Has anyone else noticed the quality of U.F.O. shows has gone up?

originally posted by: data5091
a reply to: Nickless

The ufo's most of the pilots are talking about on the programs I have watched are talking about a cubish shaped object, maybe about 40 meters in size, probably metallic, and capable of moving in an instant or a blink of an eye, some have estimated speeds of over 100,000 mph. I think that would eliminate birds, planes and balloons.

What programs would those be? Haven't heard that, and I certainly wouldn't believe such claims.

a reply to: Nickless

"Contact", " Unidentified" and " Alien Highway". You should watch and learn.

originally posted by: data5091
a reply to: Nickless

The ufo's most of the pilots are talking about on the programs I have watched are talking about a cubish shaped object, maybe about 40 meters in size, probably metallic, and capable of moving in an instant or a blink of an eye, some have estimated speeds of over 100,000 mph. I think that would eliminate birds, planes and balloons.

Exactly!

Again, the pseudoskeptic wants you to throw out all common sense and accept their twisted logic!

a reply to: Nickless

You said:

Apparently you fail to understand that there has been multiple incidents with different features and little reason to suspect all those were same kind of objects. Some are likely planes, some balloons, some birds, and some drones. Most cases likely feature pilot misinterpretations

This just encapsulates the twisted, blind logic of the pseudoskeptic.

So all of these Pilots, Police, Military Personnel and others who are describing what they saw and experienced should be weighed equally and all be seen as idiots who can't identify birds or balloons.

We're supposed to blindly ignore these accounts and throw out all common sense and accept the word of a bias and blind pseudoskepic that nowhere near the event when it happened.

When multiple witnesses on a Military base with Nukes see a U.F.O. hovering over the base and then the Nukes are disabled and they describe what they saw and experienced, should we listen to their story and believe or not believe them based on the credibility of the witness or should we believe the bias pseudoskeptic who makes illogical and asinine comments?

For me, that's an easy call

Alien Highway clunkers.

Episode 1 Skinwalker
The team set up two motion detection cameras to monitor a random stretch of road and a field at night. The following day they retrieve the cameras to review the footage. They were “lucky enough” to capture a passing truck that blares its horn right as it appears on camera which provides a contrived comedy jump scare – note Dan has told everyone (including the audience) to listen seconds before its horn sounds. They were even luckier to capture a skinwalker wolf which magically appears dead centre of their randomly placed camera. They managed to do in one night what Bigelow and NIDS couldn't do over several years. Rewind and we notice that the two fixed cameras somehow provide three different views of the road. One shows the date 16 January 2019, the other 12 February 2019. They could argue that the dates weren't set correctly but that wouldn't account for the difference in temperature the sensors recorded.






Episode 3 Escape from Area 51
When they “investigate” the abandoned military hangar within 3 minutes of their arrival (as Dan states) two mystery vehicles drive up, come to a standstill and observe them before racing away. Chuck acts unnerved and snaps photos and they all claim not to have seen them before and conclude they're most likely government agents. Says Chuck, “If these are government vehicles it tells me we're getting close to something big.” Rewind to their arrival at the hangar and we can clearly see the same “4-door black suburban” parked up when Dan is shown exiting the vehicle. It's there, right next to them ready for the scripted fake sinister approach section.







Episode 5 Missouri Mayhem.
The team have been provided with a photo of a circle of dried grass by someone's house. They tell us a UFO landed there. They set off to investigate. The circle is no longer visible so they set about trying to determine its exact spot by using a transparency of the photo. They push red flags in the ground until they have a ring of markers. Dan reckons they've marked it exactly when suddenly the camera fails. The cameraman claims the batteries have been drained. Chuck goes for his EMF meter and steps in and out of his circle of flags concluding that there is a mysterious energy present that drains batteries. Oddly there were no effects to the camera while it roamed around filming the measuring of the site and planting of the flags, nor did the camera that filmed the failing camera have any problems. Worse still, Chuck's battery operated EMF meter functioned fine both inside and outside the battery-draining circle. To add icing on the cake a mysterious white van appears. Dan cautiously approaches before it drives away. Government agents again or the crews van – you decide!

