What if you saw a UFO?

This isn't a joke.  Most discussions of UFO sightings focus on reported sightings and reactions of those who saw the object or objects.  If you consider yourself a rational individual with a good understanding of the physical world, actually having the experience of seeing a UFO can be a life changing event.  A recent poll on Daily Kos was very interesting.  About a third of us have advanced degrees.  I have a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering with an undergraduate degree in Engineering Physics.  I'm 65, and I've been a private pilot since the age of 18, and am used to looking at objects in the sky.  My wife, who also saw the objects is a Ph.D. clinical psychologist who testifies in court as an expert witness from time to time.  Our experience follows:  

We were in Negril, Jamaica on vacation last January.  We were walking outside on a very clear night when my wife suddenly asked me, "Are those airplanes?"  There were five round orange globes about a tenth of the diameter of the moon moving actoss the sky in a way that can't be associated with any aircraft.  The motion was uneven, with abrupt changes in speed and direction.  The whole thing lasted less than a minute before the objects vanished over the horizon.  I posted about it on the Negril message board when I returned home to see if anyone else had seen this, and nobody had.  I checked the internet and read about the O'Hare sighting as well as one by a retired air force F-16 pilot in Arkansas that was very similar to what we had seen.

I don't want to focus on the details of what we saw, but rather our reaction to it.  I am having a very hard time dealing with this.  I made a nice living as an engineer/scientist, and I always assumed that regardless of the reports, that interstellar travel faster than the speed of light was impossible.  I certainly enjoyed Star Wars, and I used to read science fiction from time to time.  I enjoyed Larry Niven and Harlan Ellison, in particular.  I feel like the rug has been pulled out from under me right now.  I never had a problem with the idea of advanced civilizations, but I didn't think they'd have any interest in us, and they certainly wouldn't be traveling faster than light to visit us.  Obviously, I was wrong.  As a matter of interest, when a nuclear explosion occurs, a particular kind of very strong radio signal termed EMP is generated.  I think perhaps we may have got something's attention with our above ground testing in the 1940's.

My wife is not having the same problem I am.  She just thinks our known laws of physics will be modified in the future, and in the meantime, life goes on.

I have been giving this a lot of thought, and one conclusion I have come to is that I would be having an even more difficult time if I had seen this by myself.  If any of you are in that position, be assured that you're OK.  That's as much as I can come up with right now.  We may be an interstellar tourist attraction; who knows?  

•  Whaddaya mean "What if"?

  by Pozzo on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:34:49 AM PDT

•  leaninig on technical definitions...

  You saw a UFO.
  That means, you (a) saw something flying and (b) didn't know what it was.
  That happens. A lot.

  If they were spaceships, well, that's an entirely different matter, and one beyond the scope of either this diary or of your (or anyone's really) expertise.

  by khereva on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:36:09 AM PDT

  •  I saw a bird the other day...

    ...but couldn't tell what kind it was.  Ergo...

    by rserven on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:55:14 AM PDT

    •  well then, you saw a UFB

      not a UFO! ;)

      by Pandoras Box on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:30:31 AM PDT

  •  But what if you saw it not only with your eyes

    but with a fairly powerful reflector telescope while star gazing?

    by skippythebox on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:09:54 AM PDT

    •  then you saw something flying

      and didn't know what it was-- ergo UFO.

      In essence, once you've proven (to yourself or anyone else) it's a spaceship, it isn't a UFO anymore, because it's no longer Unidentified.

      by khereva on Tue May 29, 2007 at 11:54:01 AM PDT

      •  true.

        was the oddest thing to see though and very hard to describe in a precise manner.  Think of a field of light and within that light you have smaller and less intense blobs of light moving within it all with distinct dark edges at their perimeter showing that they were all circular.  Two larger blobs/bubbles/circles what the hell ever you wanna call it with very little movement and many smaller ones moving more rapidly near by them, and occasionally either going behind them or into them.

        All very, very, very odd.

        by skippythebox on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:51:28 PM PDT

•  If I saw a UFO,

  suddenly the last 6 years or so would make a lot more sense.

  by johnny71 on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:38:19 AM PDT

  •  If Giuliani wins,

    I'm hitchhikin'.

    by bleeding blue on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:48:22 AM PDT

    •  Just Don't Panic.

      Or do, actually.....

      by means are the ends on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:00:52 AM PDT

      •  And don't forget your towel. n/t

        by sbdenmon on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:18:21 AM PDT

•  Occam's Razor

  Lots of weird stuff in the sky. But any pattern of lights, shapes, etc., will probably have a more simple explanation than one which requires travel at faster-than-light speeds.

  by The Raven on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:41:16 AM PDT

  •  I used to believe exacty that

    I don't know how to explain more clearly that this was something entirely different than I had ever seen.  

    by Steve15 on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:45:51 AM PDT

    •  I have to go with Raven on this -

      you saw something different then you have ever seen - but then to leap to extraterrestrial from that makes little sense.

