Should we start saying "AFOS" instead of UFO

UFO's are still unknown, thus the acronym. AFOS is inaccurate, since we don't know they are aliens. They're still unidentified.

It's certainly possible they're aliens, but could be interdimensional, from the government, a hidden race from here on Earth, plasma life forms etc etc.

"aeiou+" beings?

Alien/extraterrestrial/inter-dimensional/out of body/under the earth or sea beings.

And then a "+" so as not to exclude any being that might still pop up (or refuse to).

Not sure about the craft, but the beings should have a division between "extra-terrestrials" and "aliens".

Extraterrestrials could simply mean beings like us who live outside earth, whereas "aliens" implies completely different lifeforms.

IF there is a possibility that they are time travelers from our past or future, then any reference to them being ALIEN would be a bias.

I prefer "AAA" Anonymous Airborne Artifacts (or Anomalies). Kind of covers all possibilities.

originally posted by: halfoldman
Extraterrestrials could simply mean beings like us who live outside earth, whereas "aliens" implies completely different lifeforms.

Why?

originally posted by: neo96
Contrary to urban legend.

Aliens from space haven't been proven to exist.

I truly hate it when someone makes an uninformed statement like this...Makes me think that they have unrealistic expectations of the evidence available, or they do not understand the science involved.
Evidence


It is actually rather simple...Extraterrestrials have in fact visited, interacted with Earth and have abducted individual Humans.

However, referring to ET as an "alien" is incorrect. Off-worlders, while technically "alien" should not be lumped into the same class as we would Mexicans, or Canadians, French, German, etc. You should observe a bit more respect for the individuals involved...

originally posted by: james1947
You should observe a bit more respect for the individuals involved...

What individuals, the Aliens? If yes, why?

originally posted by: james1947
I truly hate it when someone makes an uninformed statement like this...Makes me think that they have unrealistic expectations of the evidence available, or they do not understand the science involved.
Evidence

Carl Sagan certainly understood the science involved and he said it was plausible that aliens have visited the earth in the past, though he never saw evidence of this.

He did see what you suggest is "evidence" and explains why it's not scientifically viable, so perhaps it's you who neither understands the science, nor the expression "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

However, referring to ET as an "alien" is incorrect. Off-worlders, while technically "alien" should not be lumped into the same class as we would Mexicans, or Canadians, French, German, etc. You should observe a bit more respect for the individuals involved...

I don't know if off-worlders deserve more or less respect than aliens from other countries, since I've never met any off-worlders.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

Carl Sagan certainly understood the science involved and he said it was plausible that aliens have visited the earth in the past, though he never saw evidence of this.

He did see what you suggest is "evidence" and explains why it's not scientifically viable, so perhaps it's you who neither understands the science, nor the expression "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

Well, I only wanted to voice my objection to the statement that there is "no evidence", or "no proof", since neither is true!

However, the Mighty Carl Sagan was using information that is not obsolete when he made his statements, but has become obsolete over time. Further, he obviously (to anyone who has actually done the work) didn't do any of the work to determine IF Betty's map was valid or not. He may not have had the tools to do that level of work in his time.

And, again, he, and all the others, have based their remarks on old/obsolete data. My work is based on modern data, and perhaps just as important, modern understanding of Astronomy and Astrophysics...something Carl Sagan didn't have benefit of. SO, perhaps before you go quoting something/somebody that is proven wrong, you might want to actually check out the new stuff.

The very great advantage I have in this is access to modern data, both stellar data, and planetary data, and the ability to produce software that consumes that data and produces "views" of that data that most (including Astronomers) never have access to...the advantage of being a Software Engineer...

Then there is the FACT that Betty's "map" predicts the existence and relative positions of some 8 stars that were not known in 1961 (nor for much of Carl's life)...