UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[Astrophotographer]

[The pilot (copilot, news crew, etc) saw the “light” as being on a level with their airplane.

Then it should have been visible on the Christchurch radar but it wasn't. Klass states Maccabee says that the depression angle for the light was 5 degrees below the plane's fore-aft axis (p. 244). If I read Dr. Maccabee's Applied optics plot right, he describes depression angles of 20-40 degrees at point D. That would be well below the aircraft.

I guess you have not looked at a map of New Zealand recently and noted the locations of the identified squid fleets in relation to it. The easterly fleet was on the EAST side of the South Island EAST of Christchurch! No boat departing from Christchurch would traverse Pegasus Bay to get to it.

Christchurch is on Pegasus bay. What did the boat do? Leap over the bay?

http://www.tramsoft.ch/gps/screenshots/garmin/mapsource/neuseeland/garmin_mapsource_nz_pegasus-bay_big.jpg

Klass alleges a boat going into Pegasus Bay. He does not say where it departed from (Christchurch or Wellington) and he does not KNOW what the purpose of such a journey might have been even IF the allegation were true. Besides, HIS alleged boat was two weeks prior!

If the boat went to Pegasus bay to fish, how long do you think they would be out? It would take at least a day from Wellington to get there and I am sure two weeks would not be that long if the fishing was good. There is no evidence that this squid boat did not leave Pegasus bay.

Besides, squid are (in the main) ocean-going, deep-water fish. Yes they might come into shallower waters, like Pegasus Bay, to spawn, but while it is possible (in this mad mad world of ours) that the NZ Agriculture Ministry would allow the Japanese to fish the spawning grounds, it hardly seem likely.

I guess you missed where the quote I gave where the best fishing results for these type of squid was less than 200m. That is not exactly "deep water" is it?

Yes, the EAST coast has deep water close to the coast, so squid fishing occurs there – but we are talking about the WEST coast here – and the KNOWN squid fleet was 110 nm WEST of Christchurch (out in the open ocean).

I think you need to get your directions straight. Earlier you said the fleet was East (which is where it is shown on Dr. M's map) now you say West.

Ireland and Andrew distorted the flight path of the plane to fit their “squid boat” hypothesis to show a turn of 120 degrees, while the PILOT states his turn was ONLY 92 degrees. Who do we believe? The pilot who conducted the manoeuvre, or the vested interests of Klass and Ireland who HAD to have a greater turn based only on the necessity to fit their hypothesis? Dr Maccabee had already published the pilots statements in this regard before Klass and Ireland came up with their hypothesis – so they just ignored the pilot’s testimony!)

Exactly how often did the pilot change his testimony? Do you have the interviews? Do we have the actual flight path of the plane? I find it interesting that the plot used by Maccabee to refute Ireland/Andrew's plot has the line of sights all pointing to the same general location (just like Ireland's plot) as if the target were stationary until the pilot turns away from the target (sighting line E).

Previous aircraft (as you note) DID report the phenomenon! You merely speculate that AP were involved in those reports. Who knows why others did not report in the meantime. Who knows if there was even a phenomenon to report in between times. WHAT was the phenomenon reported? THAT is the 64 thousand dollar question!

What about the efforts of the PEL scientists associated with the P-3 orions just a short while after these events? They demonstrated that AP was quite common. The scientists also noted this when monitoring the radar at Wellington.

A note on squid boats: The combined power output of one of those boats can be up to 200000 watts! There is just no mistaking those babies! One might mistake an oil well near the horizon, but NOT a squid boat, especially if it were closer!

Of course, when you are seeing it from the air at a distance of 10-20 km, it would not be so easy to figure out.

Finally In Dr Maccabee’s Applied Optics paper, he notes that the squid fleets were picked up by a satellite, but that there were no lights in Pegasus Bay.

Hmmm.......So, one squid boat would be easily seen? Sheaffer has the photo in his book but it is not very clear. Perhaps you can present us with a copy. The image around christchurch is overexposed and it is difficult to see anything in the bay due to the spill over. The combined output of the squid fleet has one large blob and you can not make out individual lights.

 

[Jocce]

But there were NOT “numerous” radar echoes and “numerous” light sources (at least not as you generally describe).

