Origin of the Phenomena

[Ezechiel]

We can't just say that a UFO is technology from some advanced, non-human race. Neil DeGrasse Tyson explains it quite well.</EMBED>

He's right, without the 'nuts and bolts' to put under a microscope he can't officially answer the question with a yes or no.

An honest answer could have been: 'Well, I don't know... '

Should Rendelsham and Malmstrom type cases be brushed away because there is no physical evidence. Aren't radar tracks, left over radiation, multiple witnesses cases worth the attention ? IMHO I think so and its a question of opinion.

The strong cases are compelling, the policeman following Venus is not and it's obvious DeGrasse has decided the subject is not worth consideration.

 

[trainedobserver]

I think the term "nuts and bolts" is misleading. I don't think we can say what type of technology is being employed to manifest the phenomena. The technology may and seemingly does, employ principles and materials that we totally unfamiliar with.

I think there are three things at play. The first being the misidentified or unrecognized natural phenomena. The second being misidentified or unrecognized human technology, which would include hoaxes. The third being the UFO phenomena proper such as described in the Rendlesham forest incident, by Gorden Cooper, JAL Flight 1628, the 1976 Iran incident, and the Hessdalen Phenomena, among others.

I think there is sufficient evidence for a reasonable person to say that there are, as yet, unidentifiable objects operating under intelligent control in our atmosphere. Intelligent control, implies the use of technology unless one assumes that the UFO phenomena is a natural manifestation of a living being of some sort. I think the evidence suggests that the phenomena are not "rods", "light beings/orbs" or "sky fish" (all of which I think can be proven to be camera artifacts) but rather "machines" of unknown origin and purpose.

Whether the origin of the phenomena is earthly, extra-terrestrial, or inter-dimensional (which by definition is extra-terrestrial as well) it seems that unless one wishes to entertain the notion of super-powered supernatural beings masquerading as products of technology, that "nuts and bolts" (that is to say technology of some kind) must play a part.

We must first, as a society, admit that there really is something to the phenomenon. Then we can move into the dispassionate study of it. Only then can we start to get a clearer picture of its origin.

Nicely put Ron. I think the NSA document "UFO Hypothesis and Survival Questions" elaborates on this point well.

"Up until this time, the leisurely scientific approach has too often taken precedence in dealing with UFO questions. If you are walking along a forest path and someone yells 'rattler' your reaction would be immediate and defensive. You would not take time to speculate before you act. You would have to treat the alarm as if it were a real and immediate threat to your survival. Investigation would become an intensive emergency action to isolate the threat and to determine its precise nature. It would be geared to developing adequate defensive measures in a minimum amount of time. It would seem a little more of this survival attitude is called for in dealing with the UFO problem."

 

[Kieran]

If the phenomenon was just seen now and again and observations were limited to certain people. I would question my sightings and other peoples sightings as being a trick of the mind, but we know, that is not the case. This phenomenon has been spotted hovering over high level target's like local nuclear power Stations and Nuke bases and over major cities in the last 50 years. So Come of it people.. imagined fantasy's shouldn't be seen here ( unless we are completely crazy) and these imagined fantasy's shouldn't be picked up on radar and for Countries to be clueless to who own's these objects. Is very revealing. The fact is. Or Scientists have never explained what the phenomenon is, well shouldn't they especially, if we are all seeing things, shouldn't we be studied? lol It simple current science cannot explain it, and how can you explain something to the public, if you don't ever understand, it yourself?

 

[Xylo]

It's very difficult to scientifically study a phenomenon that occurs at seemingly random times, and isn't replicable in a laboratory setting. The best that can be done is gather evidence afterwards, if any exists, and interview witnesses.

Physical evidence will always be called into question...if it ever appears. If it's melted metal and it's a common metal or an uncommon metal that could be produced on earth, well, at best it's something for the grey basket.


I think it is common knowledge that something is happening in Earth's sky. There are things flying around that no one can name as anything but unidentified. I don't think that the majority of people would dismiss it simply as hallucination, imagination or mass hysteria. Without an ability to source the data, without an ability to replicate the data, without an ability to physically inspect, quantify and qualify witness, radar, sonar, photographic and video evidence, what we are left with at the end of the day is exactly what we started out with: The question "what the hell is that?"

