UFOs?

[Mirage]

At the end of the day the bosses are repeating what their advisors and SMEs tell them. And if they're anything like most engineers they shy away from certainty in either direction and speak in terms of risk, uncertainty, and likelihood. And since they haven't told The Boss that they're definitively not aliens (or the other way) The Boss isn't going to start making definitive statements.

No one's saying rule it out. We're just saying that it doesn't need equal billing with far more likely answers.

Several years ago I was watching a documentary on the sinking of the Edmund Fitzgerald (With a load of iron ore twenty-six thousand tons more / Than the Edmund Fitzgerald weighed empty) and in the final 15min they presented 3 scenarios that each took 5min to propose how she sank:

1. Waves opened a hatch and water came in
2. Waves drove the bow under and the ship took on water
3. Aliens

1 and 2 are pretty believable and likely scenarios that, without a smoking gun proving one or the other, serious naval architects can discuss and debate. These scenarios are worth the air time. 3 isnt worth discussing for 5sec let alone 5min because the likelihood (ie %) is so low compared to the other two.

Or maybe another scenario, if you were betting your paycheck on what's causing UAPs, how much would you put on aliens?

Engineers shy away from certainty for a reason. Those who assert certainty when it is uncertain are only fooling themselves.

I agree with you completely about the Fitzgerald, though I know nothing of that situation. If a bunch of former presidents, intelligence officials and agencies, and the Senate all decided to seriously look into whether it was aliens, then I would no longer be so sure, though. When everyone who looks at the available evidence I have, plus that I don't have, and unanimously agree on both sides of the political and ideological isles that we can't rule out something as implausible as aliens, that is a good indication that I shouldn't either.

Why is it that you feel equipped to rule out something that everyone who knows more than you refuses to?

 

[Pags]

Engineers shy away from certainty for a reason. Those who assert certainty when it is uncertain are only fooling themselves.

I agree with you completely about the Fitzgerald, though I know nothing of that situation. If a bunch of former presidents, intelligence officials and agencies, and the Senate all decided to seriously look into whether it was aliens, then I would no longer be so sure, though. When everyone who looks at the available evidence I have, plus that I don't have, and unanimously agree on both sides of the political and ideological isles that we can't rule out something as implausible as aliens, that is a good indication that I shouldn't either.

Why is it that you feel equipped to rule out something that everyone who knows more than you refuses to?

Because I'm willing to admit that the odds that these images are of aliens are so low it's essentially zero. At the same time I'm also willing to say that odds are that there is intelligent life out there. But those two things can be true at the same time.

 

[Brett327]

Because I'm willing to admit that the odds that these images are of aliens are so low it's essentially zero. At the same time I'm also willing to say that odds are that there is intelligent life out there. But those two things can be true at the same time.

Why can’t more otherwise intelligent people grasp this simple concept?

 

[Mirage]

Why can’t more otherwise intelligent people grasp this simple concept?

If all the agencies and leaders I mentioned, who know far more than us, acted like the odds were essentially zero, then perhaps I would also believe the odds were essentially zero. I have no reason to disagree with them, and neither of you have answered yet why you believe you know something they don't that lets you disagree with them.

 

[IKE]

Why can’t more otherwise intelligent people grasp this simple concept?

Research has shown humans are not good at rough probability estimation. We have to actively think about probabilities and use math to evaluate them.

I think this is a philosophical issue, the answer to which is the rebuttal of Pascal's wager. The only rational course of action when there is zero evidence of something is to act (and believe) as if that thing doesn't exist. Any other COA is a waste of time, energy, and mental space, and will likely lead to cognitive dissonance.

In the absence of evidence, statements like "it could happen" or "you don't know it isn't xx phenomenon" are arbitrary. To quote Pauli, they are not even wrong.

 

[Mirage]

Research has shown humans are not good at rough probability estimation. We have to actively think about probabilities and use math to evaluate them.

I think this is a philosophical issue, the answer to which is the rebuttal of Pascal's wager. The only rational course of action when there is zero evidence of something is to act (and believe) as if that thing doesn't exist. Any other COA is a waste of time, energy, and mental space, and will likely lead to cognitive dissonance.

In the absence of evidence, statements like "it could happen" or "you don't know it isn't xx phenomenon" are arbitrary. To quote Pauli, they are not even wrong.

