UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[ufology]

When I read some of these accounts of strange objects in the sky, the mind starts to entertain the possibility that it might be an alien spacecraft. But, there is no way that I can swallow the patent bollocks that Timothy Good et al would have me believe. The alien bases on earth ...

Sideroxylon:

It is true that Tim Good explores more controversial areas of ufology as well. But the work I cited is not Alien Base but Beyond Top Secret. Goods other books are interesting to contemplate, but Beyond Top Secret is largely historical case studies. If you really want to get into the nitty gritty on case studies then get your hands on some of the NICAP reports by Richard Hall.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Sideroxylon:

It is true that Tim Good explores more controversial areas of ufology as well. But the work I cited is not Alien Base but Beyond Top Secret. Goods other books are interesting to contemplate, but Beyond Top Secret is largely historical case studies. If you really want to get into the nitty gritty on case studies then get your hands on some of the NICAP reports by Richard Hall.

The "controversial" permeates the UFO community and seems to be symptomatic of the lack of critical thinking that goes on. Once the flying saucer goggles go on, it seems that everything gets shoehorned into the whole aliens visiting earth narrative.

I would be very interested to know which ideas within the UFO community strike you as being a problematic or even complete rubbish.

 

[Chuck Guiteau]

Hey Chuck:

The only evidence I can offer to support the assertion that Earth has been visited by alien craft are case summaries found in books and my own experience, both of which have been referenced and discussed already. So I'm not going through it all again. Instead, if historical cases are sufficient to qualify as evidence for you. Instead of asking me, pick up a copy of Beyond Top Secret by author Timothy Good. It's about 600 pages thick. Also check out the classics by Ruppelt, Hynek, Edwards, and Keyhoe. If none of that is any good for you to believe something extraordinary has been taking place, then you'll just have to have an experience yourself or wait for disclosure or discovery.

I've already read most of them, and they don't offer anything beyond " a lot of people saw something unusual", except for perhaps Good who throws in the gubmint conspiracy theme (at about $50.00 a pop). Even then, he fails to make a compelling case as to why the government would not simply say, "The Altarians are opening an embassy in Washington next week".
In an age where you can dial up your college roomie who now lives in Pakistan just to check on the weather, heart transplants are common, and you can play Boggle in Klingon, I really don't see the unwashed masses going into a panic at the thought. I can, however, see the enormous benefit of of being the first government to open that Altarian Embassy.

Good is simply pandering to the uneducated much the same way others have claimed that Ford Motor Corporation (or was it Chevy?) bought up the patent rights to a 200 MPG carbueretor then sat on it. It's simply playing on the simple minded person's distrust and paranoia. Good for fringe authors and Democrats, but not much else.

I still fail to see the direct link between "something extraordinary has been taking place" and "extraterrestrials are flying around our skies". In the Middle Ages Europeans thought something extraordinary was happening whenever an old crone cured a sick calf, but that is not evidence of witchcraft.
Unless you can provide a direct link between "extraordinary event" and "alien spacecraft" you have the same problem.
The default position of "I can't explain it" is not "must be them aliens" anymore than "must be witchraft".

 

[ufology]

Good is simply pandering to the uneducated much the same way others have claimed that Ford Motor Corporation (or was it Chevy?) bought up the patent rights to a 200 MPG carbueretor then sat on it. It's simply playing on the simple minded person's distrust and paranoia. Good for fringe authors and Democrats, but not much else.

So you are denying that numerous cases and documents that were formerly secret have come to light ... many released by FOIA provisions? Are you also denying that many such documents were deemed exempt from disclosure or partially blacked out? And why the intellectual elitism? What's so hard to understand? Perhaps you can go get those documents for us and prove that there is no barrier between the public and secret defense files on UFOs ... it's all just made up to pander to the uneducated. So now we're waiting ... go ahead ... just walk into the MOD or Space Command and get them for us OK? How far do you really think you'll get?

Regarding the 200MPG carb. That is an interesting story. I saw a story called "The Myth of the 200 MPG Carbeuretor" in one of the popular mechanics magazines years ago. They took a team outside the USA to do the testing because there were some patent issues they had to deal with that prevented them from disclosing anything in the USA. So the article sponsors went on to run these independent tests and one vehicle got almost 200 MPG with a special oxygen assisted intake. However it iced up and quit working after a while and was not practical. No others came even close, but it is still interesting to note that the highest unassisted model got over 50MPG in a full size V8 car. According to the article, that one was bought by a US manufacturer and has never been put into production. Instead we are given these lousy electronic fuel injection computerized nightmares that still only get around half or maybe a little better.

