'Are UFOs Real?'

Johnno,

Fascinating stuff! How did it end up? Any witnesses come forward to describe the object? Any video or photos? What about the Garda's conclusion? KFM radio station conclusion?

Eamonn A

Eamon

there is at least one person who has video evidence of the flashing lights near Naas racecourse.

KFM took over 20 calls.

Both Betty Meyler of the UFO Society of Ireland and Michael Soaper of Contact International are aware of the sightings.

I am not aware of anything further than what the paper says.

If you PM me your address I will send you the paper tomorrow.

Johnno

What I find fascinating is the things you don't read or see in the general media, and mostly anything that is published or broadcast in the general media is treated somewhat as a bit of unusual light-hearted fun and somewhat controlled, any following debates that may occur seem to me to be within limited parameters mostly. This reminds me of a quotation by Noam Chomsky...

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate".

I remember reading the book "The Missing Times" by Terry Hansen (science journalist). He wrote the book to provide tools for his fellow journalists when dealing with UFOs.

Stephen, the sightings by the pilots were north of Dublin Airport in the Slane/Newgrange region.

John, I agree with you regarding SETI been a waste of time. Its a pity they are not trying other methodologies beside just radio. What about Dyson Spheres in the infrared bands!

Eamonn A

eamonn,
i can rest easy now that i know it is in meath. they can gang probe as many meathmen as they want and make burgers out of the cattle if they want to as well . wether they come from zeta retculi or from venus like the aetherius society say really depends what branch of the religion you believe in. when there is a distinct lack of real evidence a conspiracy is always nice and handy to have, of course you can always trust my nieghbours, cousins, aunts pet fish hypnotist who saw a light in the sky. there may be lights to be seen in the sky such as ball lighting and other atmospheric things that are little understood. but this does not mean that they are under control of the little greys.

while radio seti maybe a long shot it is better than nothing. it will be far easier to find an artifical signal in the radio spectrum than a hypothecial dyson sphere. it would be far harder to figure out the infrared signature of such spheres than to figure out what a radio signal is artificial.
stephen.

Our enthusiasm for SETI is based on the evidence from current scientific understanding of the nature of the cosmos and the evolution of life on Earth. The same scientific understanding that supports SETI can also be used to argue for a scientific ufology. A simple logic would argue that if an ET life form has evolved to the stage where it has the ability to transmit radio signals to other worlds, then the technological step to interstellar space travel (at least with robotic probes) is not that great.

Of course, the enormous distances to be travelled in the cosmos, the extraordinary energy requirements, and the extremely lengthy times involved may temper the desire of any ETI to undertake interstellar travel, but there is in principle no insurmountable technological barrier. Physics does not get in the way. And time is on ETI's side.

For reasons that are far from obvious, science has stepped back from the rational investigation of the possibility of alien visitations. I would like to see scientists think again about their present coyness to look for evidence of interstellar mobility. Despite the giggle factor and the wacky approach to UFOs used by the tabloid press and the pseudoscience fringe, if we accept the scientific case for SETI, it would be wrong not to try to establish a comparably sound scientific case for a scientifically legitimate ufology.

If science is not prepared to contemplate a soundly based ufology, then the battle for truth will have been lost to the misinformed cranks who currently peddle untruths and fantacies about UFOs, and those honest citizens who have seen things that they find difficult to understand will not have sensible explanations. If science does not take the trouble to explaiin people's genuinely believed sightings of unexplained objects, then it is hardly surprising that conspiracy theories have proved so popular.

I would propose a science based ufology does not start with urban based myths, conspiracy theory, or sightings of flying saucers. It starts with the contention that ETI could have an interstellar mobility capability, and then asks what evidence should we look for. The basis is the same as SETI, which starts with the contention that ETI could have a radio communication capability and then mounts surveys to obtain the evidence.

What needs to come next? A firm long term commitment to SETI and a serious consideration of a genuinely science based ufology.

Eamonn A

Just to add fuel to the ETI fire.

For sake of argument we hear a signal that appears to eminate from Rigel. (ignoring the fact that rigel is a four star system and possibly has no planets in a stable orbit in the Hab zone) While being a monumental discovery the realistic problems start to pop up. The transmission was sent in 1006 and any reply we were capable of sending would not arrive until 3006. impractical to say the least.

interstellar travel is impractical without either a large fraction of light speed or some form of FTL travel. But dont rule it out. 100 years ago cutting edge air travel was a load of plywood and canvas at altitudes measured in 100's of feet.

To go back to rigel. in the 1000 years since the signal was first sent if the civilization that sent it is still around then they have had 1000 years of R&D over our current level of technology. If you're thinking fanciful then bear in mind that in computing R&D they are researching Holographic storage and a number of years ago they integrated a computer chip and a tape worm brain cell and got a signal to pass between the two. current artifical limbs have basic movement controlled by electrical signals picked ip from the remains of the amputated limb. Technology will advance.

To bring this rambling discussion of mine to a close. Dont assume that UFO's dont exist but also dont assume that they do keep an open mind and keep watching the sky's

This is all based on the assumption that radio is the best means of communicating across the cosmos ?!? as far as we know it is.

100 years ago, writing text on paper was the best means of communicating long distances, we know better now.
When someone comes to me with hard undeniable proof and not just "good" theories, extrapolations or hearsay, then I'll be convinced, its a leap of faith I will not take.

Using the argument that an opinion is unpopular in modern scientific circles, is a weak method of getting across a theory.
It's abit like saying only someone "not able to think outside the box" or with limited thinking would not believe so and so, again a very weak argument.

This is not an attack of you Eamon, I respect that you have certain opinions on things, and thats fine, I think I might hold a different opinion.
All the same, it is certainly a debate worth having.