UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[ufology]

You measured a map and a road. What instrumentation did you use to triangulate the light that you believe was a long distance away so that you could confirm what your fallible perception told you was a long distance away?

I believe the light was about 3 Km away because I could see it go down behind the trees on the other side of the lake ... how much more obvious could that be ... If you see a bird fly behind a building, the bird has to be at least as far away as the building ... it's just plain logical.

Also just because there are car accidents doesn't change the fact that we can and do make many decisions on the road regularly with perfect precision. Plus for your analogy to be accurate, you'd be implying that all these accidents are all due to drivers seeing something that isn't actually there, but they believe is there for several seconds. How many of all these accidents that you quote are due to hallucinations in healthy unimpaired individuals? Also consider the analogy of playing catch. How many times can you catch a softball that you plainly see coming at you? I used to do it for hours. And suggesting a white sphere and a ball of light aren't similar enough to discern what and where they are is just plain unreasonable. I have no problem with people refusing to believe me because they need to see it for themselves, just don't invent faulty reasons.

j.r.

 

[Marduk]

I believe the light was about 3 Km away because I could see it go down behind the trees on the other side of the lake ... how much more obvious could that be ... If you see a bird fly behind a building, the bird has to be at least as far away as the building ... it's just plain logical.

this logical discconect that you're now exhibiting, have you had it happen before when someones offered a mundane explanation that fits what you saw perfectly or is this a new experience for you ?

 

[Resume]

Plus for your analogy to be accurate, you'd be implying that all these accidents are all due to drivers seeing something that isn't actually there,

j.r.

No, they see what's there, they just misjudge the distance.

 

[ufology]

this logical discconect that you're now exhibiting, have you had it happen before when someones offered a mundane explanation that fits what you saw perfectly or is this a new experience for you ?

The above is a misrepresentation. I had said, "If you see a bird fly behind a building, the bird has to be at least as far away as the building". Please explain the "disconnect" in the logic there.

j.r.

 

[RoboTimbo]

I believe the light was about 3 Km away because I could see it go down behind the trees on the other side of the lake ... how much more obvious could that be ... If you see a bird fly behind a building, the bird has to be at least as far away as the building ... it's just plain logical.

You believe the light went down behind the trees. Do you see why unfalsifiable anecdotes are useless for validating extraordinary claims?

Also just because there are car accidents doesn't change the fact that we can and do make many decisions on the road regularly with perfect precision. Plus for your analogy to be accurate, you'd be implying that all these accidents are all due to drivers seeing something that isn't actually there, but they believe is there for several seconds.

No, that's your penchant for strawmen coming out again. You should learn to curb that habit.

How many of all these accidents that you quote are due to hallucinations in unimpaired individuals? Be reasonable.

Yes, be reasonable. They happen in their millions every day to people who are unimpaired and not due to hallucinations. Why do you only argue against strawmen?

If you drive then you know what I'm saying is true. Also consider the analogy of playing catch. How many times can you catch a softball that you plainly see coming at you? I used to do it for hours. I have no problem with people just refusing to believe only me because they need to see it for themselves, just don't invent faulty reasons.

j.r.

Consider the analogy of playing catch. If you've ever seen a major league baseball game, you've probably seen professionals miss balls. Why do you believe that every person in the world catches every ball thrown to them every time? That's a strawman. Do you see why it is an invalid method for arguing your case?

I have no problem with you believing in your alien flying saucery on no evidence, just don't invent and embellish your stories thinking that they will have any traction with people who think critically. Do you see that unfalsifiable anecdotes are useless for validating belief in extraordinary claims?

 

[Marduk]

The above is a misrepresentation. I had said, "If you see a bird fly behind a building, the bird has to be at least as far away as the building". Please explain the "disconnect" in the logic there.

j.r.

lol you really can't see it can you
your brain has started insulating you from the obvious facts
like when a bird flies into a building you know
1) the size of the building
2) its distance from you
3) the relative speed of the bird
3) the size of the bird

with the above its possible to determine what you are seeing
your experience has no similar frame of reference, you saw what you'd wanted to see since you were seven

yet, you will never be able to be honest with yourself about it, which is why your description of the event keeps changing with every retelling
This is why several posters here think you are dishonest, you aren't, yet the filter youre brain has subconsciously created is an out and out liar, and you are relating your experience through it

 

[ufology]

No, they see what's there, they just misjudge the distance.

