Cont: UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[Stray Cat]

I already realise I'm peeing into the wind here, but who needs sleep?

Shows how close you read my post and looked at the illustration, which was stated as being not perfect and primarily to illustrate the ideas, but even so, if you look at the black arc on the red line ... that is where I suggested the smoke line may have been for a slow approach and power turn/accelleration... and it's not 8 miles.

You're right, it's not

The black line indicating where the smoke would be is only 5 miles across Johnson's line of sight. Remind me, did Johnson happen to mention a 5 mile wide streak with a solid looking blob at one end?

Of course, the mistake I made was not realising that the actual plane would turn invisible once it had stopped belching out magic smoke, because in your inaccurate diagram (that you did as fluff in lieu of not actually being bothered to do any calculations with real numbers and stuff)
The arc of the plane extends well beyond the smoke line thus, the distance the plane would travel across Johnson's line of sight would be 8.2 miles.

And apparently wouldn't be seen in the remains of the magic disappearing smoke, but about 3 miles to the left of it.

Are you starting to see why we actually do calculations yet and not just rely on our "regular guy without any professional air experience" guesses?

For an actual takeoff the line would have been in another place altogether.

Yes, and for it to not have been there at all it would also have been in a different place altogether.

 

[ufology]

Well it was definitely a UFO, but how do you know it was not an alien craft?

I don't know with any certainty it was not a UFO or other alien thing, I just don't have sufficient reason to think it was either.

 

[Akhenaten]

I respectfully disagree.

Presents at least one fact not in evidence.

Would a cloud fool you or anyone else here except maybe GeeMack ( he said he was fooled by a mountain top once )?

I'm absolutely positive that all of us have been fooled into thinking that what we were looking at was something else at some stage.

Is attempting to turn a simple statement of this obvious fact into an insult part of what you refer to as 'respectful disgrement'?

The term as you use it certain is counterintuitive, I must say.

Clouds have never fooled me into thinking I was looking at an airplane.

You don't know that.

My house faces west and I watch airplanes and clouds daily. I've viewed both through binoculars many times and at many different times of day, including sunset. I've seen so many it would be pointless to guess how many. Yet never once ... including the dozens and dozens of lenticular clouds I've seen have I ever confused one with an aircraft.

Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy so what do you reckon pretending that the appelant is the authority should be called? Delusion? Straw clutchery?

Now I'm just an average guy ... so why would I think multiple experienced airmen would be less competent than me ... and why would you think you are more competent that they are ... and you weren't even there yourself. Sorry but if they say they considered a cloud and after some study they all ruled it out, then it's just not reasonable to insist it had to be a cloud.

That's why the only thing that's being insisted on is that it was a UFO ( UFO )

If there was any major error, it's more likely to be in the distances, which I've shown through example can be ( under the right circumstances ) much closer than the other estimates used by proponents of the cloud theory.

You can shout this claim from the rooftops and stamp your widdle foot until your toes fall off but it'll never be true.

You've shown no such thing, other than for values of 'showing' that include reapeatedly whining "'tis so!"

It is also just more logical from a common sense point of view. For example suppose you are flying and you see another aircraft. Which bit of information is more likely to be in error:

A: The exact distance to the aircraft.
B: That it is actually an aircraft.

I'd say neither. What do your calculations show?

If we're being honest we'll admit that it's much more likely that we can be sure we are looking at an aircraft than it is to know the exact distance to it. So if we're close enough to be sure it's some kind of flying craft, then the distance estimates are probably the ones that are off. It doesn't matter if we can make out the exact make and model. Those details aren't even all that relevant to our case. Then add in that this flying craft was seen over a military base with an airport ... really how much more obvious does this need to get?

It's quite noticeable that despite admonishing everyone else not to jump to the cloud conclusion, everything you say about this case indicates that you have arrived at the aircraft conclusion and won't be budged from it.

 

[ufology]

I already realise I'm peeing into the wind here, but who needs sleep?



You're right, it's not

The black line indicating where the smoke would be is only 5 miles across Johnson's line of sight. Remind me, did Johnson happen to mention a 5 mile wide streak with a solid looking blob at one end?

Of course, the mistake I made was not realising that the actual plane would turn invisible once it had stopped belching out magic smoke, because in your inaccurate diagram (that you did as fluff in lieu of not actually being bothered to do any calculations with real numbers and stuff)
The arc of the plane extends well beyond the smoke line thus, the distance the plane would travel across Johnson's line of sight would be 8.2 miles.

And apparently wouldn't be seen in the remains of the magic disappearing smoke, but about 3 miles to the left of it.

Are you starting to see why we actually do calculations yet and not just rely on our "regular guy without any professional air experience" guesses?


Yes, and for it to not have been there at all it would also have been in a different place altogether.