      No one here most likely can tell you what you saw - we can point to hundreds of times people claim that what they saw were spaceships yet they had earthly explanations, yet somehow, the next time there is something unexplained, we seem to want to go there again...

      Enjoy the experience, marvel at the mystery, but spend your time working on solving more earthly puzzles, you will feel better in thte end.

      by ETinKC on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:02:02 AM PDT

•  Hmmm

  I beleive that there is a strong possiblity that we are not alone, so seeing a UFO would not upset my world view.

  by dotdot on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:41:27 AM PDT

•  I can understand

  Experiencing something that rocks your world or at least your understanding of it.

  But what you have seen doesn't necessarily mean that you have also seen interstellar spaceships.  To me that is a leap in logic.

  Perhaps, given that you do have a scientific and enquiring mind you should seek out those people who are applying logic and scientific rigor to UFO sightings and see what they have come up with.

  I remember reading years ago that most UFO sightings occurred over or near water.  Interesting from the perspective of your experience.

  I also read of a UFO sighting in Iran last winter that was widely reported.  That one made me wonder what the US was up to, not aliens.

  by Bionic on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:45:42 AM PDT

•  "UFO" does not necessarily equal

  "beings from outer space in technologies we are light years away from."

  I saw one video clip of "strange lights hovering over the horizon and moving in unusual ways" on a TV show that was pretty plainly (to my eye, anyway) the lights of planes in a holding pattern approaching LAX.  The only reason it looked odd was because of the distortions in human perception created by night-time, and the fact that things moving in 3 dimensions (i.e. including towards you) look different from things moving across a 2-dimensional plane.

  There are much simpler explanations for odd lights in the sky than interstellar tourism.

  by Loquatrix on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:48:29 AM PDT

•  I aint seen no saucers

  except the ones upon my shelf
  and if'n I ever see one
  you know
  I'll keep it to myself....

  For if there's life out there
  beyond this one here on Earth
  Linda must have gone out there
  and got her money's worth!

  (J. Prine - Linda's gone to Mars)

  I'm keepin' my eyes peeled.

  And if I ever get abducted, I will be REAL convincing that I need lots of a particular  sweet-smelling herb for the long journey... and a box or 2 of brownie mix...;)

  But first I will try to get them to obliterate the white house.

  by xxdr zombiexx on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:51:09 AM PDT

•  Carl Sagan: People see things

  People have always seen things.  Whether the call them angels, demons, ghosts, fairies, leprechauns, UFOs, or whatever, people see things.  

  You saw something. Perhaps there's a natural explanation for it, like gas or phospherus. Perhaps there's a man-made explanation like a weather balloons.  

  Perhaps it's aliens or time travelers.  But you can't accept any hypothesis on the basis of a short observation.

  But I hope you waved to Grbntz for me.  He still owes me money.

  by Tracker on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:51:31 AM PDT

  •  Did You Read His "UFO's: A Scientific Debate"

    with Thornton Page, c. 1969 or so? Great collection of reports and presentations by experts in a number of related fields.

    Plus at the end Sagan's "Santa Claus" hypothesis discussion of hypothesis testing.

    by Gooserock on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:59:16 AM PDT

•  A friend of mine's dad

  is a rancher in Texas, and he had an encounter.  He chose to insist his family never mention it again.  Spooky things.  

  by reef the dog on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:53:15 AM PDT

•  I once saw one

  So did about half my hometown.  Turned out it was a new advertising airplane, with scrolling lit-up letters on the bottom of the wings, that was flying too high to be read.

  by Leggy Starlitz on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:55:12 AM PDT

  •  That happened to me too!

    It was a very weird light in the sky moving in an unusual pattern and making no sound, even though it seemed fairly close.  It was definitely a UFO, until it passed overhead and we clearly read the advertising message.  Suddenly it was an IFO but it was a really weird experience up to that point.  

    by sarahnity on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:32:45 AM PDT

    •  Me, too. I think it's a relatively common

      "wierd" experience. I  also live close to several airplane  flight paths, so I have learned to identify the many strange at-first-anomalous-looking lights in the sky around me.

      Nevertheless, I don't discount the scientific probability that we are not the only sentient species in the universe. Or even that they might have a better grasp of types of science that we have not yet fully mastered, or perhaps even be aware of--e.g. quantum mechanics and such. So I guess I'm with the diarist's wife on this one.

