Quote from: Uncle Pete on May 30, 2023, 11:33

Quote from: Lowls on May 29, 2023, 13:37

Quote from: Uncle Pete on May 29, 2023, 13:16

Quote from: Big Toe on May 26, 2023, 05:35

Quote from: Uncle Pete on May 22, 2023, 12:02

I've never seen a UFO. Keep in mind that my cameras haven't either. My night timelapse cameras, usually one but sometimes two, have recorded nothing. There are people with 24/7 sky watching cameras looking for meteorites. There's a world network of those. No space ships. Astronomers around the world, watching day and night. No space ships.

They all use cloaking devices, so you cannot see them. The cloak is only dropped in the presence of a true believer.

If they show on radar but can't be seen, that's proof.
If they are visible but don't show on radar that's proof.
If you can see them and they are showing on radar that's proof.
And if they aren't there and weren't on the radar, it's because we don't believe in them... but they are still there.

All bases loaded. 

Ahhhh
A radar return is evidence that an object caused a return. What that object is is open for discussion. But I'm not an expert in radar. However very luckily the Nimizt case had been going for 3 weeks. Was part of a fleet performing sea trials. Even had a sub in the area. They had been monitoring the radar returns and had been recording these craft travelling at impossible speeds. In some cases 20,000 mph. But because sea trial windows are very tight you cannot just .. pause ... orders come from fleet and usually you are coordinating a lot of air space, other shipping, recording facilities, crew leave, crew training needs ro take place and you have experienced inspectorate teams performing instruction and all to train ready to enter a operational theatre. So windows are exact. It was one of the Captains officers who said look these things are now entering air space regularly and the pilots are seeing them in instruments, radar has them, there's been a few near misses so we have multiple ship radar returns of craft performing impossible maneuvers and aircraft instruments across a variety of aircraft systems seeing them also. All data is conclusive we must treat this as a air safety issue. If we have a crash and don't know what it is we will be in serious problems.

At this point David Fravor is detailed off along with another crew ro investigate. After his report further pilots also chased them down leading to the Tic Tak video. After which another crews pilots filmed Go Fast and Gimble videos. All with on oard instrument logging the same and ship radar systems tallying.

This wasn't supposed to be released to the public. But it was. By I believed the then head of governmnent UAP task force Luis Elizondo. He'd had enough of the BS and had access to a variety of data both instrumental and visual and crew reports. And on ....  but it transpires that it was actually Christopher Karl Mellon, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations and later for Security and Information Operations.

But what I always love to ask Sceptics is this ... what would constitute enough proof for you. Because it will never be enough. So what is the point of you.

What would you consider proof that something wasn't a UFO or a mysterious event. Nothing explained is ever enough for you. 

My point was not one specific event, but the system of logic that believers use, which they first believe, then make a weak attempt to discover the truth and then declare as a real sighting. In every case, the radar is the proof, no matter what the results. Impossible to fair conclusion based on variable truth.

A number of people have suggested that real science and research involves, repeatable or reproducible evidence. There is also a requirement that theories and suppositions, have statistical study and involve peer review. That doesn't mean that "peers" will agree and there isn't politics involved or some healthy skepticism, but unlike UFOs and conspiracies, there's nearly no requirement of proof or evidence, and reports are released and published, without anyone even reviewing what is claimed, before it's distributed to the shared networks of advocates.

In the end, and my point is, radar evidence is a rubber bag that can be stretched into any shape needed to include how radar proves that the sighting was alien space craft technology, because nothing known could have done that. Instead of looking at how various situations could be weather, or errors or some other phenomena.

And yes I'm skeptical and I inquire and look for solid facts and confirmed evidence. I'm proud of that. Being called a skeptic is an honor.  Looking for the truth involves questioning the accepted mythology.

Not me but I agree with some of the things you state. The repeatable crap is .. but I'll deal with that later.
So what's important here is your claim about radar readings.

Please explain more and also can you please give your qualifications in radar operation specifically of that used on the Nimitz so that the explanation is in context and your skepticism has a solid foundation. Thanks in advance.

