NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

Reply to thread

Message

Ron Collins beat me to it. Most professional astronomers work indoors, studying very specific problems with highly specialized instruments. What Plait and Angel of Ioren say applies more to amateur astronomers/skywatchers. I'm more or less one myself, and in 40+ years of it I haven't seen anything I couldn't ultimately identify either. I think P and AoI in the main are right, particularly about purely visual 'light in the sky'-type sightings with no other anomalous aspects.

I'd be less sure about writing off relatively close-up sightings of large objects. And the ones that reportedly involve missing time, vehicle interference, etc. have non-visual components that would be really strange for anyone to experience.

I also have to wonder if anyone has actually done a study on the backgrounds of people who report UFOs. Are amateur astronomers etc. really less common among them than they are in the general population? And does this also apply to the "high strangeness" type reports?

<blockquote data-quote="NTS" data-source="post: 97626" data-attributes="member: 1819">Ron Collins beat me to it. Most professional astronomers work indoors, studying very specific problems with highly specialized instruments. What Plait and Angel of Ioren say applies more to amateur astronomers/skywatchers. I&#039;m more or less one myself, and in 40+ years of it I haven&#039;t seen anything I couldn&#039;t ultimately identify either. I think P and AoI in the main are right, particularly about purely visual &#039;light in the sky&#039;-type sightings with no other anomalous aspects.&nbsp;I&#039;d be less sure about writing off relatively close-up sightings of large objects. And the ones that reportedly involve missing time, vehicle interference, etc. have non-visual components that would be really strange for anyone to experience.&nbsp;I also have to wonder if anyone has actually done a study on the backgrounds of people who report UFOs. Are amateur astronomers etc. really less common among them than they are in the general population? And does this also apply to the &quot;high strangeness&quot; type reports?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="NTS, post: 97626, member: 1819"] Ron Collins beat me to it. Most professional astronomers work indoors, studying very specific problems with highly specialized instruments. What Plait and Angel of Ioren say applies more to amateur astronomers/skywatchers. I'm more or less one myself, and in 40+ years of it I haven't seen anything I couldn't ultimately identify either. I think P and AoI in the main are right, particularly about purely visual 'light in the sky'-type sightings with no other anomalous aspects. I'd be less sure about writing off relatively close-up sightings of large objects. And the ones that reportedly involve missing time, vehicle interference, etc. have non-visual components that would be really strange for anyone to experience. I also have to wonder if anyone has actually done a study on the backgrounds of people who report UFOs. Are amateur astronomers etc. really less common among them than they are in the general population? And does this also apply to the "high strangeness" type reports? [/QUOTE]

Verification