UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,600

    I am open to the possibility that what we are seeing with ufos is some superintelligent species living underneath our oceans. The association of ufos with the ocean is well documented, and many accounts describe them emerging from and submerging into the sea or lakes. How and why this species has long remained hidden from us while occasionally eavesdropping on our activities will be a story left for future telling. Perhaps they are indeed aliens who long ago settled on our planet and developed underwater facilities. Perhaps this ties into the myth of Atlantis. Who knows? So much to learn about this fascinating phenomenon! Here is an extensive database full of water-related ufo sightings:

    http://www.waterufo.net/2012/search.php?txtSearch=all
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2018
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,864
    Troll on, oh ship of state...
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,549
    I had to stop right there lest I may think you were not pulling my leg.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,864
    Magical Realist likes this.
  8. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Is it progress or regress to change from space aliens to ocean aliens?

    I am open to the possibility that what we are seeing with ufos is some superintelligent species living underneath our oceans.

    Of course ocean aliens have a great need of flying submarines

    How and why this species has long remained hidden from us

    Perhaps it's because they don't exist???

    I'll stop now before my jelly consistent brain turns to real jelly

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. sweetpea Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,329
    Do you agree with MR that every ufo 'event' should be flagged-up '' There is no other explanation'' other than they are either from the future, or interdimensionals, or extraterrestrials?
    Here's what MR means by UFO:
    MR then goes on to say about UFOs:
     
  10. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Mod Note

    You have been warned, repeatedly, about posting videos with little to no commentary.

    And I mean that literally. You have been asked, repeatedly, issued infractions, repeatedly, to stop doing this.

    Instead of respecting the requests of this site's administrator, you choose to keep doing it. And to really drive you point home, you then go out of your way to flame. Maybe you think you are being a martyr? Taking an arrow to the knee for the cause and whatnot.

    I am going to give you a bit of an analogy by way of advice....

    If you visit someone's house, you tend to not drop your pants and take a dump in the middle of their living room floor because that's how you do it at home. You would respect their house and use the toilet, like every other adult and child in that house. You know, you would respect that it is not your house, ergo, you need to abide by their rules and how they do things.

    This site is not your house.

    You have been asked repeatedly to stop.

    Respect that this is not your house.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  11. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,864
    Ahem:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Magical Realist likes this.
  12. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Another thought about flying submarines

    Seems not to have occurred to MR the submarine would have to be full of water under the same pressure from the depth the aliens would have been living at

    Needed so they don't expand and explode all over the place

    A flying submarine with tons of water pressure per square inch INSIDE pushing outwards

    Advanced technology indeed

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,902
    It's possible, but exceedingly unlikely in my opinion. If there was some kind of scientific/high-tech/industrial civilization down on the ocean floor, we would have had some indication of it by this time. Our sonar and ocean listening abilities are pretty good and we haven't heard them. We haven't noticed any of their junk that floated free. Sonar ocean floor mapping hasn't revealed them. (One wonders what kind of heavy industrial processes would be possible in an aqueous environment.)

    It's perhaps a little more likely that somebody who wants to remain unknown to us (whether locals or not) has established a covert base or bases making use of the majority of the Earth's surface that's little known to us.

    I think that we could spin those kind of speculations into a science fiction novel. But that's all that it would be at this point.

    I fully agree that the possibility can't be excluded with any kind of certainty. But it isn't part of my working-assumption worldview either.
     
  14. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,549
    Uh, oh.

    Look who it is!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    sweetpea likes this.
  15. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Why if it isn't fake Jesus

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Magical Realist:

    I see you've got yourself banned again. Some people never learn. Anyway...

    WTF? It's a direct quote from one of your posts!

    Thanks for bringing up the Ravenna county thread again, Magical Realist. Here's a link to the thread for those who are interested:

    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/portage-county-ravenna-ufo-chase-1966.158484

    I invite people to judge for themselves whose interpretation of the facts is more ridiculous - yours or mine. I was quite persuasive in that thread, I think. And you? Well, not so much.

    As a general comment, it is interesting that you deny that Venus can look like a disc or a red ball in the sky. That's hardly a controversial claim. Also, I didn't say "flaming", though I probably said "bright". Why did you feel the need to embellish (i.e. tell a lie) there?

    You really ought to check it out for yourself. Then again, I provided you with links to the info in the thread, and you didn't bother to look then, so why would you look now?

    Tut tut!

    I have been very explicit about what I know and do not know about UFOs, many times. Why do you repeat the lie that I claim there are no such things? I have never claimed to know what any UFO is before I've looked into the matter. That's the way you roll, not me. For you, every light in the sky is aliens (or insert any other "paranormal" phenomenon that takes your fancy at the moment), and you don't even bother to look into it.

