, other then it stayed in a large, but specific region of sky.
    It would travel from left to right, sometimes in a straight line, and sometimes in the most random pattern, before turning around and travel back the same direction it had come, with just as random movements. It didn't always travel the same distance before truing around and going back the other direction. Sometimes it would travel a thumb width before turning around or making a 90 degree turn. A few times, it blinked out (Like a star disappearing) only to be seen again in a different part of the sky. Some times further along the same direction it had traveled and sometimes in the opposite direction it had been traveling. We watched it for half and hour before it blinked out and we never saw it again.

  87. January, 1987 by cultibot · · Score: 1

    While there have been several times I have had some cause to wonder at the nature of what I was seeing, there was one extraordinary event that was so in my face I couldn't manage to explain it away. That story is here... https://people.well.com/user/s...

  88. Great view! by mspohr · · Score: 1

    I would have a great view of UFOs from my house but I haven't actually seen any.

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
  89. Wish they'd visit here by DCFusor · · Score: 1

    instead of some drunk homophobe in flyover country whom no one's going to believe. I'm a physicist and would like to ask some questions about their transport methodology. Since that never happens....and as someone said above, since ubiquitous cameras, they seem to not be anywhere anymore...I think the idea of alien visits is pretty unlikely.

    --
    Why guess when you can know? Measure!
  90. orange haired alied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've seen an orange haired alien on tv, pretending to be President of the USA. Very scary looking.

  91. My view of UFOs ... by Rambo+Tribble · · Score: 1

    ... has always been from below. Hope that helps.

  92. With 4.7 billion cameras in the world today? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More than 50% of the human race carries at least a basic mobile phone, including a camera, today. And we're still having this discussion? Pictures - LOTS of pictures - or it REALLY didn't happen.

    If "UFOs" ever WERE vistors from another planet, they've either stopped coming, or they're using stealth technology beyond our ability to penetrate.

  93. Exactly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Government policy is to cover up their secrets and they also have whole departments and even super massive unchecked agency that specialize in misinformation.

    Aliens would fall into national security; also they have on record a policy of secrecy on the matter. So high tech human UFO or actual UFO or alien UFO - they will all be handled basically the same way as far as the public. Hell, even long time afterwards when they'd disclose the info they will always keep secret the schemes used to cover it up back in the day because those are still being used on other things today. We know about the old spy planes but they are not declassifying all their good old plans and tricks to cover it up.

    The likely hood of alien UFOs is not high and one can only guess how an alien would handle the situation (surely invasion would be a nearly impossible.motive; that is more a function of our fears manifesting metaphorically.) The government asking around to figure out alien policies is fact, but one only needs to imagine it to ask questions and plan-- they have plans drawn up for tons of situations and they were extra paranoid and fearfull around WW1 to WW3.

  94. Amazing testimonies by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Some of the testimony is otherwise enough to put somebody away for murder. In one case a military bomber plane was passing nearby a military base in broad daylight, and ground witnesses spotted an undiscernable metallic object near it.

    There were 3 people aboard the plane. Two of them, the non-pilots, got a good view out the side window of a lens-shaped silver-metallic craft with an orange or tan band around the upper half. They estimated it came as close as about 20 feet from the window and roughly the size of a small plane. If I remember correctly, the pilot also saw it, but didn't get the best view.

    The crew of 3 basically freaked out and insisted on landing nearby instead of continue the flight. They never sought publicity.

    (I'm still trying to find the name and date of the incident...)

  95. Wasn't an airplane I saw, was daytime +... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I lived in the country as a boy up to 14 yrs. of age (I was ~10 then iirc) when I saw that (around 3 - 4 p.m. in the summer iirc (was warm & my Uncle was "haying" on his tractor (you don't do that in the winter, lol)).

    It was two fairly large discs flying in parallel (actually hovering & drifting slowly) & bigger than what you see for instance, jetplanes in the sky are (passenger types) as I've said to others in my other replies.