 

[Trajanus]

I think the term "nuts and bolts" is misleading. I don't think we can say what type of technology is being employed to manifest the phenomena. The technology may and seemingly does, employ principles and materials that we totally unfamiliar with.

In many cases it utilizes technology we are quite familiar with. People have seen UFOs/occupants with dials and levers, hatches, drills, even buckets and shovels.

I think there is sufficient evidence for a reasonable person to say that there are, as yet, unidentifiable objects operating under intelligent control in our atmosphere. Intelligent control, implies the use of technology unless one assumes that the UFO phenomena is a natural manifestation of a living being of some sort. I think the evidence suggests that the phenomena are not "rods", "light beings/orbs" or "sky fish" (all of which I think can be proven to be camera artifacts) but rather "machines" of unknown origin and purpose.

Of course. People have also seen rivets on some. And on many occasions, occupants, often through windows or bubble canopy.

Whether the origin of the phenomena is earthly, extra-terrestrial, or inter-dimensional (which by definition is extra-terrestrial as well) it seems that unless one wishes to entertain the notion of super-powered supernatural beings masquerading as products of technology, that "nuts and bolts" (that is to say technology of some kind) must play a part.

Of course. And the ETH is by far the best explanation. We know other planetary systems exist in great numbers. Have "other dimensions" ever even been verified? Not to my knowledge. As for an earthly origin, it makes little sense.

 

[Ivette]

What amaze me is people that have never seen a UFO commenting about UFO. I have always thought that us seekers of this phenomena have a reason to ask many questions. We are thought some basic physics in which they don't fix. I always thought of aerodynamics essential for flying, but I just happened to witness a very low flying square and small craft that was as fast as a plane with four round common lights in each corner and a red beacon light in the center and it emitted a low jet sound. This seems mechanical but unreasonable, why square?
I have witness five different UFOs, amber, metallic, morph, cone, and bird-like shape with round disk at the bottom, all of them but one disappeared or moved so fast to a very near cloud and stayed there. Over 20 years since I saw the first (amber) and from August 2008 until the beginning of this month I saw the rest. Why pick on me? The only thing I remember since I was young is that I loved the night sky and observed to find shooting stars, but my first experience happened when my youngest daughter was about 9 yo, then 20 years went by (I am 55 this month).ffice.<O</O
I have been searching the web for people's experience and it surprises me how many different shapes and so many of them describe the same as me. <O</O
Once you see one, you will find your self looking for the next one. (I don't do it in an obsess manner) but I’m looking.

Back to my question: if you haven't seen one why try and explain. Or are you envious that you have not seen one. These haven’t altered my life by any means. I still believe in God. Go to church. Because it makes me believe in something bigger than us that we have no control upon. It does not makes me a crazy person. I go on with my life and my problems.

 

[trainedobserver]

Back to my question: if you haven't seen one why try and explain. Or are you envious that you have not seen one.

You aren't suggesting that unless you've seen a UFO you shouldn't attempt to understand them or make your thoughts about them known to others are you? Are you saying you honestly can't understand why people who have never seen one could be fascinated with the phenomena and formulate theories and notions about them? And to be quite frank Ivette, it is pretty clear that experiencing the paranormal, whether it is UFOs or what have you, is absolutely no help in understanding it.

Because it makes me believe in something bigger than us that we have no control upon.

I just go out into the back yard and look up for that sort of thing.

 

[Ivette]

Dear trainedobserver, I think I "Thanks" your threads. I am referring to others I read that ridiculed people that try and make some understanding of the matter. We are all guessing here, for like I read someone here posted, scientifically we haven’t got the evidence (which we have to accept since government only dispatches as weather balloons.).
I conclude that you haven't seen a UFO, I suggest dont look too hard and you will see it when you less expectedffice

 

[hak]

I use to think it was extra-terrestrial, but now i seem to lean towards inter-dimensional. Humans (throughout history) have always had a myopic human-centric view of life, the universe and consciousness...
Flatland opened my understanding to other dimensions... and I've been trying to figure out the fourth dimension ever since.. but it is elusive.
Perhaps awareness/conciousness is limited to our dimension. Gawd only knows.. but it is fun to speculate upon.

