2014, Smartphones everywhere, where are the UFOs?

[Phil]

Almost everybody I know has a smartphone and I see people constantly taking pictures and videos. This being the case, why haven't there been a rash of ufo sightings?

I realize that the universe is immensely huge, so that we are definitely not alone as intelligent beings. However, the interstellar distances are daunting, and the limitations of physics (speed of light) have yet to be contradicted. Wormholes, etc. while theoretically possible have not been detected and we do not know if they really exist.

We are better equipped technologically and better informed now then during the late 40's when the Kenneth Arnold and Roswell events occured.

While not apriori excluding their existence, interstellar spacecraft do not seem to exist (in the sense of provable evidence). I have a friend who told me of having seen ufos several times, for as long as 30 minutes at a time, but when I asked him why he didn't take any photos, he said he had no camera with him. He is one of the "I want to believe"-kind, he is convinced of what Erick Von Däniken relates ("ancient astronauts") - I could never understand why an advanced civilization would create primitive structures...

So, it seems to me that the evidence supporting extraterrestrial vehicles is weakening with the advent - of ubiquitous technology to record and photograph - a message of itself...

 

[manxman]

if there were a ' rash of sighting's ' where exactly would you expect to see them, newspapers internet facebook tv ?.

 

[Sentry]

While outside, I often take pictures of hawks, low-flying helicopters or planes. Most of them come out as specks due to the limitations of the iPhone, with objects at a distance being photographed much smaller than seen by the eye. It's also difficult to track a moving object and many of my attempts yield nothing but empty sky.

In the daytime pictures, the objects are usually identifiable. The night photos are a different matter altogether, and sometimes a picture of a clear Moon comes out hazy with a blur or haze obscuring it. A classic daylight disk photographed at long range might look interesting, but a night photo of a UFO by camera phone will show just some streaky or blurred little lights,

 

[Charlie Prime]

This being the case, why haven't there been a rash of ufo sightings?

There has been.

 

[Trystero]

I realize that the universe is immensely huge, so that we are definitely not alone as intelligent beings. However, the interstellar distances are daunting, and the limitations of physics (speed of light) have yet to be contradicted. Wormholes, etc. while theoretically possible have not been detected and we do not know if they really exist.

The universe is not only huge, it's about 14 billion years old. Who's to say that in all that time there hasn't arisen at least one intelligent species that is currently a thousand or a million years ahead of us? What we see as "daunting" or seemingly impossible they might consider as well understood and commonplace as we regard commercial air travel. Our cosmology and physics are still in their infancies, with new discoveries being made all the time. Imagine where we'll be in a few hundred years, let alone a few thousand, if we make it that far as a species. Likely, someone else out there already has.

 

[Ezechiel]

The universe is not only huge, it's about 14 billion years old. Who's to say that in all that time there hasn't arisen at least one intelligent species that is currently a thousand or a million years ahead of us? What we see as "daunting" or seemingly impossible they might consider as well understood and commonplace as we regard commercial air travel. Our cosmology and physics are still in their infancies, with new discoveries being made all the time. Imagine where we'll be in a few hundred years, let alone a few thousand, if we make it that far as a species. Likely, someone else out there already has.

Its a reasonable assumption, and one that should guide the search for artificial structures in the cosmos. Thing is... until we fully understand the dynamics of this universe its very hard to discern what is truly artificial or natural (created by a self-aware organic being.. actually could be a self-aware machine if you stretch this a bit).

What could make this worse is realizing that this universe is actually part of a self-aware organism (multi-verse construct) and we're just bugs in the machine lol.

Another assumption that I think holds water is that any civilization (or bug in the machine) that acquires the ability to jump to other solar systems is probably at an evolutionary stage where they have realized that life-bearing planets are actually dangerous platforms (earthquakes, volcanoes, asteroid strikes, floods, sensitive atmospheres, solar radiation and biological threats) . Creating artificial paradises using nuclear fusion plants adjusted perfectly to an evolved life-form is what its all about (... and checking the neighborhood for threats of course...). They have left their pestiferous planets a long time ago.

Checking up on the neighborhood makes sense as an explanation for stealthy UFO's... You would think anyone visiting here has good technologies (like a few thousand years in advance )that make them hard to detect.

 

[Phil]

The universe is not only huge, it's about 14 billion years old. Who's to say that in all that time there hasn't arisen at least one intelligent species that is currently a thousand or a million years ahead of us? What we see as "daunting" or seemingly impossible they might consider as well understood and commonplace as we regard commercial air travel. Our cosmology and physics are still in their infancies, with new discoveries being made all the time. Imagine where we'll be in a few hundred years, let alone a few thousand, if we make it that far as a species. Likely, someone else out there already has.

Sure, but that is pure speculation. Possible but not something we can currently ascertain.

 

[Phil]

if there were a ' rash of sighting's ' where exactly would you expect to see them, newspapers internet facebook tv ?.