    APK

    P.S.=> For the past (on & off, I travelled for much of my life for work as a programmer-analyst/software-engineer) 40 yrs. though I have lived by an airport & do now currently (well, 20 or so miles away) I didn't then (not even close) for what you describe I haven't seen OR would recognize it as you state it - just being straight-up honest w/ you - for what I saw to have been lights as you describe it, the plane w/ the lights you note would have to be as big as 100 planes (scaling considered)... apk

  96. Real, but psychological not physical by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    UFO's (in the sense of extra-terrestrials) are just the modern equivalent of ghosts. Enough "reliable" people have reported seeing UFOs and ghosts that the effect seems to be real as far as a human brain is concerned. However, the complete and utter lack of physical evidence suggests that they are purely a psychological effect and not a physical one.

    1. Re:Real, but psychological not physical by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > the complete and utter lack of physical evidence

      NASA's own video footage disagrees with you.

      Evidence: The Case For NASA UFOs - Part.1 (2004)
      Evidence: The Case For NASA UFOs - Part.2 (2004)

      --
      First Contact is tentatively "scheduled" for ~2024.

    2. Re:Real, but psychological not physical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I am totally going to trust a random, ancient straight-to-VHS video hosted by paranormal crackpot Dan Aykroyd and uploaded to YouTube by someone named "Chemtrail Crimes"...

      There is precisely zero evidence of extra-terrestrials presented and a whole lot of wild guessing and superstition. I'm sorry, but if you believe in anything in those videos, then you are a fool.

    3. Re:Real, but psychological not physical by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Only an idiot throws out the baby with the bathwater.

      They have _actual_ footage from the Space Shuttle mission STS-75 if you would pull your head out of your ass and stop assuming.
      i.e.
      NASA UFOs: STS-75 The Tether Incident

    4. Re: Real, but psychological not physical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Always add the word "debunked" to your google search before you embarrass yourself.

      https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/STS-75_incident

    5. Re:Real, but psychological not physical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Know what I see in that super low resolution video? A bunch of blurry dots which could be anything. Only an idiot immediately jumps to "aliens" as their explanation for things that are much more easily explained.

      I'm sorry to be the one to break this to you, but you are fucking stupid.

    6. Re:Real, but psychological not physical by doccus · · Score: 1

      There is a whole slew of physical evidence for alien craft. Admittedly it does tend to disappear fast, but it's hard to argue with actual scorch marks in the soil coupled with extremely high radiation counts. There's been lots of cases of this.. And authenticated photos of spacecraft such as the one surrounded by soviet soldiers guarding it, which only came to light after the fall of the soviet union, have to be considered hard evidence since there would be no reason for the Soviet military to fake such and then hide it away for 30 years. And the list goes on..
      But "UFOs" ? You can't have "hard evidence" for an unidentified flying object... although there's thousands of videos and photos of them all over the world. Some are just real creepy, such as those silver spheres that show up and are filmed repeatedly in California (I think in LA), and lots more..

    7. Re:Real, but psychological not physical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are far simpler answers for anything that you think is due to aliens.

      I happen to live in LA. We have all sorts of air traffic, kids with drones, people setting off fireworks, people shooting guns, etc. and I have never seen an alien spaceship. You're just a fucking idiot.

    8. Re:Real, but psychological not physical by Keith+Henson · · Score: 1

      " However, the complete and utter lack of physical evidence suggests that they are purely a psychological effect and not a physical one."

      I know from personal experience that is not true in all cases. Long ago, the early 60s, my friends and I flew lights under balloons over Tucson, AZ. We finally got caught. In the late 1990s, a TV show called "Sightings" talked me into flying another one north of Los Angeles. I still have the tape showing how to build and launch one. Perhaps I should put it up on youtube.

      About the same time, a close relative was flying almost identical UFOs over Albuquerque, New Mexico. It was independent, I didn't find out he was doing this until a decade or so later.

      --
      End MGM. Get prospective parents of boys to Google: Men do complain
    9. Re:Real, but psychological not physical by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      I know from personal experience that is not true in all cases. Long ago, the early 60s, my friends and I flew lights under balloons over Tucson, AZ.

