I saw a UFO a week or so ago, and to this day I am not sure what it was. It was late afternoon, right at or just shortly before sunset. In the western sky just above the mountains (as seen from Denver) there was a tiny, bright pinpoint of light. [The photo here is a simulation as I did not have a camera with me. In real life the object was smaller and starlike. The mountains here are from Rocky Mountain National Park, and the UFO added graphically. Original landscape image courtesy of FreeStockPhotos.com. ] In the few minutes I observed it, it did not appear to move or change, but I was in a moving car so I cannot be sure that the object didn’t move. It seemed considerably brighter than I would expect from sunlight reflecting off an airplane. It was certainly brighter than would be expected even from Venus under those conditions, and in fact Venus was not in the sky at the time. There is no reasonable astronomical explanation of it.
(Note that the graphic shown here, courtesy of FreeStockPhotos.com, is a simulation only — it is not a real photo of what I saw.)
Now, I could go out on a limb and make some pretty wild speculations about this — that it was some secret military flying craft or even a spacecraft filled with big-headed and bug-eyed miniature humanoids. But truth be told, it likely was something far less exotic. It certainly was a U.F.O. because it was Unidentified, Flying, and presumably an Object of some kind. But there is no justifiable reason to think that because I didn’t know what it was, that it must have been some alien spacecraft.
It is unreasonable to jump to the conclusion that something is necessarily not of this world, or not operating within the boundaries of known science just because I do not know what it is. In fact, that is not only unreasonable, but arrogant as well, because it presumes that if I can rule out the things I specifically know, then it must be something outside of the established body of human knowledge. But that is a pompous, arrogant and utterly unsupportable conclusion.
I still don’t know what it was that I saw. I can confidently rule out all astronomical phenomena, and a only a little less confidently all meteorological phenomena. Nor do I think that this was the result of any birds or groups of birds. I suppose that it could have been result of some secretive military aircraft. More likely it was the result of sunlight reflecting off a commercial jetliner flying toward Denver from the west. Frankly, that would have required some relatively unusual circumstances, but nothing impossible. Most likely, in my opinion, was that this was a high-flying research balloon of some kind.
Ultimately, I will never know what this was. I’d like to think that it was an alien spacecraft of some kind. It is somehow comforting to think that we very well may not be alone in the Universe, and exciting to think that we may soon make contact with others “out there.”
But as much as I would like that to be true, I have absolutely no good reason to think that it is true from this experience. To think otherwise would require me to make assumptions that simply are not scientifically justifiable. So until some solid evidence turns up, I will have to live with the uncertainty.
Larry S.
Comments are welcome, but please keep them civil and on the subject. Rude, off-target or otherwise inappropriate comments will be removed.
Your sighting sounds a bit like what I saw (and tried to tape) this November here in Oregon - and in broad daylight. I prefer to call them spheres (some call them orbs) I haven’t a clue what these strange things are that can hover over for up to 30 minutes at a time and defy the wind direction. They are so small, and against the bright blue sky they are hard to spot. They move very little if at all and that might be partly why they go unnoticed.
I constantly struggle to “rationalize” if these spheres could actually be OUR technology - possibly unmanned drones spying on us? It wouldn’t surprise me with all that’s gone on with the current admin in the White House.
I don’t mind seeing the ocassional UFO’s out there, but I’m pretty sure I DON’T want to meet up with what’s driving them whether they are military or from out there some where.
My best guess would be an Iridium flare. I have seen a very few in the day time and they can be quite birght. In fact, they can reach -8.0 Magnitude and are very beautiful when seen at night.
Cindy,
I got a similar story from someone in the NW this summer and of course for decades your region has been a hotbed of reports. Obviously there is something going on that a lot of people see. My caution is not to “struggle” too much with it. I haven’t seen just what you saw, but unless there is some real evidence to link these to military or spy craft, why posit that? Of course they may be, but if the past is any guide, it is likely that a much more mundane explanation is likely true.
You know what I “struggle” with? Magicians. Such as when they make an elephant or the space shuttle disappear. Assuming that there are no camera tricks (if on TV), it would seem utterly impossible to do something like that. And it is. I have seen demonstration of how it is done, and it truly is just an illusion. Now the difference between what a magician does and what Nature does is that the magician has intent, whereas Nature just happens. But I think that if we can be so mystified by a magician who is obviously creating an illusion (and often confesses to that), why wouldn’t this also be possible with Nature? By that I mean that Nature could pose an observation of some otherwise ordinary thing as something extraordinary, or our senses and brain could perceive some otherwise ordinary event or object as something extraordinary.
