Size and Sound - May 13th Show

[dorkbot]

In listening to the most recent show I was struck by the fixation on what I, perhaps wrongly, perceive as the outlier reports of BT size in the 5000+ ft range. I would ask the following:

1. Disregarding the downtown Phoenix lights of '97 that we've all seen photos of, what percentage of BT reports are ~5000+ ft?

2. Of those reports that are ~5000+ ft, how many are in the form of first hand interviews and how many are anonymous internet or phone reports?

Also, while I think it is safe to say that BTs are always low-noise, it wouldn't be accurate to characterize them as exclusively silent. There are many reports of a low hum, transfomer-like buzz, or, as in the 2000 Illinois case "a well-tuned v8 engine at 40 ft." (I think this was Melvern Noll's statement but I'd have to look it up.) Strictly in regards to the noise aspect, considering that many witnesses report distances of no less than several hundred feet, it is entirely possible to effectively silence large internal combustion generators at this distance with no magic technology whatsoever. I can barely hear a new Honda Accord at idle when I'm 2ft away from it not to mention a purely electrical system. If they are capable of dead-silent operation they don't always do so.

As always, I've never seen one so some or all may very well be ET/non-human but I'm restricting my speculation to the military thing. One of the reasons I ask about the percentage of the outliers is that if this was indeed some sort of military craft you can bet that there would also be a program to spike the ufo sightings databases with reports of wildly varying sizes, locations, performance characteristics, etc. One or two people with a handful of shell accounts and a bit of creativity could throw so much noise at the sightings databases that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to tell what was what.

I would weight sightings reports that come as firsthand interviews substantially higher than anonymous internet reports or even phone reports unless it is an extended phone interview and I would probably throw out any outliers that didn't come from interviews. The excellent Final Frontiers documentary on the 2000 Illinois case shows how much field work was actually done in that investigation.

I can buy a stealth blimp of maybe 600-1000 ft. 5000 ft pushes me off the cliff to a non-human source like Biedny's cigar. There are of course lots of problems with the military explanation but I'd hate to see the bulk of sightings reports morph into dead-silent, mile-long craft without justification.

 

[Tom Levine]

In listening to the most recent show I was struck by the fixation on what I, perhaps wrongly, perceive as the outlier reports of BT size in the 5000+ ft range. I would ask the following:

1. Disregarding the downtown Phoenix lights of '97 that we've all seen photos of, what percentage of BT reports are ~5000+ ft?

2. Of those reports that are ~5000+ ft, how many are in the form of first hand interviews and how many are anonymous internet or phone reports?

Also, while I think it is safe to say that BTs are always low-noise, it wouldn't be accurate to characterize them as exclusively silent. There are many reports of a low hum, transfomer-like buzz, or, as in the 2000 Illinois case "a well-tuned v8 engine at 40 ft." (I think this was Melvern Noll's statement but I'd have to look it up.) Strictly in regards to the noise aspect, considering that many witnesses report distances of no less than several hundred feet, it is entirely possible to effectively silence large internal combustion generators at this distance with no magic technology whatsoever. I can barely hear a new Honda Accord at idle when I'm 2ft away from it not to mention a purely electrical system. If they are capable of dead-silent operation they don't always do so.

As always, I've never seen one so some or all may very well be ET/non-human but I'm restricting my speculation to the military thing. One of the reasons I ask about the percentage of the outliers is that if this was indeed some sort of military craft you can bet that there would also be a program to spike the ufo sightings databases with reports of wildly varying sizes, locations, performance characteristics, etc. One or two people with a handful of shell accounts and a bit of creativity could throw so much noise at the sightings databases that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to tell what was what.

I would weight sightings reports that come as firsthand interviews substantially higher than anonymous internet reports or even phone reports unless it is an extended phone interview and I would probably throw out any outliers that didn't come from interviews. The excellent Final Frontiers documentary on the 2000 Illinois case shows how much field work was actually done in that investigation.

