Ufo Files Declassified

[Skeddan]

Lots of evidence for UFOs - but what these unidentified phenomena are remains a mystery.

 

http://ufopressrelease.nationalarchives.gov.uk/

 

MoD (Air Secretariat) 2a is responsible for coordinating UFO reports. While there are many sightings, their remit is limited to possible defence implications, and they do not carry out investigations unless a clear threat to the security of the UK has been identified.

 

Because there are many possible natural explanations for these sightings of unusual non-identifiable objects in the sky (satellite debris, meteorological balloons, ball lightning, meteorological phenomena, light refractions etc.), these are not investigated by MoD AS 2a.

 

Not a big cover up - rather defence funding does not cover scientific investigation of such phenomena, and MoD files are classified as a matter of course.

 

I saw a UFO once - in New Mexico. My guess was that it was a satellite and some kind of mirage type effect as sunlight reflecting off this bounced back off the atmosphere - magnifying it and making it shimmer and move in very strange ways.

[Jimcalagon]

I don't believe in the ET hypothesis of UFOs - rather it is more likely that the vast majority are misidentified natural phenomena, aircraft, space debris etc. I think there are probably a hard core (maybe less than 1%) of sightings which are hard to explain though.

 

Also I did once see ball lightning which, until relatively recently, was regarded as complete rubbish by most scientists.

[Sebrof]

I don't believe in the ET hypothesis of UFOs - rather it is more likely that the vast majority are misidentified natural phenomena, aircraft, space debris etc. I think there are probably a hard core (maybe less than 1%) of sightings which are hard to explain though.

 

So what is your theory on those?

 

S

[bluemonday]

I've seen one or two things in the sky that I couldn't explain one way or another so I'm keeping an open mind.

Foolish to assume as written in stone that we are alone in the universe.

[don fugazi]

I see things every day that I can't explain one way or another. The latest and most baffling being "Strictly Come Dancing".

[Jimcalagon]

I don't believe in the ET hypothesis of UFOs - rather it is more likely that the vast majority are misidentified natural phenomena, aircraft, space debris etc. I think there are probably a hard core (maybe less than 1%) of sightings which are hard to explain though.

 

So what is your theory on those?

 

S

 

Most likely classified experimental aircraft.

[Jimcalagon]

I've seen one or two things in the sky that I couldn't explain one way or another so I'm keeping an open mind.

Foolish to assume as written in stone that we are alone in the universe.

 

I agree that we are most likely not alone in the universe but the probability that there are any advanced alien civilisations close enough to us to actually visit has to be incredibly small. When looking at these things it's always best to keep Occam's Razor close at hand.

[bluemonday]

On the subject of experimental aircraft etc, Remember the 'Silent Vulcan UFO' reports back in the 90s, spanning several years flying along the Pennines?

So called because the craft in question resembled the old Vulcan bomber and was silent (obviously ) - if you look at the US stealth bombers, that might be an explanation in that particular case.

[BillyPilgrim]

Didn't some military guy or astronaut recently come out in the papers and confirm that they knew Aliens existed.

[Jimcalagon]

Didn't some military guy or astronaut recently come out in the papers and confirm that they knew Aliens existed.

 

Lots of people have said lots of things. At least one astronaut said they felt the presence of God on the moon. Doesn't make it true. David Icke said that the Isle of Man would sink into the sea in 1999. We're still here.

 

I'd love the alien hypothesis to be true but there is not one shred of hard evidence to support. Don't you think after more than 60 years of investigation, someone would have found something?

[Mutley]

[Albert Tatlock]

I'd love the alien hypothesis to be true but there is not one shred of hard evidence to support. Don't you think after more than 60 years of investigation, someone would have found something?

I agree the evidence so far is pretty flimsy, much of it, if not all, non-evidence and 'hysteria'. However, just because nothing concrete has been seen yet, doesn't mean there isn't something out there, or hasn't been something out there, or won't be something out there.

 

The universe is a big arsed place, and even a craft from the nearest star would take 4 years at the speed of light to get here. We've discovered something like 300 (Jupiter like) planets orbiting stars in the past few years, and are only starting to learn where to look. With new space telescopes over the next 10 to 20 years we will soon be able to detect earth size planets operating in the habitable zone around stars.