 

[trainedobserver]

Dear trainedobserver, I think I "Thanks" your threads. I am referring to others I read that ridiculed people that try and make some understanding of the matter. We are all guessing here, for like I read someone here posted, scientifically we haven’t got the evidence (which we have to accept since government only dispatches as weather balloons.). I conclude that you haven't seen a UFO, I suggest dont look too hard and you will see it when you less expectedffice

I apologize if I came across a little cross there. I could have phrased that response better.

You are correct, I have never seen anything I could not account for myself, but it isn't for want of trying.

I recently had the pleasure of speaking to a couple of folks who saw a UFO just last year. As he related the story I could see that the experience had a profound effect on him. I was surprised at his insistence on their interpretation of the event given the dearth of information available to construct it though. It indicated to me that a profound and highly strange event had occurred in the observer's heads as well as in front of them. Obviously there are things flying around that confound folks senses and have a real and lasting effect on their minds, worldviews, and sense of self.

I certainly would welcome the experience of seeing a true UFO at this point myself as long as I could avoid the brain-scramble associated with it.

 

[jimp]

I've never seen a UFO -- or a ghost or any other sort of "paranormal" phenomena. I simply think that it's all very fascinating -- and I do believe that people have witnessed or experienced "something". Regarding whether UFOs are ET, ID, UT, CT, demons, angels, misinterpreted natural or man-made phenomena, etc., my answer is all the above -- or one -- or some -- or none. We simply don't know.

ET is certainly a much better possibility now that we know how many solar systems with possible earth-like planets are in the galaxy. Twenty years ago, the top scientists were arguing against ETs because they assumed there were none or very few planets like earth. Paradigms change, don't they?

I would love to see a UFO. I live in a city with an international airport and a major air force base. There are aircraft in the skies above me almost constantly. I look up a lot because I enjoy stargazing, and because the mere act of flying is still pretty amazing -- especially when you see an Air Force super cargo jet that somehow doesn't fall out of the sky. I'm also a birdwatcher. I should have seen one, dammit!

 

[trainedobserver]

Perhaps awareness/conciousness is limited to our dimension.

The reality of the situation is that your brain/mind system is a 3D Virtual Reality interface with the multidimensional real world. It is about as representational of it as a footprint in the sand is of the human being that made it. It is formed by the real world but is neither of the same substance or form. It isn't hard to imagine other entities that experience the real world with other types of mind/brain virtual reality interfaces who experience reality quite differently than we do.

 

[hak]

Right so if our sensory organs and mind/brain interface is pure 3d, then that is what limits our experience. One has to wonder if 4-ders (we will just call them that) then can see us and we can't really see them unless they enter our space.
We can assume that we can possibly exist together.. in the same(yet not the same) area.
Yet.. we (3-ders) never interface with 2-ders.. if they exist.. perhaps they can't. Our minds don't have the 2-d interface. Perhaps they occupy our space as well.
Fun.

 

[trainedobserver]

Right so if our sensory organs and mind/brain interface is pure 3d, then that is what limits our experience. One has to wonder if 4-ders (we will just call them that) then can see us and we can't really see them unless they enter our space.
We can assume that we can possibly exist together.. in the same(yet not the same) area.
Yet.. we (3-ders) never interface with 2-ders.. if they exist.. perhaps they can't. Our minds don't have the 2-d interface. Perhaps they occupy our space as well.
Fun.

I think it means that they exist along side our real selves in the multidimensional real world. We just don't have the neurology to perceive them correctly if at all under normal conditions. The 3D world of your conscious experience is a brain/mind system generated illusion consisting of whatever material or medium constitutes consciousness. It isn't that they live in some other dimension or another, they exist in the same real space we do, however we only experience the brain/mind system generated representation. Can you dig it? I knew you could. (I say all this seemingly with great confidence but I recognize that I may be quite wrong about the entire business.)

 

[Ron Collins]

I certainly would welcome the experience at this point myself.

I admire that. But.. I do not want to be "affected" by whatever it is. This is one aspect of the phenomenon that is rarely talked about. The instantaneous conviction as to what it "is" and in many cases the "message" conveyed. As you have said, it is particularly odd given the lack of supporting substance to he sighting. Many years ago I found myself immediately writing those folks and their opinions off as the inevitable nutbag. There is little doubt that this aspect has significantly contributed to the giggle factor. But, it may (I would like to stress the word MAY) yet be another facet to this very odd phenomenon. A facet that I would personally rather not experience. Much like the abduction phenomenon I have absolutely no interest in experiencing this firsthand.