I can buy a stealth blimp of maybe 600-1000 ft. 5000 ft pushes me off the cliff to a non-human source like Biedny's cigar. There are of course lots of problems with the military explanation but I'd hate to see the bulk of sightings reports morph into dead-silent, mile-long craft without justification.

Hi Dorkbot - again, I say that with the utmost respect

I think I mentioned that my position on the size aspect of the BT phenomenon is that there are indeed deviations, and I believe much of that comes from differing perceptions/perspective of large objects in the air. Compare the size of a blimp up close, to a blimp 200 yards away, to a blimp 5 miles away, and depending on your experience and background, you might call it a couple football fields in length, or even a mile across.

That said, it's perfectly reasonable to explore the Phoenix Lights event (the earlier one), and the descriptions of size which stemmed from it. I would agree with you that there's nothing like concrete, hard testimony, from valid witnesses in multiple groups, similar to Shiloh. I'd submit that Phoenix is just that, and these folks reported a craft a mile in length (or so). That alone, is worthy of discussion. If what they saw was real, then David 'went on record' to suggest a craft 5000 feet in length, is most likely "non-human". He pointed to the largest known aircraft and the largest known ships, and this thing would have to be at least the length of 5 ships, or perhaps larger than 5 blimps across. So, let's assume the earlier Phoenix Lights sighting is real, and let's assume that the multiple witnesses accurately reported its size that evening. The discussion from Sunday night shed light on the the conclusion that if these facts are true, most likely, we didn't build it.

I differ perhaps from your point of view in one, key concept, and that is to discount the phoned in and even internet-based reports. I'm not sure that makes a lot of sense in modern times, to do that. NUFORC is the largest and the best UFO reporting center in the country, and perhaps globally. Almost all of those reports are received via telephone straight to Davenport. One thing I like about Mr. Davenport, is his follow-up. They call these folks back, and obtain further information and clarification, and then they (they probably meaning just Peter Davenport) submit their editorial comments into the testimony, posted on their site. We can't just discount this information, because frankly, that's what we have to work with. Sure, some of the witnesses reporting UFOs at NUFORC are crazy or lying, or whatever. But I'd argue that many, if not most of them, are genuine. Their reports tell a story, and if there are patterns and trends that stem from these reports from NUFORC, then that can be equally powerful as evidence, for me at least.

One final point: Those phoned in reports, can in fact, be converted into first-hand interviews. All it takes in an investigator willing to make the calls.

 

[pixelsmith]

this is my report on the nuforc site on 1-30-07. i wonder now if it was a triangle viewed from the side.

as my girlfriend and i were driving home at 10:10 PM we saw a very bright light low in the sky, we turned on to the last road home and saw the light again as we were behind trees and farm houses for a mile or so. the light hadnt moved, it was stationary. then as we got closer the object was about the size of a quarter held at arms length, it started to move to the right slowly at first then very quickly until we couldnt see it, it had disappeared behind a line of trees which make up a huge woods. we continued driving for another mile and all of a sudden the light went straight up and started coming back towards us quickly. i pulled over and got out of the car to look at it. as it went by about 2 miles away i could see a long row of lights and one tiny red lid underneath. it was VERY COLD (0 degrees) and WINDY but i managed to get a couple poor quality pics. it then slowly veered away from us and i drove as fast as i could to follow it. i could not keep up so i pulled over and got out of the car one more time and then heard a very loud roar which turned out to be a jet of some sort that flew righ over my car fairly low. it had all the running lights i would expect that blink. the object we saw had no blinking lights. the jet followed the same direction as the object but much higher and to the left of it. they both continued flying away from us until out of sight. i called the local airport, they were not interested but gave me the FAA number which i called and that lady was not too interested either. i offed to send the photos but she said dont bother and have a nice day.

