Official explenation of UFO's from the british government.

http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/7D2B1...mary_dec00.pdf

What I got from this is.

They are inertialess balls of plasma that retain shape and are of natural origin.
They can become linked in such a way as to block light between them and appear to be solid objects, possibly hundreds of feet in length. Triangle shapes are common.

Through magnetic and electrical action they can modify the normal thought processes of the human brain.

They can reflect both infrared, ultraviolet, and radar signals and appear solid. They can either produce their own light or reflect light.
Occassionally aircraft have crashed performing extreme maneuvers to avoid them.

They can affect electrical equipment and disrupt engines and radio communication.

Being inertialess they can change direction and maneuver at extreme velocities and direction changes.
Recomendations is for aircraft to make no other maneuvers other than trying to place them astern.
They are little understood naturally forming balls of plasma energy.

In other words.

It is a natural ball of plasma energy that can alter your mind and make you imagine that you see spaceships.
Trust your government and not what you see with your own eyes.

I like the official explenation. It is so thoroughly explained that there is no room for disagreement.
If you disagree it is because what you saw changed your thought processes.

All arguments pro and con are presented and explained. No discussion can be made. I guess this closes the subject forever.

What I got from it was that it is a document that shows research into the possiblities of the UAPs, the potential for hazard to aircraft, and possible scientific exploitation of any new findings.
Particularly...
Item 10 under the summary lists many possibilities are mentioned.
The plasma idea is the only one that they consider to be of some value of persuing.

How in the world did you come to the conclusion that these things have some sort of mind control?

Hardly, the document also has a list of related studies and avenues of interest. This document is only a summary of a single branch of an idea.
Are you saying that this single 23 page document is all that has been documented of a 20 year study?

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

Looks more like they are saying we have looked at the evidence and it suggests that there are no extra terrestrial goings on. Investigations are on going as to the cause.

Lets see. One paragraph says "there is no evidence that any UAP, seen in the UKADR, are incursions by air-objects of any intelligent (extra-terrestrial or foreign) origin, or that they represent any hostile intent."

It also appear to refer to many other documents, contents not mentioned in this one?

Official explenation of UFO's from the british government.

You mean a theory about one kind of sighting. Paragraph 11 under "Key Supporting Findings."

Further, the report says cleary that the conclusion stands only "in the absence of evidence to the contrary." If you dispute the conclusion, provide evidence that it's not true, not just a lamentation that curious observations don't seem to have astounding and far-reaching causes.

It is a natural ball of plasma energy that can alter your mind and make you imagine that you see spaceships.
Trust your government and not what you see with your own eyes.
I like the official explenation. It is so thoroughly explained that there is no room for disagreement.
If you disagree it is because what you saw changed your thought processes.

Emotion, and sour grapes. Can we justly assume you have fully transitioned into your new role as little more than a thoughtless ridiculer of the mainstream?

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Why do you think that someone with only a cursury interest in UFO's my whole life suddenly became so interested in the subject that I look for answers everywhere?

I had an experiance that defied all of my logic. No photos, no other witnesses, and no proof. I choose to keep it as a personal experiance and not share it with anyone. Being unable to explain or understand I sought an answer outside of myself in the world at large. I place myself in the catagory that one witness with no evidence, is proof of nothing to anyone but me.

Make of that what you will.

So far all that I have seen in the search outside myself is hoaxes, more mystery, and little understanding. The conviction from all of the science community that all is explained by prosaic causes is one that I find personally unsatisfying.

This study cought my attention because it is the first one that acknowledged the phenomena as being real. The explenation I find lacking.

Are you saying that this single 23 page document is all that has been documented of a 20 year study?

According to the consensus on this forum the phenomena is unworthy of study on any level. Do you change that position?

I presented what I found that has relevence to my search because it comes from a scientific study and not from the UFO community, so preconception is ruled out.

I am no longer willing to debate the matter here because I have found no more evidence than what I have previously debated. Circular debate is wasteful and time consuming.

I made this post because there has been no previous acknowledgment of research after the Condon report. Further that there was no significance to defense.

