What happened to OC? - CLOSED Carnage?!
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
icstars2

Are UFOs worthy of serious study by mainstream scientists?

43 posts in this topic

187075849.jpg

 

With countless reports across the world of UFOs being sighted, the theory that other life may be very close is abundant. An unidentified flying object, or UFO, in its most general definition, is any apparent anomaly in the sky that is not identifiable as a known object or phenomenon. Such anomalies may later be identified, but depending on the evidence or lack of evidence, such an identification may not be possible generally leaving the anomaly unexplained. While stories of unexplained apparitions have been told since antiquity, the term "UFO" (or "UFOB") was officially created in 1953 by the United States Air Force (USAF) to serve as a catch-all for all such reports. It was stated that a "UFOB" was "any airborne object which by performance, aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual features, does not conform to any presently known aircraft or missile type, or which cannot be positively identified as a familiar object." Often explained as planes or other misc objects in the skies, occasionally sightings have thwarted the identification from agencies such as the FAA. Should UFOs and other life reported be studied more in-depth by scientists, compared to passing such sightings off as conspiracy theories?

Takka likes this

343OrM8.jpg?1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiddy-bits:

The absence of evidence, is not the evidence of absence.

Actually it is, to any rational person. In this particular scenario, not finding something that supports your hypothesis is considered evidence of absence. This is very basic logic. To say that aliens do not exist simply because we have not observed them is of course a fallacy, however to say that they do exist requires proof to validate such an argument. You could say that UFOs are evidence for extraterrestrial life, but then you'd be stating an oxymoron due to the fact that the objects have not been identified. Until a UFO is exclusively scientifically linked to aliens existing (through any means provable), it's not really a matter of absence of evidence, but rather wishful thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually agreeing with you Mars. I believe you misunderstood how I intended to apply the quote here.

... not finding something that supports your hypothesis is considered evidence of absence...

Eh, I disagree. I believe you've got that flipped around. I would consider that an absence of evidence; A lack of evidence on the subject at hand, but not proof that something does not exist.

Allow me to rephrase it in a more appropriate manner to this specific topic;

The absence of evidence as to what these objects are, is not necessarily evidence that they are absent from our knowledge.

Just because we can't identify these objects does not necessarily mean they are beyond what we know. More times then not, any UFO or miraculous event is easily explained without conjuring aliens or Gods. In the moment they are spotted however, we may simply be unable to properly identify what it is.

Just because we cannot identify something (absence of evidence), does not mean that it's something supernatural beyond rational explanations (evidence of absence).

Floofies likes this

signature2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh yesss. I was waiting for this one.

Usually, the only people that I hear talking about UFOs are either imaginative conspiracy theorists (who can easily be led to believe a great many other things via the power of suggestion) or scientists who only seem to hear "aliens" whenever the subject is brought up, thus they find the need to discredit rather than investigate. And it is true that the subject can easily be discredited; the mind is easily tricked as well, and you hear the usual "99% of these objects are misidentified, but what about the other 1%" The popular cases are always blown out of proportion and usually make for very good stories, but can often be lost in the passage of time, as they can't receive detailed scientific analysis due to the evidence being hazy, for only photographs and video footage can be the true deciding factors, and most recordings are either forgeries or too hard to make out. Witness testimony falls under the same problem as before; the imagination often overwrites the will to find the truth.

 

However, I postulate that to confirm any sightings as a definite UFO, proper steps should be taken before conclusions are jumped to. Some objects behave in strange manners, or have strange shapes; the wrong thing to think is "these are intelligently controlled/intelligently designed," but they should rather be classified based on their activities and shapes. This can be easily done once you have reference footage of most things known to us in the sky, planes, birds, balloons, etc. Then, the proper equipment is needed; what would be able to successfully record object of unknown origin for a significant amount of time? In the 20th century, when these cases started appearing camera technology was still based mostly on film, but in the digital era, things have changed.

