UFO Conjecture(s)

Monday, July 06, 2015

What if there were only one….

… real flying saucer/UFO event?

Of all the UFO/flying saucer reports over the years – over the millennia even – isn’t there one unique episode that rings true and also contains evidence that isn’t compromised in some way?

I think we can exclude the Kenneth Arnold account (see Kevin Randle’s blog for a current take on that iconic sighting), the Roswell tale, the Trent/McMinnville photos, The Hill’s “abduction,” Socorro, the Walton “take away,” the Phoenix lights, and any number of other commonly offered sightings, many mentioned here and at other blogs or web-sites.

But isn’t there one subliminal or ignored sighting/event that presents a real episode that tells us UFOs are actual phenomena or, at least one actual phenomenon.

And what would that one sighting be?

Any suggestions?

RR

29 Comments:

  • No!

    And you won't get the definitive sighting or event until and unless some actual hardware is produced and available for public viewing. And by this I do NOT mean some photo, slide or movie. And even if you do get actual publicly displayed hardware (as opposed to alleged hardware that is hidden from public view) this would still require detailed scientific scrutiny and/or analysis before being pronounced genuine.

    Until this happens, forget about UFOs as ET vehicles or anything else.

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, July 06, 2015  

  • CDA:

    I'm leaving out the ET hypothesis.

    Maybe there's a prosaic or esoteric explanation for a phenomenon unique to the Earth or its human species....ecological, physical, psychological, neurological, quantumical, etc.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, July 06, 2015  

  • The Redmond, Oregon case of September 24, 1959. Not a flashy case with the UFO crowd or the media, but an absolutely solid mystery. Multiple witness; unconventional flight characteristics; multiple radar tracks; 6 F-102 intercept jets (which the "object" easily evaded; strong military debunking and attempted silencing of personnel. I'm also a huge fan of the Levelland, TX sighting of Nov. 2nd, 1957. Again, multiple sightings of a strange "object" that stopped or stalled automobiles. No hardware, CDA, but a totally unconventional event.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Monday, July 06, 2015  

  • Yesterday I would have suggested Rendlesham Forest. Alas today I cannot for it joined the rest of the cases I have ever attached significance, in the 'nothing to see here' category.:(

    By Blogger Unknown, at Monday, July 06, 2015  

  • The Phoenix Lights: not the lights/flares/whatever seen over the city, but the huge black triangle observed overflying much of Arizona at the same time. A poor photographic record was compiled of such, but much of the eyewitness testimony, including then-Gov. Symington's, is compelling -- though it continues to compel me to think it was one of "ours" since I see no logical reason for alien craft to use running lights.

    By Blogger Ron, at Tuesday, July 07, 2015  

  • Fellows....

    I was hoping for some "sightings" or events that are not (well) known.

    I have a passel that I've found, but hoped you guys might have some in your UFO portfolios that would be juicier.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 07, 2015  

  • You're getting close, Rich!

    What if there were none?

    Lance

    By Blogger Lance, at Tuesday, July 07, 2015  

  • A real possibility, Lance....

    Not a probability but a possibility.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 07, 2015  

  • Minot AFB UFO case 1968 : http://minotb52ufo.com/

    Guerra - Portugal - 1982: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread667873/pg1

    Westall -Australia - 1966: https://youtu.be/1ih31ehCarM

    Hessdalen - Norway : https://youtu.be/HdjgWzOdVZA , https://youtu.be/UdFjIwbAKfg

    Best Regards,

    Julien (from Montreal)

    By Blogger hessdalen lights, at Tuesday, July 07, 2015  

  • Thanks Julien...

    Interesting sightings, but even they've brought out the skeptics.

    We need a sighting that even the skeptical crowd has trouble debunking.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 07, 2015  

  • Looking for one good case might be misguided. After all these decades, and tens of thousands of reports, not one UFO case has had an unambiguously positive conclusion.

    Instead, proponents will point to the numerous reports, the mountains of (imputed) physical evidence, and the millions of witnesses who have not made reports. So we should require UFO groups to analyse this overabundant evidence to deduce the location of the Earth bases for these innumerable ships and their legions of crew members (not to mention their filling stations, supply depots, etc.). If this task can be done, we will have an answer. If it cannot, we should conclude there is no alien presence on our planet.

