unusual flight characteristics
June 25, 2021 3:41 PM Subscribe
The long-awaited Preliminary Assessment of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, aka "that government UFO thing," has been released. According to the report, "a handful of UAP appear to demonstrate advanced technology."
Is it aliens?
Is it aliens?!
IS IT ALIENS!?!?!?
it's not aliens.
posted by chavenet at 4:05 PM on June 25, 2021 [13 favorites]
Is it aliens?!
IS IT ALIENS!?!?!?
it's not aliens.
posted by chavenet at 4:05 PM on June 25, 2021 [13 favorites]
The strandbeest person made a ufo back in the day
posted by aniola at 4:08 PM on June 25, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by aniola at 4:08 PM on June 25, 2021 [2 favorites]
I knew there would be repercussions for demoting Pluto.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 4:10 PM on June 25, 2021 [27 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 4:10 PM on June 25, 2021 [27 favorites]
"Airborne Clutter: These objects include birds"
I'd imagine the feeling is mutual.
posted by howfar at 4:15 PM on June 25, 2021 [30 favorites]
I'd imagine the feeling is mutual.
posted by howfar at 4:15 PM on June 25, 2021 [30 favorites]
Also according to the report:
In a limited number of incidents, UAP reportedly appeared to exhibit unusual flight
characteristics. These observations could be the result of sensor errors, spoofing, or
observer misperception and require additional rigorous analysis.
[...]
We were able to identify one reported UAP with
high confidence. In that case, we identified the object as a large, deflating balloon. The others
remain unexplained.
[...]
The UAPTF has indicated that additional funding for research and development could further the
future study of the topics laid out in this report.
This is the same military that strong-armed the patent office into granting patents on the now comprehensively discredited "EmDrive", claiming that "this will become a reality" and that "China is already investing significantly in this area". I am very inclined to put this in the same box as the Stargate Project and other attempts at getting more funding from the government for pie-in-the-sky, pseudoscientific research projects. Perhaps it's sincere, credulous paranoia, perhaps it's simple grift. Probably it's a mix of both.
What it is not is evidence that even approaches the quality I would need to accept that utterly physics-breaking tic-tac shaped "craft" is a simpler explanation than "sensor errors, spoofing, or observer misperception".
posted by Spiegel at 4:16 PM on June 25, 2021 [16 favorites]
In a limited number of incidents, UAP reportedly appeared to exhibit unusual flight
characteristics. These observations could be the result of sensor errors, spoofing, or
observer misperception and require additional rigorous analysis.
[...]
We were able to identify one reported UAP with
high confidence. In that case, we identified the object as a large, deflating balloon. The others
remain unexplained.
[...]
The UAPTF has indicated that additional funding for research and development could further the
future study of the topics laid out in this report.
This is the same military that strong-armed the patent office into granting patents on the now comprehensively discredited "EmDrive", claiming that "this will become a reality" and that "China is already investing significantly in this area". I am very inclined to put this in the same box as the Stargate Project and other attempts at getting more funding from the government for pie-in-the-sky, pseudoscientific research projects. Perhaps it's sincere, credulous paranoia, perhaps it's simple grift. Probably it's a mix of both.
What it is not is evidence that even approaches the quality I would need to accept that utterly physics-breaking tic-tac shaped "craft" is a simpler explanation than "sensor errors, spoofing, or observer misperception".
posted by Spiegel at 4:16 PM on June 25, 2021 [16 favorites]
Which is not to say that I don't support gathering reports of UAPs, which we now seem to call them. The observations are clearly real, in the sense that people have seen things and sensor readings they can't easily explain. That's interesting and worthy of noting down, but we have to keep in mind the prior probabilities here. Even extremely unlikely errors or misperceptions should be seen as more likely than technology that breaks very, very, well established laws of physics. Be it Chinese or "Other".
posted by Spiegel at 4:27 PM on June 25, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by Spiegel at 4:27 PM on June 25, 2021 [3 favorites]
They identified everything but 140 UAPs.
They were alien entities from space ships.
No. They were still unidentified. That's all.
posted by Splunge at 5:02 PM on June 25, 2021
They were alien entities from space ships.
No. They were still unidentified. That's all.
posted by Splunge at 5:02 PM on June 25, 2021
Foreign Adversary SystemsI love listening to military people when they try to talk fancy. It's like watching dogs play piano. At least in this case, it's unlikely to directly kill anyone.
EXPLAINING UAP WILL REQUIRE ANALYTIC, COLLECTION AND
RESOURCE INVESTMENT
UAP clearly pose a safety of flight issue
posted by eotvos at 5:12 PM on June 25, 2021 [6 favorites]
Is “WILL REQUIRE ANALYTIC, COLLECTION AND
RESOURCE INVESTMENT” the military equivalent of the academic “further research is needed?”
posted by ook at 5:58 PM on June 25, 2021 [4 favorites]
RESOURCE INVESTMENT” the military equivalent of the academic “further research is needed?”
posted by ook at 5:58 PM on June 25, 2021 [4 favorites]
Woody Allen:
All UFOs may not prove to be of extraterrestrial origin but experts do agree that any glowing, cigar-shaped aircraft capable of rising straight up at 12,000 miles per second would require the kind of maintenance and spark plugs available only on Pluto.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:03 PM on June 25, 2021 [3 favorites]
All UFOs may not prove to be of extraterrestrial origin but experts do agree that any glowing, cigar-shaped aircraft capable of rising straight up at 12,000 miles per second would require the kind of maintenance and spark plugs available only on Pluto.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:03 PM on June 25, 2021 [3 favorites]
What we don’t know about the Universe would fill a few universes.
posted by dbiedny at 6:36 PM on June 25, 2021
posted by dbiedny at 6:36 PM on June 25, 2021
The tic-tac is cool and all, but I'm gonna stick with William of Ockham on this one.
posted by tclark at 6:44 PM on June 25, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by tclark at 6:44 PM on June 25, 2021 [2 favorites]
Is “WILL REQUIRE ANALYTIC, COLLECTION AND
RESOURCE INVESTMENT” the military equivalent of the academic “further research is needed?”
It means "This is a wonderful opportunity to send money to contractors in the states of key senators."
posted by happyroach at 6:54 PM on June 25, 2021 [10 favorites]
RESOURCE INVESTMENT” the military equivalent of the academic “further research is needed?”
