8 ms·

And the pictures where UFOs are clearly visible are rapidly dismissed as CGI. There is no picture that would convince a hardcore skeptic, and that is not necess

And the pictures where UFOs are clearly visible are rapidly dismissed as CGI. There is no picture that would convince a hardcore skeptic, and that is not necessarily a bad thing, but it needs to be clear to everyone. Extraordinary disbelief calls for extraordinary evidence, and that likely means repeated observations by multiple credible observers -- credible to the person in question, that is. It is a tall order without systematic funding to collect that data a la Project Galileo. I remain on the fence. On the one hand, the publicly-available data is entirely unconvincing, while on the other hand the testimonies from high ranking officials to pilots are intriguing.

nrdgrrrl 3y ago
[dead]
George83728 3y ago
> And the pictures of UFOs that are clearly visible are rapidly dismissed as CGI. The UFO hoaxers should probably spend some more time learning how to use Blender well. The most compelling videos are the real videos of LIZ objects. The videos which show anything clearly are uniformly laughably bad. I challenge you to link some videos that depict an apparent alien craft clearly which aren't obviously fake.
- Loquebantur 3y ago
  https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/135revf/amazing_footage_of_cylindrical_ufo_filmed_by/ https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/135revf/amazing_foota... Raw footage is linked there, too.
  - olddustytrail 3y ago
    Again, just looks like something that's blown up into a cloud and is now being blown around in the turbulence. It's reflective enough that the sun shining through the clouds makes it look bright. Probably flat rather than a cylinder. I'd love to see a UFO, but I'm always disappointed by the footage.
    - jamilton 3y ago
      It'd have to be a pretty big object, I think. Your reasoning alone is not enough for me to consider it not-weird. If there was evidence that there was a windstorm in the area at the time and/or that a big piece of sheet metal fell in some field, that would probably be enough to make it less-weird. Edit: comments in the thread suggest it might be camera distortion, which seems more reasonable to me, but doesn't account for it appearing to go behind clouds.
    - ljf 3y ago
      Looks similar to a 'Roswell Rod' which turned out to be insects.
- throwaway24124 3y ago
  Currently unresolved sighting of a UAP https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/video/Middle%20East%20UAP.mp4 https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/video/Middle... disclosed during the AARO public hearing https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/to-receive-testimony-on-the-mission-activities-oversight-and-budget-of-the-all-domain-anomaly-resolution-office https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/to-receive-te... on April 19th, 2023. Obviously not definitive proof, but high res footage of an anomalous craft with no visible means of propulsion.
  - olddustytrail 3y ago
    Looks like a child's balloon blowing in the wind. It's not a large object lower down, it's a small object closer to the camera. That's why it appears to be moving so quickly and why it doesn't cast a shadow in the initial shot.
SoftTalker 3y ago
In general, if you are invested in believing something, you dismiss any evidence to the contrary with a variety of rationalizations. It's just how humans work psychologically and even scientists and other people who "should know better" can get caught up in this.
MrJohz 3y ago
I think the biggest argument against UFOs (or at least, against UFOs being aliens) is the set of claims that need to be true for it to hold up. * Aliens (which in fairness, is the easy thing to accept here) * Aliens that have the technology and means to travel vast distances to our solar system, and then on to earth * (Alternatively) Aliens that have the technology and means to hide their presence in nearby solar systems and also still pretty good technology for traveling long distances * A desire in these aliens to regularly and specifically visit earth (otherwise we wouldn't have sightings over such a long period of time) * A desire to avoid being spotted by humans (otherwise we should surely expect far more of these sightings) * A consistent inability in these aliens to avoid being spotted despite the aforementioned desire and technological capability (otherwise we would have no sightings at all) * A very heterogenous set of equipment, vehicles, creatures, and patterns to account for the wide range of different reported sightings * A desire by the government to keep this information hushed up (in fairness, this might not be required, but it seems insisted upon by every UFO believer I've ever heard) * An inability by the government to keep this information hushed up * A conscious choice by experts and the media to be sceptical of this story even when evidence is leaked or released In fairness, all of this stuff could be true. If the evidence points to it, we should be willing to accept crazy claims like "this particle is actually also a wave" and "black holes exist". But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and repeated, consistent evidence. And that's what the whole "UFOs are aliens" lacks. There is a handful of circumstantial, fuzzy evidence from photos and videos that show wild things but aren't consistent with each other, and at best support one or two of the claims made above. For me, that's the biggest issue here. It's not just accepting that some shiny ball of light might be an extraterrestrial vessel, it's also building a full theory out of that assumption that actually makes sense. Every interpretation I've seen requires so many crazy assumptions that it's very difficult to take the whole thing seriously at the end.
- themodelplumber 3y ago
  > UFOs (or at least, against UFOs being aliens) This right here is a huge issue. You get UFO believers who can't talk about UFOs without mentioning aliens. But then you get disbelievers with the same problem! It's ridiculous and automatically calls into question individuals' claims of rationality or scientific intentions.

