>As someone who is fascinated by the UFO witnesses coming forward, which I have posted about on this site to standard ridicule, I think theres something to it.
I mean I wouldn't call it "standard" at this point. The last 3 years the UFO community has made lofty claims and received unprecedented government attention but nothing has come out of it.
Every. Single. Video or piece of evidence has been debunked in a very rigorous scientific sense. The rest have been proven to be literal videos of balloons.
In one hilarious incident for MONTHS the UFO community believed there was a real video of the Malaysian airlines flight being abducted via some type of teleportation technology.
Meanwhile the video had been on the internet for like 10 years and the actual animator had to come and say he had made it himself.
When you compare such grand, extraordinary claims with the outcomes there's no logical choice but to just call the people involved in those circles grifters or Russian assets.
There IS a reason why Newsmax is pushing the UFO stories. And it's not because they're valid.
Quite frankly if I were in poverty and watched how the government treated the lower classes, while it gives unwarranted respect to UFO conspiracy theorists at the highest levels of government it'd lead me to do very drastic things.
And I'm not afraid to say that publicly.
Absolutely! The entire UFO phenomenon is just edging its true believers, or like dubstep that takes infinitely long to get to the drop. Always there's something that's about to be revealed or blow the whole thing open, but then it's just more rumors and hearsay and blurry videos of not quite anything.
There are serious people studying UFOs. There are also a lot of people flying around a lot of weird drones. Reports of triangular objects going really fast may be one of these.[1] It's even possible to hover one of those, standing on its tail, with the proper control system.
There are some people pushing an open source UFO detection system, which is basically a dome surveillance camera pointed upward, connected to tracking software.[2] They have lots of videos. Airplanes, helicopters, hawks, even the International Space Station. 117 sites worldwide, supposedly. No major discoveries yet.
Not well coordinated, though. They need to get the same target from two or three viewpoints. That gets you range, and resolves most reflection-type illusions. So you need a few in each city-sized area. Data reduction should be coordinated with ADS-B data, to ident aircraft.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVNIWuLs_7E
[2] https://ufodap.com/
There are billions of HD video recording devices in the world today. If UFOs were actually real we would have have a lot of footage of them like we have for everything else that's actually real.
>If UFOs were actually real we would have have a lot of footage of them like we have for everything else that's actually real.
Who is the "we" with access to everyone's video recording footage? I don't have access to anyone's camera footage. If I ask a big organization with lots of cameras for unfettered access to their camera footage they will probably tell me to take a long walk off a short pier.
If a large military organization has suspicious footage of unidentified objects, they probably don't share it to every outsider who asks for it.
Now, some organizations claim to have UFO footage, but I have little reason to take their claims at face value. Example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos
> we would have have a lot of footage of them like we have for everything else that's actually real.
I don't have a lot of footage of narco-submarines or drug cartel headquarters. Does that mean they don't exist?
Does something stop being real when cameras stop being pointed at it?
People are extremely likely to upload footage they think is a real UFO. There isn't a shred of physical evidence for UFOS after so many decades.
>People are extremely likely to upload footage they think is a real UFO. There isn't a shred of physical evidence for UFOS
Is there some central repository of alleged UFO evidence that every single human with a camera is given access to as soon as they get the camera? No, I don't think that's what you meant.
There is a huge amount of human-generated information, and it is ambiguous and practically impossible to process as a whole. No one person can audit all of the videos uploaded to Youtube, rumble, odysee, etc. If we want to argue about what footage has been uploaded, we have to be able to specify what body of footage we are familiar with.
I don't know your background -- people in various walks of life have very different ways of talking about evidence. In my experience of non-paranormal claims, scholars cite scholarly sources, so when I see people saying, "There is no evidence" without immediately adding a bunch of book titles and journal articles, I suspect they are commenting outside their field of expertise.
Instead of just saying "there is no evidence," which is overly broad, you could argue, "I, <insert name here>, have confidence in experts X, Y, and Z, plus committees P, Q, and R <insert websites here> and all their reports on the evidence have been negative."
XKCD for that.[1]
[1] https://xkcd.com/1235/
That's actually really cool though, and is the sort of creativity that you'd like to see some out of these things more often because it has genuinely useful applications.
I'm mid forties and I've been hearing about UFOs for as long as I can remember and yet there is absolutely no hard evidence for their existence. Thus I conclude they probably don't exist.
Same logic applies to Bigfoot.
I appreciate you well defining the standard.