Most interesting UFO incidents thread

[ufology]

While I would suggest that supernatural claims are incredulous at best, there seems to be something about UFOs that ruminates in the back of my mind.

UFOs ( alien craft ) are not supernatural. Interstellar travel is well within the bounds of scientific plausibility.

This is most likely due to the consensus that extraterrestrials most probably do exist and that it is likely that at least some of them have or at least had or will have the potential to visit our planet.

This being said, I still find it extremely unlikely that extraterrestrials do visit our planet given the lack of substantial evidence and the astronomical figures that make extraterrestrial visitation extremely implausible and technologically challenging.

The question of how likely it is that we've been visited by aliens depends on the statistics used. A statistical study was performed by the Battelle Memorial Institute that is quite interesting.

I am generally disappointed by the lack of concrete evidence and the inconsistencies that are regular in the majority of UFO reports. Many skeptics will easily debunk many of these claims or at least cast serious doubt on them. A part of me wants them to be true, but my desire has to be met with good evidence before I can satisfy that part of myself honestly.

To my knowledge here is no scientifically verifiable material evidence that proves UFOs are real. However scientifically verifiable material evidence is the only standard by which we can form reasonable conclusions. This forum also purports to foster the use of critical thinking, and if we apply that process to the problem of UFOs, alien visitation is an entirely reasonable explanation.

So the purpose of this thread is to offer some of the 'best' or most interesting UFO cases that 'seem' to be exhaustive of naturalistic explanations. I'll start by offering the 1976 Tehran UFO incident which seems to hold some water. Do I think it is an extraterrestrial spacecraft? Probably not, but from my knowledge this case lacks an explanation, and there is something interesting going on here, even if it is just some monumental incompetence from the professionals involved or a bizarre physical phenomena.

Thanks in advance, enjoy!

It has already been mentioned that this topic has been discussed in some detail elsewhere. However the claim that, "not a single incident was described which could not be explained by natural or known causes" is exaggerated. Virtually anything can be explained by natural or known causes if we choose to alter the information to suit that explanation by assuming any number of possibilities that may or may not have actually been the case. To be fair, that type of behavior also seems to take place on both sides of the argument.

 

[Akhenaten]

To my knowledge here is no scientifically verifiable material evidence that proves UFOs are real. However scientifically verifiable material evidence is the only standard by which we can form reasonable conclusions. This forum also purports to foster the use of critical thinking, and if we apply that process to the problem of UFOs, alien visitation is an entirely reasonable explanation.

As usual, you are doing nothing more here than demonstrating your own inability to differentiate between the very real phenomenon of unidentified flying objects and the speculative fantasy of alien spacecraft.

Please review the many threads in which this gross misunderstanding has been corrected for you.

 

[Sideroxylon]

UFOs ( alien craft ) are not supernatural. Interstellar travel is well within the bounds of scientific plausibility.

UFOs (unidentified flying objects) are by definition things people see in the sky that they cannot identify. This does not mean that others cannot or have not supplied reasonable explanations based on known phenomena. You don't get to magically define flying saucers into existence.

Interstellar travel faces a major problem of distance. But this is a red herring since even if we accept this possibility, it doesn't allow us to infer that any of the things people have seen in the skies are flying saucers.

The question of how likely it is that we've been visited by aliens depends on the statistics used. A statistical study was performed by the Battelle Memorial Institute that is quite interesting.

How do the numbers come out for the sightings being witches?

To my knowledge here is no scientifically verifiable material evidence that proves UFOs are real. However scientifically verifiable material evidence is the only standard by which we can form reasonable conclusions. This forum also purports to foster the use of critical thinking, and if we apply that process to the problem of UFOs, alien visitation is an entirely reasonable explanation.

Occam's Razor is a key tool in the critical thinking tool box and it says you should come back when you have the verifiable evidence. And it's not just this forum that sees the evidence as lacking - This perspective is one held by academic intuitions, military, astronomical and aviation bodies around the world.

It has already been mentioned that this topic has been discussed in some detail elsewhere. However the claim that, "not a single incident was described which could not be explained by natural or known causes" is exaggerated. Virtually anything can be explained by natural or known causes if we choose to alter the information to suit that explanation by assuming any number of possibilities that may or may not have actually been the case. To be fair, that type of behavior also seems to take place on both sides of the argument.

