Neil DeGrass Tyson on UFO's....
- Thread starter Gingerbread Demon
- Start date
What are your thoughts of this video?
It was interesting.
Made me think of the "observer effect" where a group of people watch the same event but if you interview them each will tell a different story to each other..
How we all perceive things makes a huge difference..
I am going to watch it again to digest more of it...
His point about argument from ignorance is spot on. The parallels to region are strong.
Nothing that hasn't basically been said before, repeatedly, but done with style, and evidently it still needs to be repeated over and over. Yeah, I also like how he drew a big red circle around the fallacy of, "It's unidentified, therefore aliens." It's quite the fallacy indeed.
This is where I'm at. If someone can't come up with a legitimate photo in this day, then the likelyhood of these things existing goes down. With aliens, the likelyhood of them visiting goes down substantially.
This is where I'm at. If someone can't come up with a legitimate photo in this day, then the likelyhood of these things existing goes down. With aliens, the likelyhood of them visiting goes down substantially.
To be fair, it is possible to fake a legitimate-looking photo. Even I might doubt it could be the smoking gun, so what do you think the super-skeptical media will call it?
These things are far more serious than you think though. Even the government investigated the phenomenon (and probably continues to do so in secret).
I assure you, UFOs are a real phenomenon. It's just easier to hypothesize what they might be, than to prove what they actually are.
What if mythical creatures just don't show up in photos?
You know, like vampires and mirrors!
You know, like vampires and mirrors!
It sounds like you're saying that the lack of conclusive photographic evidence of UFOs as extraterrestrial spacecraft can be accounted for by the people having encounters not posting their pictures because they're afraid that people will assume they've faked their photos!
Just how Sirius are they, though?
On the other hand, they could have just crated everything and stored it in a giant warehouse.
No argument on the latter point.
Off the point just a bit. I was watching a show on the History Channel (can't remember the name offhand) and it's these guys standing there talking about this UFO their watching and all the spectacular stuff it is doing. The camera man never takes the camera off of them talking.
I'm like "WTF?!"
"The seeing of things in the sky and not being able to tell what they are" is indeed a real phenomenon. Who even doubts that?
UFO believers aren't claiming the sky is full of things a typical person can't identify. They're claiming the sky is full of things that defy any attempt at explanation. And that is just not the case.
Unless it's Supernatural (the show) when everything shows up on camera, whether or not humans can see it at all.
But I mean we'd all have to walk around with a smart phone glued to our faces all the....oh.
Different cameras have different artifacts--take "Rods" for example. Digital blooming makes a moth look like ball lightning orbs on security cameras.
This low light camera will be the next source of spooks:
http://www.wired.com/2015/07/canon-me20f-sh/
Now, one thing I would like to see is a set up where you have a camcorder, a digital camera and a film camera all take a photo of the same object--say that moth near a security floodlight--or perhaps plasma.
Just to show different effects. Some UFOs on film were an after image of the camera iris, or so I've heard.
There are tons of photos and videos of what people perceive to be UFO's. A 5-second search for UFO's on YouTube return thousands of hits - many within the past year. The problem is, the image quality still sucks. Whatever it is they're recording is too far away to be discernible from anything mundane. Yes, almost everyone has a camera with them now-a-days. Not everyone carries around a tripod and/or Tyler mount/steadycam apparatus. And, sadly, for the ones that are clear enough to be seen as potentially not-of-this-earth, they tend to look easily PhotoShopped or CG'd in. Inconsistent pixel compression quantization around sloppy edge halos is usually the dead giveaway. Not to mention all the things that could be mistaken for UFO's like planes, choppers, satellites, shooting stars and now, most commonly, unmanned drones that are sometimes even specifically designed to look extraterrestrial.
For every one potentially viable image, there are a hundred-thousand doctored and/or shit images that are totally worthless white noise generators. The good stuff gets buried, not necessarily through conspiratorial cover-ups, but by sheer overwhelming volume of the absurd. The human mind shuts down after a while in the face of such flotsam.
Which is exactly my point. In any given area where a UFO sighting occurs there are at least five thousand people with cameras and a clear line of sight. If a UFO sighting turned out to be something particularly extraordinary, it wouldn't remain a secret for long; it would end up on Facebook and Youtube within half an hour and would be on the national news by sundown.There are tons of photos and videos of what people perceive to be UFO's. A 5-second search for UFO's on YouTube return thousands of hits - many within the past year. The problem is, the image quality still sucks. Whatever it is they're recording is too far away to be discernible from anything mundane. Yes, almost everyone has a camera with them now-a-days. Not everyone carries around a tripod and/or Tyler mount/steadycam apparatus. And, sadly, for the ones that are clear enough to be seen as potentially not-of-this-earth, they tend to look easily PhotoShopped or CG'd in. Inconsistent pixel compression quantization around sloppy edge halos is usually the dead giveaway. Not to mention all the things that could be mistaken for UFO's like planes, choppers, satellites, shooting stars and now, most commonly, unmanned drones that are sometimes even specifically designed to look extraterrestrial.
This is EXACTLY what has happened multiple times with meteorite events, and is exactly why the "UFO" theory is effectively debunked: because every sighting of something "real" actually DOES get the attention of several different cameras from several different angles, which are then analyzed and found to be something mundane after all.
Actually "the good stuff" gets analyzed thoroughly and found to be nothing special in the end. The last really interesting UFO sighting I've ever heard of turned out to be the smoke trail from a rocket launch viewed from an unusual angle.
With all the dashcams, footage of that incredible meteor over Russia in 2013 went viral pretty much instantly. Not fake, not buried.
Similar threads
- Locked