    By Blogger Terry the Censor, at Tuesday, July 07, 2015  

  • Terry...

    You presume that my one case has to have an alien patina.

    It might be something altogether different...no?

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 07, 2015  

  • ET is the presumption of the vast majority of proponents.

    If your one case shows us a different solution, ET proponents will not take it as explaining their pet cases nor negating their position. They will always point to their residue of unexplained cases.

    To follow your course, we first have to get the ETH off the table. To accomplish that, we have to demand the ETHers prove their case or admit defeat. They have to show their hypothesis is at least falsifiable. They have to design a program to find those bases, to find the fleet, to track down the aliens.

    If the ETHers make excuses that this can't be done, then they're done.

    By Blogger Terry the Censor, at Tuesday, July 07, 2015  

  • Terry...

    In my mind (and milieu), I've dispensed with the ETH and its advocates long ago.

    I keep a candle lit for the hypothesis, but it's one of those birthday candles.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 07, 2015  

  • Yes, but are you looking for an answer just to please yourself, or do you hope to convince others too?

    By Blogger Terry the Censor, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • T:

    I'm looking for a bona fide sighting/event.

    If others find it so, I'd be happy.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • Hello Rich,

    So far, I am not aware of any credible "debunking" of the cases and sightings that I have listed above.

    There is a very interesting French case with two pilots who witnessed in 1977 a UFO that followed their plane twice when performing a full 180 U-turn: http://ufologie.patrickgross.org/htm/giraud77.htm

    Ray Bower -Alderney (UK) 2007 is also a very interesting case: Again multiple witnesses with radar detection: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Alderney_UFO_sighting

    A little known but very interesting case: Tagish Lake: http://www.ufobc.ca/yukon/tagish.htm

    The so-called "residue" is really really huge...

    There is a genuine phenomenon out there. However, I don't think that ETH is a valid hypothesis.

    It's something else.

    My two (Canadian) cents

    Best Regards,

    Julien

    By Blogger hessdalen lights, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • Julien:

    While no skeptics have taken notice, yet, of the sightings you listed, there are elements within them that open the door to questions.

    The school case, for instance, might be attributed to mass hysteria or hoaxing.

    The Minot case to radar malfunction.

    The Hessdalen Lights to weird atmospherics. French skeptic Gilles Fernandez, I would have thought, could address that sighting.

    My point is that such cases are not iron-clad....good sightings perhaps, but not without possible mundane explanations.

    I'm looking for sightings or events devoid of any possible prosaic explanation with bona fide evidence against such.

    But you're on point; your listings are good ones.....just not ex cathedra.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • "French skeptic Gilles Fernandez, I would have thought, could address that sighting."

    - Really ? I wasn't aware that Gilles published something about the Hessdalen Phenomenon. Is it in a peer reviewed scientific journal ?

    If so, could you please forward me the link ? Thanks in advance.

    Best Regards,

    Julien

    By Blogger hessdalen lights, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • Julien:

    I think he's made comments about Hessdalen recently here.

    I'm hoping he'll see this exchange and will engage.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • What occured in the two cases I suggested, the Redmond Oregon case and the Levelland, Texas case are not easily explainable. Indeed, I would assert that they are simply not explainable at all. (I am not claiming any ETF connection). In the first case we had multiple witness and multiple radar confirmations of something with impossible flight characteristics. We can always assert that people are mistaken and that radar malfunctions but these are not reasonable objections in this case. Also, with respect to Levelland, multiple observations and multiple car and ignition interruptions. The Air Force said, I believe, "ball lightning" but I think that most of us know that this was released without any evidence about weather, etc. But if not ball lightning, what? Why do these two cases not satisfy your query? Especially when they are taken in the context of several other observations, especially in the Levelland case.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • Dominick...

    I find the Redmond, Oregon case interesting, but one could apply the Menzel treatment to the sighting because of this description:

    "FAA station observers saw object hover and emit long tongues of red, yellow and green light which extended and retracted at irregular intervals. As F-102’s approached the object from the SE [?] it turned into mushroom shape, emitted red and yellow flames from lower side."

    A strange (unique?) meteorological phenomenon?

