Should DU have a 'UFO' topic forum?

[Ninja Jordan]

I think so.

[cyborg_jim]

1. What's so special about UFOs that demands their own topic forum?

[nadinbrzezinski]

THey are fun

they are cute, and most people really don't care that much for them

[Ninja Jordan]

3. It's a worldwide phenomeon

Also, the role the US gov't plays is an interesting angle.

[cyborg_jim]

8. Yes, thats right, the inability to identify an object in the sky is really important

Oh, you mean ALIENS right?

That would make it a IFO forum, not a UFO forum.

[Ninja Jordan]

9. UFO's ARE real.

http://video.google.com/url?docid=-5070476612863849446&esrc=sr1&ev=v&q=nasa+ufos&vidurl=http://video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D-5070476612863849446%26q%3Dnasa%2Bufos%26hl%3Den&usg=AL29H22LFpl0zzS1MULEx0wEyAZAI26Nww (part 1)

http://video.google.com/url?docid=8524267568796529301&esrc=sr2&ev=v&q=nasa+ufos&vidurl=http://video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D8524267568796529301%26q%3Dnasa%2Bufos%26hl%3Den&usg=AL29H21tn2cCccvJEbBraoj0obIqRZeDKg (part 2)

[cyborg_jim]

13. Yes, unidentified objects are real

Are you claiming to be able to identify some?

[GoneOffShore]

138. What Rubbish!

Here's some facts for you.

http://www.debunker.com/ufo.html


Maybe we should have a Loch Ness Monster Forum as well.

[Cetacea]

170. And a National Security Issue as well

If not, all of the data would have been released many years ago.
some of the objects are military craft, many are not.

[shadowknows69]

24. Gee only that if its proven aliens are visiting us

that it would be the most significant even in human history.

[Cetacea]

171. Astronauts and government officials feel they are important

At least the ones I've spoken to do.

[shain from kane]

2. United for Obama.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

4. Did you see that?? Ooops... it's gone now, sorry. n/t

[Ian David]

5. We already do

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=247

[Ninja Jordan]

7. Have to be a donor apparently. That's fine, though.

Thanks.

[JackBeck]

11. Have to be a donor to do what?

Click on "DU Groups" and look around?


:eyes:

[Ninja Jordan]

15. To follow the link the poster sent. You eye-roller, you.

[orleans]

20. try this link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=set_sort_key&forum=247¶m=last_date

the other one was just to post in that group--this is a link to that group

[Ninja Jordan]

22. Thanks

[shireen]

6. as in extraterrestrials?

cool, we could exchange abduction stories. :P

[scarletwoman]

10. "How to Suggest a DU Group"

How to Suggest a DU Group

One of the best things about DU Groups is that members have the ability to suggest new groups to the Administrators of Democratic Underground. If you wish to suggest a group, please follow this procedure:

1. Start one discussion thread in the forum of your choice to tell people about your idea for a DU Group.

2. In that thread, you must get responses from at least ten DU members who agree to be active participants in the suggested DU Group. All ten members to respond must have donor stars.

3. In that thread, members must agree on a proposed mission statement for the DU Group.

4. When enough members have signed on to join the group and have agreed on a proposed mission statement, one member must officially suggest the DU Group to a DU Administrator (Skinner, EarlG, or Elad), by sending an email. Please be sure to include a link to the thread where members have discussed the proposed Group.

5. The Administrators will consider the request and make a decision. The Administrators will either 1) Accept the Group as it is proposed, 2) Deny the Group outright, or 3) Ask for changes to the Group or its mission statement which would be necessary for its approval.

6. Once the suggested Group has been accepted by the Administrators, the Administrators will create a new DU Group in the "DU Groups" Category forum, and pin the mission statement of that Group to the top of that Group's forum.

If you are considering a DU Group on a controversial topic, the Administrators would appreciate if you contacted us before collecting your ten members, so we may discuss any sensitive issues. This courtesy will increase the chance that your Group is approved. Also, please be aware that proposed Groups that are redundant with existing DU Forums are unlikely to be approved.

If you have any questions, please contact a forum Administrator.

Skinner
EarlG
Elad

Democratic Underground Administrators

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

12. OK....here is the scoop. I posted once that I saw a UFO (in the company of many neighbors)

and then Conservative Underground had me listed as someone who was visited by Extra-Terrestrials. So, I don't think this will "fly" with the Admins here at DU.

[JackBeck]

68. I've got the feeling

that's where the OP got their marching orders.

[wyldwolf]

14. why not! Let's add to that special DU reputation

[patricia92243]

16. Sure. I'll be one of the ten people you need. (I do not believe in UFOs) But that is part of th

the fun, isn't it - arguing about it.

:)

[OxQQme]

17. An invitation to Lucy Pringle's web site--crop circle archive

http://www.lucypringle.co.uk/photos/index.shtml

2002 was an especially active year.

