it was fast: 3,600 mph

Page 1 of 3123>
December 19th, 2017 at 8:14:08 AM permalink
reno
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 57
Posts: 1043
On December 16, 2017 the New York Times reported that during the first 2 weeks of November 2004, the US Navy was monitoring a UFO near San Diego.

What we know about this mysterious aircraft:
- 46 feet long
- Oval-shaped like a giant white Tic-Tac
- No wings
- No rotors
- No windows
- No engines
- No plumes or exhaust
- Altitude ranged from 50 feet to 80,000 feet above the Pacific Ocean
- Able to travel 60 miles in less than 1 minute (over 3,600 mph)

On the morning of November 14, 2004 the Navy sent several F/A-18 Super Hornets from the USS Nimitz to investigate the object, but the fighters weren't fast enough to keep up with the UFO.

As UFO sightings go, the evidence is persuasive:
- the 12 eyewitnesses were all experienced Navy pilots
- the USS Princeton observed the UFO on radar
- a lengthy paper trail of official US Navy documents
- infrared video of the encounter authenticated by the US Dept of Defense
- audio recordings of the pilots describing the object in real time

Perhaps the eyewitnesses all got it wrong, but the USS Princeton was equipped with SPY-1, which in 2004 was the most sophisticated and powerful tactical radar on the planet. It's unlikely that the radar was malfunctioning.

Is any of this true? Who knows. But the evidence has been vetted by the New York Times fact-checkers for an article written by 2 journalists with Pulitzer Prizes under their belts. If you're a skeptic who'd prefer to read a pilot's perspective, this 2015 article has even more details about the events of November 14, 2004.
December 19th, 2017 at 8:48:19 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 345
Posts: 12536
It's not a UFO if there's no cover-up :)
Donald Trump is a fucking liar
December 19th, 2017 at 8:56:14 AM permalink
odiousgambit
Member since: Oct 28, 2012
Threads: 94
Posts: 2353
Quote: reno
Is any of this true?


I keep thinking of the 18 yo's in a row, which has a known likelihood of 1 in the numerator and 18^18 in the denominator, assuming random [and let's say instead it's 10^18]. If you wanted to give an observer the benefit of the doubt and accept that there is only a one in a million chance he was wrong to report seeing 18 in a row, there is still a likelier explanation [that he was simply mistaken] by 12 orders of magnitude.

We don't know how to fashion the denominator for the chances that these UFOs are extraterrestrial in origin, but I would be willing to place the chances that this is not a hoax, or whatever, quite out there, but that it is an unexplained natural phenomenon not as far out there as one in a million overall with all these possibilities. But let's say it is in fact one in a million. I would still say natural phenomenon etc a more likelier explanation by many orders of magnitude - without being able to place it exactly.
Mustard:You like Kipling, Miss Scarlet? Sure, I'll eat anything [from movie]
December 19th, 2017 at 12:30:24 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 132
Posts: 6721
The technology may only be 100-150 years ahead of us. Imagine an F-!5 appearing in the skies in the mid 1800s just before the invention of the first combustion engine? Those vertical take-off are pretty impressive.
Nobody learned anything from the global financial crisis.
December 19th, 2017 at 12:41:09 PM permalink
Wizard
Administrator
Member since: Oct 23, 2012
Threads: 208
Posts: 4947
I personally find this story very interesting and wish it were pushed up in priority in the media.
Knowledge is Good -- Emil Faber
December 19th, 2017 at 2:23:03 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 345
Posts: 12536
Skepticism is your friend:

https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/pentagon-ufo-video/

Quote:
What about these new videos? They are the UFO equivalent of blobsquatch. Believers describe the incident in more dramatic terms:
Donald Trump is a fucking liar
December 19th, 2017 at 2:38:13 PM permalink
reno
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 57
Posts: 1043
Quote: Nareed


Here's a quote from the article you linked to:

Quote: Steven Novella
In reality, determining how big and therefore fast an object is requires knowledge of how distant it is. If the perception of distance is off, then interpretations of size and speed will be similarly off. So a small, slow, and near object may appear to be a large, fast and distant object, but that is just an optical illusion.

The pilots also report seeing the object “break the laws of physics.” That is always a red flag for me. If you think something is breaking the laws of physics, then there is likely an error in perception.


Optical illusions? These are pilots landing F-18s on an aircraft carrier... the pilot's life depends on interpreting size, distance, and speed correctly. Their life depends on not believing optical illusions!

But let's suppose that all 12 pilots thought that the slow object was a actually a fast object. They were all mistaken. We know that the UFO flew 60 miles in less than 1 minute... based upon the sophisticated radar on the USS Princeton. Radar isn't susceptible to optical illusions.
December 19th, 2017 at 3:33:31 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 345
Posts: 12536
Quote: reno
Optical illusions? These are pilots landing F-18s on an aircraft carrier... the pilot's life depends on interpreting size, distance, and speed correctly. Their life depends on not believing optical illusions!


And I completely buy the notion that these pilots know what to look for when they see out the windscreen at the Fresnel lens landing lights, a clear deck, as well as their instruments, and instructions from the Landing Signals Officer.


Quote:
But let's suppose that all 12 pilots thought that the slow object was a actually a fast object. They were all mistaken. We know that the UFO flew 60 miles in less than 1 minute... based upon the sophisticated radar on the USS Princeton. Radar isn't susceptible to optical illusions.


Of course they are. As far back as WWII, there were many different radar decoys, blockers, etc. You throw some strips of aluminum foil and blind a radar. modern autonomous radar-guided missiles know to ignore the large, stationary or slow-moving target. But they can't see past it. Radar is also prone to interference from certain atmospheric phenomena and lightning, for example.

And radar operators are as prone to error as you and me.
Donald Trump is a fucking liar
December 19th, 2017 at 3:42:28 PM permalink
Wizard
Administrator
Member since: Oct 23, 2012
Threads: 208
Posts: 4947
Quote: Steven Novella
The pilots also report seeing the object “break the laws of physics.”


Reminds me of this great line:



Longer version of the scene.
Knowledge is Good -- Emil Faber
December 19th, 2017 at 3:47:11 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 345
Posts: 12536
Bottom line: If the bet is aliens vs anything else, how would you bet?
Donald Trump is a fucking liar
Page 1 of 3123>