On the southern leg there were numerous echoes and light sources near the coast (around Kaikoura). But near the plane (within a few miles) there was ONLY one.
On the northern leg, there was ONLY ever one.

And I'm sure you can provide evidence for that?

Are you stating that radar is incapable of providing distance? I thought that was what radar was FOR! Radar controller states “Target, 2:00, 4 miles”. You look and see a light at 2:00. There are NO other lights visible.

First, I am obviously talking about the impossibility judging distance in a visual observation of a light source at night. Stop hunting straw men. Second, I hope you can provide evidence that no other lights were visible

According to you, our whole existence is based on irrational beliefs.

No, just homeopathy, faith healing, flat earthers and UFO=alien ship proponents.

So film of an event is “3rd-hand retelling” now? You gotta do better than that too!

Maybe you should start adressing the critique you get instead? And yeah, a shaky film of unidentified lights at night is hardly evidence of UFOs.

 

[Access Denied]

So, where do UFOlogists get funds for such a system? Well, the Fund For UFO Research gave Stanton Friedman some ridiculous money to research MJ-12. It was almost like donating him a nice sum of money to confirm what he already believed.

And, what was more likely than not, based on his own “research”… while all us idiots skeptics do all the debunking critical analysis for free. Go figure.

My all time favorite circular reference of Friedman’s…

http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/mj12_update2.html

“HOW DID A HOAXER KNOW SO MUCH?

In Ref. 2 I provided a list of more than 37 facts not known to be true until after the EBD, TFM, and CTM had been received or found. A lot were trivial such as the date given, August 1, 1950, for Smith having permanently replaced the deceased Forrestal as an MJ-12 member. I obtained from the Truman Library the fact that that was the only date when Truman and Smith met during a many-month period of time before Smith succeeded Hillenkoetter as DCI. They had not provided that information to anyone else.”​

Hmmm… how did the hoaxer know so much?

[scratches head]

I doubt any would dare to do it because, deep down, they probably already know what the results will be.

And, not to mention, really bad for business…

Much easier to rest your laurels on the cases that successfully convinced the unwashed masses of the previous generations… sooner or later someone like Rramjet with incredulity and ignorance to spare will stumble upon any number of crusty old UFO websites blissfully unaware of all the evidence to the contrary and proceed to become your new source of free advertising.

Round and round we go…

 

[EHocking]

...Besides, squid are (in the main) ocean-going, deep-water fish.

Anyone who has fished for squid off jetties and piers in Port Phillip Bay, Melbourne, Australia will realise that you are talking out of your hat. While this assertion may seem to support whatever argument you are trying to make - it is untrue.

Yes they might come into shallower waters, like Pegasus Bay, to spawn, but while it is possible (in this mad mad world of ours) that the NZ Agriculture Ministry would allow the Japanese to fish the spawning grounds, it hardly seem likely.

Unfounded supposition.

 

[Correa Neto]

 

[Toke]

That looks more like a bat to me.

 

[Astrophotographer]

I find it interesting that the plot used by Maccabee to refute Ireland/Andrew's plot has the line of sights all pointing to the same general location (just like Ireland's plot) as if the target were stationary until the pilot turns away from the target (sighting line E).

These lines tend to point towards one location as if the target were nearly stationary. If we discount the "E" sighting lines, it paints an interesting picture.



Considering the problems with figuring out azimuth values on a moving/banking plane and that we are basing most of this on the memories recalled weeks/months after the event, I think Maccabee's plot is very similar to what Ireland and Andrew provided (this assumes the E lines are erroneous or another light source seen after the bank to port).

 

[Correa Neto]

That looks more like a bat to me.

Nah. You are batfish crazy!

 

[Astrophotographer]

And yeah, a shaky film of unidentified lights at night is hardly evidence of UFOs.

Actually they are UFOs. They are unidentified lights. However, I am not sure they are "flying". Maybe they are "floating"? There really is no indication that these lights come from a supernatural source or are evidence of something unknown to science.

 

[GeeMack]

Actually they are UFOs. They are unidentified lights. However, I am not sure they are "flying". Maybe they are "floating"? There really is no indication that these lights come from a supernatural source or are evidence of something unknown to science.