The other episodes contain more similar examples of comedy gold.

It looks like Contact and Mysteries Decoded (Roswell episode) are following a similar pattern.

a reply to: torsion

Do some of these shows over hype things for entertainment? Yes. It happens with pseudoskeptics as well. Here's pseudoskeptic Michael Shermer in a gotcha TV show he was trying to do where the Vedic Astrologer debunked the debunker.



The whole name, Skeptical Inquirer is for entertainment purposes and to play off of the name National Enquirer.

At the end of the day, Contact and other shows are nothing like Alien Highway, which can be a little over the top.

For instance, this happened on Contact:

First, they talked to a guy working on the radar that day of the tic tac U.F.O. where the video was recently released by the Government.

He said the craft was moving too fast and a human would be crushed if they were in the craft.

They then used the link analysis software (I need that software) to find U.F.O. sightings associated with loud noises. This is because if a craft was moving that fast, it would make a noise.

They found a sighting associated with people at a stadium reporting hearing a loud noise. They also linked this to people making social media posts about the noise.

You had people outside the stadium who heard the noise. You then had people who heard the noise and had a U.F.O. sighting.

They then found a link to the biggest earthquake to occur in the area at the time of the noise and the sighting.

They also had a noise expert who has been analyzing noises for 35 years, match the noise from 2 different sources as the same noise. He then said he never heard a noise like this in his 35 years that stayed in a constant range and didn't oscillate.

Contact is all about using big data and the latest link analysis software to look into these things. A very welcomed approach because the area of Ufology has a ton of data that should be linked and allow intelligent algorithms to find correlations in the data which may lead to new insights.

I know you want to lazily lump all shows together but that doesn't make sense.

a reply to: neoholographic

very very well said!! I am just now going to check out the latest episode of "Contact", will post comments later.

originally posted by: data5091
a reply to: neoholographic

very very well said!! I am just now going to check out the latest episode of "Contact", will post comments later.

Thanks and Contact was great last night.

Everyone that's interested in this topic should watch that show. Their approach is superb.

What they're doing should be a new template across Ufology. Where people use link analysis software to make connections in the data. Ufology has built up a ton of data over the years with eyewitness accounts, abduction cases, ancient aliens, mass sightings, U.F.O. and Nukes and more. You can then connect that data to different things like U.F.O.'s seen around the time of an earthquake or loud noises associated with a sighting.

You can also connect this to different scientific disciplines to find interesting and new correlations in the data.

EXCELLENT SHOW!

originally posted by: data5091
a reply to: Nickless

"Contact", " Unidentified" and " Alien Highway". You should watch and learn.

So who talked about such UFOs in Unidentified, and in which episode? Do you mean those cube inside a sphere type of UFOs, which were basically described to act like balloons? As mentioned here:

www.thedrive.com...

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: Nickless

You said:

Apparently you fail to understand that there has been multiple incidents with different features and little reason to suspect all those were same kind of objects. Some are likely planes, some balloons, some birds, and some drones. Most cases likely feature pilot misinterpretations

This just encapsulates the twisted, blind logic of the pseudoskeptic.

So all of these Pilots, Police, Military Personnel and others who are describing what they saw and experienced should be weighed equally and all be seen as idiots who can't identify birds or balloons.

We're supposed to blindly ignore these accounts and throw out all common sense and accept the word of a bias and blind pseudoskepic that nowhere near the event when it happened.

When multiple witnesses on a Military base with Nukes see a U.F.O. hovering over the base and then the Nukes are disabled and they describe what they saw and experienced, should we listen to their story and believe or not believe them based on the credibility of the witness or should we believe the bias pseudoskeptic who makes illogical and asinine comments?

Thanks for confirming what I just said by mixing in further unrelated events.

With your "logic", all those would be just drones because one random pilot made such split second guess of one target he couldn't identify.

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: torsion

Do some of these shows over hype things for entertainment? Yes. It happens with pseudoskeptics as well. Here's pseudoskeptic Michael Shermer in a gotcha TV show he was trying to do where the Vedic Astrologer debunked the debunker.

