"One of my missions.. is to destroy ufology as we know!" - Elizondo

originally posted by: Skeletonized
Regarding the reported Turkey UFO('s) captured by Yalcin Yalman (I think?):

I've always liked this footage of whatever it is.

Bad photography. He's using a telescope held up to his camcorder and they're not properly aligned. That's why the thing seems to "morph" as the camera shifts. It's some kind of internal reflection. When he got a new camera rig with a proper telescopic lens, the aliens never came back.

originally posted by: Skeletonized
On another note, what is considered the best video evidence of something unexplainable at this point? I mean by those who are on the fence, not the polar extremes. For instance, Is the 2008 Turkey UFO series debunked?

I seem to remember someone claiming it was the lights from an ocean vessel.

I haven't seen a good solid debunking of the Turkey case, but, it's not really unexplainable. This series of images for me debunks the idea it was a UFO, it didn't move for an entire year:

www.metabunk.org...

Over the months he sees the same exact object 3 times in exactly the same position, at the same distance.

So, it's not a UFO, what was it?

Blue Shift said that the photographer bought a new camera and he could no longer reproduce the shots he was getting with his old setup,. If blue shift or anybody else can post a source for that, I'd like to save that link for my files. Here is his reply to when I posted that image before:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Blue Shift
If you look at all the footage, including the stuff that doesn't look like a convertible flying saucer, it often looks distorted and compressed. And if you speed up the footage, you can get a better idea about what it really is, which is some kind of odd misalignment of the crazy rig he was using to do the filming. He was holding a cheap telescope up to the lens of his camera, and the "UFO" is a reflection off one of the edges of the lenses or lens mounts. With this one, the far-off light (probably a boat) is likely reflecting off (or refracting through) the top of the telescope lens.

That might also explain why it's green and has concentric circles. After he made some money with this, he got better equipment including a camera with a real telephoto lens. Not surprisingly, the aliens stopped showing up.

As someone who uses a monocular regularly, I can attest that misalignment is a recurring issue.

I don't know why people are so enthralled with this video. This one and the Salida, Colorado video are so often presented as some of the best proof of possibly alien UFOs, yet they are both just garbage.

What about NASA footage?

There's one NASA video that's difficult to explain. But I don't think any of the "UFOs" in the video are alien space ships. Ironically few people talk about that one, and they hype up the STS-48 video which has been explained in great detail, where an object changes direction as a result of a thruster firing. Jim Oberg's site has writeups on that and the other NASA videos that UFOlogists have made the most noise about.

originally posted by: mirageman
It's an old ufological cliche that gets trotted out. But after 75 years an awful lot of generations have been slowly conditioned. Yet for what? Many of them are no longer with us.

Since 2017, I think we have been conditioned for something, but I'm pretty sure it's not disclosure. I think John Greenewald's hypothesis has merit, which to paraphrase is to throw so much garbage at us that most normal people can see it for the garbage it is and then tend to ignore anything they hear about UFOs assuming it's more garbage. Or as Greenewald put it, "muddy the waters" strategy.

But before 2017, yes this "conditioning for disclosure" mantra has been going on for decades. In some respects we have had some disclosure, like admitting that the Roswell cover story was false and it wasn't really a weather balloon. But, that's not the disclosure some people are looking for, so they claim we still haven't had it. Again for the Canary Islands UFO, we got disclosure decades later that the "UFO" was a classified military project, which was eventually declassified after decades. It will never be real time from the military, but they may let us know what happened when the incident is decades old with technology that isn't relevant any more.

I seem to remember reading about a new US objective to declassify old UFO related stuff after 40 years, unless there was a reason to still keep it classified. I'm not sure, but I think that was in the same bill that called for the 180 day UAP report due to be released next month. Or maybe I just read about that in the same article.

originally posted by: mirageman
For a study that is entirely independent of the military there is a low-key and low budget one in Hessdalen, Norway. Although no one is claiming aliens.

They have from time to time made claims towards the suggestion that the lights may distort the perceptions of some witnesses, though they have also been suitably cautious about making any conclusions about that phenomenon given the limits of the data available.

I personally would have expected a serious investigation into UAPs to take the time to speak to the Hessdalen team just to exchange notes, a "what can we learn from each other" kind of thing on data collection, behavioural similarities, that kind of thing. I can't for the life of me think of a reason why anyone interested in UAPs wouldn't be interested in Hessdalen except I suppose the lack of an alien angle (though of course some witnesses did describe seeing craft but it is generally accepted that such witnesses mispercieved the phenomenon for one reason or another).

a reply to: KilgoreTrout

There just doesn't seem to be much interest in it over here for some reason. You have the odd student project here and there but everything seems pretty superficial.

Hessdalen
Judging from this page, it seems like it's a more low-key tourist attraction than anything else, with "UFO hunts / UFO safari". You can also rent the "UFO cabin".

For anyone interested, here is a rough translation of the type of equipment they have at the now permanent science station:

- 3x Novus NVC-GDN5801C-2 CCTV cams, with a sensitivity of 0,00003 lux
- 1x Mintron MTV-12V6HC-EX camera that is configured as an automatic detector in their alarm system
- 1x Kinetic Avionics SBS-3 Virtual Radar Box
- 2x weather stations with the usual measurements like temperature, wind, etc.
- 1x Teradek Cube 200-connected radar

They also have a REG sensor that's tied in with the Global Consciousness Project for detecting deviations from randomly generated patterns.

