UFO Research: Findings vs. Facts

SPACE.com ^ | u Jun 22, 7:00 AM ET | Leonard David

[Solamente]

Again, you and I have been there.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1123484/posts

[Quix]

Sometimes there is hard evidence. Contrast that to Astronomy, and limit the data source to just stars, what physical evidence do you have other than light spectra? Not much. This not to say that astronomy is bunk, it certainly isn't, but if that science can be supported by optics and radar, but not chunks of stars of bits of extrasolar planets, it isn't unreasonable to consider the reality of UFO's. Ufology has photographic data, spectra, soil evidence, physical adjuncts manifested in materials and sometimes people after encounters, and of course the anecdotal evidence - it really isn't a narrow base of evidence on which the study rests.
- - - -

Excellent paragraph.

Won't sway many 'true UNbelievers' but we knew that. They have this addiction to TYPE II errors that they have a Death Grip on.

[Quix]

Am I given to understand that I should expect skeptics to be polite?

Knew I'd been messing something up.

[BenLurkin]

Let me get this straight.

Are you equating faith in our Lord with a belief in flying saucers?

[BenLurkin]

If you think I have not been polite you are wrong.

If you know when and where we - you and I - can go to see such things of which you speak then let us go and see one together.

[Quix]

I don't recall any beef with you.

I tend to reply too often to a generalized gestalt I have in my mind toward all skeptics. My fault.
Sorry.

[Quix]

NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC HAS A UFO SHOW ON CURRENTLY MOUNTAIN TIME.

Channel 276 DIRECTV

[Las Vegas Dave]

Well seeing is believing I suppose -- but I sure haven't seen it.

All you need to do is look up in the sky, and try to have a camera with you. You may be lucky enough to take a snapshot of an unusual object that defies our perception of conventional aircraft design.

[Houmatt]

And since you have never seen one, they do not exist.

Go piss up a rope. It is the height of arrogance to believe we are the only form of intelligent life in the universe.

[Houmatt]

Actually, I think this applies more to RightWhale than Ben Lurkin.

[Solamente]

Maybe, but not by much. The thread was a setup for a religious lecture. I guess I fell for it because I was tired and cranky after a long day.

[BenLurkin]

I watched it.

Thank you for the heads up.

[RightWhale]

Evidence counts. Otherwise the experience falls into the subjective.

[RightWhale]

Has to do with subjective versus objective. We might not know what anything really is, but we can at least set up procedures and get the same numbers. Not so with UFOs; they are all different and there are no procedures.

[RightWhale]

we are the only form of intelligent life in the universe

So it appears. Produce the corpus.

[RightWhale]

Don't compare UFOs to religious experience. Both are completely subjective, but the similarity ends there.

[Frank_Discussion]

Now, there, I agree with you to a degree. There is an awful lot of subjective chasing of the tail in ufology, despite a decent objective data pool. My disagreement with you rests on the idea that mainstream scientists confuse that high-visibility subjective screaming with an apparent lack of objective potential.

I also wouldn't say that there aren't procedures - MUFON in particular has a pretty rigorous set of standard tools for investigation and research. There are folks out there putting forth a best effort at consistency, but there as yet no analog to the NAS for ufology. We do what we can as best as possible, including trying to keep the data and its analysis as clean as possible. But that isn't everyone's approach.

My appeal to you is that there is no logical reason for UFO's to not exist. There are potential explanations for that which people see in the skies that is repeatable over the many years. I expect that an organized approach will only aid in characterizing that, especially if it exposes and freezes out the hucksters.

[RightWhale]

Since I do not accept that the Theory of Relativity means that FTL travel is impossible, I might accept that ships of some kind could scoot across the galaxy at any speed. That does not mean that any such ships exist as yet, and the ones reported do not have to originate anywhere but this planet.

Maybe we are not looking at the right things the right way, but it does not appear there is any sign of intelligent life anywhere but earth. I wouldn't look far for the origins of UFOs.

[Frank_Discussion]

*That* is a reasonable response. I don't know what they are, but I know people have been seeing them for a long time. That alone makes them worthy of study, though not of interest to all people.

[RightWhale]

UFOs have changed a lot in the 100+ years of modern sightings. They seem to have kept up with technology, just a tad ahead of what is already flying out of Air Force bases. The people aboard the UFOs have also changed over the years, seeming to reflect types of persons found in society, all the way fromn NAZIs during the mid 1900s, to bio-scientists now. There are valid studies, mostly in the field of psychology.