It means "This is a wonderful opportunity to send money to contractors in the states of key senators."
posted by happyroach at 6:54 PM on June 25, 2021 [10 favorites]
This document leaves things open.
At least with buckets:
...if and when individual UAP incidents are resolved they will fall into one of five potential explanatory categories: airborne clutter, natural atmospheric phenomena, USG or U.S. industry developmental programs, foreign adversary systems, and a catchall “other” bin.
posted by doctornemo at 7:25 PM on June 25, 2021
At least with buckets:
...if and when individual UAP incidents are resolved they will fall into one of five potential explanatory categories: airborne clutter, natural atmospheric phenomena, USG or U.S. industry developmental programs, foreign adversary systems, and a catchall “other” bin.
posted by doctornemo at 7:25 PM on June 25, 2021
I'm having a hard time with the most sophisticated intelligence-gathering apparatus in the world saying There's hardware we don't understand invading our airspace and we have no idea what it is [shrug]
posted by The Half Language Plant at 7:29 PM on June 25, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by The Half Language Plant at 7:29 PM on June 25, 2021 [6 favorites]
I'd like to be alerted whenever that "catchall 'other' bin" is updated.
posted by Rash at 7:54 PM on June 25, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by Rash at 7:54 PM on June 25, 2021 [2 favorites]
It’s not going to be aliens. I don’t know what it will be when we find out, but it’s going to be much, much weirder than aliens.
posted by bigbigdog at 8:00 PM on June 25, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by bigbigdog at 8:00 PM on June 25, 2021 [2 favorites]
It was me. Sorry guys. Just board.
posted by eagles123 at 8:09 PM on June 25, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by eagles123 at 8:09 PM on June 25, 2021 [4 favorites]
cmon now. the usaf had aircraft that could go mach 3 in the early 60s. they (aka nasa) put a man on the moon later that decade. now, everyone has a supercomputer in their pocket. imagine the bonkers-ass sci fi secret nonsense shit they are spending our (taxpayers') hundreds of billions of dollars on.
it is definitely, assuredly, not aliens. i recommend isaac arthur's youtube channel, though, for anyone interested in extraterrestrial thought experiments and the utter absurdity of travelling between interstellar space.
posted by wibari at 8:41 PM on June 25, 2021
it is definitely, assuredly, not aliens. i recommend isaac arthur's youtube channel, though, for anyone interested in extraterrestrial thought experiments and the utter absurdity of travelling between interstellar space.
posted by wibari at 8:41 PM on June 25, 2021
...the academic “further research is needed?”
posted by ook
The most reproduced and robust of all scientific findings.
posted by Pouteria at 9:30 PM on June 25, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by ook
The most reproduced and robust of all scientific findings.
posted by Pouteria at 9:30 PM on June 25, 2021 [4 favorites]
As to the report, it basically just confirms that there is shit out there we don't understand yet.
Is it
1) A known earthly adversary being an order of magnitude ahead on a range of critical technologies.
2) Big holes in our understanding of the basic physics of natural phenomena.
3) Aliens.
4) All of the above.
Not clear to me which is least implausible.
posted by Pouteria at 9:48 PM on June 25, 2021 [5 favorites]
Is it
1) A known earthly adversary being an order of magnitude ahead on a range of critical technologies.
2) Big holes in our understanding of the basic physics of natural phenomena.
3) Aliens.
4) All of the above.
Not clear to me which is least implausible.
posted by Pouteria at 9:48 PM on June 25, 2021 [5 favorites]
Is it aliens?
Is it aliens?!
IS IT ALIENS!?!?!?
it's not aliens.
U.S. Has No Explanation for Unidentified Objects and Stops Short of Ruling Out Aliens [NYTimes]
posted by Ahmad Khani at 9:52 PM on June 25, 2021 [2 favorites]
Is it aliens?!
IS IT ALIENS!?!?!?
it's not aliens.
U.S. Has No Explanation for Unidentified Objects and Stops Short of Ruling Out Aliens [NYTimes]
posted by Ahmad Khani at 9:52 PM on June 25, 2021 [2 favorites]
Metafilter: a large, deflating balloon.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 10:21 PM on June 25, 2021 [7 favorites]
posted by Hairy Lobster at 10:21 PM on June 25, 2021 [7 favorites]
Last time we had this kind of widespread UFO talk was when stealth aircraft were still secret squirrel shit. The time before that it was the A12. The time before that it was "weather balloons" that were really collecting air samples to detect nuclear weapons tests.
Remember the Glomar Explorer. The CIA convinced a lot of people, including many reputable scientists, that we could mine manganese nodules from the sea floor to cover for their effort to raise a sunken Soviet missile submarine.
My money is on some novel means of fooling sensors if it isn't just some new fighter jet or spy drone that can pull ridiculous Gs because there isn't a meat bag aboard. It's not unknown physics and it's definitely not aliens.
posted by wierdo at 12:00 AM on June 26, 2021 [20 favorites]
Remember the Glomar Explorer. The CIA convinced a lot of people, including many reputable scientists, that we could mine manganese nodules from the sea floor to cover for their effort to raise a sunken Soviet missile submarine.
My money is on some novel means of fooling sensors if it isn't just some new fighter jet or spy drone that can pull ridiculous Gs because there isn't a meat bag aboard. It's not unknown physics and it's definitely not aliens.
posted by wierdo at 12:00 AM on June 26, 2021 [20 favorites]
My money is on some novel means of fooling sensors
Same same. There are credible accounts of direct visual observation by trained observers of what seem to be impossible flight behaviours, and I have no doubt at all that those trained observers saw manoeuvres that would have been beyond plausible limits of materials engineering if executed by craft at the distances the observers thought them to be.
However, given that all of those trained observers were using radar-based systems to judge those distances, it seems to me that the most parsimonious explanation has to be small craft much closer than the radar says they are.
If I wanted to design that kind of spoofing, I'd do it by putting a software designed radio on my tiny drone, programmed to look for incoming radar pings and actively echo them after a controllable delay period. It should be possible to make radar trackers generate stable but completely wrong distance results this way.
For extra observed weirdness points, I'd have that radio work out which direction the observer's radars were coming from, so that whenever I wanted to I could suddenly flip my relatively flat quadcopter sideways to the observer while switching off its active ping responses. I would expect to be able to get quite a convincing approximation of sudden total disappearance.