 

[Jocce]

So you are denying that numerous cases and documents that were formerly secret have come to light

I don't think I've seen anyone deny this and can't really see the point of your question. Is it "The government has been hiding stuff before so therefore they are hiding evidence of aliens"?

What's so hard to understand? Perhaps you can go get those documents for us and prove that there is no barrier between the public and secret defense files on UFOs

No no...that's shifting the burden of proof. It's your claim that the government is hiding evidence of alien visits. You provide the evidence for that claim. Btw, which government are we talking about?

 

[Aepervius]

So you are denying that numerous cases and documents that were formerly secret have come to light ... many released by FOIA provisions? Are you also denying that many such documents were deemed exempt from disclosure or partially blacked out? And why the intellectual elitism? What's so hard to understand? Perhaps you can go get those documents for us and prove that there is no barrier between the public and secret defense files on UFOs ... it's all just made up to pander to the uneducated. So now we're waiting ... go ahead ... just walk into the MOD or Space Command and get them for us OK? How far do you really think you'll get?

Just because there are a few secret hidden from public knowledge, does that not mean that those secret pertain to alien or whatnot. The "secrets" I have been privy to, and signed NDA, were about technology usable for military, and the other I can see would be about infrastructure, tactic, and so forth. There is nothing extraordinary here and nothing about alien. absolutely nothing.

You are just having your "alien pink glasses" and see everything filtered by your own faith. If you could remove those glasses for a few second , you 'll be welcome to the club. But, no, everything is nefarious, conspiracy, aliens, and secrets. I am quite expecting the MIB to come in at6 some point.

Regarding the 200MPG carb. That is an interesting story. I saw a story called "The Myth of the 200 MPG Carbeuretor" in one of the popular mechanics magazines years ago. They took a team outside the USA to do the testing because there were some patent issues they had to deal with that prevented them from disclosing anything in the USA. So the article sponsors went on to run these independent tests and one vehicle got almost 200 MPG with a special oxygen assisted intake. However it iced up and quit working after a while and was not practical. No others came even close, but it is still interesting to note that the highest unassisted model got over 50MPG in a full size V8 car. According to the article, that one was bought by a US manufacturer and has never been put into production. Instead we are given these lousy electronic fuel injection computerized nightmares that still only get around half or maybe a little better.

Ha. The usual claim of "they got the tech but sit on it". I saw that for the 200 MPG carburator, the water engine, special electro-magnetic board by that german guy, I see that every day on the free energy board I frequent (mostly for the laugh).

As for your stuff about 50 MPG... Or even 100 MPG or even 200 MPG....

http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/fish3.htm

I don't think so.

 

[Chuck Guiteau]

So you are denying that numerous cases and documents that were formerly secret have come to light ... many released by FOIA provisions? Are you also denying that many such documents were deemed exempt from disclosure or partially blacked out? And why the intellectual elitism? What's so hard to understand? Perhaps you can go get those documents for us and prove that there is no barrier between the public and secret defense files on UFOs ... it's all just made up to pander to the uneducated. So now we're waiting ... go ahead ... just walk into the MOD or Space Command and get them for us OK? How far do you really think you'll get?

Regarding the 200MPG carb. That is an interesting story. I saw a story called "The Myth of the 200 MPG Carbeuretor" in one of the popular mechanics magazines years ago. They took a team outside the USA to do the testing because there were some patent issues they had to deal with that prevented them from disclosing anything in the USA. So the article sponsors went on to run these independent tests and one vehicle got almost 200 MPG with a special oxygen assisted intake. However it iced up and quit working after a while and was not practical. No others came even close, but it is still interesting to note that the highest unassisted model got over 50MPG in a full size V8 car. According to the article, that one was bought by a US manufacturer and has never been put into production. Instead we are given these lousy electronic fuel injection computerized nightmares that still only get around half or maybe a little better.