The point wasn't specific and especially not the Nimitz or over Washington DC. And I don't need to be a radar expert to see that, in any situation, no matter what the radar shows, it's claimed as some kind of proof that there's an unexplained space craft, connected to the phenomena, not just a radar anomaly or equipment error.

Or a temperature inversion?  https://www.washingtonian.com/2023/02/13/dc-had-multiple-ufo-sightings-71-years-ago/#:~:text=Radar%20experts%20theorized%20that%20the%20culprit%20in%20DC,Some%20feared%20it%20was%20advanced%20aircraft%20from%20Russia.
"The next weekend, the odd radar blips were back�this time, air-traffic controllers counted a dozen. An Iowa newspaper would later blare: �Saucers Swarm Over Capital.�"

Some reports are over reaction or trying to create news.

Yes I understand repeatable is not for unidentified, but when someone can show a UFO photo is faked and how it was done, how about that kind of repeatable? Debunking like skepticism, gets a bad name, when it's really necessary and not evil. Just an honest search for the truth.

I know I've written this before, but if the truth is out there and someone is seriously studying and trying to find answers, how do you do that when the whole field of evidence is buried under fakes and fantasy, and there's no effort to say, throw out the frauds and creative writing, start looking at what isn't explained. Roswell is explained. The people who are interested in the truth should also be cleaning house and throwing out the trash that's in the way of potential, more interesting or real cases?

Quote from: Lowls on May 30, 2023, 18:35

Quote from: Uncle Pete on May 30, 2023, 11:33

Quote from: Lowls on May 29, 2023, 13:37

Quote from: Uncle Pete on May 29, 2023, 13:16

Quote from: Big Toe on May 26, 2023, 05:35

Quote from: Uncle Pete on May 22, 2023, 12:02

I've never seen a UFO. Keep in mind that my cameras haven't either. My night timelapse cameras, usually one but sometimes two, have recorded nothing. There are people with 24/7 sky watching cameras looking for meteorites. There's a world network of those. No space ships. Astronomers around the world, watching day and night. No space ships.

They all use cloaking devices, so you cannot see them. The cloak is only dropped in the presence of a true believer.

If they show on radar but can't be seen, that's proof.
If they are visible but don't show on radar that's proof.
If you can see them and they are showing on radar that's proof.
And if they aren't there and weren't on the radar, it's because we don't believe in them... but they are still there.

All bases loaded. 

Ahhhh
A radar return is evidence that an object caused a return. What that object is is open for discussion. But I'm not an expert in radar. However very luckily the Nimizt case had been going for 3 weeks. Was part of a fleet performing sea trials. Even had a sub in the area. They had been monitoring the radar returns and had been recording these craft travelling at impossible speeds. In some cases 20,000 mph. But because sea trial windows are very tight you cannot just .. pause ... orders come from fleet and usually you are coordinating a lot of air space, other shipping, recording facilities, crew leave, crew training needs ro take place and you have experienced inspectorate teams performing instruction and all to train ready to enter a operational theatre. So windows are exact. It was one of the Captains officers who said look these things are now entering air space regularly and the pilots are seeing them in instruments, radar has them, there's been a few near misses so we have multiple ship radar returns of craft performing impossible maneuvers and aircraft instruments across a variety of aircraft systems seeing them also. All data is conclusive we must treat this as a air safety issue. If we have a crash and don't know what it is we will be in serious problems.

At this point David Fravor is detailed off along with another crew ro investigate. After his report further pilots also chased them down leading to the Tic Tak video. After which another crews pilots filmed Go Fast and Gimble videos. All with on oard instrument logging the same and ship radar systems tallying.

This wasn't supposed to be released to the public. But it was. By I believed the then head of governmnent UAP task force Luis Elizondo. He'd had enough of the BS and had access to a variety of data both instrumental and visual and crew reports. And on ....  but it transpires that it was actually Christopher Karl Mellon, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations and later for Security and Information Operations.

But what I always love to ask Sceptics is this ... what would constitute enough proof for you. Because it will never be enough. So what is the point of you.