This is not a philosophical question. It is a scientific one. What are these phenomena? To answer this you have to gather evidence and rule things out as you are able to. If you rule things out before then, you will likely overlook the answer, especially in a situation like this when all the plausible answers have already been ruled out.

It seems that no matter what the answer is here, it is something (or multiple different things) that is/are extremely unlikely to happen. The points you mentioned hinge on there being no evidence, but in this case there is.

 

[squorch2]

Given unlimited time, resources, and attention - sure, this is a scientific problem.

with constraints on all 3, there are better priorities.

 

[Brett327]

who know far more than us,

You’re giving a tremendous amount of credit to a bureaucracy that is routinely lampooned on this site for doing extraordinarily stupid things and making bad decisions. On the other hand, show me a statement by a credible actor or agency within our government that authoritatively states that there is evidence of extraterrestrial origin for any UFO. I think that’s quite a stretch.

 

[Mirage]

You’re giving a tremendous amount of credit to a bureaucracy that is routinely lampooned on this site for doing extraordinarily stupid things and making bad decisions. On the other hand, show me a statement by a credible actor or agency within our government that authoritatively states that there is evidence of extraterrestrial origin for any UFO. I think that’s quite a stretch.

The former Director of National Intelligence said "There are a lot more sightings than have been made public" (they have more info than us). "And when we talk about sightings, we are talking about objects that have been seen by Navy or Air Force pilots, or have been picked up by satellite imagery that frankly engages in actions that are difficult to explain. Movements that are hard to replicate that we don't have the technology for. Or travelling at speeds that exceed the sound barrier without a sonic boom." I haven't seen any satellite imagery released on this, but there's clearly a lot they have that isn't released.

Further, the former head of the AATIP said "The United States Government is in possession of exotic material"

Can you find me a single govt official who in the last couple years has said definitively that we can rule out that this is extraterrestrial? To me that silence says a lot, because that was the standard line for decades.

Again, I'm not saying this is aliens, and I think that's unlikely. I also think it's unlikely an adversary jumped ahead of us technologically by many generations and is flaunting it in our face. But a lot of people who study only this, and those they brief, say that we can't yet explain it away as drones or something mundane. They clearly are either lying or have no idea what this is, but it seems like tech we can barely fathom. If this actually is technology of some kind that has these capabilities, it's hard to imagine it was made by humans in 2021. That is evidence. Not convincing or anything, but enough to pay attention to and not dismiss.

 

[squorch2]

 

[Pags]

The former Director of National Intelligence said "There are a lot more sightings than have been made public" (they have more info than us). "And when we talk about sightings, we are talking about objects that have been seen by Navy or Air Force pilots, or have been picked up by satellite imagery that frankly engages in actions that are difficult to explain. Movements that are hard to replicate that we don't have the technology for. Or travelling at speeds that exceed the sound barrier without a sonic boom." I haven't seen any satellite imagery released on this, but there's clearly a lot they have that isn't released.

Further, the former head of the AATIP said "The United States Government is in possession of exotic material"

Can you find me a single govt official who in the last couple years has said definitively that we can rule out that this is extraterrestrial? To me that silence says a lot, because that was the standard line for decades.

Again, I'm not saying this is aliens, and I think that's unlikely. I also think it's unlikely an adversary jumped ahead of us technologically by many generations and is flaunting it in our face. But a lot of people who study only this, and those they brief, say that we can't yet explain it away as drones or something mundane. They clearly are either lying or have no idea what this is, but it seems like tech we can barely fathom. If this actually is technology of some kind that has these capabilities, it's hard to imagine it was made by humans in 2021. That is evidence. Not convincing or anything, but enough to pay attention to and not dismiss.

I don't think Elizondo is an honest broker. By that I mean that there seems to be a question as to whether he was actually a Pentagon employee. And he recently worked as a UFOlogist with the guy from Blink 182. So he may have a vested interest in driving this narrative.

 

[wink]

The former Director of National Intelligence said "There are a lot more sightings than have been made public" (they have more info than us). "And when we talk about sightings, we are talking about objects that have been seen by Navy or Air Force pilots, or have been picked up by satellite imagery that frankly engages in actions that are difficult to explain. Movements that are hard to replicate that we don't have the technology for. Or travelling at speeds that exceed the sound barrier without a sonic boom." I haven't seen any satellite imagery released on this, but there's clearly a lot they have that isn't released.

