The Science of UFOs: Fact vs. Skepticism

Originally posted by Fastwalker81
May I ask you this: If the government wanted to put up a smokescreen through UFOs then why are they ridiculing and denying the subject for almost 60 years?

Would you care, Fastwalker, to tell us why the Robertson Panel felt it was necessary to debunk and ridicule UFO reports?

Originally posted by spookjr
If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times.

Something doesn’t become more true because you say it frequently.

There is absolutely to solid evidence that those strange lights in the sky are aliens. None. Absolutely none.

I’m with you on that. But would you care to show us the “solid evidence that those strange lights in the sky” are military black projects?

You’re also (apparently) limiting your description of UFOs to “lights in the sky”. There is much more to UFOs than lights in the sky, and one would be foolish to believe either explanation based solely on lights in the sky, as they can be anything and prove absolutely nothing except that something is in the sky and emits light.

And the lack of evidence is due to the fact that the UFO phenomenon is nothing but another classic example of a government smokescreen to divert attention from black projects.

Big claim there. Where is your solid evidence?

And what do you do to the evidence and cases that don’t fit the black projects explanation? What do you do with abductions? What do you do with cases that predate the invention of the airplane? Let me guess, you dismiss them all as hoaxes and lies because it doesn’t fit the black projects explanation.

How is that any different of the doe eyed believers that say the only explanation has to be aliens from another planet?

The bottom line is that there isn’t one single explanation that fits and accounts for all the evidence and known cases. Anyone who thinks everything can be either explained as aliens or black projects hasn’t looked at all the evidence.

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Would you care, Fastwalker, to tell us why the Robertson Panel felt it was necessary to debunk and ridicule UFO reports?

Of course I would Savior.

The primary reasoning for this recommendation lay in the belief that the Soviets might try to "mask" an actual invasion of the USA by causing a wave of false "UFO" reports to swamp the Pentagon and other military agencies, thus temporarily blinding the US government to the impending Communist invasion.

May I ask why you ask?



[edit on 5/1/09 by Fastwalker81]

reply to post by Fastwalker81


Thats an interesting read this 1969 U.S. Rand report also covers the CIA's use of ridicule when dealing with credible UFO witnessess (it also has some interesting comments about the Fatima case )
stinet.dtic.mil...

Also this film shows more (very intruiging) government documentary evidence:
video.google.co.uk...


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]

Originally posted by Fastwalker81
Of course I would Savior.

May I ask why you ask?

None of your business, that's why!

Seriously...just in the interest of full disclosure, so there are no misconceptions.

Ok I will be prepared to be completely honest.

1. I like/I am interested in the UFO phenomenom.
2. I am also interested in the possibility or extraterrestial life.
3. I am interested in Evidence of possible Extraterrestial contact or visits.
4. I hate Hoaxes and don't want to fall for one.
5. I don't like it when people use my interests to make money by peddling false information and belief systems.
6. I don't like it when people make outlandish claims to gain attention.
7. I don;t like it when people blindly believe something without having looked at the scientific facts first.
8. I distrust Alternative news sources even more than mainstream news.
9. I want to find the simplest most appropiate answer for unexplained phenomenem.
10. I want my beliefs to be challenged to keep me thinking fresh and not become stuck in my ways.

All of these things make me a skeptic and I freely admit to being impatient with believers. But I think my reasoning is sound even if maybe a little cynical I am a Londoner!




[edit on 5-1-2009 by oinkment]

reply to post by theresult
[more)

Aliens are real, we are real, a lot of things are real.

Jesus is real, God is real (well....I hope so...).

But what is most real is that we have to live our lives on this planet while it lasts, and while we last.

reply to post by spellbound


yes they are real.. try looking up.. there called stars!

I mean how strage is life?? can any skeptic give me proof of anything about god other than just words in a book?

Is that proof? My point is ITs mathamaticly PROVEN that life is on other planets.. Finding it is the problem "due to distance"

Do you think nasa would go looking for life is there was none? LOL

Skeptics never as what nasa is doing "searching" for life on mars?

If they didnt think "there was any reason to" they just wouldnt bother looking..


the fact we are here is the reason we look for life outside our planet ITS LOGICAL..

Or is the world still flat?? jeez some people are so blind to being alive its unreal.. skeptics drive me insane becouse they sit on there fence says well show me proof

YOU ARE THE PROOF - YOU ARE ALIVE happy? there you go simple ... now

what is your proof of god? ME? You? does god send rovers to mars? NO we do..