This report clearly refutes that.

All documents that have so far come to light from the UK disclosure indicated that they merly filed reports and deemed them unworthy of even cursury investigation.

This is the first report that I have discovered admitting to any other official inquiry than Bluebook.

I have nothing new of relevence to offer so I post this report for you consideration and do not wish to debate its merits. I find it so circular that it closes discusion.

I made this post because there has been no previous acknowledgment of research after the Condon report. Further that there was no significance to defense.

This report clearly refutes that.

Let me clarify this staement before it is atacked. The application to defense is that an illusion is capable of confusing an enemy. I saw no other inference here than this.

At least this makes clear to me why you are so reluctant to regard 'trained pilots' as anything else than any other observer, with at least a similar rate of wrong conclusions based on certain observations.

So why won't you discuss this event? It is the only thing that you can speak authoratively about, and who knows, maybe it does not defy all logic?

Certainly not my concensus. Especially those reports that might indicate a 'near miss' are worthy of study. And studied they are. I prefer my airspace to be as safe as possible when I fly.

You find this report circular?

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

I would say the phenomena is unworthy of examination with the intention of proving it is a UFO or disproving earth bound explanations with the understanding that UFO means alien life form.

You find this report circular?

Yes. It states that plasma can link together to form shapes that look like solid objects with lights mounted on them that can even fool radar. Then it states that plasma can alter the mind of the observer in such a way that they imagine the solid shapes.

Which is why you are having difficulty here explaining yourself. You still do not understand. We do not deny that people see UFOs and therefore admit UFOs are "real" in that sense. We (and I hope I am speaking for most skeptics) just feel that there is always a more likely explanation than something extraordinary or "beyond the knowledge of modern science". I find the most likely explanation has to do with the way the human brain interprets an event. You seem to be more willing to pursue more fanciful possibilities despite the wealth of data that shows a majority of all UFO reports are simple misperceptions/misidentifications. 60 years and counting for UFOlogy. The only things it has proven is people mistake things in the sky as something else (something known since project SIGN/GRUDGE/BLUEBOOK) and that many UFO proponents can be very gullible and are taken in by various hoaxes.

I already asked you, where do you get the idea that the plasma alters minds? This is a direct question....

Besides, that does not answer the question of why this report is circular.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

Make of that what you will.

You're exhibiting nearly all the stereotypical characteristics of a pseudoscientific, UFO true-believer. That's what I make of it. You're just not being very honest about it.

I am no longer willing to debate the matter here...

Then do not debate the matter here further. This is the second thread on UFO investigations you have started after saying you were leaving in disgust. I for one find your melodramatic games tedious. Stay and debate, if you wish. If you don't wish, then leave; don't simply keep threatening to leave while raising new points for discussion. This is a serious adult forum; we're beyond that game-playing.

Circular debate is wasteful and time consuming.

As is posting links to useless and irrelevant internet public-opinion polls. It's becoming clear that your sojourn here is intended, if possible, to portray mainstream thought as pig-headed and skeptics as nothing but a chilling influence on "real" science. It doesn't really seem to have much to do with UFOs.

I have nothing new of relevence to offer so I post this report for you consideration and do not wish to debate its merits.

Changing horses. This new hogwash about references to prior studies or attitudes is entirely distracting. Your initial post mentions none of that. It mentions only a distorted and cherry-picked summary of the cited document, along with some very sarcastic editorializing about blindly trusting the mainstream's supposedly lame explanations.

By posting in the Conspiracy Theories section you acknowledge your duty to propose and defend a conspiracy theory. Posting things "for your consideration" with no intention to debate, in a forum specifically requiring debate, is poor form. I have brought this up before.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Yes. It states that plasma can link together to form shapes that look like solid objects with lights mounted on them that can even fool radar. Then it states that plasma can alter the mind of the observer in such a way that they imagine the solid shapes.

Um, that's not a circular argument.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

I ask you to quote from the summary and explain how you arrive at these conclusions. Also, please answer the other direct question I asked you in my first post on this thread.