      Unless you and your friends happen to be visiting us from a faraway planet I fail to see how you doing this provides any physical evidence whatsoever of extraterrestrial UFOs. Indeed if anything your hoax - like crop circles - just illustrates that people seeing such things are just seeing phenomena with simple explanations and their brain is then going on wild flights of fantasy convincing them that these lights are somehow alien. This seems like a psychological effect to me, perhaps triggered by a physical stimulus.

    10. Re:Real, but psychological not physical by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      There is a whole slew of physical evidence for alien craft. Admittedly it does tend to disappear fast

      Ever wonder why?

  97. UFO are common by elcor · · Score: 1

    a good way to see real ones, meaning ETs is to meditate a little, put out a blanket in a clearing atop a mountain and wait, they'll show up and do things that won't leave doubts

  98. Unfortunately, nope, no UFOs by whitroth · · Score: 1

    Except maybe for stealth probes.

    And the reason I say this is simple: if we were to observe one, we would know certain things from the observations... and so we would know something is possible that we didn't know before.

    However, there have been NO UNEXPLAINED BREAKTHROUGHS. We know where *every* bit of technology came from, from what research. No, UFO's didn't give us microwave ovens.....

    Besides, if *you* were an intelligent alien race, would *you* want to contact this bunch of insane idiots (obligatory nod to the psycho in the White House)?

  99. Well the flying car was never explained by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

    July 2009: Google updated the base aerial photography for this area and the “flying car” is no longer there. This rules out some of the theories in the comments that it was a permanent structure.

    https://www.gearthblog.com/blo...

    Other articles tell of people going to that location to see for themselves, yet never found anything.

  100. Conflating "UFO" with alient spacecraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact that nearly everyone conflates the term "UFO" with alien spacecraft tells you that they don't understand what UFOs are at all, and are simply thinking wishfully about humanoid alien visitors. Anyone using their brain would understand that "UFO" means "unidentified", not alien. There is no reason to assume even one sighting or object is alien, let alone all of them, unless you're a wishful thinker who doesn't want to or is unable to separate fantasy from reality.

  101. Unknown unknowns by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

    The vast majority of people don't have the drive and/or the means to actually go out and investigate places where there are alleged strange phenomenas (eg UFO flaps) occurring, or where strange land formations appear on google earth/maps (eg Antarctica). Until more people do and document what is there or not there, we will only have what looks like a crap artist production and hearsay.

    Don't get me wrong, I would love to go on an expedition in the Antarctic to investigate those mountains that kinda sorta look like pyramids and bring back proof that they are just mountains (or actual pyramids!). But I'm not rich, and I don't have easy access to the ship and aircraft (and people to sail/fly those for me) that I would undoubtedly need.

  102. It's a bird, or an airplane not a UFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most UFO signing are birds or airplanes.

  103. Stoopid Question by a Maroon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (1) Is it flying (as in not on the ground)?
    (2) Do you know what it is?

    If the answer to (1) is YES and the answer to (2) is NO, then the object is an "Unidentified Flying Object".

    The original question seems to have a third assumption that is NOT present in the descriptive "Unidentified Flying Object" -- that there is somehow extraterrestrials involved.

    If I throw a turd across the room and you, seeing it, cannot idenyify the object as a turd, then it is an "Unidentified Flying Object"

  104. Actually I have long ago (on wasps/ants) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: I grew up in the country as a kid (up to 14) & I had an "ant farm/colony" in a treestump so yea, I cared if they were aggressive or not (not fireants though, I've been stung repeatedly by those in the Southern USA so in their case? Yea, I care for sure) - I used to do a task for my Mom @ request - pulling japanese beetles off her rose bushes (they will tear them up fast) & I put them in a jar to bring to the ant colony sending them into the tunnels in the wood - they would come out, soon enough, w/ 100's of ants ALL OVER THEM eventually dissecting them in gang attacks (was like watching robots battle, lol - that's what I thought as a kid @ least). On wasps I do also. In their case, I notice they are NOT 'aggressive' for no reason UNLESS harassed. My cousin whom I note in my seeing UFO's was screwing around w/ some wasps that nested beneath our garage "eve" & he took a long yellow flower stalk (~ 4 ft. high) & started messing around w/ the mudwasp 'hive' - My other cousin Mary & I stayed WAY away watching, knowing he was playing w/ fire - well, next thing you know, he is yelling & screaming waving his hands around, & he ran to the cowpond on his farm & dove in (was funnier than hell for us - not him though). We lived near 20++ beehives I used to work in w/ my grandpa & grandma in fact. I was more worried about them (but like wasps, bees GENERALLY aren't aggressive until attacked, this I know from being stung 100's of times & initially being DUMB & swatting @ them when they buzzed me (they were kinder Italian bees, not African killer bees) but @ times, they will 'swarm' homes (did ours & we had to bellows them off & 'grab' them on branches to get them back to their hives I noted...))