Again unidentified is not a blank cheque to cash in on invoking your cherished little green men into existence. Why not witches?

 

[Stray Cat]

UFOs ( alien craft ) are not supernatural. Interstellar travel is well within the bounds of scientific plausibility.

UFO's aren't alien craft, UFOs are UNIDENTIFIED Flying Objects.
To call them aliens craft would require enough information to be a ble to identify them as aliens craft, therefore they would no longer be UFOs.
Stop being so silly, how many times does this simple fact have to be pointed out to you?

The question of how likely it is that we've been visited by aliens depends on the statistics used. A statistical study was performed by the Battelle Memorial Institute that is quite interesting.

The only statistic that would be relevant when attempting to determine if earth has been visited by aliens would be how many aliens have been confirmed in the process of visiting Earth... that is a quotable number, not a load of weasel words... that number is ZERO.

Regardless of which statistics you wish to use, that number ZERO will remain the same... Unless you know different in which case there many people here who would love to see you actually present some conclusive evidence in the moderated UFO evidence thread.

To my knowledge here is no scientifically verifiable material evidence that proves UFOs are real.

UFOs are very real.... people see stuff in the sky that they can't identify all the time, it's been happening for centuries and is well documented.
It's aliens craft that have so far been shown to not have a shred of verifiable evidence to support their existence and plenty of reason to conclude that aliens have not visited our planet.

However scientifically verifiable material evidence is the only standard by which we can form reasonable conclusions. This forum also purports to foster the use of critical thinking, and if we apply that process to the problem of UFOs, alien visitation is an entirely reasonable explanation.

No it's not.
But then you've proven on more that one occasion that you don't even know what critical thinking is let alone be able to utilise it correctly.

It has already been mentioned that this topic has been discussed in some detail elsewhere. However the claim that, "not a single incident was described which could not be explained by natural or known causes" is exaggerated. Virtually anything can be explained by natural or known causes if we choose to alter the information to suit that explanation by assuming any number of possibilities that may or may not have actually been the case. To be fair, that type of behavior also seems to take place on both sides of the argument.

You're wrong again.
If aliens were visiting us in flying saucers, it could only be explained by aliens visiting us in flying saucers (not a known cause)... so far, that hasn't happened.

 

[Krikkiter]

To my knowledge here is no scientifically verifiable material evidence that proves UFOs are real. However scientifically verifiable material evidence is the only standard by which we can form reasonable conclusions. This forum also purports to foster the use of critical thinking, and if we apply that process to the problem of UFOs, alien visitation is an entirely reasonable explanation

No. When you attempt to use critical thinking regarding UFO's you come to the unfounded conclusion that "alien visitation is an entirely reasonable explanation".

The thing is, you've shown time and time again that you have no idea what critical thinking is let alone how to apply it.* That's why you jump to erroneous conclusions.

You know, I finally found my lecture resources from when I did critical thinking at Uni. Not that I really needed it but I think you might. Let me know if you'd like some help.

ETA: * Jeez I wonder where I got that from. Apologies SC. Subconscious plagiarism.

 

[tsig]

An unbelievable UFO encounter.

While I would suggest that supernatural claims are incredulous at best, there seems to be something about UFOs that ruminates in the back of my mind. This is most likely due to the consensus that extraterrestrials most probably do exist and that it is likely that at least some of them have or at least had or will have the potential to visit our planet.



planet given the lack of substantial evidence and the astronomical figures that make extraterrestrial visitation extremely implausible and technologically challenging. I am generally disappointed by the lack of concrete evidence and the inconsistencies that are regular in the majority of UFO reports. Many skeptics will easily debunk many of these claims or at least cast serious doubt on them. A part of me wants them to be true, but my desire has to be met with good evidence before I can satisfy that part of myself honestly.

So the purpose of this thread is to offer some of the 'best' or most interesting UFO cases that 'seem' to be exhaustive of naturalistic explanations. I'll start by offering the 1976 Tehran UFO incident which seems to hold some water. Do I think it is an extraterrestrial spacecraft? Probably not, but from my knowledge this case lacks an explanation, and there is something interesting going on here, even if it is just some monumental incompetence from the professionals involved or a bizarre physical phenomena.

Thanks in advance, enjoy!

