UAP Report and the Standard Model

[Cobul]

Here is the report submitted

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57619755

"UFO report: US finds no explanation for sightings

The US government has said it has no explanation for dozens of unidentified flying objects seen by military pilots.
A Pentagon report released on Friday says of 144 reports made about the phenomena since 2004, all but one remain unexplained."

It means 143 remains unexplained.

In moments like this. I think the best way to think about it is that Standard Model rules the universe. Any observation that is in conflict with the standard model must be violently rejected?

As I sleep tonight. I think of contemplating on the mantra "standard model, standard model rules.. PF.. PF". I think we will forget about the report soon if we all do that. PF being the fiercest defender of the standard model, right?

Second. I guess we must think human lives are the standard creatures of the universe. Anything else is blasphemy, for example. The thought about creatures that evolve in the dark matter universe that somehow can revert to our baryonic matter by eating something in our universe, explaining these shape shifting UFOs. Some military intelligence units were thinking of this already.

 

[Cobul]

Why are UAP topic so boring already?

It's because as one researcher of the Pentagon tv documentary put it something like this "This has been going on decades before. And they are just repeating it over and over again".

The phenomenon can somehow adapt to culture. For example. over 100 years ago, they disguised as airships, or as foo fighters in world war 2. They can copy cultural, collective or different temporal fashion or mass thought patterns.

So we are not dealing with something from Star Trek. This means no Spock, or Vulcan technology or cloaking device. But something that simply can shapeshift. The whole object seems to be alive and a shapeshifter.

Some military units just believed the words of RAF Air Marshal Sir Victor Goddard, KCB, CBE, MA, a very high-ranking member of British government who in May 3, 1969 gave a public lecture at Caxton Hall in London, in which he cited these main points:

"“That while it may be that some operators of UFO are normally the paraphysical denizens of a planet other than Earth, there is no logical need for this to be so. For, if the materiality of UFO is paraphysical (and consequently normally invisible), UFO could more plausibly be creations of an invisible world coincident with the space of our physical Earth planet than creations in the paraphysical realms of any other physical planet in the solar system. . . . Given that real UFO are paraphysical, capable of reflecting light like ghosts; and given also that (according to many observers) they remain visible as they change position at ultrahigh speeds from one point to another, it follows that those that remain visible in transition do not dematerialize for that swift transition, and therefore, their mass must be of a diaphanous (very diffuse) nature, and their substance relatively etheric . . . . The observed validity of this supports the paraphysical assertion and makes the likelihood of UFO being Earth-created greater than the likelihood of their creation on another planet. . . . The astral world of illusion, which (on psychical evidence) is greatly inhabited by illusion-prone spirits, is well known for its multifarious imaginative activities and exhortations. Seemingly some of its denizens are eager to exemplify principalities and powers. Others pronounce upon morality, spirituality, Deity, etc . All of these astral exponents who invoke human consciousness may be sincere, but many of their theses may be framed to propagate some special phantasm, perhaps of an earlier incarnation, or to indulge an inveterate and continuing technological urge toward materialistic progress , or simply to astonish and disturb the gullible for the devil of it”.

No Vulcan technology or Borg Queen or beam me up Scotty. So boring, isn't it?

 

[russ_watters]

Why are UAP topic so boring already?

Thanks for posting about this, I'd been meaning to start the discussion, but...

I downloaded the report, but when I saw it was only 9 pages I realized it was pointless (and my expectations were already low) and didn't even bother to start reading it yet. Heck, I didn't even bother to read the rest of your post! 9 pages means it includes precisely zero analysis of any individual incidents, and only talks in broad strokes about the overall issue. No doubt it says all the bland/basic/pointless things we already know...

...which surely answers the basic question.

But I'll eventually get bored enough to read it and provide a more detailed response.

 

[atyy]

No Vulcan technology or Borg Queen or beam me up Scotty. So boring, isn't it?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I became fascinated with this subject almost 40 years ago when I was randomly assigned the topic for a college English paper. As the internet came of age and I discovered more and more declassified military UFO reports in the archives at the NSA, DOD, CIA, FBI, Air Force, Navy, and other government institutions and entities, I started reading until I had read the 2000 or so reports available at that time; some going back to the so-called Foo Fighters of WWII. I stay informed on the latest and have followed the subject with great interest ever since. I am fairly well versed in most of the famous and most compelling cases.