 

However, another thing to consider is the age of the universe and the number of potential civilisations that we have also missed or haven't started yet. If the universe is around 15 billion years old, and you equate that to a 24 hour clock, humans have only been around for a few seconds before midnight, and only started to develop the technology to look out there in the past few milliseconds. You also have to take into account the probability of civilisations 'overlapping' too on those timescales.

 

I think it is pretty much a certainty that there is, and has been, 'life' elsewhere. There are something like 10^11 to 10^12 stars in our galaxy, and there are perhaps something like 10^11 or 10^12 galaxies that we know of so far - with those odds it's just a matter of time and technology before we find something. IMO, if anything, by not seeing much evidence yet it proves Einstein was right in that the speed of light is a limiting factor in terms of travel.

 

Anyhoo, which advanced race would be arsed spending many hundreds, if not thousands, millions or even billions of years travelling (with the kids saying 'are we there yet') to see a group of 'ants', who pass green bits of paper to each other, eat up all of their resources till they have to fight over them, or move on to do the same in another area?

[Sebrof]

I'd love the alien hypothesis to be true but there is not one shred of hard evidence to support. Don't you think after more than 60 years of investigation, someone would have found something?

I agree the evidence so far is pretty flimsy, much of it, if not all, non-evidence and 'hysteria'. However, just because nothing concrete has been seen yet, doesn't mean there isn't something out there, or hasn't been something out there, or won't be something out there.

 

The universe is a big arsed place, and even a craft from the nearest star would take 4 years at the speed of light to get here. We've discovered something like 300 (Jupiter like) planets orbiting stars in the past few years, and are only starting to learn where to look. With new space telescopes over the next 10 to 20 years we will soon be able to detect earth size planets operating in the habitable zone around stars.

 

However, another thing to consider is the age of the universe and the number of potential civilisations that we have also missed or haven't started yet. If the universe is around 15 billion years old, and you equate that to a 24 hour clock, humans have only been around for a few seconds before midnight, and only started to develop the technology to look out there in the past few milliseconds. You also have to take into account the probability of civilisations 'overlapping' too on those timescales.

 

I think it is pretty much a certainty that there is, and has been, 'life' elsewhere. There are something like 10^11 to 10^12 stars in our galaxy, and there are perhaps something like 10^11 or 10^12 galaxies that we know of so far - with those odds it's just a matter of time and technology before we find something. IMO, if anything, by not seeing much evidence yet it proves Einstein was right in that the speed of light is a limiting factor in terms of travel.

 

Anyhoo, which advanced race would be arsed spending many hundreds, if not thousands, millions or even billions of years travelling (with the kids saying 'are we there yet') to see a group of 'ants', who pass green bits of paper to each other, eat up all of their resources till they have to fight over them, or move on to do the same in another area?

 

My view is that the odds that there are, have been, or may in future be, other forms of intelligent life in the universe are quite high, but the likelihood that we will ever meet them is extremely low.

 

Like religion, people believe this stuff because they want to, not because it make sense.

 

S

[Skeddan]

My view is that the odds that there are, have been, or may in future be, other forms of intelligent life [elsewhere] in the universe are quite high, but the likelihood that we will ever meet them is extremely low.

We have already encountered other forms of intelligent life in the universe - dolphins. It's not a facetious point - too often people think humans are the only intelligent lifeform known so far, so wonder if perhaps we are alone.

 

I also wonder if the technological means of inter-stellar travel would require a species with similar deficiencies and maladaptiveness in other respects which technology use compensates for. Possibly it may also be necessary to have the kind of fragility, destructiveness and propensity to unsustainability seen in humans. If so, it might be incredibly exceptional for such a species to progress to such an advanced level before it wipes itself out or sends itself back into a stone age.

[immortalpuppet]

If another civilisation of alien life exsists then i wouldnt know why the fuck they would want to come here, if they have a way of space travel then i am sure there will be better forms of life than what we have turned ourselves into.