Yes. I know. I am one of those watching the skies on a relatively regular basis. The weather sort of stops me a lot and I don't have as much time as I used to. Anyway, I write about it here:

http://members.aol.com/tprinty/astronomers.html

Astronomers do report UFOs every so often. However, many turn out to be mundane in nature. The one incident I talk about at the end may have been a US spy satellite making a course correction (it sounds a lot like similar events happening in orbit I have read about) but the TLE does not quite match up. The TLE could be wrong however since I only had one line. If the orbit was changed, then the TLE would be different.

Same for me. And I see flying things frequently (not debris nor meteoroids) and have on occasion glimpsed them momentarily as they've passed through the field of view. For me, they were and remain unidentified. But I don't care, I assume they are man-made objects and am not inclined to investigate. Even if one stopped and hovered in my FOV, I would probably just be annoyed that it is impeding my field of view and ruining my night-vision.

And Meteorologists.

And Satellite trackers.

Jon

And it is beliefs like these that provide the casual reader with the wrong information. Lt. Halt was actually in the forest when the event was taking place. If you cared to Google this incident you would find that there is even a tape recording of it. But as usual with sceptics of UFOs (as is the case with the vast majority here on BA) - you would rather guess fact from fiction.

Please dont speculate if you dont know what your talking about.

Hmmm... Can you point towards a single case where a satellite's re-entry has been mistaken for a triangular UFO? Also, there are many documented UFO encounters by military personnel who, I am sure, are far more qualified than either you or I to make a judgement on aerial craft. Have you ever looked at the 'fastwalker' incidents?

Surely any structured unidentified craft which is flying in a countries airspace is of military importance? Do you also believe that the incident at Rendlesham Forest (which was a US Nuclear Military Base) was of no importance to either the MoD or the US Military? After Lt. Halt filed his report he never heard about the incident from his superiors again? Rather odd don't you think?

Again - how can UFOs buzzing a US military base with nuclear capability be of no interest to the US military?

'buzzing'?

How do you define 'buzzing'? Usualy it means deliberately flying low over or around something.

__________________
'The eye can only see what the mind is prepared to accept'

Hi aceshi, welcome to the forum. Did someone claim they were structured craft or just unidentified objects?

Yes, several.


A large, well lit flying wedged shaped object flying very low over my house without any noise...There were many lights outlining the wedge shape. They seemed to be about the same brightness although some appeared to be reddish while others blue. (November 14, 1997 report from the NUFORC database - Satellite reentry)

A huge black triangular object was seen slowly traversing across the sky very close at what he estimated to be 300' off the ground. It was witnessed at aprox. a 60 degree angle traveling from a Northwest to a Northeast direction, seeming to be possibly over "Air Base Parkway" and heading toward the North side of Travis. This object was completely silent, massive and solid in its structure, as the star fields behind it became blocked as it moved along in a slow controlled trajectory...Ben described the object as a huge black mass which might have gone un-noticed if it were not for this trailing flame which shone behind it. As he stared in awe at this huge mass in such a close proximity he began to look for details on it. He noticed several small independent white lights, which were spaced randomly on the object, and emitted a continuos white light. He noticed that the lights revealed some sort of piping apparatus details around them, on the surface of the craft. (UFOlogist Steve Moreno report - Satellite reentry at the same time)

I'm amazed how such a sighting could be mistaken for a rocket booster re-entering the atmosphere! The craft was observed to be moving very slowly. It tilts and reorients itself. This is not what a falling rocket booster does! The news report is rife with disinformation and confusion. It is truly frightening how this type of craft can flaunt itself in our skies and be explained away and dismissed so easily. This video speaks for itself. (Ignatius Graffeo report/analysis of a booster reentry video)