OK so you accept what I saw was actually there then? Now since I saw it go down and come up from behind the tress on the other side of the lake, the object must have been at least that far way, this logic is the same as if you see a bird fly behind a building, then the bird must have been at least as far away as the building. If you know how far away the building is, then you can measure the minimum distance. If you also see the bird fly in front of another building at the same time, then you know it went between the buildings and you can get an approximate distance from you to where the bird was by measuring the distance from your position to a spot between the two buildings ... it's all quite logical ... if not then please explain why you don't think so.

j.r.

 

[Marduk]

OK so you accept what I saw was actually there then? .

yes, because what you saw has a mundane explanation
you have become "Mr firefly"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_perspective


what size was the alien ship ?

 

[Resume]

OK so you accept what I saw was actually there then? Now since I saw it go down and come up from behind the tress on the other side of the lake, the object must have been at least that far way, this logic is the same as if you see a bird fly behind a building, then the bird must have been at least as far away as the building. If you know how far away the building is, then you can measure the minimum distance. If you also see the bird fly in front of another building at the same time, then you know it went between the buildings and you can get an approximate distance from you to where the bird was by measuring the distance from your position to a spot between the two buildings ... it's all quite logical ... if not then please explain why you don't think so.

j.r.

Sure, you saw something that has no scale, and misjudged from there. So what? You think it dipped behind some trees the way, I don't know, a firefly flits behind a bush.

 

[AdMan]

I believe the light was about 3 Km away because I could see it go down behind the trees on the other side of the lake ... how much more obvious could that be ... If you see a bird fly behind a building, the bird has to be at least as far away as the building ... it's just plain logical.

Google maps shows Windermere Lake to be barely over 2 Km wide at its widest point.

Did you get the 3 Km wrong too (like you did the north south thing), or what is that based on?

 

[Marduk]

At midnight a glowing blue-white orb sprung up from behind the mountain range across the lake and bounced down the side of the mountain in three big arcs. We were all stunned and didn't know what to say. Finally Karen said, "did you see that?" we were already nodding. It was about the size of a Volkswagen beetle,

ftfy

 

[ufology]

Google maps shows Windermere Lake to be barely over 2 Km wide at its widest point.

Did you get the 3 Km wrong too, or what is that based on?

My girlfriends ranch house was up on the bench away from the lake and the object didn't come down on the lake, but up above on the rise toward the foot of the mountain on the east side of the highway. This adds extra distance that is known from fixed landmarks.

j.r.

 

[Marduk]

My girlfriends ranch house was up on the bench away from the lake and the object didn't come down on the lake, but up above on the rise toward the foot of the mountain on the east side of the highway. This adds extra distance that is known from fixed landmarks.

j.r.

3 km distance from the mountain puts you on the east side of the lake, the east west yellow line is exactly 3km in length

this proves without a shadow of a doubt that you have no idea of the distances involved and are now guessing on a 30 year old memory
this also proves that you have never even bothered to investigate your own alleged sighting properly, yet claim to know every detail
theres that pseudoscience you were denying

 

[AdMan]

...the object didn't come down on the lake, but up above on the rise toward the foot of the mountain on the east side of the highway.

How could you be sure of this from three kilometers away?

I think you are just guessing at distances. Easy to do, if you have no experience or frame of reference.

 

[ufology]

3 km distance from the mountain puts you on the east side of the lake, the east west yellow line is exactly 3km in length
this proves without a shadow of a doubt that you have no idea of the distances involved and are now guessing on a 30 year old memory
this also proves that you have never even bothered to investigate your own alleged sighting properly, yet claim to know every detail
theres that pseudoscience you were denying

All the above proves is that the poster wasn't paying attention. I said the object was across the lake from me, so the yellow 3km line would have to cross the lake from west to east, to be anywhere close to where the line of sight was from me to the LZ. The LZ was on the bench just off the east side of the highway 95 ( probably a few hundred meters ). I should really do one of those Google Earth maps shots to make it clearer sometime. The example would be more accurate if you moved the line over between the highway marker and the little green tree across the lake ( close but not perfect ).

j.r.

