The UFOs are gone!

reply to post by SaturnFX

A level 5 civ would not be showing up in mechanical ships with bio beings sitting in it like some space WW2 pilots.. They would be sending micro-machines..nanoprobes, etc that simply relay information about our planet back to wherever. Trucking through the atmosphere in some big craft just to see how the humans are coming along seems absurd unless space is far more steampunk than logic would dictate.

I agree with this distinction too. Back when the ETH came about it was quite a reasonable idea given the techno reference points they had to go off. How else could those 'aliens' come from Mars, or further, other than in machines a few years in advance of our own?

Now we're deep into the Digital Age of the Anthropocene Era, such concepts have more elegant alternatives than chugging around the planets or tacking between Solar Systems; elegant and highly-speculative alternatives! AI could be at the level of sentient replica consciousnesses in our future. What mass of material might it take to contain one or more consciousness? We've already got 1TB sd-cards when only a couple of years ago we were all 'goshing' about 3.5" 1TB hard-drives.

Yeah it's speculative and yet the idea of massive tanker-like motherships with biological (mortal) beings cruising the gaps between worlds seems a bit rusty.

reply to post by Kandinsky


What you're mentioning reminds me of an episode of the X-Files in which tiny robotic roaches were being used as a type of surveillance drone by unknown alien entities. It sounds outlandish, but the concept made an odd amount of sense. The prospect of biological entities exploring the galaxy in person just seems unlikely, and with the rate of technological progression you mentioned, the idea of a digital or mechanical avatar, even as a roach, is actually sounding feasible.

reply to post by Brighter

For instance, in the 1986 Japan Airline case, the UFO actually continued to pace the 747 as the plane made a complete 360 degree turn.

Thanks for the recap of this case. I am pretty familiar with it. I really enjoy that FAA guy too, John Callahan, and his attitude. I don't think you mentioned that they matched up the radar hits with the voice recordings and got some interesing results. At least thats the story. Is any of that available or was that confiscated? I am familiar with these cases but my memory sucks.

It does make a good case for intelligently controlled objects buzzing around. I am actually jealous of the captain and know he is convinced what he saw was the real deal. I think he refered to it as a "spaceship" in his report. Now I am not a "debunker" by any stretch and I don't try to explain away cases such as these as they are pretty well documented and very complex. I am not a radar technician or a pilot either so I have to take the word of all involved. That being said, there doesn't seem to be any holes in this account or any reason to disbelieve anyone. Obviously something was there but I do think the captain had a predisposition to believe in spaceships from other planets based on his report. My memory sucks, so If I am wrong, please correct me.

Not debunking or dismissing or anything like that so please don't yell at me tonight. Maybe another time we can call each other names and have at it...I just like to think about these things and its just food for thought.

Humans really like to project intelligence onto things and find patterns in randomness. Its just what we do. Now I remeber taking a college course on intellengence and one of the hardest excercises to do was to actually define what makes something intelligent. So there could be a whole debate just on that alone that would never really get resolved. But for all intents and purposes, we have a percieved solid object(s) zipping around a 747. (that alone is a dumb thing to do)

The two smaller UFOs that the captain described each had a rectangular matrix of glowing nozzles. When they were close enough to the cockpit, he could feel the heat from them on his face. Other physical characteristics that you commonly see reported involve other symmetrical shapes, windows or portholes, blinking lights, search lights that shine onto the ground or into a flying aircraft's cockpit, and more. All of these suggest them having been intelligently designed

Now I do find it really interesting that two of my favorite subjects have some commonality. Now I have also seen lots of geometric shapes blinking and glowing and whirling about. It was some time ago in my younger years. now those chemicals are almost identical to natural endogenous brain chemicals, one being adreniline which I am sure was present when he saw this thing. I know I would be scared or really excited if I saw something I thought was from outer space! It is actually a well documented phenomenon that we see geometric shapes and patterns when in altered states.

It is a misconception that a hallucination is just flat out seeing something that isnt there in empty space like conjuring up an image of a pink elephant out of nowhere for no apparant reason. They are more like the subtle patterns described that are projected onto something and then a paredolia from those patterns.