No one is denying that the government has kept secrets about aircraft (which by definition would make them "unidentified" flying objects). The B1 bomber is an excellent example. But there is nothing I am aware of in those documents released under FOIA (or released for any other reason) that admits (or even concludes) that they have located or shot down any craft of extraterrestrial origin or recovered any part thereof.
During the Cold War there were some damn good reasons to keep certain things secret, and if it kept the commies noses turned in the wrong direction, then allowing wild rumors to circulate is an excellent, if possibly serendipitous, piece of misdirection.

Perhaps you can go get those documents for us and prove that there is no barrier between the public and secret defense files on UFOs ... it's all just made up to pander to the uneducated. So now we're waiting ... go ahead ... just walk into the MOD or Space Command and get them for us OK?

I'm not the one putting forth the theory, ufology, you are. If there's something in the documents you mentioned that offers concrete proof of the existence of extraterrestrial craft visiting our planet, then it is incumbent upon you, as the theorist, to offer it. I can think of lots of reasons the government would have for maintaining a veil of secrecy regarding aircraft (and not all of them noble ones) that have nothing to do with little green men.

As to the 200 MPG carb, common sense should tell a person of average intelligence that a working model (especially 30 years ago when the rumors started floating around) never existed. Had a major auto maufacturer managed to acquire such a patent, they wouldn't have buried it, sheer greed (if nothing else) would have prompted them to advertise it with a vengeance. Overnight, they would have cornered the automobile market and at the same time guaranteed the oil industry a permanent (or at least generations long) market.
I'm all for viewing big business with a cynical eye, but the myth of the 200 MPG carb is carrying it to absurd lengths.
And, until you have some evidence, so is the default position that if the government keeps secrets about aircraft sightings it must be because they are covering up the presence of extraterrestrials.

 

[Tomtomkent]

So at what point did any government keeping restrictions on files become proof those files must, or even could, contain evidence of aliens?

Somewhere out there a retired CIA chap is laughing his socks off. He no doubt said "blame roswell on the little green men!" Not because aliens were real, but to discredit any future sightings of experimental aircraft, or high altitude balloons with cameras or spy radio equipment. Decades later people are still assuming any secret is "alien". Never mind much more plausible, interesting and mundane explanations.

But "secret" no more means alien than "unidentified" does.

 

[Sideroxylon]

The U.S. government cover-up narrative is lacking due to its parochialism. What about the other major world governments, who clash on many other security issues? Are they in the dark, or is it not surprising that they have not only found long-time consensus on this issue, maintained through a series of leadership changes, but also managed to prevent leaks? Turkish PM Erdoğan, with emerging confidence as an international player, would be all over this like a rash, making grand speeches to our alien visitors and inviting them over for tea and baklava.

 

[aggle-rithm]

So you are denying that numerous cases and documents that were formerly secret have come to light ... many released by FOIA provisions? Are you also denying that many such documents were deemed exempt from disclosure or partially blacked out? And why the intellectual elitism? What's so hard to understand? Perhaps you can go get those documents for us and prove that there is no barrier between the public and secret defense files on UFOs ... it's all just made up to pander to the uneducated. So now we're waiting ... go ahead ... just walk into the MOD or Space Command and get them for us OK? How far do you really think you'll get?

I hate to break it to you, but life just isn't as exciting as you seem to think it is.

From my experience, I would say that most difficulty in getting to classified information can be chalked up to stubborn bureaucratic blockheads.

 

[Akhenaten]

And yet you seem to know about it.

How could anyone know about what is blacked out?

I don't think they could. The bloke who wrote this does, though:

I'll say it again:
Other wise why so much blanking out of secret information about them in our government files?

It's still being suppressed.

So I'll ask again. What's being supressed and how do you know?

What I do know is before I ever seen anything remotely that resembled a classic UFO/flying saucer/object, that there were already many hoaxes.
Till my own sightings occurred at which point I was thoroughly convinced that a certain amount of others that had sightings had to be telling the truth...and that they in essence seen something that was related to my own experiences involving sightings of unknown origins with a greater understanding of physics of which we have no clue about.

Somehow or other you know that the unidentified things that unknown people have seen are the same as the unidentified things that you've seen and that they represent advanced technologies.

Brillo.

So watching an old Ragan speech to the U.N. tends to make me reach the same conclusion, they are already here and been here.

MKay Mister drivel?

Not much I can add to that.