I was walking down a country road when I saw something indescribable so I won't try to describe it, it performed unbelievable maneuvers so I can't say what they were, then it took me aboard and did unspeakable things to me so I won't speak of them, after being released my life changed in uncountable ways so I won't recount them.

 

[ufology]

No. When you attempt to use critical thinking regarding UFO's you come to the unfounded conclusion that "alien visitation is an entirely reasonable explanation".

The thing is, you've shown time and time again that you have no idea what critical thinking is let alone how to apply it.* That's why you jump to erroneous conclusions.

You know, I finally found my lecture resources from when I did critical thinking at Uni. Not that I really needed it but I think you might. Let me know if you'd like some help.

ETA: * Jeez I wonder where I got that from. Apologies SC. Subconscious plagiarism.

You're proclamations are unsupported by the evidence. This can be confirmed by my repeated references to the Foundation For Critical Thinking as a model and to the numerous quotes I've used from independent sources that when combined with logic support my position. Additionally, I'm not resistant to changing my position when presented with a convincing counterpoint. In contrast your criticism amounts to little more than bad mouthing, and I can see there is still no reason to pull you off my ignore list. Had I logged in first I would have been spared your querulousness.

Examples:

• http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8557965#post8557965
• http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8014395#post8014395
• http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8013343#post8013343
• http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8009831#post8009831
• http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8013239#post8013239
• http://www.criticalthinking.org/ ( in case you need to do some brushing up ).

 

[Akhenaten]

[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3][/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3]You're proclamations are unsupported by the evidence. This can be confirmed by my repeated references to the Foundation For Critical Thinking as a model and to the numerous quotes I've used from independent sources that when combined with logic support my position. Additionally, I'm not resistant to changing my position when presented with a convincing counterpoint. In contrast your criticism amounts to little more than bad mouthing, and I can see there is still no reason to pull you off my ignore list. Had I logged in first I would have been spared your querulousness.[/SIZE][/FONT]

Yes, as you say, you were completely wrong.

Thanks for the apology.


By the way, it's "your", not "you're".

 

[Stray Cat]

You're proclamations are unsupported by the evidence. This can be confirmed by my repeated references to the Foundation For Critical Thinking as a model and to the numerous quotes I've used from independent sources that when combined with logic support my position.

You may well talk about critical thinking and logic... yet you constantly fail to apply it correctly. This is entirely because you don't understand it, you think it's something to bend to your blind beliefs to make it fit...


... It isn't.

 

[Garrison]

UFOs which does not = ( alien craft ) are not supernatural. Interstellar travel is well within the bounds of scientific plausibility.

But not one bit of meaningful evidence that any interstellar vessel has ever visited Earth; which is the fundamental claim of Ufology. Oh and I added the words you clearly missed out.

 

[ufology]

But not one bit of meaningful evidence that any interstellar vessel has ever visited Earth; which is the fundamental claim of Ufology. Oh and I added the words you clearly missed out.

I've made no "fundamental claim" that interstellar craft have visited Earth. In fact I've made no specific "claim" here at all. I'm simply having an informal discussion. For example, one of the UFO incidents that I find the most interesting happened during the DC flap of 1952:

"On Sunday July 27, 1952, Washinton National Airport radarscopes picked up several UFOs and two F-94 Starfires New Castle AFB were ordered to the area. When the jets were vectored toward the UFOs, Lieutenant William Patterson, a veteran of the Koren War, found his F-94 surrounded by a ring of bluish-white lights. He was not given permission to fire on them and they soon went into evasive maneuvers, instantly accelerating away beyond range. ARTC vectored Patterson toward another UFO and he made visual contact. He cut in the F-94's afterburner and tried to pursue, but the object easily outdistanced the interceptor and disappeared."

​

Here's another clip:

" ... the pilot pushed the nose of the F-86 down and started after the object. He closed fairly fast, until he came to within an estimated 1,000 yards. Now he could get a good look at the object. Although it had looked like a balloon from above, a closer view showed that it was definitely round and flat -- saucer-shaped. The pilot described it as being "like a doughnut without a hole."

As his rate of closure began to drop off, the pilot knew that the object was picking up speed. But he pulled in behind it and started to follow. Now he was right on the deck.