 

[Tom Levine]

That's an excellent report, Pixelsmith. It reminds me of some of the sightings in February, 07. Several witnesses reported unusual activity comprising of lights and/or objects, alongside military jets. Check out the corroborating statements from several witnesses who reported a southward direction, both jets and objects/lights, from 3 separate States, all within about 3 hours of eachother on the same evening.

Yours is very similar, and was only a couple weeks earlier to the February reports.

What was your location? (city/state).

PS: I'm not surprised about the lack of interest from the FAA. Think "O'Hare".

Sincerely, t

this is my report on the nuforc site on 1-30-07. i wonder now if it was a triangle viewed from the side.

as my girlfriend and i were driving home at 10:10 PM we saw a very bright light low in the sky, we turned on to the last road home and saw the light again as we were behind trees and farm houses for a mile or so. the light hadnt moved, it was stationary. then as we got closer the object was about the size of a quarter held at arms length, it started to move to the right slowly at first then very quickly until we couldnt see it, it had disappeared behind a line of trees which make up a huge woods. we continued driving for another mile and all of a sudden the light went straight up and started coming back towards us quickly. i pulled over and got out of the car to look at it. as it went by about 2 miles away i could see a long row of lights and one tiny red lid underneath. it was VERY COLD (0 degrees) and WINDY but i managed to get a couple poor quality pics. it then slowly veered away from us and i drove as fast as i could to follow it. i could not keep up so i pulled over and got out of the car one more time and then heard a very loud roar which turned out to be a jet of some sort that flew righ over my car fairly low. it had all the running lights i would expect that blink. the object we saw had no blinking lights. the jet followed the same direction as the object but much higher and to the left of it. they both continued flying away from us until out of sight. i called the local airport, they were not interested but gave me the FAA number which i called and that lady was not too interested either. i offed to send the photos but she said dont bother and have a nice day.

 

[pixelsmith]

it was about 8 miles East of Rochester MN

 

[pixelsmith]

i should point out that 2 days later someone from the airport called me and was very interested in what i had to say. well... he said he was from the airport. we talked for about 15 minutes, the guy was extremely friendly and wanted to know every detail. after we hung up i remembered something else and tried to call him back. no number came up on my caller ID and when i called the airport they had no clue as to what i was talking about. i kept asking for supervisors or higher ups until i got some lady who was very stern with me and said no one called and to please stop bothering them.

 

[dorkbot]

I differ perhaps from your point of view in one, key concept, and that is to discount the phoned in and even internet-based reports.

I wasn't suggesting that we throw phone and net reports away exactly, rather that we separate them into different piles for some statistical analysis.

pile 1: firsthand witness testimony on camera or in person. Shiloh, Belgium, etc. go here for sure.

pile 2: things like NUFORC reports submitted by phone and followed up on.

pile 3: things like phone reports that are not followed up on, anonymous internet reports, reports submitted to forums, etc.

When we don't have a strictly repeatable phenomenon to observe at our leisure as in the natural sciences, statistical analysis is going to be one of the best tools we have to try and firm up the picture.

Speaking as a sci-fi nerd, the prospect of an advanced or novel human built craft is intriguing so I think it worthwhile to continually keep this possibility in mind and to have some ongoing effort in the research to at least try and eliminate this possibility. To that end, if you looked at the three different piles of reports above, what would the median size, shape, sound, and performance characteristics look like for each separate pile? The other really important details I think are time of day and weather conditions. Discarding the outliers doesn't mean we completely deny the possibility of 1 mile or six inch long triangles, just that we are temporarily doing so for the purpose of statistical analysis. To my mind there is an enormous difference in estimating that something is 600 ft long and one that 5280 ft long that isn't reconciled by perspective when considering the perceived low altitude that is frequently reported.

One speculation might be that if we are dealing with something non-human or non-physical that is morphing to meet expectations the picture might vary wildly with all three piles of reports. However, if we are dealing with an actual physical craft the picture might firm up quite a bit. If there is a stealth blimp running around I think somewhere in the numbers should be an even firmer picture.

