UFO Conjectures

Wednesday, May 03, 2017

Define UFO (rather) specifically and ufology will move forward

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
UFO: Unidentified (obviously), flying (of course), object (something seemingly tangible)

A UFO should be something with apparent tangibility, an object that is flying above or near the ground, and is blatantly not something familiar to the observer.

A UFO isn’t a light in the sky. Lights in the sky can be anything, meteorological phenomena that is odd, for instance.
Unless a weird light seems to be attached to something equally weird, such sightings should be ignored, dismissed.

Those kinds of sightings have cluttered the UFO data streams, and divert investigators from checking on flying anomalies that appear to be solid craft or something with a substantive corporeality.

Observers, who mistake Venus, for a UFO are not qualified to be named in UFO witness lists. They are stupid people, merely compromising UFO sightings with ignorant sensory data.

UFOs are things flying above, not blobs or lights in water.

Something (un)identified should have proximity to the viewer, the observer. Flicks of light or dark forms seen far off could be anything – an errant cloud, a balloon, a large bird, a kite, anything that gets airborne.

(Here's a photo of a kite but one that also has captured a UFO -- boxed in red -- from snowdeal.org)
A UFO should be close enough to be seen as truly odd.

A UFO designation should only be ascribed to something that moves with purpose, even if that movement is erratic but not deviating from seeming intention, as a balloon in the wind might.

Sticking with a categorical definition of UFO, as the term was intended initially, will eliminate the massive accumulation of sightings that are meaningless for the searcher of odd craft that could be something flown by sentience.

Discarding the term UAP, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, will winnow the flying saucer litany to that which purports to be something worthwhile to investigate, rather than a catch-all for stuff that is the purview of people attracted to anything that is up, up and away.

UFO: an unknown, flying object.

RR

6 Comments:

  • It should have mass and velocity.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Wednesday, May 03, 2017  

  • I can't imagine, Tim, a by-standing witness, a tyro observer, having the ability to determine either.

    Even an astute witness, one trained in physical laws and aerodynamics, would not be able to "compute" mass of an object flying by rather quickly or even hovering.\

    An "expert" might compute mass in the abstract or determine velocity via their expertise, as Ken Arnold supposedly did, but that's merely educated guessing.

    I'm thinking of bloke, like myself, who saw weird things -- once a group of erratic lights in the night sky -- which wouldn't be worthy of much research or investigation and a v-shaped "squadron of lightly illuminated things, also unworthy of much research effort, and then the orange rectangular shaped thing in the Detroit sky, which would also be eliminated from extensive scrutiny, although seen by thousands, as it was something less than an object to my way of thinking and not flying, with purpose, but hovering above, watching we humans below below or just a meteorological artifact that slowly faded away or rose upward until it was no longer seen.

    Tightening up the definition as I suggest would eliminate the chaff from the wheat as it were.

    There might not be much to add to the UFO canon but that which would be has cachet for serious scrutiny, yes?

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 03, 2017  

  • Rich, I had anticipated your reply, but due to being on my smart phone at the time I could not explain my two short list of criteria.

    By mass, I mean the ability to perceive that the object has mass. If I see an aircraft in the sky, I know that it has mass despite the fact that I don't know how much it ways...but it has mass. Mass is a tangible quality.

    Velocity has speed (It does not matter the precise speed, as most observers give,"slow, hovering, fast, etc.) Velocity also has a vector or direction of travel, north, south, east and west.

    I failed to mention acceleration, but this is of interest.

    All of these can be ascertained via subjective descriptions of witnesses or observers.

    Objective data is of interest: wind speed, temperature, other climate conditions, time of day, etc.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Wednesday, May 03, 2017  

  • I recognized your suggestions, Tim, in the context you just provided.

    I'm not asking observers or UFO buffs to throw out a UFO sighting if they can't estimate velocity or mass..

    I think that if someone sees what is perceived as a solid object, moving with some purpose -- something palpably unusual -- that they can report it as a UFO and UFO investigators can feel free to check further into their observation without concern that they are pursuing a red herring.

    I'm disturbed by all the sightings popping up via my Google UFO alerts that are just lights or a smudge in the sky.

    Who cares about lights in the sky? That's not something that ufologists should be fooling with.

    I would hope that ufology would categorize UFOs more tightly, and get at those that seem concrete or less evanescent than what many UFO researchers have spent and are spending effort and time on.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 03, 2017  

  • Off topic, but you might appreciate.

    What if there were two other witnesses with Lonnie Zamora (Socorro UFO case) and they were in a position to see the insignia on the craft. Would all three agree to the insignia's design/shape? Or would we have three variations with one having nothing in common to the others two?

    I believe we all have our own personal zone of reality at any given point in time.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Wednesday, May 03, 2017  

  • Indeed, Tim, something you're familiar with more than most.

    The post about perception right below this one, which I got via my Facebook feed, addresses your very issue, but without the hint of a neurological or psychiatric patina.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 03, 2017  

Post a Comment

<< Home