I had hoped to one day reach a definitive conclusion on the subject but that hasn't happened yet. If I had to bet my life one way or the other, I would bet we have been visited by something either not of this time, or not of this place; and we have been for a very long time. In fact if taken at face value, the most impressive reports leave little doubt of that.

Clearly we are not being given all of the information the military has in its possession even when they release information. For example. a review of the testimony of the pilots clearly indicates that famous tic tac video only shows a fraction of the data from that event. And none of it shows the most intriguing events claimed by the pilots. We should be able to confirm or debunk the pilots' detailed testimony with multiple videos and other information like RADAR tracks from both the aircraft and the ship, as they described for example in their 60 Minutes interview. But instead we get a few seconds of basically nothing.

One of the paradoxes of this problem is that when one really thinks things through, there is very little that could be offered as the so-called "extraordinary" scientific evidence required to convince skeptics et al that ET or similar is here. Almost any claimed evidence could be dismissed as either fake, or due to equipment errors or anomalies, or human error or hallucinations, or a laboratory error. There are plenty of highly credible reports that seemingly defy any known prosaic explanation.

 

[Bandersnatch]

One of the paradoxes of this problem is that when one really thinks things through, there is very little that could be offered as the so-called "extraordinary" scientific evidence required to convince skeptics et al that ET or similar is here. Almost any claimed evidence could be dismissed as either fake, or due to equipment errors or anomalies, or human error or hallucinations, or a laboratory error. There are plenty of highly credible reports that seemingly defy any known prosaic explanation.

Whether a story is credible or incredible is in the eyes of the beholder, so we need to rely on established standards for evidence. There have always been werewolves and dancing faerie just beyond the edge of the firelight. They will keep popping up, no matter how technologically advanced we get, because the monkey brain stays the same.
It's not hard to imagine a convincing set of data, repeatedly captured in full sight of scientific instruments littering the globe, and corroborated by high-res satellite images. Heck, even a mass sighting at an academic institution would be more convincing - at least they might scramble to gather some actual data.
Instead we get a rehash of the same old personal stories, likely glitches, and pareidolia, released by a by-design secretive organisation, whose secretive nature is used to plug the holes to one's liking (the actual evidence must be in what they DIDN'T release!). It's not like the US military is the sole purveyor of truth, or the aliens have an exclusive crush on US aviators (or maybe they're weird like that?).

The opening of this thread makes me sad. It's one thing to fancy aliens being out there, while acknowledging the lack of convincing evidence either way. It's another thing to see more unconvincing evidence and run with it, rambling about gatekeepers of the 'standard model' and shapeshifting dark matter aliens.

So yeah, the whole thing is kinda boring, since it's nothing new under the sun.

 

[russ_watters]

Clearly we are not being given all of the information the military has in its possession even when they release information. For example. a review of the testimony of the pilots clearly indicates that famous tic tac video only shows a fraction of the data from that event. And none of it shows the most intriguing events claimed by the pilots. We should be able to confirm or debunk the pilots' detailed testimony with multiple videos and other information like RADAR tracks from both the aircraft and the ship, as they described for example in their 60 Minutes interview. But instead we get a few seconds of basically nothing.

That's what I had hoped for as well; a complete accounting/deconstruction of that event in particular (and any other that might be compelling). The pilot's account is pretty compelling on its own, but there's no way to know just how compelling it is without seeing the full evidence and analysis. I'm not sure if the Pentagon is even doing that (maybe the report says...).

One of the paradoxes of this problem is that when one really thinks things through, there is very little that could be offered as the so-called "extraordinary" scientific evidence required to convince skeptics et al that ET or similar is here. Almost any claimed evidence could be dismissed as either fake, or due to equipment errors or anomalies, or human error or hallucinations, or a laboratory error. There are plenty of highly credible reports that seemingly defy any known prosaic explanation.

It's really disappointing that you continue to make this false claim despite your extensive experience with this issue, including discussion on PF/with me. It's just plain not true. And there's two parts to this:

1. The vast majority of even claimed skeptics, such as myself, would be delighted to see truly compelling (convincing) evidence. I'd love to meet ET - as long as it's Vulcans and not Romulans, of course.