Newspapers, internet, etc. Remember when CNN covered the Mexican UFO story? Campeche, I believe? Looked pretty good for awhile. I am just not into conspiracies...

 

[Phil]

There has been.

Could you please cite a credible source?

 

[withoutlimits09]

I have often said the same thing. You would think that with the advent of smart phones and the popularity of digital cameras, the number of good UFO pictures would increase. However, the more I thought about it the less sure I became. Try taking a photo of a news helicopter flying high above the city. Granted you can hear it pretty well and clearly see it, however an iPhone photo will reveal only unremarkable speck. The same goes with planes. Unless the aircraft is coming in for a landing at a very low speed, the photos are unremarkable. I have actually taken some test shots to prove this point. You can't really see much of anything. If the object is at night, forget about it, you are left with a blown out white orb, no matter what is flying in the night sky. This also brings up another point, who says the crafts have to ever come low enough to be seen. Unless the purpose is to land on the ground, I have no reason to believe we should even expect to photograph one.

 

[Polterwurst]

Almost everybody I know has a smartphone and I see people constantly taking pictures and videos. This being the case, why haven't there been a rash of ufo sightings?

I guess it would require people to look up and watch the skies, but instead most are looking down (not only because they are texting or doing other things with their smartphone).

If I imagine seeing something moving in the sky I'd probably not even pay attention, automatically write it off as a plane or helicopter etc. and go on with daily routines anyways.

Should something seem off or should other people point to the sky, I'd look closer of course, but before I'd even consider pulling out the phone, I'd want to rule out all mundane explanations.

And if it was clearly not just some chinese lantern or other earthly object., I'd probably be too astonished to think of smartphones.

In UFO sighting reports, you often hear descriptions along these lines: "my eyes registered the object but my brain just didn't want to process the data".

Another quote that comes to mind comes from "Out of the Blue", where a witness said something like "you don't want to look away or even blink because it might be gone".

In short, the object would probably be long gone before the smartphone comes out. And as Sentry and withoutlimits said, if it should wait around long enough for me to take a picture or make a movie, there probably wouldn't be much to see besides a blurry dot in a shaking frame.

There's plenty of those on Youtube, btw...

 

[Phil]

Just to clarify my position: I am not negating the existence of ufo's in the terms of extraterrestrial intelligence. I am just saying I haven't seen any conclusive proof to date, not withstanding the proliferation of smartphones. Now if a group of independent observers would video a candidate ufo, then that would be pretty convincing...

 

[Ezechiel]

I guess it would require people to look up and watch the skies, but instead most are looking down (not only because they are texting or doing other things with their smartphone).

Wouldn't be surprised if a few good shots were missed while a quiet saucer landed right next to a guy doing facetime LOL

 

[Ezechiel]

Just to clarify my position: I am not negating the existence of ufo's in the terms of extraterrestrial intelligence. I am just saying I haven't seen any conclusive proof to date, not withstanding the proliferation of smartphones. Now if a group of independent observers would video a candidate ufo, then that would be pretty convincing...

Some have seen conclusive proof. I've never seen any but I'd certainly put some chips on the ET square given all the planets we're finding and the technological curve humans have experienced in the last century against the age of this universe. Seems like a no-brainer. A smartphone isn't a smartcamera yet.

 

[Phil]

Some have seen conclusive proof. I've never seen any but I'd certainly put some chips on the ET square given all the planets we're finding and the technological curve humans have experienced in the last century against the age of this universe. Seems like a no-brainer. A smartphone isn't a smartcamera yet.

Maybe it is a case of what is considered "conclusive proof". If someone has such proof, they should come forward and present it.

 

[Ezechiel]

Gordon Cooper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wasted breath....

 

[Charlie Prime]

Could you please cite a credible source?

What would you consider a credible source regarding the number of UFO sightings?

 

[trainedobserver]

Maybe it is a case of what is considered "conclusive proof". If someone has such proof, they should come forward and present it.

I am becoming more and more convinced that the real stuff, the real research, the real evidence, isn't happening in the public eye or being posted to youTube on UFO channels.

 

[Phil]

What would you consider a credible source regarding the number of UFO sightings?

Just to agree on semantics: UFO is not synonymous to extraterrestrial spacecraft. It is an "Unidentified Flying Object". I assume you are referring to the latter.

I would consider a number of independent witnesses taking photos of videos of the same object and agreeing on the sighting. This would confirm that is an UFO. That it be deemed an extraterrestrial spaceship, it would have to be a clear picture showing details of its structure, and not just a fuzzy, out of focus image.

 

[Phil]

I am becoming more and more convinced that the real stuff, the real research, the real evidence, isn't happening in the public eye or being posted to youTube on UFO channels.

The general trend today is for the public not to trust the government, hence all of these conspiracy theories. What you say might be true, but it pure speculation until proven otherwise...