Roswell, 2019... The only difference is now the Navy says UFOs are real

[Polinski 41]

After the Roswell crash we were told it was a weather balloon. So at this time the government was accused by many of a coverup.  Now we have the Navy briefing Congress on the UFOs that they are admitting to seeing.

Now, nobody get mad at me, because this is not my story.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/u-s-senators-briefed-on-ufos-as-suspicions-grow-surrounding-naval-sightings

 

 

[Strange 4271]

So, Roswell was identified, this is unidentified. 

Doesn't tell us what it was or even if it was a thing. 

[beecee 526]

UFO's are real. Around 5% of sightings remain as UFO's...that is Unidentified and not readily explained by atmospheric conditions etc. Please note that the U in UFO means unidentified, and gives no cause to extrapolate that to of alien origins.

[Polinski 41]

4 hours ago, beecee said:

UFO's are real. Around 5% of sightings remain as UFO's...that is Unidentified and not readily explained by atmospheric conditions etc. Please note that the U in UFO means unidentified, and gives no cause to extrapolate that to of alien origins.

So the Navy is briefing Congress on the Unidentified objects toying with F15's

Might be ball lightning huh, or swamp gas over the Ocean.

If you think you know it all, you are not thinking

[beecee 526]

56 minutes ago, Polinski said:

So the Navy is briefing Congress on the Unidentified objects toying with F15's

Might be ball lightning huh, or swamp gas over the Ocean.

If you think you know it all, you are not thinking

It's simply unidentified as the Navy says in its briefing.. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence....Carl Sagan.

[Polinski 41]

35 minutes ago, beecee said:

It's simply unidentified as the Navy says in its briefing.. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence....Carl Sagan.

Outflying the best pilots in the best jets is extraordinary.  The Navy is concerned enough to be briefing Congress.  Your fear that life might exist off the Earth and might not have formed only on Earth is noted as Sagan demanded

37 minutes ago, beecee said:

It's simply unidentified as the Navy says in its briefing.. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence....Carl Sagan.

If you had unidentified in your backyard or in your living room what would you do

Edited June 21, 2019 by Polinski

[QuantumT 27]

Conclusion without evidence is superstition. And there is zero evidence of extraterrestrial visitors.

Edited June 21, 2019 by QuantumT

[Polinski 41]

11 minutes ago, QuantumT said:

Conclusion without evidence is superstition. And there is zero evidence of extraterrestrial visitors.

Radar recordings are evidence

What are you afraid of?

 

[QuantumT 27]

12 minutes ago, Polinski said:

Radar recordings are evidence

What are you afraid of?

Evidence of what? All it shows is "something" in the air! And that something must be extraterrestrial according to you?

[Polinski 41]

1 hour ago, QuantumT said:

Evidence of what? All it shows is "something" in the air! And that something must be extraterrestrial according to you?

100 or more pilots saw and observed the objects, also all we see is what they choose that we do.  Anything outflying an F18 is a threat to the nation.  Dont come at me with this, tell the pilots and carrier captains that they are stupid. I am just the messanger here, as I was not there.  However owning a boat and knowing how to read sonar I know what different types of fish are from less info than those radar images provide

Edited June 21, 2019 by Polinski

[Phi for All 5873]

1 hour ago, Polinski said:

Radar recordings are evidence

It's only peripherally supportive of extraterrestrials, like saying sonar evidence that could be whales is really aliens. It's much more likely to be whales.

Similarly, it's much more likely that these UFOs have an earthly origin. Some country testing unusual aircraft.

1 hour ago, Polinski said:

What are you afraid of?

Ignorance and fear. When you mix them, as you have, it produces stupidity, hate, and unreasonableness. Critical thought on vacation, if you will.

[Polinski 41]

9 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

It's only peripherally supportive of extraterrestrials, like saying sonar evidence that could be whales is really aliens. It's much more likely to be whales.

Similarly, it's much more likely that these UFOs have an earthly origin. Some country testing unusual aircraft.

Ignorance and fear. When you mix them, as you have, it produces stupidity, hate, and unreasonableness. Critical thought on vacation, if you will.

So you are claiming that Navy carrier captains and pilots are ignorant.

Why

I know you are aiming that at me but I didnt see the ufos.

Are you a qualified captain and pilot

12 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

It's only peripherally supportive of extraterrestrials, like saying sonar evidence that could be whales is really aliens. It's much more likely to be whales.

Similarly, it's much more likely that these UFOs have an earthly origin. Some country testing unusual aircraft.

Ignorance and fear. When you mix them, as you have, it produces stupidity, hate, and unreasonableness. Critical thought on vacation, if you will.

However the pilots are aware of the capabilities of all terrestrial aircraft and missile tech

[Sensei 1037]

41 minutes ago, Polinski said:

Anything outflying an F18 is a threat to the nation. 

..anything remote controlled can outperform airplanes which have human on board.. Human is limiting aircraft because of acceleration. Too rapid acceleration and pilot loses consciousness.

Edited June 21, 2019 by Sensei

[swansont 7443]

37 minutes ago, Polinski said:

100 or more pilots saw and observed the objects, also all we see is what they choose that we do.  Anything outflying an F18 is a threat to the nation.  Dont come at me with this, tell the pilots and carrier captains that they are stupid. I am just the messanger here, as I was not there.  However owning a boat and knowing how to read sonar I know what different types of fish are from less info than those radar images provide

!

Moderator Note

You can't claim to just be the messenger when you are advocating for something that misrepresents the claims and is not a conclusive deduction of the evidence.

Further, none of the objections hear are equivalent to calling the pilots stupid or ignorant, and nobody has claimed that they are.

Everyone has been pointing out that "unidentified" means we don't know what it is. The evidence is inconclusive to make a determination. But you are claiming we do know. The burden of proof here is on you. 

