>and he refuses to look at other evidence that contradicts the statement.
Hmm I'm doubtful about this. It would be very unlike him. I found his explanation quite illuminating, and the pilot he had a back and forth with was interesting.
It's been a few months since I checked but last I did, I was satisfied that Mick made a good case for why the others are wrong about the distance.
Mick refuses to accept the fact the distance is 6-8nm as the pilots stated it was shown on their SAs. Ryan Graves asked Mick to present his analysis at a coalition of former military pilots for them to debate him, but he said he was “too busy”.
Again, mick does a great job debunking things that should be debunked. But you can’t debunk something by claiming the distance of the object was farther than it actually was
Multiple of the most sophisticated instruments for this purpose on the planet are capturing this data. If the US was flying F18s that misconstrued the range of a foreign adversary by over 20 nautical miles, that would be a huge story in of itself.
You trust the tech way too much to the point of not being able to confidently reject the impossible.
This woderful US military tech tracked a guy in Afghanistan for a day and bombed him thinking that water he was carrying home to his children is explosive and he's a terrorist.
I am not rejecting the possibility of this being human technology. to quote the former Deputy Secretary of Defense for Intelligence “The Alien Hypothesis currently best fits the facts”.
We have been to space. We have theories that FTL travel may be possible (Alcubierre drives, wormholes). The JWST just showed us that galaxies formed as early as 300 million years after the Big Bang. Hell, we didn't know there were planets outside of our solar system until the 1990s. We still don't know what Dark Matter or Dark Energy are. We have far more left to explore and understand.
I despise people like you who try to diminish every important scientific venture because you think you know better.
And some things just remain impossible. They laughed at Galileo but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
I think there's huge probabiliy that aliens really do exist. But they are nowhere close. And we don't have any resonable theories about FTL. They sound reasonable up to a point of "yeah, but you need negative mass to do that". So basically it's an artefact that equations produce when they are pushed to the domain they are no longer valid in.
Best scientific venture about alien life is SETI and JWST. Not some nonsense of pilots seeing things they believe to be violating the laws of physics. And some recordings of instruments that just show wrong data.
People like you mix science with science-fiction and that really does no good for either.
You don't need FTL travel to reach Earth from somewhere else in the Milky Way, if you don't mind waiting a long time to arrive. Which unmanned probes would not. Your confidence in your assertions just demonstrates you haven't thought about explanations that are less likely but still coherent with non-human technology being present in Earth's atmosphere.
So those aliens traveled for thousands of years (probably in multigenerational spaceship or deep anabiosis) from a place that close relatively speaking but somehow still undetectable for us despite thousands of years of interstellar technology development there just to be blips on our radars and visual smudge here and there.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and "we don't know what's that" is not an extraordinary evidence.
Why do you assume the UAPs have aliens in them, and why would you anthropomorphize aliens in any case to be anything like humans? Why do you assume the origin of such objects would be detectable? You're jumping to a lot of conclusions here, when the only core question being explored is the plausibility of physical objects in Earth's atmostphere demonstrating superhuman technology not created by humans.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is just a meaningless phrase by the way mostly used in discussions like these to try to signal that the person is somehow more "scientifically minded" than their interlocutor. There's no such thing as "extraordinary evidence", there's just evidence and the explanations which best explain that evidence.
We've only known about quantum mechanics for around 100 years. Why do you think we've discovered everything there is to know about physics? That's just hubris.
The 'entirety of history' is meaningless since we don't really know what happened in the past.
You take the word of few random soldiers and some output of some devices over accumulated effort of generations of scientists who brought us all of technology and you accuse others of hubris?
It's quite a hubris to say that something is evidence of violation of known laws of physics on the basis of personal direct observation and output of devices that you find trustworthy only because known laws of physics do work as formulated.
As for history we know for sure that aliens didn't made their presence know in any undoubtable manner in at least few thousands of years.
Every observation that we ever managed to explain was explained by something else than magic or aliens.
Every new discovery, by definition, begins with new observations.
The word you're clinging to is "known". We've been spectacularly wrong in the past (the sun orbited the earth, which was flat, etc.).
As for history, there's no reason to suspect they would have made their presence known in any undoubtable manner. They may have been here just to observe.
> Every observation that we ever managed to explain was explained by something else than magic or aliens.
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Clarke
Ah, so now we don't just assume alien tech on Earth. Now we need to also assume aliens intent? Are you sure you are not adding epicycles to your model of reality?
> “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Clarke
And yet no technology we ever seen actually IS magic or of alien origin.
I'm not sure what's your point is? That alien tech might look like magic? Sure. But we have never observed any magic either in our world. So they both belong squarely in the world of dreams not reality.
