Pentagon Confirms New UFO Video

[IAmReallyImportant]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

And there is no evidence at all you got a dick.

I don't know why you are interested on evidence that I have a dick lol

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

I don't know why you are interested on evidence that I have a dick lol

If we're gonna be scientific, let's start there.

Has Neil DeGrass Tyson proven you got a dick? Cause if not... I dunno... let's not jump to conclusions.

[Gregp]

17 minutes ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

There is no evidence at all that this is about extraterrestrial life.

 Occams razor says you shouldnt go to huge conclusions on little data. So this is probably a weather phenomena. Its boring.

[DocWatts]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Another example of horrible misuse of "science". The science is: you see a fucking alien in the sky, and you say aliens exist. It makes zero difference how many sicentists agree or disagree. 

I'm assuming you'd agree that how people interpret the world around them is filtered through whatever cultural paradigm they've been indoctrinated in to, right? 

Are the vast number of these sightings unambiguous enough where it's crystal clear that the thing that's being looked at is a 'fucking alien', or is it the case that the vast majority of these sightings are of a small blob or series of lights far off in the distance being Interpreted as a UFO because that's become the 'default explanation' for anything strange looking that defies easy categorization?

Note : If aliens ever fly thier ship over my fucking head, I'll revise my tune on this ?

Edited May 27, 2021 by DocWatts

[Scholar]

6 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

I'm assuming you'd agree that how people interpret the world around them is filtered through whatever cultural paradigm they've been indoctrinated in to, right? 

Are the vast number of these sightings unambiguous enough where it's crystal clear that the thing that's being looked at is a 'fucking alien', or is it the case that the vast majority of these sightings are of a small blob or series of lights far off in the distance being Interpreted as a UFO because that's become the 'default explanation' for anything strange looking that defies easy categorization?

Note : If aliens ever fly thier ship over my fucking head, I'll revise my tune on this ?

So what is your position on the Fravor incident?

[Carl-Richard]

22 minutes ago, Gregp said:

 Occams razor says you shouldnt go to huge conclusions on little data. So this is probably a weather phenomena. Its boring.

? Occams razor is used when you have two competing theories with similar amounts of evidence but you discard the one that uses more a priori assumptions.

[Gregp]

@Carl-Richard 

Definition of Occam's Razor by Merriam-Webster:

a scientific and philosophical rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities

 

So its the weather!

[Scholar]

2 minutes ago, Gregp said:

@Carl-Richard 

Definition of Occam's Razor by Merriam-Webster:

a scientific and philosophical rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities

 

So its the weather!

Don't use a razor if you don't know how or when to you use it.

[Carl-Richard]

6 minutes ago, Gregp said:

@Carl-Richard 

Definition of Occam's Razor by Merriam-Webster:

a scientific and philosophical rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities

 

So its the weather!

I don't understand that definition. Can you please explain it to me? ?

[DocWatts]

17 minutes ago, Scholar said:

So what is your position on the Fravor incident?

Well fortunately for me I'm comfortable with saying "I don't know" for any of the number of strange incidents that defy easy identification.

Sure it could be that a US Navy pilot spotted an actual UFO, or a case of instrumentation error and a alien vessel being the most plausible interpretation given the inputs he had to work with at the time. I don't believe that the people involved in the incident are being dishonest, but even highly experienced professionals can make mistakes, or reach conclusions based on faulty info. 

Or it could be that the account is %100 genuine. I don't know, and neither do you.

Agnosticism seems a perfectly valid response to situations like this. I'm not claiming to possess knowledge that I don't have, but I don't think it's unreasonable to reserve judgement until more conclusive and verifiable evidence is available from reputable sources.

[Scholar]

6 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

Well fortunately for me I'm comfortable with saying "I don't know" for any of the number of strange incidents that defy easy identification.

Sure it could be that a US Navy pilot spotted an actual UFO, or a case of instrumentation error and a alien vessel being the most plausible interpretation given the inputs he had to work with at the time. I don't believe that the people involved in the incident are being dishonest, but even highly experienced professionals can make mistakes, or reach conclusions based on faulty info. 

Or it could be that the account is %100 genuine. I don't know, and neither do you.

Agnosticism seems a perfectly valid response to situations like this. I'm not claiming to possess knowledge that I don't have, but I don't think it's unreasonable to reserve judgement until more conclusive and verifiable evidence is available from reputable sources.