    * So I guess you could say I care with reason!

    APK

    P.S.=> Wasps & ants are not technologically proficient w/ fusion bombs etc. - if they were? I'd be interested (for peace purposes alone) to negotiate friendly cooperative terms @ the very least for non-aggression... apk

  105. Elvis was kidnapped by Aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw him in Vegas and he told me that UFOs are real.

  106. the same as those who see Jesus, Mary or Joseph by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    on a piece of toast, in macaroni and cheese, in a dogs ear, in a cloud, on a worn brick, etc.

    They believe they saw something, it has no correlation to reality and there really isn't anything there but lighting effects, natural chaos, etc.

  107. If you've never seen an UFO... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think Arthur C. Clarke said it best in an interview for 2001: A Space Odyssey.

    Also, obligatory Calvin & Hobbes

  108. Space is too big for exo-Sentients NOT to exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Steven Hawking made this point that I arrived at decades ago, knowing space is VERY large and contains quadrillions of potential life supporting worlds in just our own ordinary galaxy. Not to mention all that have been found in my paltry seventy years of my own 'sentience'........ decillions of galaxies in our observable universe, not to mention those in the rest of our own corner of the multiverse.

    It is reasonable, knowing how plentiful resources are in our own intraplanetary space, such as water that fairly litters our system, and all kinds of elements including the elusive on earth 'rare earth' elements that we have found all kinds of uses for... that any civilization will eventually find easy living IN space in their own ships. Such ships will probably be at first like in the old out of print computer game: "Homeworld".

    Our new Manifest Destiny as a species IS to go forth into our system like a mini' Star Trek; to go to our mini worlds and satellites for the resources to keep our ships running and our agricultural domes and bays supplied with the necessaries to maintain our food security in space. In OUR space we will learn new enabling technologies for many scientific research efforts require zero gravity environments, and safe places for 'hot labs' for dangerous studies like singularities, bioresearch, and atomic and later intranuclear and still later interbosonic research. Out of this will come our intradimensional and warp drive ships enabling interstellar travel.

    If WE can do it, and WE can see a clear path to do it, and if little old ME can see this, then I can NOT be the only one to think of it. Steven Hawking has seen it. Aliens can NOT be nonexistent! We have seen them.

    The Air Force has a policy that ANYONE that reports seeing a UFO will see his career END with that event. Same with numerous other major nation's armed forces organs as well. This IS coordination driven by fear!
    The most thorough and vicious investigations and seizures ever seen in recent times involve the removal of any physical evidence of the reality or our 'alien' visitations. Governments kind of 'know' that you the public are aware of the visits of our interstellar neighbors, but they are extremely and often deadly loathe to allow any proof to surface in any non-plausibly- deniable way.

    This has led to the 'believability' of just about any plausible wives tale, and many many 'conspiracy' theories. When you 'hear' about an 'event', BELIEVE the 'first reports' and dismiss all the 'explanations' or 'debunk' bunk that comes after when the cover ups 'kick in'. Look at old 'first reports' with the same eyes. All 'explanations', fables, swamp gasses, and other clap trap is the 'propaganda of ignorance'. Some of that propaganda is religious in nature, as religious leader KNOW that their faiths will change when the light of truth dispels or changes in a nonprofitmaking way the fables that often make the 'priests, mullahs, disciples, etc.' less able to exploit their adherants.

    When our neighbors WANT to all earth sentients KNOW their presence, they will do do in a way that will convince every significant person on this world of the existance of other people off our planet or outside our system.