Actually, I am not so certain about military personel being able to make judgements you suggest. I spent over 20 years in the Navy and I met many officers, who had very little knowledge of astronomical events in the sky. Pointing out planets and stars to them was an education. The problem with UFOlogists who generalize things is they don't really know what the qualifications of the individual really is. They see "pilot" and suddenly the individual is placed in such a lofty status, you would think he could make Carl Sagan look like an idiot. In the Rendlesham case, you have low ranking enlisted men, with no qualifications beyond being security guards at an airbase and an officer, who was not a pilot and only the base CO, which means his qualifications were for running an airbase but not dealing with phenomena outside of that speciality. All these individuals are human and their abiilties can be very limited. Even Jenny Randles, who originally thought of the case as Britains Roswell, has changed her stance on the matter and now agrees with many of the skeptics conclusions (see "UFOs that never were" by Roberts, Clarke, Randles).

Feel free to post the "fastwalker incidents" you descirbe. I have heard of several but they all fell apart under scrutiny. Maybe you have something I am not aware of.


There is no direct evidence of anything in the airspace other than the reports of Halt. His report, filed some time after the incident, got the dates wrong. Hard to react to a report that is inaccurate on the date. Additionally, there was no activiity after the events of the two nights. I am sure Halt got a phone call or two from superiors to ask a question or two but it was not worth really the effort to investigate. Were there any weapons problems? None that were reported so there was no need to file a report or the superiors to respond. Were aircraft affected? No. No need for a report. Just a strange report of lights seen outside the base. Any "beams" shot down into the base appeared to had no effect otherwise Halt would have mentioned it in the report. There is nothing odd about the sequence of events if you decide to take the blinders off and look at it from a military point of view and not a UFO point of view.



No evidence has been presented that the UFO affected anything on the base. If it did, there would be an interest in the matter. Otherwise, the response would be "so what"?

I would have to take issue with military personnel immediately put on the pedestal of lofty brilliance whose word is scared, as well.

I would be sacred of that too.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

Doh!

Right.
Do you know what you're talking about?

The "Halt memo" is dated Jan. 13, 1981.

The first night of sightings was Dec. 26, 1980.

Some two weeks...

Yes, Halt was present the second night of sightings, but the first paragraph of his memo is based on the 5 reports of those witnesses from the first night.
No speculation involved.


You'd do well to not throw me in with the other "usual... sceptics of UFOs."

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

And so you think Clarke's statement is incorrect, that reports from the RAF and civil aircrew were investigated, satisfactorily even?

I'd be interested in knowing to which investigations JayUtah was referring; there are only a couple of handsfull. And if I recall correctly, several suggested further study was needed.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "investigated." I noted earlier one of the more credible reports which remains unexplained.
But yes, a few gov't and military investigations concluded "no threat" and left it at that.
More of an appeasement than an assessment, IMO; a Cold War relic, I think.

A few scientific studies suggested further research was needed.

If not open, the book is surely marked.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

I see.
I disagree, however, that it is as you said, "always cannot be explained" and "never "unexplained with available evidence."

More importantly, though, is the fact that 5-10% of reports remain unexplained given available evidence (which, IMO, is a given anyway. I mean, were there more evidence, they might not remain "unexplained").

Unless and until a reasonable explanation is presented I could only remain curious about this percentage.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

I'm skeptical such a "proactive" approach would work anyway.

I mean, today we have radar-visual cases, EM effects, video photographs etc. and yet...

UFOs are so random in time and place I don't see how they could effectively be studied.

I think this is one reason "science" doesn't like them.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Yup definately another stealth tax, everything is going up in price sharply, since the collapse of Northern Rock (Or am I the only one to notice). How else are they gonna bail them out. They aint gonna put their hands in their own pockets now, are they. :P

I am not saying it can be done. I am just stating that if UFO proponents really were interested in doing something scientific with their "hobby", they would develop a proactive approach. Instead, they spend thousands of dollars getting somebody to read old cases and claim they are "true unidentifieds". UFO groups will then spend the rest of the cash getting people like Stanton Friedman to authenticate bogus documents. Go figure...