Is it just me, or are sightings becoming more frequent?

reply to post by txMEGAlithic


HALLELUJAH! THANKS THANKS.

Much appreciate the encouragement--particularly for ATSers to report what they see--preferably in a form and with sufficient detail that some meager stats could be ran on the info.

Please let me know if you find any interesting stats. I looked months ago to no avail.

reply to post by BO XIAN

I searched late last night and for a long time tonight with no luck finding anything. I did find several stats but nothing official. Just information someone pulled off of the data base filter for MUFON and other similar sights. Disappointing really but its understandable considering the field has no solid funding. Volunteers can only do so much. They have other more pressing obligations in life besides siting around building spreadsheets all day. I would love to see that kind of information displayed on a spreadsheet. The spread sheet could have a column headed " Likely hoax". You could just pop a filter on it and get rid of all the CG, RC helis, and balloons. In another column you could have links to videos, pics, and other evidence. It would be nice. Maybe some day.
It would be a real job staying on top of all the data entry for this spreadsheet but it would be so useful.
I'd love a job doing that all day.
TXML

reply to post by txMEGAlithic


Yeah.

That was my experience several yeas ago . . . and my goal with a spreadsheet.

Sigh.

And, I couldn't get any of the larger sites to take any interest. There was always the understandable complaint that the raw data was toooo variable, inconsistent etc. etc. yadda yadda yadda.

There are ways around that but folks were just not interested.

Given the stakes involved, I think that's . . . more than a lot sad.

I think events will overtake before anyone gets to the task. Then it will be moot.

When the craft are daily in all the large cities in broad daylight and the critters are regularly on the nightly news with the global oligarchy gestapo . . . it will be moot.


Sigh.

Thanks for your efforts and for letting me know. Nice to know it wasn't just me and my perceptions and experiences.
.
.

Am going to start a new thread on the stats I've found.

There's a lot more available than I expected.

Thanks.

reply to post by d00d557

This is true. I guess I just meant if any of yous guys have seen any lately. I'm talking full fledged unidentified. Meaning you've gone through just about every alternative in your head and through process of elimination come to the conclusion this is indeed something not of the ordinary.

The number of "full fledged unidentified" varies with the individual. The better informed and more experienced the viewer, the fewer "unidentifieds," because the list of possible identifications is longer. For example, your first, sunset, sighting might well have been an Iridium flare, or possibly even the ISS. It is possible to confirm these possibilities here:

spaceweather.com...

It also helps to observe objectively, rather than simply guess. On what do you base your estimate that the crescent shaped objects you spotted were traveling at 250 miles per hour? A more useful set of information would be: angular size of the objects, elevation above the horizon, angular distance covered per unit of time. These elements would allow a range of possible sizes, distances, altitudes and speeds to be calculated. If you can make such detailed observations, it adds greater weight to them, which makes an "unidentifiable" classification that much more meaningful.