To my way of thinking, in the absence of any good evidence, it is best to accept the mystery as having a simple (if currently undiscovered) explanation, rather than to attribute it to any sinister or exotic cause.
Larry S.
Denver
Derral,
I’m pretty sure it was not an Iridium flare. They move perceptibly and they last at most maybe 30 seconds or so. This might have moved, but not by much, and it definitely was in view longer than any Iridium flare I have seen.
LS
I saw something similar about twenty years ago in west Texas. It happened mid afternoon on a summer day. No clouds what so ever just a clear blue sky and a bright star like object about 45 degrees from the horizon. It was a few times bigger then a star or even a planet would be at night. I stared at it for a long time trying to figure out what it was. I kept thinking that it couldn’t be a plain or a helicopter reflecting the sun because it wasn’t moving and there was no sound. I think I stared at it for at least ten minutes. When I couldn’t find an ordinary explanation for it I realized I needed witnesses. I ran inside my house and dragged my little brother out but it was gone. I have ruled out everything I can imagine. It couldn’t have been a whether balloon because in the few seconds it took to drag out my brother it was long gone. I’ve been baffled as to what it was all these years. I’ve resisted the extra terrestrial explanation because obviously it would be huge leap. But it sure has been tempting.
Antonio,
What you saw does sound very much like what I saw this time, as well as what I have seen and what has been reported to me in the past. Several years ago, somebody else reported something similar that he was watching at the time — I suggested that he look at it with binoculars and he did. In fact it did turn out to be a weather balloon.
I would suggest that you might revisit this idea because I have personally found that bright objects in the daytime sky are hard to re-find once you turn away from them. Even Venus, which seems so bright, can be very difficult to find in the daytime sky if you stop looking for a few minutes and go inside or look in another direction. Obviously I wasn’t there when you saw what you saw, but I know this kind of thing has happened to me before and I have been observing for a long, long time! Just a suggestion.
I don’t want to imply or make anyone think that absolutely EVERYTHING has a prosaic explanation, but in all the many years I have been observing the sky, I have never come across anything that I could definitively say was not explainable by natural or manmade phenomena.
Larry S.
Denver
Hi Larry,
Interesting stuff, this. I think it’s far more common than we might assume, and with the wide expanse of skies and the difficulty in seeing such things during the day, there’s no telling how many things that fly literally over our heads.
In August of 2006 I saw one such orb several evenings around 6:50PM in approximately the same position over a lake. It would move slowly from west to east and if an airplane or jet would come too close it would dim its white light, expel a gas/cloud of some kind, begin to descend, then emit a drone/decoy object about the same size that would just sit there as the original object continued its descent. With the naked eye, the orb was difficult to see even when it was luminous but when it would dim I couldn’t see it at all. I began watching it through binoculars that I mounted my camera to and ended up getting over a thousand pictures of it, including sequences when it would expel gas and emit a decoy.
I’m not sure what it was, but it was not a natural occurrence and was intelligently controlled (at least it was programmed to take evasive maneuvers when an aircraft came too close). Once it was above some low clouds and it didn’t dip below them at all…it all seemed rather pre-programmed. I had a witness with me who also took pictures of it, and I estimated its size to be no larger than 3 feet in diameter when it was brightly luminous, and smaller when it would dim.
Alien? I don’t think so, but who knows. Since it isn’t a natural phenomena (unless it’s an unknown animal that hasn’t been “discovered” yet) then logic dictates that it was designed by an intelligent agency. The technology in this device is not anything generally known to the public, and since it is probably not mass produced it would be expensive. Some individuals, scientific groups, or private businesses could afford such technology for a prototype if they could actually figure out how make it fly, but the military would quickly commandeer the device for its own purpose and hush up the inventor on the grounds of national security. The military itself would have plenty of resources to buy or build such a device, as would government contractors. In my opinion, the government or military is the most likely candidate for the source of these orbs that are becoming more and more common. Aliens could also account for such devices if many witnesses are to be believed–can’t say as I’ve ever witnessed an alien or had any solid evidence they exist (sure would be interesting though!).
By the way, some of these move extremely quickly, though most I’ve seen move slowly as described in an earlier comment–not sure if the slow ones can move fast or it it takes a “sports model” to move quicker than a snail’s pace.
Keep looking up!
DF
Larry,
What makes you think that an alien in a spaceship would not be a part of Nature? Is Nature reserved to Earth only? and to plants and animals? Earthly plants, that is.