Anyway, I offer no explaination but also think its premature to say "intellegently controlled objects". I also think that it is possible that something like this could happen that could be accounted for that doesn't involve "intellegently controlled objects". The elements are there for such an explaination, there is just no way to prove it. The elements are also there to make the case that you lay out. That is just where I am at on this.


www.maps.org...
tripzine.com...

reply to post by Malfeitor


But if you are a multidimensional being you would have more fun than sending robots out. Go down there and see what them apes are doing for themselves

Originally posted by CrypticSouthpaw
reply to post by anomalie

 

Yeah i saw some obvious fakes in there, I liked the music tho and thought it looked cool. I don't think half of these are real lol.

But this video is quite interesting i saw it quite a while ago.

fake or not. those lights are trippy

And just an FYI non of the ufos in any of these videos looks like the thing i saw. So they are probably fake. But i like the crazy blue jelly fish pattern in this one video. Looks intense.

The blue "jelly fish pattern" is from a rocket launch. The hot exhaust gases high up in the atmosphere give the appearance of ghostly translucent fabric or membranes.

Originally posted by beezzer
Maybe the aliens (?) are just disguising themselves better because they are realizing that we are sentient and becoming aware.

*Hey! I believe!

if you accept the premise of UFOs existing, that's a good thought. they started in the 1940s as metallic discs with running lights, then in the 70s went to glowing orbs, and now have perfected cloaking, either because their tech improved, or they needed to send in their better ships as our tech developed (as we might send a cheap helo to monitor traffic, but an SR-71 for strategic recon).

worth noting; in the 1940s and following decades we all thought of flying craft as metallic with running lights (FAA required), so perhaps unconsciously we figured the aliens would have lit metallic craft, jus more advanced (more aerodynamic). this supports the they-never-were-real school of though.

other theory; they finished their survey and decided not to pursue contact with us (at this time). all they really need is a satellite/asteroid to monitor our xmissions and they'll get all the intel they need.

from what I've read of the old UFO books there was a feeling of imminent contact, to the point of invasion; the whole thing seems to have dwindled away. maybe they were just weather balloons and experimental craft all along.

Originally posted by Chrysalis
This silly war skeptics are waging against the rest needs to stop.
I know it won't stop like that but still.

UFOs have been, and still are a strong force driving people to places like this one.
Even if skeptics have problems admitting it, the reality of this site is :

In my world, 55.8+25.8=81.6% of ATS visitors believing they are out there.

81.6%

Taken from ATS Real Poll

And that is from about 20000 people responding.

Of course, several skeptics have put up their own polls to try reflect the results they wish to see here, and conveniently ignore this big effort put forward by ATS Staff.

Instead of facing the reality of this poll, all we get is noise, and more noise.

Don't let the vocal minority fool you, be conforted in your feelings.

To sum up this post: The unpopular opinion is wrong because it is unpopular. The minority voice should keep quiet.

Btw, I answered neutral to that question because I don't think there is strong reason to believe either way.

Originally posted by zonetripper2065
Same as they've ever been, people just aren't as dumb as they used to be.
For one why would a spacecraft need lights, the only reason modern planes have lights is so they don't slam into each other.

edit on 3-2-2013 by zonetripper2065 because: (no reason given)

So alien craft shouldn't have lights on them?

reply to post by CrypticSouthpaw


Yeah it makes sense. How does a third dimensional physical being prove that a fourth dimensional non-physical being exists?

The UFO phenomena is real. Countless people who are clearly not delusional or of questionable psychological background saw something that could not be explained. There have been many trace cases, radar cases, and multiple eye witness events, including high ranking military officials. The "top secret government air craft" explanation is sorely lacking, unless of course, every country in the world has the capability and the funding to build stealth fighters. Even if it all just belongs to the U.S, then that would spark a serious international crisis for violation of sovereign air space without permission. I doubt the U.S would risk such thing with it's closest allies.

The fallacy comes from equating UFOs with aliens, which even some skeptics in this thread are falling victim to. Aliens most certainly cannot get here, especially in those "ships" reported to be a few feet in diameter. The elementary laws of mechanics and relativity simply forbid practical interstellar travel to be consistent with unexplained UFO sightings and why the ETH is faulty. It is however possible that a fraction of UFO reports could be the Von-neumann probes of some long-gone civilization that sent these self-replicating bots to colonize the galaxy millions of years ago. But such speculation is not scientific and should be taken with a grain of salt.