Further, the former head of the AATIP said "The United States Government is in possession of exotic material"

Can you find me a single govt official who in the last couple years has said definitively that we can rule out that this is extraterrestrial? To me that silence says a lot, because that was the standard line for decades.

Again, I'm not saying this is aliens, and I think that's unlikely. I also think it's unlikely an adversary jumped ahead of us technologically by many generations and is flaunting it in our face. But a lot of people who study only this, and those they brief, say that we can't yet explain it away as drones or something mundane. They clearly are either lying or have no idea what this is, but it seems like tech we can barely fathom. If this actually is technology of some kind that has these capabilities, it's hard to imagine it was made by humans in 2021. That is evidence. Not convincing or anything, but enough to pay attention to and not dismiss.

Even after reading this I find that there is evidence of...wait for it...observations and phenomena we can not explain. Evidence of nothing concrete at all. That leaves open the possibility of something mundane, very much not aliens from space, that an explanation for has simply eluded us. Over the course of human history we have lived with the unexplained for thousands of year. Then one day, an explanation. And it usually dispels the most supernatural, unworldly, and grandiose theories previously contemplated.

 

[Brett327]

Again, I'm not saying this is aliens, and I think that's unlikely.

Yet you seem to be fighting awfully hard on this issue. I guess I really don’t understand what your point is. You’re upset that I’ve personally all but ruled out ET, when there are 100 more plausible explanations. There is zero physical evidence of these supposedly “high performing” vehicles. The speed of a radar contact does not constitute evidence of an object traveling at supersonic speeds, nor is a human looking at a scope and rendering an interpretation of something they think they see there. Case in point, I observed a radar contact just yesterday converging on my position at 2.4M. Is that evidence of an aircraft flying at that speed, or evidence of a fairly common glitch in the radar that sometimes produces false or erroneous tracks.

Nobody from the USG in your quote above said anything about ET, and Elizondo (who I’ve read a lot about) is absolutely not a credible source on anything - laughably so.

You are free to believe whatever you like, but don’t come down on us for taking a reasonable approach to this issue.

 

[Brett327]

Over the course of human history we have lived with the unexplained for thousands of year. Then one day, an explanation. And it usually dispels the most supernatural, unworldly, and grandiose theories previously contemplated.

Sounds like you’re making an argument for atheism. Come on in... the water is nice. ?

 

[Mirage]

Even after reading this I find that there is evidence of...wait for it...observations and phenomena we can not explain. Evidence of nothing concrete at all. That leaves open the possibility of something mundane, very much not aliens from space, that an explanation for has simply eluded us. Over the course of human history we have lived with the unexplained for thousands of year. Then one day, an explanation. And it usually dispels the most supernatural, unworldly, and grandiose theories previously contemplated.

Agreed. That's my bet for what happens as well. But I bet whoever discovers the thing that explains this is a guy/gal with an open mind that doesn't rule out everything that doesn't fit in his nice little box of previous experiences

Yet you seem to be fighting awfully hard on this issue. I guess I really don’t understand what your point is. You’re upset that I’ve personally all but ruled out ET, when there are 100 more plausible explanations. There is zero physical evidence of these supposedly “high performing” vehicles. The speed of a radar contact does not constitute evidence of an object traveling at supersonic speeds, nor is a human looking at a scope and rendering an interpretation of something they think they see there. Case in point, I observed a radar contact just yesterday converging on my position at 2.4M. Is that evidence of an aircraft flying at that speed, or evidence of a fairly common glitch in the radar that sometimes produces false or erroneous tracks.

Nobody from the USG in your quote above said anything about ET, and Elizondo (who I’ve read a lot about) is absolutely not a credible source on anything - laughably so.

You are free to believe whatever you like, but don’t come down on us for taking a reasonable approach to this issue.

Not upset at all.. just contributing to a debate. My only point is that there is insufficient evidence to rule out that this is tech from elsewhere. People having been ruling things out with insufficient evidence since forever, and they feel smart because they think they have answers when they don't (flat earth, air travel, breaking sound barrier, religion, atheism, etc.) That particular quality of humans is something I really don't like, so I argue against it when I see it. Don't mean to "come down" on anyone, so really, my apologies if it came across that way.