Archer17 said:
If you are going to seriously tell me that you think someone doesn't know the difference between a spotlight(s) and an pontential extraterrestrial craft then you are more cynical than I am. I'm only proposing they don't know the difference between a laser image and potential extraterrestrial craft ..
LOL...I am telling you that someone might confuse a particular type of spotlight display with a potential extraterrestrial craft, yes. But only because of my own personal experience with precisely that reaction! I was truly and honestly freaked out by the display (I suppose I should go into more detail--as Kittynh guesses, it was on a cloudy night. The lights whirled around each other against the background of the clouds, such that the lights grew and shrank and moved...of course, size, speed, and distance are only interpreted in our visual system by visual angle, so variations in size can be interpreted as changes in direction and speed...in addition, their distance from me was unknown. Without a known size, the distance could only be guessed; in my case, I guessed wrong, apparently, because I thought I'd be approaching it quickly. Instead, it appeared to stay ahead of me much longer than I thought it should; the perception, of course, was that it was moving away from me. At this point, despite my skeptical credentials, my pulse was racing, my breath more shallow, and I was starting to really freak out. Mrs. Mercutio was asleep in the passenger's seat, so I had no other witness to check my own perceptions against. I was honestly relieved, if a bit embarassed, to find that I had been fooled by spotlights.).
So, humilating as it may be, I advanced this explanation because it happened to me. Had I turned off the highway before I found out the truth, I might not have this explanation, and I might scoff at it as you do. I'd thumb my nose at the silly attempt to explain so remarkable experience with such a mundane reality. But, in fact, while it may not be the explanation for Kittynh's eyewitness, it is a perfectly adequate and parsimonious explanation for the experience.
I would also suggest, Archer17, that you look at the number of different objects that have been reported as UFO's over the years. (If memory serves, there are stories of law enforcement officers on a high-speed, interstate chase of...the planet Venus. The UFO reported by President Jimmy Carter was also Venus.)
Here and
here are a couple of places to start. Our visual system is imperfect, especially under dim or dark conditions, and what we see is coloured by our expectations (and once the "maybe it's a UFO" idea pops in, it is very easy to look for confirmatory evidence).
This is not lazy skepticism. This is skepticism based on a thorough understanding of perceptual systems, and an attempt to be parsimonious. Looking for a more complex and less common explanation just because you refuse to believe that one could be fooled by spotlights seems odd to me.
The real article here, I humbly suggest, is on Kitty's work as the UFO expert, and her experiences with the individuals who come to her. It sounds like there is quite an art to telling people "yes, you saw something, but it was most likely not what you thought it was" without them hearing an implicit ", you idiot". And it sounds like Kitty does it well.
