3 ms·

The linked video in the article showing how a triangle iris creates triangle ufos is brilliant, and seems obvious after you see it. https://youtu.be/-r2oaQWmqk

The linked video in the article showing how a triangle iris creates triangle ufos is brilliant, and seems obvious after you see it. https://youtu.be/-r2oaQWmqkk https://youtu.be/-r2oaQWmqkk Debunking this stuff is not as exciting as believing in aliens, which is why it’s a never ending battle. But the problem is when people who can make policy get duped. Again, we need better science education and should demand such for those we elect.

13years 5y ago
This is why those we elect should never be involved in science. It was never supposed to be the role of government. The expectation that those we elect should be knowledgeable over the entire domain of knowledge that represents important things we care about is unreasonable and is why they always fail our expectations. Instead, the domain of their responsibility should be very limited as to not impact everything in our lives.
- slver 5y ago
  Those we elect are not “involved in science”. Still you’re supposed to have higher bar for representatives, instead of saying “representatives are dumb”. You realize this essentially says those being represented are also dumb. Or there is a systemic flaw to address
  - 13years 5y ago
    Government is involved in science everywhere. Through both policy and investments. Everyone always points out how some politician has failed to understand some aspect of technology or some particular deep domain of knowledge. This problem is never going to get better because it isn't feasible that those who spend their lives mostly trying to understand how to campaign and influence you to vote for them are going to deeply understand anything about complicated subjects of the world. It is the entire reason the original role of government was essentially to protect your liberties. Not decide how you should live your life or what is true or false in the realm of deep fields of knowledge.
- crazydoggers 5y ago
  How can we limit the domain of their responsibility so severely? Take climate change. Ultimately we need elected officials to enforce regulations. If we limit their ability to do so, then you’ll have a power vacuum, and those with the most money power and influence will be making the rules... again with science losing. I don’t think we need to expect them to have expertise in every field. Instead even basic critical thinking skills, basic ability to asses scientific method vs pseudoscience. I feel like that should be a low bar to hit.
  - 13years 5y ago
    And yet, when they get involved it completely distorts what is known. https://www.livescience.com/56396-americans-misinformed-on-climate-change.html https://www.livescience.com/56396-americans-misinformed-on-c...
    - crazydoggers 5y ago
      Well yes, because we’ve chosen poorly, and the bar is so low on basic scientific knowledge in this country. So then how do you combat climate change? Why would those making billions to pollute the environment care about science if we don’t elect officials who can enforce regulation. At least now we have some pull and some percentage of elected officials making rational decisions. Without even that, what do we have? And back to the article at hand. Elected officials need to be at least in charge of military response I would assume you would agree. Is it not best that they can understand it’s not an alien or “commy” conspiracy when they make decisions?
      - 13years 5y ago
        Before regulations, pollution was solved by strict property rights enforcement. Courts eventually stopped enforcing property rights because it allowed for zero pollution. Regulation agencies were created to allow pollution, but in a manner that would be acceptable to balance business needs. In effect, regulations have only outsourced the creation of pollution to elsewhere. How much better have we actually gotten vs just making the optics look better? However, ironically if politics weren't involved, there might actually be more universal public opposition and pressure on companies as before political involvement in climate change the belief in climate change was about equal among left and right. Military response should require an act of congress which requires debate and discussion which should also involve the public. Congress has given up its role in this endeavor to the executive branch, but that is how it is supposed to be. With more open debate and discussion at least your more likely to stay within the realm of rational.
jk7tarYZAQNpTQa 5y ago
What that video doesn't tell you is that a triangular object will also produce a triangular bokeh. Bokeh is like a hash function, it destroys information. So there's no way to know if the original object was triangular in nature or not. Also, this thread: https://twitter.com/4Eridani/status/1387157151232167936 https://twitter.com/4Eridani/status/1387157151232167936
- crazydoggers 5y ago
  Again I can only lament the lack of science education in this country. Triangles show up as triangular bokeh... therefore... must be aliens?? Im sorry that Twitter user thought it was denigrating those in the military.. but that’s a red herring argument and nothing to do with anything. This is a much better read than Twitter... https://www.amazon.com/Demon-Haunted-World-Science-Candle-Dark/dp/0345409469/ref=nodl_ https://www.amazon.com/Demon-Haunted-World-Science-Candle-Da...
  - jk7tarYZAQNpTQa 5y ago
    >Again I can only lament the lack of science education in this country. What country exactly? > Triangles show up as triangular bokeh... therefore... must be aliens?? No. But, "Triangles show up as triangular bokeh" completely disproves the sentence "it's just bokeh, not a pyramid". Additionally, when people talk about UFOs, they don't imply it must be aliens (even though it's the most probable explanation for several top members of the US government). > This is a much better read than Twitter... Agreed. Most reads are better than Twitter. But let me recommend you to read something on the UFO phenomenon, so that you get a better understanding of it. For example something from Jacques Vallée, who has been applying data science to it since the 70s.
    - crazydoggers 5y ago
      I know Vallée, he was the inspiration for the character in Close Encounters. His thinking is marked by significant logical errors including but not least.. Observational selection: basically ignoring the large body of observational evidence against UFO as paranormal or alien Appeal to ignorance: Saying since we can’t 100% disprove ufos are alien or paranormal, they must be Straw man: Blaming hard to explain data on some “invisible entity” attempting to deceive mankind Special pleading: He can’t explain why crop circles exist. So “watch out. It is probably psychological warfare” If you read Carl Sagan’s book, you’ll quickly realize that the “science” of Vallée is not that at all. And it’s not just Carl Sagan, the vast 99% of scientist with a firm understanding of the scientific method would concur. Ultimately, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and that is precisely what UFO phenomena fail to generate in regards to alien or paranormal explanations.