      There is a perfectly logical and scientific explanation for the diarist's experience, one way or another.

      by means are the ends on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:47:53 AM PDT

•  I'd make sure somebody else saw it too

  And nobody who was related or romantically involved with me.

  by neil on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:56:30 AM PDT

•  I Saw a Plane Respond to a UFO

  Happened I think in the spring of 68, a starry warmish night in a semi rural Ohio industrial-area suburb. We were looking up and watching a high altitude commercial jet cross the sky; the sound was trailing very roughly 10 degrees behind the aircraft as is the familiar experience.

  Directly overhead, it instantaneously got massively bright; we presume landing lights were switched on. We had the impression that there was a second very bright light in front of the aircraft momentarily at the same time, and we had the impression that it partially illuminated the commercial jet.

  The known aircraft made two hard swerves around 30 degrees or so, offcourse and then back on during 3-5 seconds. We were in no position to guess what vertical component may have been involved since we were directly underneath.

  By around 5-7 seconds later the jet was back on track.

  We never saw evidence that any other aircraft was leaving that location in any direction.

  So it's a UFO in the most classic, neutral sense of the term. Both the pilot and we had seen something which we at least couldn't identify.

  As to the possibility of alien visitors, well, I'm not a trained scientist but I use scientific kind of problem solving in my artistic work. My first rule is that anything that happens must be possible.

  If aliens were coming here from anyplace more distant than Jupiter, they're utterly magical by our standards. Our laws of physics are being tweaked all the time at least in minor ways, and we had some really gigantic tweaks only a century ago. Dark matter and accelerating expansion seem to be pretty startling and basic ideas.

  We've got to presume that evidence of real extra-solar-system visitors is going look contradictory, nonsensical or magical to us, and we have to presume they wouldn't have any more interest in "contact" with us than we do in negotiating with antelopes and for the same reason.

  I don't have a hard belief in alien visitors any more than about precognitive dreams, not for pure lack of experience but so far because I've got nothing reliable I can work with. Other than that, the idea of unknown physics, sure, no big deal.

  by Gooserock on Tue May 29, 2007 at 07:57:44 AM PDT

•  It is difficult to have one's comfortable

  scientific worldview shattered. The fervor of the scientific view can be carried almost to the point of an evangelical cult,IMHO, which denies the possibility that anything exists outside of what is currently known scientifically.

  Given our primitive state at present, this is actually a rather laughable assumption, but one which I solidly shared up until about 34 years old. Don't worry, it only took me about 10 years to adjust. You will, too, I am sure. And science will still be there, working well.

  In this instance, you have a confirming witness, and the intellectual tools to expand your views of what constitutes our universe. Best of luck.

  Meanwhile, I recommend looking at Rupert Sheldrake's homepage. He maintains that "science is a method, not a position", which I find valid. I take no position on it, I just enjoy looking at the fringes of our comfortable little scientific paradigms.

  Wanna blow your mind a little more? Look deeply into Near Death Experiences. Not what others say about NDE's, but what the experiencers actually say and have had confirmed. It's interesting.

  by means are the ends on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:00:03 AM PDT

  •  if seeing one thing that you can not

    explain "Shatters" your scientific world view, then it was a fairly flimsy foundation to begin with.  An I have looked into NDE, did a research paper on them in college, and yeah, they were unsubstantiated then and even more so now.

    by ETinKC on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:05:49 AM PDT

    •  LOL. If one research paper in college

      is your basis, best of luck. I have done post-doctoral research, so it's not like I'm abandoning science! This Ph.D. has room in her expansive world view for all things, including examining intriguing anomalies. It just makes life interesting, and I am always attempting to debunk, and to fit things into my firmly ensconced (newly flexible but still there) scientific worldview.

      by means are the ends on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:34:41 AM PDT

      •  Oh, and I think your mom and I

        share the same religion!

        by means are the ends on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:36:13 AM PDT

      •  Actually, my basis was the published body

        of peered reviewed research.  

        by ETinKC on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:36:32 AM PDT

        •  Yes. And part of good scientific

          research is going back to the orginal sources. "Peer reviewed research" is a good start, but hasn't prevented, for example, drug companies influencing the outcomes of research published in excellent peer-reviewed journals, to the point that the AMA had to step in and make better rules. And that is why sometimes those who go back and recrunch numbers find completely different results. Etc.

          One thing I learned in researching my dissertation, different field) is that the source material was often quite different than described second or tenth hand. And that conclusions reached were often highly influenced by the researcher's particular scientific axe to grind. It was quite an eye opener. I then realized why the first part of any dissertation is a thorough literature review. Just my experience. Your mileage may vary, depending on the field.

          by means are the ends on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:44:00 AM PDT

          •  And first person accounts are incredibly

            unreliable, just as eyewitness testimony is notoriously inaccurate.

            As said elsewhere, if you want to learn about horseracing, don't ask a horse. He can't tell you anything you can use.

            First person accounts form almost no basis for NDE research, for the same reasons that Velikovsky forms almost no basis for papers in physics or astronomy.

            by khereva on Tue May 29, 2007 at 03:40:41 PM PDT

  •  Uh...