    Such may already be known. We may have stumbled out of the dark on a mining operation on Ceres.... those mysterious lights. Any idea that this is 'salt' is absolute BS. Take the acid test. Take your saltshaker into your closet at night, close the door, put all lights out, and see if the salt in your saltshaker can light your way to your favourite pair of shoes.

    Our neighbors may even be among us now, advising us and guiding us in constructive ways. How else did the Soviet Union fall in 1989. Watch for the same mysterious end to Kim Jong Un's hitlerian totalitarian police state as well.

  109. explanatory liposuction by epine · · Score: 1

    DNA Analysis Finds That Yetis Are Actually Bears

    Almost as if by the hand of God himself, the category of the unexplained accumulates the unexplainable, and no amount of explanatory liposuction ever fully drains this ponderous pond.

  110. What's your view on chemtrails by DougDot · · Score: 1

    Same delusion, different manifestation.

  111. I Saw One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 1954, when I was about nine years old, a friend and I were playing in his yard one afternoon. We looked up a saw something hovering above us at several thousand feet. Our mothers were inside and we yelled at them to come out look. My friend's mom brought out binoculars. The object was disk shaped with different colored lights around the perimeter. After a few minutes it started to slowly fly toward the edge of town. We all jumped into our car and followed for about 10 or 15 minutes until it abruptly shot off at very high speed. A minute or two later, two Air Force jets appeared heading off in the same direction as the object. This took place in Derry, New Hampshire, a place that was not exactly a hotbed of technology in that day and age. To this day I have no idea what it was that we observed. My dad was the duty officer at Grenier Air Force Base that day and when asked, he had no comment about any Air Force activity that day.

  112. Didn't believe until I saw one myself by nwaack · · Score: 2

    I was taking my dog out to go to the bathroom around 2am. I was looking up at the night sky because it happened to be a particularly clear night and you could see a lot. What happened next baffles me to this day. Two green lights went silently from one side of the horizon to the other in about 10 seconds time. It seemed like they were attached to something; however, you could see clear space between the two lights. They were roughly as high as a jetliner, but definitely weren't a plane. I live near an airport and Lake Michigan (where the military routinely runs drills) so I'm very familiar with all that...it wasn't a plane, helicopter, drone, etc. Since then I've done my own research (satellite tracks and whatnot) and talked to amateur skygazers, but haven't gotten an answer. So yeah, I believe in UFO's because I saw one.

  113. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unidentified Flying Objects are relatively speaking real. If I see a plane fly by I have no idea what that is specifically except for a flying object.

    Now, UFO as "alien" in origin; nope. These types are conspiratards. If you believe in alien abductions or alien aircraft entering the Earths atmosphere that can be seen with the naked eye; you must prove it. A picture is not proof nor is a video. Both mediums easily doctored.

  114. anal penetration by aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i dreamed i was anally penetrated by an alien in a helmet, leather and a futuristic motorcycle. I believe these are fragments of actual events. I have written a letter to the police.

  115. Easy... by MerlTurkin · · Score: 1

    Mistaken identity and mental illness. Same with people who see or hear ghosts, spirits, demons,etc.

  116. my view is by mapkinase · · Score: 1

    I haven't seen any.

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  117. don't know, don't care by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    So if it's flying, and I can't be bothered to look up from my iShiney in order to identify it, it's a AFO (Apathetical Flying Object)?

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  118. this is going to be such an awesome thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh wait...

  119. Identity? by skrot · · Score: 2

    Why don't people ask the UFO what it identifies as? It would be wrong for us to make any assumptions that could cause offense.

  120. That'd be "our girl" JC... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry for late reply & all that + "nice catch" on your end (hence why I did a "CYA" noting Ben Rich of Lockheed Martin's quote). Guess it just goes to prove you REALLY can't trust mass media (lol)!

    * You never know!

    NOW, since we're on the topic of the YouTube stuff many times being 'faked'? It amazes me & lends credence to my view on mankind being deceitful here (which was oddly 'downmodded' even though on the WHOLE I feel most folks are decent enough) https://entertainment.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11468297&cid=55722529/...