I don't think we need military scientists analyzing the results from the Other bucket so much as professional illusionists.
posted by flabdablet at 12:20 AM on June 26, 2021 [14 favorites]
Same same. There are credible accounts of direct visual observation by trained observers of what seem to be impossible flight behaviours, and I have no doubt at all that those trained observers saw manoeuvres that would have been beyond plausible limits of materials engineering if executed by craft at the distances the observers thought them to be.
However, given that all of those trained observers were using radar-based systems to judge those distances, it seems to me that the most parsimonious explanation has to be small craft much closer than the radar says they are.
If I wanted to design that kind of spoofing, I'd do it by putting a software designed radio on my tiny drone, programmed to look for incoming radar pings and actively echo them after a controllable delay period. It should be possible to make radar trackers generate stable but completely wrong distance results this way.
For extra observed weirdness points, I'd have that radio work out which direction the observer's radars were coming from, so that whenever I wanted to I could suddenly flip my relatively flat quadcopter sideways to the observer while switching off its active ping responses. I would expect to be able to get quite a convincing approximation of sudden total disappearance.
I don't think we need military scientists analyzing the results from the Other bucket so much as professional illusionists.
posted by flabdablet at 12:20 AM on June 26, 2021 [14 favorites]
missed edit window: s/software designed radio/software defined radio/
posted by flabdablet at 12:27 AM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by flabdablet at 12:27 AM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
This astrophysics youtuber debunks the three videos.
It was the first Iraq war when we first saw this kind of military footage and quality hasn't changed much. Still a blurry mess open to wild interpretations and pareidolia. None of the bizarre physics-breaking maneuvers described are shown here. One pilot said that they were seeing these things on the daily for over a year, and they considered the best way of documenting this is with 1991 era grainy-cam. They couldn't do better? Not even a polaroid?
Why aren't militaries of other nations reporting this? Countries with no interest in keeping secrets. If it's only Americans being targeted, it has to be another country. If you think aliens are only interested in America, well, take your massive ego and fuck off.
Y'all losing your minds over blurry bullshit and tall tales.
posted by adept256 at 12:40 AM on June 26, 2021 [13 favorites]
It was the first Iraq war when we first saw this kind of military footage and quality hasn't changed much. Still a blurry mess open to wild interpretations and pareidolia. None of the bizarre physics-breaking maneuvers described are shown here. One pilot said that they were seeing these things on the daily for over a year, and they considered the best way of documenting this is with 1991 era grainy-cam. They couldn't do better? Not even a polaroid?
Why aren't militaries of other nations reporting this? Countries with no interest in keeping secrets. If it's only Americans being targeted, it has to be another country. If you think aliens are only interested in America, well, take your massive ego and fuck off.
Y'all losing your minds over blurry bullshit and tall tales.
posted by adept256 at 12:40 AM on June 26, 2021 [13 favorites]
The book Mirage Men by Mark Pilkington is a worthwhile read. It talks about a few specific government - affiliated folks who participated in and encouraged the earlier (X-Files era and before) UFO enthusiast community and helped drive one of them to madness.
Upshot being that fostering UFO interest somehow served government purposes. Government folks have been pushing the most recent UFO talk pretty hard and none of these guys come off as true believers, so you have to wonder what purposes it serves this time around.
posted by duoshao at 5:04 AM on June 26, 2021 [6 favorites]
Upshot being that fostering UFO interest somehow served government purposes. Government folks have been pushing the most recent UFO talk pretty hard and none of these guys come off as true believers, so you have to wonder what purposes it serves this time around.
posted by duoshao at 5:04 AM on June 26, 2021 [6 favorites]
The time before that it was "weather balloons" that were really collecting air samples to detect nuclear weapons tests.
I think you're referencing Project Mogul which involved using high-altitude balloons to loft microphones that could detect the distinctive vibrations of above-ground nuclear tests. The project was a top secret, not because the technology was advanced, but because the use was novel and publicity would just lead the Russians to move their testing underground (as, ultimately, everyone did).
Mogul is particularly interesting because one of its balloons was the "saucer" that touched off the Roswell incident.
posted by SPrintF at 6:42 AM on June 26, 2021 [2 favorites]
I think you're referencing Project Mogul which involved using high-altitude balloons to loft microphones that could detect the distinctive vibrations of above-ground nuclear tests. The project was a top secret, not because the technology was advanced, but because the use was novel and publicity would just lead the Russians to move their testing underground (as, ultimately, everyone did).
Mogul is particularly interesting because one of its balloons was the "saucer" that touched off the Roswell incident.
posted by SPrintF at 6:42 AM on June 26, 2021 [2 favorites]
It was me. Sorry guys. Just board.
posted by eagles123 at 8:09 PM on June 25 [2 favorites +] [!]
"...just board." As in 'just come aboard'? As in 'just climb on into my spacecraft and I, a bored space-teenager buzzing this mud-ball for yucks, will take you on a trip that will blow your little earth-bound mind????'
hmmmmm?
On the off chance that you're not, this whole business does stink to high heaven. Why draw attention to this issue of putative UAP/UFO's that are a security risk when in some cases the 'threat' happened 15 years ago? And the jerky, fuzzy images - is that what the armed forces have to work with? Really? So, then, is this a back-handed way of saying, 'We need more money to get better, more reliable imaging devices?' I could work with that.
What seems even more plausible is the guy running this whole 'investigation' button-holed the former Pres and said, 'Hey, I got a way to rake in some sweet Defense Dept. Cash, we investigate UFO's! They need investigating - obviously, so, we set up a bureau to do just that, we'll need a budget, and I'll kick 10% to you. I'll phrase that differently when the time comes, of course but, you know.'
It's a pretty good application of occam's razor - Former Pres was a grifter-crook, someone offers him a grift, he's in. The rest is just the grift in play.
posted by From Bklyn at 7:18 AM on June 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by eagles123 at 8:09 PM on June 25 [2 favorites +] [!]
"...just board." As in 'just come aboard'? As in 'just climb on into my spacecraft and I, a bored space-teenager buzzing this mud-ball for yucks, will take you on a trip that will blow your little earth-bound mind????'
hmmmmm?
On the off chance that you're not, this whole business does stink to high heaven. Why draw attention to this issue of putative UAP/UFO's that are a security risk when in some cases the 'threat' happened 15 years ago? And the jerky, fuzzy images - is that what the armed forces have to work with? Really? So, then, is this a back-handed way of saying, 'We need more money to get better, more reliable imaging devices?' I could work with that.