Since you chose to post this apparent conspiracy in this forum you are IMHO required to answer these questions. If not, a moderator will no doubt correct me.

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

I had an experiance that defied all of my logic. No photos, no other witnesses, and no proof. I choose to keep it as a personal experiance and not share it with anyone.

If you choose not to share it, why mention it in the first place? I think it would be interesting to know what you saw and discuss it.

If you choose not to share it, why mention it in the first place?

Because it's strategically advantageous now, whereas it wasn't earlier. Now that we're all well-characterized as skeptics and the well is, well, well-poisoned, he can play the sympathy card when he discusses his own UFO sightings. Statements made when bart5050 was just an interested bystander can now be reinterpreted since bart5050 is a UFO witness.

It's the classic bait-and-switch (or changing-horses) debate tactic I explained and identified earlier. Bart5050 wants to make sure that all skeptical approaches to his own UFO experiences come only from sources that he has had ample opportunity to try to discredit as too skeptical to be reasonable.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

It does seem that way, JayUtah. He did seem strangely vehement for someone with just a recent curiosity as was suggested.

I really should browse more old threads.. but there are soo many... Some rainy day summer perhaps. Maybe some of the old hands here can cooperate and make up some kind of sticky with links to 'The Best Of..' threads.

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

If someone says they choose to keep an experience of this type personal and not share it with anyone, it seems to me as if they are treating it religiously.

Because he wants to let everyone know that UFOs are "real" (which normally means something physical that represents a craft of unknown origin that can not be constructed by present technology) because he has seen them. It is like ghosts and bigfoot. They are real to those who say they saw them/him.
It would be pointless to talk about his sighting. If we were able to provide a plausible explanation, he would outright reject it because his personal observations are important to him. I recall watching the ABC show and they were interviewing what I recall was an abductee. He was stressing how important this was. One can easily suggest it was important to him because he wanted an answer that met what he wanted to hear. He did not want to hear he was suffering from sleep paralysis or something ordinary. He wanted it to be that he was extremely important to aliens who were abducting him. The medical explanation makes him just one of thousands who suffer from this. The abductee explanation makes him very special. When it comes to UFO reports, people don't want to hear they mistook the ISS for a UFO, they want to hear they saw something extraordinary and that their experience was "special". As a result, even if you demonstrated they saw the ISS, they will resort to saying, "I have seen satellites before and this was no satellite" or something like that.

I mention it to establish that I am not pursuing something due to mental disorder or irrationality or paranoia. I further stated that it is clearly proof of nothing. Nor do I offer it as anything more than personal motivation. Nor do I offer it as an argument of alien visitation because in no way is that established in my own mind.

I expected the liar argument as well. I do not have a religious belief either. Religion is purly an invention of man. The designer of a universe (if there indeed is such, do not know) would have no need of religion.

If I felt that a single eyewitness account without supporting evidence was proof worthy of argument I would present it. I do not accept this as an argument of proof from anyone.

I mention it just to say I have personal motivation for exploration and not some religious or mental deficiency for such.

I have previously stated that I have never seen a UFO because I do not consider it totally unknown. And having structure does not make it alien either. It just mades me curious enough to seek an answer outside myself.


Now as to my opinion of this report and it being circular. That is more germaine to the issue.

First they argue that plasma phenomena can link up in such a way as to appear solid with triangle shapes being predominent. That such false solidity can fool infrared and radar.

Then they follow with the argument that plasma phenomena can affect the human brain and cause hallucination of solidity.

This establishes that the witness can present no argument not discounted by hallucination.

To establish this would require a study of the range of the mental effects. At what distance is the observer subject to or immune. Exacly what those effects are and what type of hallucinations and what senses or memory would be affected.

So it becomes an unfounded argument ment to discredit without any supporting evidence or even establishing a distance of the effect. Any dissenting view is self defeating because the observer can be considered under the influence.

How is that not circular? A cause cited without establishing any range or qualifications as to senses affected or how the effect works.

UFOllogist is brought to task on speculation but science is not? How disengenuous.

For the argument of how plasma energy behaves they cite no studies.