[GoneOffShore]

126. Crop circles are easy

Thinking rationally is hard.

[frogcycle]

18. no

[GoneOffShore]

19. Crop circles, alien abduction, Intelligent Design, Levitation

Just different sides of the same coin.

So, no.

[Marie26]

89. Or maybe just have an X-Files forum? nt

[Canuckistanian]

21. Why not?

If we can have a "Grateful Dead" forum or a "Comic Book" forum, why not a UFO forum?

[krispos42]

23. It's a distinct topic

I don't see why not.

I personally doubt their existence. I do believe in intelligent extra-terrestrial lif, and that one day we will be star travellers.

But, if they were here, we would have seen them coming.

The enormous energies required to accelerate a space vehicle up to a significant percentage of lightspeed, then decelerate it to solar-system velocities, would have shown up on our telescopes. Nuclear fusion, anti-matter drives, it doesn't matter. The spike of hard radiation and light would have been visible for months as the space craft's exhaust was pointed at us.

And I'm not buying into 'warp drive' until some bright scientist figures out one that can do more than sent a subatomic particle across the galaxy.

But that's just me. By all means, start one up. Sounds like a fun place that will have lots of discussions and debates! :-)

[cboy4]

25. I think we should also have a unicorn forum!

Are we really sure unicorns don't exist? :eyes:

[shadowknows69]

26. When hundreds of people start seeing unicorns all over the world

every year sure. Does it feel good to belittle other people's beliefs or is it something you do subconciously?

[cyborg_jim]

28. Ah, the old, "coddle the delusional" argument

Tell me, is it also wrong to belittle the beliefs of Republicans?

I hear there are literally millions of them!

[Ninja Jordan]

30. Hundreds of thousands of people who've reported sighting are "delusional"?

I expect more from a supposed liberal.

[cyborg_jim]

34. As I have been TRYING to get across to you

*Seeing* something in the sky makes it a UFO *IF* you do not know what it is.

It is unidentified. It is flying. It is an object.

It is a UFO.

When you start making up all kinds of unverifiable stories about *what* it is that is when delusion starts to kick in.

It is no longer unidentified. It is an IFO.

Being liberal minded does not some how shut-off my ability to cognate clearly nor does it mean I give carte-blanch to people to spout nonsense unchallenged nor does sloppy semantics get a free pass.

You do *not* want a UFO forum. You want a, "all those unexplained lights in the sky are really aliens, there's government conspiracies, Area 51..." and so on and so forth.

[Ninja Jordan]

38. I *do* want a UFO forum. Thanks.

[cyborg_jim]

40. Well, you ain't likely to get one here so stop whining about it

And maybe come out of your UFO thought loop long enough to parse what others are trying to explain to you.

Thanks.

[Ninja Jordan]

43. Why don't you "parse" this?

http://video.google.com/url?docid=-5070476612863849446&esrc=sr1&ev=v&q=nasa+ufos&vidurl=http://video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D-5070476612863849446%26q%3Dnasa%2Bufos%26hl%3Den&usg=AL29H22LFpl0zzS1MULEx0wEyAZAI26Nww

Are you scared?

[cyborg_jim]

49. Yes.

Dan Akroyd is an absolute woo nut.

Funny, but man, his ideas are NUTTY.

But please, do convince me of god with a link to an online Bible.

It might just work... this time.

[Ninja Jordan]

51. Watch the video before judging. It deals with strict science.

[cyborg_jim]

52. *Sigh* Do not try to bullshit someone who knows actual science

[Ninja Jordan]

54. Scared to watch I guess. Is the sand nice? I don't like sticking my head in it.

[cyborg_jim]

57. Yes. I'm terrified.

Of wasting time I will not get back.

Would I convince you if I debunked the video? Unlikely. You have made your mind up.

Get back to me when you IFOers can show that you have actually identified the UFOs.

[Ninja Jordan]

59. You wouldn't be able to debunk it. Period.

[cyborg_jim]

61. I didn't need to listen beyond the Roswell meantion

Damn hoax it was. Get over it.

[Ninja Jordan]

64. Great debunking there. I'm now utterly convinced by your awesome argument.

The film isn't even about Roswell.

[Beelzebud]

65. No it's about space debris that a bunch of morons mistakes for aliens.

Do you realize how much space junk is in orbit from the 30+ years we've been launching stuff into orbit?

There is no science in that video, I've watched it before. One of my hobbies is watching these types of videos for comedic value.

They show you video with space junk in it, and then they tell you it's aliens.

[Ninja Jordan]

67. Space debris that defies the laws of physics?

[Beelzebud]

69. LOL What law of physics are being defied?

This should be interesting.

Tell me what laws of physics are being defied by these pieces of space junk? And remember, they're in zero gravity, not the atmosphere.

Tell us exactly what it is these things are doing that defy the laws of physics.