What seems even more plausible is the guy running this whole 'investigation' button-holed the former Pres and said, 'Hey, I got a way to rake in some sweet Defense Dept. Cash, we investigate UFO's! They need investigating - obviously, so, we set up a bureau to do just that, we'll need a budget, and I'll kick 10% to you. I'll phrase that differently when the time comes, of course but, you know.'
It's a pretty good application of occam's razor - Former Pres was a grifter-crook, someone offers him a grift, he's in. The rest is just the grift in play.
posted by From Bklyn at 7:18 AM on June 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
I want to believe.
posted by misterpatrick at 8:02 AM on June 26, 2021
posted by misterpatrick at 8:02 AM on June 26, 2021
I'm gonna stick with William of Ockham on this one.
I’m not ready to rule out angels at this stage.
posted by Phanx at 8:03 AM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
I’m not ready to rule out angels at this stage.
posted by Phanx at 8:03 AM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
Do they say anything to address the fact that 50 years ago, even wealthy households owned only one or two cameras and those cameras only had film in them about 50% of the time - while today, just about every human on Earth is walking around all day/everywhere with a recording device capable of holding at least a half hour of high-resolution video ...and there hasn’t been any sort of corresponding increase in the amount of documentation?
posted by bonobothegreat at 9:02 AM on June 26, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by bonobothegreat at 9:02 AM on June 26, 2021 [8 favorites]
and there hasn’t been any sort of corresponding increase in the amount of documentation?The sensors and optics in phones are too small to capture enough light to properly record anything in the distance. They are made for selfies. To test this, gaze at the beauty of a full moon and then take a picture with your phone, or try to take a picture of a plane that you can plainly see with the naked eye. The number of quality cameras has actually decreased since the smartphone revolution. That's why companies like Olympus have quit the business entirely.
I completely understand the skepticism in general, which is the result of a decades long disinformation campaign by the USG. It was useful to cover up sighting of secret military technology and to decrease the number of UFO reports because they were overloading our intelligence agencies.
I follow the UFO/UAP topic as kind of a lark, but what I keep coming back to is why decorated veterans and fabulously wealthy heirs like Christopher Mellon have been making statements about their experience with UAPs instead of doing anything else, and why the Pentagon is verifying evidence of events like the Nimitz encounter. My guess is that they have some new form of propulsion, and are dripping out evidence of it to gauge the reaction of military adversaries. Whether coincidence or not, almost every member of Five Eyes (US/UK/CA/AU) has recently formed their own Space Force. The USAF has also not offered a single comment on the videos verified by the Pentagon.
The catch here for skeptics is if we have built craft capable of hundreds of gs and thousands of miles per hour without control surfaces, then a big part of the easy dismissal of earlier UAP reports goes out the window.
posted by nicoffeine at 9:50 AM on June 26, 2021 [5 favorites]
When I was a graduate student beginning my research, I had to give a seminar explaining what I planned to do for my dissertation. Afterwards, one of the RAs dropped by my cubical and said he noticed my data was all observational, and while there was nothing wrong with that, had I considered developing a hypothesis based on my observations and doing an experiment to prove or disprove the hypothesis? It's sad he needed to tell me this, but I didn't get a lot of guidance from anyone on my committee, and this was startling news to me. So I thought a bit, and designed an experiment that became the second half of my dissertation. I don't think I ever properly thanked that guy, so I can only play it forward. Hey, military people? If you have a pilot who sees UAP almost every day, not only do you have an opportunity to do first-class observations with better camera equipment, but you have an opportunity to test hypotheses. Like, send the pilot up in a different plane and see if it still happens. Swap out his radar equipment: still happen? Replace his front window with no-glare glass: still get funny lights? Take his plane, and let a different pilot drive? Some of those things would cost nothing, or would be a good investment if you are really worried about safety.
That report reads a lot like some Grant quarterly reports I have written when I'm trying to disguise that I haven't done anything.
posted by acrasis at 9:54 AM on June 26, 2021 [11 favorites]
That report reads a lot like some Grant quarterly reports I have written when I'm trying to disguise that I haven't done anything.
posted by acrasis at 9:54 AM on June 26, 2021 [11 favorites]
if we have built craft capable of hundreds of gs and thousands of miles per hour without control surfaces
NARRATOR: we haven't
posted by flabdablet at 10:15 AM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
NARRATOR: we haven't
posted by flabdablet at 10:15 AM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
while today, just about every human on Earth is walking around all day/everywhere with a recording device capable of holding at least a half hour of high-resolution video ...and there hasn’t been any sort of corresponding increase in the amount of documentation?
I would argue that while everyone has a camera in their hand, they are arguable spending 90% looking down at their phone rather than the sky or anywhere else. So that could explain a lack of increase in recorded sightings
posted by ill3 at 10:36 AM on June 26, 2021
I would argue that while everyone has a camera in their hand, they are arguable spending 90% looking down at their phone rather than the sky or anywhere else. So that could explain a lack of increase in recorded sightings
posted by ill3 at 10:36 AM on June 26, 2021
"If I told you some secretsJudee Sill
Would you say I'm unreal?
I could easily love you
If you'd just let me feel
I can't play forever
The games I've outgrown
But just 'til enchanted sky machines
Take all the gentle home"
posted by Richard Saunders at 11:20 AM on June 26, 2021
This is the same military that strong-armed the patent office into granting patents on the now comprehensively discredited "EmDrive"
Also the goats. Don't forget the goats. And the whole idea that loud cricket noises are melting people's brains.
posted by meehawl at 12:00 PM on June 26, 2021
Also the goats. Don't forget the goats. And the whole idea that loud cricket noises are melting people's brains.
posted by meehawl at 12:00 PM on June 26, 2021
"Why aren't militaries of other nations reporting this?"
Some have, including the UK.
Note, too, that the US military was *not* reporting this for a long time. There's a long tradition of military pilots and others saying they were told not to mention weird stuff.
It took that odd story of the To the Stars group etc. for this to gain any traction at all.
"Countries with no interest in keeping secrets."
...most national militaries and government are actually pretty interested in secrets.
"If you think aliens are only interested in America, well, take your massive ego and fuck off."
On the one hand, no. Check out the UFO literature. It's been multinational for a long, long time.
