At the moment there is a bit of a lull in so far as UFO sightings and media interest is concerned. However, do not dispair, as I have noticed in the past that during these times some of the best, and most strange cases appear. Its always when the media glare goes and public interest wanes that UFOlogy always picks up for those who are truly interested. I also think UFOlogy will undergo quite a change soon as well. The claims of being abducted are drying up a bit, the black triangle are not as common so I reckon the next big thing will be along shortly. The net is also changing the way we deal with the subject and this area of communication/media/whatever is where UFology will really take off from now on. Just some thoughts, nothing more.
Lull may bring interesting cases.
- Thread starter mothman8
- Start date
uair01
Antediluvian
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2005
- Messages
- 5,537
- Location
- The Netherlands
I wish it was true. Recently I bought some classic UFO books in a secondhand shop and was impressed by a book by Allen Hynek "The UFO experience", 1973. A very interesting book - he has some cases that are truly puzzling.
On the other hand - if UFO's still existed, then we surely would have many pictures and films in this age of digital photography? And weird things would surely appear in the modern robotic telescopes that are peering at the sky each night. And given enough of this evidence even diehard skeptics would change their opinions?
A really intriguing question is why there was a "golden age" of UFOlogy and why it is over now ... But some books will survive, like John Keel's "Operation Trojan Horse". It can be read like phantasy thriller.
On the other hand - if UFO's still existed, then we surely would have many pictures and films in this age of digital photography? And weird things would surely appear in the modern robotic telescopes that are peering at the sky each night. And given enough of this evidence even diehard skeptics would change their opinions?
A really intriguing question is why there was a "golden age" of UFOlogy and why it is over now ... But some books will survive, like John Keel's "Operation Trojan Horse". It can be read like phantasy thriller.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2001
- Messages
- 54,631
Yes, we should have more pics nowadays. My digital pics sometimes show tiny anomalies, but so far I've put them down to distant birds, or nearby insects, and airbrushed them out! (But if I ever get anything more interesting, you can be sure the FTMB will hear of it!)uair01 said:
But don't expect too much from telescopes - they mostly have far too small a field of view to catch anything interesting. If a UFO did pass across their line of sight, it would probably fill the field of view entirely, blotting it out, and this would be put down to a technical blip, like a transmission interruption!
The only robotic cameras that ought to pick up interesting anomalies would be the wide-field telescopes used for catching meteor images, which might appear anywhere in the sky.
Graylien
As if!
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2004
- Messages
- 4,428
- Location
- Norwich.
There are still plenty of photographs. You can find a choice selection at http://www.ufoevidence.org/photographs/photohome.asp
However, what has happened is that people have become a lot more sceptical about photographs since the 'golden age' of UFOs. Now that anyone with a digital camera and a copy of Photoshop can produce a reasonably authentic looking UFO photograph, photographs have much less credibility as evidence than they did thirty years ago.
As far as the telescopes are concerned, I think it's a mistake to assume that professional astronomers would have any interest in analysing possible UFO sightings. They have their own specialist projects and fields of study, and have to compete for the relatively small amount of telescope time allotted to them by the major observatories . Getting involved in UFO spotting (and especially reporting a UFO which was later proved to be something mundane) would only harm their professional credibility, and compromise their ability to get funding for their next project.
However, what has happened is that people have become a lot more sceptical about photographs since the 'golden age' of UFOs. Now that anyone with a digital camera and a copy of Photoshop can produce a reasonably authentic looking UFO photograph, photographs have much less credibility as evidence than they did thirty years ago.
As far as the telescopes are concerned, I think it's a mistake to assume that professional astronomers would have any interest in analysing possible UFO sightings. They have their own specialist projects and fields of study, and have to compete for the relatively small amount of telescope time allotted to them by the major observatories . Getting involved in UFO spotting (and especially reporting a UFO which was later proved to be something mundane) would only harm their professional credibility, and compromise their ability to get funding for their next project.
Actually the main problem with modern observatories not caputring a UFO is not the field of view but something far more mundane. About 90-95% of the time modern telescopes just produce hundreds of thousands of spectrums of pre-programmed objects. Imaging now only very rarely takes place for actual work. I suppose you could say that a UFO could be caught by the WASP project, which uses many CCD's together to capture very large portions of the sky at each time, at least the size of Orion and bigger. As for CCTV images, I suppose there must be wierd stuff appear on them quite a bit, but it would take a patient person to either go through all the archives or pick them up as they happen. I reckon it has potential though with, as you say, them being on all the time.
People are still claiming to have had encounters with UFO-related entities too.
For example: http://www.ufoinfo.com/humanoid/humanoid2005.shtml
For example: http://www.ufoinfo.com/humanoid/humanoid2005.shtml