I did see a round sphere on a clear blue sky in 1979 - with a group of friends taking a stroll on a golf course. The sphere reacted to our gestures: We would wave our arms “hello” and the sphere would move in identical patterns above the sky. We could tell that this object moved in a “circumflex way” - never in a straight line - which was the weirdest part of the experience. The second most intriguing part was that it stayed with us for 4 hours, and our list of witnesses grew!
I’m fully convinced of the origin of our flying object, but I cannot reproduce the cyrillic alphabet with my keyboard, which could look like this: SPUTNIK!
Jackie
Austin, TX
Or it could look like this too: USA
“Whoever” was handling that flying object (identified or unidentified) had a lot of time on their hands to spend 4 hours hovering their hellos to us.
DF,
No, that was certainly not any natural phenomenon that I know of, nor one that would seem to make any sense for an experiemental military device or for that matter, any kind of maneuver you might expect from an “alien” spacecraft. (But then, how would we know on the latter?). Actually, it sounds like something out of a computer game or show.
However, in the absence of any real evidence, what logic demands is the simplest solution, which in this case would be that what you saw was simply a misinterpretation of a natural or human technological event. Now, I admit that I do not know what it might have been, but the assumption that it was something “normal” although perhaps not under normal circumstances, is a simpler solution than the idea even that it might have been some secret military operation or other non-normal event.
Science demands evidence, and in this case you have photos and two (or more) eyewitnesses. But while photos and eyewitnesses might sway jurors in a trial of law, they are not sufficient evidence in science. Let’s just say that science is held to a higher standard. That doesn’t mean that the scientific approach is always right, but it does increase the odds and improves the reliability of its conclusions.
LS
I should have mentioned that this happened in my backyard. When I dragged my brother out I knew precisely the spot I was standing and in what direction to look towards because of the house and a tree that I used as a reference. I agree with you that the only explanation that comes close is a weather balloon. But in my opinion not close enough. For ten minutes it didn’t seem to move at all. But for argument sake let said that it did and that I just didn’t perceive it, why would it continually reflecting the sun for all that time. The whole time it was extremely bright. It didn’t dim or flicker or do anything but just stay there in the exact same stop in the sky. I’ve seen Venus in the day time and it doesn’t come close to the brightness of what I saw. When I first noticed the object, I wasn’t scanning the sky to see what I could find. I was busy working on my go-cart when I got a glimpse of it from the corner of the eye. It was bright enough to draw your attention to it even if you weren’t sky watching. I don’t know what it was but I’m reasonably sure of what it wasn’t. It wasn’t a plain or helicopter or a weather balloon or a star or planet.
I was very much into Sherlock Holmes when I was a kid and I don’t remember it word for word so I’m paraphrasing. I think he said something like you should consider all the possibilities and eliminate them according to the facts and what ever you are left with must be the truth. In this case nothing is left unless we start considering other more extravagant explanations.
Jackie,
Certainly you could define any physical object as “natural” in the sense that it originally was formed (if we assume) through processes of natural law. I am a part of nature and so are you. So is my toaster. But left to its own, Nature does not form toasters or spacecraft or glowing balls in the air that react to human motions. Those are produced by some form of intelligence above the operation of natural selection.
Now, you can interpret what you saw however you like, but I can assure you that neither in 1979 nor today, the Soviets (Russians) were not sophisticated enough, nor stupid enough, to build some device to interact with golfers on a US golf course for no apparent reason. It just makes no sense for them to do something like that. I cannot presume to know the motivations and reasonings of any aliens that might be out there — and in fact I am not justified in the absence of any good evidence of assuming that any are there to begin with — but I can base my conclusions on the standard practices of logic and science.
Antonio,
A couple of things. First, weather ballons start off as teardrop shaped bags with a long tail. The top part is a bubble of gas to make the balloon float, and the tail is the rest of the balloon that hasn’t filled out. Normally they are highly reflective. As the balloon rises higher, the atmospheric pressure on the outside reduces, causing the balloon to expand. At high altitude the balloon gets bigger and more spherical (although in what I have seen they always tend to appear somewhat flattened and of course always have the pendant “tail”, which is where the instrument package is attached. Having a curved, semi-spherical shape, they can reflect sunlight from many directions, so they can appear to move (slowly) across a part of the sky and still appear bright from reflected sunlight.