Apparently you are not familiar with this topic then, the astrologer actually did not do very well, not as well as the Forer results which have been duplicated numerous times. Here are the Forer results that you need to compare this type of thing against as a control or baseline:

Forer effect

The Forer effect refers to the tendency of people to rate sets of statements as highly accurate for them personally even though the statements could apply to many people.

Psychologist Bertram R. Forer (1914-2000) found that people tend to accept vague and general personality descriptions as uniquely applicable to themselves without realizing that the same description could be applied to just about anyone. Consider the following as if it were given to you as an evaluation of your personality.

"You have a need for other people to like and admire you, and yet you tend to be critical of yourself. While you have some personality weaknesses you are generally able to compensate for them. You have considerable unused capacity that you have not turned to your advantage. Disciplined and self-controlled on the outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure on the inside. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. You also pride yourself as an independent thinker; and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof. But you have found it unwise to be too frank in revealing yourself to others. At times you are extroverted, affable, and sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary, and reserved. Some of your aspirations tend to be rather unrealistic. "

Forer gave a personality test to his students, ignored their answers, and gave each student the above evaluation. He asked them to evaluate the evaluation from 0 to 5, with "5" meaning the recipient felt the evaluation was an "excellent" assessment and "4" meaning the assessment was "good." The class average evaluation was 4.26. That was in 1948. The test has been repeated hundreds of time with psychology students and the average is still around 4.2 out of 5, or 84% accurate.

In short, Forer convinced people he could successfully read their character. His accuracy amazed his subjects, though his personality analysis was taken from a newsstand astrology column and was presented to people without regard to their sun sign. The Forer effect seems to explain, in part at least, why so many people think that pseudosciences "work". Astrology, astrotherapy, biorhythms, cartomancy, chiromancy, the enneagram, fortune telling, graphology, rumpology, etc., seem to work because they seem to provide accurate personality analyses. Scientific studies of these pseudosciences demonstrate that they are not valid personality assessment tools, yet each has many satisfied customers who are convinced they are accurate.

So the Forer method gives about 84% accuracy, and since the astrologer averages below that, he's actually not very good, he would get a higher percentage using the Forer method which ignores the pseudoscience BS and tests people's reactions using a scientifically controlled method.

originally posted by: Nickless

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
So probably the most compelling UFO case left on my list is the January 2000 UFO sighting in Illinois

You mean this advertisement blimp?


Those have caused a number of other UFO reports as well.

Yes, as I said I had some ideas of what the UFO might have been, and that's one idea, but I can't really prove that's what it was.

a reply to: Nickless

if you watched the shows, then you would know, but for some reason you don't want to, may I ask why?

Meh we should all be concerned that disclosure has not occurred yet. Most TV 📺 UFO 🛸
SHOWS are designed for money 💰 in a outdated capitalistic system. We now have footage from many governments and documents highlighting things in our skies that defies the technology of man. Yet the charade continues it is easier, to be lazy, it is easier to satisfy instinctive purpose, it is easier to work in a system and remain distracted however you choose to do so, emotionally logically and or physically. That is how I have concluded that man, may never be as evolved as he once has since the cataclysm. I digress, maybe in our lifetime big maybe disclosure may occur, not by our choice obviously mankind as a whole cannot remain focused long enough due to his instinctive nature and of course his emotional vices.

But ya ancient alien is great I used to fall asleep watching it.

The new shows are simply slicker. Which is to be expected.

I posted a response in a sister thread about the new series 'Contact', which I may as well repeat here:


As entertaining as some of these new shows can be, the 'Entertainment' factor does seem to suffocate whatever nuggets of potentially fascinating material that may be lurking within on occasion.

It's fascinating how much more genuinely informative and 'adult' UFO documentaries were in the 20th century compared to the 21st. The 'dumbing-down' arguably increased with each passing decade.

I recommend visiting our own Isaac Koi's YouTube Channel for a collection of the best examples throughout the years, dating back to the 1950s and onwards.

PS: What is remarkable is how little the mystery has moved on in 70 years; in other words, the older documentaries remain as relevant today as at the time of their production. And could still hold important clues to help us in the current climate.