2. Examples of what convincing evidence could look like are obvious. A flying saucer landing on the White House lawn and ET climbing out for a meet-and-greet would be irrefutable. The fact that the evidence we have doesn't come anywhere close to that level of compelling is not our (skeptics) fault.
The fact that the typical evidence sucks isn't a feature that can be explained away by blaming the people examining it. There's no such thing here as 'this is all we have, so it has to be good enough'. No, it doesn't. The fact of the matter is that even the seemingly very compelling cases like the Navy/tic-tacs case only rise to a Cold Fusion or 9/11 conspiracy theory level of compelling.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I confess I found the whole SM comparison confusing, and what parts I understood I found a stretch.

I look at it this way: since the 1940's the amount of sensor data - mostly from cameras - has gone up by call it a factor of a million. In the 1940's, we had a few phenomena right at the edge of measurement. After having increased our ability to measure by this million, we still have a few phenomena right at the (new) edge of measurement.

 

[U_S19]

Why are UAP topic so boring already?

It's because as one researcher of the Pentagon tv documentary put it something like this "This has been going on decades before. And they are just repeating it over and over again".

The phenomenon can somehow adapt to culture. For example. over 100 years ago, they disguised as airships, or as foo fighters in world war 2. They can copy cultural, collective or different temporal fashion or mass thought patterns.

So we are not dealing with something from Star Trek. This means no Spock, or Vulcan technology or cloaking device. But something that simply can shapeshift. The whole object seems to be alive and a shapeshifter.

Some military units just believed the words of RAF Air Marshal Sir Victor Goddard, KCB, CBE, MA, a very high-ranking member of British government who in May 3, 1969 gave a public lecture at Caxton Hall in London, in which he cited these main points:

"“That while it may be that some operators of UFO are normally the paraphysical denizens of a planet other than Earth, there is no logical need for this to be so. For, if the materiality of UFO is paraphysical (and consequently normally invisible), UFO could more plausibly be creations of an invisible world coincident with the space of our physical Earth planet than creations in the paraphysical realms of any other physical planet in the solar system. . . . Given that real UFO are paraphysical, capable of reflecting light like ghosts; and given also that (according to many observers) they remain visible as they change position at ultrahigh speeds from one point to another, it follows that those that remain visible in transition do not dematerialize for that swift transition, and therefore, their mass must be of a diaphanous (very diffuse) nature, and their substance relatively etheric . . . . The observed validity of this supports the paraphysical assertion and makes the likelihood of UFO being Earth-created greater than the likelihood of their creation on another planet. . . . The astral world of illusion, which (on psychical evidence) is greatly inhabited by illusion-prone spirits, is well known for its multifarious imaginative activities and exhortations. Seemingly some of its denizens are eager to exemplify principalities and powers. Others pronounce upon morality, spirituality, Deity, etc . All of these astral exponents who invoke human consciousness may be sincere, but many of their theses may be framed to propagate some special phantasm, perhaps of an earlier incarnation, or to indulge an inveterate and continuing technological urge toward materialistic progress , or simply to astonish and disturb the gullible for the devil of it”.

No Vulcan technology or Borg Queen or beam me up Scotty. So boring, isn't it?

"Boring...". If this label is directed at describing the craft/technology/entities then it is certainly unfounded.

The observed, recorded and analyzed data is quite the opposite. So much so, that upon closer investigation of these "objects" (as I define them based on discovery and hard data) where the "craft" label seems to be incorrect with respect to my cases, always seem to only raise more questions and provide little answers. The approach has largely been attempting to discover clues. Through observation of these objects it is obvious there are beyond advanced technology processes being exhibited. From cloaking/invisibility, the ability to maneuver/travel using what appears to be methods that defy imagination and quite possibly physics (not referring to speed, although that is another aspect of it).

The inconsistency of the ability to determine the shape and structural features of these objects is absolutely mind-blowing. One would think that if a photo or video were to be taken of one of these gray disc objects for example, that upon closer examination of the photo or video that one would observe a gray shaped disc,...but not so.

The technology behind these objects begins to defy imagination.
Anyone who believes they can explain one particular characteristic that I have yet to describe, please reply to this.

 

[russ_watters]

I think this thread ran its course and doesn't need to be resurrected. Thread closed.