UFOs could certainly be some interesting new atmospheric phenomena never studied before or something so far beyond our comprehension that there is no hope we will ever have the capacity to understand it. One thing is for sure that UFOs are most probably not aliens. Too bad we'll never know for sure unless the phenomena can be repeated in lab experiments or by professional observation. Until then, it is really not worth further scientific study.

Originally posted by Diablos
The UFO phenomena is real. Countless people who are clearly not delusional or of questionable psychological background saw something that could not be explained.

Quibbler here. Just because someone says something is unexplained doesn't mean that no one can explain it.

The fallacy comes from equating UFOs with aliens, which even some skeptics in this thread are falling victim to.

The main reason this occurs is because a substantial amount of the interest in ufos comes from their possible connection to extraterrestrial activity.

Aliens most certainly cannot get here, especially in those "ships" reported to be a few feet in diameter. The elementary laws of mechanics and relativity simply forbid practical interstellar travel to be consistent with unexplained UFO sightings

More quibbles, sorry. What is impractical to us isn't necessarily to others. And we already have a precedence for intelligent interstellar travel. The pioneer and voyager spacecraft are well on their way out of the solar system, are they not? And they are only a few feet in length.

. It is however possible that a fraction of UFO reports could be the Von-neumann probes of some long-gone civilization that sent these self-replicating bots to colonize the galaxy millions of years ago.

I was thinking about this idea about self-replicating Von-neumann probes. Something occurred to me and I want to see what others have to say about it. Von-neumann probes might be a bad strategy because whomever sends them out might risk losing control over them. Wouldn't Von-neumann probes be subject to evolution in a similar way to biological organisms? They might mutate out of control and become a danger to whomever created them in the first place.

This also occurred to me. Could life on Earth possibly have evolved from a mutating technological space probe? Maybe we're descended from robots, lol! A far-out thought, I know.

Originally posted by Tearman
Quibbler here. Just because someone says something is unexplained doesn't mean that no one can explain it.

Actually, that is exactly what it functionally means. If something cannot be explained because of a further lack of data to shift a plausible hypothesis one way or no one can come up with an accurate model explaining the phenomena, then simply no one can explain it at this time. Whether it can be explained in the future or never is anyone's guess.

Originally posted by TearmanMore quibbles, sorry. What is impractical to us isn't necessarily to others. And we already have a precedence for intelligent interstellar travel. The pioneer and voyager spacecraft are well on their way out of the solar system, are they not? And they are only a few feet in length.

Except you missed one caveat: Voyageur spacecraft would take 70,000 years just to reach the closest star system to us, and it was only able to reach its top speed by using gravitational assists from Jupiter and Saturn. There is no indication that ET is within a 20 light-year radius from Earth. So, assuming speeds comparable to voyageur craft, ET would be looking at one-way transit times of at least 310,000 years and round trips greater than half a million years (not taking into account accelerations and decelerations) just to zip around the sky and troll some humans.

Originally posted by Diablos

Originally posted by Tearman
Quibbler here. Just because someone says something is unexplained doesn't mean that no one can explain it.

Actually, that is exactly what it functionally means. If something cannot be explained because of a further lack of data to shift a plausible hypothesis one way or no one can come up with an accurate model explaining the phenomena, then simply no one can explain it at this time. Whether it can be explained in the future or never is anyone's guess.

Okay, okay. Technically that is what is meant by the word. But just because someone says so, doesn't make it true. I've seen a lot of things called unexplainable by some, but those people obviously didn't look very far for explanations.

Originally posted by TearmanMore quibbles, sorry. What is impractical to us isn't necessarily to others. And we already have a precedence for intelligent interstellar travel. The pioneer and voyager spacecraft are well on their way out of the solar system, are they not? And they are only a few feet in length.