I am not sure if you are familiar with the case because what you say does not make a lot of sense. Highly experienced professionals make mistakes, but it is highly unlikely that 4 of them see an object that according to all of them behaved in the same way. The object was seen by their eyes, not merely instruments.

Again, even if you wanted to dismiss all of them, you also have radar data, optical data and so forth all corroborating what these people saw.

 

To me it actually is highly implausable that they are being honest and that at the same time that what they describe is some phenomena we can explain through ordinary means. It is far more likely that they would all be lying and that this would be some sort of conspiracy. But I find that itself rather implausible.

 

I don't actually  think you have contended with anything here, you just remain agnostic for the sake of seeming rational. Again, give an account of all of the data points we have, you are doing precisely what I have been criticizing a few posts earlier.

Edited May 27, 2021 by Scholar

[Bojan V]

At the time of ex-Yugoslavia, when Tito, the authoritarian leader, was still alive, they had to postpone the flight he had becose several military pilots saw Ufos. Of course pilots didn't tell that to the public at the time but later that story came out.

Also there was another incident where military airplanes were sent to intercept the Ufo and one of the planes crashed down. 

Also some civilian pilots reported the Ufo sightings as well.

The communist regime at that time was very interested in Ufos and they were conducting the investigation of these and other incidents...

 

[_Archangel_]

@Leo Gura So you're saying that there is zero possibilities that they actually don't know if that's Chinese/russian equipment or else?
If so, why make it public? prepare the ground? If governments know, then there must be enourmous benefits to keep secrecy.
Otherwise i don't  understand why not a single country has ever confermed the existence of aliens.
 

[Gregp]

@Carl-Richard Sure. Dont look for religious bullshit farfetched rubbish if you don't understand something. Its just the weather.

[DocWatts]

1 hour ago, Scholar said:

I am not sure if you are familiar with the case because what you say does not make a lot of sense. Highly experienced professionals make mistakes, but it is highly unlikely that 4 of them see an object that according to all of them behaved in the same way. The object was seen by their eyes, not merely instruments.

Again, even if you wanted to dismiss all of them, you also have radar data, optical data and so forth all corroborating what these people saw.

To me it actually is highly implausable that they are being honest and that at the same time that what they describe is some phenomena we can explain through ordinary means. It is far more likely that they would all be lying and that this would be some sort of conspiracy. But I find that itself rather implausible.

I don't actually  think you have contended with anything here, you just remain agnostic for the sake of seeming rational. Again, give an account of all of the data points we have, you are doing precisely what I have been criticizing a few posts earlier.

Well what you're contending with in even the more credible accounts of encounters with these types of phenomena isn't any sort of positive identification of any of these objects, but rather a process of elimination where the object seems as though it's not explainable through more conventional explanations.

Now the possibility is certainly open that some of these objects might actually be from another world; but without some method of verification you're not really doing anything more than guessing at this point; there may be possibilities that aren't at all obvious which you're not accounting for.

Note that I'm not claiming that the Scientific Method of attempting to empirically Validate claims is the only way of acquiring knowledge (or even always the best way), but I have my doubts that eyewitness accounts from other people of things that lie far outside of most people's lived experience are altogether reliable or trustworthy. Nor is the recorded footage that exists which shows objects recorded from a great distance behaving in strange or unexpected ways necessarily indicative of something from another world, though of course it could be that.

If an Alien lands on my lawn tomorrow, or if additional types of evidence further add to the mosiac in a convincing way, I'm of course open to revising my opinions on this matter.

[cigologic]

Very grateful that this forum has policy against conspiracy theories(as these are at the very least lazy defense mechanisms) yet at the same time is open to having discussions like these. Not easy to find. I think this topic is very important exactly because it challenges all types of dogma and world views.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, _Archangel_ said:

So you're saying that there is zero possibilities that they actually don't know if that's Chinese/russian equipment or else?

It is not Chinese/Russian equipment. That's just absurd.

[Alex_R]

 

They were here forever

 

[_Archangel_]

@Leo Gura

58 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It is not Chinese/Russian equipment. That's just absurd.

Fair, that means most governments know that's aliens, so my question still stands.

[Christdas]

According to Ra some of them of from the constellation orion with intentions of enslaving us