NASA UFO Team Calls For Higher Quality Data In First Public Meeting (science.org) 39
sciencehabit shares a report from Science Magazine: The truth may be out there about UFOs, or what the government currently calls "unidentified anomalous phenomena" (UAPs). But finding it will require collecting data that are more rigorous than the anecdotal reports that typically fuel the controversial sightings, according to a panel of scientists, appointed by NASA to advise the agency on the topic, that held its first public meeting [on Wednesday].
The 16-person panel, created last year at the behest of NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, is not itself evaluating UFO claims. Instead, it is advising NASA on how the agency can contribute to federal investigations that have been led by the Department of Defense (DOD) and intelligence agencies, says panel chair David Spergel, an astrophysicist and president of the Simons Foundation, who spoke to Science ahead of the meeting. "NASA is a public agency, an open agency, that encourages the use of the scientific method for looking at results." But science can only be done when there are data to work on, he adds. "You're not going to learn much from fuzzy pictures from the 1950s." So far, most "unidentified" phenomena flagged by the military have ended up being weather balloons, drones, camera glitches, or undisclosed military aircraft, Spergel says. "It's very unlikely there are space aliens that travel through space and use technology that looks remarkably like what we have right now." [...]
It remains to be seen whether NASA will devote any further funding to study UAPs beyond the $100,000 allocated for the panel, which will issue a report this summer. Many scientists would be reluctant to have existing funds steered away from more conventional lines of research in the search for signatures of life or extraterrestrial intelligence. As the panel meeting wound down, Spergel said no UAP so far demands the existence of extraterrestrials. "We have not seen the extraordinary yet." Most incidents end up being more mundane. Panel member Scott Kelly, a former NASA astronaut and naval aviator, recounted flying in an F-14 off the coast of Virginia, when his co-pilot swore that he saw a UAP. "We turned around," he said. "We went to go look at it. It turns out it was Bart Simpson, a balloon."
The 16-person panel, created last year at the behest of NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, is not itself evaluating UFO claims. Instead, it is advising NASA on how the agency can contribute to federal investigations that have been led by the Department of Defense (DOD) and intelligence agencies, says panel chair David Spergel, an astrophysicist and president of the Simons Foundation, who spoke to Science ahead of the meeting. "NASA is a public agency, an open agency, that encourages the use of the scientific method for looking at results." But science can only be done when there are data to work on, he adds. "You're not going to learn much from fuzzy pictures from the 1950s." So far, most "unidentified" phenomena flagged by the military have ended up being weather balloons, drones, camera glitches, or undisclosed military aircraft, Spergel says. "It's very unlikely there are space aliens that travel through space and use technology that looks remarkably like what we have right now." [...]
It remains to be seen whether NASA will devote any further funding to study UAPs beyond the $100,000 allocated for the panel, which will issue a report this summer. Many scientists would be reluctant to have existing funds steered away from more conventional lines of research in the search for signatures of life or extraterrestrial intelligence. As the panel meeting wound down, Spergel said no UAP so far demands the existence of extraterrestrials. "We have not seen the extraordinary yet." Most incidents end up being more mundane. Panel member Scott Kelly, a former NASA astronaut and naval aviator, recounted flying in an F-14 off the coast of Virginia, when his co-pilot swore that he saw a UAP. "We turned around," he said. "We went to go look at it. It turns out it was Bart Simpson, a balloon."
Here We Go Again (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
They seem to like to do this. First, announce they're looking into the UAP situation. Then, a year or two later say "We looked under every rock and found no proof. But we still think something is going on." Or words to that effect. Let us know when you find something NASA. We won't hold our breath.
The main goal of any government-driven committee is to secure more funding and more staff for the next fiscal year...because in the Federal budget process SIZE DOES MATTER to that committee.
All of those word salad public statements is just a game to keep people interested in the work of that committee.
Re:Here We Go Again (Score:5, Interesting)
They seem to like to do this. First, announce they're looking into the UAP situation. Then, a year or two later say "We looked under every rock and found no proof. But we still think something is going on." Or words to that effect. Let us know when you find something NASA. We won't hold our breath.
The main goal of any government-driven committee is to secure more funding and more staff for the next fiscal year...because in the Federal budget process SIZE DOES MATTER to that committee.
That's true, but they also can't 100% rule out that there's no alien spacecraft buzzing the earth for laughs. I'm sure you'd be mocking NASA if they tried to claim that.
It's very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very unlikely but they have to keep on looking, just in case. I for one would like to know about it.
I don't think Alien arrival would be subtle though. If somebody is going to spend the money and time needed to cross a galaxy to visit us then they'd let us know.
Re: Here We Go Again (Score:2)
... very, very unlikely but they have to keep on looking
Why?
Some things are so ridiculously unlikely that there is no point. Somewhere in your backyard, there *might* be a huge pot of gold. Why aren't you digging it up to check? If you did, and haven't found gold, dig deeper!
Seriously, this us a stupid waste of money and effort...
Re: (Score:3)
... very, very unlikely but they have to keep on looking
Why?
Because it will revolutionize society if they find something.
Religion, for one, will have change radically. As will politics. Hopefully for the better.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't think Alien arrival would be subtle though. If somebody is going to spend the money and time needed to cross a galaxy to visit us then they'd let us know.
Probably they assume that all the probing lets us know.
Re:Here We Go Again (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you expect them to say .. in spite of cameras advancing over the decades .. all UFO pictures still look like they were taken on a 100 year old antique Kodak brownie. They can't say it's not a UFO because it's a blob. Amateur photographers can take highly detailed photographs of distant comets like this: https://imageio.forbes.com/spe... [forbes.com] but can't take a single clear shot or video of a UFO.