Or does god make us send rovers to mars to look for life that is not there "as you state" ... so why bother?

skeptics lack logic..

reply to post by karl 12

Thanks for the links Karl. I will check them out shortly.

Another interesting fact about the Robertson panel is that Dr. Allen Hynek was a associate member. Dr. Hynek also was a participant in Project Sign, Project Grudge and Project Bluebook.

In 1953, Hynek was an associate member of the Robertson Panel, which concluded that there was nothing anomalous about UFOs, and that a public relations campaign should be undertaken to debunk the subject and reduce public interest.

Initially Dr. Hynek was extremely skeptical about the UFO phenomenon.

Hynek suspected that UFO reports were made by unreliable witnesses, or by persons who had misidentified man-made or natural objects. In 1948, Hynek said that the "the whole subject seems utterly ridiculous," and described it as a fad that would soon pass.

For the first few years of his UFO studies, Hynek could safely be described as a debunker. He thought that a great many UFOs could be explained as prosaic phenomena misidentified by an observer. But beyond such fairly obvious cases, Hynek often stretched logic to nearly the breaking point in an attempt to explain away as many UFO reports as possible. In his 1977 book, Hynek admitted that he enjoyed his role as a debunker for the Air Force. He also noted, accurately, that debunking was what the Air Force expected of him.

Then when time passed Dr. Hynek experienced a change of opinion.

Hynek's opinions about UFOs began a slow and gradual shift. After examining hundreds of UFO reports over the decades (including some made by credible witnesses, including astronomers, pilots, police officers, and military personnel), Hynek concluded that some reports represented genuine empirical observations.

Hynek would later come to lament that the Robertson Panel had helped make UFOs a disreputable field of study.

Think about what a good job the airforce and intelligence agencies did with making UFOs a disreputable field of study, even to this day.

In my opinion its a shame that this debunking campaign was undertaken denying this important subject the scientific attention it deserves.

The very people that were responsible like Dr. Hynek even admit they were wrong, but unfortunately they realised this to late..

Originally posted by theresult
can any skeptic give me proof of anything about god other than just words in a book?

Perhaps you can tell us which skeptic in this thread has talked about god, or has said God exists and aliens do not? The only person who has brought up the existence of god is you, not the skeptics. Whether or not God exists is irrelevant to this discussion.

Originally posted by theresult
Is that proof? My point is ITs mathamaticly PROVEN that life is on other planets.. Finding it is the problem "due to distance"

What equation proves "mathematically" that life exists elsewhere?

Originally posted by theresult
Do you think nasa would go looking for life is there was none?

Skeptics never as what nasa is doing "searching" for life on mars?

If they didnt think "there was any reason to" they just wouldnt bother looking...

No skeptic says "there is no reason" for NASA to look for life on Mars. The planet may have had something akin to Earth-like conditions at some point in its past, so it makes sense to start our search for extraterrestrial life there.

And yes, so far to the best of our knowledge, considering that no life has been found, NASA has been searching for life where there is none.

Originally posted by theresult
the fact we are here is the reason we look for life outside our planet ITS LOGICAL...

No, it's not. But it's not illogical either, for the simple fact that we do not know.

Originally posted by theresult
YOU ARE THE PROOF - YOU ARE ALIVE happy? there you go simple ... now

Us being alive, here and now, does not prove anything about life elsewhere in the galaxy, no more than it proves that cavemen drove foot-powered cars and ate brontosaurus steaks.

Originally posted by theresult
skeptics lack logic...

Much like this rambling, nonsensical post of your's.

reply to post by SaviorComplex


Savior don't waste your time on people who bash all skeptics in general because the skeptics don't agree with their beliefs.

I mean I'm no UFO/alien skeptic as you have probably noticed but that doesn't mean I can't be skeptical. Without the skeptics this board would be worse than Alice in Wonderland in my opinion.

I do have a big problem with the debunkers. It's ok to debunk something if the evidence points to fraud but some debunkers here are just UFO cinics who take great pleasure in ridiculing others.

So keep up the skepticism unless of course you are paid by the government to do so.

reply to post by Fastwalker81


Fastwalker thanks for the reply - the Hyneck reversal of opinion is very interesting,especialy when you think that he was the person who concocted the infamous 'swamp gas' debunk.

Its also interesting that Nick Pope,who was hired by the UK's Ministry of Defense to investigate the UFO subject was also initialy sceptical but,after impartial analysis (and using the scientific tool of arriving at judgement 'after' dispassionately examining evidence) he completely reversed his position and concluded that the UFO subject to be a very real one.

