17 ms·
Here's my post in response to a comment in the "US urged to reveal UFO evidence after claim that it has intact alien vehicles" HN thread[1] from a few weeks ago
by heavyset_go 3y ago
Here's my post in response to a comment in the "US urged to reveal UFO evidence after claim that it has intact alien vehicles" HN thread[1] from a few weeks ago that addresses this:
> Watch the introduction to the 4 hour UAP panel that NASA hosted a few days ago[2], they address this.
> According to NASA, even highly trained and experienced pilots can easily be fooled, and often reported UAPs are artifacts of the technology that detects them, or are indeed things like weather balloons. For example, NASA even used the example of Navy pilots being fooled by a procession of commercial airplanes queueing to land at an airport 40+ miles away from their base.
> They also emphasize that radar, detection systems, etc are not scientific instruments that are suitable for the detection or analysis of this phenomenon. They emphasize that the technology that the Navy et al. use are strictly optimized for defensive/offensive interception of conventional weapons. That's to say that they're calibrated for war and not for accurate scientific observation.
> Going back to the procession of airplanes waiting to land, according to the instruments available to pilots and their own observations, those airplanes were doing things that were impossible to do without bending the laws of physics. Yet all they were were just a bunch of airplanes doing what all airplanes do.
> > Due to the supposed feeds and eye witness accounts, it seems infeasible there is a 'weather balloon' type explanation
> Pilots and their systems are fallible, you'd have to assume some argument from authority to believe otherwise.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36216745 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36216745
[2] Public Meeting on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (Official NASA Broadcast): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQo08JRY0iM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQo08JRY0iM
- esbranson 3y agoOccam's razor tells us it's unlikely that all those unlikely failures happened at once. Videos, multiple eyewitnesses and AEGIS military radars. Lol.
- quickthrowman 3y agoNow apply Occam’s razor to the following two choices: 1. Aliens have visited Earth. They crashed their spaceships or we shot them down. The US Government (and possibly other governments) retrieved and studied their technology and managed to keep it a secret for decades 2. Aliens have not visited Earth
- Hikikomori 3y agoAnd somehow these alien crafts are capable to cross interstellar distances but then crash at a rate higher than our airplanes, unless of course there's a shitload of them flying around here.
- midoridensha 3y agoScenario 1: the alien craft are piloted by teenagers and stolen from their parents to go on joyrides. Scenario 2: the aliens are bumbling and incompetent, and stole their spacecraft tech from some more intelligent race. (You could call them "pacleds")
- Loquebantur 3y ago"Occam’s razor" is merely a heuristic, not some sort of law. Neither logical nor otherwise. Here, you are even using it wrong. You present a false dichotomy and rely on top of that on the faulty, but commonly held assumption, one choice was vastly less probable than the other. If the US government has covered up the topic for the last 80 years, you must assume your priors to be faulty.
- quickthrowman 3y agoOk, let’s add a third scenario: aliens have visited Earth undetected. Hell, you can add as many scenarios as you like, I’m still going to go with ‘Aliens have not visited earth’ unless presented with overwhelmingly concrete evidence. Anecdotes and eyewitness accounts from falliable humans and weird sensor readings from non-scientific sensors that are designed for war are not the least bit convincing to me. Being visited by alien beings would be the most consequential event in human history, I’m personally fine with having an extremely high bar for any evidence or proof before I even entertain the possibility. I do believe it’s probable that intelligent life exists in the universe, for what it’s worth.
- TheOtherHobbes 3y agoYou don't want evidence, you want someone important to say convincing evidence exists. One is factual and scientific, the other is authoritarian. There are decades of evidence of sightings and encounters, collected by government and military agencies in multiple countries. It's nonsense to claim no evidence of anomalies exists when that's just not factually correct. Evidence of what is a different question. But the scientific approach starts with "That's interesting and unexpected" and develops from there. Not from "I can't imagine this is happening and it makes me anxious, so I'll just pretend there's nothing real to worry about."
- heavyset_go 3y agoI implore you to watch the NASA UAP panel video, because not only do they explain that it's happened before, it's what they believe is the problem now.
- havnagiggle 3y agoRemind me, which law is it that someone who doesn't understand Occam's razor will cite Occam's razor?