    (I honestly don't understand WHY some folks pull 'hoaxes' only to be BUSTED later for it having to live in shame for it!)

    However, lol - in 'defense of myself' using that? I could be a dick & say "Who knows if that is truth & not a gov't. coverup" etc. (which I won't - this isn't that important to me - it's all merely speculation & viewpoints here - YOU have some 'proof' though, I give you that)

    APK

    P.S.=> Lastly - This has been a fun conversation we've all had here in the end. Much nicer folks than the "computer geek" section, that's sure (Had to note that)... apk

  121. For your reference per my other post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's @ the VERY LEAST, interesting (especially the "dogma" part & it scares me to be honest about it (truth or what strikes deep into the heart of you can)) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDOWEX5jIIU/

    * In regard to my last post on "Offset Spatial Divergence"...

    APK

    P.S.=> Faked or NOT? It makes a hell of a statement & gives myself @ least, "Food for Thought" - hope it gives you the same! apk

  122. My view is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I donâ(TM)t give a shit.

  123. RIP Slashdot by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

    Going the way of Alex Jones or the History channel. Conspiracies and bullshit to drive clickbait.

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  124. Lightning Bug is Firefly by cciRRus · · Score: 1

    I have never heard of the term Lightning Bug, and I just found out it was just Firefly. Learned something new today.

    --
    w00t
  125. I thought about which term to use, for 200ms by raymorris · · Score: 1

    That's funny. For a split second I thought about which of the two terms I should use. After about 200ms, when I couldn't remember the other term (fire fly), I went with lighting bug. :)

  126. Strange perspective (meteors travel the same direc by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Have you watched a meteor shower? The meteors absolutely appear to radiate outward from a central point, going in all different directions. Anyone watching would say some of the meteors in a given shower go east, some go west, some go south, etc. Unless you're watching from the moon. Watching from far away from the Earth, you see they are actually all coming from the same direction.

    I suspect that's what you saw - either a meteor or space junk re-entering was coming toward you. Toward you and very slightly to your left. You could only the leftward motion. As it broke up, a piece continued toward you, but very slightly to the right. You can only see the rightward component, not the "toward you" component of the motion. From everything your eyes can see, it was going left, then it turned and went right
        Your eyes have no way of knowing that while it was going left at 100 MPH, it was also going toward you at 4,000 MPH.

  127. Seen em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Meh. A decade or so ago I saw one flying in figure 8s, stop, and continue on. Eventually it took a straight line path towards the horizon. It was on 4th of July and I dunno bout y'all but we didn't have mortars that did that dozens of miles in the atmosphere. I told this story to a coworker and he said he saw the exact same thing on that 4th of July.

    Seen them a couple more times over the years. Maybe aliens, maybe not. Probably some guy at the alien lab getting board and taking the spacecraft to Antarctica for kicks

  128. Triangle UFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the early 1990’s I was with a friend walking across Alamo Square in San Francisco close to midnight. She looked up, gasped and pointed to the sky. “Look at that!”

    There was a huge dark triangle shape blotting out the stars. The edges were lit. We watched it for probably 20-30 seconds as it drifted away into the clouds. I gave her paper and told her not to say anything but to sketch what she saw. I did as well. We both separately sketched the same thing: a triangle with lights on the sides.

    This was years before I ever heard of "black triangle" UFO's. (Also in the years before cell phones ... so no video!)

    I am not convinced it was otherwordly, but I've never seen anything like it before or since.

  129. Re:Its Flying. It's not been identified. Duh. by slash.jit · · Score: 1

    True.. Probably the right question is are some of those UFOs actually spacecrafts from alien civilizations ?

  130. View on UFO Sightings by Doctrinsograce · · Score: 2

    My view on UFO sightings is always blurry.

  131. UFOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most cane be explained but a few are actually alien.

  132. I Believe.... by Stubbyfingers · · Score: 2

    In UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS.

    I do not necessarily believe they came from alien intelligences.
    I just believe they're "UNIDENTIFIED"

  133. one or two cases that stand out for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like some of you I've watched many ufo stories / videos / films ex politicians & military personal coming out ect, most of the time I don't really give them much thought, but over the years two cases stand out :

    The first one is that of Bob Lazar, I'm not gonna say much here , just a story I find interesting true or not.

