3 ms·
Well, I don't think "lights in the sky" are a particular socially acceptable thing to hallucinate; I'm not sure seeing things that others don't believe were the
by lostcolony 4y ago
Well, I don't think "lights in the sky" are a particular socially acceptable thing to hallucinate; I'm not sure seeing things that others don't believe were there is ever particularly socially acceptable. But it's still pretty common. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/hallucinations-what-explains-these-tricks-of-the-mind https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/hallucinations-wha...
As to "why shiny craft in the sky", we get patterns of light in the -vast- majority of situations. We have an optical system trained by millions of years to recognize patterns; throw in any sort of stimuli that doesn't fit the expected patterns, and our minds will still try and categorize it.
What you'll note we're not seeing are detailed craft with any sort of definition to them. As you say, no flying spaghetti monsters, but also not even something more complicated than an orb or a disk. Not even an orb with a decal on it. Not even as described, let alone the photo/videos. Just light and reflections. Even the Chinese surveillance balloon had more texture to it in its images and descriptions, and you'd at least think we'd have seen a spacecraft with some branding or customization, the equivalent of a Spitfire's Roundels or a shark's mouth decal or an identifier a la NCC-1701.
- phendrenad2 4y agoBy this logic you can discredit anything people see. People commonly see cows. But, people also hallucinate orbs in the sky, so cows don't necessarily exist, do they? So, back to my original point, if we focus on the relative number of sightings of two things, and exclude random other things, there's still a huge number of sightings of "shiny metal objects in the sky" compared (relatively) to "flying spaghetti-and-meatballs monster in the sky".