13years 5y ago

This is why those we elect should never be involved in science. It was never supposed to be the role of government. The expectation that those we elect should be knowledgeable over the entire domain of knowledge that represents important things we care about is unreasonable and is why they always fail our expectations. Instead, the domain of their responsibility should be very limited as to not impact everything in our lives.

slver 5y ago
Those we elect are not “involved in science”. Still you’re supposed to have higher bar for representatives, instead of saying “representatives are dumb”. You realize this essentially says those being represented are also dumb. Or there is a systemic flaw to address
- 13years 5y ago
  Government is involved in science everywhere. Through both policy and investments. Everyone always points out how some politician has failed to understand some aspect of technology or some particular deep domain of knowledge. This problem is never going to get better because it isn't feasible that those who spend their lives mostly trying to understand how to campaign and influence you to vote for them are going to deeply understand anything about complicated subjects of the world. It is the entire reason the original role of government was essentially to protect your liberties. Not decide how you should live your life or what is true or false in the realm of deep fields of knowledge.
crazydoggers 5y ago
How can we limit the domain of their responsibility so severely? Take climate change. Ultimately we need elected officials to enforce regulations. If we limit their ability to do so, then you’ll have a power vacuum, and those with the most money power and influence will be making the rules... again with science losing. I don’t think we need to expect them to have expertise in every field. Instead even basic critical thinking skills, basic ability to asses scientific method vs pseudoscience. I feel like that should be a low bar to hit.
- 13years 5y ago
  And yet, when they get involved it completely distorts what is known. https://www.livescience.com/56396-americans-misinformed-on-climate-change.html https://www.livescience.com/56396-americans-misinformed-on-c...
  - crazydoggers 5y ago
    Well yes, because we’ve chosen poorly, and the bar is so low on basic scientific knowledge in this country. So then how do you combat climate change? Why would those making billions to pollute the environment care about science if we don’t elect officials who can enforce regulation. At least now we have some pull and some percentage of elected officials making rational decisions. Without even that, what do we have? And back to the article at hand. Elected officials need to be at least in charge of military response I would assume you would agree. Is it not best that they can understand it’s not an alien or “commy” conspiracy when they make decisions?
    - 13years 5y ago
      Before regulations, pollution was solved by strict property rights enforcement. Courts eventually stopped enforcing property rights because it allowed for zero pollution. Regulation agencies were created to allow pollution, but in a manner that would be acceptable to balance business needs. In effect, regulations have only outsourced the creation of pollution to elsewhere. How much better have we actually gotten vs just making the optics look better? However, ironically if politics weren't involved, there might actually be more universal public opposition and pressure on companies as before political involvement in climate change the belief in climate change was about equal among left and right. Military response should require an act of congress which requires debate and discussion which should also involve the public. Congress has given up its role in this endeavor to the executive branch, but that is how it is supposed to be. With more open debate and discussion at least your more likely to stay within the realm of rational.

jk7tarYZAQNpTQa 5y ago

What that video doesn't tell you is that a triangular object will also produce a triangular bokeh. Bokeh is like a hash function, it destroys information. So there's no way to know if the original object was triangular in nature or not. Also, this thread: https://twitter.com/4Eridani/status/1387157151232167936 https://twitter.com/4Eridani/status/1387157151232167936

crazydoggers 5y ago
Again I can only lament the lack of science education in this country. Triangles show up as triangular bokeh... therefore... must be aliens?? Im sorry that Twitter user thought it was denigrating those in the military.. but that’s a red herring argument and nothing to do with anything. This is a much better read than Twitter... https://www.amazon.com/Demon-Haunted-World-Science-Candle-Dark/dp/0345409469/ref=nodl_ https://www.amazon.com/Demon-Haunted-World-Science-Candle-Da...
- jk7tarYZAQNpTQa 5y ago
  >Again I can only lament the lack of science education in this country. What country exactly? > Triangles show up as triangular bokeh... therefore... must be aliens?? No. But, "Triangles show up as triangular bokeh" completely disproves the sentence "it's just bokeh, not a pyramid". Additionally, when people talk about UFOs, they don't imply it must be aliens (even though it's the most probable explanation for several top members of the US government). > This is a much better read than Twitter... Agreed. Most reads are better than Twitter. But let me recommend you to read something on the UFO phenomenon, so that you get a better understanding of it. For example something from Jacques Vallée, who has been applying data science to it since the 70s.
  - crazydoggers 5y ago
    I know Vallée, he was the inspiration for the character in Close Encounters. His thinking is marked by significant logical errors including but not least.. Observational selection: basically ignoring the large body of observational evidence against UFO as paranormal or alien Appeal to ignorance: Saying since we can’t 100% disprove ufos are alien or paranormal, they must be Straw man: Blaming hard to explain data on some “invisible entity” attempting to deceive mankind Special pleading: He can’t explain why crop circles exist. So “watch out. It is probably psychological warfare” If you read Carl Sagan’s book, you’ll quickly realize that the “science” of Vallée is not that at all. And it’s not just Carl Sagan, the vast 99% of scientist with a firm understanding of the scientific method would concur. Ultimately, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and that is precisely what UFO phenomena fail to generate in regards to alien or paranormal explanations.