UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[EHocking]

Tell me Marduk: Do you see any red areas on the cape marking goose territory? Any red area at all would do. Even the tiniest shading of red. No? Hmmm…

You were warned not to pursue this, so.

The map you are discussing is merely a range distribution map. It is an indicator of where you are most likely to find the birds and not a should not be used as a definitive description of a species range.

Let's, instead, look at ACTUAL SIGHTINGS.

From the Bird Atlas of Australia.
First the explanation of what the map can do.

The Map Viewer software was created for Birds Australia by acroMap Pty Ltd. The species list display is created using the current Atlas2 database. This display enables you to retrieve the species that have been observed in a specified grid square within continental Australia. The latest release of the MapViewer software (April 2000) also enables you to view your observations in a grid square by entering your Atlas Observer ID.
​

Here's the grid square centred on Cape Otway.

Here's the resulting list of OBSERVED SPECIES at Cape Otway in summer.

Species List

Lat: -39 00 00 Long: 143 00 00 to Lat: -38 00 00 Long: 144 00 00

From December to February

Locale: AUS

Number of species: 200


Species name
in taxonomic order
Stubble Quail
Blue-billed Duck
Musk Duck
Black Swan
Cape Barren Goose
Australian Shelduck
Australian Wood Duck...

I performed the search for all four seasons which resulted in Cape Barren Geese being observed all year round at Cape Otway.
Your persistent claim that Cape Barren Geese are not observed at Cape Otway is unsupported by the evidence available.

Give it up and accept that geese as an explanation for the sighting is plausible.

 

[John Albert]

The above are simply more unfounded proclaimations. There are thousands of cases where mundane possibilities were explored. Most ufology books don't go into mundane cases because they aren't what people are interested in reading about.

OK, I concede that point.

I had one particular ufologist in mind with that little barb.

Sorry about that.

 

[mike3]

My original statement is still perfectly accurate: Modern civilian radar uses transponder and ant-clutter techology that eliminates returns historically associated with UFOs. The transponder is part of the secondary radar system used in conjunction with the primary radar system and anti-clutter technology. Perhaps the primary rardar's anti-clutter technology can be switched off, but I doubt that's part of their routine. Maybe that's what you were trying to refer to?

j.r.

You said "For all we know", indicating you were speculating -- now it seems you are asserting this as a fact. Got evidence?

 

[Akhenaten]

I performed the search for all four seasons which resulted in Cape Barren Geese being observed all year round at Cape Otway.
Your persistent claim that Cape Barren Geese are not observed at Cape Otway is unsupported by the evidence available.

Give it up and accept that geese as an explanation for the sighting is plausible.

But the mountains and the rainforest . . .

 

[Aepervius]

Address the argument not the arguer. I did google doppler radar and several other pages in an attempt to figure out what you are talking about. Doppler radar is simply a type of radar system. So what?

My original statement is still perfectly accurate: Modern civilian radar uses transponder and ant-clutter techology that eliminates returns historically associated with UFOs. The transponder is part of the secondary radar system used in conjunction with the primary radar system and anti-clutter technology. Perhaps the primary rardar's anti-clutter technology can be switched off, but I doubt that's part of their routine. Maybe that's what you were trying to refer to?

j.r.

Transponder are simply request-answer electronic which gives either identification or other info (like altitude) when queried. They can be linked to radar as to give automatic info (they are in small aircraft, aren't they ? So that when the control tower paint them, automatically the transponder is queried and transmit the altitude and speed info to the tower). They are not per-see part of the radar system. FF system are transponder too for example.

"eliminates returns historically associated with UFOs" yeah right. So instead of the logical explanation (crappy older system were showing phantom object newer more reliable system do not) you jump to cloacking. Ha !

 

[Aepervius]

It must really suck to realize that one of your gods has turned his back on you.

Would not have it to face him to be able to perform that operation ?

nevermind .

 

[Akhenaten]

Transponder are simply request-answer electronic which gives either identification or other info (like altitude) when queried. They can be linked to radar as to give automatic info (they are in small aircraft, aren't they ? So that when the control tower paint them, automatically the transponder is queried and transmit the altitude and speed info to the tower). They are not per-see part of the radar system. FF system are transponder too for example.

Altitude (Mode C) and aircraft ident (Mode 3/A) for both civil and military aircraft, and type/mission (Mode 1) and tail number (Mode 2) for military only.

The military IFF system is based on the encrypted Mode 4.

