Discussing Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs)

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the definition and implications of UFOs, emphasizing that they are simply Unidentified Flying Objects, which can include anything from new aircraft to balloons. Participants debate the connection between UFOs and extraterrestrial life, with some asserting that aliens likely exist given the vastness of the universe, while others argue that there is no concrete evidence linking UFO sightings to alien encounters. The conversation touches on historical perspectives, suggesting that early sightings of human-made aircraft were perceived as extraordinary, and questions the credibility of claims about alien technology and communication methods. Additionally, crop circles are mentioned as a point of contention, with some believing they are evidence of alien activity, while others attribute them to human hoaxes. Ultimately, the thread highlights the ongoing fascination and skepticism surrounding UFOs and the possibility of alien life.
  • #91
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
You be the judge; but if you wish to judge please look first.

True, maybe I need a new pair of glasses ;)

I don't know if it is ET, but if so the implications are staggering!

I think the implications could be quite staggering even if there is no ET's involved.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
On January 16, 1957 - the day after NICAP's Board of Governors met for the first time - Board Chairman Delmer S. Fahrney called a press conference. News media all over the country quoted his statements (see Associated Press story below), identifing him as one of the few "top brass" to speak out in defense of UFOs.
WASHINGTON AP - Retired Rear Adm. Delmer S. Fahrney, once head of the Navy's guided missile program, said Wednesday reliable reports indicate thst "there are objects coming into our atmosphere at very high speeds. Fahrney told a news conference that "no agency in this country or Russia is able to duplcate at this time the speeds and accelerations which radar and observers indicate these flying objects are able to achieve."
Fahrney said he never has seen a flying saucer but has talked with a number of scientists and engineers who reported seeing strange flying objects. He added there are signs that "an intelligence" directs such objects "because of the way they fly. They are not entirely actuated by automatic equipment," he said. "The way they change position in formations and override each other would indicate that their motion is directed."

An Air Force spokesman said that service is still investigating all reports but has found absolutely no concrete evidence that there are flying saucers. He said that a majority of the reports are found upon checking to have some logical explanation, but that a percentage remains unexplained.

Fahrney called a news conference following an organizational meeting of a new private group. the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, of which he is board chairman.

Fahrney told reporters he has no information or preconceived ideas as to whether the unidentified flying objects are from outer space, but believes they involve "a tremendous amount of technology of which we have no knowledge," and that their development must have taken a long period of time.
 
  • #93
Is there any testimonies from non military scientists and has anybody sweared under oath that the things they claim to have seen are real ?
 
  • #94
Originally posted by username
Is there any testimonies from non military scientists and has anybody sweared under oath that the things they claim to have seen are real ?
Even though many scientists have spoken out on the subject, and I have seen the signed reports from Carter and others, beyond public statements I don't remember a particular report that would satisfy your request. I am sure there are so I will check. Are you looking for affidavits, or just absolute conviction about these person's opinions?

Edit: Bare in mind that any public statements about UFOs by a scientist qualifies professionally as extremely risky behavior.

One real interesting story in this is that of Hynek. As the official debunker for the Air Force, he was the originator of the swamp gas explanations and other bogus debunking. He was in fact the person responsible for much of the popular attitudes found today in people who are unfamiliar with the UFO phenomenon. He then made a complete and public reversal in his position and became a leader in the UFO community. I suggest reading his book "The Hynek UFO Report".

For the moment, here is another scientist's point of view:
Dr. Jacques Vallee, astrophysicist, computer scientist and world renowned researcher and author on UFOs and paranormal phenomena. He worked closely with Dr. J. Allen Hynek. Commenting on the need for science "to search beyond the superficial appearances of reality":
"Skeptics, who flatly deny the existence of any unexplained phenomenon in the name of 'rationalism,' are among the primary contributors to the rejection of science by the public. People are not stupid and they know very well when they have seen something out of the ordinary. When a so-called expert tells them the object must have been the moon or a mirage, he is really teaching the public that science is impotent or unwilling to pursue the study of the unknown." (Vallee, J., Confrontations, New York: Ballantine Books, 1990.)
 
Last edited:
  • #95
Unidentified Flying Objects: An Historical Perspective
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Design Engineering Conference
George W. Earley
Americana Hotel, New York City
May 15-18, 1967


http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/histper.htm
 
  • #97
"The UFO hypothesis and Survival Questions"
---declassified from SECRET.

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo35.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #98
Atmosphere or UFO?
by Bruce Maccabee Ph.D.
Optical physicist for the Navy Deparment
--on RADAR events
http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/pdf/maccabee.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #99
Originally posted by username
Is there any testimonies from non military scientists and has anybody sweared under oath that the things they claim to have seen are real ?