But there is no certain indication that they didn't come from a supernatural force. So the possibility does exist that they were a phenomenon created by gods to make some crazy high school kid believe they are evidence of aliens.

So again the "UFOs = gods" theory is not refuted. Not by you, and not by Rramjet. And since billions more humans have believed that gods are real than those who believed aliens are real, and since humans have believed gods are real for far longer than they have believed aliens are real, the gods conjecture is still kicking the "UFOs = aliens" conjecture's ass.

 

[Spektator]

I noted earlier a former colleague's experience when he thought his car was being paced at night by a low-flying UFO. He discovered that it was just a vehicle with one headlight, coming down a mountain road (and hence above his car from his point of view). Maybe we should have a different term if it's uncertain whether the lights at night are aerial or not: UNL, maybe? Unidentified Nocturnal Light?

 

[RoboTimbo]

For a frightening look into the mind of a true UFO believer, read The Secrets of the Mojave, compiled by "Branton". It's online so it's free but it is book length so be prepared. It is linked through this website, which is an entertaining read in itself.

The book is chock-a-block full of the same type of fallacies that Rramjet uses in this thread

 

[RoboTimbo]

But there is no certain indication that they didn't come from a supernatural force. So the possibility does exist that they were a phenomenon created by gods to make some crazy high school kid believe they are evidence of aliens.

So again the "UFOs = gods" theory is not refuted. Not by you, and not by Rramjet. And since billions more humans have believed that gods are real than those who believed aliens are real, and since humans have believed gods are real for far longer than they have believed aliens are real, the gods conjecture is still kicking the "UFOs = aliens" conjecture's ass.

There are at least a couple of threads on this forum regarding evidence or proof for gods so you have that going for you. Something I find compelling for your theory is that physical objects have to obey phyiscal laws. They can't escape physics. Yet Rramjet has given evidence that his UFOs do defy known physics. That really only leaves "gods" as the answer, assuming that Rramjet is correct about the UFOs defying physics part and theists are correct about the gods don't obey the laws of phyiscs part.

Admittedly, that's two big "ifs" but it's about 37,426 fewer than Rramjet has made.

 

[Toke]

Looks like that angelfire/brandon site got almost every conspiracy invented yet.

 

[Marcus]

Sorry Rramjet, you haven't conclusively shown how anyone can accurately measure by eye a light source against a black sky and black sea to be able to tell how far away it was to be able to confirm it was the same blip that was on the radar.

Until you can do this, you can not say that there was any radar visual tie up.

I've often wondered how people who sight UFO's are able to provide distance estimates without knowing the size of the object... No wait, they estimate the distance from their size estimate, and estimate the size from their distance estimate, silly me.

P.S. nice poster

 

[GeeMack]

I've often wondered how people who sight UFO's are able to provide distance estimates without knowing the size of the object... No wait, they estimate the distance from their size estimate, and estimate the size from their distance estimate, silly me.

Maybe ask Signore Ponzo?

 

[tsig]

But there is no certain indication that they didn't come from a supernatural force. So the possibility does exist that they were a phenomenon created by gods to make some crazy high school kid believe they are evidence of aliens.

So again the "UFOs = gods" theory is not refuted. Not by you, and not by Rramjet. And since billions more humans have believed that gods are real than those who believed aliens are real, and since humans have believed gods are real for far longer than they have believed aliens are real, the gods conjecture is still kicking the "UFOs = aliens" conjecture's ass.

Ufo's = god makes even more sense when we consider the nature of the phenomena. If we assume that the ufo's are piloted by rational creatures then there behavior makes no sense but gods are known to be arbitrary and capricious so there's one more fact to add to the list that some god is playing with RR.

 

[EHocking]

I think I have this solved.

Here's a magnification of the water droplet photograph...

 

[Correa Neto]

I must warn that you are pretty close to the astounding REALITY regarding the inteligencies which dwell beyond the borders of what we call the natural world.

Be warned that many became insane after contemplating these entities.
Some even said they are fishes...

 

[Toke]

Some even said they are fishes...

Or bats.