    Wanna blow your mind a little more? Look deeply into Near Death Experiences. Not what others say about NDE's, but what the experiencers actually say and have had confirmed. It's interesting.

    No. It's not.

    by Morlock on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:36:58 AM PDT

    •  Uh, we're all different. n/t

      by means are the ends on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:38:19 AM PDT

      •  I acknowledge, however, that the area

        may not interest the diarist, who is a hard-sciences guy. Point taken.

        by means are the ends on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:49:15 AM PDT

        •  Maybe quantum physics instead?

          Lots of interesting anomalies there, to keep scientists happy, and humble, for decades.

          by means are the ends on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:38:45 AM PDT

          •  chaos theory and fractals are enough

            to blow my mind (and scare the s**t out of me), but i am open to the idea, and try to revel in the joy, that there is great mystery in the universe.  

            by Pandoras Box on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:54:07 AM PDT

            •  why is that scary for you?

              Were you that invested in the "clockwork universe"? I find chaos theory not just a revelation, but an affirmation of everything i'd always thought about how the world "works".

              by subtropolis on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:01:00 AM PDT

              •  admittedly, the book on Chaos theory

                was my hubbie's beach book, not mine. I am half-kidding about it being scary, but from his explanations and his demonstrations on fractals, it simply seemed to me to be so utterly profound and deep, that it was simply overwhelming to me.  Very mind expanding.

                I don't think I understand what you mean by a "clockwork" universe, btw. Can you explain? Do you mean one in which we understand the universe only by our own scientific processes?  Because I can embrace a much wider reality than that, but when I find that science and mystery meet, embrace, and dance together, I am awed (and a little frightened...in a good way)

                by Pandoras Box on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:09:05 AM PDT

                •  clockwork, from Newtonian motion

                  Back then, the universe was thought to run like clockwork—an orderly, precise, almost mechanical universe. This included not only the movements of the planets but also to processes here on Earth. We've since come to see that there is a lot more to it than that, including a better understanding of evolutionary processes, quantum theory, etc. Of course, even these are still not fully understood (and, to some extent, open to interpretation).

                  Anyhoo, i too, find it all thrilling. I understand you're use of the word "scary" in that context but i'm happy to stick with thrilling. I guess i asked because so many people (throughout recorded history) have seemed to have missed the point of these revelations entirely through an unfortunate inability to come to grips with them, remaining afraid, and, ultimately, hostile to the nature of our very being.

                  by subtropolis on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:47:02 AM PDT

                  •  Thrilling is a MUCH better word!

                    It does feel like one is standing on a monumental precipice, gazing out at the unknown!  

                    And thank you for the explanation of the "clockwork" universe!

                    :)

                    by Pandoras Box on Tue May 29, 2007 at 12:24:14 PM PDT

              •  Well, I and the diarist are old enough

                to be in a generation where most were sold on the salvation of "clockwork science", so I may actually understand his reaction a bit more.

                Science was going to save the world, anything beyond our understanding was scoffed at, and God did not play dice with the universe (except quantum physics, but we didn't think about that too much).

                This is the way that it was for me, and for many around me, although of course not everyone.

                Just as women's experiences are different now to the point of not recognizing or understanding the limitations and restrictions with which those my age  grew up, science also moves and shifts, to the point that certain paradigms and understandings that are accepted easily now, were seen as beyond the pale in the past.

                I identify with the diarist in his bewilderment. Many of us, though of course not all, were sold some versions of the "clockwork universe". It is a bit wrenching to move beyond it, but rewarding and necessary.

                This paragraph from Wikipedia nices points out the divide in the progress of science which I am discussing, and how the development of the computer hastened our understanding, and ability to compolete the complex experiements and calculations to further our understanding. It has not always been so, however.

                Chaos theory progressed more rapidly after mid-century, when it first became evident for some scientists that linear theory, the prevailing system theory at that time, simply could not explain the observed behaviour of certain experiments like that of the logistic map. The main catalyst for the development of chaos theory was the electronic computer. Much of the mathematics of chaos theory involves the repeated iteration of simple mathematical formulas, which would be impractical to do by hand. Electronic computers made these repeated calculations practical. One of the earliest electronic digital computers, ENIAC, was used to run simple weather forecasting models.

                by means are the ends on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:15:54 AM PDT

•  No worries. Not only are they out there...

  they're here too. After your mind bends enough to accept that, you can start looking to proving yourself wrong...only to ending proving yourself right. There's info out there. You can start here..

  http://www.disclosureproject.org/

  this is interesting too. Don't know if it's true, but if it is, it's certainly mindbending.

  http://www.serpo.org/

  Don't worry, you're not alone. I was bitch-slapped out of my view of reality in my teen years.  It does change your fundamental world view. The fear is real. Reality becomes questionable. There's nothing you can do about it...except search for answers. And the few you find won't be acceptable. But you will accept them nonetheless.

