Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

There’s also a history of humans not being able to accept something radically different when being presented evidence of it. In this case, that appears to be happening to you.

Please, just stay out of this conversation. Let the real scientists like Gary Nolan and Avi Loeb continue to investigate this subject as they please. Whatever this phenomenon ends up being, your opinions are not going to help us find that out.




UFOs are not radically different idea with recent evidence. It's literally more than half a century old secular religion which "evidence" for never panned out into anything or were thoroughly debunked.

Gary Nolan and Avi Loeb will die of old age before they can deliver actual proof of alien technology exactly as every scientist and layman did so far. If they explain those artifacts it won't be aliens. That's just my opinion. Please keep it at the back of your mind for the rest of your life.

From now on I'm staying out of this particular conversation.


Just let the damn scientists study the evidence and keep your opinions to yourself, damn. You obviously have a huge bias against studying things that are currently unexplained, so you're not helping the conversation. Keep that in the back of your head.


Solid scientists:

Immunologist that thinks he saw UFO:

https://med.stanford.edu/profiles/garry-nolan

Guy who thought Oumuamua is alien spaceship (gathered evidence gives exactly zero reasons to think that):

https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Avi-Lo...

Theoretical physicist with his head deep in things like Alcubierre drive that appears from Einstein's equations when applied to such things as negative mass (which doesn't exist) without acknowledging that quantum mechanics exists. He was also hired by Pentagon to investigate UFOs. Nothing came of it, but he had every incentive to make stuff up to keep his job. Which he was eventually fired from when it closed, but he claims it wasn't closed and he still works there. He also claimed they got some materials of alien origin they couldn't identify. Claim that has zero backing. And he can't even come clean that he lied because that would mean government could sue him for fraud.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eric-Davis-16

I see how those three are superbly equipped to validate or falsify claims of some Airforce pilots. /s

Basically 3 believers with some accidental degrees including some with vested interest in continuation of UFO research.

Why am I against it? I just hate bs that poisons minds of so many people giving them some false sense of superiority for "having open minds" and forefront knowledge.

I know it's hard to be confronted with information that undermines your belief. It can be painful. But it's worth it. Freedom from bs waits on the other side of this path. And having accurate model of reality and yourself matters.


All you do is take one point from each of their accomplishments out of context and refute their entire credibility.

Gary Nolan is the one of the premiere immunologists and pathologists in the world. He has created multiple multi-million dollar companies. He was asked by the CIA to perform scans on people who had been encountered UAP and had health effects or death.

Avi Loeb is a renowned Harvard astrophysicist. Yes, he is studying Oumuamua because it was the first object outside our solar system to come by Earth. It also had an extremely odd shape and a trajectory that does not seem natural. He's simply hypothesized that it could be some kind of ET probing device passing Earth, but he's not definitively said so. All he's saying is no other physicist has come up with a proper explanation for what Oumuamua was, and so he wants to study other interstellar objects that come near by.

Eric Davis has been working for DoD for almost 3 decades. He's well known within the defense space to being an incredibly intelligent human being.

You can't just take one piece of their history and dismiss their entire credibility. What are your credentials that make you so important to dismiss these people as insane for just studying this phenomenon?


All of my credentials is that I learned a bit of physics and I read a bit of SF and I can tell one from the other. If it was about existence of leprechauns and effects of meeting them you'd have no problem dismissing it as well regardless of how accomplished people would be interested in the subject. And if it's UFO which has exactly the same amount of confirmed evidence as leprechauns suddenly there's a problem and you need credentials because ufologists made their belief sound sciency.

I know that those 3 scientists are accomplished people in their respective, unassociated fields. For various definitions of the word "accomplished".

But I'd much rather see a psychiatrist and plane surveillance device constructor/tester and possibly a magician or a con artist investigating those documents coming out of DoD first than three avid ufologists. In my opinion it might be way more productive and brilliant immunologist could stick to doing good work in immunology, astrophysicist could research new insights in astrophysics that is actually very promising field, and ex DoD employee very theoretical physicist might continue his mid life crisis or whatever he's doing.

But rest assured, the research is going on. Good news for you:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-try-to...

I'll just be bitter for the waste of research power for the next few years before it goes away. As it always did.

Maybe they'll even get the funding becuse eyes up the sky might be useful:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40054/adversary-drones...


You put that so wonderfully. The DoD and other scientists should absolutely stop investing things that are hovering over their naval ships and nuclear silos just because a man on hacker news would rather see other people investigating them. Your credentials having read a bit of physics are so, so helpful. Please, help the rest of the feeble planet with your intellect because you are truly the one person who knows what is worth investigating and what isn't.

> And if it's UFO which has exactly the same amount of confirmed evidence as leprechauns

That is absolutely false. The 3 navy videos have enough evidence behind them to show UAP are real and exhibiting interesting flight characteristics. You are denying hard evidence - for what reason I don't know.