[Ninja Jordan]

71. Watch the video for yourself.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5070476612863849446&q=nasa+ufos&hl=en

[Beelzebud]

72. Point me to the segment where they demonstrate them defying the laws of physics.

You can skip around on google video. What time do I find the part where they outline how these things are defying the laws of physics.

[Ninja Jordan]

75. God, I don't know starting at about 7:30 maybe? The whole thing is about phsyics.

[Beelzebud]

78. Debris being pushed around by shuttle thrusters isn't good enough for me, sorry.

Having the shuttle's exhaust thrusters pushing around debris outside the window isn't very convincing "proof" of aliens. LOL

Is this the best they could come up with? Are the aliens microscopic?

[Ninja Jordan]

80. Are you dense or something?

[Beelzebud]

94. No but that space debris sure is.

Have you even thought critically about this, or is Dan Akroid just that good?

[Ninja Jordan]

95. Have you thought about watching the video before spouting nonsense?

I'd love a debunking. "Dan Akroid" isn't a good argument.

[Beelzebud]

98. You haven't addressed my argument. I've seen the video. It's space debris.

Counter my argument.

My argument is that these "UFOs" outside the window are space debris. Refute it. Explain to me why that's not space debris.

First you said these things were "defying the laws of physics". How so? I gave you a perfectly reasonable explanation. These are not large objects, like that video claims, but small pieces of debris. The one where the thing does a 90degree turn is a piece of debris being pushed by the shuttle's exhaust.

I'm giving you concise things to refute.

[Ninja Jordan]

99. You haven't seen the video because it directly rebuts your 'space debris' assertion.

You watched an 1 hr 30 min video in 10 minutes?

[Beelzebud]

100. I've seen it before. Give me a time-stamp where they refut that it's space debris.

[johnnie]

88. Science is a joke

If science is so advanced, than they should give it up because everything has been discovered already.

[Ninja Jordan]

91. lol yep.

[Bjorn Against]

160. self delete

[Dukkha]

161. Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie

by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things! -- Ned Flanders

[Beelzebud]

44. At least the UFO people base their beliefs on things they SEE.

[cyborg_jim]

50. I saw a unicorn this morning.

What, are you going to tell me otherwise?

HOW DARE YOU!

Yeah, it might just have been a horse but man, I ain't going to listen to that.

IT MIGHT BE TRUE!

[Beelzebud]

53. Actually I'd quietly laugh at you like I do the UFO people.

My statement in no way suggested they were right.

Just that as far as beliefs go; at least they're basing their ideas on something they actually witnessed.

[cyborg_jim]

55. And if I base my unicorn belief on the actually seeing a horse?

You do not understand.

What these people have ACTUALLY witnessed and what they CONCLUDE they have witnessed are not the same thing.

You seem to be labouring under some delusion that it is impossible for people to be mistaken about what they see.

[Beelzebud]

58. We're in agreement. I understand just fine.

They see a UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) and then they just make up shit to explain what it was. (funny how 90% of UFO sightings happen within 100 miles of air force bases)

I was just jabbing at belief systems in general. I know plenty of "serious" people that believe in things based on nothing but just being told to believe in it.

[cyborg_jim]

60. Sorry. I have a headache from these people.

Literally.

I'm sure taking the analgesic is probably infecting me with a government mind control device but there you go.

[Beelzebud]

62. Np at all man. I was being a little vague in my original jab.

I was basically ripping off a George Carlin bit. He is talking about religion, and how the establishment gets to decide who is crazy and who is faithful. His point was that the UFO crowd bases what they believe on things they see, whereas the religious crowd bases what they believe off of what they're told to believe.

The underlaying message being that the UFO people and the religious people are both nuts. :D

[cboy4]

93. HOW DARE YOU

steal my unicorn joke. LOL!

[cboy4]

33. I'm sure hundreds of people do. They're all huffing

model airplane glue.

[JackBeck]

35. LOL!

:evilgrin:

[NoGOPZone]

36. Including Jimmy Carter and James McDivitt? nt

[cboy4]

46. I believe the experts concluded Carter was actually looking at

the planet Venus.

No?

[Ninja Jordan]

47. Nice try.

[cboy4]

56. Here's some information:

Carter reported seeing a UFO in October of 1969. The Presidential UFO Website has a copy of Carter’s UFO report and letter about it scanned in. The Humanist magazine printed an article in it that stated what President Carter saw was actually the planet Venus. The article goes on to state that many UFO sightings are actually Venus:

Mr. Carter is in good company in misidentifying Venus as a UFO. Many highly trained and responsible persons, including airplane pilots, scientists, policemen, and military personnel, have made the same mistake. During World War II, U.S. aircraft tried to shoot down Venus on numerous occasions, believing it to be an enemy aircraft. In October of 1973, Ohio Governor John Gilligan made headlines by reportedly sighting a UFO. Governor Gilligan's "UFO" turned out to be a misidentification of the planet Mars.

http://american-presidents.blogspot.com/search/label/Jimmy%20Carter


Seems logical to me.

