Was the UFO explosion in the 50s a wave of extraterrestrial surveillance?(scientificamerican.com)
scientificamerican.com
Was the UFO explosion in the 50s a wave of extraterrestrial surveillance?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/did-astronomers-photograph-ufos-orbiting-earth-in-the-1950s/
19 comments
Humans are bad eye witnesses. We don’t like this so it’s easier to scour the world looking for evidence we were right all along. Combine this with how well we see patterns even when they aren’t there and you get ufos.
This isn’t about eyewitnesses, it’s about looking at historical pictures of the sky before the advent of space flight.
> Villarroel and her team used the digitized scans to study the night sky as it was before the 1957 launch of the first artificial satellite, the Soviet Union’s Sputnik 1, to eliminate the possibility of seeing space-based interference from human activity.
> Under the auspices of Villarroel’s Vanishing & Appearing Sources during a Century of Observations (VASCO) project, they identified more than 107,000 transients.
> Villarroel and her team used the digitized scans to study the night sky as it was before the 1957 launch of the first artificial satellite, the Soviet Union’s Sputnik 1, to eliminate the possibility of seeing space-based interference from human activity.
> Under the auspices of Villarroel’s Vanishing & Appearing Sources during a Century of Observations (VASCO) project, they identified more than 107,000 transients.
Sounds good, but then you have the lights over Arizona in 1995 and other incidents that are on video.
Are Aliens here goofing off? Probably not but humans are either conjuring these manifestations of mass hallucinations or they are actually happening. I guess the first case is a really a version of the second case.
We used to have issues with fairies, now it's humanoids visiting in crafts.
Are Aliens here goofing off? Probably not but humans are either conjuring these manifestations of mass hallucinations or they are actually happening. I guess the first case is a really a version of the second case.
We used to have issues with fairies, now it's humanoids visiting in crafts.
I think that people are, for the most part, seeing real phenomena of various sorts. The problem is that people tend to jump from "I don't know what that is" directly to "it's aliens", ignoring the vast number of other, much more likely, possible explanations.
> We used to have issues with fairies, now it's humanoids visiting in crafts.
I wish I could find it, but many years ago I read a great paper on this. The thesis was that when people see things they can't explain, they will interpret what they see in the context of their society. Technologically-oriented societies produce explanations of a technological nature. Mystically-oriented societies will produce explanations of a mystical nature, and so on.
As I said in another comment, people tend to see what they expect to see rather than what is actually there.
> We used to have issues with fairies, now it's humanoids visiting in crafts.
I wish I could find it, but many years ago I read a great paper on this. The thesis was that when people see things they can't explain, they will interpret what they see in the context of their society. Technologically-oriented societies produce explanations of a technological nature. Mystically-oriented societies will produce explanations of a mystical nature, and so on.
As I said in another comment, people tend to see what they expect to see rather than what is actually there.
But the fact remains that people are seeing things or lights buzzing around the sky in a manner we cannot explain.
Yes. Humans tend to see what they expect to see rather than what is actually there.
The best example of this is all the "ghost hunter" shows that were (are?) popular.
If you listen to static looking for something to hear, you're gonna find something.
If you see a heat pattern left by someone leaning on a locker and you want to see something, you're gonna see "a face and body!!!" instead of just the fact that the shoulder pressed more than the arm and left a larger circle.
If you listen to static looking for something to hear, you're gonna find something.
If you see a heat pattern left by someone leaning on a locker and you want to see something, you're gonna see "a face and body!!!" instead of just the fact that the shoulder pressed more than the arm and left a larger circle.
It seems like anything that has a hint of legitimizing UAP in any way will promptly be dismissed by the establishment within a day of making headlines. It’s curious that our culture is willing to use any other explanation at all, no matter how tenuous, other than non-human intelligence as at least a possibility for an event.
Can any headline ending in a question be answered in the affirmative? (No.)
For the informed nerd (e.g. read Elizondo first or Greer, Bledsoe) it should by now be established, that we have a serious UAP problem. Hence it's a good thing that all the incidents that were previously ridiculed and downplayed are now one by one reconsidered.
I didn’t know who Elizondo is. I just read a little. It appears he’s been pretty comprehensively debunked?
By serious UAP problem did you mean problem with people claiming everything is a UAP, or did you mean problem in the sense of “there are lots of UAPs and we don’t know why”?
By serious UAP problem did you mean problem with people claiming everything is a UAP, or did you mean problem in the sense of “there are lots of UAPs and we don’t know why”?
The transition from burning bush to UFO to UAP...
I wonder of we modernized our relationship to phenomena in technology and shift from spectral beings to extraterrestrial beings as a built-in problem of explanations, based in some simplistic reliance of cause and effect.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352250X2...
I wonder of we modernized our relationship to phenomena in technology and shift from spectral beings to extraterrestrial beings as a built-in problem of explanations, based in some simplistic reliance of cause and effect.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352250X2...
Yes, people used to see fairies a lot.
There are probably 1000s of reports of from people across the globe that are seeing very similar things that remain unexplained. If the evidence went to a courtroom, I think certain UAP “cases” would pass have a positive “verdict” based on overwhelming circumstantial evidence. However, science has a higher bar (as it should) so when we ask our experts what’s happening they have to say “no evidence” or else lose their credibility.
The debunking of each case of UAP I've seen involves a mixture of science and folk science. They're fairly easily debunked if your persepctive changes.
Some, yes. If you’re genuinely curious I’d invite you to read project blue book or read through nuforc reports.
But I get it. If I hadn’t heard some things first hand from credible witnesses I’d be more skeptical too.
But I get it. If I hadn’t heard some things first hand from credible witnesses I’d be more skeptical too.
For the records: I'm taking it very seriously and had this book in mind: Elizondo, L. (2024). Imminent: Inside the Pentagon's hunt for UFOs. William Morrow.
The tone is very dark though.