I just noticed that I misread your post. Yes. Plenty of affidavits and signed official reports do exist from many, many people. I thought that you meant a non-military scientist who has sworn under oath, such as in a court of law. I don’t know if you consider a signed official [legal] document acceptable or not. A number of the references listed include non-military scientists who have gone on the record.
 
  • #100
Roswell

Whewww! I have looked at so much stuff on Roswell... I wanted to post this link since it provides at least one reputable source of information.

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo32.pdf

The economic benefit to Roswell - which had a military base and a Xmas tree ornament factory and I think that's about it - is undeniable. Aliens have put Roswell on the map. It is obvious to nearly anyone that an entire industry now exists around the alien claim; especially in Roswell. I would tend to accept the government's explanations of this particular event and be done with it, however a few bothersome facts still keep my interest:

1).The government has and now admits to having consistently lied about this event. I watched the news conference a few years ago in which the official "case closed" evidence was presented by the government. The four foot aliens seen were, according to the now "truthful" government explanation, really six foot test flight dummies that had been dropped for high altitude tests. This claim of alien bodies is about the most important one for the government to dismiss; due to the number of the witnesses and people who claim direct knowledge of the "events" of 1947. Some sharp reporter was wise to this explanation and asked how this happened considering that the dummies weren't used until five years later [this claim is correct]. The government official stammered a bit and said he would look into it.

2). It appears that many key government docs related to this event were illegally destroyed. Please see the attached nsa.gov link.

3). in an interview about the document at the attached link [the GAO report] Congressman Schiff complains about a seeming unwillingness for certain government agencies to comply with his request for information about Roswell records. This motivates his appeal to the General Accounting Office and the related report.

4). Recently, an archeologist was asked to investigate the supposed UFO crash site. Anomalies were found in the soil compaction that supports "eyewitness" UFO claims. The scientist met with the Governor of New Mexico and presented his findings.

5). Although clearly not all credible, many witnesses to the events of 1947 have video taped their testimony "for the record". One key witness, a dying Colonel Corso, effectively gives death bed testimony in which he claims "I saw the [alien] bodies!".

6). If claims or events like this one are true, then one would expect that over time, as the people involved in these events grow older, more and more of these people would come forward and tell their stories. This is exactly what has happened.

7). Many explanation for this event demand that we assume that the worlds only nuclear strike force - the 509th at Roswell - was comprised of idiots who can't tell a UFO from a balloon that they themselves had launched.

Edit: Almost forgot one:
8). Military records do not support the current explanation offered by the government. For example, the offical report indicates that the balloon and radar reflector debris were shipped to Wright Patterson AFB, the same base to which the alien bodies were allegedly shipped, yet no materials handling bills or personnel records are found showing that any transport was ever made.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #103
Big Sur

The Big Sur Filming
Big Sur, California
September 15, 1964

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/bigsurdir.htm

Edit: I attempted to speak with Mr Mansmann a couple of times. Unfortunately he was too ill to speak and then passed away. I did speak with his wife twice and she was kind enough to have a short discussion with me on both occasions. According to Mrs. Mansmann, Mr. Mansmann maintained the truth of this story until his dying breath.
 
Last edited:
  • #104
Last edited:
  • #105
To: Commander, USAF Security Services

UFO reports from the Air Force.

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo31.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #106
a note on Roswell:

I have recently noticed a slight error developing in the government’s explanation that I would like to correct:

Page 3 of the government response to Roswell states:
http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo39.pdf

“There is no dispute, however, that something happened near Roswell in July, 1947, since it was reported in a number of newspaper articles; the most famous of which were the July 8 and July 9 editions of the Roswell Daily Record. The July 8 edition reported “RAFF Captures Flying Saucer on Ranch in Roswell Region.”

On page one, paragraph one, sentence one of the GAO report, we find that it was the Air Force, and not the Roswell Daily Record and “newspapers” that initiated the UFO report:
http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo32.pdf

“On July 8, 1947, the Roswell Army Air Field (RAAF) public information office in Roswell, New Mexico, reported the crash and recovery of a ‘flying disc’. Army Air Force personnel from the RAAF’s 509th Bomb Group were credited with the recovery.”
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #109
CIA's Role in the Study of UFOs, 1947-90

CIA web site: Users beware!
http://www.odci.gov/csi/studies/97unclass/ufo.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #110
Echelon

Why is https://www.physicsforums.com bringing up the CIA's website on my browser lol ?

EDIT: By the CIA's website I mean their homepage http://www.odci.gov/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #111
"Skeptics, who flatly deny the existence of any unexplained phenomenon in the name of 'rationalism,' are among the primary contributors to the rejection of science by the public. People are not stupid and they know very well when they have seen something out of the ordinary. When a so-called expert tells them the object must have been the moon or a mirage, he is really teaching the public that science is impotent or unwilling to pursue the study of the unknown." (Vallee, J., Confrontations, New York: Ballantine Books, 1990.)
This guy is an idiot. If he thinks that telling the public what they want to hear is a good thing, then he has misunderstood science as a whole. If you state something, state it because scientifically you think the evidence points at it. Calling people skeptics doesn't help, and saying that science should pander to what people believe in doesn't help either. Simply on the account that you cannot pursue the study of the unknown on the basis of what people want to be told.
 