[NoGOPZone]

48. Would you mind answering my question?

Were these gentleman sniffing glue at the time of their observations?

[cboy4]

63. I would say it's probably not likely Jimmy Carter was...

however it was the '60's so anything's possible.

The astronaut may have been simply suffering from hypoxia.

[NoGOPZone]

79. Interesting speculation. Now I read a letter McDivitt wrote

about a decade after the event, in which he took pains to emphasize the 'unidentified' aspect of his sighting. Paraphrasing, he said that no one had been to state with certainty what he saw. It did not mean that he observed an intelligently operated spacecraft from a remote civilization, nor could that be ruled out. I think with cases like this, there's enough room for debate to make an interesting forum. More so then one about unicorns, IMHO.

[cboy4]

83. The last time I checked, DU was a POLITICAL forum.

If you want to talk about flying saucers, I bet there are plenty of forums where you can have at it.

However, I'm opposed to it because it would greatly affect the credibility of this site.

[NoGOPZone]

85. The last time I checked, we had forums like

Humor, Poetry, TV and Travel on this POLITICAL site, emphasis yours.

Also, I disagree about it affecting the credibility of this site. Those who would use something like that to undermine us aren't our friends anyway. As long as people participate 'in a respectful, non-disruptive manner', to steal Skinner's rules for one of the topic forums, I don't think it will be a problem.

[Ninja Jordan]

27. Wow, what an asinine analogy.

[cboy4]

32. Alright, scratch unicorn, and put me down for a bigfoot forum

instead. :eyes:

Everyone knows these "UFO's" are military aircraft being flown at night so people can't see what's being worked on.

I'm sure lots of people called this in when it was being flown at night:



come on.

[Midlodemocrat]

70. We should have a leprechaun forum, too!

and a fairy forum and a witch and warlock forum and all kinds of forums so that certain websites can have a grand old time showing everybody how nuts we are.


:eyes:

[cboy4]

74. I love those ideas. I would even enjoy a

Loch Ness Monster forum!

:bounce:

[Midlodemocrat]

76. OOh, and a bigfoot forum! And an abominable snowman one!

Yippeeee, Freepville should be having a field day right about now.

[cboy4]

81. Abominable snowman!

:spray:

Yea, I would predict the word "nut" is being used early and often over there!

[Akoto]

29. Absolutely. I would support it 100%.

I'm always amazed by some of the duality here on DU. There are people who see convoluted conspiracies in every little act of the right wing, yet they can't open their minds to the possibility of an interstellar species.

Our universe is massive, and countless planets have existed since long before ours was inhabited by anything. That is not delusion, it is fact. As humans, we can conceive of such things as traveling to these worlds and searching out other forms of sentient life. Given a few centuries of scientific advancement, way can very realistically accomplish that. Perhaps sooner, out of necessity.

Who's to say that somebody else out there hasn't thought of the same thing, except they have the tools to actually do it?

[Ninja Jordan]

31. Couldn't agree more.

[cyborg_jim]

37. Wrong.

I for one am doggedly logical, skeptical and argumentatively ruthless.

My mind is perfectly open to the idea of life in the rest of the galaxy - I may even believe it actually exists.

*HOWEVER* the UFOer claims are slightly more than that. They are far more specific. They are far more illogical. They *ARE* paranoid.

It is WAY beyond conjecture for them.

[Ninja Jordan]

39. What about abductees?

[cyborg_jim]

41. What about people who have talked to the dead?

They have no proof.

Without proof their words mean pretty much jack-shit.

That you are convinced is nice for you but I have higher standards for the quality of evidence before I start believing in the likely plethora of conspiracies you do.

[Ninja Jordan]

42. I assume you're an atheist then? Plenty of phenomenon cannot be explained.

A lack of proof does not categorically make it false.

[cyborg_jim]

45. Atheism is about gods

That I don't believe those claims either is neither here nor there.

You are arguing from a position of ignorance, not knowledge.

When you start having some knowledge call me. Until then you're making shit up. And I can make it up better and by your own argument you should take me just as seriously because, hey, if you can't show it's false it just might be true!

[Bjorn Against]

66. Yeah, I heard that bat boy is real too...

The Weekly World News told me he is real, and you can't prove them wrong.

[dysfunctional press]

149. you mean people who have experienced sleep paralysis?

because that's what it is.

http://www.csicop.org/si/9805/abduction.html

i've never been abducted, but i have experienced sleep paralysis- it's really scary until you understand what's happening.