    The second one hit a bit closer to home and I struggle with the thoughts about it ...
    I'll let you guys make up your own minds , not here to convince anybody about anything.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgZE8s0hBRQ (short clip)
    (there are loads of videos about this event , some are interviews, some showing the drawings of the children)

    years later .... one of the children recounting the event :
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaLvp-BkqAo

    look into their eyes , their facial expressions , their emotion and their body language
    have a bit of an open mind ... and tell me what you see ...
    keep in mind in this place at that time , there are only analog phones, and television and media are state controlled.

  134. Washington DC 1950's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://alien-ufo-research.com/...

    This was one of the most widely viewed UFO sightings in history (Mexico City I believe was the 2nd one), by hundreds of DoD personnel.

    I'm curious what folks who don't believe in intelligent extra-terrestrial life visiting Earth, make of this incident.

    1. Re:Washington DC 1950's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, my first "UFO" encounter was when I was walking home from a train station with a friend; I'd moved into the area 8-ish months beforehand, and thought I knew the area well.

      And my friend couldn't stop laughing at me... because I was way too excited about the flashing, utterly silent lights in the sky.

      I was experiencing something that wasn't native to the place I grew up: something my mind put into the same category as will 'o the wisps, and ghosts -- you see, that night, I saw fireflies for the first time.

      Combine that with the fact that Human depth perception goes out the window at night, and we can't tell the difference between small objects 30 feet away or aircraft 30 miles away. Fireflies became glowing spacecraft moving at incredible speed and impossible manuverability.

      Bottom line: There are more than enough terrestrial phenomenon that is unfamiliar to the observer. Ever notice how often UFO sightings are from people on road trips? Unfamiliar flora, fauna, and geography makes the mundane alien.

  135. The subject have validity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and the evidence is enormous if you you do some research. There are objects that fly in our skies that are not from here. From where? That is the question.
    We have been conditioned to believe its a fairy tale.

    Here is a taste.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClhNHIEPCKE

  136. Mostly during the 70s decade because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Substance abuse was abundant and unregulated. People could shoot up marijuana or something way more lethal and come up with these "brilliant" sightings.

    1. Re:Mostly during the 70s decade because... by sl3xd · · Score: 1

      Give tetraethyl lead its due as well.

      The fact is that the entire global population is breathing a lot less neurotoxin in 2017 than in 1977.

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
  137. OVNIs by mcswell · · Score: 1

    Dunno about UFOs, but those OVNIs, now...

  138. From underneath my hat by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

    From underneath my tinfoil hat.

    --
    There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
  139. Watts Riots August 1965 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was August of 1965 during the Watts Riots in Los Angeles. My parents had sent my brother and I to stay with my Uncle and Aunt in the Pacific Northwest to a small town in a rural community. My Uncle's and Aunt's house was situated outside of town with a backdrop of wheat fields and low rolling foothills. My Uncle was the Sheriff of the town. One afternoon in August of 1965 my brother and I were playing outside the house with our two cousins. It was late afternoon when one of my cousins shouted out pointing at the foothills. What I saw was two very bright luminous spherical objects dancing over the foothills. One of my cousins called to my Aunt to come out and see the objects. She came out of the house and watched the objects. She was visibly shaken. We children ask her what they were. She said she didn't know. Just then my Uncle's Sheriff patrol car came speeding down the dirt road that lead past the house. Speeding behind him were another Sheriff patrol car and two State trooper patrol cars. They speed off into the distance until we only saw the dust cloud in their wake. The objects continued to slowly dance over the foothills until they disappeared. Later that night my Uncle came home. His face was ashen and he was unusually quiet as he was a big man, well over 6'5" tall, and had a booming voice. We told him what we had seen and asked if he had been chasing them. He very seriously told us that we were not to talk about the objects to anyone, including my parents, and he never wanted to hear about them ever again. I am now sixty-six years old, such a long time when in August of 1965 I was thirteen, nearly fourteen years old. Yet I have never forgotten what I saw and how it had shaken my Uncle and Aunt.