About this time the pilot began to get a little worried. What should he do? He tried to call his buddy, who was flying above him somewhere in the area at 20,000 feet. He called two or three times but could get no answer. Next he tried to call the ground controller but he was too low for his radio to carry that far. Once more he tried his buddy at 20,000 feet, but again no luck.

By now he had been following the object for about two minutes and during this time had closed the gap between them to approximately 500 yards. But this was only momentary. Suddenly the object began to pull away, slowly at first, then faster. The pilot, realizing that he couldn't catch it wondered what to do next.

When the object traveled out about 1,000 yards, the pilot suddenly made up his mind -- he did the only thing that he could do to stop the UFO. It was like a David about to do battle with a Goliath, but he had to take a chance. Quickly charging his guns, he started shooting . . . . A moment later the object pulled up into a climb and in a few seconds it was gone."
​

I like this one too:

"During 1943 a tail gunner on a mission over central Germany reported that an odd shaped gold sphere about the size of a basketball approached his B-17 from the rear and moved slowly over the airplane's wings before rapidly departing toward the aft."

​

Surely someone else here must have a few examples of UFO incidents that they find interesting? It doesn't always have to be about whether or not they scientifically prove anything.

 

[Garrison]

I've made no "fundamental claim" that interstellar craft have visited Earth. In fact I've made no specific "claim" here at all. I'm simply having an informal discussion. For example, one of the UFO incidents that I find the most interesting happened during the DC flap of 1952:

Sorry but if you don't have the stomach to stand behind your UFO = alien spacecraft argument then why should anyone engage with you? It's abundantly clear from previous threads that you believe 'alien spacecraft' to be a plausible explanation for specific cases such as the one you quote and the only reason you want to have an 'informal discussion' is to avoid having to justify that belief.

Surely someone else here must have a few examples of UFO incidents that they find interesting? It doesn't always have to be about whether or not they scientifically prove anything.

What exactly would be interesting about them? All that's ever offered are unsubstantiated anecdotes or blurry photos that are either indecipherable or show perfectly mundane things pictured in unusual circumstances; and that's not even bringing up the subject of hoaxes...

 

[Checkmite]

Flying saucers and zippy-flying spots of light don't grab my interest. Such interest in UFOs as I have is reserved for only the really unusual reports.

For instance, I remember hearing about a rather unusual set of "sightings" of what might be called UFO's in South America not too many years ago. These UFOs were nothing like the most common sightings; they were described as generally being the size and shape of refrigerators - too small really to be "manned", even by the commonly-described grey fetus-aliens - but nevertheless behaving intelligently. IIRC, they made a noise like a diesel engine when moving, and they were reported to float through wooded areas looking for people, which they would attempt to blast with a "beam of light" that killed or severely injured their victims. There was a spate of such sightings/claims for a while, before they tapered off I guess.

 

[Stray Cat]

I've made no "fundamental claim" that interstellar craft have visited Earth.

"Strewn amid the events above are a host of other paranormal experiences including hauntings and iconic religious manifestations. I experienced all of these events while healthy conscious and unimpaired. The only conclusion I've drawn about these experiences is that some UFOs represent an advanced alien transportation technology. Anything else is pure speculation. However it is reasonable to assume that the principles that allow the various components of UFOs to work could also be used to produce a variety of paranormal and religious phenomena, including apparitions and levitation."
Source

"However the prevailing view is that the original Estimate Of The Situation reached by Project Sign is accurate to the extent that the objects in some UFO reports are alien to human civilization and probably extraterrestrial in origin."
Source

 

[Krikkiter]

You're proclamations are unsupported by the evidence. This can be confirmed by my repeated references to the Foundation For Critical Thinking as a model and to the numerous quotes I've used from independent sources that when combined with logic support my position. Additionally, I'm not resistant to changing my position when presented with a convincing counterpoint. In contrast your criticism amounts to little more than bad mouthing, and I can see there is still no reason to pull you off my ignore list. Had I logged in first I would have been spared your querulousness.

Examples:

• http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8557965#post8557965
• http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8014395#post8014395
• http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8013343#post8013343
• http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8009831#post8009831
• http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8013239#post8013239
• http://www.criticalthinking.org/ ( in case you need to do some brushing up ).

LOL! You commit a logic fallacy when trying to convince me that you're using logic and reason to come to your conclusions. Bravo.

I wonder, could you email criticalthinking.org and ask them what's wrong with the following statement:

UFO = alien craft.