    Of course you are. Maybe it's an undersea colony of Bigfoots piloting all the UFOs!

    But hey! I'm also open to the possibility. Got any evidence in favour of your hypothesis? No? Oh well.

    Yeah, except for the far more numerous accounts where they don't emerge from the sea or lakes...

    And we're off on a fantasy frolic with Magical Realist.

    Oh, and chalk him up as a believer in Atlantis, too. How surprising and unexpected that there's yet another pseudoscientific belief that he has swallowed uncritically.

    That interview on Fox News adds nothing to the information that was posted earlier in the thread.

    I note that the pilot has had a decade to hone and streamline his story, so he's got it all down pat by now.

    Tell me, Magical Realist. Just how much publicity has this guy had? And how much has he been paid to tell his story, over the years? Do you know? Do you care?

    You're referring to the fact that you continue to refuse to abide by our positing guidelines, by spamming our forum with cut-and-pastes of youtube videos with zero commentary or analysis from you, despite repeated warnings and education regarding why this is not acceptable.

    Some people never learn.

    If you want to get permanently banned, you're on the right path. Just keep right on doing what you're doing. You must know what will work after years of doing this. Want to be a UFO martyr? It's sure looking like you do.

    Not at all. I'd love to see compelling evidence that aliens are visiting Earth, as you know. I wrote that earlier in this very thread.

    It has long been apparent that the word "compelling", when it comes from you, is empty of its usual meaning. I suppose when you use that word you think you're being annoying, or that you're sticking it to the man, or something. It's a bit childish really. I assume you know what "compelling" actually means, and what you post ain't it.

    Probably more than you know.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I can be childish too. Just not all the time.

    I'm glad you're enjoying your time here.
     
  17. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Yazata,

    Is this based on the reports, or are you assuming all this "same spot" stuff?

    What I was getting at is that (for example) if one pilot in a plane at 40,000 feet spots something in the sky, and another pilot at 1000 feet spots something above the ocean surface, and these observations occur within a short timespan of each other, it does not automatically follow from the proximity in time that the two pilots saw the same object.

    The Portage County UFO is a good example of this kind of thing, as I suggested in that thread (linked above). There, multiple witnesses at widely-spaced locations saw things on the same night (and in the early morning). It is easy to assume that the various sightings were related, but that can turn out to be be a very bad assumption. In that case, for example, various sightings of the planet Venus and (a little later) of a weather balloon were most probably conflated.

    It's really easy to take one pilot's description and run into flights of fancy. One pilot says "like what a hovering Harrier might cause", and suddenly everybody has a clear picture in their minds about what it looked like. But what if that pilot was wrong, or if the pilot didn't describe what he saw accurately? And what if other descriptions might have been more applicable to what was actually seen?

    It's also a small mental step from thinking about jet wash from a Harrier to assuming that a propulsion system must have caused the waves that were seen. And so the story grows. The "raw" observation quickly gets lost as supposition upon supposition is piled on.

    No. I am talking about the visual observations. Those were not made by radar operators or supervisors on a ship somewhere else. Those people weren't there and didn't see that. The planes at high altitude didn't see the "hovering tic tac" and the water disturbance.

    Objective fact does not follow from what one (or two) people thought they saw.

    The radar operators are trained to recognise known objects and phenomena on the radar, no doubt. That doesn't necessarily mean they are experts in deducing the causes of unusual radar phenomena.

    There's no problem here with people being willing to accept the anomalous report of a UFO here. The military took it seriously enough to assign somebody to investigate and write a report on the incident.

    But maybe you're referring to my unwillingness to accept that the "tic tac" was a likely alien spaceship. I'm not unwilling to accept that, if there's any evidence for it.

    I repeat: it's okay not to know. Chances are that we're not going to get good enough evidence (given the 14 year elapsed time) to sort out exactly what happened here. And so we'll probably just have to file this one under "unexplained". That's okay. The point is: there's no reason at all to put it in a file marked "UAV" or "likely alien spaceships".

    In general, I think people give the military too much credit for having super-advanced technology. I think it's because the military is secretive. It's easy to imagine that the military/government has all kinds of funky technology that they are keeping secret from the general public. But military technology is all based on known science, and the state of known science generally is publically available, for the most part. Big advances in aircraft propulsion would be very hard to cover up, for instance. If somebody managed to figure out how to build in flight characteristics like the ones typically reported for UFOs (massive acceleration, no visible propulsion, silent operation etc. etc.) then enough people would know about it that it would be known (or leaked).

