UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

No, I'm saying that other possibilities have not been ruled out. And to jump from UFO, which I agree it is, to Alien controlled craft, is pretty drastic.

Granted! Perhaps I did. But from all accounts no one else saw it, and I am unable to rule out other possibilities, including someone playing tricks or games. But it sure had me excited at the time!

Why? I mean as far as I am concerned, I would love to be the first human to interact with an alien. I'm of the belief though, that contrary to what Hollywood would have us believe, that advanced beings would not be aggressive or violent.

No, we certainly do not know everything! But MR pushes even the Bigfoot illusion with as much fervor as he does ghosts and UFOs.

In summing wegs, and while I aint no scientist, I do value the scientific methodology as by far the best means we have. Our greatest theories such as the BB and GR, are everyday, being tested to their limits by young up and coming scientists who would dearly love to wear Einstein's mantle. But even they need to run the gauntlet so to speak...just as Einstein's theories did.
Why the hell can't MR just admit that they are UFO's...or unidentified. Because that's all they really are! I have given a couple of links back further that questions the radar images and even throws some possible misdemeanor and/or fraud involving this incident.

Like I said earlier, I would dearly love for that bit of extraordinary evidence to show that what I believe is true to be revealed...that we are "logically" not alone, but time and distance are the two great barriers that inhibit contact.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Got it

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

After reading paddoboy's post - here's what I wonder:

Why must other people see/experience what we see/experience, in order for it to be true? Paddoboy tells of an experience that he had, but became doubtful of it when he realized no one else had witnessed the same thing. Granted, I'm not suggesting we start believing all eyewitness accounts as I've mentioned above, but if you are drug-free, sober minded, competent, intelligent, and an otherwise rational person - why choose to (always) cave in to your doubts? Can't we cherish an experience and consider it ''real,'' without popular acceptance?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wegs....I didn't really doubt what I saw, and I didn't automatically infer "my UFO" as being of alien origin....I saw it as a UFO.
If the unlikely situation ever arises where we are able to say, "we are alone" in my opinion, it would raise far many more questions then the likely reality that we are not alone. Some religious zealots would have a field day!!!
But as yet, we just do not have the required evidence to confirm that, sadly.

 

Okay, fair enough.

True that a''UFO'' needn't be an alien spacecraft. It could be something else, entirely. It could be a government weapon...and a conspiracy to keep it quiet. That thought is actually scarier than believing in alien life lol

 

So paddoboy now gives a like to a post entertaining a government conspiracy theory?! A little digging and...
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/10-principles-for-investigating-ufo-reports.158542/#post-3426413
Run with the hares, hunt with the hounds. Win win!
It may take several views of vid posted back in p110 #2182 to get the sensible message. No government secret military aviation tech could remotely explain the multiple accounts from highly trained, highly responsible military personnel. Not to mention encounters of a similar general nature going back decades to well before cgi or PhotoShop style tech existed. Washington 1952 flap incidents being a premier example. And many other troubling encounters witnesses by many trained personnel at e.g. US strategic nuclear missile silos especially in 1960's and 1970's.

To dismiss it all as secret but ultimately mundane human technology at play would indeed logically imply a conspiratorial cover up at the highest levels in military circles and even higher. Catch 22 for debunkers who inevitably also dismiss any and all 'conspiracy theories' as paranoid delusions of 'nutters'. But for a single, now acknowledged counterexample as cure for that mindset, do a search for e.g. Operation Northwoods. Not on topic per se, but the bind UFO debunkers come conspiracy theory scoffers are put in is hopefully clear. I have no such conflicting viewpoint - UFO's as other than secret military craft or 'interstellar space aliens' makes best sense, AND nasty government level conspiracies and cover ups/disinfo are normal practice. Have been for a long time.

 

Or maybe an everyday object seen from or in an unusual way.

 

Nick West's final admission 'not 100% confirmation'. Very agreed there. Read the comments below vid. Thing is, if it was just even foreign i.e Russian military aircraft incursions, that would have been quickly determined from the get go. So. either that extremely easily verifiable at the time info was suppressed - government cover up - or it's Nick's suave believable BS dismissal of inexplicable by conventional criteria phenomena. I opt for the latter. Because far, far too many similar encounters have been reported by far too many trained and responsible personnel, from various disciplines, as well as general public, in various countries and diverse settings, over the decades. That persistent, stubborn '5%-10%' unexplained residue.

 

Government conspiracy theory - that’s funny. I was being er...semi-serious

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Right. Do you have a definite, final, serious position on all this? You will notice I don't try and win friends and allies with overly chummy and flattering overtures. Unlike one or two others here,

 

My ''position'' is that we don't know, what we don't know. That said, we shouldn't rush to believing anyone and everyone who claims that they've seen UFO's, or possible alien life. That would be silly. But, I also think we'd be foolish to dismiss all claims, as well. Not all claims have equal merit, in terms of validity. For me, the latest update from MR in this thread of the ''tic tac'' like UFO, seems credible, because of the seemingly good character of the eyewitnesses. That factors into it, for me.

 

Tally ho! Gives the hares a sporting chance I say!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

That's really interesting. Impressive how they figured it out. And so there is an example of not necessarily dismissing the claim, but upon further research and observation, it turns out that it was not an alien aircraft. (or some other type of UFO)

 

Are you really sure - that it was just IR flare from a conventional jet aircraft? Then, as per my earlier post, why no official confirmation of that mundane explanation?

 

Regarding MR's post?

 

He he he. Which one out of the likely hundreds if not thousands of MR's cumulative posts are you referring to?!

 

The ''tic tac'' one?

If that is the one you're referring to, it could be something else. The difference though is that it seemed to ''take off'' and just vanish. The pilots were following it for a while, and then it just disappeared. I don't know of any aircraft currently that can accelerate like that. Did you watch the video?

 

MR originally posted links to initial 'tic tac' vids relating to just 'the 2004 Nimitz' incidents 'unprecedentedly' released by US navy iirc in late 2018. As per my p110 vid posting, that has subsequently been greatly expanded with details from crew involved at the time. A value judgement as to credibility - eyewitnesses vs official position (and actions) - is in everyone's individual court to make. Not just there and then, but spanning back many decades of similar. So make your own choice. How much importance you place on it will be reflected in the time and effort spent in researching the topic. Cheers.

 

No.

No.

I think Bigfoot is much more likely than ghosts; he/she is biological, after all and we know that biologicals exist. The problem with UFOs is where do they come from and how do they get here? Without an explanation better than sci-fi, the most likely explanation seems to be that they are not "here" in any concrete sense.

 

Problem with that explanation is the pilots said they saw a whole fleet of them. This is something that would readily have been known to be other jets flying in the area. Like they wouldn't know that already. Plus the image in the Gimbal video is well defined as a consistent top shape that rotates not as an infrared blob that doesn't rotate. Plus other pilots report seeing spinning tops and tic tacs.