Moontanman

First of all, my point here is not to jump to anything but to consider the eyewitness accounts and compare them the official dismissals and how the two are so different as to make the dismissals as puzzling as the sightings. To be honest anyone who claims aliens is yanking something out of their rectum until someone defines what kind of evidence would allow that conclusion. How ever some accounts are extremely difficult to explain and the "official" explanation dismisses everyone involved and their testimony. Do I need to start another thread to further this or do we move on to the "there" ?

Yes and no, I honestly wanted to avoid that association in this thread but eventually i plan to open another thread that is more specific. This why i wanted to avoid discussing this problem in the context of UFOs. You have already decided the quality of the sighting by suggesting they are all "Insufficient Evidence", "Lights in the Sky", "Optical Illusion", not to mention suggested that no matter how "professional" the witnesses are being mistaken is most likely.

Should eyewitness testimony be considered better or worse depending on what kind of witness, numbers of witnesses, or numbers of independent witnesses....?

Well I honestly didn't want to go there specifically, but I was trying to understand why extensive eyewitness testimony is counted so strongly when our lives might depend on it and why it's discounted to easily when the subject is something people want to discount. This happens even in the court system as well. In the USA taking a walk while black seems to be enough to get you shot quite easily and until body cams started showing what was going on the testimony of the police officer was practically law. I've heard this kind of thing has been going on all my life but because I am white I seldom if ever see it. But some of friends of color would tell me these things and I would wonder if we lived in different realities but that is off topic. If you want to get into the "there" of this we would have to discuss a particular "crime" in detail and while I am up for that I would like to get this idea of eyewitnesses down before I post about that yet again. The idea of eyewitnesses being discounted out of hand by people who weren't there and have no expertise on the subject always bothers me...

Have you been to Texas? I wouldn't call that eyewitness, IMHO eyewitness would more akin to picking someone out of a line up, but more importantly is how this is weighted. One person seeing something and two unrelated persons seeing the same thing would from different places, at least to me have more weight. However, does the number of independent witnesses bear on the strength of the testimony?

We commonly hear that eyewitness testimony is not reliable, in fact it is often portrayed as the worst type of evidence. But you or I can be sent to death by eyewitness testimony. In the courtroom eyewitness testimony is often touted as fundamental in many if not most criminal cases, yet when we judge something outside the courtroom such assertions are poo pooed as not to be believed and cannot be used to judge any aspect of the natural world. Is this bias against eyewitness testimony only applicable if there is only one eyewitness? Does Two make it better? Does multiple independent eyewitnesses lend more credence to the testimony? Should we consider eyewitness testimony? If so, at what point does it become sufficient? Does the person who gives the testimony have any bearing on how important that testimony would be?

No it is not logical that an insect would be uniformly warm, they are regional endotherm and only keep small parts of their bodies above ambient temps. From your own link. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect_thermoregulation Moreover the thing we are talking about is not just uniformly warm the structures you are calling legs are the same temps as the rest which in something as small as an insect would improbable to say the least. Exposed to the cold window the insect would be cold, the cube square law would require a stationary insect exposed to freezing temps to be... wait for it... frozen...

Like most UFO sightings of the modern era this suffers greatly from eyewitness/photography fatigue. We all know, or so we are told that eyewitnesses are not as reliable as many think. I've even seen J. Allen Hynek being quoted as saying that military observers aren't particularly good observers and yet Hynek changed his mind about UFOs due to Military sighting, at least in part, and went from debunker to believer. Photos always suffer from the too good to be true or not good enough to be considered syndrome, everyone seems to be polarized with no middle ground. There are inexplicable sightings with an embarrassment of information, the air force has been guilty of simply not wanting to admit they might not know something and giving out explanations that fail utterly to explain anything and i mean completely fabricating info to try and explain away incidents. Sadly the believers have done the same things the fog of signal to noise has only gotten worse and our modern technology has rendered photos and videos as meaningless simply due to the old too good to be true or too bad to be considered paradox. It's to the point now I'm not sure I would believe a live news broadcast that showed one landing in the middle of the super bowl...

Guys, I am not arguing this is a alien space craft, but the videos combined with the testimony of the pilots, the CIC operators on the ship, and the videos does lend far more credence the object or objects were external to the aircraft and not something inside or on the lens of the flir... Personally I think this is pretty weak evidence to hang aliens on, Drones of some sort injected into the training scenario makes much more sense..

You didn't see where it came into frame from the right at what appeared to be high speed and the excitement in the voices of the pilots as they tried to get a lock on it?