 

[Strange 4271]

28 minutes ago, Polinski said:

However the pilots are aware of the capabilities of all terrestrial aircraft and missile tech

All? Extremely unlikely. Most major countries probably have secret craft in development that only a limited number of people are aware of.

Also, people are generally very poor witnesses, especially of rapidly changing, one-off events. In particular, people cannot really tell the difference between a large thing that is a long way away, and a smaller thing that is nearer. Similarly, it is hard to distinguish something close and moving fast from something more distant moving slowly. Pilots are no less prone than anyone else to misinterpret what they see. And, being pilots, they will tend to interpret what they see as some sort of flying craft (because that is what they are most familiar with).

Radar systems are also quite capable of giving false readings. If they really saw something and if the same thing was recorded by radar, then it is intriguing. But we still don't have any information about what it was (it was unidentified, remember).

It is also possible that there is no connection between what they saw and what showed up on radar.

It is an unjustifiable leap to go from "unidentified" (and, presumably, unidentifiable) to "ALIENS!!!!1!"

[Moontanman 2231]

Michio Kaku posted a video recently that made a pretty good case the things the Navy is reporting are highly maneuverable hypersonic drones being developed by the US and Russia... 

[Polinski 41]

20 minutes ago, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

You can't claim to just be the messenger when you are advocating for something that misrepresents the claims and is not a conclusive deduction of the evidence.

Further, none of the objections hear are equivalent to calling the pilots stupid or ignorant, and nobody has claimed that they are.

Everyone has been pointing out that "unidentified" means we don't know what it is. The evidence is inconclusive to make a determination. But you are claiming we do know. The burden of proof here is on you. 

 

I can claim to be the messenger as I forwarded a link.  Your claiming that I did not already do something that was clearly already achieved in the past is lacking logic

[Strange 4271]

3 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Michio Kaku posted a video recently that made a pretty good case the things the Navy is reporting are highly maneuverable hypersonic drones being developed by the US and Russia... 

You lost me at Michio Kaku ...

 

[Phi for All 5873]

41 minutes ago, Polinski said:

So you are claiming that Navy carrier captains and pilots are ignorant.

We were talking about radar contacts. Why would you mention pilot ignorance? Or is this strawman just easier to hit?

 

44 minutes ago, Polinski said:

However the pilots are aware of the capabilities of all terrestrial aircraft and missile tech

Ah, here's why you mentioned pilot ignorance! But really, how could "the pilots" know about stuff that's not "need to know", or that comes from another country? I think claiming "the pilots" know "all" the tech is pretty sketchy. Really bad reasoning.

[Strange 4271]

Just now, Polinski said:

I can claim to be the messenger as I forwarded a link.  Your claiming that I did not already do something that was clearly already achieved in the past is lacking logic

Try reading what was said: "You can't claim to JUST be the messenger."

Or was it a deliberate straw man argument?

[Polinski 41]

21 minutes ago, Strange said:

All? Extremely unlikely. Most major countries probably have secret craft in development that only a limited number of people are aware of.

Also, people are generally very poor witnesses, especially of rapidly changing, one-off events. In particular, people cannot really tell the difference between a large thing that is a long way away, and a smaller thing that is nearer. Similarly, it is hard to distinguish something close and moving fast from something more distant moving slowly. Pilots are no less prone than anyone else to misinterpret what they see. And, being pilots, they will tend to interpret what they see as some sort of flying craft (because that is what they are most familiar with).

Radar systems are also quite capable of giving false readings. If they really saw something and if the same thing was recorded by radar, then it is intriguing. But we still don't have any information about what it was (it was unidentified, remember).

It is also possible that there is no connection between what they saw and what showed up on radar.

It is an unjustifiable leap to go from "unidentified" (and, presumably, unidentifiable) to "ALIENS!!!!1!"

Why such animosity?  Would it not be a good thing if we were not alone?

 

[Moontanman 2231]

3 minutes ago, Polinski said:

 

BTW, UFOs have always been real, Unidentified doesn't mean not real, it means unidentified. I think the visual sightings made by two other pilots hours before the ones in 2004 along with radar contact are a lot more interesting than the radar plots with no visuals.. 

Edited June 21, 2019 by Moontanman

[Strange 4271]

1 minute ago, Polinski said:

Why such animosity?  Would it not be a good thing if we were not alone?

1. There was no animosity.

2. It depends on who we are not alone with, I guess.

3. There is zero evidence of that, so it is a moot question.

[Polinski 41]

3 minutes ago, Strange said:

Try reading what was said: "You can't claim to JUST be the messenger."

Or was it a deliberate straw man argument?

If you wish to argue you will have to argue with the Navy as I have made absolutely no claims

Have fun with that

Edited June 21, 2019 by Polinski

[Phi for All 5873]

2 minutes ago, Polinski said:

I can claim to be the messenger as I forwarded a link.  Your claiming that I did not already do something that was clearly already achieved in the past is lacking logic

You won't last long here if you keep making fallacious arguments. EVERYBODY here is interested in discussing these issues with you, but NOBODY wants to deal with stupid, ignorant, poorly formed ranting from someone standing on a soapbox.

How about you climb down and deal with people in an intellectually honest way? 

1 minute ago, Moontanman said:

BTW, UFOs have always been real, Unidentified doesn't mean not real, it means unidentified  

It also doesn't automatically mean alien either.

3 minutes ago, Polinski said:

Why such animosity?  Would it not be a good thing if we were not alone?

Not animosity, just frustration with poor reasoning. You jump to a conclusion many are still skeptical about, and you lash out when this behavior is pointed out. I can see why you perceive it that way, but we're a civil board if you stop and give it a chance.