 

[Akhenaten]

Garrison:

Science is based on observation of measurable and repeatable experiments. Not all science is done under strictly controlled conditions, and not all science requires a null hypothesis. However if you are going to invoke a null hypothesis for a particular scientific study, then you need to establish what conditions allow you to make subsequent scientifically valid comparisons of the data so that a statistical probablity can be extrapolated. If you can't do that then using a null hypothesis is pointless. With asteroids, there are a number of known constant quantifiers that can be used. When combined with repeatable instrumented observation useful data can be collected.

So many words, so little relevance.

Here's all you need to know:

All UFOs are of mundane origin.​

UFOs do not allow for such repeatable observation and we don't know what constants apply to them.

There's only one constant that applies to them, and it's the one thing that you appear to be in complete denial about - they're unidentified.

If you're looking for a repeatable observation, it's that the sole purpose of ufology is to invent justifications for translating 'unidentified' into 'alien'.

So again, the null hypothesis is ill suited to the study of them. The best we can do is record the observations of the phenomena as it happens or soon thereafter and then compare that to other similar information.

But that's not what you're doing. You're looking at 50- or 60-year-old reports, comparing them to each other or to your own campfire story and concluding that the whole mish-mash is representative of a single phenomenon.

But all that really amounts to is personal study and investigation. There just isn't enough reliable scientific evidence to perform a conclusive scientific study ( IMHO ).

Never mind. Pseudoscience has no such constraints.

 

[Akhenaten]

So you are denying that numerous cases and documents that were formerly secret have come to light ... many released by FOIA provisions? Are you also denying that many such documents were deemed exempt from disclosure or partially blacked out? And why the intellectual elitism? What's so hard to understand? Perhaps you can go get those documents for us and prove that there is no barrier between the public and secret defense files on UFOs ... it's all just made up to pander to the uneducated. So now we're waiting ... go ahead ... just walk into the MOD or Space Command and get them for us OK? How far do you really think you'll get?

"Gubmint secrets" = "OMG . . . aliens!" ???

Does this supersede "unidentified" = "OMG . . . aliens!" or is it just an additional meaning?

 

[RoboTimbo]

Hey Chuck:

The only evidence I can offer to support the assertion that Earth has been visited by alien craft are case summaries found in books and my own experience, both of which have been referenced and discussed already.

What people have been asking and you have been not answering is, How do you get from "I don't know what I saw" to "I know exactly what it was, aliens!"? Your will to believe is not evidence.

So I'm not going through it all again. Instead, if historical cases are sufficient to qualify as evidence for you.

No, he asked for actual evidence, not anecdotes.

Instead of asking me, pick up a copy of Beyond Top Secret by author Timothy Good. It's about 600 pages thick. Also check out the classics by Ruppelt, Hynek, Edwards, and Keyhoe. If none of that is any good for you to believe something extraordinary has been taking place, then you'll just have to have an experience yourself or wait for disclosure or discovery.

Timothy Good, as far as I know, doesn't post on this forum. You do and have made extraordinary claims. When asked for evidence of those claims, you've come to realize that you really don't have any that stands up to critical scrutiny.

ufology, how do you get from "I don't know what I saw" to "I know what I saw"?

 

[RoboTimbo]

Marduk:

You're smarter than you know. If we could just get our hands on an alien craft, that's about all the evidence we'd really need isn't it?

Yep, or alien raygun, or alien body. You know, extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims being made.

Why don't we have those? We hear stories about crashed flying saucers and dead aliens. Where are they?

 

[RoboTimbo]

Garrison:

Science is based on observation of measurable and repeatable experiments. Not all science is done under strictly controlled conditions, and not all science requires a null hypothesis.

Pseudoscience, like UFOlogy, relies on unfalsifiable anecdotes and believes them to be evidence for themselves. Pseudoscience, like UFOlogy, requires an unfalsifiable null hypothesis such as "Some UFOs are alien spaceships" which can never be falsified. This allows them to keep the illusion alive.

However if you are going to invoke a null hypothesis for a particular scientific study, then you need to establish what conditions allow you to make subsequent scientifically valid comparisons of the data so that a statistical probablity can be extrapolated. If you can't do that then using a null hypothesis is pointless. With asteroids, there are a number of known constant quantifiers that can be used. When combined with repeatable instrumented observation useful data can be collected.

We need extraordinary evidence which can be studied: alien raygun, alien spaceship, alien body. It is pseudoscientific to base a religious-like belief in extraordinary events on no evidence.