nrdgrrrl 3y ago

[dead]

George83728 3y ago

> And the pictures of UFOs that are clearly visible are rapidly dismissed as CGI. The UFO hoaxers should probably spend some more time learning how to use Blender well. The most compelling videos are the real videos of LIZ objects. The videos which show anything clearly are uniformly laughably bad. I challenge you to link some videos that depict an apparent alien craft clearly which aren't obviously fake.

Loquebantur 3y ago
https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/135revf/amazing_footage_of_cylindrical_ufo_filmed_by/ https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/135revf/amazing_foota... Raw footage is linked there, too.
- olddustytrail 3y ago
  Again, just looks like something that's blown up into a cloud and is now being blown around in the turbulence. It's reflective enough that the sun shining through the clouds makes it look bright. Probably flat rather than a cylinder. I'd love to see a UFO, but I'm always disappointed by the footage.
  - jamilton 3y ago
    It'd have to be a pretty big object, I think. Your reasoning alone is not enough for me to consider it not-weird. If there was evidence that there was a windstorm in the area at the time and/or that a big piece of sheet metal fell in some field, that would probably be enough to make it less-weird. Edit: comments in the thread suggest it might be camera distortion, which seems more reasonable to me, but doesn't account for it appearing to go behind clouds.
  - ljf 3y ago
    Looks similar to a 'Roswell Rod' which turned out to be insects.
throwaway24124 3y ago
Currently unresolved sighting of a UAP https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/video/Middle%20East%20UAP.mp4 https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/video/Middle... disclosed during the AARO public hearing https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/to-receive-testimony-on-the-mission-activities-oversight-and-budget-of-the-all-domain-anomaly-resolution-office https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/to-receive-te... on April 19th, 2023. Obviously not definitive proof, but high res footage of an anomalous craft with no visible means of propulsion.
- olddustytrail 3y ago
  Looks like a child's balloon blowing in the wind. It's not a large object lower down, it's a small object closer to the camera. That's why it appears to be moving so quickly and why it doesn't cast a shadow in the initial shot.

SoftTalker 3y ago

In general, if you are invested in believing something, you dismiss any evidence to the contrary with a variety of rationalizations. It's just how humans work psychologically and even scientists and other people who "should know better" can get caught up in this.

MrJohz 3y ago

I think the biggest argument against UFOs (or at least, against UFOs being aliens) is the set of claims that need to be true for it to hold up. * Aliens (which in fairness, is the easy thing to accept here) * Aliens that have the technology and means to travel vast distances to our solar system, and then on to earth * (Alternatively) Aliens that have the technology and means to hide their presence in nearby solar systems and also still pretty good technology for traveling long distances * A desire in these aliens to regularly and specifically visit earth (otherwise we wouldn't have sightings over such a long period of time) * A desire to avoid being spotted by humans (otherwise we should surely expect far more of these sightings) * A consistent inability in these aliens to avoid being spotted despite the aforementioned desire and technological capability (otherwise we would have no sightings at all) * A very heterogenous set of equipment, vehicles, creatures, and patterns to account for the wide range of different reported sightings * A desire by the government to keep this information hushed up (in fairness, this might not be required, but it seems insisted upon by every UFO believer I've ever heard) * An inability by the government to keep this information hushed up * A conscious choice by experts and the media to be sceptical of this story even when evidence is leaked or released In fairness, all of this stuff could be true. If the evidence points to it, we should be willing to accept crazy claims like "this particle is actually also a wave" and "black holes exist". But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and repeated, consistent evidence. And that's what the whole "UFOs are aliens" lacks. There is a handful of circumstantial, fuzzy evidence from photos and videos that show wild things but aren't consistent with each other, and at best support one or two of the claims made above. For me, that's the biggest issue here. It's not just accepting that some shiny ball of light might be an extraterrestrial vessel, it's also building a full theory out of that assumption that actually makes sense. Every interpretation I've seen requires so many crazy assumptions that it's very difficult to take the whole thing seriously at the end.

themodelplumber 3y ago
> UFOs (or at least, against UFOs being aliens) This right here is a huge issue. You get UFO believers who can't talk about UFOs without mentioning aliens. But then you get disbelievers with the same problem! It's ridiculous and automatically calls into question individuals' claims of rationality or scientific intentions.