  • #112
Originally posted by FZ+
This guy is an idiot. If he thinks that telling the public what they want to hear is a good thing, then he has misunderstood science as a whole. If you state something, state it because scientifically you think the evidence points at it. Calling people skeptics doesn't help, and saying that science should pander to what people believe in doesn't help either. Simply on the account that you cannot pursue the study of the unknown on the basis of what people want to be told.

Hey FZ+, I wondered where my other favorite foil had gone
I think I agree with the premise of your objection, but also I think it is a little out of context. What is the message to the individual who "knows what they have seen", but who is told that they didn't see what they saw? And then what about those people who know, trust, and believe this person? My answer to his point and yours is this: Rather than suggest that a person who claims to have seen a 30 foot diameter UFO hovering their back yard really saw Venus, or some explanation that completely dismisses the claims of the supposed witness, I think the answer should be that either we have no explanation to account for his testimony, or simply that nothing scientific can be said. The typical response is imply that the person was an idiot, and then to give some ridiculous explanation that itself defies reason.

Do you argue that all phenomena is explained?
 
  • #113
Do you argue that all phenomena is explained?
No, neither do I argue that saying aliens are visiting is a always a better explanation than seeing venus. I am saying that it is understandable that there is doubt when we are dealing with eyewitness accounts from people who want to believe, or were in unusual mental conditions, or we see grainy, nasty images after tons of computer image enhancement.
 
  • #114
Originally posted by FZ+
No, neither do I argue that saying aliens are visiting is a always a better explanation than seeing venus.

Ivan says...I think the answer should be that either we have no explanation to account for his testimony, or simply that nothing scientific can be said.

FZ+ says...I am saying that it is understandable that there is doubt when we are dealing with eyewitness accounts from people who want to believe, or were in unusual mental conditions, or we see grainy, nasty images after tons of computer image enhancement.

It would seem that you haven't reviewed my posts. As a good example that the scenario that you present is not the state of the evidence, I will post this reference again for starters. Note that this comes directly from the National Security Agency:

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo6.pdf

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo17.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #115
Nonbody seems to care that something/someone temporarily redirected www.physicsforums.com to the cia homepage after reading one of Ivans dodgey posts, I was quite shocked!

I have a picture of it but no trace routes etc :(

EDIT: Sorry not really on topic but wtf
 
Last edited:
  • #116
Originally posted by username
Nonbody seems to care that something/someone temporarily redirected www.physicsforums.com to the cia homepage after reading one of Ivans dodgey posts, I was quite shocked!

I have a picture of it but no trace routes etc :(

Username, you are joking. Don't play with my head; I have a wife for that!
 
  • #117
Nope this is for real. My MS OS has all the latest service packs etc. It happened after reading a document that was linked to the cia website (your post with the joke warning). Must have lasted about 3 mins.

I know about echelon and all that but still ... how do they do it must have control of my isps dns servers or somthing ?
 
  • #118
Originally posted by username
after reading one of Ivans dodgey posts

Pronunciation: (doj'E), [key]
—adj., dodg•i•er, dodg•i•est.
1. inclined to dodge.
2. evasively tricky: a dodgy manner of dealing with people.
3. Chiefly Brit.risky; hazardous; chancy

Could you please indicate which option you mean. I hope you mean option 3:
 
  • #119
Originally posted by username
Nope this is for real. My MS OS has all the latest service packs etc. It happened after reading a document that was linked to the cia website (your post with the joke warning). Must have lasted about 3 mins.

I know about echelon and all that but still ...

Taking your word for it...YIKES! I'm killing power now. I will be in touc
 
  • #120
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Pronunciation: (doj'E), [key]
—adj., dodg•i•er, dodg•i•est.
1. inclined to dodge.
2. evasively tricky: a dodgy manner of dealing with people.
3. Chiefly Brit.risky; hazardous; chancy

Could you please indicate which option you mean. I hope you mean option 3:
Three what else ;)
 

Similar threads

The UFO report is expected to be submitted next month
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
UAP Report and the Standard Model
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Using the surrounding airflow to deduce the physics around UAP/UFO
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
How to Watch a UFO: Tips for Identifying Unidentified Flying Objects
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
What Is the True Meaning of UFO?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
31K
Is the Washington Post compromised? (UFO story)
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Is the Baltic Sea's Mysterious Object a Sunken UFO?
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
29K
What Is the Physics Behind True UFOs?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Is IU-Purdue Teaching a Class on UFOs?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Golden Birds UFO Sighting: Unidentified and in the Sky
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K