Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Government/Military UFO's

  1. Dec 8, 2009 #1

    Pythagorean

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I notice that a lot of people associate UFO's with aliens. But these sighting need not be extraterrestrial.

    Is there any evidence of the government or military experimenting with flying machines that would account for the plethora of sightings out there? If it isn't obvious, I never really studied UFO's before, so I may be stating the obvious.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 8, 2009 #2
    Neil Tyson has a nice take on the subject:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2014
  4. Dec 8, 2009 #3

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There is no doubt that everything from 747's to then classified B2 bombers and F117s account for many UFO reports.

    Based on the results of studies like project Bluebook [USAF], perhaps 5% of all reports are apparent mysteries. That is also what drives the silliness to absurd levels, including esp many debunkings. It is easy to debunk the 90-95% that even ET-UFO advocates expect to be explainable in prosaic terms; or at least ignorable due to a lack of any compelling anecdotal evidence. The remaining 5% are what keep everyone interested [I would actually say it is more like 1%].
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2009
  5. Dec 9, 2009 #4
    The legendary wreckage at Roswell was first claimed by the military to be a "flying saucer", but later they claimed that was a cover lie to hide the fact it was a high altitude balloon equipped with sensors to pick up Soviet Atom Bomb tests.

    In recent times they have freely released footage of a big variety of unusual looking small drone aircraft which are designed mostly for surveillance.

    If you were interested in researching it, Popular Science, or possibly Popular Mechanics had a cover story within the past ten years about a large, disk-shaped craft the government worked on for a while but then abandoned. It was nuclear powered and was designed to be able to get out of the atmosphere and into space. IIRC at least one working prototype was built and flown. I don't recall the specific problem they couldn't overcome, but it lead to the project being scrapped.

    So, yes, there is some evidence of what you're asking about.
     
  6. Mar 4, 2010 #5
    The US stopped building SR-71's, B-2, and F-117 or at least stopped developing them in the late 80's early 90's. However, the money has not stopped flowing into these departments or companies. So what are they building now?

    Was not the recent UFO over Norway, finally admitted to be a Russian military experiment? How many failed experiments or otherwise, have not been admitted to?
     
  7. Mar 4, 2010 #6
    I always found it humourous how the American people do not even know what their government is doing with billions of dollars of money, and yet they are one of the most indebted nations in the world.

    The military just roles out a brand new B-2 one day and says, "We built this billion dollar stealth bomber, isn't it great. Sorry, we didn't tell you about it for the last 20 years."
     
  8. Mar 4, 2010 #7

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    No such craft was ever built or flown; at least there is no evidence supporting such a claim.
     
  9. Mar 7, 2010 #8
    Mr. Hayman makes an excellent observation in that there are billions of dollars spent by our government and American people really don't know what it's being spent on. Unfortunately, I'm not convinced the elected officials in D.C. know either.
     
  10. Mar 7, 2010 #9


    Because if the American people know what skunkworks is building, then the enemy knows. I for one feel extremely secure knowing that things are being worked on to maintain air superiority over competing nations.
     
  11. Mar 7, 2010 #10

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What I find most compelling are official military UFO reports that are more than twenty years old, which is about all that one can gain access to anyway. We likely know what the limits of technology were at the time of any event reported.

    In the old days, presumably, the classification of these documents occured primarily because it was possible that we were seeing advanced Soviet, or later, Chinese technology. The documents are then declassified upon request, through the Freedom of Information Act, when no national security issues are known to exist. One of my objections to the conspiracy theories is that in spite of claims that the government is hiding information, some of the best evidence for real UFOs [whatever that means] comes from the Government! Names, places, addresses, and other personal information, are often blacked out; sometimes with many pages of black ink. But details pertaining to the UFO itself, as reported, are often intact.
     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2010
  12. Mar 7, 2010 #11
    And to add to what Ivan said, the FOIA releases became of special interest to "conspiracy theorist' when some or large areas where "blacked-out"

    Well, years ago I asked a friend who was once very close to such things. He told me that the reason for most of the FOIA black-outs had nothing to do with extraterrestrial UFO's. Rather, the reason was to protect classified flight data of special US experimental aircraft(or missions) and/or secret radar stations/personnel.
    Made sense to me then and does now.
     
  13. Mar 8, 2010 #12
    Ladies and Gents,

    Let me say at the beginning, I'm not wearing a hat made out of tinfoil. I find it interesting that the debunkers say there is no such thing as ET's; without even listening to what others have reported. Considering that some very intelligent and qualified individuals has said that we are being visited by other "beings" from other worlds. As an example the following astronauts have said that ET's are real. To wit:
    - Buzz Aldrin
    - Gordon Cooper
    - Edgar Mitchell
    - Neil Armstrong

    The non-astronaut individuals that I personally respect are:
    - Former Governor Simington of Arizona (the Phoenix Lights)
    - Former President Jimmy Carter
    - Former Canadian Defence Minister Paul Hellyer
    - General Wil De Brouwer of the Belgian Air Force

    And lastly read the newly declassified materials from the British MOD, Sweden, Mexico, Belgium, Brazil, and France. Check out COMETA, which was a study financed by the French government. All except our government - why you may ask? Go to YouTube and watch President Esinhower's farewell speech at the end of his term in office - where he warns about the military-industrial complex. Draw your own conclusions - AFTER you check out the materials I've identified above. If you remain a skeptic, God Bless you. (Oh, BTW, the Catholic Church as released a communication that we (they) have to accept the "probability" that ET's do exist. Check out "Fastwalkers" on the net and watch what the "Head Exorcist" from the Roman Catholic Church has to say about ET's.

    Now, I plan on putting my tinfoil hat back on and go star/UFO gaze.