What would you consider proof that something wasn't a UFO or a mysterious event. Nothing explained is ever enough for you. 

My point was not one specific event, but the system of logic that believers use, which they first believe, then make a weak attempt to discover the truth and then declare as a real sighting. In every case, the radar is the proof, no matter what the results. Impossible to fair conclusion based on variable truth.

A number of people have suggested that real science and research involves, repeatable or reproducible evidence. There is also a requirement that theories and suppositions, have statistical study and involve peer review. That doesn't mean that "peers" will agree and there isn't politics involved or some healthy skepticism, but unlike UFOs and conspiracies, there's nearly no requirement of proof or evidence, and reports are released and published, without anyone even reviewing what is claimed, before it's distributed to the shared networks of advocates.

In the end, and my point is, radar evidence is a rubber bag that can be stretched into any shape needed to include how radar proves that the sighting was alien space craft technology, because nothing known could have done that. Instead of looking at how various situations could be weather, or errors or some other phenomena.

And yes I'm skeptical and I inquire and look for solid facts and confirmed evidence. I'm proud of that. Being called a skeptic is an honor.  Looking for the truth involves questioning the accepted mythology.

Not me but I agree with some of the things you state. The repeatable crap is .. but I'll deal with that later.
So what's important here is your claim about radar readings.

Please explain more and also can you please give your qualifications in radar operation specifically of that used on the Nimitz so that the explanation is in context and your skepticism has a solid foundation. Thanks in advance.

The point wasn't specific and especially not the Nimitz or over Washington DC. And I don't need to be a radar expert to see that, in any situation, no matter what the radar shows, it's claimed as some kind of proof that there's an unexplained space craft, connected to the phenomena, not just a radar anomaly or equipment error.

Or a temperature inversion?  https://www.washingtonian.com/2023/02/13/dc-had-multiple-ufo-sightings-71-years-ago/#:~:text=Radar%20experts%20theorized%20that%20the%20culprit%20in%20DC,Some%20feared%20it%20was%20advanced%20aircraft%20from%20Russia.
"The next weekend, the odd radar blips were back�this time, air-traffic controllers counted a dozen. An Iowa newspaper would later blare: �Saucers Swarm Over Capital.�"

Some reports are over reaction or trying to create news.

Yes I understand repeatable is not for unidentified, but when someone can show a UFO photo is faked and how it was done, how about that kind of repeatable? Debunking like skepticism, gets a bad name, when it's really necessary and not evil. Just an honest search for the truth.

I know I've written this before, but if the truth is out there and someone is seriously studying and trying to find answers, how do you do that when the whole field of evidence is buried under fakes and fantasy, and there's no effort to say, throw out the frauds and creative writing, start looking at what isn't explained. Roswell is explained. The people who are interested in the truth should also be cleaning house and throwing out the trash that's in the way of potential, more interesting or real cases?

Unfortunately Peter this is where we are. Left with what people have decided is the only credible evidence which is that given by as credible witnesses as you. an get. Scientist aren't credible unfortunately because like any for hire group you don't see the BS you only see bought and paid for data. When it gets peer reviewed again the BS falls by the wayside but does so because of money or agendas. The guy that cured burns leaving no scarring or minimal scarring ... where is he now. Ridiculed to oblivion. Not before a very interesting documentary was made showing uts secrets. A particular root/potato I forget which ... disgustingly mixed by chewing with the saliva of the tribeswomen and and regurgitated and spat out onto the wound. Left and hey presto ... minimal scarring and faster healing. Why ... pffffff ... lunatic bye bye now. Its probably still out there.
Leaches still used today. But the septics would claim only by quacks. Unfortunately incorrect. Used by oral surgeons after mouth grafts following oral cancer to draw blood into the grafted tissue. I know cause I dated a nurse who worked in that field. grim or what and it made her puke dealing with those patients. She just know how they coped.

So with UFOs we are now left with apparently just the.military or professional pilots under the guise of air safety dangers to accumulate new data with modern technology built by and invented by scientists ro protect your very lives night and day. Or Joe public who is apparently as thick as pig sh�t and twice as runny and can't be trusted.