Those 3 videos?

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/weird-news/2020/04/28/pe...

Third one is a goose:

https://youtu.be/mfhAC2YiYHs

Super solid evidence, no doubt.

Yeah, let's investigate. Tens of millions of dollars won't spend themselves. And we certainly wouldn't want to spend it on boring actual astronomy and astrophysics.

Btw the other video is just of loosing tracking of a plane:

https://youtu.be/3viYcYPRdu4


You are refusing to look at the counter-evidence I provide with regards to people trying to de-bunk the 3 navy videos.

GOFAST: The "goose" would need to be flying 100 knots to account for the wind speed https://twitter.com/the_cholla/status/1603518927891357696

GIMBAL: If the DoD would confirm the range of the object was 6-8 nautical miles (which has been confirmed by the pilots on the mission) than this object performed a "vertical u-turn" where the rotation directly correlates with the change in direction https://twitter.com/the_cholla/status/1620220980839993345?s=...

FLIR1: Hasn't been debunked has a plane. https://twitter.com/MvonRen/status/1599796010506924033

All of the attempts to debunk the videos require very specific assumptions that are not proven. The GIMBAL object was not 30 nautical miles away as Mick west says. The GOFAST object is going against 120 knots of wind, West is assuming there is no wind at all. The Tic-Tac is exhibiting instantaneous acceleration and no plane today can do this.

Nothing about these videos has been debunked. The DoD could put this to rest by releasing the additional sensor data, but they won't because the sensors are highly classified.


GOFAST: The plane traveled at half a speed of sound, speed of wind or a goose is insignificant in comparison. This guy claims he found exact trajectory of a goose from a handful of pixels and numbers on the screen that don't have required precission. Did you notice his 'analysis' doesn't have error bars? That's because they would be very large. It's basically a guy who measures one thing to be 3, other to be 7. Divides those values and draws conclusions from the digit at 6th decimal place.

So he really has no idea how fast goose traveled.

His second objection is that the object was cold in IR (compared to water in the background) which is perfecly consistent with a bird travelling at 2.5 km which is well insulated to be able to fly so high because it's obviously colder up there than at sea level.

FLIR: I see no specific objection and no explanation for why this object looks exactly like other IR recordings of planes from behind where hot exahaust washes out the image and why would speeding off at the end should be rather explained by object violating laws of physics than camera loosing tracking.

GIMBAL: No explanation why the object should show any rotation in sync with camera rotation which proves its shape and angle is optical artifact. Again objections are to details which cannot be accurately established. With complete disregard of the main argument.

What people say that DoD says or doesn't say about it is just heresay. Videos are the data. The only actual data we have.

Goose, plane from behind, and posssibly a debris field of space junk are currently best actually scientific explanations of the data that consists of those 3 videos.

I'm not refusing to address anything, but I'm beginning to think I started a discussion about ufos with avid ufologist. So I don't guarantee I'll still find it worthwhile to respond to your next message if it comes.


> The plane traveled at half a speed of sound, speed of wind or a goose is insignificant in comparison

Are you insane? going 100 knots against 30-50 knots of wind requires far more force than a fucking Goose can provide with its wings. Not to mention the object is at 13,000 feet above sea level which would be insanely high for a goose to travel.

You're also discounting the pilot testimony about the GOFAST video. GOFAST and GIMBAL were taken on the same day by the same pilots. There's a longer classified video that shows the object in GOFAST increasing its altitude to meet up with 4 other objects that appear to be of the same kind. Then the GIMBAL object comes into the page which is where the targeting pod locks onto. The 5 objects are in front of the gimbal object, they begin to turn around and that's when the GIMBAL object performs a vertical u-turn as shown on the ASA. Now, I don't disregard that the rotation may have been caused by the camera, but the trajectory of the object itself is interesting in that we don't have a plant that can perform the same kind of vertical u-turn at such slow speeds. They're going less than 1 mach, the object slows to a stop and then turns around going vertically. Any mechanical plane would stop and fall to the Earth, but this thing didn't.

> I see no specific objection and no explanation for why this object looks exactly like other IR recordings of planes from behind where hot exahaust washes

I dare you to ask any military pilot their opinion on what the object in the screen is. According to the pilot, Chad Underwood, who took the video, he was closing in 10-15 miles of the object and at that distance should be able to make out the the wings, the exhaust plumes, the type of aircraft even with the glare from the exhaust. Here's the pilot saying this himself https://youtu.be/7O1SE0IR13o?t=1231

Let's not forget, the Tic-Tac was active jamming (which is an act of war) and the object in the video matches the description of Cmdr Dave Fravor's description of what he saw with his own eyes.

Again, the DoD could shut you up by providing the additional classified data from the mission.

For future reference, you should stay completely out of this conversation because you are not a true scientist. You are an avid skeptic who will one day be ashamed of himself.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: