[Geezer]

It was sciences job to make sure the world did not revolve around the sun, I don't see how its any different today, as much as it was the Vatican's idea to say it was sciences job to make sure the shroud of turin was neither true or not, until science proved it.

QC, you might take a look at this if you don't already know the story.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_(radio_drama)

[CliffordK]

The problem is when "science" does provide an explanation, and UFO believers choose to ignore it.

So many theories of crashed alien ships...  but no actual hull fragments or alien bodies?

And potential crash sites like Tunguska seem more consistent with meteor impacts than alien landing sites.

I just can't imagine the idea that our government would spend millions or billions of dollars on radio telescopes and other technology to search for alien life, and would turn around and "cover-up" actual terrestrial evidence.  

It is possible that the idea of "aliens" would have caused mass hysteria when the War of the Worlds Radiobroadcast was done on October 30, 1938.  However, I think we are beyond that, and still desperately seeking answers to the age-old question of whether we are alone in the universe.

At some point Aliens might become a fundamental part of a religious question, but the secular nature of at least the USA would tend to preclude that as an argument for a "cover-up".

As far as Carl Sagen, I believe most of his arguments were directed towards the possibility of technologically advanced life living on extra-solar planets.  Arguments that such aliens could actually travel to Earth are much weaker.

If, for example, humans chose to travel to Proxima/Alpha Centauri, and it took several centuries for our "generation ship" to arrive, would we be content to just buzz a planet similar to Earth while hiding the colony ship somewhere out of sight, and not making any efforts to choose an alternative planet or moon to colonize?

[QuantumClue (OP)]

Eh... we'll apparently have to disagree then.  I don't think either of us can provide a detailed analysis of the evidence to get the other to give ground. 

As I pointed out in a different thread, though, a majority of scientists have similar views to those I've expressed--the evidence just isn't conclusive to them.  Unless something much more concrete appears, this type of sighting will convince believers, but not skeptics, and won't have mainstream scientific support.

That is my point. A lack of scientific evidence is a lack of understanding and not a lack of integrity of the public and officials who have serious complaints about these phenomenon. Using the extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence requires an extraordinary survay and scientific investigation. The lack of a scientific course lacks a true understanding of how to approach sightings. The very fact we have now reached the year 2011 and without credible explanation gives an even better understanding of how bizarre and unnatural these events are, never mind looking for natural events to appreciate them.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

The problem is when "science" does provide an explanation, and UFO believers choose to ignore it.

What evidence have you apprecieted, rather than the dogma? Only dogma appreciates the people who view such sightings as something to fail in the scientific arena. The scientific arena has failed to answer the public, which makes a big difference to your logic.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

In other words cliff, the evidence is beyond at most times a credible explanation. If the evidence is incredible then why try and support it with credible explanations when those explanations truely do not phsyically fit the bill? Such wide ignorance is observed and is disliked by UFOLOGISTS wordwide. NASA is famous for such statements.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

It was sciences job to make sure the world did not revolve around the sun, I don't see how its any different today, as much as it was the Vatican's idea to say it was sciences job to make sure the shroud of turin was neither true or not, until science proved it.

QC, you might take a look at this if you don't already know the story.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_(radio_drama)

\

I know of this, what is it meant to mean though???

[CliffordK]

Look up the "Project Blue Book".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Blue_Book
http://www.nicap.org/rufo/contents.htm

"There was no evidence indicating that sightings categorized as "unidentified" were extraterrestrial vehicles.[1]"

Here is a sample from the "Blue Book".  There are numerous events that are likely balloons, but records are often sparse.   

The pilot had just finished making some practice passes for night fighters when he spotted an orange light to the east of his plane. He checked on aircraft in the area, learned that the object was unidentified,

44.The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects

and started after it. Here is his report, written immediately after he landed:

As it [the light] approached the city from the east it started a left turn. I started to intercept. During the first part of the chase the closest I got to the light was 8 to 10 miles. At this time it appeared to be as large as an SNJ and had a greenish tail that looked to be five to six times as long as the light's diameter. This tail was seen several times in the next 10 minutes in periods of from 5 to 30 seconds each. As I reached 10,000 feet it appeared to be at 15,000 feet and in a left turn. It took 40 degrees of bank to keep the nose of my plane on the light. At this time I estimated the light to be in a 10-to-l 5 mile orbit.