On the debunker forefront we have the Great Mick West 🤡

He has thoroughly debunked the 29 Palms UFO footage and photographs and declared case closed. Done. Its flares by the way. The large amount of witnesses who are military - irrelevant. The 30 ro 40 Humvs driving round the air base, helicopters searching ... jets ready to go chase it ... lume rounds fired at it and in the same footage side by side... just business as usual on a training base ... at 10 till 4 am ...

From his own site he clearly and precisely shows how in two very similar photos the 'craft' (flares) slowly sink down over a period of 19 seconds. Proving that the lights and triangle taken in low light mode on an iPhone are nothing more than flares drifting down over a 19 second period.



And this is lol ... jeeze what is this ... the very dross people jave to wade through.

Lowls, thanks for correcting me, my English is really bad. Therefore, they do not always understand me here.

....Scientist aren't credible unfortunately because like any for hire group you don't see the BS you only see bought and paid for data. When it gets peer reviewed again the BS falls by the wayside but does so because of money or agendas. The guy that cured burns leaving no scarring or minimal scarring ... where is he now. Ridiculed to oblivion. Not before a very interesting documentary was made showing uts secrets. A particular root/potato I forget which ...

is that your idea of a peer review?  and you dont trust scientists but trust those w/o credible evidence who profit from, books,faux-documentaries, etc??

Leaches still used today. But the septics would claim only by quacks. Unfortunately incorrect. Used by oral surgeons after mouth grafts following oral cancer to draw blood into the grafted tissue..
 

you're distorting the facts again -please show ONE 'skeptic' who says such use of leeches is quackery? 

medical use of leeches has been found to be effective (also when re-attaching fingers) by careful, scientific, peer reviewed, controlled studies published in professional journals

Lowls, thanks for correcting me, my English is really bad. Therefore, they do not always understand me here.

Your English is excellent. Not correcting you ... just being a bit more specific which changes the context. And that was from memory so ... not exactly word for word.

Edit: Specifically what he stated with regard to the first arrival of Spanish ships as they arrived "They didnt know what it was, they couldn't see it for what it was". Not far off.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-12141359/NASAs-UFO-task-force-livestream-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena-meeting-TOMORROW-Watch-here.html
NASA to hold historic public meeting about UFOs TOMORROW: Space agency to give first update of its study into unidentified craft in our skies AND oceans - and you can watch it live

That's 4 hours of stuff there thank you. I started watching because it was steamed a few hours ago. Is it selling what it's pushing. No.  No it is already confused itself and although slick they've already made morons of themselves. It's a panel of experts in their individual fields of science. Cool. This is what they state they'll be doing...

Right off the bat a few minutes in we have this gem

 "The existing data from eye witness reports are often muddled and cannot provide conclusive evidence that supports UAP recognition and analysis (Short version - the past is the past and we won't be looking at anything previously reported no matter who it cane from)."

and ...

"Additionally an objects background can complicate the data further and render it unusable due to conventional objects that can mimic or overshadow the phenomena completely such as commercial air craft, military equipment, the weather and ionospheric phenomena like auroras. (Not leaving a lot left ro look at there folks because they don't come in a box)

 *This lack of high quality data make it !!!!impossible!!!! to draw scientifc conclusions about UAP.  (LOL so what are you doing. What is the point of this)

So basically this team are gathering to create a method for scientifically analysing and identifying only future  UAP data as long as it doesn't involve any of the criteria that would make the data unusable. Has a background. Has a plane in it. Has military equipment in it or could be weather or rainbows and comes from the public because they're muddled.
So basically a huge  waste of time.

There also said this team will not be pouring over grainy film images. Ok so no footage or photos, no eye witness reports no military or classified data because of restrictions only unclassified data that you collect which will become classified and never see the light of day lol.

Well 3 hours 45 minutes to go ...