Except you missed one caveat: Voyageur spacecraft would take 70,000 years just to reach the closest star system to us, and it was only able to reach its top speed by using gravitational assists from Jupiter and Saturn. There is no indication that ET is within a 20 light-year radius from Earth. So, assuming speeds comparable to voyageur craft, ET would be looking at one-way transit times of at least 310,000 years and round trips greater than half a million years (not taking into account accelerations and decelerations) just to zip around the sky and troll some humans.

edit on 6-2-2013 by Diablos because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-2-2013 by Diablos because: (no reason given)

I'll agree that from our perspective that apparent purpose doesn't seem to be worth the great expense of effort or time. But our perspective is only one of many possible perspectives, and appearances can be deceiving. Who knows what resources they might have at their disposal or how they are willing to use them or what lengths of time they are willing and able to wait.

Originally posted by CrypticSouthpaw
reply to post by anomalie

 

Yeah i saw some obvious fakes in there, I liked the music tho and thought it looked cool. I don't think half of these are real lol.

But this video is quite interesting i saw it quite a while ago.

fake or not. those lights are trippy

And just an FYI non of the ufos in any of these videos looks like the thing i saw. So they are probably fake. But i like the crazy blue jelly fish pattern in this one video. Looks intense.

Rocket launch failures, circles in sky (rare natural phenomenon), meteorites, flares, Jerusalem UFO hoax, balloons tied together and tons of balloons released.

Conclusion : 90% of what we are saw in that video is easily explainable or deliberate hoax.

Originally posted by flexy123
Notice how sightings and UFO reports these days get worse and worse, most of the time bordering the utmost absurdity of hoaxes, fakes, misinterpretations etc. (Just browsing ATS for the latest videos etc..makes one shake heads in disbelief). Birds, lens-flares etc..etc...

Then we have the startling discoveries of "aliens" and similar often in countries like "some town in Russia" or Mexico...and the biggest and most absurd hoaxers like Greer, Maussean etc.

Is this all "UFOLogy" is today? Birds on youtube videos and claims by proven fakers and hoaxers like Maussean about "invisible UFO landings" and similar?

Cheezus....compare this with the 50s or 60s, at least there were HALFWAY credible cases compared to all this nonsense today...just saying...

I have to agree.
For some reason, most UFO cases reported today are very, very boring "lights in the sky" and what might even be worse, "things that people in find photos" and "bugs and blurs caught on infra-red cameras at night". What a massive yawn inducing ... well, you get the idea.

Yes, it is true that the number of reports is still increasing. Isn't in any way related to the fact that now every dummy can make a report from his iPhone in ten seconds perhaps?

Since I do believe that some (maybe just a few) UFOs are probably actual alien spacecraft, then I have to conclude that for some reason, they are keeping a pretty low profile in recent years.

Originally posted by Diablos

The fallacy comes from equating UFOs with aliens, which even some skeptics in this thread are falling victim to. Aliens most certainly cannot get here, especially in those "ships" reported to be a few feet in diameter. The elementary laws of mechanics and relativity simply forbid practical interstellar travel to be consistent with unexplained UFO sightings and why the ETH is faulty. It is however possible that a fraction of UFO reports could be the Von-neumann probes of some long-gone civilization that sent these self-replicating bots to colonize the galaxy millions of years ago. But such speculation is not scientific and should be taken with a grain of salt.

I am torn myself in regards to the ETH. There is "evidence" which speaks for it, but than also against it. Based on our CURRENT understanding, it is however more "logical" to assume "they" are from "outer space" (if we assume the phenomenon is real) - as opposed to coming up with a theory which has less base to stand on (other dimension etc.) since we know not much about this. The notion however that life exists on other planets is NOT that difficult to comprehend, so from a certain POV the explanation *does* make sense.

HOWEVER - I agree that some sighting are just so ridiculous that they contradict an ETH theory. A number of reports is REALLY talking about rather small "craft" not bigger than car with "windows" and more often than not even reported how "Aliens" are actually visible through the windows. I cannot for the life of it imagine interplanetary (or interstellar even) travel in such a childish laid out "space ship" in the classical sense of a flying saucer with glass dome and an alien "sitting in it". It's just an absurd idea.