As you say, it's not part of the radar but a separate duplex receiver(1030MHz)/transmitter(1090MHz).

Speed information comes from the Doppler, where equipped, or more frequently from the airframe driver himself simply telly the ATC how fast he's going.

"eliminates returns historically associated with UFOs" yeah right. So instead of the logical explanation (crappy older system were showing phantom object newer more reliable system do not) you jump to cloacking. Ha !

When your automatic response to an anomolous blip on a screen is "OMG . . . aliens!" it's only a little extra step to "OMG . . . Romulans!"

 

[EHocking]

But the mountains and the rainforest . . .

http://www.yvonneclaireadams.com/HostedStuff/CapeOtway2.jpg​

Yeah, somthing that can fly would have great difficulty traversing that terrain.

 

[Resume]

I performed the search for all four seasons which resulted in Cape Barren Geese being observed all year round at Cape Otway.
Your persistent claim that Cape Barren Geese are not observed at Cape Otway is unsupported by the evidence available.

Give it up and accept that geese as an explanation for the sighting is plausible.

I'm betting that someone with reasonable photoshop skills could come up with a BlimpoGoose.

 

[Agatha]

Rramjet, now that EHocking has shown that Cape Barren Geese are observed at Cape Otway, do you accept you were in error when you categorically asserted that

No geese live in the area and none migrate over the area. Never have and never will

?

 

[Rramjet]

You were warned not to pursue this, so.

(...)

Your persistent claim that Cape Barren Geese are not observed at Cape Otway is unsupported by the evidence available.

Give it up and accept that geese as an explanation for the sighting is plausible.

I was “warned”? What with… a continuation of the ridicule, the abuse, or the utter implausibility of the “geese” hypothesis?

I have never claimed Cape Barren Geese were not present at Cape Otway. I claimed that where my sighting occurred there are no Cape Barren Geese, nor do they fly over in migration - it simply does not happen. Those are the facts of the matter. Full stop.

I also stated the location of Cape Otway as a reference point for the satellite hypothesis and claimed that it was "near enough" to the actual location of my sighting for that purpose.

I have also made a number of references to the effect that geese do not fly over the Otways (the forested mountain range) and indeed the habitat of the geese maps support that. This should have indicated to anyone paying attention that the actual location was in the Otways and not precisely at the Cape.

But of course you will keep believing what you want to and I cannot help that.

Now: A very simple question for you:

Where to the north of the Otways are the Cape Barren geese?

My sighting was of four objects, indistinguishable in character from stars or satellites, travelling in train at a great height, at 11:45 PM, travelling due south to north, with the first two objects oscillating about a central point between them.

Another simple question for you:

What possible light source could illuminate birds so that they are indistinguishable from stars or satellites?

These answers to these two questions are critical for the plausibility of the “geese” hypothesis.

The answers to those questions (in order) are of course: There are none and there is none. The “geese” hypothesis is implausible.

Move on ...unless you want to “warn” me with something else…LOL.

 

[Akhenaten]

I'm betting that someone with reasonable photoshop skills could come up with a BlimpoGoose.

 

[GeeMack]

I have never claimed Cape Barren Geese were not present at Cape Otway. I claimed that where my sighting occurred there are no Cape Barren Geese, nor do they fly over in migration - it simply does not happen. Those are the facts of the matter. Full stop.

Interesting that you choose to dig in and continue the lie rather than simply admitting you were completely wrong when you said this...

... but there were no geese. No geese live in the area and none migrate over the area. Never have and never will. For that matter, there is nowhere for any migrating bird to have come from but the open ocean... unless perhaps they were Emperor Penguins.

There is a common mundane explanation for you claiming to have seen a UFO, an explanation which you have yet to address. The entire story is a not very imaginative tall tale. You made it up.

 

[Rramjet]

Hey there Ramjet, I've also been through the spanish inquisition here regarding my own sighting. It ultimately came down to being told I don't deserve anything but ridicule. Great way to earn the respect of those seeking answers eh?

Yes, for an organisation that pretends to public outreach and education they have a very peculiar way of going about it. I could have sworn that ridicule, abuse, misrepresentation and obfuscation were not particularly effective teaching methods – but of course that just my opinion. LOL.

Personally I find your sighting rather interesting. You say the objects looked like satellites but the leading two "oscilated around a central point". The constant lighting almost rules out satellites. But if the lighting was just right, and the satellite was shaped just right, it is feasible that you may have seen some tethered satallites reflecting the sunlight followed by two other objects from the same launch. You can read a bit about space tether missions here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_tether_missions

That’s interesting and so far a lot more thoughtful as a response that anything the debunkers have been throwing at me. I have not had time to look into it more closely but I wonder if any of those could have been orbiting south to north?

