• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

What's The Most Convincing UFO Photo / Evidence?

" I don't believe we can reverse engineer UFO materials."

Agreed. If you believe UFOs to be alien technology, capable of interplanetary travel, they are so far in advance of our knowledge that it would be the equivalent of giving Alexander Graham Bell an iPhone and expecting him to reverse-engineer that!
A lot of people speculate that alien technology uses mechanical engineering principles that are unknown to us. The key reason to want to study their tech is to figure out HOW it works. Even if you can't duplicate it, learning how/why it works might teach you how to make something similar.

Alexander Graham Bell would probably understand the concept of micro-circuitry, but the mechanics of how to make them would probably be outside his comprehension. They don't really require materials he doesn't have, but machinery and tools he doesn't have.

Applying this logic to UFOs... welll… maybe the hulls of UFOs aren't solid metal but an advanced sort of electromechanical propulsion. Kinda like printed circuits or microcircuits, but metal.
 
If anyone needs to reconsider their paradigms it is the UFO researchers. They've been looking for evidence fot 70 years and found nothing.
 
In this case that the experience of encountering impossible seeming craft in the sky is a thing that happens both frequently and widely in the world. The experience itself is a thing. I can concieve no explanation of incident A, B or C that would expunge the entire alphabet.
Of course, every single sighting has a different explanation, and we can't generalise. But in the present day, more and more people are taking pictures or movies of the phenomena, using smartphones or more sophisticated equipment. These pictures or movies can be analysed, and they either turn out to be CG fakes or mundane objects which have been misidentified. In every recent case every UFO image or movie has turned out to be either a fake or have a mundane explanation. That tells me something.
 
It should tell you that people want to see UFOs and that they aren't that common, as one would expect from surveilling devices controlled by an intelligent agency. During waves, as in the '40s they were seen clearly and sometimes up close by intelligent people, and surprise, they weren't meteors or weather balloons.
 
. In every recent case every UFO image or movie has turned out to be either a fake or have a mundane explanation.
Turns out to be? Or is accused of being? I've recounted many times on these boards my reasons to lack confidence in the confident claims of online sceptics when it comes to analysing photos.

A perfectly straight forward but comical picture i took on a train was frequently suspected by people not wishing to be fooled of having been photoshopped or faked. It wasn't. But on one particular website i watched as someone adopting the coat of scientific or technical expertise pointed out the tell tale colour distortions in the pixels on one area of the photo as evidence of my good but not quite good enough attempt at fakery. Others, duly impressed by the verdict of someone sounding as if he knew what he was talking about treated it as case closed. It was bizarre to watch. It told me something about the credulity of the incredulous. It only takes one person to claim to have debunked something genuine for the world to believe it was debunked and that there's nothing more to see here.

The frequent claim that now the whole world carries cameras in their pockets yet there is no increase in nor clear photos of UFOs ( or ghosts or cryptids) is a telling one. Because it's demonstrably untrue. The number of clear images of these things online are countless. They're just not believed. Perhaps rightly. But the only thing that's changed are the goal posts. Old or out of focus images are met with " isn't that convenient ..how come they're never clear?" yet new or pin sharp images of the same things are rejected because they're "too good to be true - obviously a Photoshop job".

And they may be. But what can't be said with a straight face is that the advent of the phone camera has not resulted in an increase in the number or clarity of such photos. It has. What's gone down is the willingness to give them any credence at all.
 
I don't rely on photos often unless they are old and convincing --accounts from witnesses are far more valuable.
 
But what can't be said with a straight face is that the advent of the phone camera has not resulted in an increase in the number or clarity of such photos. It has. What's gone down is the willingness to give them any credence at all.
What has changed is that the pin-sharp fake photos and clips are generally posted by anonymous pranksters, while the fuzzy, indistinct photos and movies are often genuine, and have good provenance, but can be analysed in more detail. I'd certainly not give any credence to pictures and movies posted by anonymous YouTubers.
 
If anyone needs to reconsider their paradigms it is the UFO researchers. They've been looking for evidence for 70 years and found nothing.
Yeah...

Observer: "70 people reported UFO sightings."
Analyzer: "30 were airplanes, 10 were probably hoaxes, and the other 30 don't have enough info to determine what they were."

Those numbers I made up but it's the same basic idea we see in UFO reports.
The title of that page says a lot about the nature of the phenomenon. Assuming UFOs are "real" in some sense of the word. How is it that they can dictate who sees them and how? This is boogeyman territory. Also if they don't leave behind evidence were they actually there?
 
Yeah...

Observer: "70 people reported UFO sightings."
Analyzer: "30 were airplanes, 10 were probably hoaxes, and the other 30 don't have enough info to determine what they were."

Those numbers I made up but it's the same basic idea we see in UFO reports.
The title of that page says a lot about the nature of the phenomenon. Assuming UFOs are "real" in some sense of the word. How is it that they can dictate who sees them and how? This is boogeyman territory. Also if they don't leave behind evidence were they actually there?
It's not that hard --these characteristics were explored by AATIP (the ability to remain cloaked and only appear to certain people in an area), and the other characteristics that caused the Army to recently become interested in them. Read the old encounters --they aren't hoaxes, and they are quite similar. They exist in a more advanced information universe, which is much richer than what we perceive --connections between people and events etc. This is what "advanced" is.
 
It's not that hard --these characteristics were explored by AATIP (the ability to remain cloaked and only appear to certain people in an area), and the other characteristics that caused the Army to recently become interested in them. Read the old encounters --they aren't hoaxes, and they are quite similar. They exist in a more advanced information universe, which is much richer than what we perceive --connections between people and events etc. This is what "advanced" is.
I've been reading about UFO encounters for 30-ish years. The main commonality is that there isn't one.

