UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

Don't see any reason to want. Like fits me better

Playing the percentage game I would go for almost 100% LIFE is out there

Sentinent less so. Personal guess 70%

Another personal guess of sentinent beings having Star Trek technology less than 0.5%

Sentinent beings having Star Trek technology stumbling across us less than 0.00000000000...1% (you get the general picture)

Don't let my rambling stats stop you wanting

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Is that really true though?

As just one example, was the account in post 5861 one of the "most convincing"? Yes, you were eventually told that it was mundane, but are you saying that - in time preceding, and the two days after you posted it - you considered it to be one of the most convincing?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I certainly found it convincing enough to post here. That it turned out to be a logo was something I hadn't considered though. We are all fallible simians afterall..

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

As Sherlock Holmes used to say, you can't draw a viable conclusion from insufficient data - i.e. if your data is insufficient, you can not conclude that something is "unexplainable".

 

With the best cases, there is enough information about the ufo to reach a conclusion, however tentative. There is a point when all mundane explanations are ruled out and nothing else remains but that the ufo is a real phenomena with its own unique characteristics. After that it can be compared to other unexplained cases for more information about it. We may at this point know "that it is" without knowing exactly "what it is."

 

Nobody has a problem with the tentative conclusion that the ufo is a real phenomenon.

But you have to stop there. If you would stop at THAT it is, you would probably get little argument here. But you have insufficient data to draw ANY conclusion about WHAT it is.

 

Nooooooo you can only list characteristics which have been collected about it

Many mundane explanations can be ruled out. Unthought of mundane explanations cannot be ruled out

but that the ufo is a real phenomena with its own unique (?) characteristics

which it has in common? with other UFO's?

Again nooooooo. There might be some common characteristics, all characteristics might match

Since the other unknowns the latest unknown is being matched are

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Gifcat

unknown no determination can be made about the newest member other than similarities (it not) and the newest unknown remains

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Gifcat

unknown

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I do stop there, at least when I'm not offering personal speculations. The ufo remains a mysterious phenomena that defies mundane explanations. The problem here seems to be is whether it is still explained mundanely or suggests something we've never encountered. The skeptics here want to leave the mundane explanation door open so that it doesn't suggest something otherworldly. I otoh say the otherworldly door is open because the mundane has been ruled out. This seems to be the major bone of contention here.

 

Only the thought of mundane explanations, not the unthought of mundane explanations

Suggests - pushing it, more I would veture unthought of

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

How do you know the unthought of mundane explanations exist?

 

If you can have

something we've never encountered I can have

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Exactly - because there IS nothing "otherworldly", as far as we know.

Otherworldly can only be considered if it becomes mundane.

 

It's hard to see something as extraordinary and exceptional as a ufo as a mundane event. By it's very nature and appearance ufos inspire wonder and strangeness, at least to the persons witnessing them.

UFO's share in the property of being experienced as something wonderous and exceptional. If it presented as a mundane and ordinary event, it wouldn't be a UFO. It'd be an IFO (identified flying object.) This is why I leave the otherworldly door open, because UFOs constitute an extraordinary phenomenon that defies our notions of what is possible.

 

I said becomes mundane. If there is no mundane explanation, there is no explanation.

Yes, that's the problem. The human mind loves wonder and strangeness. That's why we do science. But science is restricted to mundane explanations.

Sure it would. But "unidentified" has nothing to do with "otherworldly".

 

Oumuamua interstellar interloper

Noted to be accelerating as it leaves our solar system

Could it be Earth's UFO's are moving on?

Nope

After ruling out effects from “solar-radiation pressure, drag- and friction-like forces, interaction with solar wind for a highly magnetized object, and geometric effects” due to the shape of the asteroid, they concluded that Oumuamua accelerated due to “comet-like outgassing.” This means that Oumuamua vents gases

https://magazine.scienceconnected.o...t effects from,that Oumuamua vents gases when

Back to mundane explanations

Still more Oumuamua like objects out there (as well as the truth) and one might be a interstellar space craft

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Why would aliens be visiting our planet? Only one reason really: our hot soccer moms!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Extraordinary feelings and manifestations supervene on (ordinary) electrochemical sensory and thought processes of a brain. "Remarkable" only from the standpoint that in all other contexts, matter activity lacks accompanying presentations of itself as anything -- even having elemental "properties of appearance and impression" to build-up in complexity from are not among its physical attributions.

Similarly, but yet differently -- extraordinary interpretations, meanings, and portents can be projected upon sometimes ordinary events and circumstances in the environment that are construed or misconstrued as unconventional.

Unlike our "the sky is blue" brain experiences, however (which usually are reliable agreement-wise and not unexpected) the significance of an _X_ supposed anomalous event (often having routine causes) may vary more dramatically from person to person. As a result, the value assigned to it has no firm objectivity or consensus among humans.

For example, one individual may regard a UFO incident as a space visitor, another as a demon, another as a glitch in the matrix, another as a time travel entity, etc (the skeptical minded, of course, prefer a mundane interpretation). Pariedolia might be an exception, where most people will agree that the "idea of a face" seems to supervene on a particular inanimate object or natural occurring, lifeless pattern. ("Seems" being key here.)

The beef about our brain experiences that are concomitant with certain neural configurations is that all the explanations are either controversial (crazy), self-refuting, or superfluous slash inadequate. But they do arguably establish that "transmundane values and meanings" can automatically affiliate themselves with the relational arrangements and performances of "ordinary stuff". In a more heavy-handed manner than just the projections of imagination and cognitive misapprehensions born from and distributed by culture, social discourse, and storytelling.

Though anomalous events often turn out to have everyday origins (if not always), the issue of whether a "meaning or significance" of alternate character was seizing an opportunity (flying under the radar of natural principle violations) to impose itself upon certain external situations labeled UFOs, ghostly visitations, etc -- is a separate, oddball issue.

To figuratively clarify: A video game, for instance, might allow "messages from the outside" to intrude upon its simulated domain as long as they're passive and merely cryptically supervenient on its rule-following activity. (IOW, biased inference on the part of an inhabitant would be required to decipher them, which would always be afflicted with speculative status, though still triggering personal behavior and thereby fulfilling the stealth agency's covert agenda.)