    [/U]
     
  14. Mar 8, 2010 #13

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Your post is far too vague - no references, much less qualified references - and not all of the information is correct. For example, Buzz Aldrin specifically denies making any such statement. Nor did Armstrong ever said such a thing; at least not that I've ever seen in a good reference. Also, for the Catholic church to admit to the possiblity of ET is not the same as claiming that ET is flying UFOs. And even if they did, it wouldn't count as evidence for anything.

    It does no good to argue for credibility while making bogus or marginal claims. If you wish to present evidence, even anecdotal evidence, a source is needed; and I don't mean some fringe UFO site. Also, appeals to authority have no value. Not only does a report from Jimmy Carter prove nothing, but the report was a UFO report, not an ET report. He has never said it was ET.
     
  15. Mar 8, 2010 #14

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There was a rather famous sighting of two flying saucers by the then powerful Senator Russell, back in the 1950's, while he was travelling through the old Soviet Union. For a number of years the official CIA report could be read, but Russell's name, dates, and references to the Soviet Union, were blacked out. Nothing was done to hide information about what he allegedly saw, rather the trip itself was a secret, so information about him was omitted. Later, it was possible to read the report entirely without the black ink.

    The report is linked in the Napster. He claimed that two UFOs took off near the train, in clear view, while it was in transit.
     
  16. Mar 8, 2010 #15
    To paraphase, I once heard "...to dominate the air is to dominate the battlefield."

    Given that, most of the so-called UFO's are actually various governmental(US and otherwise) experimental attack/reconnaissance aircraft.
     
  17. Mar 9, 2010 #16

    Garth

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I was immensely impressed at the 1996 Farnborough International Air Show when for the first time a B-2 Spirit Stealth bomber was exhibited, the 'Spirit of Washington' made two flybys, giving the impression of a real leap in technology over other aircraft.

    It had arrived a few minutes early and I saw it flying a circuit on the horizon before closing for the flypast. If I had not been expecting its arrival I could have sworn I had seen a UFO. (Literally as the U stands for 'unidentified'!)

    Garth
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2010
  18. Mar 9, 2010 #17

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Really? I see no evidence for that. Some UFOs are certainly experimental and even known aircrafts, but to say "most" UFOs are explained by this is pretty tough to defend. For starters, there are plenty of reports resulting from mundane objects such as balloons, flares, and lenticular clouds, not to mention things like ball lightning, earthlights, gaseous fireballs, and meteors. Beyond that, there is a class of reports that seem to be inexplicable, which is why the subject of UFOs attracts some serious people. Some of the most interesting, apparently credible reports [such as official military reports], would seem to suggest that there are still a few mysteries to be solved.
     
  19. Mar 9, 2010 #18

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I didn't quite catch this before. Your friend's comments do not appear to be consistent with many reports. It could be true in some cases, and I can think of a few possible examples linked in the UFO napster, but in many other cases, there is plenty of information about the flight characteristics of the UFO. This is in fact what makes the reports interesting.
     
  20. Mar 9, 2010 #19

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    This is one of my favorite reports to use as a leader; as an example of what I referenced above. It reads like something out of a sci-fi movie, yet it is very well sourced. Linked is the Joint Chiefs of Staff copy, directly from the files of the NSA.
    http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ufo/joint_chiefs_staff_report.pdf

    It is the first link in the UFO napster. What did we or anyone else have in 1976 that could account for this report? Note that at that time, the Iranian AF was an arm of the US, which is why US intelligence was involved and onsite. The best non-ET explanation that I've managed to conjure is that, rather than a craft, these pilots encountered some sort of highly energetic, unrecognized natural phenomenon. This idea is not entirely consistent with the report, but it seems more likely than the propositions that we or others have highly advanced technology that has been kept secret for over thirty years, or that ET is visiting.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  21. Mar 9, 2010 #20

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Personal theories are not allowed, so I have to be very careful here, but I wanted to convey one additional thought. About ten years ago, I read every declassified report that was available. This was no small challenge as there are many thousands of pages of print that is barely legible at times, but I wanted to explore the entire database of the most credible reports [expecting to solve this "UFO" mystery - a common mistake]. I have noticed one potential clue to some of these reports; including perhaps the Iran '76 report linked above. I want to be clear that I am offering an observation with a little extrapolation, not a theory. It is inteneded as a question, not an assertion. I am not qualified to make any such assertion.

    In a few highly compelling reports, I noticed the specific claim repeated that, more or less, a bright ball of light in the sky responded to RADAR contact. What's more, as in the Iran case, the UFO seemed to run from the RADAR source. If indeed we are seeing credible reports of an unrecognized but natural phenomenon, is it possible that these anomalous objects are RADAR opaque, and virtually massless? If so, could that explain why they seem to run from the RADAR, as if acting evasively? Could it be that these airborn and ground-based RADAR signals are actually pushing the UFO phenomenon, or causing it to accelerate due to a secondary reaction to the energy of the RADAR? Imagine a pilot pushing one of these all over the sky with his RADAR, while thinking the UFO is acting intelligently and evasively. I found that to be an interesting option to consider. The specific common comments suggest that the UFOs were essentially idle until the moment they were hit by RADAR, at which time they immediately ran. I also noticed that they seem to run [approximately] away from the RADAR source, as in the Iranian encounter.

    There is not enough information to address this question in formal terms, so please don't, but it might be worthy of consideration in studies relating to ball lightning and other atmospheric phenomena. The Iran report would seem to offer some specifics in terms of speed, distance, and the energy of the RADAR signal.
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2010
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Government/Military UFO's
  1. US Government and UFOS (Replies: 5)

  2. Ufo (Replies: 18)

  3. Government (Replies: 25)

Loading...