Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Community Forums
 General Discussion
 Can Critical Thinkers become critical too soon?
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

bngbuck
SFN Addict

USA
2437 Posts

Posted - 01/03/2008 :  00:57:10   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send bngbuck a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Dude, Boron, and Cune.....

Each of you in your own way has expressed interest in continuing the substantive portion of the discussion that was on my initial threads in the Astronomy forum of SFN, several months ago.

Dude
Let me just ask you to start a different thread and provide those of us who don't know about these "vetted" UFO sightings the data we've been asking you for since shortly after your first post on these forums. As I said before, I'm definitely interested in examining these alleged instances.

Boron
Well, bngbuck, I was quite interested in continuing the line of discussion in your first thread,...

Cune
[Well, this was my point all along. I'm plenty familiar with UFO reports and have been interested in them since I was a kid. But it seemed to me that until we established what counted as a "highly vetted, rigorously investigated UFO incident" it was moot to talk about them.
Although I have largely completed that chapter in the manuscript (I'm knee-deep in religious perception right now), I would be happy to further discuss the topic line concerning sightings of UAP that have been examined, vetted, investigated, whatever; and still remain unexplained.

As you know, having read this current thread up to it's last posting today (January 2): in response to what I understood to be Dave's request, I have provided several more instances of what I consider to be investigated yet unexplained sightings. Dave apparently has no interest in commenting on these other than a confirmation of his opinion of the BOLA incident, which I consider to be a significant example.

I cited three of sixteen Condon Report events that remained unexplained in it's final version. There are many more, but these are representative of what I see as unusual aerial phenomena, significantly observed, and unsatisfactorily explained! A reading of the full report is useful to put that early investigative work in perspective to the situation today, where it is estimated that there have been over a million reports of sightings (only a small number of these have been investigated, however)

All of you have participated in this thread and have expressed interest in reviving discussion, so if you would care to read any or all of the material I suggested above and then opine, agree, disagree, or merely comment on whether or not you think these events occured; I will be happy to participate in discussion with you.

I do trust that everyone here understands, as Dave clearly does, that I am not attempting to claim that these unexplained sightings were evidence of extraterrestrial visitation. I have tried very hard to make that point clear here and in the earlier threads.

But, if nothing else, there is something odd about this specific area of human experience (perception) that, to me, is not dispelled by dismissal as in "a UFO is a UFO" period! or by speculating that it must be some sort of an alien vehicle from another part of the universe or by blithly attributing it to factors that did not exist at the time of the sighting - clouds, ball lightning, swamp gas, balloons, etc. None of these quick fixes is satisfactory to me!

If no one has the interest to comment in depth on the examples I have already given, both here and in the previous threads, and new participants do not join in with comment, I will have to assume that all has been said about this subject that is going to be said here, and drop the subject. On the other hand, if we can intelligently discuss these instances, and it is stimulating to anyone's curiosity; perhaps other members who are interested in the subject may contribute subject matter to evaluate.

It is for this reason that I do not want to begin a new thread on the subject. Perhaps there is new ground to tread here, I truly do not know until there is some reaction to the four or five examples above, and perhaps some more on the Haisch references and the BOLA incident. Let's see!
Edited by - bngbuck on 01/03/2008 12:29:14
Go to Top of Page

Dude
SFN Die Hard

USA
6891 Posts

Posted - 01/03/2008 :  04:23:57   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Dude a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I opened one of those links, but have been pressed for free time the last couple of days. If I have some leisure time I'll give them a look today.


Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson

"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin

Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth
Go to Top of Page

Dude
SFN Die Hard

USA
6891 Posts

Posted - 01/08/2008 :  18:02:53   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Dude a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ok, I read though yout links to the Condon report and some of the others.

I'm left with the same conclusion I have previously held on the matter: Some people saw some stuff they don't have an explanation for.

Ok.

When I ask myself what the significance of these observations is, I also come right back where I was previously. There isn't any.

Bring me some clear pictures, some HD video, some unobscured observations by trained observers, some radar data that can't be explained by atmospheric conditions/meteors/malfunctions/arora borealis.

Handheld personal video cameras are available for $100, HD for as little as $300. Most cell phones have still and video image capability. CCTV is prevalent in Europe and expanding in the US, our airports and military instilations especially. Almost every city with a local station has at least one high quality HD camera looking at the horizon all the time (here in St Pete every local station has a few, looking at the sunset, weather, traffic, etc).

Radar technology has improved drastically in the last 20 years, our newest aircraft has very sophisticated systems on board.

So where are the high quality images and more reliable radar sightings? Anything from 2006, rather than 1956?


Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson

"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin

Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.25 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000