UFOs and UAPs


Are there UFOs? Yes, there are flying objects we can’t easily identify.

Are they alien? Not so fast.

Aliens is one possibility, but it’s not the only possibility and shouldn’t be our first choice when considering an unknown phenomenon.

We humans have a long history of jumping to conclusions. For thousands of years, this resulted in superstitions and traditions that lead to bizarre beliefs. To this day, people avoid black cats, think bad luck comes in threes, and avoid anything with the number 13. As irrational is these sentiments are, they’re persistent.

Science has given us the means of removing our natural biases and flawed intuition about the world around us, giving us a clear (or at least clearer) view of reality. Science has shown us we can’t trust our own senses. The sun doesn’t rise each day—Earth turns. Even scientists need to be “double blind” to avoid any bias.

If you’re not familiar with the term “double blind,” it arose from trials comparing new drugs with harmless placebos. Although patients didn’t know who got the real drug and who didn’t, they were able to read subtle, unintentional clues from researchers and this influenced the outcomes. It became necessary to “blind” even the researchers handing out the drugs. So when giving pills as part of a trial, even the researchers don’t know who gets what until after the experiment concludes.

The point is—science cannot identify genuine results without first eliminating any human bias. When our natural tendency is to jump to the spectacular, this becomes extremely difficult.

When it comes to UFOs—Unidentified Flying Objects—also known as UAPs—Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon, our first concern needs to be eliminating our own bias to ensure we’re seeing clearly.

To the credit of those involved in the recent 60 Minutes special on this, they considered (1) advanced US technology (2) advanced foreign technology and only lastly (3) alien technology.

So what are these things?

1, 2 or 3?

Being unidentified, we don’t know and shouldn’t guess.

Honestly, that’s the conclusion we can reach. They could be 1, 2, 3, or 4, 5, 6, as there may be other possibilities we haven’t yet identified.

One of the claims in this video is that UFOs/UAPs were observed on an almost daily basis over the Atlantic. This is good for science. It means we can make multiple observations. More data leads to better analysis. Let’s get a look at these things through a dedicated spectroscope and figure out their composition. Let’s get some focus on this and collect detailed information so we can form a proper hypothesis. If UFOs/UAPs are really visible on a daily basis, the guys at JPL are going to love this. It’s a lot easier than spending decades planning missions to Mars, Europa, Enceladus and Titan to look for microbes. And it would be a great way to silence the critics like me.

Science loves converging lines of evidence. Take evolution as an example, there are multiple converging lines of evidence that support the theory of evolution—the fossil record, the phylogenetic relationships between species at a genetic level, the ability to observe evolution both in the lab and in the wild, etc.

When it comes to UFOs, we expect to see converging lines of evidence. So far, we have eyewitness testimony of extremely competent, trusted military aviators, video and radar imaging. That’s a great start.

For me, the most compelling point so far is when the pilots discussed the object disturbing the ocean as that’s showing an interaction with the physical environment.

A lot of these sightings defy physics, which is not something that should be taken lightly. An acceleration of 700 gees or descending 80,000 meters in seconds is going to have a physical effect on the environment. We may not be able to measure much on the craft itself, but we should be able to observe clear physical effects within the atmosphere.

When an airplane breaks the speed of sound, it generates a sonic boom occasioned by a vapor cone. Regardless of the alien technology, any UFO that suddenly accelerates beyond the speed of sound is going to cause something similar in the air around it. This is an unavoidable consequence of moving through our atmosphere. So far, we haven’t seen any evidence of this, leaving a significant question about what is actually being observed.

Another factor to consider is these things are showing up on the video and radar of a fighter jet, but they’re not showing up in orbit, where we are tracking space debris with considerable care and our most advanced technology.

The US Air Force and various other space agencies in different parts of the world are ALL tracking space debris. We’re looking for nuts and bolts up there—literally. Anything that could potentially interfere with a space mission. We’re tracking half a million objects in a variety of orbits, looking at debris down to about two inches in length, but we haven’t detected anything the size of a UFO.

Our ability to use radar from a ground installation and satellites is more advanced than anything in a fighter craft simply because it doesn’t need to be minimized to fit into a high-performance jet. Oh, and this is run by the Department of Defense. Orbital debris is taken very seriously.

Someone might argue that UFOs are dark and intended to fool our instruments. The problem here is they’re not fooling the instruments on fighter craft. Even if a UFO was pitch black, we would see them in outer space as we’re constantly looking for asteroids that might pose a threat to life on Earth. We wouldn’t see a completely dark UFO, but we would see it occult or block out distant stars. Imagine someone walking in front of the porch light. As soon as a shadow blocks the light, you know someone’s there. We don’t see this. If we did, it would raise alarm bells around the world.

Again, like the space debris, asteroid tracking is conducted by multiple space agencies in various countries. This is a great opportunity for converging lines of evidence, but… crickets.

As the analysis video below shows, these pilots are used to intercepting fast-moving objects and expect large velocities. When they see something almost stationary against a moving background, it causes an illusion of perspective that can fool even the most experienced fighter pilot. That and issues with the optics themselves are the best answer to this phenomenon. Seriously, check out the video, it’s awesome.

Another thing that bothers me about UFOs is their size. They’re roughly the size of the fighter jets observing them. That doesn’t seem like a comfortable ride across the galaxy.

At the moment, the odds are this is either US tech, foreign tech or simply mistaken sightings. There’s no compelling evidence UFOs or UAPs are extraterrestrial in origin.

Sorry.

2 thoughts on “UFOs and UAPs

  1. Nice article Peter,

    I saw this on 60 minutes and had a good laugh at the sensationalism of it all.

    It was obvious even from the promo that it is not alien in origin – I mean, even after watching what they had on the TV, it is not clear what it is, and obviously, we got bugger all of what they actually had (especially if they have days and days of tracking from radars on board different aircraft and ground based installations – there must be terabytes of information to go through??) Given it is over the water, it is most likely a drone of some sort from China, that would be my first guess, they have a good capacity for this sort of tech, and both the ability, and the nature for performing this sort of action so that they can observe and steal technology, concepts, ideas, and other things from countries that have tech that is either different or more advanced than them – this is how they are managing to leap ahead of everyone in just a few years – it isn’t research – it is plagiarism (combined with a bit of clever assimilate and integration of the prototypes that they have either stolen or copied). It is how they put together a working rail gun before the US, UK and Germany – by stealing ideas from all three of them, and then combining the concepts of all three into a working weapon – It has a US base concept, but when you dig into it, there are factors from the UK and Germany actually embedded within, and this was how they overcame the issues that the US have been battling for over 25yrs now, and that doomed the Destroyer Class that was made along side their Aegis Class (Its like the Zuhmwherer or some really weird name??? 😃)

    Regardless – the point is that the Chinese have some very clever drone tech, and it could easily be mistaken for a UFO/UAP.

    I do really love your argument though about the mapping of debris in space – it is something that everyone forgets so often in all of this, just the amount of beams that are criss-crossing the upper band of our outer-atmosphere as such, where there is a considerable amount of debris (what is that joke? If we continue to drop too much more up there, we run the risk of creating our own ring around the planet, and dooming all of humanity to be trapped as no one will be able to launch through the layer of debris??), and that debris is being mapped by a massive amount of satellites and ground based radar to track each and every movement, because one wrong move could be the death of a multi-billion dollar satellite, and then there is a chain reaction of destruction as well.. It is almost like a defensive layer around the planet that the aliens have to penetrate to get down, run the gauntlet so to speak 😊

    It is great to see your ‘Thinking Sci-Fi’ emails again Peter, you seemed to go quite for a while, and I really love reading your Sci-Fi thoughts – so thanks for taking the time to push these out 😊

    I can’t wait for Jury Duty, I have it pre-ordered, got it the day you put it up – and the other two were awesome as well. Déjà vu was a fascinating story, one that was a really interesting, (and rather creepy at the start), look into the human psyche.

    I hope you and the Family are well Peter 😊 You take care – and thanks again for the email!! Cheers Jas P

    • Jas, yeah, there’s clearly far more to this than 60 Minutes suggested. It’s notable that they didn’t include any independent analysis of the videos or any discussion with scientists. lol.

      I’ve just updated this article with a great video analysing these gun camera shots. In essence, these pilots are used to intercepting fast-moving objects and expect large velocities. When they see something almost stationary against a moving background, it causes an illusion of perspective that can fool even the most experienced fighter pilot. That and issues with the optics themselves are the best answer to this phenomenon. Seriously, check out the video, it’s awesome.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s