On the other hand, the US-centrism in this particular story partly stems from the use of new sensing tech; I don't know how many other nations' militaries are using that stuff now.
"Y'all losing your minds over blurry bullshit and tall tales."
Not really. America isn't losing its mind over this UFO report. It's only getting a bit of coverage, largely because the report says little.
posted by doctornemo at 12:16 PM on June 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
Some have, including the UK.
Note, too, that the US military was *not* reporting this for a long time. There's a long tradition of military pilots and others saying they were told not to mention weird stuff.
It took that odd story of the To the Stars group etc. for this to gain any traction at all.
"Countries with no interest in keeping secrets."
...most national militaries and government are actually pretty interested in secrets.
"If you think aliens are only interested in America, well, take your massive ego and fuck off."
On the one hand, no. Check out the UFO literature. It's been multinational for a long, long time.
On the other hand, the US-centrism in this particular story partly stems from the use of new sensing tech; I don't know how many other nations' militaries are using that stuff now.
"Y'all losing your minds over blurry bullshit and tall tales."
Not really. America isn't losing its mind over this UFO report. It's only getting a bit of coverage, largely because the report says little.
posted by doctornemo at 12:16 PM on June 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
The report does say little ("AVAILABLE REPORTING LARGELY INCONCLUSIVE"), but it gestures in a lot of directions.
There is an argument that UFOs/UAP are a potential danger:
"UAP THREATEN FLIGHT SAFETY AND, POSSIBLY, NATIONAL
SECURITY ...
Most of the UAP reported probably do represent physical objects...UAP clearly pose a safety of flight issue and may pose a challenge to U.S. national security."
Plus this: "UAP would also represent a national security challenge if they are foreign adversary
collection platforms or provide evidence a potential adversary has developed either a
breakthrough or disruptive technology."
Which leads to a call for something like a national UFO/UAP directorate:
"Consistent consolidation of reports from across the federal government, standardized
reporting, increased collection and analysis, and a streamlined process for screening all
such reports against a broad range of relevant USG data will allow for a more
sophisticated analysis of UAP that is likely to deepen our understanding."
and
"efforts are underway to standardize incident reporting across U.S. military services and other government agencies to ensure all relevant data is captured with respect to particular incidents and any U.S. activities that might be relevant."
There's also the finding that UFOs/UAP aren't a single thing, but a category with multiple subcategories:
"There are probably multiple types of UAP requiring different explanations based on the
range of appearances and behaviors described in the available reporting. Our analysis of
the data supports the construct that if and when individual UAP incidents are resolved they will
fall into one of five potential explanatory categories: airborne clutter, natural atmospheric
phenomena, USG or U.S. industry developmental programs, foreign adversary systems, and a
catchall “other” bin."
posted by doctornemo at 12:23 PM on June 26, 2021
There is an argument that UFOs/UAP are a potential danger:
"UAP THREATEN FLIGHT SAFETY AND, POSSIBLY, NATIONAL
SECURITY ...
Most of the UAP reported probably do represent physical objects...UAP clearly pose a safety of flight issue and may pose a challenge to U.S. national security."
Plus this: "UAP would also represent a national security challenge if they are foreign adversary
collection platforms or provide evidence a potential adversary has developed either a
breakthrough or disruptive technology."
Which leads to a call for something like a national UFO/UAP directorate:
"Consistent consolidation of reports from across the federal government, standardized
reporting, increased collection and analysis, and a streamlined process for screening all
such reports against a broad range of relevant USG data will allow for a more
sophisticated analysis of UAP that is likely to deepen our understanding."
and
"efforts are underway to standardize incident reporting across U.S. military services and other government agencies to ensure all relevant data is captured with respect to particular incidents and any U.S. activities that might be relevant."
There's also the finding that UFOs/UAP aren't a single thing, but a category with multiple subcategories:
"There are probably multiple types of UAP requiring different explanations based on the
range of appearances and behaviors described in the available reporting. Our analysis of
the data supports the construct that if and when individual UAP incidents are resolved they will
fall into one of five potential explanatory categories: airborne clutter, natural atmospheric
phenomena, USG or U.S. industry developmental programs, foreign adversary systems, and a
catchall “other” bin."
posted by doctornemo at 12:23 PM on June 26, 2021
“WILL REQUIRE ANALYTIC, COLLECTION AND RESOURCE INVESTMENT”
I read this yesterday and thought it might be a nice way to ease the tax-payer into ongoing investment in the military.
The Cold War is fading from peoples memory, Russia is no longer the bug-bear it used to be (and they can use information warfare to great affect so don't necessarily need to invest in an arms-race - hell they can just black-mail/bribe their way victory!) and China is expanding but is still far enough behind that its value as a bogey-man is not great (also, could likely buy their way to victory). UFO's on the other hand, they could be used to kick-start investment in Space Force or a F-35 successor.
Came across an amusing info-graphic of reported UFO sightings globally and it very much appeared to be a 'first-world problem' (Aliens also appear to have a real problem with the Canadian & Mexican border). Can't find the source so it may have been created purely for jokes.
posted by phigmov at 12:26 PM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
I read this yesterday and thought it might be a nice way to ease the tax-payer into ongoing investment in the military.
The Cold War is fading from peoples memory, Russia is no longer the bug-bear it used to be (and they can use information warfare to great affect so don't necessarily need to invest in an arms-race - hell they can just black-mail/bribe their way victory!) and China is expanding but is still far enough behind that its value as a bogey-man is not great (also, could likely buy their way to victory). UFO's on the other hand, they could be used to kick-start investment in Space Force or a F-35 successor.
Came across an amusing info-graphic of reported UFO sightings globally and it very much appeared to be a 'first-world problem' (Aliens also appear to have a real problem with the Canadian & Mexican border). Can't find the source so it may have been created purely for jokes.
posted by phigmov at 12:26 PM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
Diné (Navajo) comedian Vincent Craig said it best, and most presciently given the current awful news from Canada: “I don’t know, Buddy, all I know is I’m not scared [of the aliens], because I went to boarding school.”
We are the aliens.
posted by spitbull at 1:02 PM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
We are the aliens.
posted by spitbull at 1:02 PM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
Chris Carter in the NYT: I Created ‘The X-Files.’ Here’s Why I’m Skeptical of the New U.F.O. Report.