Why is speculation by a scientific study acceptable while UFO theorist are held to rigorous proof?

I do not totally discount the arguments presented. I ask where is the proof and the studies to support such speculation.

They accept that the phenomena is real and observable by witness, radar, and infrared. They argument as to cause is unsuported speculation.

Ok , really that report was a bit dumb, dont know if they want to hide something...but i wonder if the ITER research team are watching little green men righ now

Anyway Bart5050, do you want to comment tour "experience"?, i want to know....only for morbid feeding ..hehe

I asked you to quote from the document you presented. Why don't you? I am not going to go through all of it again just to check if what you say is in there or not. Please quote the line and mention page number. This is YOUR claim. Please provide the quotes to support it.

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

Unfortunately I see a pattern from your threads that you think there is a single explanation to cover all the unexplained sightings, and that this would naturally explain your sighting. That is not going to exist. There will be explained sightings that might correlate with yours, but no single explaination of the unexplained will exist.

For the third time...where does the document say that it affects the mind?

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

I believe that the report does mention something about a possible effect on the brain or mind, although I haven't got time to look it up at the moment. Feel free to read the report and find it if you have time- I might have remembered it wrong.

Incidentally I don't hold much truck with this explanation by the MOD Condign report; structured balls of plasma may explain a tiny fraction of UFO reports, but I doubt if they are truly significant, or if the mind-altering effects exist in reality.

I do however think that the human mind spontaneously starts to go into an exaggerated, hyperaware state when some unexplained phenomenon occurs, be it UFOs, ghosts, or witches; no plasma field required. This hyperaware state of mind seems to somehow give solidity to otherwise insubstantial illusions.

__________________
New Orion's Arm Site . The Starlark . Against a Diamond Sky (OA Novella Collection) . OA Flickr set

Neowatcher, If you read the last paragraph on page 7, which continues onto page 8, it is stated that electromagnetic fields cause responses in the temporal lobe of the brain, leading to an incorrect impression of what has occured.

Late at night traveling in car. Returning home from a boat trip. Not near any airport on a lonely country road. Something passed directly over the car very low, less than 100 feet, and boating has given me a good judge of distance.

It was totally silent with no flame or exhaust. It had a light under it that lit up the interior of the car so bright that it awoke a sleeping passenger who jumped up saying, what was that?

It came and left my view so fast that I had less than three seconds at the most for study. One very bright light underneath and several on periphery. Dark shiney structure with no wings, tail, or projections seen. Size was about 150 to 200 feet, surface smooth, totally silent. The air was still with no wind disturbance noted. Thickness was indeterminate as was exact shape but was some angular look and not round. Velocity indeterminate but it was rapid. There was a half moon so night was not totally dark.

What was it?, don't know. It was a silent and structured shape without wings or tail.

See, it proves nothing. It could have been almost anything. But it made me immensly curious. Not even worthy of reporting because it would establish absolutly nothing.

Does that satisfy your curiosity?, because all it did was stimulate mine.

No; I finally found it. Item 13-third paragraph.

But; I don't see it contributing to a circular reference. I read it as that those who are close enough have a more extreme experience.

I equate it with lightning. At a close distance, it's bright enough that I can't be sure what I really saw. A little closer, and the thunder clap has added disorientation. Even closer, and it may physically affect my eyeballs. And even closer, a leader or the bolt may actually be enough to scramble something in my head.
But; those are extreme cases just as the report mentions.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

There is also the possibility of Earth Lights (q.v). I've seen photos of these that were taken in broad daylight and looked astonishingly like solid artifacts.

__________________
Olsen the moderator.

Interesting bart5050, thanks for sharing. I can understand how such an experience could get you interested in knowing more.


For the argument of how plasma energy behaves they cite no studies.

Why is speculation by a scientific study acceptable while UFO theorist are held to rigorous proof?

As to this point, the document in question is only an executive summary, and three volumes are mentioned in the appendix. One would have to access all the information before ascertaining whether or not any studies are referenced.

If you don't want to read the report then why bother posting at all. Its not a book. can read it all in fairly short order.