Second, the exact quotation is: “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Now think about that for a moment. Is the statment true? Well, yes, it is logically consistent and true. However, is it a practical statement? No, because logically you cannot eliminate the impossible. To know every single impossibility you would need to be omniscient, which effectively means you have to be God. I don’t qualify for the job, nor do you, nor does any human being. So we cannot eliminate the impossible. The statement might have practical application to crimes, if applied loosely, but it is not scientific and cannot be relied on in all situations.
Larry S.
I do see your point but still a weather balloon doesn’t quite fit the facts. I call them facts because I’m sure of what I saw and of what I’m telling you via this blog. I know to you it’s only hearsay but I assure you it was as I’m describing it. When my brother and I came back out it was long gone. If it was a slow moving weather balloon that could constantly reflect sun light then why or how did it disappeared? It was too bright or too large for us to miss it in that big blue empty sky. We both climbed up on the roof and spend a good hour scanning the sky hoping get another glimpse of it.
I understand your skepticism but I am as sure as I can be that it was not a weather balloon. I do appreciate the scientific method and I’ve tried to be as logical as can be but I don’t think we can strictly apply those methodologies in these circumstances. There is no physical evidence to study. We don’t know when or where or if it will ever happen again so we can test our theories. Science can’t be fully utilized on an event that can not be predicted. In my opinion it was a UFO in the sense that it was unidentifiable. I’ve had a hard time calling it extra terrestrial but I don’t think that to be so far fetch any more. The universe is so vest and full of so many possibilities that I would even venture to say that it is probably unlikely that we have not be visited by extra terrestrials.
Antonio,
Almost anything is possible, a fact that science readily acknowledges. However, it gives us tools for dealing with the physical world. What I am saying is that if you cannot apply the methodologies of science to some problem or question dealing with the physical world, then science can say nothing about it. Anything you say at that point is speculation. The same is true even if the phenomenon is real, but you have no acceptable evidence.
When you are talking about the “non-physical” or paranormal world, then science can say nothing about that, either. Presumably if such worlds exist, they operate outside the bounds of normal physical laws, and hence outside of science. I know nothing about paranormal phenomena. I’m not saying that they don’t exist, nor am I saying that they do. I am saying that there is currently no good evidence, from a scientific standpoint, that they exist.
In science, if you do not know the answer to some phenomenon or question, you’re initial stance should always be to assume that it is the result of the simplest interaction of known laws and known realities (that is, things and processes). That’s not to say that you cannot study it further and perhaps at some point discover a new law or a new way that nature works, but until you have evidence, all is speculation.
Larry S.
I’ve very much enjoyed this. I’ve never spoken publicly of what I saw way back them until now. I’m not sure why I decided to respond to your blog. I don’t even remember how I came upon it but it’s been very interesting.
I’d like to make one point which I admit is not very scientific but somewhat more human. Going back to the quote from Sherlock Holmes “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”. I appreciate you correcting me. I couldn’t for the life of me remember the actual wording. Lets say we modify it and make it less omniscient. When we have eliminated all we know of that it could be then we have to start considering things outside of our very limited knowledge. I suspect we should be able to agree that our knowledge of the universe is incomplete and imperfect to say the least. I‘d even speculation that we are probably wrong on a few things we consider scientifically proven. One thing that annoys me every time I here it is when some so called expect say in an interview that it is impossible to travel from stars to stars. It obviously impossible for us at this point and time and it might be impossible to centuries to come. But imaging how advanced our technology will be if we survive despite our vices for a billion years. We can’t possible image the wonders that will be possible then.
Antonio,
There is an oft-quoted snippet from Arthur C. Clarke’s book, Profiles of the Future,” which has now become known as “Clarke’s Law”:
“When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.”
I have had the honor to meet and spend a little time with Dr. Clarke, and I even am in one of his books (don’t ask, because that is all I am going to say — read his books). The quotation is very popular and very correct. The currently known laws of physics allow *almost* anything to be true — but just because something is possible does *not* mean that it is likely. It is possible, just barely possible, that apparently random events on an atomic level could conspire to take atoms from all over the universe such that they come together in front of me in exactly the right positions and order to form an apple of the “thin” air — let’s be specific and say it is a 8.345 ounce Honey Crisp apple. That *is* possible, but it is almost indescribably unlikely. Something like that might not happen in 100 billion times the current age of the universe. Physicists actually have an equation that — in theory — can calculate the odds, but it is not easy and I haven’t done it. But suffice it to say, almost anything is possible, if not probable.