Try this, science with Peer Review. Oh wait, you already have your mind made up that real science is all bought and paid for or biased. While unsubstantiated rumors, conjecture and no review, everything gets in, is the real basis for UAP research.

Since submitting the papers for peer review, the Galileo Project�s international and cross-institutional team has been busy testing and calibrating the many sensors and tools developed for this unique astronomical effort. Having field-tested the equipment even through the extreme weather of a New England winter, the project is now looking to leverage what it learned in phase 1 and bring additional locations online across the United States. Galileo Project researchers are simultaneously preparing for an upcoming expedition to collect remnants of the first documented interstellar meteor, and developing software to analyze data recorded both by field instruments as well as by Earth-observing satellites.

All Galileo Project papers are freely available to the public with Open Access at the Journal of Astronomical Instrumentation�s website, https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscinet/jai. A list of all published papers is available in the Publications section of the Galileo Project website, at https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/galileo/publications.


https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/galileo/news/galileo-project-publishes-first-peer-reviewed-scientific-papers-jai

Quote from: Lowls on May 31, 2023, 12:16

Unfortunately Peter this is where we are. Left with what people have decided is the only credible evidence which is that given by as credible witnesses as you. an get. Scientist aren't credible unfortunately because like any for hire group you don't see the BS you only see bought and paid for data. When it gets peer reviewed again the BS falls by the wayside but does so because of money or agendas.

Yeah leeches and potatoes. Except you ignore the other 98% that pure trash science or fraud and gets exposed. How about perpetual motion machines? Powering your car by adding a water inserted to your carburetor. Or aliens flying from outer space, just to look up our butts?

The reason that leeches are used now for some procedures, is they have been tested and proven to work. I can't say about burns and potatoes. Many old word medical advice is actually dangerous, people used to think that drinking mercury would cure them of diseases.

Claims have to be studied and proven. It's the responsibility of the person making the claim to prove it's true, not the backwards denial that says "Prove it's not true"

Faeries, ghosts, elves, and the like. Imaginary monsters, exobiology, mostly rubbish.

In fact there's more hard evidence that Santa Claus is real, based on belief and personal observations.

Right. But as we were talking in the context of UAP that's where my comments were aimed. Not science generally. Scientists investigating UAP. This shower has already proved my point because theybalways turn to astronomy scientists to explain away something the size of a tanker 50 fee above a witness. For example Peter.

Mercury... totally works. Attacks the nervous system too and is cumulative . Totally works and still does Peter ...

For more than 3,000 years, mercury and its derivatives have been used as anti-parasitic drugs, anti-syphilis, antipruritic, antiseptics, anti-inflammatory drugs, diuretics, dental amalgams, and substitutes.

Chemo doesn't target Cancer cells it just targets cells. Hopefully by the time all the cells that are cancerous are dead you have enough to crawl off. What's your point.

You keep typing this:

Claims have to be studied and proven. It's the responsibility of the person making the claim to prove it's true, not the backwards denial that says "Prove it's not true"

and yet the muppets keep running from under the sink cupboard to scream and rant that it's all BS and endlessly throw out utterly unfounded authoritative statements that it's all fake.

Well OK Peter your claim is that its fake. Can we now finally have some proof 🤷. I'm not sure what scientific community you've experienced but because I said so isn't usually how it works is it lol.

p.s. Peter if you use anything from Mick Wests site I will be handing you your buttocks to hard, your grandkids will feel it 

Faeries, ghosts, elves, and the like. Imaginary monsters, exobiology, mostly rubbish.

I'm afraid that your, and for that matter, our (mainstream) understanding of the wider reality is much closer to "mostly rubbish" than to the truth. Just try to understand, for example, the implications of the double-slit experiment and it should destroy your assumptions about the reality and what is really going on.

Yes it's difficult to be skeptical of extreme claims and as everyone reading this thread can see, it's futile to try to give reasonable solutions when the replies will be emotional and one sided. I understand that my being a skeptic is like attacking someones religion, it's their personal beliefs. Same with politics now. There's no way to argue logical and reasonable points, because the other people only see that they are being personally attack, and don't see that what I'm trying to point out is the facts are flawed. That is not personal, it's just about facts, data information, history and that nasty word... REALITY.