I've seen high flying aircraft at night that look like slow moving satellites, but the objects you saw would have to be cruising pretty fast to cover the distance in the time you report. These days however, I suppose that kind of speed is possible. But it would still be unusual.

Indeed. As you say. But of course no satellites have so far been found that would fit the time and location…

I've also seen plenty of birds flying at night. They just don't light up like satellites or stars. If you were already familiar with satellites, then the difference between them and birds is more than obvious.

That’s perfectly correct. Not only that, there was simply no light source that could have illuminated birds. It was nearly midnight, so the sun was practically on the direct opposite side of the planet. If it were a powerful spotlight (just for the sake of argument…) then its beam would certainly have been visible cutting through the sea mist over the mountains…

I couldn't say with the same certainty as my own sighting that you saw anything alien, but let me ask you if there was anything specific that makes you think they weren't of Earthly origin?

I have absolutely no idea what they were. They simply defy plausible mundane explanation. As you know I am loathe to put the ET interpretation onto UFOs. I know that for many the explanation is plausible – indeed compelling. But speaking strictly from a scientific perspective, we simply don’t have the direct evidence to have proof of the conclusion (some may argue that we do – I have presented only one case where the DNA evidence showed something out of the ordinary – but still, ET? Who knows?)

 

[Rramjet]

Interesting that you choose to dig in and continue the lie rather than simply admitting you were completely wrong when you said this...

“... but there were no geese. No geese live in the area and none migrate over the area. Never have and never will. For that matter, there is nowhere for any migrating bird to have come from but the open ocean... unless perhaps they were Emperor Penguins.”​

I stand by that statement. The last sentence of course was in reference to the direct and unwavering south to north trajectory of the objects and a reference to the fact that there is absolutely no land directly to the south of the location (except Antarctica and penguins…). Of course what was meant as a mildly humorous throw-away line has been turned into a big production…

At the location of my sighting there are no geese, nor do they migrate over the area. Nothing to this point that has been presented falsifies that contention.

However, in order to maintain the “geese” hypotheisis, you will need to answer two questions:

Given my sighting was of four objects, indistinguishable in character from stars or satellites, travelling in train at a great height, at 11:45 PM, travelling due south to north, with the first two objects oscillating about a central point between them.

Where to the north of the Otways are the Cape Barren geese?

and

What possible light source could illuminate birds so that they are indistinguishable from stars or satellites?

 

[GeeMack]

[qimg]http://www.yvonneclaireadams.com/HostedStuff/GooseBlimp.jpg[/qimg]​

That looks like a Canada Goose Blimp. Everyone with half a brain knows that around Apollo Bay in Australia you'd be seeing mostly Greylag Geese, Cape Barren Geese, and Magpie Geese. You know, those three (3) kinds of geese that make this argument look so foolish...

... but there were no geese. No geese live in the area and none migrate over the area. Never have and never will. For that matter, there is nowhere for any migrating bird to have come from but the open ocean... unless perhaps they were Emperor Penguins.

... and add support to the notion that Rramjet's alleged sighting is pure fiction.

 

[Resume]

At the location of my sighting there are no geese, nor do they migrate over the area. Nothing to this point that has been presented falsifies that contention.
[/I][/B]

Are you saying that migratory waterfowl have never been shown to alter their migration patterns?

 

[Akhenaten]

I was “warned”? What with… a continuation of the ridicule, the abuse, or the utter implausibility of the “geese” hypothesis?

Warned that your ridiculous contention that Cape Barren Geese are unknown in the vicinity of Cape Otway would be shown up for the complete balderdash that it is.

I have never claimed Cape Barren Geese were not present at Cape Otway. I claimed that where my sighting occurred there are no Cape Barren Geese, nor do they fly over in migration - it simply does not happen. Those are the facts of the matter. Full stop.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cape_barren_Goose.png

That red area in the map above includes Cape Otway and happens to be the habitat for Cape Barren geese, a big old bird with a wingspan of almost 2 meters, known to fly in small flocks, especially outside of the breeding season of July - September. So, that's kind of a known-to-exist thing.

This red area below is ... well, lie is a pretty strong word.

OMG. Your own map demonstrates my contention that ‘there were no geese. No geese live in the area and none migrate over the area. Never have and never will.” is true!