    As for Levelland, which Kevin Randle also likes, it has been examined to death (at his blog and elsewhere) with caveats, leading to the thesis that the object seen and experienced was perhaps a military vehicle.

    Good cases, but open to dismissal, by some (as has been the case).

    I'm looking for a case or sighting that is free of any flaws or possible skeptical debunking.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • RR, with all due regard, how can there be a case "free of any flaws or possible skeptical debunking". Unless the thing crashes and is examined immediately on national television (and even here there is a slight probability that it's all some publicity stunt) how can anything meet your criteria. The courts never decide guilt or innocence with such an impossible standard and, frankly, even most scientific debates are not settled with such standards. But replication is important (in scientific debates) and we should take that into account in the UFO debate. There have been hundreds of car stalling and car stopping cases associated with the UFO phenomenon. Levelland is just one example of many. A military vehicle as a reasonable explanation? I don't think so.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • Dominick...

    You know how highly I appreciate your views.

    And yes, I'm asking for more than may be possible in ufology, but I'm trying to get at UFO sightings/events that are not open to skeptical asides.

    The readers here, like you, are not inclined to present the kind of drivel that one finds at other blogs, such as Kevin Randle's or Isaac Koi's Above Top Secret and others I could name, such as Frank Warren's The UFO Chronicles.

    Nonetheless, I'm trying to force a UFO example that meets an objectivity that can't be libeled by my friends Lance, Gilles, Zoam, or CDA.

    Those guys are tough.

    Like the elements of Quantum Mechanics one should be able to produce a UFO case that may be hypothetical but has accoutrements that are pristine to the point that no antithetical proposals can deny its reality.

    There should be one UFO account that does this....at least one.

    That's what I'm digging for, here.

    Levelland isn't that incident, nor is the Oregon event, interesting as those cases seem to be.

    But I thank you for providing them as your examples of excellent, real UFO sightings.

    For me, they aren't.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • Hell, even the old Florida Scoutmaster case (certainly not impressive in any other way) had an "accoutrement" that is absolutely "pristine" and that no skeptic (that I'm aware of) has ever dealt with seriously: The Air Force discovery of "charred roots" under the spot (and nowhere else) where Sonny said a UFO hovered. O.K., alleged fair-minded skeptics, explain that discovery away in prosaic terms. Sixty years should be time enough to have come up with some conventional explanation. My bet is that it's simply easier to say that a. it all just never happened or b. that the lab that ran the tests made a mistake. Aha! Case solved!

    By Blogger Dominick, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • I always liked the Desvergers case but Dominick the flaw lies in the character of Sonny.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • Scientific truth, RR, has absolutely nothing to do with the personal character of the scientist. Tesla may have been a pervert (I have no idea) but his discoveries have stood the test of time. BTW, don't let the skeptics off of the hook on the Desvergers case by trashing Sonny. He never claimed that the grass roots (not the grass itself) were charred, he did not discover the charring, and he did not do the anlaysis...so his alleged character has noting to do with the "pristine" accoutrement that you requested.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • Dominick..

    I've done a few postings over the years on the Desvergers episode. (You can find them via Google I think.)

    That whole case is premised by Sonny's character.

    It's an interesting account surely but marred by his "character."

    I'd like to accept your naive view of the episode, but can't.

    That's the problem with ufology and UFO research. No one is being forensic, and I mean about everything: physical attributes of the sighting or event, the psychology of the witnesses or those interviewing them, and the interference of the government or other agencies, et cetera.

    UFO "research" is slipshod and, in your case, despite how much I like you and believe you to be a trustworthy, honest, intelligent guy, you are too quick to accept UFO reports at face value.

    Drill down into the Desvergers account, before the fact and after the fact, and see if you still find the case to be virginal.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 08, 2015  

  • There is that odd CE-2 case in Project Blue Book Report 14, a few days after the Desvergers case. Occurred at Pittsburg, Kansas, and listed as a 'good unknown' by the Battelle Institute (and still an unknown in Blue Book's final list when they closed the project). It was a strange craft that landed in a field in daylight near the main road. Look it up in BB Report 14. But in the end it is still only a single witness affair.

    By Blogger cda, at Thursday, July 09, 2015  

Post a Comment

<< Home