  On the bright side...it's a new mental journey. Enjoy.

  by cosbo on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:04:14 AM PDT

  •  my nit about disclosure project

    is that Steven Greer is a bit too … esoteric for my tastes. The list of witnesses and their testimony¹ is indeed quite thought-provoking. But it bothers me, a bit, that Greer focuses so much on his theory that "UFO technology" is being covered up so as to keep "free energy" from the world.² This impression was bolstered by his appearance here in Montreal as part of a conference along with all manner of New Age types. (No, i did not attend.)

    That said, again—the witnesses, themselves, are quite compelling.

    ¹ Not really testimony, really, as the fact that they wish to be given clearance from their respective security gags in order that they might testify was the reason for their press conference.

    ² This may very well be the case. At least, it may be partially correct. However, i feel that it's more important to establish just what has been going on for the past several decades first. A good start is Richard Dolan's UFOs and the National Security State, Vol. I

    by subtropolis on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:58:51 AM PDT

    •  The Discolsure Project (video for the interested)

      Here's a link to the two hour press conference that was held May 9th, 2001 at the National Press Club.

      Here's the blurb:

      On Wednesday, May 9th 2001, over twenty military, intelligence, government, corporate and scientific witnesses came forward at the National Press Club in Washington, DC to establish the reality of UFOs or extraterrestrial vehicles, extraterrestrial life forms, and resulting advanced energy and propulsion technologies. The weight of this first-hand testimony, along with supporting government documentation and other evidence, will establish without any doubt the reality of these phenomena, according to Dr. Steven M. Greer, director of the Disclosure Project which hosted the event.

      Here's a link a to a two page pamphlet of the major quotes.

      One of them:

      US Air Force, NRO Operative, Sergeant Dan Morris
      UFOs are both extraterrestrial and manmade. It's not that our government doesn't want us to know that there are other people on other planets. What the people in power don't want us to know is that this free energy [from energy generators developed with UFO technology] is available to everybody. So secrecy about the UFOs is because of the energy issue. When this knowledge is found out by the people, they will demand that our government release this technology, and it will change the world. --Disclosure, pp. 364.

      So apparently Dr. Greer isn't the only one with the 'free energy is the reason' theory.  

      A lot of very powerful people would stand to lose a lot if energy was free.  

      Think about it.

      by Dr Seuss on Tue May 29, 2007 at 12:24:43 PM PDT

      •  oh, i'm not discounting it

        This may very well be the case. At least, it may be partially correct. However, i feel that it's more important to establish just what has been going on for the past several decades first.

        FWIW, i remember when this press conference happened, and followed the project for quite some time. It's not surprising, given this administration, 9/11, etc. that it basically disappeared, though.

        by subtropolis on Tue May 29, 2007 at 01:29:48 PM PDT

        •  ok... cuz

          this kind of stuff, if true, would really make me take second and third looks at the black helicopters ...

          by Dr Seuss on Tue May 29, 2007 at 03:37:29 PM PDT

      •  All it would take is a single leak

        to produce an awful lot of "free energy" generators, and you couldn't swing a cat without hitting a public demonstration of one.

        I'll believe it when I see it... just as I'll believe in interstellar craft when one lands on the White House lawn in front of cameras and crowds of thousands.

        by khereva on Tue May 29, 2007 at 03:43:54 PM PDT

•  Can IT Be

  For the writer is the Kwisatz Haderack

  by unicornone on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:07:44 AM PDT

•  The Town of Ward Colorado had a Meeting on This

  We decided that if a UFO ever landed within the city limits the citizens of the town would form one long line and moon it.

  by Queen of Swords on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:10:24 AM PDT

  •  tee hee!

    by Pandoras Box on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:36:50 AM PDT

•  Wait a second..

  .. so you see lights in the sky, that appear to the human eye to be moving erratically and changing direction and you conclude aliens are visiting us? Just becausse they are different from anything you have seen before?

  Very scientific of you.

  You spend much of the diary going over you scientific credentials and throw any form of critical thinking out of the window.

  Did you see little men in the windows? What empirical evidence do you have that these lights were controlled by intelligent life? "Abrupt changes in speed and direction" does that sound like intelligent life was at the wheel? Why do all these accounts seem to have abrupt changes of direction? Is it because that rules out regular aircraft? I think it is. And why would intelligent life be throwing these craft around in abrupt changes of direction? Because they can? Wouldn't they glide around smoothly?