[gulfcoastliberal]

73. Yes. Nobody believes all the pilots & mechanics at O'Hare who saw the UFO, eh?

Discussion should focus on as much "hard" evidence is out there ie, pictures and videos.. Also news reports from as reputable as possible sources, testimonies from credible eyewitnesses (ie, pilots, ex-military). I know several active & retired commercial pilots who've told they've seen some crazy things in the skies. I have no reason to believe they imagined them. Experienced pilots have seen all kinds of weather and can distinguish between a cloud or a craft flying under power. I'm told they see them more often on transcontinental flights, maybe just because of the simple fact they're airborne for a much longer duration.

[Beelzebud]

77. There is a distinction between a UFO and little green men.

Just because people can't identify something doesn't instantly mean it must be an alien presence.

[gulfcoastliberal]

90. If you think man is the only "advanced" civilization in the universe, that's ok.

I mean once folks argued pretty hard that the sun rotated around the earth. And the world was flat.

I believe the testimonies of former NASA astronauts, including Buzz Aldrin and former President Carter that they saw craft flying around obviously built by a civilization far more advanced than our own. I believe commercial pilots who've told me personally of seeing UFOs hundreds of feet long flying near their aircraft. They've told me both airline policy and the FAA don't want to hear about it. Unfortunately for our open, transparent government, too many people at O'Hare witnessed a classic disk hovering over a United Airlines gate, where many pilots both on the tarmac and airborne reported seeing it, as did mechanics towing a 'plane to a hangar. Both United and the FAA have been forced on record about it. What technology do we have that allowed the craft to move so fast that it literally punched a hole in the cloudcover?

[Ninja Jordan]

92. Have you seen the NASA UFO analysis? It's very good.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5070476612863849446&q=nasa+ufos&hl=en

[gulfcoastliberal]

102. Yep. I remember when NASA showed non-military shuttle missions live, until

their cameras caught a UFO and they got called on it. Now, no more live video. The official veil of secrecy is quite powerful and their M.O. of mocking people who come forward publicly and ostracizing them means only the bravest will come forward. I'd recommend people watch Dr. Greer's "Disclosure Project", where dozens of ex gov't-military folks say the will testify under oath that they have seen evidence of UFOs, if Congress holds an investigation or hearing. We need a sea change of the way the gov't handles and disposes of UFO evidence and disclose exactly what's real and what isn't.

Check out:

http://tinyurl.com/2jg6ys (1 hr 56 min)

O'Hare UFO unedited newscast:

http://tinyurl.com/3bxsvv (about 9 mins)

Yep, I've seen how NASA obfuscates and denies and lies about their astronauts encountering UFOs, including video evidence.

[cyborg_jim]

103. Again THERE ARE UFOS

Damn you UFO nuts. It's the IDENTIFICATION that is being disagreed with.

Good Chaos I hate sloppy semantics.

[Ninja Jordan]

105. The video proposes that, based on what we know about physics, the UFO's are not man-made.

[cyborg_jim]

106. "Not man made" covers an infinite multitude of possibilities not involving aliens

Would you like to hear about my theory that Angels and Demons are behind it?

[Ninja Jordan]

107. You haven't presented an argument. You just smugly make comments.

Where's your scientific explanation for the phenomenon discussed at 38:00?

[cyborg_jim]

108. Angels, Demons. Gods. Unicorns. Bigfoot. Crop Circles.

[Ninja Jordan]

109. No thanks. I believe in science (which is discussed in the video).

[Beelzebud]

111. Only if you flunked physics is that considered science.

[cyborg_jim]

115. One does not 'believe' in science.

Discussing science does not make your discussion scientific.

Believing in science does not make your beliefs scientific.

Whether or not you like it the fact is that the conclusions are faulty. They are not scientific. They are a flight of fancy. One might as well say that these odd movements are proof of a god that is trying to assert its power.

In science the most mundane explanation is the one taken.

The mundane explanation is the one outlined by Beelzebud.

Live with it.

[Ninja Jordan]

117. So the best scientific explanantion is a guess by someone who hasn't watched the video?

gotcha

[Beelzebud]

119. I've seen that shuttle video countless times. It's a gem of the UFO world.

The crap before it and after it, in your video, isn't science at all.

I prefer the "space debris" truth, to the "high frequency wave-form energy bending light to move faster than the speed of light" bullshit any day.

[cyborg_jim]

121. The best scientific explanation is ALWAYS the most mundane one

This is a basic scientific principle - one does not invoke any more entities than necessary to explain the data.

The data presented by the video is lacking. The conjecture is therefore unsound. The conclusion faulty. The scientific process, ignored.

[Ninja Jordan]

122. HOW is faulty? You're stating conclusions.

[cyborg_jim]

123. It is faulty for the previous reasons

1) Without data on distance the conjecture that the objects are far away is faulty, therefore the chain of reasoning to conclude aliens is faulty
2) The 'explanation' made up is high on words and low on content. The words presented just do not meaning ANYTHING - they speak of physical concepts in ways that are not congruent with them.

Number 2 is particularly damning. This is not Star Trek.

[Bjorn Against]

132. In what way is that video science?

Has it been peer-reviewed? Or is it just science simply because you claim it is science? You can not call something science unless you are using real scientific methods to prove (or more accurately disprove) your theory.

[Beelzebud]

156. The guy is standing in front of a chalk board! It MUST be science!

[Bjorn Against]

131. Fine, then find me a peer-reviewed scientific article that says UFOs are alien spacecraft...

If you are basing your views on science you should surely be able to find some peer-reviewed work to back up your theories. And for the record I don't think Dan Ackroyd has been peer-reviewed by any credible panel of scientists.

[Beelzebud]

110. That isn't science. It's a lot of assumptions, and BS.

"High frequency wave-form energy is the only thing that would survive that turn" - nonsense.

He's assuming the size, distance, and speed of the object with no basis in fact.

Tell me this. What makes sense:

High frequency wave-form energy is "bending itself" to move faster than light. (what does that mumbo jumbo even mean?)

or

A small piece of space debris, that was close to the shuttle, got blown away by the shuttle's thrusters.

[Ninja Jordan]

112. What does it mean? It's defined in the preceding 38 minutes that you DIDN'T watch.

[Beelzebud]

113. He is making it up as he goes along.

[Ninja Jordan]

114. Strike two

Want another try?

[Beelzebud]

116. I haven't seen you present anything factual at all so get off your high horse.

What another try?

You said earlier you gave up. Frankly you should.

You're looking at small things close up, and saying they're large things from far away. The "science" that guy talks about in that video is laughable garbage. I'd like to see him submit some of that crap for peer review.

[Ninja Jordan]

120. Are the objects at 1:14:25 close up or far away?

[Beelzebud]

124. Why not let someone that was involved in that mission explain it:

RE: STS-75 Question
Date: 03/03/2000 9:26:59 AM Central Standard Time
From: [e-mail] (SHAW, CHARLES W. (CHUCK) (JSC-DA8))
To: [e-mail] ('[e-mail]')
CC: [e-mail] (CAMPION, ED (JSC-AP))

Hi Jim,

I was the Lead Flight Director for STS-75, and was on console
for the tethered satellite deploy operations and at the time the
tether broke. Operations had been nominal up to the point Jeff
Hoffman called down that the tether broke, and then we saw the
status in telemetry a couple of seconds later. The behavior of
the satellite and the tether remnant on the satellite was
exactly as we had expected for a tether break case.

In the footage of the video, etc. which was examined in GREAT
detail post flight in hopes of finding SOMETHING to aid in what
had caused the tether break, we never saw anything that was
"unexpected". Your comments as to artifacts and small
debris/dust /ice particles/lens reflections/blooming/etc., are
all quite common and we have seen those things in virtually
every shuttle mission's video. What was present in the video
and the data that was examined post flight was all within this
type of artifact and/or expected results.

Post break, we called upon tracking and imaging resources world
wide to be able to establish a trajectory for the satellite and
tether remnant, in order to determine the feasibility of a
rendezvous and recovery, in addition to being able to command
the satellite transmitter on to gain some science data from it,
even though the tether was broken. At no time did any of these
tracking data show anything unexpected, and we were LOOKING for
unexpected things (like extra pieces of tether, or debris from
the satellite and/or science booms) that could cause us to not
want to fly up in the vicinity of the satellite

As it turned out, the arcing of the voltage in the tether to the
deployer structure burned the tether in two. Rather ironic that
the experiment worked so well to show the ability of the system
to generate power, and in fact worked so well as to fatally
damage the experiment!

I have always been fascinated by UFO investigations, and
"personally" I hope we are not really alone in this wonderful
universe.

Hope this helps,

Chuck

Chuck Shaw
Flight Director
Mission Operations Directorate, NASA
Johnson Space Center, Houston Texas


The tether broke, and we're looking at the debris.

Nice try. That video is another favorite of the UFO world. And it's been debunked since day 1.

[cyborg_jim]

118. He is making up scientific sounding nonsense

To rope in people like yourself who only understand the fact that it SOUNDS scientific, but lack the ability to discern that there is no scientific content.

It's a bit like if you and I watched an episode of Star Trek. Sure I can enjoy the program but unlike you I would know that the scientific sounding mumbo jumbo in the show is just that whilst you'd be salivating about transporters and warp drives being possible in the 24th century.

[Ninja Jordan]

104. NASA's STS missions stopped feeding the live UV camera footage.

Whatever these objects were could only be seen in the longer spectrum.

[Beelzebud]

96. Actually I do not think man is the only advanced one. But he universe is huge.

It's a lot bigger than a lot of people's imagination. Especially some in this thread!

I don't think aliens would bother flying over the expanse of the universe to visit trailer parks, and fuck with the space shuttle.