However, based on the currently known laws of physics, some things are simply impossible — not for lack of technology, but because Nature apparently does not allow it. Here’s an analogy Stephen Hawking sometimes uses in a slightly different context. Trying to travel faster than the speed of light is a bit like trying to travel one mile North of the North Pole. You simply cannot do it. There is no “North” of the North Pole. And according the Einstein’s Special Theory of Relatively, now more than 100 years old, traveling faster than light would require an infinite amount of energy. Not just a lot, but an infinitude of energy. That simply is not possible if Einstein was right, and at this point, more than 100 years after the theory was introduced, no one has been able to find a flaw in it, and it has been confirmed in every way we can. If this is true — and we really have no reason to believe that it isn’t — then no matter how far we are in the future, no matter how advanced the technology, we just can’t do it.
Actually you mentioned traveling from star to star. I’m not so pessimistic about that. We will at some point be able to do it. But I think what you were referring to was the type of travel depicted in Star Wars and Star Trek, where they appear to zip through space at many times the speed of light. Doing that does appear impossible, and hence makes practical travel between stars a very long term prospect. However, Einstein’s own work (his General Theory of Relativity) opens the door to a prospect of getting from star to star without traversing the space between them. This would be kind of like traveling from New York to Sydney by tunneling through the Earth rather than going around it. But this is very speculative at the moment and we have no experimental data on it. I’m not going to talk about it any more other than to say that it would not violate Einstein’s Special Relativity — even though you might travel 10 light years in 10 minutes, nothing actually moves faster than the speed of light.
I guess my point is that you have to open minded, but you also have to be aware of the probabilities of things. I blogged about this topic some time back, and a concept I call Positive Skepticism. You might take a look at that for ideas on dealing with things such as this.
Larry S.
where i live we see weather balloons released at the least twice daily. at night they have lights but during the day they reflect the light of the sun. at different heights they will either move or remain what appears to be stationary depending on the altitude. and the different wind directions of their height.they also swell as they rise and eventually they burst,or catch a fast moving wind.i doubt we are under observation but i will admit that i believe…no i would bet anything that other life exists.the argument that its here watching is simple, if you think about it.
Sam,
You are absolutely right about the weather balloons. They do seem to hover at times, or when caught in a fast wind high above, can appear to move fairly quickly, although much slower than a meteor and even slower than a satellite. And I agree entirely with the probability that there are forms of life out there in the cosmos. However, I don’t believe that the argument for this being here and watching is really that simple. Well, it may be simple, but it isn’t highly likely. If our current understanding of relativistic physics is correct, no material abject can travel at the speed of light, and even to travel at speeds near that of light require truly enormous amounts of energy. There is no reason to believe that Einstein was wrong, and many confirmations that he was correct. But to travel in reasonable amounts of time (to humans anyway) between stars would take both enormous amounts of energy and long periods of time. I’m not saying it cannot be done at slower than light travel speeds, but it likely is unpractical. Even at the speed of light, a round trip between Earth and the nearest other star would take nearly 9 years. There is some possibility of getting around the relativistic restriction without violating it, but this has not been demonstrated and also would take absolutely incredible amounts of energy. But maybe with time we will discover a way, and maybe other civilization out “there” have already done so. But if they have visited Earth, they have left no good evidence no matter how many observations of alien spacecraft people claim to have made, or how many photos have been taken. None of that is good evidence acceptable to science.
LS
I read your article on Positive Skepticism as you suggested and I agree with you. I agree with everything you said so far except that it was a weather balloon what I saw way back then. I know that the simplest answer is most likely the right answer. And I don’t necessarily think or even believe that I saw an alien space craft way back then. But I reiterate that it was not a plain, a helicopter, a star or a planet or a weather balloon. I was a kid back then (barely a teenager) and I was very much into star wars, star trek and 2001 space odyssey like most kids in the eighties. And I admit that I’m bias. I want there to be extra terrestrials visiting earth. A universe void of intelligent life except for ours seems to me truly unfeasible. I know that this is more of an emotional response then a logical one. But even with all my partiality, I was methodical in trying to determine what the object was. Spock was my favorite character in the original star trek and Data in the second and as a kid I tried to emulate them. Reasoning and logic and science are the only thing that really separates us from the animal kingdom. I know clearly we are very much part of it still but I’m sure you know what I mean. My only argument is that since our knowledge is incomplete then obviously our conclusions are imperfect.