At 12,000 feet I stopped climbing, but the light was still climbing faster than I was. I then reversed my turn from left to right and the light also reversed. As I was not gaining distance, I held a steady course south trying to estimate a perpendicular between the light and myself. The light was moving north, so I turned north. As I turned, the light appeared to move west, then south over the base. I again tried to intercept but the light appeared to climb rapidly at a 60 degree angle. It climbed to 35,000 feet, then started a rapid descent.

Prior to this, while the light was still at approximately 15,000 feet, I deliberately placed it between the moon and myself three times to try to identify a solid body. I and my two crewmen all had a good view of the light as it passed the moon. We could see no solid body. We considered the fact that it might be an aerologist's balloon, but we did not see a silhouette. Also, we would have rapidly caught up with and passed a balloon.

During its descent, the light appeared to slow down at about 10,000 feet, at which time I made three runs on it. Two were on a 90 degree collision course, and the light traveled at tremendous speed across my bow. On the third run I was so close that the light blanked out the airfield below me. Suddenly it started a dive and I followed, losing it at 1,500 feet.

In this incident the UFO was a balloon.

The following night a lighted balloon was sent up and the pilot was ordered up to compare his experiences. He duplicated his dogfight - illusions and all. The Navy furnished us with a long analysis of the affair, explaining how the pilot had been fooled.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

No, no... I know of this project. Most UFOLOGISTS believe that the survay was made by dogmatists. Even if not, there is believed there is a great deal more sightings which where not recorded which cannot be explained.

I've done my homework on this. Project Bluebook is like a skeptics handbook.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

Th incident of 1952 was eluminated by events which cannot be explained by hot air balloons, one of the biggest explanations, and one of the most unconvincing of them all, used to demystify sightings.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

Hot airballons simply do not have the sort of technology to evade the US AIRFORCE, unless you disagree> Maybe they where natural phenomenon... what was it...? Nearly seven lights within a 50 mile radius from each other... which managed to disappear on the arrival of the US AIRFORCE....

[Geezer]

It was sciences job to make sure the world did not revolve around the sun, I don't see how its any different today, as much as it was the Vatican's idea to say it was sciences job to make sure the shroud of turin was neither true or not, until science proved it.

QC, you might take a look at this if you don't already know the story.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_(radio_drama)

\

I know of this, what is it meant to mean though???

Oh, I think it's just an interesting example of how people can be deceived, even when there is no intention to deceive.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

So can clouds... which is why I don't understand your statement in what it to achieve? There are many people who know the difference between a stationary cloud, and a slow moving weather balloon... hence why I get frustrated over some answers made at this site concerning this very real phenomenon. Glowing bright, evading US aiforce officials, to even the officials who cover such things up with incredible evidence, are all evident enough something is happening. To deny it in my opinion, is one of the highest ignorances. As I said, extraordinary proof requires an extraordinary explanation is only the tip of what is, a most inconceivable and extraordinary unsolved mystery of the skies... one which cannot so easily dismissed with the evidence in hand.

To deny it, is with little understanding into these incidences. The 1952 shoots down every claim of weather balloons, or any balloon of any type... and also any known phenomenon.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

Like project bluebook, many documents can be hoaxes. To prove this happens, look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanton_T._Friedman

Criticisms and controversiesFriedman is outspoken in his articulation of positions and in his criticism of UFO debunkers, often stating he is not an "apologist ufologist". His positions are regarded as controversial in mainstream science and media, but Friedman claims to have received little opposition at his many lectures, most of which have been at colleges and universities, many to engineering societies and other groups of physicists.[2](p. 24) He has had a number of debates in the mainstream media, including one with UFO skeptic Michael Shermer on CNN.

Friedman has been criticized both by skeptics and other Roswell researchers for taking the position that there are no substantive grounds for dismissing the authenticity of some Majestic 12 documents. Friedman himself was the first to provide evidence that some of the documents are clearly hoaxes. For example, he showed that a supposed memo from Admiral Hillenkoetter to President Truman, dated February 17, 1948, was actually the emulation of a letter from Marshall to Roosevelt that featured in the book The American MAGIC. Friedman has researched the MJ-12 documents since first becoming aware of them from Wiliam Moore and Jaime Shandera in 1984.[2][10] He addressed criticisms of the original documents in both sources. As an example, Philip J. Klass claimed lexicographic inconsistencies based on the use of Pica typeface in the Cutler-Twining memo and offered $100, in a challenge to Friedman, for each legitimate example of the use of the same style and size Pica type as used in the memo. Friedman provided 14 examples and was paid $1000 by Klass.[2](reproduced on p. 262)

Because of this, one has to ask why certain officials even ''feel the need'' to fake documents or have a half-hearted view on the phenomenon. Until a true extensive research is made by respectful and trustworthy scientists, I cannot believe anything the government tells me.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

Here, Friedman, arguably a brilliant man has some interesting points about the project - some unusual facts about the statements themselves made:

[BenV]

So many ''illogical conlcusions being brought forth'' here.

Films have very little impact. If anything, sightings have impacted movies. Wrong logic. After the 1952 incident the well watched and biggest movie out of all previous came out The Day the Earth Stood Still. To believe that movies have contributed to the 1952 incident is obviously false and blindly led. How can one come to these conclusions cliff? I am perplexed by ignorance of others into these situations, and get quite angry sometimes within myself.

I'm going to have to directly contradict you here.  Although I don't have any data specifically pertaining to UFO sightings, depictions in fiction certainly do have an enormous impact on people's descriptions of unusual events.  To take the example of alien abductions...

Early reports of abduction are rare, either because they were not taken seriously or (and here's the clincher) nobody claimed their experience to be extra-terrestrial in origin.  Alien abduction reports increase after aliens started appearing in fiction (pulp novels and comics initially).  However, in early abduction reports, the aliens were described as a huge range of body shapes & sizes.  As I'm sure you know, aliens are often now depicted as small, humanoid, grey figures with elongate faces and almond shaped eyes.  This is the description many abductees give, but is was never given prior to it's use in comics and science fiction.

This is merely one example, but it shows how wrong you would be to come to the conclusions you have reached.  

I have no knowledge of this particular incident, so cannot comment on it.  I merely intend to point out that popular depictions have an enormous impact on public perception, and it would be very, very wrong to discount them out of hand as you have done.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

I base what I said on UFO sightings, not abductions. I cannot take abductions too seriously. The first UFO movie was brought out in 1950. Before this there is a plethora of UFO sightings - usually saucerlike or brightly colored, gleaming with a great light. World War two had hundreds of sightings, named foo fighters - the War began in 1939 and ended in 1945 - it was during this age such things of saucer like craft where never spoke about.

No I hold to what I said BenV. Sightings have shaped UFO movies, not the other way round. Now with what sightings have been made, perhaps many want to hoax their way in this world, but it gives it no justice to call it a true sighting. 

[BenV]

You appreciate that pulp novels, non-pulp novels, comics, radio plays etc will have all contained aliens, UFOs etc long before any movies did?  These are what the movies are based on.

Edit - and my point still stands.  Dismissing the impact of popular media out of hand is foolhardy.

Extra Edit - The first Flash Gordon films came out in 1940!  So by 1952, people would already be keyed in to the idea that things they see in the sky and can't explain might be aliens.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

We are referring to populare culture, yes? Of course aliens where mentioned in pulp novels and whatnot. I do believe one of the best examples comes from 1898 - The war of the worlds. I don't believe there where any saucers in that exactly - yes an alien craft, but no saucers. Saucers are like a trademark of the UFOLOGIST era. You will however, find tapestries and paintings which predate 1800's of what looks like UFO's in the background. Some art even predate that with mysterious objects in the sky and if anyone was to research this, one will find most of them do look like flying saucers, but their recognition was not taken into hand until very late, until the 70's to present day.

The first sighting was on June 24, 1947, so thus was borne the saucer age. This was before movies even intended to depict saucer like craft and even before this, I doubt there was any literature of flying saucers - only indirect reports dating back to the middle ages, which I am sure very few people, maybe just a handful knew about.

What is appreciated, atleast from my stance, is that the possibility of UFO's (probably not even called that in many literatures before 1950) was not widely recognized as saucer shape, which is the whole point here - how saucer like craft became recognized is quite clearly from the world war and from the first saucer sighting in 1947. Movies today, are not wholey based on our primitive culture before 1950. The saucer age did not stem from there. If there had been no sightings of saucer shaped craft in the skies, then I doubt very much it would have had any significant role in the movie industry.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

Flash Gorden did not have flying saucers. I appreciate aliens where speculated about; but I don't think you fully understand my arguement BenV.

[QuantumClue (OP)]

I might be wrong on something afterall. The press did use saucershape crafts in their illustrations... http://ufopop.org/ufopop_mags.php How this was adopted is somewhat baffling me right now.

I apologize ben.