UFOs do not allow for such repeatable observation and we don't know what constants apply to them. So again, the null hypothesis is ill suited to the study of them. The best we can do is record the observations of the phenomena as it happens or soon thereafter and then compare that to other similar information. But all that really amounts to is personal study and investigation. There just isn't enough reliable scientific evidence to perform a conclusive scientific study ( IMHO ).

You should think about why they don't allow for repeatable observation. The best that the pseudoscientists can do is listen wide-eyed and open-mouthed to the anecdotes and then claim "OMG PseudoAliens!"

The easily falisfiable null hypothesis which is:

"All UFOs are of mundane origin"​

has never been falsified. You should think about that, too.

 

[RoboTimbo]

So you are denying that numerous cases and documents that were formerly secret have come to light ... many released by FOIA provisions?

Your favorite fallacy - strawman. Can you link to or quote the post where anyone said this? No, of course you can't.

Are you also denying that many such documents were deemed exempt from disclosure or partially blacked out?

Was the farm store having a closeout sale on straw?

And why the intellectual elitism? What's so hard to understand?

What is hard for some to understand is that the plural of anecdote is not evidence. I agree, we should pity them but try not to look down on them.

Perhaps you can go get those documents for us and prove that there is no barrier between the public and secret defense files on UFOs ... it's all just made up to pander to the uneducated. So now we're waiting ... go ahead ... just walk into the MOD or Space Command and get them for us OK? How far do you really think you'll get?

Which documents are you claiming exist? If you're making claims, you should be able to support them with evidence.

<snipped credulous CT mindset diversion about mythical 200 mpg carbs.

 

[Cuddles]

it is still interesting to note that the highest unassisted model got over 50MPG in a full size V8 car. According to the article, that one was bought by a US manufacturer and has never been put into production. Instead we are given these lousy electronic fuel injection computerized nightmares that still only get around half or maybe a little better.

Nice to see your knowledge of cars is on a par with the rest of your knowledge. Decent cars easily get far more than 50mpg. That's not just hybrids or anything silly like that, you can get estates, people movers and 4x4s that get better than 70 or even 80mpg. Hell, you can get a family estate car that does 0-60mph in 10 seconds and still gets 75mpg. Just take a look here, for example. US numbers are a bit lower since they use the wrong size gallon, but still get well into the 70s. The idea that anyone is suppressing an engine that gets worse mileage than existing cars really is just plain stupid.

Edit: Also worth pointing out, these aren't in any way obscure cars. Of the top selling cars in the UK last year, exactly one of the top ten (number 10) isn't listed on the link above.

I hate to break it to you, but life just isn't as exciting as you seem to think it is.

I have to disagree. If anything, life is much more exciting than ufology seems to think. The problem is that he's getting excited over things that don't actually exist, instead of all the exciting things that actually do.

 

[Garrison]

Garrison:

Science is based on observation of measurable and repeatable experiments. Not all science is done under strictly controlled conditions, and not all science requires a null hypothesis. However if you are going to invoke a null hypothesis for a particular scientific study, then you need to establish what conditions allow you to make subsequent scientifically valid comparisons of the data so that a statistical probablity can be extrapolated. If you can't do that then using a null hypothesis is pointless. With asteroids, there are a number of known constant quantifiers that can be used. When combined with repeatable instrumented observation useful data can be collected.

UFOs do not allow for such repeatable observation and we don't know what constants apply to them. So again, the null hypothesis is ill suited to the study of them. The best we can do is record the observations of the phenomena as it happens or soon thereafter and then compare that to other similar information. But all that really amounts to is personal study and investigation. There just isn't enough reliable scientific evidence to perform a conclusive scientific study ( IMHO ).

Your comments make it clear you failed to read the article my comment was based on. A shame because it was about scientists working in the field to identify and track the possible landing sites of meteorites. That is investigating transient, unpredictable phenomena observed in the sky and seeking evidence to substantiate the sightings.
I posted it for two reasons:
1) It refutes the narrow characterization of the scientific approach that you have repeated in the above post.
2) It shows how real investigators go about examining reports of strange things seen in the sky, it involves more that gathering up some cool stories and posting videos about them on a website.

 

[Paul2]

Not all science is done under strictly controlled conditions, and not all science requires a null hypothesis.

Can you be specific? When does science not require a null hypothesis? References would be helpful, too.