  But you know like crop circles, ghosts and urban myths in general there are some people in the world who actively want to keep these myths alive. I think that’s the interesting social studies experiment. What makes the people who fake abductions, who fake big foot, who fake fairies at the bottom of the garden tick? Because its these people who allow mass group think sightings (such as the valley sighting, that turned out to be flares) to happened. If these wasn’t people furthering these myths and talking about them, they would die very quickly.

  by back2basics on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:11:20 AM PDT

  •  to be fair

    the diarist said he's an engineer, not a scientist (there's a joke in there, trust me).

    As for "the people who fake abductions, who fake big foot, who fake fairies at the bottom of the garden" i'm sure there will always be those sorts around, for one reason or another. However, the fact that some people hoax UFO sightings, etc. in no way discounts the possibility that some of them are the real thing. Yes, i know that the evidence is very slim. I'm just pointing out that, for the hoaxers, it's trivially simple to come up with something that looks or sounds like countless other sightings.

    Do the grey people exist? Who knows? Are a lot of the sightings of the little grey people a load of BS? Most assuredly so. It's just too easy to come up with something that, to the really gullible, seems to be exactly the same thing that has happened somewhere else.

    The subject has become an extremely difficult one to study these days, as the internet has made it far too easy for the assholes to blow an awful lot of noise into the signals.

    by subtropolis on Tue May 29, 2007 at 01:41:15 PM PDT

•  headlights on clouds

  round globes of light moving erratically in the night sky...

  distant car headlights reflecting off of dark clouds.... a very common and misinterpreted visual phenomena at night.

  google search on "Marfa lights" for a more regional example.

  by Ray in TX on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:11:26 AM PDT

•  What Do You Mean "If?"

  I saw something.

  It was flying.

  I couldn't identify it.

  File under "UFO."

  I'm not going to jump to a speculative identification.

  by greenskeeper on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:18:34 AM PDT

•  An alternative solution

  Having vacationed in Negril, it occurred to us when we got home, was how "mellow" everyone was on the island.  The fact that our clothes reeked of Mary Jane furthered our "mellow" contention.

  Even second hand, it's a little spacey.

  by JFinNe on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:23:54 AM PDT

  •  We were both straight at the time

    We'd had a couple of rum drinks a couple of hours earlier, and had just stopped at the bar to get four glasses of ice water to take back to our room.  That's a fair comment.

    by Steve15 on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:12:32 AM PDT

•  Well if I saw a UFO..

  I'd see if the immigrants onboard could run for
  office and do some 'cleaning work' that the current
  occupants can't seem to get done...but then I have fins so I'm probably going to hell... ;)

  by ronny mermaid on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:25:24 AM PDT

  •  Waiddaminit--We've ALREADY Got Mysterious

    aliens running the country whose methods and thinking are unknown to us.

    I don't want to replace them with aliens we're physically incapable of understanding!!

    by Gooserock on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:03:40 AM PDT

•  see a UFO and people call ya' crazy!

  But say that you believe in an invisible man who lives in the clouds and sends you personal messages and you're elected president of the United States. go figure!?

  by tgray on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:36:00 AM PDT

  •  not only that one believes this, but, apparently

    in this country, one MUST believe this to even be considered for election.

    ish.

    by Pandoras Box on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:21:13 AM PDT

•  It's not what you actually see,

  it's what you think you see.

  You have no alternative but to define it according to your conditioned self.

  And if it doesn't fit in....Well....

  Can you "be still and know"?

  That's how I'm conditioned.

  by DW Dawg on Tue May 29, 2007 at 08:48:12 AM PDT

•  Ummm... Heh...

  I am open to the possibility of UFOs (why the hell not) but I'm not certain that dKos is really the best place to discuss it.

  Just sayin'.

  by Karmafish on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:00:49 AM PDT

  •  I thought about that

    This community seems to be highly educated and reality based.  I guess I'll have to leave it at that.  

    by Steve15 on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:07:52 AM PDT

•  My mom saw one too

  She was driving my brother and a friend back from a Boy Scout meeting. They saw a bright light in the sky and stopped the car on the side of the highway. A couple of other cars had stopped as well. The light, as I said, was very bright and absolutely stationery. It hovered (again, not hovering really, it stayed stock still) for a while and then shot off at a high speed. Being the 1960's (probably 1965 or 1966), there was nothing around that could act like this. No helicopters, planes, etc.
  There was only one conclusion. Of course, my dad didn't believe my mom or brother. Then on the way to work the next day he heard someone call into a radio show and describe the same event.
  Folks can laugh. But, really, are we so arrogant to believe that there is no other life in the universe, or that they might be more advanced than we are? When you look at it, we're still a pretty primitive people.

  by MA Liberal on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:15:45 AM PDT

  •  why we laugh

    "There was only one conclusion."

    "Folks can laugh."