Heck we can even image the JWST from 1.4 million miles away: https://scitechdaily.com/image... [scitechdaily.com]
Re:Here We Go Again (Score:5, Funny)
To be honest, now that I have a new Samsung phone with AI assisted camera, all my UFO-bloblike photos look like very sharp and detailed Moons.
Maybe it was the Selenites all along?
Re:Here We Go Again (Score:5, Interesting)
OK but there isn't a single defined line in the image of the comet, there isn't any detail to show, just what amounts to lens flare and fake color and similarly the JWST image is nothing but blurred blobs.
These are objects in rapid motion in the water filled atmosphere typically being photographed from a stationary point or vantage with a drastic velocity difference. Yes there are much higher quality aircraft images but they are generally taken on the ground or by a professional photographer who has set up for the shot and arranged it for lighting. and cherry picked the image out of hundreds where it came out right.
You can't expect someone hiking and taking pictures of wildlife is going to get a clear shot of a fast moving and distant object. Similarly, your cell might take a gorgeous shot of someone ten foot away but it lacks the focal depth to take a clear shot of something like that. What is generally happening is that people are zooming in on the object which makes it appear blurry. I saw one HD video captured by coincidence by a military drone that was pretty good but even though the drone was traveling quite fast the object still had a motion blur.
There have been a few which are notable over the years.
This 50 year old image from Costa Rica https://metro.co.uk/2022/05/09/the-best-ever-picture-of-a-ufo-has-been-restored-after-50-years-16610588/
The Calvine photo https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/world-s-clearest-ufo-photo-revealed-after-30-years-it-s-called-the-calvine-photo/ar-AA10HDyI
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"My take was why are we only seeing images generated by what seems to be 40 yr old sensor technology? For example, we're not seeing anything close to the equivalent of images taken by high end 4K home security camera systems. You'd think the DoD can afford these"
No offense but I can tell you haven't actually been in the military. Even if we pretend DoD budget means things are pretty and new rather than everything being 15yrs old... the design constraints aren't the same as consumer technology. For starters
Re: (Score:3)
Well that's the point, it's only unknown because the image is too poor to identify.
When you take good detailed photos you can see what it really is so it's no longer an unknown object, it's just a photo of a balloon or something equally mundane.
Re: (Score:1)
Who says the aliens aren't using balloons to stay hidden?
"Hey look, a UFO! Oh it's just another ballon..."
*aliens in balloon giggle*
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
What is amusing is that the US is the only country in the world with UFO/UAP issues. Russia doesn't have flying saucers. China doesn't have Marfa lights. Canada doesn't have "angel hair" flying to the ground. This seems to just be only a US phenomena for some reason.
Re:Here We Go Again (Score:5, Informative)
You couldn't be more incorrect.
* Brazil's Varginha UFO incident [wikipedia.org]
* UFOs in Canada [wikipedia.org]
* UFOs in Russia [wikipedia.org]
* UFOs in the UK [wikipedia.org]
* The Calvine Photo [newsweek.com] is probably one of the famous ones in the world from the UK. Allegedly [news.com.au] it was a US aircraft.
* Various UFO sightings from around the world [artangel.org.uk]
NOT an UFO:
* Africa's Ariel School incident [wikipedia.org] (This was a black military vehicle)
Re: (Score:1)
Look at the maps that show reported sightings. It's mostly the USA, secondarily other English-speaking countries. Sometimes the borders are clearly delineated, as with cattle mutilations and other such nonsense.
I think the fifth horseman of the apocalypse is named Stupidity, and has been released on us for some reason. (And it's hardly just the UFO mongers that make me think that.)
Re: (Score:2)
The Australian article is very difficult to read because they called the F-117 a bomber and the SR-71 a fighter. These people obviously don’t even know their airplanes.
Re: (Score:2)
The F117 was a bomber, it wasn't designed to shoot down other planes.
And the Blackbird was originally designed as an interceptor (YF12A) but they had more need of a high altitude recon plane to replace the U2
Re: (Score:2)
I love how many people here accuse others of ignorance in the same breath they show how utterly ignorant they are.
back to the future (Score:2, Troll)
I suggest black suits, ties, tinted windows on late model black cars, aggressively implying to witnesses that they saw nothing and should speak to no one. You know, the shit that worked in the 50s. Conservatives love that shit.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a large, out-of-focus, monster roaming the countryside.
Re: (Score:1)
To be fair there aren't that many big foot pictures. Mostly people claiming to have encountered it or heard it in the distance etc, no pics, plus foot prints which don't pass scientific muster.
When I did a road trip through big foot country a few years ago, my wife and I joked about how dense the forests are and there could be a whole big foot village only 50 feet inside the tree line and we wouldn't know. I'd put my money on a shy pre-historic left over before greys mutilating cattle.
Most UFO pictures and videos.. (Score:2)
... seemed to use the special Bigfoot filter. UHD smartphones and cameras suddenly revert to sub EGA quality with added motion blur and/or bokeh.
Re: (Score:2)
That's because the aliens cause the cameras to go all blurry. It is all part of the plan to punk the UFO-Nuts.
Plastic bags (Score:2)
https://ohnopodcast.com/invest... [ohnopodcast.com]
Re: (Score:1)
I think they're saying that if you filter out all the trash you get data that exactly matches the phenomenon - i.e., nothing.
NASA needs to buy people better phones! (Score:2)
Issue settled / https://xkcd.com/1235/ (Score:2)
They need electrolytes! (Score:2)
We only saw Venus..... (Score:3)
Flying metallic mystery spheres? (Score:1)
This is actually wild. Is it a military drone? Or is it related to this?
https://thedebrief.org/intelli... [thedebrief.org]
Re: (Score:1)
The video of the actual sphere is pretty out there. "We see these all over the world making very interesting, apparent maneuvers."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]