 

 

The person that came up with this method is just an individual; there is always the possibility that he gets it wrong from time to time, seeing as he's the only one involved with the recording. Could the same be said for a team of scientists dedicated to the subject? In the same way meteors can be recorded with mounted cameras, modified security cameras can be placed in a variety of locations in order to get clear, concise footage, and to also remove the possibility of spreading the wrong idea, the very antithesis of scientific study. It would not be some random person trying to identify possible UFOs, but many persons, with the intention to identify, or at least classify. From there, more questions can be established, like why certain shaped UFOs fly the way they do, or why they can be located in certain areas. The most reasonable places to start obtaining footage of tracked objects would be population centers; after the known objects are rooted out, then the ones worthy of observation could be studied from that point forward.

 

The true question I think should be asked isn't why UFOs should be studied, but how. Our species is able to determine what composes planets billions of miles away based on slight visual cues, but whenever it comes to something hanging a mile in the sky, very few people take the time to set apart why unknown objects are unique, and what might be the cause of their appearance.

 

Just because something has been frequently tied to the paranormal doesn't mean it should be discredited. I believe, though, these answers many people seek will also be sought by those of great intelligence, and we can get one more piece of the puzzle about reality.


xgd0s9.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the fact that unidentified flying objects are just that, unidentified, why only focus on one speculative point (IE aliens)?

Because that was the topic I needed to do for the week :P

 

 

It is not a coincidence that UFO's only appear near and on the most populated planet known to mankind.

There are "sightings" on/near other planets as well; however, we do not have the ability to watch other planets nearly as well as we can our own planet. Do you expect us to be able to tell if other life is around Pluto as well as we can on earth?


343OrM8.jpg?1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, I disagree. I believe you've got that flipped around. I would consider that an absence of evidence; A lack of evidence on the subject at hand, but not proof that something does not exist.

Allow me to rephrase it in a more appropriate manner to this specific topic;

The absence of evidence as to what these objects are, is not necessarily evidence that they are absent from our knowledge.

Just because we can't identify these objects does not necessarily mean they are beyond what we know. More times then not, any UFO or miraculous event is easily explained without conjuring aliens or Gods. In the moment they are spotted however, we may simply be unable to properly identify what it is.

Just because we cannot identify something (absence of evidence), does not mean that it's something supernatural beyond rational explanations (evidence of absence).

If you fail to observe something, that does not mean it does not exist, I agree. What is evidence of absence, then? If after eliminating that you have failed to observe something, you still cannot observe it, it stands to reason that it does not exist or support any positive hypothesis. Our hypothesis says that some UFO sightings can be linked to aliens, but there has been no proof related to that.

If the hypotheisis says "There's an apple in a box", and I look in the box but do not see an apple, then the hypothesis is wrong. In this case, the box is a multi-faceted solar system which makes it extremely hard to observe something like an apple. With that in mind, it is far more likely that we have only failed to observe it, a fault non-related to the supposition the hypothesis presents. With aliens, it is very easy to say that we have failed in this regard, and at the same time the hypothesis has gone unproven.

There is evidence of absence in regards to alien life, as we have not observed it. However, this evidence is falliable as we have not eliminated our own failure to observe.

Overall it's just semantics and nitpicky logic, so I agree with you on this.

Because that was the topic I needed to do for the week :P

I didn't mean you, just the general public. :P

There are "sightings" on/near other planets as well; however, we do not have the ability to watch other planets nearly as well as we can our own planet. Do you expect us to be able to tell if other life is around Pluto as well as we can on earth?

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with unidentified doesn't necessary mean its alien. There are plenty of secret projects like X-37 going on and other that we never heard of.(I am not a conspiracy theorist)

What about the B-2 in the eighties? If I saw it then in the night sky I would crap my tight jeans.(yes I wore them then). I don't reject the idea alien civilizations out there but we must keep a clear mind on this.

Risk and Floofies like this

You can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation.

-Plato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.