What possible conclusions might we reasonably draw if pile 1 yielded a much firmer averaged picture than pile 3?

 

[Tom Levine]

That's really very wierd. I wonder who it was that called you...Whoever it was, I'll bet dollars to donuts, it wasn't an airport employee.

i should point out that 2 days later someone from the airport called me and was very interested in what i had to say. well... he said he was from the airport. we talked for about 15 minutes, the guy was extremely friendly and wanted to know every detail. after we hung up i remembered something else and tried to call him back. no number came up on my caller ID and when i called the airport they had no clue as to what i was talking about. i kept asking for supervisors or higher ups until i got some lady who was very stern with me and said no one called and to please stop bothering them.

 

[Tom Levine]

Yeah. That's an excellent point for sure.

Even looking at internet-based reports and/or phone based reports, you can even separate their sourcing even further. Many websites receive reports, even my little blog. I noticed a definite difference in terms of quality of reports, from NUFORC as compared to MUFON. That's not to say that MUFON doesn't hold a place or have value, but in terms of housing a database of UFO reports, NUFORC wins by a longshot. much more consistent data, statistically, and, much more thorough reporting and accuracy on detail.

I wasn't suggesting that we throw phone and net reports away exactly, rather that we separate them into different piles for some statistical analysis.

pile 1: firsthand witness testimony on camera or in person. Shiloh, Belgium, etc. go here for sure.

pile 2: things like NUFORC reports submitted by phone and followed up on.

pile 3: things like phone reports that are not followed up on, anonymous internet reports, reports submitted to forums, etc.

When we don't have a strictly repeatable phenomenon to observe at our leisure as in the natural sciences, statistical analysis is going to be one of the best tools we have to try and firm up the picture.

Speaking as a sci-fi nerd, the prospect of an advanced or novel human built craft is intriguing so I think it worthwhile to continually keep this possibility in mind and to have some ongoing effort in the research to at least try and eliminate this possibility. To that end, if you looked at the three different piles of reports above, what would the median size, shape, sound, and performance characteristics look like for each separate pile? The other really important details I think are time of day and weather conditions. Discarding the outliers doesn't mean we completely deny the possibility of 1 mile or six inch long triangles, just that we are temporarily doing so for the purpose of statistical analysis. To my mind there is an enormous difference in estimating that something is 600 ft long and one that 5280 ft long that isn't reconciled by perspective when considering the perceived low altitude that is frequently reported.

One speculation might be that if we are dealing with something non-human or non-physical that is morphing to meet expectations the picture might vary wildly with all three piles of reports. However, if we are dealing with an actual physical craft the picture might firm up quite a bit. If there is a stealth blimp running around I think somewhere in the numbers should be an even firmer picture.

What possible conclusions might we reasonably draw if pile 1 yielded a much firmer averaged picture than pile 3?

 

[pixelsmith]

a friend of mine is a pilot for NW airline. i have tried to talk to him about ufos and he will not talk about them. he said he would be grounded if he ever talked about things he has seen.

 

[Tom Levine]

I'll lend you my digital voice recorder for that interview, Pixel.

a friend of mine is a pilot for NW airline. i have tried to talk to him about ufos and he will not talk about them. he said he would be grounded if he ever talked about things he has seen.

 

[dorkbot]

a friend of mine is a pilot for NW airline. i have tried to talk to him about ufos and he will not talk about them. he said he would be grounded if he ever talked about things he has seen.

It depends on how it is done. If he were to go on television in his Northwest uniform as an active pilot there would probably be repercussions from his employer. My understanding is that if he were out of uniform and did not directly associate himself with Northwest there isn't much at all they can do.

Richard Haines is a very sharp professional who worked for NASA for 20 years and specializes in pilot cases. I know he has interviewed active commercial pilots in a number of high profile cases. If your friend is concerned about his job it would probably be a good idea to contact Haines and ask him how to go about recording an interview without crossing any boundaries that will piss off the airline.