Just one:
Elemental and methylmercury are toxic to the central and peripheral nervous systems. The inhalation of mercury vapour can produce harmful effects on the nervous, digestive and immune systems, lungs and kidneys, and may be fatal. The inorganic salts of mercury are corrosive to the skin, eyes and gastrointestinal tract, and may induce kidney toxicity if ingested.

Neurological and behavioural disorders may be observed after inhalation, ingestion or dermal exposure of different mercury compounds. Symptoms include tremors, insomnia, memory loss, neuromuscular effects, headaches and cognitive and motor dysfunction. Mild, subclinical signs of central nervous system toxicity can be seen in workers exposed to an elemental mercury level in the air of 20 μg/m3 or more for several years. Kidney effects have been reported, ranging from increased protein in the urine to kidney failure.

https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2017/10/22/mercury-was-considered-a-cure-until-it-killed-you.html

Mercury is no longer used for dentistry, or quack cures. "It wasn�t until the mid-20th century that mercury compounds finally fell out of favour, thanks to a solid understanding that heavy metal toxicity was actually, you know, bad." 

Ancient wisdom is more often wrong, than the few cases where someone verified and tested, scientifically and found that some tribal or folk belief that is actually quite useful and works.

Most home remedies or natural therapies, though, haven�t been put through the same rigorous clinical testing you expect from pharmaceutical medications. Some pharmaceutical medicines are synthetic versions of ancient herbs or plants that have been found to be effective. This is done by rigorous testing, not a friend of a friend who knows someone who says, some herbal remedy is good for your.

The best people to investigate unexplained phenomena, just like the best people to research medicine, are people who do research and keep records and used scientific method. Not people who spread rumors, myths and folk beliefs, because it's their personal belief. UFO and aliens believers have a personal agenda and inner motivation for their conclusions. Real science derives answers from investigation and research, not folk beliefs.

So that's a no then we can't expect anything valid from you regarding your claim that its all fake.

I'm not sure who you are referring to when you state beinga skeptic is like attacking someone's religion. Skeptics aren't professional lol. They just are. They may have a profession. But disbelief in UFOs, whilst moronic, isn't offensive. What is offensive is typing a wall of conjecture without providing any proof.

I posted a wall of video taken by the military, analysed by their experts (who are more qualified than you on every level) to assess validity and this in turn led to your governmment creating ... ANOTHER task force. AARO ... The fourth iteration the first being Blue Book which was a hoax. I'm not sure what other evidence you need that UAP exist but I did ask you. You didn't answer that one either.

In fact the only closed minded people here are the skeptics who deny the validity of any authoritative source over their own opinion. Which doesn't effect me in any way. This thread was for uploading any footage that any may have taken.

It became your punching bag and you played tag with ya chum. It didn't matter to me. Discussion about the possible causes or origins of UAP is campfire off topic worthy particularly as ex high ranking members of the government and military have now taken the reigns. So yeah have at it.

What I would say is don't put emotions and opinions in my mouth. You don't know me, my motivation or my opinions at all. You do however know that I'm able to hold up examples. Unlike you who relies solely on slim pickings and generalisations.

So that's a no then we can't expect anything valid from you regarding your claim that its all fake.

I'm not sure who you are referring to when you state beinga skeptic is like attacking someone's religion. Skeptics aren't professional lol. They just are. They may have a profession. But disbelief in UFOs, whilst moronic, isn't offensive. What is offensive is typing a wall of conjecture without providing any proof.

In fact the only closed minded people here are the skeptics who deny the validity of any authoritative source over their own opinion. Which doesn't effect me in any way. This thread was for uploading any footage that any may have taken.

It became your punching bag and you played tag with ya chum. It didn't matter to me. Discussion about the possible causes or origins of UAP is campfire off topic worthy particularly as ex high ranking members of the government and military have now taken the reigns. So yeah have at it.