Again the measurement on my diagram isn't of the black mark along the red line just after the start of the turn, but of the entire turn radius. I accept that the black part of the line does not stand out huge ... but it is definitely there. And you'll notice I didn't say it was a perfect representation. But it's good enough to get the idea across and could be made more precise ... I just don't have the time or inclination for this case. Give me a reason I should think the object was a UFO ( alien craft ) and that might get my attention. As for what Johnson saw ... yet another time: He didn't know how long the black thing was there before he saw it, ( the thing that he originally thought was jet smoke ), but by the time he got his binoculars on it, there was a black object heading out through a layer of haze that could easily have been the dissipating smoke. Then as it started to speed away, the pursuing air observers ended up coming in behind it at some distance and watched the aircraft as it disappeared into the distance ... it's really quite simple. As for your calculations, I'm glad you are having fun with them but garbage in = garbage out and since we really don't have any precise and verifiable numbers to work with, any calculations are just reflections of our own theories ... they don't actually prove anything unless they are way way way outside the possible margin of error, which as you are so fond of pointing out, is in your opinion almost astronomical whenever human estmates are concerned.

 

[Akhenaten]

From the USAF definition of UFO:

<irrelevance>

What does the 'U' In 'UFO' stand for, ufology?

 

[Akhenaten]

I don't know with any certainty it was not a UFO or other alien thing, I just don't have sufficient reason to think it was either.

Cool! Bonus question.


What does the 'U' in 'UFO' stand for, ufology?

 

[Stray Cat]

From the USAF definition of UFO:

"Aircraft flares, jet exhausts, condensation trails, blinking or steady lights observed at night, lights circling or near airports and airways, and other similar phenomena resulting from, or indications of aircraft. These should not be reported under this regulation as they do not fall within the definition of a UFO."

Just wondering what the cut off point is for "near airports and airways" before it's not classed as a UFO.

 

[Akhenaten]

Again the measurement on my diagram isn't of the black mark along the red line just after the start of the turn, but of the entire turn radius. I accept that the black part of the line does not stand out huge ... but it is definitely there.

Remind me, ufology, what is the significance of the black part of the line?

And you'll notice I didn't say it was a perfect representation. But it's good enough to get the idea across and could be made more precise ... I just don't have the time or inclination for this case.

That's why your pronouncements about it are being universally rejected, and yet you seem to think this is unjustified.

Give me a reason I should think the object was a UFO ( alien craft )

Because until it's shown to be otherwise, there's no such thing as a UFO ( alien craft ).

. . . and that might get my attention.

Your attention is irrelevant.

As for what Johnson saw ... yet another time: He didn't know how long the black thing was there before he saw it, ( the thing that he originally thought was jet smoke ), but by the time he got his binoculars on it, there was a black object heading out through a layer of haze that could easily have been the dissipating smoke.

Or a formation of witches breaking up.

 

[Stray Cat]

It's about honing your critical thinking skills, not working out whether the object was definitively a cloud, or definitively a plane or witch or flying saucer or wotnot.

Of course, we've all been overlooking the obvious...



... It was nothing more than a "wotnot"

Case closed, now what happened to that pair of flying scissors that overtook the plane who's very experienced trustworthy pilot who was flying his aircraft from the third passenger seat from the back whilst taking photos out of the window?

 

[23_Tauri]

From the USAF definition of UFO:

"Aircraft flares, jet exhausts, condensation trails, blinking or steady lights observed at night, lights circling or near airports and airways, and other similar phenomena resulting from, or indications of aircraft. These should not be reported under this regulation as they do not fall within the definition of a UFO."

What I find odd is that the USAF were so sure that aliens weren't interested in having a closer look at our airports, therefore enabling them to rule out any unidentified things seen near airports or airways as being of alien origin. After all, aliens in their little saucers were very interested in missile bases and had spent plenty of flying hours hovering around Malmstrom AFB, so why not airports too?

 

[23_Tauri]

Of course, we've all been overlooking the obvious...



... It was nothing more than a "wotnot"

It was. It was witches' wotnot n'all.

Case closed, now what happened to that pair of flying scissors that overtook the plane who's very experienced trustworthy pilot who was flying his aircraft from the third passenger seat from the back whilst taking photos out of the window?

They're very talented these highly trained pilots, they can do it from the back of the plane too!

Aren't you asleep yet?

 

[Stray Cat]

Again the measurement on my diagram isn't of the black mark along the red line just after the start of the turn, but of the entire turn radius.

What does this even mean?
Originally you said the black line represented the black smoke.
Are you changing your mind now?
If you're not, that would make the black smoke trail 5 miles wide across Johnson's field of vision.

I accept that the black part of the line does not stand out huge ... but it is definitely there.

I know, I measured it.

And you'll notice I didn't say it was a perfect representation. But it's good enough to get the idea across and could be made more precise ... I just don't have the time or inclination for this case.

That's part of the problem with ufologists, they never have time to do anything precise. Too busy trying to cut corners to try and prove their conclusion to bother with accuracy.

Give me a reason I should think the object was a UFO ( alien craft ) and that might get my attention.