When it comes to science I’m very much an amateur. But I love to read about it and I try to use it and apply it when ever possible. I’ve read about the theory of relativity and I think I understand it. I’ve also read about string theory and quantum and all that and I’ve also read that they are incomplete. I’ve read about another one called the unified theory which according to what I’ve heard would be all three put together. But the thing is that they don’t quite fit each other. I know I’m simplifying it too much and please correct me in anything you see fit. My point is very close to your point in that we should avoid absolutes. No one can know if space travel is possible because physics is far from finished. But if it is possible then I’d say that it’s being done today by other civilizations out there some where in space.
Logically speaking if space travel is a reality and we have not being visited by extra terrestrials than that would be a strong indicator that there is no intelligent life out there other then our own.
Antonio,
I don’t know what you saw. All I can say is what it seems like it could be to me. If you are convinced that it was something other than a natural or manmade phenomenon, or perhaps an entirely new or unknown natural phenomenon, I cannot prove otherwise. I do not “know” that it was something outside the realm of normal experience. However, I can confidently say that the odds are in favor of it being something, which if you could have observed it more closely, would have proved far less exotic or mysterious. But I cannot prove anything about what you saw. Again, I cannot rule out it being an entirely new phenomenon, but it is unlikely.
My hope is that everyone will adopt the attitude that unless there is direct evidence to the contrary, such sightings are the result of “normal” phenomena. Keep in mind that such sightings, which are not immediately obvious as to origin, *could* be the result of some unknown phenomenon, but statistically speaking it is more likely that they are the result of some otherwise mundane or common cause.
Don’t rush to the conclusion, that simply because you cannot explain it, it is not explainable in terms of known causes.
I, too, believe that statistically speaking, it is HIGHLY likely that there are intelligent species out in the cosmos. I also recognize the enormous distances involved and the difficulties that any physical transport or even communication over these distances would pose. I also feel — subjectively — that it is unlikely that any extraterrestrial intelligence would spend much time trying to contact or observe us, and do such a bad job at it anyway.
In terms of natural phenomena, it seems to me — again subjectively — that any phenomenon explaining what you (and I) saw, must surely already be familiar to physicists, astronomers and meteorologists. As such, I consider such observations as the result of insufficient information rather than any new or unknown phenomenon.
It is certainly true that new phenomena that seemed at the time contrary to “common knowledge” have been discovered down through the ages. But it is also true that all such phenomena have been ultimately accepted as true only through a large body of experimental evidence or repeated and incontrovertible observations. There have been many observations similar to that of yours and mine, but not one — not one — has ever been proven to be anything other than the result of some natural or human-made phenomenon. (I will not argue the point that “human-made” phenomena are also “natural”, since humans are — in the eyes of science — the result of natural evolution. That really goes without saying.)
Everyone should be open-minded but should not jump to conclusions. Err on the side of reason. Emotion is important. In fact, emotion is essential in science as in all human endeavors. Our “wants” are important as well. But to venture out into the unknown, guided only by our wants and emotional needs is to venture into deep waters. It is dangerous and fool hearty if you aren’t guided first and foremost by logic, reason and empirical evidence. In the absence of any real evidence to the contrary, it is best to assume that your knowledge is insufficient, and that the answer to the question does not involve some revolution in science and human knowledge. To assume otherwise is, in my opinion, arrogance. That is not anywhere I wish to go, and I doubt you do, either.
Larry S.
I’m reasonably sure of what the object I saw was not but as you said neither one of us could possibly know what it actually was without more information. And since it unlikely that we will ever gather more evidence even if we happen to see another star like object in the sky. Then this means we are condemn to never finding out. As you said people see these things all over. So it’s possible (highly unlikely according to what we currently know but possible never the less) that aliens are zipping all over our skies. But unfortunately because of science, we are precludes from accepting this possible reality without conclusive evidence.
It seems to me that the real question or questions is not are this objects extra terrestrial but how possible is it that they are. In my opinion what it boils down to is two questions. Does intelligent life exist else where? And is space travel possible without having to physically travel from point to point? The first question is a huge YES. In my mind it’s almost rude to argue other wise. The second is the big unknown but at least theoretically possible. Assuming that it is possible then that means that it’s only a matter of being technologically advanced enough to take advantage of it.
I know, I’ve beaten this horse to death. I’ll let you be after this one. I agree with almost every thing you said. We shouldn’t jump to conclusions and all that and I believe I didn’t. But I just don’t think is as unlikely as you or scientific community imply it is that we might be visited by ET’s.
Sorry for being so argumentative.
Sorry I just have to add one last thing.
What I believe to be very unlikely (if ET’s are visiting us) is that they would bather to purposefully make there presents known to us. As advanced as they have to be to be here, they probably see us as we see cattle on the side of the road when we go on road trips.