What I would say is don't put emotions and opinions in my mouth. You don't know me, my motivation or my opinions at all. You do however know that I'm able to hold up examples. Unlike you who relies solely on slim pickings and generalisations.

You win, it's no use trying to be reasonable. Profession skeptics, who said that? Skeptics don't deny "any authoritative source over their own opinion" that's precisely how the believers validate their false claims and erroneous beliefs, with no facts or truth to support them. Denial belongs to the believers, evidence and facts are on the side of the skeptics. That's the ground floor truth.

UFO exist by definition, because they are unidentified. Same for UAP. But that doesn't mean the same means they are real, or aliens or ET or something else. Just Unidentified.

Slim picking and generalizations?  How many UFOs are real and how many are explained and errors in observation. That's a tough question, I have the answer from history, bluebook and even the people who are supporting the aliens stories. How many are explained and how many are possible and how many are firmly = unexplained.

Who relies solely on slim pickings and generalisations? to use your own stab at people who doubt, because the want something beyond campfire stories, myths, exaggerations or outright lies? Slim Pickins? (love him in Dr. Strangelove. 

Quote from: LDV81 on June 01, 2023, 19:10

Quote from: Uncle Pete on June 01, 2023, 12:17

Faeries, ghosts, elves, and the like. Imaginary monsters, exobiology, mostly rubbish.

I'm afraid that your, and for that matter, our (mainstream) understanding of the wider reality is much closer to "mostly rubbish" than to the truth. Just try to understand, for example, the implications of the double-slit experiment and it should destroy your assumptions about the reality and what is really going on.

I'll have to find that experiment I haven't read or seen anything. Sounds interesting and I can't comment until I have more than a name of some experiment? I don't know what it's supposed to show or how it was run or who was behind it.

Do you mean the quantum eraser? I'll try to see what it's all about.

The double-slit experiment is probably the most famous experiment in quantum physics. And maybe the most puzzling one in the history of mankind so far.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txlCvCSefYQ

In a nutshell, the act of observation/measurement of the experiment changes the result. Whatever can happen, does happen - the particle is in multiple places at the same time. Until you try to observe it. Before observation, particles have no defined properties. They are kind of "rendered" only when observed or measured. In other words, the reality is super-weird and super-crazy, until you try to observe what exactly is going on - then it immediately changes and behaves as our intuition would tell us.

Quantum Eraser is even weirder than the normal double-slit experiment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgs

Some of the widely discussed implications of the double-slit experiment are the Multiverse Theory and Schr�dinger's cat, which, theoretically, is both dead and alive at the same time.

But the double-slit experiment is only the beginning. Watch the videos with Professor Donald Hoffman and they will make you question the nature of reality. And yes, he does provide solid mathematical and experimental evidence for his theory and he is a respected scientist at a well-known university.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYp5XuGYqqY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reYdQYZ9Rj4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIRHq3d7Uuo

Space-time is not fundamental, it is just a "useful fiction", an interface, a VR headset, according to Hoffman. Whatever REALITY is, it is not what you thought it was. What you considered to be the REALITY is just a fiction in the grand scheme of things. You cannot trust your senses at all to understand the reality. Interstellar travel becomes a completely different subject, once you realize that space-time is not fundamental - and Hoffman sometimes mentions it in his interviews. And some top physicists, like Nima Arkani-Hamed, indeed already go beyond space-time with their theories.

And for what it's worth, idealism has no issues with the double-slit experiment or quantum entanglement. It is only problematic within the materialist paradigm.

author=Uncle Pete link=topic=37704.msg587567#msg587567 date=1685745069]

Slim picking and generalizations?  How many UFOs are real and how many are explained and errors in observation. That's a tough question, I have the answer from history, bluebook and even the people who are supporting the aliens stories. How many are explained and how many are possible and how many are firmly = unexplained.

Unfortunately you don't have the answer from history Peter that is a falsehood yet again. At this point it is just wilful and deliberate on your part. I can debate with a skeptic but you cannot debate lies.

 You hold up bluebook (created by the military) which discarded almost all UFO reports as rubbish and yet refuse ro accept military acknowledgment and testimony.