Or maybe you could just tell me that you've decided to abandon that little mess? If so, well done. If not... well, what can I say that hasn't been said before.

Look, put the whole forum on ignore if you like. I could not care less but it won't help you in your plight to have UFO's become something other than what they are.

 

[Krikkiter]

"Strewn amid the events above are a host of other paranormal experiences including hauntings and iconic religious manifestations. I experienced all of these events while healthy conscious and unimpaired. The only conclusion I've drawn about these experiences is that some UFOs represent an advanced alien transportation technology. Anything else is pure speculation. However it is reasonable to assume that the principles that allow the various components of UFOs to work could also be used to produce a variety of paranormal and religious phenomena, including apparitions and levitation."
Source

"However the prevailing view is that the original Estimate Of The Situation reached by Project Sign is accurate to the extent that the objects in some UFO reports are alien to human civilization and probably extraterrestrial in origin."
Source

Lying For Aliens.

 

[tsig]

Lying For Aliens.

Show some respect, they died for you at Roswell.

 

[Krikkiter]

I've made no "fundamental claim" that interstellar craft have visited Earth. In fact I've made no specific "claim" here at all. I'm simply having an informal discussion. For example, one of the UFO incidents that I find the most interesting happened during the DC flap of 1952:

"On Sunday July 27, 1952, Washinton National Airport radarscopes picked up several UFOs and two F-94 Starfires New Castle AFB were ordered to the area. When the jets were vectored toward the UFOs, Lieutenant William Patterson, a veteran of the Koren War, found his F-94 surrounded by a ring of bluish-white lights. He was not given permission to fire on them and they soon went into evasive maneuvers, instantly accelerating away beyond range. ARTC vectored Patterson toward another UFO and he made visual contact. He cut in the F-94's afterburner and tried to pursue, but the object easily outdistanced the interceptor and disappeared."

​

Here's another clip:

" ... the pilot pushed the nose of the F-86 down and started after the object. He closed fairly fast, until he came to within an estimated 1,000 yards. Now he could get a good look at the object. Although it had looked like a balloon from above, a closer view showed that it was definitely round and flat -- saucer-shaped. The pilot described it as being "like a doughnut without a hole."

As his rate of closure began to drop off, the pilot knew that the object was picking up speed. But he pulled in behind it and started to follow. Now he was right on the deck.

About this time the pilot began to get a little worried. What should he do? He tried to call his buddy, who was flying above him somewhere in the area at 20,000 feet. He called two or three times but could get no answer. Next he tried to call the ground controller but he was too low for his radio to carry that far. Once more he tried his buddy at 20,000 feet, but again no luck.

By now he had been following the object for about two minutes and during this time had closed the gap between them to approximately 500 yards. But this was only momentary. Suddenly the object began to pull away, slowly at first, then faster. The pilot, realizing that he couldn't catch it wondered what to do next.

When the object traveled out about 1,000 yards, the pilot suddenly made up his mind -- he did the only thing that he could do to stop the UFO. It was like a David about to do battle with a Goliath, but he had to take a chance. Quickly charging his guns, he started shooting . . . . A moment later the object pulled up into a climb and in a few seconds it was gone."
​

I like this one too:

"During 1943 a tail gunner on a mission over central Germany reported that an odd shaped gold sphere about the size of a basketball approached his B-17 from the rear and moved slowly over the airplane's wings before rapidly departing toward the aft."

​

Surely someone else here must have a few examples of UFO incidents that they find interesting? It doesn't always have to be about whether or not they scientifically prove anything.

Look Ufology, we get it. Investigating Unidentified Flying Objects anecdotes are a hobby of yours. It's interesting to you. Let's call it a passion.

That's all well and good but when you distort reality to make it fit into conclusions you'll be called on it, especially here.

In other words, you love it but we all got bored of it a long time ago. I wonder why?

 

[Krikkiter]

Show some respect, they died for you at Roswell.

You're right. I apologise. Indeed, what harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for ufologists ... a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against ufologists, they would accept them.

 

[Checkmite]

Some of my favorite UFO sightings are the "airships" of the late 1800's - giant dirigible-looking things reported all over the US, evidently human-powered for the most part. Some of those sightings were incredibly weird in comparison to modern flitting-light sightings.