ON THE OTHER HAND...if we assume "those beings" mastered the art of bending space-time...one explanation could be that even long distance travel is so easy and casual they can indeed use the most ridiculous craft for that purpose - because all what we associate with space travel would not apply for "them". Short: Their way to travel through space to other planets has become so "casual" in the same way as I can take a car to get to to the store around the corner - something which also was SciFi just 150 years back.

reply to post by sean


If that's what you draw from my statements then sure why not? Whatever makes you happy sweetheart

reply to post by flexy123


Haha I literally just saw one a few moments ago on my deck. A small bright white orb of light that was doing fast (I mean FAST) S-shapes through the upper atmosphere til it disappeared into the clouds. It might not be aliens, but it sure as hell wasn't anything human that I know of. Could be black project I suppose... but frankly I'd rather aliens. Aliens haven't attacked us yet. Black projects are designed to kill! Not cool man!

Keep your eyes on the skies. They're up there brother, I swear it. I'm no liar! (I'm not claiming they're aliens... but I've been watching UFOs for weeks at my house. I've even filmed some but the footage always turns out sh#t!)

I've heard that the UFOs stopped coming in 1990 and also that they stopped coming in 2003. Who knows what's true honestly.

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
Thanks for the recap of this case. I am pretty familiar with it. I really enjoy that FAA guy too, John Callahan, and his attitude. I don't think you mentioned that they matched up the radar hits with the voice recordings and got some interesing results. At least thats the story. Is any of that available or was that confiscated? I am familiar with these cases but my memory sucks.

Sure, not a problem. From what I recall, Callahan video taped a simultaneous playback of the audio with the radar data, so at one point he was in possession of both. I don't know if he still is, or if he ever made them publicly available. If he hasn't I hope he does.

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
... Obviously something was there but I do think the captain had a predisposition to believe in spaceships from other planets based on his report. My memory sucks, so If I am wrong, please correct me.

In a later interview, he said the reason why he refused the military's scrambling of jets was because he'd heard of the Mantell case, but I don't think he referred to it as the Mantell case. He seemed to have a vague recollection of it. I don't believe he had any more interest in UFOs than the average person.

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
Now I do find it really interesting that two of my favorite subjects have some commonality. Now I have also seen lots of geometric shapes blinking and glowing and whirling about. It was some time ago in my younger years. now those chemicals are almost identical to natural endogenous brain chemicals, one being adreniline which I am sure was present when he saw this thing. I know I would be scared or really excited if I saw something I thought was from outer space! It is actually a well documented phenomenon that we see geometric shapes and patterns when in altered states.

It is a misconception that a hallucination is just flat out seeing something that isnt there in empty space like conjuring up an image of a pink elephant out of nowhere for no apparant reason. They are more like the subtle patterns described that are projected onto something and then a paredolia from those patterns.

I've no doubt that people on occasion experience convincing hallucinations. But it can't apply in this case with the two objects, because the entire crew saw them. The captain feeling the heat from them on his face, and the fact that they lit up the inside of the cabin also undermines it.

In general, I'm very skeptical of relying too heavily on psychological reductions.

I think one needs to be very careful when trying to perform an explanatory reduction. On the one hand, it's quite natural. We try to take something unfamiliar and boil it down to something more familiar. Children reduce numbers to fingers. Their faculty for abstraction hasn't yet developed, so they explain it in terms of something they're familiar with. Early man explained frightening weather phenomena in terms of angry personalities in the sky.

With something like a psychological reduction, there's a cognitive and an emotional appeal. Cognitively, you get the immediate satisfaction of feeling like you've understood something. Emotionally, you get a sense of validation, sort of like: "Hey, this discipline I've invested so much time into truly is this powerful!"

But what inexorably happens is that much of the data of these cases can't be easily boiled down to psychology or meteorology. And then the individual, still clinging to this framework, eventually says something like: "Well, some future exotic psychological (or meteorological) phenomenon will one day explain all of this!" And when you press them to explain what such an explanation might actually look like, it's often just as (or even more) outlandish than their actually being aerial craft of some kind.

I'm familiar with these progressions of thought because I've ran through them myself. I think it's the correct way to approach something like the UFO phenomenon. Anything as bizarre as this should be subjected to attempted reductions to familiar principles in disciplines that have a more established track record. But there comes a point when intellectual honesty dictates that these principles don't at all adequately explain all of the data. Obviously, circumstances differ from case to case. But in the JAL 1628 case, for instance, I don't see how psychology or meteorology or space junk even comes close (or ever will) adequately explain what they saw and was captured on multiple radars.

continued...