Hessdalen - Blue Box


Now, I'm not a scientist, but this seems to be quite crude if the goal is serious scientific study of an uknown, reoccurring phenomenon? For instance, they have speculated about electromagnetism, but they don't seem to have a (permanent) isntrument there for that type of measurement. But you have to make do with what money you have. I don't know if they get funding at all for research, but it's tied to the College of Østfold.


Edit:
Forgot to add my last point. Seeing as they only collect "basic" data, I'm not sure how valuable an exchange of information would be unless they up the ante and invest in better equipment

originally posted by: Skeletonized
Hessdalen
Judging from this page, it seems like it's a more low-key tourist attraction than anything else, with "UFO hunts / UFO safari". You can also rent the "UFO cabin".
...
Now, I'm not a scientist, but this seems to be quite crude if the goal is serious scientific study of an uknown, reoccurring phenomenon?

Yes it's crude. But, if "it's a more low-key tourist attraction than anything else", the last thing you would want to do is put a lot of resources into it to "solve the mystery". People want unsolved mysteries. Solved mysteries, not so much.

It's a symptom of the larger field of UFOlogy too, that UFOtainers don't seem to want to solve mysteries, just promote them so they have something to talk about forever. If they solve it, they talk once about the solution, and that's it, they can't keep repeating the solution and maintain any audience that way.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

It's a symptom of the larger field of UFOlogy too, that UFOtainers don't seem to want to solve mysteries, just promote them so they have something to talk about forever.

I've long said something very similar.

It's also a subject full of people who prefer to encourage ignorance to support something they wish was true. These same people appear to accept any extraordinary claims with little more than anecdotal evidence, whilst also rejecting any evidence that points to a prosaic explanation.

It doesn't mean there aren't some genuine mysteries left unsolved. But ufology even recycles long debunked cases time and time again. Often met with fierce resistance too!!!

It makes the subject frustrating. Because we only need one example to be proven as 'not of this Earth'. But the current state of ufology makes it like searching for a needle in a haystack while not being allowing to disrupt the haystack.

originally posted by: pigsy2400
Even the other Military cases such as Rendlesham are so convoluted; who can blame them for ignoring that one!

Hi Pigsy, long time no chat!

TTSA's coverage of Rendlesham in Season 1 of 'Unidentified' was quite startling in its incompetence - eg the way they implanted Jim Penniston into Night Three of the Rendlesham incident. Partnered with Adrian Bustinza (not Penniston) that night, John Burroughs, almost spat out his TV dinner watching that faux-pas.

Anyone unfamiliar with Rendlesham will read that last paragraph as uninteresting babble, but perhaps it also proves how folks are likely to take false info (whether purposefully wrong or incompetent) at face value - even Zondo's false claims of pics/films existing of the 1952 Washington flyover.

More generally, do we even need an over-arching umbrella of "Ufology" of the kind presented by TTSA and others? I think that ultimately UFOs are a very personal matter. Many here have experienced unusual phenomena that have prompted them to seek explanations and simply chin-wag with like-minded folks. The likes of TTSA have no merit within the grand scheme of things, especially if using UFOs/UAPs as a cover for military projects to tackle those pesky "THREATS" from UAVs. Which seems fairly obvious.

In the 'Real World', maybe there really is an alien intelligence at work around us; maybe it only exists at what would be perceived as an 'Occult' level if potentially millions of years in advance of our paltry 75 years of rocket science, to the extent that it perhaps only exists as pure consciousness. Indeed, to me that is probably a likely occurrence. But how would anyone go about proving it? It's not as attractive as flying tin cans for general audiences, of course, and it's ultimately a cultural cul-de-sac. And perceived as borderline rubber-room territory by many. I can easily accept the theory, but what the hell can we DO with it? Certainly not make cash...

So flying tin cans, hub caps, Tic Tacs and Toblerones are no doubt here to stay!

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Oh sure, but I doubt that they (municipality/college/private individuals) are getting rich doing this if that is indeed all they care about. I mean, it's not like Dolan's recent fee of 139$ for an all day ticket for the online conference, which Lou is to be a part of (*groans*). Or better yet, the "Greer experience".

Besides, if those Hessdalen lights are indeed a natural phenomenon tied to specific geology there, wouldn't that warrant increased scientific spending to figure out just exactly what it is? More equipment + scientists = better business for the locals. Don't really need any UFO tags to accomplish that.

Again, I'm not really opposing what you're saying, just trying to put in a differing point of view.

originally posted by: Skeletonized
Now, I'm not a scientist, but this seems to be quite crude if the goal is serious scientific study of an uknown, reoccurring phenomenon? For instance, they have speculated about electromagnetism, but they don't seem to have a (permanent) isntrument there for that type of measurement. But you have to make do with what money you have. I don't know if they get funding at all for research, but it's tied to the College of Østfold.

They did the circuit a few around the 2000s, there have been a couple of really interesting papers but beyond that they do not seem to have been able to attract any real funding - as far as I am aware and survive purely on the enthusiasm of volunteers.

originally posted by: Skeletonized
Forgot to add my last point. Seeing as they only collect "basic" data, I'm not sure how valuable an exchange of information would be unless they up the ante and invest in better equipment

Well I would have thought given that the Pentagon seem to have only obtained documentation of their phenomenon when they have intercepted it's activity in military contexts you would have thought it would be insightful to learn how similarly unexplained phenomenon can be observed in a less invasive way and what advantages the Pentagon has in applying their technology to such an experiment in more passive observation. However, I don't suppose that is how the military works. Blow it up first then ask whether they want peace seems more the perspective from my perspective. It's not really working for them though. They should open themselves up to new ideas and possibilities, let their hair down a bit then perhaps the world would seem a little less scary.