    There was a time, for example, when the stealth bomber was secret military hardware. But long before it was officially acknowledged that such a thing existed, many people understood that it was likely to exist, and the basic principles on which it operates were well understood by many in the general public.

    Another cautionary note goes here. Pilots are probably okay at estimating sizes and distances of known aircraft. But again, that expertise, such as it is, does not necessarily give any special ability when it comes to identifying unknown objects in the sky or the sea.

    Again, as soon as somebody starts describing what was seen as having "ballistic missile characteristics" or whatever, that immediately conjures an image in people's minds. The tendency is then to expand the "characteristics" to include not just the specifics that the description originally applied to (by an eyewitness description, for example), but also other characteristics that go along with ballistic missiles. Say "like a missile" and you are tempted to infer a smooth-sided metal object with no doors and windows, rounded, with an engine, that moves very rapidly etc. etc. Some of these characteristics were not reported as being observed at the time. And so the story tends to grow in the retelling.

    That's faulty reasoning. Just because elements of one guy's story are consistent with elements of another guy's story, it does not follow that both (or either) of the stories is true.

    Suppose guy A sees an large animal with grey skin, and guy B sees a large animal with four feet, and both of them agree that the animal had a tail. Guy A reports that he thought it looked like an elephant. Does guy B's story then tend to confirm the elephant hypothesis? It's not inconsistent, but adding guy B's observation doesn't make it any more likely than before that it was an elephant (as opposed to, say, a hippo). On the other hand, it's probably safe to rule out that what they saw was a car.
     
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    (continued...)

    Fine, but who has ever suggested that mysterious events don't happen?

    There are lots of mysteries in the world - stuff we don't know the answer to yet, or that we might never know the answer to.

    Skeptics are not averse to the mysterious as a matter of principle, or something. The UFO nut who says this "tic tac" encounter is proof of alien visitation is not talking about an unsolved mystery. He is claiming he has solved the mystery, so that there is no mystery at all. He claims he has figured out that the event doesn't have a mundane explanation, but requires an extraordinary one. He claims he has ruled out all the mundane possibilities, at least to high probability.

    It's one thing to point at some puzzling observations and say "Hey, this is weird. I can't easily explain this." It is quite another to claim "Science has no explanation for this. Only alien visitation can explain this."

    I'm not sure what you're saying here. You're not claiming that there are things that have no explanation or cause, are you?

    If you're merely saying that there are some things where the explanation is (currently) unknown, I don't see what's especially Fortean about that.

    Alternatively, perhaps you're making a positive claim that there are some things can only be explained by appealing to the paranormal or supernatural. If that's what you're doing, then you really need to support your claim.

    The problem is the usual problem with UFO cases. There (probably) just isn't enough evidence available to work with to draw definite conclusions, either way. Not that we have ready access to, anyway.

    It's not laughably bad if your aim to show that sometimes things are seen that we can't immediately explain. On the other hand, it probably is laughably bad if your aim to convince somebody that aliens are visiting Earth, based on what we know (so far) about this "tic tac" event.

    Based on the evidence I've seen so far, I'm quite ready to laugh away the notion that this is good evidence for alien visitation, or Bigfoots from Atlantis, or whatever it is that Magical Realist would like it to be.
     
  19. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    I think the opposite , you give the militatary to little credit .

    The science is based on , not known science but advanced science such as anti-gravity for a start .

    You would think , anti-gravity is from the 1930's , T.T. Brown . Of course any advancement on this tech. Has long been closed .

    Advanced Anti-gravity is known . As far as leaks , " we can take ET home " , Ben Rich .
     
  20. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Anti-gravity, if it existed, would be so useful to the world that the military couldn't possibly hope to keep it a secret, even if they wanted to.

    What makes you think that?
     
  21. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    To your first statement , make it secret . Which it is .

    First off , to your last statement , Germany in the 1930's was very scientific , hence knew about T.T.Browns research . Even when the U.S. ignored his research .

    But , and here is the thing , when T.T.Brown was demonstrating his Ideas to the military , in California , back home on the East coast his research was stolen .

    Advanced research on anti-gravity , whether by T.T.Brown , Tesla and other brilliant thinkers , has been going on for 90's years . Hence why people observe very large air craft with no sound , can hover and accelerate at very high speeds . Essentially disappear .
     
  22. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    That's a conspiracy theory.

    Something that big couldn't possibly be kept secret for decades.

    Germany lost many of its best physicists in the 1930s to America and other countries.

    I've never heard of this T.T. Brown.

    Where?

    You think UFOs are secret military craft, driven by secret anti-gravity propulsion? Is that what you're saying?
     
  23. river

    Messages:
    17,307

    Really so you know all things that are and have been going in area 51 ?
     

Share This Page