[Marie26]

82. How about a Bigfoot forum? nt

[Ninja Jordan]

84. How about you be respectful of other people's views?

[Name removed]

86. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Marie26]

87. Who says I'm not?

I'm so offended that you would think I was taking Bigfoot's name in vain. Bigfoot, like UFO's, may or may not exist. Like UFO's, he has been spotted by thousands of people. There's also Bigfoot photos, videos, footprints, lots of evidence. And there's a lot of important scientific issues to discuss - for instance, is Bigfoot related to the Abominable Snowman, or are they separate species? If we're going to have seperate forums to discuss maybe-real things, I think Bigfoot enthusiasts should also have a place to discuss the evidence.

[cboy4]

101. !!!

:spray:

[NV1962]

97. Unfettered Fanfare Obsessions are a very serious matter (n/t)

[nonconformist]

125. I would participate. I find this stuff facinating

My grandfather worked at Cape Canaveral/Kennedy from the late 50's to the early 70's. Being that he is the most down to earth and logical man you will ever meet, his MANY stories on what he seen and heard while working there carry a tremendous amount of weight with me.

I love this shit, and I'm not ashamed to admit it.

[k_jerome]

127. LOTR forum! nt.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

128. We already have a forum devoted to unmedicated shithattery.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=125

[GoneOffShore]

129. Great line!

:rofl:

Perhaps the UFO forum people who see what they want to see could do with a new eyeglass prescription.

[SidDithers]

163. This is the best post in the entire thread!...

:applause:

Sid

[Octafish]

130. Yes. It'd be an interesting way to keep up with the latest news and share insight.

As for the condescending Mr. Know-it-alls on this thread,
it is most revealing they want people not to think.


McMinnville, Oregon, May 11, 1950

[Cetacea]

133. Yes, eom

[Octafish]

134. Here's the second Trent photo...

And the object, blown-up:



It IS an interesting subject.

[GoneOffShore]

136. Interesting

but hardly conclusive.

The number of iterations that that photo has gone through make it suspect.

Perhaps if one has the original negative it could mean something. Otherwise, it's just a blot on what could be a retouched photo.

It could of course be the first sighting of the FSM - probably more likely.

[GoneOffShore]

137. And here's a website analyzing UFO sightings

http://www.debunker.com/ufo.html

And that photo
And a brief quote:
"Maccabee admitted that his time-consuming efforts to analyze the photos to determine if they were authentic were "not completely definitive." Maccabee conceded that "argument over the truth" of the account of the incident told by Mr./Mrs. Paul Trent "must be based in large part on their own testimony given to reporters, investigators and friends over the years." Maccabee admits that different versions of the incident were reported in the McMinnville Telephone Register, The Portland Oregonian and elsewhere, but he characterizes these as "slight differences." Maccabee opts not to provide examples or these "slight differences.""

http://www.debunker.com/texts/BSMtrentPJK.html

Maybe we should have a Loch Ness Monster Forum as well.

[Octafish]

145. Yeah. And an Amazing Randi Forum, to boot.

That way everybody who is really good at arguing stuff can get together for mutual admiration or whatever.



Heflin photograph, Santa Ann California, August 3, 1965

Something for those with more open minds:

Reanalysis of the 1965 Heflin UFO Photos

http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/abstracts/v14n4a4.php

Here's an interview with Mr. Heflin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNBZC1Ccklo

There's just a bit on a most interesting subject.

Regarding the Loch Ness Monster: I don't know, but I'd be interested in learning about it.

Why some people like to make fun of people who are curious would also make an interesting subject, don't you think?

[Swamp Rat]

147. Yep

"Why some people like to make fun of people who are curious would also make an interesting subject, don't you think?" - Yes. Maybe we could dissect their brains to see if they are filled with egg yolk. :D

[Perky]

135. Sure and while you are at it lets all put "kick me" signs on our backs

[GoneOffShore]

139. Interesting how quiet all the advocates of a UFO forum have become.

Maybe they've all been abducted and are being probed as we type.

One can only hope.

:rofl:

[dysfunctional press]

150. i think that their mothers noticed how far past their bedtimes it was.

nt

[GoneOffShore]

166. Too funny!

Either that or Sesame Street has gone into reruns.

[GoneOffShore]

140. Delete

[Phoonzang]

141. Skeptics have their own forum where

they can bash "Woo woos" or whatever derogatory term they use for people who believe in things outside the norm so why not? I'd say a general Paranormal/Esoterica forum would be more appropriate. I've been wanting this for a long time.

It would be nice to be able to seriously discuss things like that without idiots jumping in with a bunch of little assinine comments and ridiculous dismissals. Hey that way the people whose heads explode at the thought of UFOs and the like wouldn't have to see such topics cluttering their precious forums.

I'm with you if you're serious about lobbying the higher ups for a Paraforum.

[GoneOffShore]

142. To echo Perky

Why not put a "Kick Me" sign on our respective backs?