    We laugh at the idea that you think there's only one conclusion, and that it must be an intelligent alien species traveling light-years across the galaxy.

    by Ray in TX on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:30:24 AM PDT

    •  And whether you laugh or not

      doesn't alter the truth.
      If not from another planet, what would your explanation be? And no, it wasn't gasses, car headlights, or anything else.

      by MA Liberal on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:57:48 AM PDT

      •  sorry

        but lights in the sky are notorious for fooling observers.

        Humans have no visual acuity at night, no depth perception, but yet a great willingness to assume the most fanciful explanation for the most limited amount of information ("circles of light" = "aliens from another world")

        You need to think a little more critically. I have seen unexplained "lights" in the sky many, many times and not once did I think "oh my god! aliens from another planet!"

        by Ray in TX on Tue May 29, 2007 at 12:21:54 PM PDT

        •  Folks once thought the earth was flat

          your explanation could only be given by someone who has never seen one. The light they described as not high in the sky. It was only slightly higher than a telephone pole or two. And it disappearing so fast, well, sorry, but nothing man-made moves that fast (or did back then).
          Personally, I think the idea of life beyond our planet is fascinating. And to feel as though we are a mistake, that it could only happen once in all the billions of stars out there,,to me, is foolish and  not really thinking.
          AS I said, people have, for centuries, been criticized for things that were proven true. Believe what you want. But it still won't change a thing.

          by MA Liberal on Tue May 29, 2007 at 01:27:52 PM PDT

          •  once again...

            "And it disappearing so fast, well, sorry, but nothing man-made moves that fast"

            That's a wild assumption. I make light move and disappear quickly all of the time.

            "Personally, I think the idea of life beyond our planet is fascinating. And to feel as though we are a mistake, that it could only happen once in all the billions of stars out there,,to me, is foolish and  not really thinking. "

            That's the same reason people believe in god(s). To give purpose to what otherwise would seem to be a meaningless existence.

            Not believing that floating lights are extraterrestial visitors does not mean that we are a mistake, nor does it rob any meaning from our existance. Those are just your personal opinions that motivate your interpretation of what you can't readily explain.

            500 years ago, those lights would have been ghosts or spirits.

            by Ray in TX on Tue May 29, 2007 at 06:39:02 PM PDT

•  My father, now gone, reported seeing a UFO

  when he was flying in an airplane, returning from a business trip.  He said it very matter-of-factly, he saw what he saw and told us about it.  My dad was a very clear headed, very down to earth guy, with absolutely NO imagination (or even real curiosity) about this sort of thing.

  by Pandoras Box on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:18:21 AM PDT

•  My father was with the FAA for his entire career.

  In a discussion with him about UFO's, he told me that, indeed, they do exhist and that he should not be telling me that they do.

  He's been dead for 30 years...I remember the look in his eyes when he told me...he was serious, somewhat furtive, but most of all, he was telling me a truth that he wanted me to know.

  by trinityfly on Tue May 29, 2007 at 09:35:06 AM PDT

  •  my uncle - high-ranking officer in the Air Force

    and he always laughed at the UFO stories. And guess what, he knew the truth about the Area 51 "aliens" before it was made public (i.e. military weather balloons).

    The military intentionally let the UFO stories persist as cover for what they were doing in the 50s & 60s. There was a real disinformation war going on with the Soviets at the time and they had no qualms about misleading the public in the name of national security (sound familiar?). Now that they have come clean about it, people still cling to the popular belief of an extraterrestial origin to UFOs.

    UFOs are just the high-tech reincarnation of Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster.

    by Ray in TX on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:38:08 AM PDT

    •  that's partially correct

      Yes, for many years, the Air Force did allow the idea of extraterrestrial visitors provide some cover for several deep black projects. And why not? It makes perfect sense.

      However, enough evidence has been uncovered to show that the military has, for many decades, taken the subject quite seriously. I posted this link in another thread, but it bears repeating. You might find this book of interest: UFOs and the National Security State, Vol. I.

      There have also been certain figures from the military who have been quite vocal about the subject.

      That there is a serious possibility that we are being visited—and have been visited for many years—by people from outer space, from other civilisations … This should be the subject of rigorous scientific investigation, and not the subject of rubbishing by tabloid newspapers.

      – Lord Hill-Norton, five-star Admiral; former head of the British ministry of defence (1973); Chairman—Military Committee of NATO (1974–1977)

      by subtropolis on Tue May 29, 2007 at 02:02:35 PM PDT

•  maybe so, or maybe not...

  We engineering types are used to discussing "billions" of galaxies, stars, miles, light-years, etc.  

  Within those billions of potential solar systems, consider the probability that at least one planet is of such an environment that it nurtured life in a form similar to ours... carbon based, and all that...

  With billions of potential places for life to evolve, what would be the probability that in just one place, life would evolve and those beings would develop technology in a similar track to ours...