Either there's multiple races of aliens or the aliens take on different appearances based on the individuals they encounter. That's the domain of mythical trickster gods.

The idea that they have tech, or magic or whatever that lets them appear and disappear at will is also... well... more the domain of mythology than reality.

Which leaves the question: What are people seeing?
 
.....358, 359, 360.

And we are back to where we started.

INT21.
 
The same thing is happening with the drones in Colorado. A large fraction of the reported drones are normal aeroplanes, a fraction of the reported drones are misidentified stars and planets, a fraction of the reported drones are actual drones sent up as copy-cat hoaxes, and a fraction of the reported drones are actual drones or small aircraft sent up to look for the mysterious drones.

None of the reported drones are actually mysterious drones moving in regular patterns and scanning the countryside for unknown purposes. None.
 
So here is what you do.

First you prepare a site. It needs to be close to a track. but remote.

You set up a few wildlife type cameras. A couple on the track to get incoming vehicles and two or three hidden around the site.

Then you take your high powered hunting rifle and shoot down a drone.

Dressed in a alien suit you drag the drone to the prepared site. Take all the pictures you want of it, then go away and return later to see who has recovered it.

Why the alien suit ? Well, the drone will probably have it's own camera. And GPS.

If no one claims it within three month, it's yours. Just don't put it on Ebay.

INT21.
 
I've been reading about UFO encounters for 30-ish years. The main commonality is that there isn't one.

Either there's multiple races of aliens or the aliens take on different appearances based on the individuals they encounter. That's the domain of mythical trickster gods.

The idea that they have tech, or magic or whatever that lets them appear and disappear at will is also... well... more the domain of mythology than reality.

Which leaves the question: What are people seeing?
Okay, you go ahead and figure out what they are seeing! I'll just keep posting more articles that come out about them every day and we'll see how things end up! :p So what do you think people have been seeing?
 
Honestly, I don't really care anymore if people know UFOs are real. I don't think we are a great species, and I don't care if UFOs represent a threat to us or not, anymore. I'm disgusted by our species' close-minded, self-referential, arrogant attitude about most things. I have been considering for some time dropping UFO discussions completely with people, and that will certainly happen soon; if and when that does, please don't stop reading the news about them! Eventually you might be forced to know they are real, or not, I don't really care anymore. I say this from a completely calm mood; it's something I have thought about for a long time. Clearly most people aren't ready to know --and that's why the phenomenon behaves the way it does. I feel very lucky, privileged even, to have been an experiencer. Sadly, chances are most of you will go to your graves without seeing them, though you never know.
 
Honestly, I don't really care anymore if people know UFOs are real. I don't think we are a great species, and I don't care if UFOs represent a threat to us or not, anymore. I'm disgusted by our species' close-minded, self-referential, arrogant attitude about most things. I have been considering for some time dropping UFO discussions completely with people, and that will certainly happen soon; if and when that does, please don't stop reading the news about them! Eventually you might be forced to know they are real, or not, I don't really care anymore. I say this from a completely calm mood;.

Don't you dare, Feinman!

Some of us are listening. We may reserve the right to question and to disagree - but we're listening.

We need you here - just as we need Eburacum here too.

Don't desert your posts, either of you!
 
Feinman,

Don't take it to heart. No one means any ill by what is said here; Just different points of view.

We all have our views. But the actual reality will not change.
 
Don't you dare, Feinman!

Some of us are listening. We may reserve the right to question and to disagree - but we're listening.

We need you here - just as we need Eburacum here too.

Don't desert your posts, either of you!
I won't! I try to make grand exits but tend to fail miserably, as can be seen.. I can't tear my eyes away from that train with the skeptics on it; it's jumped the tracks but folks are still calmly eating in the dinner car! :p
 
I won't! I try to make grand exits but tend to fail miserably, as can be seen.. I can't tear my eyes away from that train with the skeptics on it; it's jumped the tracks but folks are still calmly eating in the dinner car! :p

We need real proof the train is de-railed. And no one wants to go out and look.
 
The Engineer keeps, saying things are fine, but alarmed personnel keep entering the cabin saying that the train is off the tracks! Hopefully there will be more proof for folks in the cabin. Not that anyone can do anything about the situation.
 
A report will be written and published in five years. After discussing it the folks on the train will send a team out to gather further data.
Conclusion is likely to be that the train is ok, it is the track that has moved out from under it.
 
Yeah, the question still remains... "what proof do we have?"

We know USAF has experimented with circular craft. We know that the publicly revealed SR-71 Blackbird is the finished production model and that unfinished but flyable prototypes exist that were built using the same tech in drastically different shapes. We don't know what they're currently tinkering with.

We know metallic debris was found at Roswell, we don't know WHAT it was.... however the photos of the pieces look a lot like military aircraft parts. In particular one of the sketches of the flying saucer airplane design.
 
Yeah, the question still remains... "what proof do we have?"

We know USAF has experimented with circular craft. We know that the publicly revealed SR-71 Blackbird is the finished production model and that unfinished but flyable prototypes exist that were built using the same tech in drastically different shapes. We don't know what they're currently tinkering with.

We know metallic debris was found at Roswell, we don't know WHAT it was.... however the photos of the pieces look a lot like military aircraft parts. In particular one of the sketches of the flying saucer airplane design.

We also know that no power has a successful flying circular craft that could perform in any meaningful way.

INT21.
 
We also know that no power has a successful flying circular craft that could perform in any meaningful way.

INT21.
How can we be sure if we don't even know what Skunkworks(or Tupelov for that matter) is currently experimenting with?
 
It was a shape that appeared to hold promise. But if it had been useful we would have seen more prototypes by now.

And the Tupolev 144 and Buran) showed that Russia were not too good at radical design. prefering to stick to the tried and tested; to their credit.
 
Back
Top