Theres some good links here about government UFO documents released by lawsuits (documents the US government fervently denied existed but were later found to be lying):
1970s:
www.cohenufo.org...
1980s:
www.cohenufo.org...

Its also interesting that the US government always trots out the line
'UFOs are of no Defense significance' yet the US Supreme court witheld over 10,000 more UFO documents from the public in the 1989 UAMS/CAUS court case citing National Defense reasons-it all sounds a bit contradictory and hypocritical to me.
Cheers

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]

Fastwalker81
I mean this would be somewhat like fighting WWI with those paper planes and at the same time secretly having Spitfire attack aircraft but not using them openly.

This would be a conspiracy in itself, secretly having advanced propulsion craft for over 30 years atleast. If this is indeed the case another weird thing is that they have been building outdated conventional aircraft for decades, instead of these new advanced propulsion craft that are superior in every way..

So to summarise I think secret aircraft are sometimes mistaken for UFOs, but thinking every UFO is just some super secret military craft is to easy in my opinion.

I see what you mean. In that case I’d probably conclude that those claims of cigar and triangle craft sighted by the public are just hoaxes because as you pointed out - if we had the tech back then we would have used it in war.

So my reasoning then is that every single claim of ufo’s as far back as the 90’s is probably a hoax and not some secret advanced technology developed in the 80’s or earlier. Which means: It’s only been in the last decade that we’ve actual had ufo like craft developed by the military and not in the last 30-40 years as I previously preposed. (so it’s only a matter of time – maybe another decade or so until the ufo like tech is realised to the public)

So there’s no need to presume aliens are behind it – just hoaxes. ‘so then what about reports from the military that detail ufos out manoeuvring fighters in the 70’s?” You know.... I have know idea the explanation, but why would any logical person point to aliens as the cause. I mean it’s like saying god created the universe because we don’t now exactly what happened before the big bang – aliens must be piloting the ufos because we don’t now exactly what else could be piloting them.....do you see the disconnect?

Out of all the theories one could come up with why aliens. There has been no evidence for them that scientists can test and I’m sure you can reply with something like – it’s covered up. But doesn’t the cover up BS imply the same reasoning I gave when I implied the governments had secret tech for almost 50 years?

[edit on 6-1-2009 by andre18]

Originally posted by Fastwalker81
Savior don't waste your time on people who bash all skeptics in general because the skeptics don't agree with their beliefs.

I am not doing it just to argue with the fanatics. I know they cannot be converted. I do it for the benefit of those fence-sitters who may be watching; it would be a disservice to skepticism to let it be attacked without response.

Originally posted by Fastwalker81
So keep up the skepticism unless of course you are paid by the government to do so.

Part of me would be very happy if the government was paying me. And not just for the extra pay. By the virtue of the fact they want to spread disinformation would tell me there is something to all of this.

And no, this is not an admission that I'm a paid government disinformant or anything for the sort.

[edit on 6-1-2009 by SaviorComplex]

Originally posted by karl 12
...yet the US Supreme court witheld over 10,000 more UFO documents from the public in the 1989 UAMS/CAUS court case citing National Defense reasons-it all sounds a bit contradictory and hypocritical to me.
Cheers

Not in the least. While UFOs as extraterrestrial-visitors may not be a national security issue, UFOs as top-secret craft and the like would be. It would be prudent to keep those documents secret, not hypocritical or contradictory.

reply to post by oinkment


Oinkment there some quite well presented,interesting information here:
video.google.ca...

video.google.ca...

Also the books 'UFOs and the National Security state' by Richard Dolan, 'Above top secret' by Timothy Good and 'Clear intent' by Barry Greenwood are well worth a read.

Originally posted by andre18
In that case I’d probably conclude that those claims of cigar and triangle craft sighted by the public are just hoaxes because as you pointed out - if we had the tech back then we would have used it in war.

There is no reason to assume they were hoaxes. If they are secret craft, we would use them in war without being public about it.

reply to post by SaviorComplex


Exactly, so SaviorComplex would you then say it's likely that we've had ufo like tech since the 50's without alien intervention, purely human knowhow? - Or otherwise?

Originally posted by andre18
I see what you mean. In that case I’d probably conclude that those claims of cigar and triangle craft sighted by the public are just hoaxes because as you pointed out - if we had the tech back then we would have used it in war.