It's hilarious how you assume that the summary of the collective ideas of scientists today know everything that is physically possible when there are many examples throughout history where the collective understanding of physics has been wrong and it takes unique individuals to prove them wrong.
There is data to suggest the objects are moving at speeds that defy our current understanding of physics. There's no reason to not keep following the data.
> [...] there are many examples throughout history where the collective understanding of physics has been wrong and it takes unique individuals to prove them wrong.
Yes. And every time the correct solution eventually reached was not 'alien technology at work'.
> There is data to suggest the objects are moving at speeds that defy our current understanding of physics.
That nullifies all the science since Newton, including Newton.
> There's no reason to not keep following the data.
Yes, and in the recent case of registering FTL neutrinos data was followed right up to faulty connection in the measurement device.
> And every time the correct solution eventually reached was not 'alien technology at work'.
Then why not let these scientists reach that conclusion if that ends up being the same.
> That nullifies all the science since Newton, including Newton.
Einstein nullified Newton's science. That's the way science works. We know Newtonian physics and General Relativity are incomplete. There's significant evidence that we are witnessing something that is breaking our current known laws of physics. With more data we can rule out faulty sensors, but we still need to study this.
Why are you so adamant about not studying something interesting? If we were all like you then science would never advance.
I don’t assume anything (nice strawman) other than that there are coherent explanations that would explain the presence of non-human technology in our atmosphere that do not require things like FTL travel. If we are going to weigh “extraordinary” phenomena then things which would require breaking known laws of physics far outclass those which do not, and many people jump to the conclusion that for non-human tech to be here it would have to have violated known physics. (It sounds like you are in this group.)
I would not be so adamant about this if the quality of the individuals telling us the government has significant classified data that shows the ET hypothesis best fits what the pilots are seeing. You are the one being unreasonable and not listening to these individuals.
Pilots are not the only ones seeing this. Ukrainian astronomers have data from their telescopes in two different cities referencing the same objects traveling at Mach 15, stopping on a dime, then turning around immediately https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.17085
we have theories that is grounded in our current understanding of physics for superluminal travel. it's not insane to think a species 1 million years ahead of us have engineered it
This is just appeal to authority. And wrong authority at that.
When you are debunking a supernatural claim you don't ask a scientist to do it (let alone a general). Because scientists are honest thus easily mislead because they assume honesty. You should ask a magician because they know myriad of ways how it could be done to fool you.
As for the patent ... Do you know how many versions of perpetum mobile are patented? Do you know how many do work? The thing doesn't have to work to be patented.
I honesty have no clue what you're trying to say with your statement from scientists. Science is the way forward with our understanding of phenomenon. Scientists are not so easily fooled, and there are several scientists with pedigrees far higher than you or any magician you'd hire that are studying this subject. Dr. Gary Nolan of Stanford, Dr. Avi Loeb of Harvard, Dr. Eric Davis a theoretical physicist. IMO you are simply stuck in the wrong mindset if you don't think this is a serious subject.
There's a history of scientists being fooled by supernatural claims.
There are even some Nobel laureates that after success in science as they get older they go straight to cookooland. Heck, even Newton who achieved much in his youth when he got older he went completely bananas.
Being a scientist doesn't guard you against getting fooled and fooling yourself.
This is not a serious subject. It's a form of modern religion and local one at that. Most prominent in USA. Believing that in our lifetime we discovered signs of advanced alien tech on Earth is not very different than believing that in your lifetime you'll experience second coming of Christ. A belief that was shared by a lot of people for last 2 millenia.
Don't get me wrong. I love science fiction. I just don't need to pretend it might be real to enjoy it.
There’s also a history of humans not being able to accept something radically different when being presented evidence of it. In this case, that appears to be happening to you.
Please, just stay out of this conversation. Let the real scientists like Gary Nolan and Avi Loeb continue to investigate this subject as they please. Whatever this phenomenon ends up being, your opinions are not going to help us find that out.
UFOs are not radically different idea with recent evidence. It's literally more than half a century old secular religion which "evidence" for never panned out into anything or were thoroughly debunked.
Gary Nolan and Avi Loeb will die of old age before they can deliver actual proof of alien technology exactly as every scientist and layman did so far. If they explain those artifacts it won't be aliens. That's just my opinion. Please keep it at the back of your mind for the rest of your life.
From now on I'm staying out of this particular conversation.
Just let the damn scientists study the evidence and keep your opinions to yourself, damn. You obviously have a huge bias against studying things that are currently unexplained, so you're not helping the conversation. Keep that in the back of your head.