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:38 PM on June 26, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:38 PM on June 26, 2021 [2 favorites]
The sensors and optics in phones are too small to capture enough light to properly record anything in the distance.
A) due to night sight, my phone can actually see things in the night sky better than I can and B) there are people riding around with go pros on their heads, millions of cars with dash cams, security cams everywhere, nature cams and on and on. There was a reason we saw so many pictures and videos of the Chelyabinsk meteor and its effects, and that was 8 years and a lot less cameras ago. "Cameras aren't good enough" is nonsense. We haven't had an increase in even *bad* UFO videos.
posted by tavella at 1:43 PM on June 26, 2021 [5 favorites]
A) due to night sight, my phone can actually see things in the night sky better than I can and B) there are people riding around with go pros on their heads, millions of cars with dash cams, security cams everywhere, nature cams and on and on. There was a reason we saw so many pictures and videos of the Chelyabinsk meteor and its effects, and that was 8 years and a lot less cameras ago. "Cameras aren't good enough" is nonsense. We haven't had an increase in even *bad* UFO videos.
posted by tavella at 1:43 PM on June 26, 2021 [5 favorites]
so you have to wonder what purposes it serves this time around.
who was it that said the product of a system is it's purpose? Many governments produce chaos and confusion, and work quietly on other tasks. Some countries now, e.g. UK are at a point where everything and nothing is believable, and ministers are making bank.
posted by unearthed at 1:51 PM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
who was it that said the product of a system is it's purpose? Many governments produce chaos and confusion, and work quietly on other tasks. Some countries now, e.g. UK are at a point where everything and nothing is believable, and ministers are making bank.
posted by unearthed at 1:51 PM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
"it might be a nice way to ease the tax-payer into ongoing investment in the military."
Could be. I remember Richard Condon waaaaaay back in 1990 or so, being asked what would happen after the USSR's demise. "They'll have to sell us something else."
On the other hand, anti-China animus is pretty popular in the DC world. It has bipartisan support in the ragged, classic way post-Truman empire tended to have. Biden's organizing a global anti-Beijing coalition, while the right hits him for being soft on China. So this could soak up a hefty budget.
Plus don't forget the war on terror, which has quite a hold on the American mind and is capable of throwing up new bogeys.
posted by doctornemo at 5:04 PM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
Could be. I remember Richard Condon waaaaaay back in 1990 or so, being asked what would happen after the USSR's demise. "They'll have to sell us something else."
On the other hand, anti-China animus is pretty popular in the DC world. It has bipartisan support in the ragged, classic way post-Truman empire tended to have. Biden's organizing a global anti-Beijing coalition, while the right hits him for being soft on China. So this could soak up a hefty budget.
Plus don't forget the war on terror, which has quite a hold on the American mind and is capable of throwing up new bogeys.
posted by doctornemo at 5:04 PM on June 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
A) due to night sight, my phone can actually see things in the night sky better than I canI'm sorry you have that condition, but that's not a strong argument.
there are people riding around with go pros on their heads, millions of cars with dash cams, security cams everywhere, nature cams and on and on. There was a reason we saw so many pictures and videos of the Chelyabinsk meteor and its effects, and that was 8 years and a lot less cameras ago. "Cameras aren't good enough" is nonsense.The comparison to Chelyabinsk doesn't make any sense: "The light from the meteor was brighter than the Sun, visible up to 100 km (62 mi) away." The UAP in the Nimitz and similar videos were only captured because they were tracked with military grade hardware designed to observe distant and/or fast moving targets.
Aside from that, every camera you're describing has a cheap small sensor, digital only zoom, poor performance at night, and most of them are wide angle or even fisheye lensed. They are typically not pointed towards the sky. They can't even pick up an airliner in perfect daylight unless they're placed near an airport.
We haven't had an increase in even *bad* UFO videos.I can assure you this is not the case, especially since Starlink deployments have started.
posted by nicoffeine at 6:32 PM on June 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
Huh? I don't have any condition, night sight is a technology that many modern phones including mine have. My confidence in your expertise on phone photo performance is not improved.
posted by tavella at 7:49 PM on June 26, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by tavella at 7:49 PM on June 26, 2021 [2 favorites]
The sensors and optics in phones are too small to capture enough light to properly record anything in the distance.
The vast, vast, vast majority of the cameras in circulation prior to the digital age had fixed focus/fixed shutter speed and tiny apertures. Anything less than full, bright daylight meant using grainy ASA 400 film. An SLR like an Olympus, with controls and maybe a zoom lens was an expensive hobbyist camera.
posted by bonobothegreat at 9:14 PM on June 26, 2021 [4 favorites]
The vast, vast, vast majority of the cameras in circulation prior to the digital age had fixed focus/fixed shutter speed and tiny apertures. Anything less than full, bright daylight meant using grainy ASA 400 film. An SLR like an Olympus, with controls and maybe a zoom lens was an expensive hobbyist camera.
posted by bonobothegreat at 9:14 PM on June 26, 2021 [4 favorites]
Hey, military people? If you have a pilot who sees UAP almost every day, not only do you have an opportunity to do first-class observations with better camera equipment, but you have an opportunity to test hypotheses. Like, send the pilot up in a different plane and see if it still happens. Swap out his radar equipment: still happen? Replace his front window with no-glare glass: still get funny lights? Take his plane, and let a different pilot drive? Some of those things would cost nothing, or would be a good investment if you are really worried about safety.
Thank god you figured out what the military should be doing, I hope they reach out to you right away. Apparently they need help! No engineers or scientists or anyone of any intelligence, according to you; all complete simpletons that didn't take any of the above steps at all. And why would they, being the dummies they are?
Or maybe. Just maybe. The unidentified objects they detected were detected with the best equipment. I mean, these particular events aren't classified, right? Is there testimony speaking to the (according to you) faulty nature of the hardware and software? I mean, they saw this stuff regularly for years, yet you really think no one thought to investigate further?
posted by zardoz at 2:01 AM on June 27, 2021
Thank god you figured out what the military should be doing, I hope they reach out to you right away. Apparently they need help! No engineers or scientists or anyone of any intelligence, according to you; all complete simpletons that didn't take any of the above steps at all. And why would they, being the dummies they are?