Well if I had this amazing technology I would have used it in wars, but then again I'm not in the military so maybe they have good reasons not to do so. It just doesn't seem logical to me that these technologies have been hidden for decades, as this is not normal practice if I understand correctly.

So my reasoning then is that every single claim of ufo’s as far back as the 90’s is probably a hoax and not some secret advanced technology developed in the 80’s or earlier. Which means: It’s only been in the last decade that we’ve actual had ufo like craft developed by the military and not in the last 30-40 years as I previously preposed. (so it’s only a matter of time – maybe another decade or so until the ufo like tech is realised to the public)

For example the Belgium UFO case from 1989 is not a hoax. It's one of the best cases to date in my opinion. If you are not familiar with it let me know and I will post the links to the official airforce reports, radar images and witness testemonies.

So there’s no need to presume aliens are behind it – just hoaxes. ‘so then what about reports from the military that detail ufos out manoeuvring fighters in the 70’s?” You know.... I have know idea the explanation, but why would any logical person point to aliens as the cause.

In my opinion pointing to aliens in some cases could be plausible. You see, the US government for example was initially as baffled as anyone when confronted with the UFO phenomenon back in the 40's and even before. They conducted multiple studies (some linked in this thread) and officially concluded they were not a direct threat to national security. This hints at the fact that these UFOs were around long before we had technology that even came close and that these UFOs were not a US military creation. This is further backed up by claims from high ranking military personel during that time who clearly state these craft were not created by the US. That of course would seem plausible as we were only flying propellor aircraft at the time.

When incidents like Belgium and Iran happened decades later the extreme performance of these craft was tracked via radar and baffled all who looked on. In the Belgium UFO case for example the craft was tracked doing manoeuvres that would instantly kill any human pilot due to massive G-Force overload. Not to mention it would rip any conventional aircraft to shreds.

The performance of the craft measured by radar:

The experienced fighter pilots were stunned by the acceleration of the UFO, which included 280 km/h to 1800 km/h in less then a second while descending from an altitude of 3 km to 1.7 km, and then coming to a dead stop. These unbelievable manoeuvres were confirmed as radar showed the craft drop from 10.000 to 500 feet in no less than 5 seconds.

The thing is we don't have anything here on earth that can match that performance that I know of today, let alone 20 years ago..

Alien life in general seems more plausible then no life at all in this massive universe. Of course this is by no means proof just probability but interesting non the less.

So I think that the alien explanation is not illogical in certain cases. And this is just going by performance of the observed craft and timeline of our technological advances. The testemonies of a select number credible wistleblowers also point in this direction (of course not counting the numerous charlatans).

I mean it’s like saying god created the universe because we don’t now exactly what happened before the big bang – aliens must be piloting the ufos because we don’t now exactly what else could be piloting them.....do you see the disconnect?

Yes I can see your point but then who or what is piloting these craft? UFO sightings have been around long before we had aircraft ourselves. Unfortunately these reports can not be verified conclusively. Also the difference between the UFO/ET phenomenon and your example of god is that nobody ever tracked god on radar that I know of.

Strange craft have been detected long before we had jet fighters ourselves..

But doesn’t the cover up BS imply the same reasoning I gave when I implied the governments had secret tech for almost 50 years?

Partly in my opinion. Secret tech has been around for a long time so we can sort of check the historical record and conclude that technological advancements have always been kept secret for a few years then deployed for all to see. This seems logical as showing your enemies your superior tech can have a certain shock effect on them.

Aliens on the other hand have not been proven to exist. If we have truly been visited I could understand why it has been kept under wraps very tightly, as this would have enormous inplications for the human race. There are serious risks of anarchy and the religious implication could lead to wide spread panic.

So covering up alien visitation could seem logical, covering up advanced secret tech for more than a few years does not.

But of course I could be wrong. I'm just interested in the truth and if that means aliens are not real then that's fine with me.

Thanks for the reply, the points you made are interesting to think about.




[edit on 6/1/09 by Fastwalker81]

Originally posted by andre18
Exactly, so SaviorComplex would you then say it's likely that we've had ufo like tech since the 50's without alien intervention, purely human knowhow? - Or otherwise?

It doesn't have to necessarily be "UFO-like" technology. A variety of what we would consider conventional aircraft could appear otherworldly under certain conditions or even in normal observation. Look at aircraft like the Tacit Blue, the Stealth Bomber, the proposed DARPA Falcon, or the hypothetical stealth blimp. When seen edge-wise the U-2 spy plane can appear cigar-shaped.