Bluebook was itself a deliberate work of fiction. The scientific head  of bluebook himself has historically rubbished it.

Don't take it from me. Take it from him -

https://youtu.be/6YYkjYAxT44

Dr J Allen Hynek. Scientific advisor to the government across various projects from 1947 to 1969. Astronomer and Astrophysicist.

Hynek acted as scientific advisor to UFO studies undertaken by the U.S. Air Force under three projects:
Project Sign (1947�1949)
Project Grudge (1949�1951)
Project Blue Book (1952�1969)

For any one else the description of that video contains a tonne of links digging far deeper into the phenomena and its implications.

Currently the US government are again, under project AARO, invetigating UAP. The preponderance of data and professional observers have caused a shift to try and identify what is going on. But already there is a serious problem.
Sean Kirpatrick who is heading up this investigation (don't worry he is high, high up) has delivered his first assembly. Using two teams of experts not named he has for a year been investigating. But already it has a whiff of the blue book farce cause severe backlash against Congress from all those military personnel involved. And this time, duty and orders aren't going to stop these witnesses from speaking out.

The deal from Congress
"You come foreward and tell us via the reporting system of any and all experiences. Who was involved. What happened. Where it was. When. Doesn't matter if you are the president now your report will be held in complete confidence. Any non disclosure agreement you were forced to sign is rendered invalid and unlawful. It is now your lawful duty to report what you saw. No matter who tells you otherwise. Anyone who is standing in the way of this investigation will be dealt with.

Very strong words. And as such Sean Kirpatricks AARO have had a deluge of reports. Around 600 are active and ongoing. In a year. They've processed and rubbished I think around 300.

How they do this.

Two teams. One is concentrating on any national security implications. If the details of the experience could be deemed a danger to national security. The other team looks at it another way more broadly. After a report is submitted both teams get a copy. Independently they assess the footage /account of witness/instrument data. Then each team submits its report. The reports are examined. If they agree it gets moved on for further study. If they disagree it gets re-examined to resolve the disagreement.

On the face of it a fair stab at it. But there is a serious failing. If they can't resolve the issue ... Kirkpatrick decides. One man.

Further their role isn't just recent UAP. It is past UAP. They are going to catalogue all the reports and curate them. This should be a good thing. But the danger is that when a small group have access to all data they could categorise unilaterally large swathes of data as not worthy. When that happens it gets filed in the dustbin. Never to be seen again. This has historically happened with any and all files from Rosswell. Allegedly. The files were removed and destroyed after it was deemed a weather balloon.

After one year Kirkpatrick delivered his report. It was actually tragic and laughable and missing significant data that is in the public domain and acknowledged as fact by the military. He declared that there were "No maritime UAP reports"

So how did he not have tic tac, gimble, go fast and others because we can get that stuff in seconds. That's all the footage there is allegedly. Hours of radar and cockpit instrument data also. 🤷 And people are pissed. Not the public. People in Congress are calling BS. Military personnel are calling BS. Kirkpatrick it is rumoured may be replaced.

And now for whatever reason NASA have waded in and created their own team. And Kirkpatrick has allowed one of their team to sit on his panel. Which is a what moment.

Further to this the military data have two tears. Stuff Congress can discuss with Kirkpatrick in the open hearings. And stuff they can't. So far 4 cases have been discussed openly for us ... out of 300 and Kirkpatricks teams have debunked 2 of those. The latest they explained away as sensor wobble and planes in flight at night.

I urge you to look at that video as he explains it 🤣.  Jesus I don't know how anyone could claim that is planes. 3 dots on a screen moving in unison. what ... its just dots and clearly it looks fake. But planes apparently. But then I don't have the rest of the data his team had. Never the less he is apparently on very shakey ground.

Hopefully this won't be another Blue Book. Even those involved in it shun it. But it suits the septics. Lazy ... don't bother looking at the evidence surrounding it's creation. Willfully ignore the people involved and in charge of it rubbishing it.

The only explanation is that they are religious zealots or suffer some other delusion.