That very experienced aircraft designer, ultra trustworthy, trained observer and celebrated engineering genius Kelly Johnson concluded:
"I should state that for at least five years I have definitely believed in the possibility that flying saucers exist - this in spite of a good deal of kidding from my technical associates. Having seen this particular object on December 16th, I am now more firmly convinced than ever that such devices exist and I have some highly technical converts in this belief as of this date"
Now unless you think he could have been fooled without knowing it. Then isn't it flying saucers that you're wanting to investigate?

The fact that the report is actually called:
Sighting of a Fly Saucer by certain Lockheed Aircraft Operation Personnel on 16 december 1953
Sort of gives it away doesn't it?

Unless he was wrong about it.

As for what Johnson saw ... yet another time: He didn't know how long the black thing was there before he saw it, ( the thing that he originally thought was jet smoke ), but by the time he got his binoculars on it, there was a black object heading out through a layer of haze that could easily have been the dissipating smoke. Then as it started to speed away, the pursuing air observers ended up coming in behind it at some distance and watched the aircraft as it disappeared into the distance ... it's really quite simple.

Meh, already covered once in this post;
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7993170&postcount=725
I'm not going through it again.
You haven't offered anything new, just re asserted the same unfounded stuff I questioned you about last time that you didn't answer.

As for your calculations, I'm glad you are having fun with them but garbage in = garbage out

The irony, it burns.

and since we really don't have any precise and verifiable numbers to work with,

Well, we haven't had any precise and verifiable numbers from you.
Mine have all been as precise as I have stated they are and all verifiable against the accurate diagrams I have drawn. GeeMacks similarly... yours not so much.

any calculations are just reflections of our own theories

You see, I keep wondering how spectacularly wronger you can get and you manage it every time.

Listen very carefully: I don't have a theory yet.

... they don't actually prove anything unless they are way way way outside the possible margin of error, which as you are so fond of pointing out, is in your opinion almost astronomical whenever human estmates are concerned.

Please stop telling lies about my opinion, it is nothing of the kind and I've pointed it out to you more than three times already quite recently.

BTW: I'm not trying to "prove" anything. I'm just looking objectively at the evidence and seeing where it goes. Try it yourself sometime, you get much more accurate results and if you get in the habit of doing it correctly, when that real alien flying saucer report lands on your desk, you;ll be able to investigate it accurately and non the of the nasty sceptics will be able to criticise you for just making stuff up when you want to fill a gap in the story.

 

[Stray Cat]

What I find odd is that the USAF were so sure that aliens weren't interested in having a closer look at our airports, therefore enabling them to rule out any unidentified things seen near airports or airways as being of alien origin. After all, aliens in their little saucers were very interested in missile bases and had spent plenty of flying hours hovering around Malmstrom AFB, so why not airports too?

Just think how many airports there are in Washington DC.

Dulles
Reagan
Andrews

For starters those are just the big ones... can't have been any UFO's over Washington either.

 

[Akhenaten]

Just think how many airports there are in Washington DC.

Dulles
Reagan
Andrews

For starters those are just the big ones... can't have been any UFO's over Washington either.

Major (blue) and minor (solid pink) controlled airports and
uncontrolled (unfilled pink) airports in the Washington area​

 

[Stray Cat]

Well there's no space for any real UFOs to fly in then.

Witches have no fear of airports.

 

[Sideroxylon]

That's part of the problem with ufologists, they never have time to do anything precise. Too busy trying to cut corners to try and prove their conclusion to bother with accuracy.

QFT. Also quite odd given our very own UFOgists lifetime interest in the subject. Sadly he has so little to show for it in terms of research skills or case knowledge. There are a lot of people who manage to reach a high level of competency in hobbies they are passionate about. You wouldn't expect someone presenting themselves as an expert or even a long-time passionate amateur with their own website to be so half arsed.

 

[Stray Cat]

Indeed, I'd call myself a UFOlogist but I wouldn't want to be tarred with the same brush.


But I have made a good case for this Johnson/Lockheed case being a flying saucer.

 

[GeeMack]

I don't know with any certainty it was not a UFO or other alien thing, I just don't have sufficient reason to think it was either.

As long as it remains unidentified it will be a UFO, your persistent demand that we accept your dishonest redefinition notwithstanding.

 

[Tomtomkent]

What does the 'U' In 'UFO' stand for, ufology?

Alien?


No...


Hmmm. If only I had a wrod to describe something I couldn't identify.

 

[23_Tauri]

[qimg]http://www.yvonneclaireadams.com/HostedStuff/WashingtonAirports.jpg[/qimg]
Major (blue) and minor (solid pink) controlled airports and
uncontrolled (unfilled pink) airports in the Washington area​

ooh goody this game is fun!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Lights

The Phoenix Lights (sometimes referred to as the, "Lights over Phoenix") were a series of widely sighted unidentified flying objects observed in the skies over the U.S. states of, Arizona, Nevada and the Mexican state of Sonora on March 13, 1997.

Lights of varying descriptions were seen by thousands of people between 19:30 and 22:30 MST, in a space of about 300 miles, from the Nevada line, through Phoenix, to the edge of Tucson.