Or maybe. Just maybe. The unidentified objects they detected were detected with the best equipment. I mean, these particular events aren't classified, right? Is there testimony speaking to the (according to you) faulty nature of the hardware and software? I mean, they saw this stuff regularly for years, yet you really think no one thought to investigate further?
posted by zardoz at 2:01 AM on June 27, 2021
I can assure you this is not the case, especially since Starlink deployments have started.
Has there been an uptick in ufo videos? Are people really thinking Starlink deployments are ufos?
I would think in this age of millions of consumer grade drones flooding the market, along with ubiquitous phone cameras, that ufo sightings would be through the roof, with pics to prove it. But they're not. Maybe those clever aliens figured out to disguise their crafts as drones in order to be ignored.
The sensors and optics in phones are too small to capture enough light to properly record anything in the distance.
UFO footage/images have never been characterized by clear, definitive quality in any era. Modern cell phone cameras are notably better than consumer grade film cameras of the past, more quickly deployed, and carried everywhere by people in the habit of deploying them for any reason. There isn't even a flood of shitty cell phone ufo footage, let alone good footage.
Thank god you figured out what the military should be doing, I hope they reach out to you right away. Apparently they need help! No engineers or scientists or anyone of any intelligence, according to you; all complete simpletons that didn't take any of the above steps at all. And why would they, being the dummies they are?
Or maybe. Just maybe. The unidentified objects they detected were detected with the best equipment. I mean, these particular events aren't classified, right? Is there testimony speaking to the (according to you) faulty nature of the hardware and software? I mean, they saw this stuff regularly for years, yet you really think no one thought to investigate further?
The thing about the report is that it certainly seems to play like the military observes these things, even with regularity, and just shrugs when it happens. Without much curiosity or coordinated effort to figure out what's going on. Which makes me wonder, if the military can barely give two fucks over this stuff, why should I? Maybe they are dedicating considerable resources to solve these mysteries? They are not expressing a whole lot of urgency over it, though.
posted by 2N2222 at 8:38 AM on June 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
Has there been an uptick in ufo videos? Are people really thinking Starlink deployments are ufos?
I would think in this age of millions of consumer grade drones flooding the market, along with ubiquitous phone cameras, that ufo sightings would be through the roof, with pics to prove it. But they're not. Maybe those clever aliens figured out to disguise their crafts as drones in order to be ignored.
The sensors and optics in phones are too small to capture enough light to properly record anything in the distance.
UFO footage/images have never been characterized by clear, definitive quality in any era. Modern cell phone cameras are notably better than consumer grade film cameras of the past, more quickly deployed, and carried everywhere by people in the habit of deploying them for any reason. There isn't even a flood of shitty cell phone ufo footage, let alone good footage.
Thank god you figured out what the military should be doing, I hope they reach out to you right away. Apparently they need help! No engineers or scientists or anyone of any intelligence, according to you; all complete simpletons that didn't take any of the above steps at all. And why would they, being the dummies they are?
Or maybe. Just maybe. The unidentified objects they detected were detected with the best equipment. I mean, these particular events aren't classified, right? Is there testimony speaking to the (according to you) faulty nature of the hardware and software? I mean, they saw this stuff regularly for years, yet you really think no one thought to investigate further?
The thing about the report is that it certainly seems to play like the military observes these things, even with regularity, and just shrugs when it happens. Without much curiosity or coordinated effort to figure out what's going on. Which makes me wonder, if the military can barely give two fucks over this stuff, why should I? Maybe they are dedicating considerable resources to solve these mysteries? They are not expressing a whole lot of urgency over it, though.
posted by 2N2222 at 8:38 AM on June 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
My money is on some novel means of fooling sensors
Imagine. It's on the same level as the tricksters who got Donald Trump elected.
posted by bluesky43 at 9:03 AM on June 27, 2021
Imagine. It's on the same level as the tricksters who got Donald Trump elected.
posted by bluesky43 at 9:03 AM on June 27, 2021
if the military can barely give two fucks over this stuff, why should I?
The CIA, at least, was concerned about UFO reports back in the 60's, largely because they were concerned that a flood of disinformation in the military channels might drown legitimate sightings of foreign military aircraft. But with satellites being the go-to technology for spying, overflights by spy planes are less of an issue these days, I imagine.
posted by SPrintF at 10:11 AM on June 27, 2021
The CIA, at least, was concerned about UFO reports back in the 60's, largely because they were concerned that a flood of disinformation in the military channels might drown legitimate sightings of foreign military aircraft. But with satellites being the go-to technology for spying, overflights by spy planes are less of an issue these days, I imagine.
posted by SPrintF at 10:11 AM on June 27, 2021
The thing about the report is that it certainly seems to play like the military observes these things, even with regularity, and just shrugs when it happens. Without much curiosity or coordinated effort to figure out what's going on. Which makes me wonder, if the military can barely give two fucks over this stuff, why should I? Maybe they are dedicating considerable resources to solve these mysteries? They are not expressing a whole lot of urgency over it, thoughYou don't have to pay attention, but the military is paying attention. As a result of the report there is a directive from the DOD signed by the Deputy Secretary of Defense to standardize and require reporting as an effort to remove the stigma surrounding the issue. Even after coverage in the NYT and on 60 minutes there are other witnesses who don't want to say anything because it has a history of damaging careers.
This is because it's a huge problem if military officers are not reporting what they see, what they observe, even when they have grave concerns about the safety of the people they trying to protect. Listen to the interview with Senior Chief Kevin Day. At the time of the Nimitz incident he had 18 years of experience on Aegis class ships. He recently posted in part:
From 2004 until 2009 when I walked away from DOD out of frustration, I tried in vain to get somebody, anybody, to listen to me. Yet, every time I tried to describe what we had witnessed out in SOCAL during TIC TAC, I was open laughed at, made the butt of jokes, and once even asked by my then-boss just WTF I had been smoking... sociocultural stigmas about UFO's did indeed prevent me from making the case at the time .. the stigmas also cost me a 2nd career in DOD at the least .. I paid a very high price personally and I hold the NAVY/DOD directly responsibleIf this was about any other topic, we wouldn't be having this discussion. We have multiple witnesses backed by data from instrumentation, authenticated by the Pentagon. It doesn't mean there are aliens, but it does mean there is something in our airspace that cannot be explained with known technology.
posted by nicoffeine at 4:02 PM on June 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
the military observes these things, even with regularity, and just shrugs when it happens. Without much curiosity or coordinated effort to figure out what's going on.