And if you think the satellite hypothesis is a plausible hypothesis, then find a solution that would explain four objects in a row with the first two oscillating about a central point between them, flying south to north over Cape Otway at 11:45 at night in December 2008...

Yeah right...

The "red area", it must be noted, does not include Cape Otway!

Do you know of ANY "satellites" that were trailing four in a row, with the leading pair oscillating about a central point between them, travelling south to north over Cape Otway, at 11:45 at night, in December 2008?

...especially when they don't consider the topography of the Cape Otway area and consider that geese fly to the mainland to graze on pasture - and the Cape Otway area is mountainous and rainforested. That's why the red area on the map does not extend further down the coast ...Love to see a Goose try to graze pasture on a mountain in a rainforest... LOL.

I said plausible in case you missed it. That means it has to fit with and explain the evidence. It has been demonstrated that your “Geese” hypothesis does not fly (Cape Otway has no geese). And if your “satellite” hypothesis had any veracity – with your expertise and interest in the field - I am almost certain you would have pointed us toward potential candidates by now.

<snip>.

If you have I must have missed it. Perhaps you would care to post that information again? Cape Otway, 11:45 at night, December, 2008.

Perhaps before European settlement there were coastal fringe grazing lands available for them - but not any more. And you will also notice that the area on the map showing the Gadubanud people's territory extends well to the west of Cape Otway ...and there are flat grazing lands out there.

What “zoology reports?

You mean this link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cape_barren_Goose.png)?

Funny how there are no red areas over Cape Otway. No geese over cape Otway? No geese over Cape Otway. And the map shows that to be the case.

(Funny how the “green dot” on your representation of the map obscures that fact isn’t it? )

You people just don't seem to get it. What about the evidence?

The objects in my sighting were travelling at a great height directly south to north. Where to the north of Cape Otway are the goose habitats?

I also stated the location of Cape Otway as a reference point for the satellite hypothesis and claimed that it was "near enough" to the actual location of my sighting for that purpose.

Near enough until you're called on it and suddenly your sighting moves.

I have also made a number of references to the effect that geese do not fly over the Otways (the forested mountain range) and indeed the habitat of the geese maps support that. This should have indicated to anyone paying attention that the actual location was in the Otways and not precisely at the Cape.

The quotes above make it abundantly clear that you were talking about Cape Otway.

But of course you will keep believing what you want to and I cannot help that.

Now: A very simple question for you:

Where to the north of the Otways are the Cape Barren geese?

Lake Colac and Lake Corangamite. Extensive wetlands 50-60 km due North of Cape Otway. Would you like some links or can you google 'lake colac cape barren geese' for yourself?

My sighting was of four objects, indistinguishable in character from stars or satellites, travelling in train at a great height, at 11:45 PM, travelling due south to north, with the first two objects oscillating about a central point between them.

Another simple question for you:

What possible light source could illuminate birds so that they are indistinguishable from stars or satellites?

These answers to these two questions are critical for the plausibility of the “geese” hypothesis.

The answers to those questions (in order) are of course: There are none and there is none. The “geese” hypothesis is implausible.

Move on ...unless you want to “warn” me with something else…LOL.

The goose hypothesis is already far more plausible than anything you've suggested.

 

[RoboTimbo]

It is possible to know that an object is non-mundane, yet not be able to positively identify it.

No, it's possible to believe that an object is non-mundane as long as you close your eyes and ears to any mundane explanations. We can clearly see that happening with the pseudoscientists here.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Think of an event that has no mundane explanation. Anything - as long as it doesn't have a mundane explanation. Suppose you are sitting in your computer chair as you are now. Suddenly, you become air borne as if floating and materialize through your wall and continue floating down the street.

We know this event has no mundane explanation, yet has no non-mundane explanation yet either.

This is not to say that a non-mundane explanation will not later be forthcoming. Many discoveries were mysteries before being understood.

You seem to be making the absurd claim that something cannot for at least a period of time be a mystery.

Think of four points of light going overhead. Think of any explanation you want to for them. Anything. Just as long as it isn't mundane. Suppose you stay rooted to the spot because you can't believe your eyes. You just know that it's PseudoAliens, probably Pleidians come to probe Uranus.

Suddenly, they wheel lower in the sky and land on the mountainous terrain of Cape Otway and begin feeding on the local greenery boulders.

Do you:

a. Suddenly feel foolish for thinking geese were here to probe Uranus?

b. Tell your story of Pleidians to an internet forum for critical thinking so that people point and laugh at you?