 

[Marduk]

During June of 1975, I was with my girlfriend Karen at her parent's ranch on the west side of Lake Windermere

At midnight a glowing blue-white orb sprung up from behind the mountain range across the lake and bounced down the side of the mountain in three big arcs.

When it landed it went dark and stayed on the ground until about 2:00AM. Then it lit up, ascended straight up to about 200 meters, stopped instantly for about two seconds,

The second time it came up it was around 4:00AM and by then both of the girls had nodded off. The orb repeated the same maneuver as it had the first time, then settled back into the forest and went dark.

Around 6:00AM the light of dawn began to illuminate the valley well enough to make out where the orb had landed. the orb came up again. It rose vertically to about 200 meters and stopped instantly.

Nice two hour intervals in june
why, that almost sounds like the mating habits of

During the breeding season in June, groups of hundreds of male fireflies of the species Photinus carolinus fly above the ground for about two hours each evening looking for mates.

not a lot more to be said for the credibility of this sighting is there

 

[Marduk]

All the above proves is that the poster wasn't paying attention. I said the object was across the lake from me, so the yellow 3km line would have to cross the lake from west to east, to be anywhere close to where the line of sight was from me to the LZ. The LZ was on the bench just off the east side of the highway 95 ( probably a few hundred meters ). I should really do one of those Google Earth maps shots to make it clearer sometime. The example would be more accurate if you moved the line over between the highway marker and the little green tree across the lake ( close but not perfect ).

j.r.

please feel free to do a google earth map
that way you will have actually spent some time investigating your own claims, thats probably the only way youre going to accept that you got pretty much everything about it wrong, don't forget to include this claim from earlier in your calculations

My girlfriends ranch house was up on the bench away from the lake and the object didn't come down on the lake, but up above on the rise toward the foot of the mountain on the east side of the highway. This adds extra distance that is known from fixed landmarks.

which you'd know if you'd bothered to look at a map, makes your account impossible as its 3km from the highway, to the shoreline on the west side of the lake.

From the rise toward the foot of the mountain

My girlfriends ranch house was up on the bench away from the lake and the object didn't come down on the lake, but up above on the rise toward the foot of the mountain on the east side of the highway. This adds extra distance that is known from fixed landmarks.

this map shows exactly the distance from the rise at the foot of the mountain
see there goes your dishonesty again, you need to continue to claim 3 km, because otherwise you think your credibility will suffer, despite the fact that you are looking at a map which destroys that claim completely
you have no credibility
none at all

 

[AdMan]

All the above proves is that the poster wasn't paying attention. I said the object was across the lake from me, so the yellow 3km line would have to cross the lake from west to east, to be anywhere close to where the line of sight was from me to the LZ. The LZ was on the bench just off the east side of the highway 95 ( probably a few hundred meters ). I should really do one of those Google Earth maps shots to make it clearer sometime. The example would be more accurate if you moved the line over between the highway marker and the little green tree across the lake ( close but not perfect ).

j.r.

Your pretense at trying to prove original geography is amusing, seeing as you couldn't figure out north from south in your original account.

 

[ufology]

please feel free to do a google earth map
that way you will have actually spent some time investigating your own claims, thats probably the only way youre going to accept that you got pretty much everything about it wrong, don't forget to include this claim from earlier in your calculations

which you'd know if you'd bothered to look at a map, makes your account impossible as its 3km from the highway, to the shoreline on the west side of the lake.

From the rise toward the foot of the mountain

this map shows exactly the distance from the rise at the foot of the mountain
see there goes your dishonesty again, you need to continue to claim 3 km, because otherwise you think your credibility will suffer, despite the fact that you are looking at a map which destroys that claim completely
you have no credibility
none at all

A semantics interpretation issue ... when you're out there the bench rises up from the lake and over to the highway, and the rise up to the mountain continues on the other side of the highway. So from my perspective when verbally describing the location, the rise up to the foot of the mountain is the whole part between the highway and where the foot is ( your eastern mark ).

j.r.

 

[Agatha]

A semantics interpretation issue ... when you're out there the bench rises up from the lake and over to the highway, and the rise up to the mountain continues on the other side of the highway. So from my perspective when verbally describing the location, the rise up to the foot of the mountain is the whole part between the highway and where the foot is ( your eastern mark ).

j.r.

Apparently, when you have enough faith you can move mountains.