You're right, which makes me think that they regard these as spurious observations. People focus on the fact that we don't know how to make a plane that can (e.g.) accelerate tremendously, stop in mid-air, then reverse itself and disappear. The flip side of that is that spurious observations caused by reflections and so forth usually don't behave the way real planes do.
Consider a faked photo of a UFO made by photographing a flying Frisbee. The "UFO" won't look quite right for an object of its purported size and distance: without the haze of atmospheric distortion its edges will look too sharp, and its rotation will mean that its surface looks too clean. It would actually be difficult to make it look like a real vehicle unless you could, e.g., suspend it from a string. Similar considerations apply to other fakes and deceptions: it's hard to make them look real.
Let's suppose that these reports are accurate observations of real objects, just ones that can accelerate tremendously and stop without inertia and disappear from radar etc. Why would that always be the case? Wouldn't we occasionally see them when they're stationary for an extended period, or have some sort of mechanical failure, or whatever? And wouldn't at least some of them be things that show up equally well on radar and visual observation, and be in reasonable range and reasonable speed for both of these? But we don't have any reports like that: almost all the reports are not defined by the fact that they're observations of unidentified objects, but that they're unidentifiable ones. It's like stories about fairies and ghosts: they're never subtle enough to be undetected, or normal enough to come around and borrow a cup of sugar, but always in that liminal space where the subject is convinced but has no proof to show their friends.
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:30 PM on June 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
You're right, which makes me think that they regard these as spurious observations. People focus on the fact that we don't know how to make a plane that can (e.g.) accelerate tremendously, stop in mid-air, then reverse itself and disappear. The flip side of that is that spurious observations caused by reflections and so forth usually don't behave the way real planes do.
Consider a faked photo of a UFO made by photographing a flying Frisbee. The "UFO" won't look quite right for an object of its purported size and distance: without the haze of atmospheric distortion its edges will look too sharp, and its rotation will mean that its surface looks too clean. It would actually be difficult to make it look like a real vehicle unless you could, e.g., suspend it from a string. Similar considerations apply to other fakes and deceptions: it's hard to make them look real.
Let's suppose that these reports are accurate observations of real objects, just ones that can accelerate tremendously and stop without inertia and disappear from radar etc. Why would that always be the case? Wouldn't we occasionally see them when they're stationary for an extended period, or have some sort of mechanical failure, or whatever? And wouldn't at least some of them be things that show up equally well on radar and visual observation, and be in reasonable range and reasonable speed for both of these? But we don't have any reports like that: almost all the reports are not defined by the fact that they're observations of unidentified objects, but that they're unidentifiable ones. It's like stories about fairies and ghosts: they're never subtle enough to be undetected, or normal enough to come around and borrow a cup of sugar, but always in that liminal space where the subject is convinced but has no proof to show their friends.
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:30 PM on June 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
Re: sensors, I just took two photos standing on my roof of two different Identified Flying Objects. Dusk lighting, planning for something random to come by. The first photo is a prop plane that was clearly identifiable by the naked eye. The second is a helicopter that I could see the color markings on, but that's clearly not visible in the photo. This is on an iPhone 12 Pro at full digital zoom while I was actively hunting objects in the sky (I live near an airport in a dense urban area). I'll try to test the bleeding edge sensors on my device when it gets fully dark (light pollution from the city and all), but I don't expect the outcome to be better.
posted by ryoshu at 5:51 PM on June 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by ryoshu at 5:51 PM on June 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
Chris Carter being skeptical makes me less skeptical
We oughta see how Bill Kristol feels
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 11:10 PM on June 27, 2021
We oughta see how Bill Kristol feels
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 11:10 PM on June 27, 2021
Wouldn't we occasionally see them when they're stationary for an extended period, or have some sort of mechanical failure, or whatever? And wouldn't at least some of them be things that show up equally well on radar and visual observation, and be in reasonable range and reasonable speed for both of these? But we don't have any reports like thatWe do. If you read the report, it's in the executive summary on page 3:
Most of the UAP reported probably do represent physical objects given that a majority of UAP were registered across multiple sensors, to include radar, infrared, electro-optical, weapon seekers, and visual observationFrom page 4 & 5 (emphasis mine):
144 reports originated from USG sources. Of these, 80 reports involved observation with multiple sensors...The public doesn't have the details of the photos, videos, instrumentation data, etc., but they exist despite "disparagement associated with observing UAP, reporting it, or attempting to discuss it with colleagues."
In 18 incidents, described in 21 reports, observers reported unusual UAP movement patterns or flight characteristics.
Some UAP appeared to remain stationary in winds aloft, move against the wind, maneuver abruptly, or move at considerable speed, without discernable means of propulsion. In a small number of cases, military aircraft systems processed radio frequency (RF) energy associated with UAP sightings.
posted by nicoffeine at 6:48 AM on June 28, 2021
I think the main thing I still don't understand about this whole fuss is why so many people seem to expect everything that's observed to be identifiable, especially when the observations are performed with augmented human senses.
Go look at a sample of topsoil through a microscope some time. If you can identify half of what you see in there, you're doing well and most likely fooling yourself at least ten percent of the time.
posted by flabdablet at 7:18 AM on June 28, 2021
Go look at a sample of topsoil through a microscope some time. If you can identify half of what you see in there, you're doing well and most likely fooling yourself at least ten percent of the time.
posted by flabdablet at 7:18 AM on June 28, 2021
I think the main thing I still don't understand about this whole fuss is why so many people seem to expect everything that's observed to be identifiable, especially when the observations are performed with augmented human senses.Agreed in general, but this is the entire point of military intelligence. It's one thing to run across uncategorized microbiology, and another if there are UAP running circles around Aegis squadrons designed to detect and track anything and everything in the area.
I'm still skeptical about ET and I think it's probably classified Air Force tech, especially since they haven't commented on anything.
But then Bill Nelson (former astronaut, current NASA Administrator) is on CNN this morning talking about reading the classified report, saying he believes the pilots based on a classified briefing a few years ago in addition to the report. Later in the interview, he's asked if he thinks we are alone, and replies, "Personally, I don't think we are."
posted by nicoffeine at 7:33 AM on June 28, 2021
« Older We reaffirm our call for Warren Ellis to earn the... | I’m only part of the cover-up if I choose to be.... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by theodolite at 3:48 PM on June 25, 2021 [5 favorites]