6 ms·

There are other options, if you're talking about the latest UFO video: 3) equipment failure 4) mass delusion 5) error in judgement 6) the creator of the mat

There are other options, if you're talking about the latest UFO video: 3) equipment failure 4) mass delusion 5) error in judgement 6) the creator of the matrix messing / debugging 7) government or private company testing a new type of propulsion Now look at all these options rationally, which ones are more likely? The problem with the UFO evidence is, it's shitty every single time. With 4K cameras in cheap smartphones, 50x optical zoom cheap consumer cameras, cheap telescopes widely available, our UFO videos haven't gotten any better.

deepnotderp 9y ago
> The problem with the UFO evidence is, it's shitty every single time. With 4K cameras in cheap smartphones, 50x optical zoom cheap consumer cameras, cheap telescopes widely available, our UFO videos haven't gotten any better. Ding ding ding.
- akhilcacharya 9y ago
  In fairness military FLIR pods are better/more credible than cheap smartphone cameras.
raverbashing 9y ago
> The problem with the UFO evidence is, it's shitty every single time. With 4K cameras in cheap smartphones, 50x optical zoom cheap consumer cameras, cheap telescopes widely available, our UFO videos haven't gotten any better. Try taking a picture of a plane at a height > 3000ft with equipment available at hand (during the night) see how it looks like
- bufferoverflow 9y ago
  So UFOs only fly at night? Cause during the day people with consumer cameras have zero problems recording planes at much higher than 3000ft: https://youtube.com/results?search_query=zoom+airplane&q=zoom+airplane https://youtube.com/results?search_query=zoom+airplane&q=zoo...
  - raverbashing 9y ago
    Most sightings are at night
  - jcun4128 9y ago
    I zoomed in on a commercial airliner flying above my house once with a 40x camera, it was really cool.
runeks 9y ago
> The problem with the UFO evidence is, it's shitty every single time. Of course it is. The greater the clarity of the footage, the lower the probability that the filmed object will remain unidentified (as in Unidentified Flying Object). If you’re on the look for unidentified things, how could anything but unclear evidence be useful?
- Houshalter 9y ago
  Even when people do get clear video, people just accuse it of being a drone or CGI. Video evidence means shit in 2017.
  - bufferoverflow 9y ago
    That's not entirely true. Cameras are starting to introduce video signing. At least there's a chance to prove the source was filmed with camera X, if its public key is known. It would be cool if camera manufacturers had a public API for that too. Example: http://www.urbanalarm.com/knowledge-base/2016/digital-chain-of-custody-for-mobotix-video-cameras http://www.urbanalarm.com/knowledge-base/2016/digital-chain-...
    - nerflad 9y ago
      What a great idea.
    - runeks 9y ago
      > At least there's a chance to prove the source was filmed with camera X, if its public key is known. To be fair, the only thing that can be proven is that it was either filmed with that camera, or someone has extracted the private key from the device (or just tricked the signing chip to sign a custom data packet).
akhilcacharya 9y ago
I think there’s an 8th possibility that is plausible - the government testing stealth technology that can spoof sensing equipment.
novaleaf 9y ago
FYI the Nimitz FLIR1 video was taken at a distance of around 30 miles. pretty good video for that distance. Also this is the only declassified video, I would assume better video exist but this will help ease us into acceptance.
- lolc 9y ago
  Acceptance of what?
taneq 9y ago
> The problem with the UFO evidence is, it's shitty every single time. Maybe, like Bigfoot, UFOs are actually intrinsically fuzzy.

deepnotderp 9y ago

akhilcacharya 9y ago
In fairness military FLIR pods are better/more credible than cheap smartphone cameras.

raverbashing 9y ago

> The problem with the UFO evidence is, it's shitty every single time. With 4K cameras in cheap smartphones, 50x optical zoom cheap consumer cameras, cheap telescopes widely available, our UFO videos haven't gotten any better. Try taking a picture of a plane at a height > 3000ft with equipment available at hand (during the night) see how it looks like

bufferoverflow 9y ago
So UFOs only fly at night? Cause during the day people with consumer cameras have zero problems recording planes at much higher than 3000ft: https://youtube.com/results?search_query=zoom+airplane&q=zoom+airplane https://youtube.com/results?search_query=zoom+airplane&q=zoo...
- raverbashing 9y ago
  Most sightings are at night
- jcun4128 9y ago
  I zoomed in on a commercial airliner flying above my house once with a 40x camera, it was really cool.

runeks 9y ago

> The problem with the UFO evidence is, it's shitty every single time. Of course it is. The greater the clarity of the footage, the lower the probability that the filmed object will remain unidentified (as in Unidentified Flying Object). If you’re on the look for unidentified things, how could anything but unclear evidence be useful?

Houshalter 9y ago
Even when people do get clear video, people just accuse it of being a drone or CGI. Video evidence means shit in 2017.
- bufferoverflow 9y ago
  That's not entirely true. Cameras are starting to introduce video signing. At least there's a chance to prove the source was filmed with camera X, if its public key is known. It would be cool if camera manufacturers had a public API for that too. Example: http://www.urbanalarm.com/knowledge-base/2016/digital-chain-of-custody-for-mobotix-video-cameras http://www.urbanalarm.com/knowledge-base/2016/digital-chain-...
  - nerflad 9y ago
    What a great idea.
  - runeks 9y ago
    > At least there's a chance to prove the source was filmed with camera X, if its public key is known. To be fair, the only thing that can be proven is that it was either filmed with that camera, or someone has extracted the private key from the device (or just tricked the signing chip to sign a custom data packet).

akhilcacharya 9y ago

I think there’s an 8th possibility that is plausible - the government testing stealth technology that can spoof sensing equipment.

novaleaf 9y ago

FYI the Nimitz FLIR1 video was taken at a distance of around 30 miles. pretty good video for that distance. Also this is the only declassified video, I would assume better video exist but this will help ease us into acceptance.

lolc 9y ago
Acceptance of what?

taneq 9y ago

> The problem with the UFO evidence is, it's shitty every single time. Maybe, like Bigfoot, UFOs are actually intrinsically fuzzy.