Antonio,
Science is not there as a dictator telling you what you can or cannot believe. It is not there to squelch human imagination or blindly deny anything that isn’t yet known. Not at all. But science has to have something to study. Observations of “UFOs” or whatever you choose to call your observation, are necessarily one-time events. They cannot be repeated at will and hence the only evidence we have that they every really occurred is someone’s description, or in some cases, generally fuzzy and indistinct photos. Rarely is any other physical evidence ever proffered, and in not one single case so far as any of the other evidence been exclusively attributable to some unknown agency.
Human memory and perceptions are often faulty, and good science is designed to weed out unreliable information by demanding corroborating evidence. People can sometimes be very good observers, but most people sadly are not. Since there is no way to know in most cases who is a good and reliable observer and who is not, science generally demands that we place little value on personal descriptions. Undoubtedly you are aware of the fact that different observers, such as in an accident investigation, often give widely conflicting stories.
Neither science nor the police can investigate every story based solely on someone’s claim. What if legitimate scientists launched a research project every time someone claimed to have seen a ghost or claimed to have encountered Big Foot? No real science would ever get done if scientists spent time on such unsubstantiated claims. That is why science demands good evidence. Unfortunately that may also weed out some observations of genuinely new phenomena, but it is the only way science can legitimately proceed.
Again, science is not there to eliminate the human element. Science is conducted by humans, and interpretation, innovation, creativity and yes, even intuition, are necessary ingredients for science. But so is logic and orderly procedure.
I too, am a fan of Star Trek. Two of my favorite quotations are from Spock:
“Even logic must give way to physics”
and
“Logic is the beginning of wisdom…., not the end.”
Basically to me, Spock’s words are the scientific method as it should be. We must rely on science (or physical evidence) because all human perceptions (including logic) by themselves are inadequate. But at the same time we must be guided by logic and reason, even while we acknowledge that our perceptions and thought processes, no matter how well intended, are sometimes faulty.
Larry S.
P.S. As for your last comment, I tend to fall back on an old argument that if aliens wanted us to know they were here, they would do so. If on the other hand they do not want us to know, they haven’t done a very good job of staying out of the line of sight but have done a good job of not leaving evidence. Your argument that basically they don’t care certainly makes some sense, but I still tend to think that even if that were true, there should be at least one piece of undeniable physical evidence — and there is not.
P.P.S. You are not being argumentative. You are thinking, which is more than I can say for a lot of people!
Sorry one last thing I swear
One thing you said which doesn’t quite fit my sense of logic. When walking in what we imagine to be a pristine forest our illusion might be crushed when we come across a candy rapper or some sort of trash. We automatically know that some thoughtless a-hole was there before us. Evidence of our presents anywhere will most likely be some sort of waist. Now assuming that ET’s have come here, we should also assume that they would have learned to produce energy with very little if any waist because of the inordinate amount of energy required for the trip regardless of the method. So it should also be safe to assume that very little if any evidence of their presents will remain behind.
I’ve enjoyed this very much.
Antonio,
I don’t think we are so far apart, but my opinion — and that is all it is — is that any aliens visting Earth would by necessity be far more advanced than we are. It seems reasonable that they would have only two reasons to visit us.
1) They want to subdue and put us under their rule. I personally find this unlikely because it is my belief (unsubstantiated by evidence) that any advanced civilization should not be warlike or empirial by nature. I do not think that a warlike civilization could progress far enough to enable interstellar travel. I personally don’t believe that any civiization can advance far enough and remain stable if they are warlike and inconsiderate of lesser species (perhaps I am too naive and sentimental, but this is what I believe).
2) Any aliens sufficiently advanced to travel to us and study us (for what reason I have no idea), would have adopted a “non-interference” policy. Yes, I know that this is really mostly a science fiction construction (ala Gene Rodenberry and Star Trek), but is based on concepts of quantum physics and as such, makes a lot of logical sense (at least as far as quantum physics goes it makes sense — but whether it makes sense or not, quantum physics reasonably describes reality as we know it). *ANY* interaction is interference and necessarily affects and changes the observed. So in my opinion, any visiting aliens — if they weren’t out to conquer us “Independence Day” style — would be extremely careful to prevent us from observing them or interacting in any way. Basically I am saying that if aliens are really visiting us, they wouldn’t allow us to observe them until they are full ready to fully reveal themselves.