In this encounter the pilots cleary saw something: https://www.livescience.com/61233-navy-pilots-ufo-sightings.html Unless your bug is flying into frame... https://youtu.be/as73FeKi2ls https://youtu.be/0Fd6ssvcBoM This one is the one I thought switched from ir to normal but I was mistaken but again the object moves out of frame faster than the equipment can keep up, none of this screams aliens space craft but it doesn't exactly scream bug on the windshield either... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9D8dzl4zGk

It did or was seen in normal light, I'll have to watch some more of these videos, to be honest I am tiring of watching the same footage over and over and seeing nothing but a blob... Either we give credence to the eyewitnesses of we don't don't. Pictures and video fall into two categories too good to be real or too bad to be considered... I'll look for it and post it with the time stamps.... In this encounter the pilots cleary saw something: https://www.livescience.com/61233-navy-pilots-ufo-sightings.html Unless your bug is flying into frame... https://youtu.be/as73FeKi2ls https://youtu.be/0Fd6ssvcBoM This one is the one I thought switched from ir to normal but I was mistaken but again the object moves out of frame faster than the equipment can keep up, none of this screams aliens space craft but it doesn't exactly scream bug on the windshield either... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9D8dzl4zGk

Why don't you display the non infrared film?

I see where you are coming from, evidently my ideas about gold were misplaced but the lack of Purple Au/Al seems to be a but odd, we do have rose gold, white gold, red gold, blue gold, green gold, and a few intermediate and none of them including purple gold use any more gold than the others in fact purple gold is 18k... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colored_gold

Any chance nobody makes motor windings from gold has to do with gold being too expensive to use in most such applications including the Au/Al alloy?

Check that 6 string Bass! My aquarium

https://geology.com/minerals/gold/uses-of-gold.shtml

Your problem with me is irrelevant, your problem is that you keep making assertions you cannot provide evidence for while ignoring things about this that disagree with your conclusion. The idea that biological beings couldn't survive the supposed maneuvers is meaningless, ever hear of drones?

I saw your picture, I also saw the videos, what you portrayed could be anything and there is more than one video. Don't pain me as the bad guy here, everything surrounding this is either stone cold superior technology or complete BS. I tend towards technology and I think it's ours but to push one possible ide as though it has to be true does nothing but make us look like debunkers instead of investigators. Doesn't get caught up in the us and them part of this. It's not either UFO nuts or government shills. There is a phenomena, often inexplicable, it might be totally explainable or it might be totally aliens, I doubt either solution is likely... BTW, stop saying you have given evidence, all you have given is your opinion, nothing more... Maybe messing with us is their version of the world series...

As I have said before this was not a case of one single object...

At no point in this thread have i said this "tic tack" was an alien space craft, the Navy's own explanation supersedes yours, I have no idea if an alien spacecraft has legs or tentacles and neither do you. You are pushing what is called in UFO circles "pelicanism" It means when an explanation is pushed beyond all bounds no matter how silly it is. "pelicans fly much like some UFOs and have been suggested as an an explanation even though they were traveling at 1200 mph +" I don't see legs in the video, I honestly figured it was some sort of drone injected into the exercise by the Navy. Now the Navy says no to that. The video is not the only part of that sighting and is in fact footage from later that day after two other jets had tried to intercept them. Them is the proper pronoun as several were seen on the ships radar. Now I don't know what they were but one thing is for sure I see no reason to try and push a ridiculous explanation for anything, even UFOs... You seem to be saying that one sighting that is explained, by you at least, negates all others. No one here would rather find out there are aliens space craft operating in our atmosphere and apart from a handful of really extraordinary events the evidence is almost completely null. You might want to watch this for a larger perspective... https://youtu.be/K-FsylX3NgE

considering all the testimony and the fact the "tic tacs" were picked up on multiple rader, seen by multiple pilots and the radar of an aegis class ship and seen over the course of several days and assumed at first to be radar clutter and the radars were adjusted several times but the "Tic tacs" only became clearer and seen more often your explanation is "ridiculous" Doesn't make it an alien spacecraft but even the navy has admitted it was something real in the airspace that day and unexplained and several others have been seen now btw... BTW it was officially a UAP, not a UFO...

He is the Antichrist, he cannot be defeated... Hmmm, nothing happened, no fire from the sky to destroy the one person who knows... maybe he isn't...

The idea has been bandied about a bit. The monolith has it's supporters.

Yes, that is one of their advantages, you can build a base there and study Mars up close with out contaminating it. The gravity is so low you could easily use mag-lev to launch probes and they could return material for study. Besides everyone knows at least one of them is a alien spacecraft... not really but they do have material that could be used for various purposes without actually landing on Mars...