Theoretical physicist with his head deep in things like Alcubierre drive that appears from Einstein's equations when applied to such things as negative mass (which doesn't exist) without acknowledging that quantum mechanics exists. He was also hired by Pentagon to investigate UFOs. Nothing came of it, but he had every incentive to make stuff up to keep his job. Which he was eventually fired from when it closed, but he claims it wasn't closed and he still works there. He also claimed they got some materials of alien origin they couldn't identify. Claim that has zero backing. And he can't even come clean that he lied because that would mean government could sue him for fraud.
I see how those three are superbly equipped to validate or falsify claims of some Airforce pilots. /s
Basically 3 believers with some accidental degrees including some with vested interest in continuation of UFO research.
Why am I against it? I just hate bs that poisons minds of so many people giving them some false sense of superiority for "having open minds" and forefront knowledge.
I know it's hard to be confronted with information that undermines your belief. It can be painful. But it's worth it. Freedom from bs waits on the other side of this path. And having accurate model of reality and yourself matters.
All you do is take one point from each of their accomplishments out of context and refute their entire credibility.
Gary Nolan is the one of the premiere immunologists and pathologists in the world. He has created multiple multi-million dollar companies. He was asked by the CIA to perform scans on people who had been encountered UAP and had health effects or death.
Avi Loeb is a renowned Harvard astrophysicist. Yes, he is studying Oumuamua because it was the first object outside our solar system to come by Earth. It also had an extremely odd shape and a trajectory that does not seem natural. He's simply hypothesized that it could be some kind of ET probing device passing Earth, but he's not definitively said so. All he's saying is no other physicist has come up with a proper explanation for what Oumuamua was, and so he wants to study other interstellar objects that come near by.
Eric Davis has been working for DoD for almost 3 decades. He's well known within the defense space to being an incredibly intelligent human being.
You can't just take one piece of their history and dismiss their entire credibility. What are your credentials that make you so important to dismiss these people as insane for just studying this phenomenon?
All of my credentials is that I learned a bit of physics and I read a bit of SF and I can tell one from the other. If it was about existence of leprechauns and effects of meeting them you'd have no problem dismissing it as well regardless of how accomplished people would be interested in the subject. And if it's UFO which has exactly the same amount of confirmed evidence as leprechauns suddenly there's a problem and you need credentials because ufologists made their belief sound sciency.
I know that those 3 scientists are accomplished people in their respective, unassociated fields. For various definitions of the word "accomplished".
But I'd much rather see a psychiatrist and plane surveillance device constructor/tester and possibly a magician or a con artist investigating those documents coming out of DoD first than three avid ufologists. In my opinion it might be way more productive and brilliant immunologist could stick to doing good work in immunology, astrophysicist could research new insights in astrophysics that is actually very promising field, and ex DoD employee very theoretical physicist might continue his mid life crisis or whatever he's doing.
But rest assured, the research is going on. Good news for you:
You put that so wonderfully. The DoD and other scientists should absolutely stop investing things that are hovering over their naval ships and nuclear silos just because a man on hacker news would rather see other people investigating them. Your credentials having read a bit of physics are so, so helpful. Please, help the rest of the feeble planet with your intellect because you are truly the one person who knows what is worth investigating and what isn't.
> And if it's UFO which has exactly the same amount of confirmed evidence as leprechauns
That is absolutely false. The 3 navy videos have enough evidence behind them to show UAP are real and exhibiting interesting flight characteristics. You are denying hard evidence - for what reason I don't know.
Yeah, let's investigate. Tens of millions of dollars won't spend themselves. And we certainly wouldn't want to spend it on boring actual astronomy and astrophysics.
Btw the other video is just of loosing tracking of a plane:
GIMBAL: If the DoD would confirm the range of the object was 6-8 nautical miles (which has been confirmed by the pilots on the mission) than this object performed a "vertical u-turn" where the rotation directly correlates with the change in direction https://twitter.com/the_cholla/status/1620220980839993345?s=...
All of the attempts to debunk the videos require very specific assumptions that are not proven. The GIMBAL object was not 30 nautical miles away as Mick west says. The GOFAST object is going against 120 knots of wind, West is assuming there is no wind at all. The Tic-Tac is exhibiting instantaneous acceleration and no plane today can do this.
Nothing about these videos has been debunked. The DoD could put this to rest by releasing the additional sensor data, but they won't because the sensors are highly classified.
Hmm I'm doubtful about this. It would be very unlike him. I found his explanation quite illuminating, and the pilot he had a back and forth with was interesting.
It's been a few months since I checked but last I did, I was satisfied that Mick made a good case for why the others are wrong about the distance.