Hence, my interpretation of UFO sightings is that they are the result of misinterpertations of natural phenomena, or else they are somehow manifiestations of manmade (if unusual) phenomena. Anything else is highly and logically unlikely.
Now again, this does NOT mean that all UFO sightings are due to natural (you know what I mean) or manmade phenomena. But it does mean that anything else is highly unlikely and demands good evidence.
Larry S.
I saw the same thing. It was around 7 am or a bit after. I was driving home when I seen the clouds shaped all the same and lots of them. As I got closer to home the clouds all at the same time started to change. About 2 mins later I pulled into my drive way and myself and the other person in the car with me got out and walked across the street. These balls of light were just sitting in the sky. A few of them dropped down to make a straight line. I watched them for about 15 mins when they just were gone. I do have pics. being that I was home and had my camera handy. This was about late Sept early Nov.
My 17 year daughter and her boyfriend took a walk 3 days ago and when they came back they said they saw these blue-green lights that hovered over what looked like either a huge field or over the river. They said there were 2 of them and they didn’t seem to move at all and then they were just gone
Sky Lover,
I don’t know what you saw. The photos may be interesting, but they bear little weight these days because photos are so easily manipulated and faked. (Note that I am *NOT* saying that you faked your photos, just that because it is so easy to do anymore, photos by themselves cannot be considered reliable evidence. There needs to be other physical evidence.)
Again, I wasn’t there so I don’t know what you saw. However, one thing that fits the general description is an airport spotlight on the clouds. You didn’t state the direction, but of course there is the regional airfield to your south. I have seen this many times and it always looks to me more like the light is coming from above rather than below. Airport spotlights typically do not move, but motion of the cloud layer could make them appear to move. There are also commercial spotlights used at car dealerships and openings and such. Those usually move in large circles in the sky. In fact I saw one just last night and it is very easy to understand why anyone would think that they represented something actually moving through the clouds. In my experience, however, they always appear white, not blue-green.
But that is just a suggested possibility, and may have nothing to do with whatever you saw.
Larry S.
Denver
2.29.08 1:45pm-2:00pm
MY A TEENAGE SON CAME IN THE HOUSE TODAY AFTER SCHOOL VERY NERVOUS AND COULDNT UNDERSTAND WHAT HE SAWIN THE SKY .THE BUS DRIVER IGNORED HIM. WE LIVE IN CAPE COD , MASSACHUSETTS. HE WAS HEADING HOME ON MAIN ST FACING WEST AND SAID HE SAW A FLAMING BRIGHT RED OBJECT FALLING AND DISAPPEARED. VERY BRIGHT. I TOLD HIM TO CALM DOWN . HE THOUGHT IT WAS A PIECE OF THE SATTELITE DEBRIS. I TOLD HIM NO THAT HAPPEN 2 WEEKS AGO OR SO. HE THOUGHT IT WAS DEBRIS FROM IT. I SAID MAYBE IT WAS PLANE WITH LIGHTS ON, HE SAID NO WAY. IT TOOK ME AN HOUR TO CALM HIM DOWN , HE WAS EXCITED BUT NERVOUS. AND THEN WE THOUGHT IT WAS PLANE ON FIRE OR CRASHED. STILL NO NEWS OF THAT. MAYBE I THOUGHT IT WAS THE SUN OR SOMETHING I WENT OUTSIDE WITH HIM AND WE LOOKED AROUND THE SKY.I DIDNT SEE ANYTHING. HE SWEARS HE SAW IT. I TOLD HIM I BELIEVED HIM. HE’S QUIET NOW.
DID ANYONE SEE THIS IN MASS OR ELSE WHERE. AND COULD IT BE A SUNDOG ITS VERY COLD OUT.
I TOLD HIM I WOULD TRY TO FIND OUT AND PUT HIS MIND TO REST. TAHNK YOU
CAPE COD , MASS
D.
I am not aware of any other sightings at this time, but there may be and I just haven’t seen the report. It *could* have been satellite debris, but not from the satellite the government shot down a week or so ago. Much more likely it was a large bright meteor, which are sometimes bright enough to see in broad daylight. The description roughly fits. I can’t think of anything else that could be seen to fall, except perhaps a plane on fire, but I strongly suspect that you would have heard news reports of that by now. It was not likely a sundog or any other atmospheric or astronomical event I am aware of. The “falling” rules out almost everything except a large meteor, satellite debris, or a plane on fire. My guess is a large meteor, sometimes called a fireball or bolide. In any event, there is no cause for alarm.
Larry S.
Denver
really interesting UFO, i havent seen something like that before.