[Phoonzang]

143. I don't see what you mean...

It would just be another interest forum just like all the others in the Personal Interests forum. There's ones for Baseball, Astrology, Motorsports, Gaming, and like I said Skepticism. How is having a tiny corner of DU were people discuss the paranormal going to somehow bring down the whole forum? I'm sorry but they're much crazier things discussed here every day in more public places.

[cyborg_jim]

152. Well since the IFOers are claiming science backs them up

Then all this wonderful knowledge they are bringing should be in the science forum right?

[Phoonzang]

153. No because then we'd have

to hear people bitching about UFOs being talked about in the science forum and the threads would be swamped by a bunch of juvenile insults about people who dare investigate such scientific heresy.

[cyborg_jim]

157. Ah yes, because science is all about dogma

And it couldn't possibly be that the IFOers are just making shit up without any real proof now could it?

[Phoonzang]

159. No debunkerism is about dogma...

and ridicule. Science is about inquiry. Can we stop exchanging messages now? It's pointless.

[cyborg_jim]

167. IFOers couldn't give a crap about inquiry

Especially any inquiry that leads them away from their treasured conclusions.

They WANT UFOs to be aliens. They just can't pony up the evidence that they are.

That they look ridiculous in the defense of their indefensible ideas is not my problem. Science may be many things but it is certainly NOT about making people feel good about their beliefs.

[rumpel]

144. "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.

It is the source of all true art and science."

Albert Einstein

Why not.

[SidDithers]

164. #36 of the WooWoo credo. Well done! ...

Quote Einstein, and do so often. Quote things he said if possible, but Einstein has been dead for ages now and so it's permissible to bring him up to date. Change the odd word here and there to make it clear that Einstein would have supported your argument if only he knew what you know. Act as if any arbitrary Einstein quote supports your position.

http://www.watchingyou.com/woowoo.html

Sid

[Forkboy]

146. If we can have the totally oxymoronic "Loner's Group" I can't see why there shouldn't be a UFO group

No offense to the loners down there.I'd post in it myself but then I'm instantly disqualified and would have to turn in my loner credentials :)

[gulfcoastliberal]

148. I think we need to cut through the chaff and do a count for those being respectful.

Let's see if it's time to email (update: 1st count of 12 yes votes for UFO/Paranormal and 11 for just "UFO".
I don't mind labeling it both UFO and paranormal, if the OP doesn't.

[dysfunctional press]

151. they were an okay band, but i don't think that their own forum is warranted.

nt

[cgrindley]

154. Absolutely not

It pisses me off about this site. On one hand people are outraged against NeoCon Christians and their hatred of science, and yet on the other hand, many DU'ers believe in homeopathic medicine, alternative medicine, vast unworkable conspiracies of shadowy corporations, Kennedy assassination crap, offensive and idiotic 9/11 conspiracies... and so on.

Many DU'ers have no idea what a reliable source of information actually is, or understand the scientific process or the way which academic articles get refereed and published, or how research should be conducted.

UFO's are horseshit.

If we want to condemn NeoCons for their Jesus jumping anti-science stance, then we should be rational. Rational. It's really starting to irk me.

[GoneOffShore]

158. Look out,

Someone will be wanting a "Law of Attraction" forum next. Huge and extremely funny article in the Style section of the Sunday NYT about how two of these charlatans are fighting it out over a film they made. The "Get Rich by thinking yourself rich" people who get rich by bilking people who believe their rubbish. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/25/fashion/25attraction.html?ref=style

As you say, "If we want to condemn NeoCons for their Jesus jumping anti-science stance, then we should be rational."

[ileus]

155. And a Chem Trail Section...

[BoneDaddy]

162. Why is it so outrageous to believe that other life forms

may be more advanced and are aware of us? I do not subscribe to the tin foil hat wearing crowd or am a trekkie, but to dismiss it outright is about as myopic as the belief that the fundies have that God created earth the way they suggest it.

[mainegreen]

168. The problem, I think, is not that there might be life on other planets, but that they cant reach us.

To far, to slow, to much energy, to dangerous.
Plus, they would have to have a colony or a ship or whatever within around 50-75 light years to have detected the EM emissions of our civilization. That's pretty bloody unlikely.

A great many scientists think there might be life on other planets (hence SETI). Hell, they might even be aware of the existence of a planet with an O2 atmosphere around our star. But the chance they would be aware of us is low, and pretty much zero chance they're zipping around our cow pastures in pie plates.

[BoneDaddy]

169. Again

I think we are way too quick to pass such judgement. The universe holds many many secrets of which we are still infants. To think we are a the top of the universe's expression of consciousness is just one more example of our arrogance as a people. Give us a couple of hundred more years and we will be able to harness the energy of stars (assuming we do not destroy ourselves first). I think it is possible that other life forms may be able to explore the universe in ways that we may be unaware of, depending upon their evolution and ability. I like to keep an open mind about such things.

[and-justice-for-all]

165. There is a Group for this topic..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=247