You know the thought just occurred to me that this feeling is much like what an intensely religious person might convey that they felt upon entering a church, or upon undergoing a certain ritual or rite. I wonder if it this is some sort of a coping mechanism of the mind. Interesting.

 

[trainedobserver]

I admire that. But.. I do not want to be "affected" by whatever it is. This is one aspect of the phenomenon that is rarely talked about. The instantaneous conviction as to what it "is" and in many cases the "message" conveyed.

I just reread my posting there and I didn't really mean what it seemed to imply. I rewrote that last sentence to read, "I certainly would welcome the experience of seeing a true UFO at this point myself as long as I could avoid the brain-scramble associated with it."

I understand completely. In all reality I waffle on wanting to see something for those complications and others. If I did witness something, I would hope someone else would be there to see it as well. Not that it would prevent the possible psychological ramifications but at least you would have someone to compare notes with.

I feel the same way as you do about the abduction phenomenon. You would hope for a contact scenario containing some sort of sane conversation rather than bizarre animal husbandry-like interactions and useless messages.

 

[Ivette]

Trainedobserver, I am trying to understand how this page works, so I am writing your user name just in case. I was trying to quote your last sentence but I don’t think it worked. Like I said, I have seen a few and absolutely nothing happens, just a little excited. I do wonder why I see them, Am I special for them. Or is it just a random and coincidental thing? But I want to share with you other experience that I have had, which do make me wonder what is going on. I saw a blue orb floating in the ceiling of a Hotel I went two years ago with my husband (Cancun Mx). It was our first night. I saw it as soon as we turn all the lights off, but still there was clarity from outside. I look for every possible source, nothing came up. This light was cobalt blue like the size of a quarter and it was flat (no dimensions) it floated all over the bed but in the ceiling. I got frighten and cover my face. I felt asleep and completely forgot all about it until a few months ago that I read a thread some where of someone that had similar experience. I asked my husband and he does not remember. I think I remember telling him but he was kind of asleep.
So, if you want to know about other mysteries search for floating orbs, or blue floating light.I have had other sightings, and this one was about 20 years ago. I saw a fairy??? I feel like a crazy person mentioning this, I told only my older daughter when she got home (she was a teen) and she just looked not knowing what to make of it. I told my parents, and the same thing happened.<O</O
As I was standing in front of the lamp over the dinning table all the sudden floats towards me give a smile floats a little back and disappeared. I was dumbfounded for a while shook my head went back to the sofa and kept looking at the lamp hoping to see it again. I can tell you up to this day I still look at the lamp (even thou is another lamp). It was about two inches, it’s been so long I forget details, but I do remember it had a white robe, and some sort of tiny wings. .<O</O
One thing that I want to do is search for the origins of the fairy tales, Tinkerbelle is depicted just as small. <O</O
I told you these stories, and everybody else that reads this, because you seem to reason. One thing I am sure, not everybody sees a fairy.
And if some one had a similar experience I will love to hear it.

 

[trainedobserver]

Ivette,

I don't know what you saw or experienced. I don't think you have enough information to make any sort of determination about the nature of what you saw. That is the important thing here, recognizing what we know and what we don't know and refusing to fill in the gaps with our imaginations. People often see weird things and jump to conclusions about what they were without sufficient information. All things are indeed possible but not all things are probable.

 

[hak]

Ivette,

I've occasion to have some pretty crazy experiences myself. I find people aren't receptive.

 

[plumbbob12]

Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a great educator. He is also a logical positivist. He uses ad hominem from a very passive aggressive approach to make fun of those who have seen things they have no explanation for. This includes people who have walked on the moon, and who have seen, quite literality, much more of the universe than he has. As far as his argument of antidotal evidence. This is “science by proclamation” He states that antidotal evidence is the “lowest form of evidence” without backing his statement up, and the masses just laugh and nod there heads. If I am extracting a substance in the lab, my notebook is my written antidotal evidence. Now it is true a good peer review process will attempt to replicate this experiment, but that also is antidotal, because it comes form people! In the end. Everything is antidotal. Ask questions! Be a scientist. Pb<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
<o> </o>
(By the way, I still think Tyson is great, and I really enjoy his programs, I just don’t have to agree with everything)<o></o>
<o> </o>

---------- Post added at 08:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:55 PM ----------

hak: still we try to tell our story. odd