  ...and of those places where the beings developed technology, what again is the probability that at least one technology is more advanced than "ours?"

  Our understanding of physics and the universe held that nothing was smaller than the electron until we started looking for something smaller than the electron...  Perhaps we don't know everything there is to know about the nature of the universe, speed of light, etc.  What we do know serves us well, but we have to be open to the fact that maybe, just maybe, we're not "all that."

  Before you drive yourself nuts, consider the probabilities.  

  Me?  I'm an EE too, but am comfortable with the notion that other life probably exists...and can probably kick our self-destructive asses.

  I just wish they'd land on the WH lawn during a daytime press conference and personally thank the bird that crapped on chimpy.

  by netguyct on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:16:56 AM PDT

•  I'm not ready to deal with ufo's

  But I do believe in ghosts. 'Nuff said.

  I had a similar experience of desparately needing to explain certain physical phenomena which was clearly impossible. It has been a couple of years since then, and I'm more comfortable with the notion that we don't really know as much as we thought. And I've proven to myself that I am not crazy or alone.

  There have been a lot of other scientific assumptions that were later proven to be untrue. The theory of the humors. Aether. Spontaneous generation. It was hard to retrain people who believed these ideas their whole lives - but eventually their generation died out.

  Taking this back to Democrats and Republicans, look at this thread - see how easy it is for people to jump to conclusions based on this or that thing they have read. It is just as hard for a conservative to understand how liberal policies might help the nation. The thing that really helps change minds is honest, real stories. I don't know what the diarist saw. I can tell that he has enough experience to know that he really did see something he couldn't explain. He doesn't have enough information to convince somebody else, but he convinced himself. I am in the same situation when I try to convince my brother that global warming is real.

  by Lefty Mama on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:18:35 AM PDT

•  I'm more worried...

  ...about the UFO seeing me!

  by JeffW on Tue May 29, 2007 at 10:46:41 AM PDT

  •  heh!

    by Pandoras Box on Tue May 29, 2007 at 12:37:42 PM PDT

•  I saw a classic UFO....until it moved further

  and I realized it was the top of a hot-air balloon partly obscured by misty clouds.

  I'm more interested in the really weird physics of plasma, lighting balls, and lightning in general. Nature. Rarely observed phenomena.

  by LNK on Tue May 29, 2007 at 11:18:04 AM PDT

•  I've never seen one

  but Lord we are a tiny speck in the universe, not even mayflies in time.
  The Sun is a lot younger than many stars.
  Not that I grasp the vastmess of the universe but I'm betting there is a lot more that we don't know than what we do know.

  I know a couple of people very affected by seeing a UFO. One was in Phoeneix during that 97 event. She didn't bring it up, I asked her. She was still disturbed. The whole neighborhood was outside watching this silent huge thing hovering...
  She heard the explanations and thinks maybe it could be a military project but found it disturbing they went over such a populated area if so. The other explanations don't wash. She shared the experience with hundreds but still feels a little crazy.

  The other person was in Michigan and it was also a shared experience. Someone had called the police who also watched it. It was filmed. There were many reports. Pilots saw it, radar people were trying to explain it.

  Who knows what they (or you) saw but they are not the explanations people use to dismiss them.

  I am always amused when people dismiss the possibility, like we know for sure.

  While I have not seen a UFO I have experienced the "impossible". It caused me to understand why the definition of the word awe includes fear or dread along with wonder. It is just too big.

  by joynow on Tue May 29, 2007 at 12:31:09 PM PDT

•  Retired Atronauts

  Have talked about it, i don't have a saved
  record, have read a couple accounts.

  I saw two low level small and slow black objects.
  What was really weird, one bee-lined, the
  other paralleled it but was zig zagging side to side abruptly.

  They were real close with good view, were not typical wing shaped.

  It's the movement that catches the eye, never
  seen before.

  by neosleaze on Tue May 29, 2007 at 06:05:01 PM PDT

•  I saw them, too.

  I saw 5 yellow globes in the sky around 1999 in the southeast US.  I had just dropped off my daughter at kindergarten and went to a path by a river to walk.  The spheres came "bubbling" overhead above the tree canopy (I don't know how high they were), and no propulsion that I know of could explain their movements.  They were quick, purposeful, and at times--playful.  It reminded  me somewhat of the movements of hummingbirds.  The spheres would slip and slide around each other and come to complete, abrupt halts. Not all of their motion was forward;  some would double back.  They were pale yellow and solid.  After less than a minute, they darted off in a direction that was perpendicular to the river and quickly disappeared.  They were not a natural phenomena;  their movements were purposeful, not random.  I was sure it would be on the news that night and was surprised when I heard no mention of them until I read your post.

  Thank you for sharing.  

  Raining Roses

  by Raining Roses on Wed May 30, 2007 at 08:53:59 PM PDT