New UFO police body cam

[Bufofrog]

32 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Not if you look closely.  On a 27 inch monitor the being closest to the family is highly visible sitting in the cab of the vehicle. 

You can't be serious... unless by 'highly visible' you mean 'indistinct smudge'.

[exchemist]

45 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

 

Not if you look closely.  On a 27 inch monitor the being closest to the family is highly visible sitting in the cab of the vehicle. 

Frankly, I don't think any video or photographic evidence is enough for some people.  Even if the video were shot in broad daylight of an alien it would be explained away as CGI or some visual effects trickery.  

For me its the confluence of factors coming together that lends legitimacy to this event. 

1.  The numerous credible eye witnesses who have come forward recently, including those in government and military circles.

2.  Credible documented accounts of close encounters with beings of unknown origin (BUOs) - to coin a new acronym.  

3.  The multiple angles from different cameras (Ring doorbell cam - officer's Bodycam), combined with the authentic footage from the family of encounter with the actual creature.

This cascade of events creates in my view a probability that this is encounter actually happened as described.  

 

Right, the entire story was fabricated by a group of individuals in that town working together.  The video was staged to get viral views, for money.  Is that it?

From what I have seen, there is no "cascade of events". The fireball, we can safely say, is a perfectly normal phenomenon. So forget that. It's only function in this tale has been to make some people panic and start imagining things.

There are no "credible documented accounts of encounters with beings of unknown origin" anywhere in this episode, so far as I can see, nor have any "military" people been involved, just a few cops who saw nothing themselves either.

There is no "entire story" to fabricate, just a small group of people who got in a panic and called the cops.     

Where are you getting all this extra stuff from about documented sources and military people?

Edited June 15, 2023 by exchemist

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Alex_Krycek said:

The multiple angles from different cameras (Ring doorbell cam - officer's Bodycam),

These are of the green falling object, right? That something fell is not in dispute. Don’t substitute this for the video of the alleged beings.

Quote

Right, the entire story was fabricated by a group of individuals in that town working together.  The video was staged to get viral views, for money.  Is that it?

Nobody claimed this, and presenting a straw man makes your position less credible.

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

From what I have seen, there is no "cascade of events". The fireball, we can safely say, is a perfectly normal phenomenon. So forget that. It's only function in this tale has been to make some people panic and start imagining things.

Further, it’s not entirely clear that one can claim that whatever caused the fireball landed in the yard. Some people are just assuming this.

[Alex_Krycek]

1 hour ago, Bufofrog said:

You can't be serious... unless by 'highly visible' you mean 'indistinct smudge'.

Yes, I'm serious.  If you pay attention and watch the video, the creature is clearly visible.   Furthermore the anatomical appearance of each creature is pretty much identical, with the same eyes and cranial structure.  One is visible in Profile while the other can be seen more or less facing the camera.  This can't be explained away as an artifact, in my opinion.

32 minutes ago, swansont said:

Nobody claimed this, and presenting a straw man makes your position less credible.

It always seems to be the implication.  Every "normie" involved in the incident is hallucinating and can't be trusted.  The family who video taped the creatures - they're imagining what they saw, there's no way they could be credible witnesses or the video they took legitimate.  It's the usual dismissive posture people take and have taken, for this incident and many others.

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

From what I have seen, there is no "cascade of events". The fireball, we can safely say, is a perfectly normal phenomenon. So forget that. It's only function in this tale has been to make some people panic and start imagining things.

There are no "credible documented accounts of encounters with beings of unknown origin" anywhere in this episode, so far as I can see, nor have any "military" people been involved, just a few cops who saw nothing themselves either.

There is no "entire story" to fabricate, just a small group of people who got in a panic and called the cops.     

Where are you getting all this extra stuff from about documented sources and military people?

I'm not referring to this particular incident as the cascade of events; rather the numerous preceding incidents such as Ariel School and Varginha, the many witnesses from the military such as David Fravor, the USS Nimitz crew, David Grusch - the whistleblower who just testified before Congress on the crash retrieval program, Ryan Graves, the F-16 pilot who talks openly about how he and other pilots saw UAPs on almost a daily basis, and many, many more examples. 

These incidents have established sufficient precedent and context in my view, to make the incident in Las Vegas not entirely improbable.  Combined with the corroborating factors at play in this incident in Vegas, and yeah, I think this is legit. 

 

Edited June 15, 2023 by Alex_Krycek

[exchemist]

35 minutes ago, swansont said:

These are of the green falling object, right? That something fell is not in dispute. Don’t substitute this for the video of the alleged beings.

Nobody claimed this, and presenting a straw man makes your position less credible.

Further, it’s not entirely clear that one can claim that whatever caused the fireball landed in the yard. Some people are just assuming this.

That's putting it mildly. It is plain that the object did NOT land anywhere that has been found - and most likely did not reach the surface at all.  Given this fireball was reported by 21 different individuals, spread across 4 states of the USA, it clearly must have been a very high altitude phenomenon and travelling very fast.  This is not AT ALL consistent with something "landing" in someone's back yard - and then mysteriously taking off again. 

5 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Yes, I'm serious.  If you pay attention and watch the video, the creature is clearly visible.   Furthermore the anatomical appearance of each creature is pretty much identical, with the same eyes and cranial structure.  One is visible in Profile while the other can be seen more or less facing the camera.  This can't be explained away as an artifact, in my opinion.

It always seems to be the implication.  Every "normie" involved in the incident is hallucinating and can't be trusted.  The family who video taped the creatures - they're imagining what they saw, there's no way they could be credible witnesses or the video they took legitimate.  It's the usual dismissive posture people take and have taken, for this incident and many others.

I'm not referring to this particular incident as the cascade of events; rather the numerous preceding incidents such as Ariel School and Varginha, the many witnesses from the military such as David Fravor, the USS Nimitz crew, David Grusch - the whistleblower who just testified before Congress on the crash retrieval program, Ryan Graves, the F-16 pilot who talks openly about how he and other pilots saw UAPs on almost a daily basis, and many, many more examples. 

These incidents have established sufficient precedent and context in my view, to make the incident in Las Vegas not entirely improbable.  Combined with the corroborating factors at play in this incident in Vegas, and yeah, I think this is legit. 

 

Aha, I thought as much. So you are trying to drag in other - unrelated - reports, over a period of years, as evidence that this incident must have involved an alien landing, even though the evidence from the incident itself is pisspoor? I'm afraid it doesn't work like that. We are discussing this one incident, to see what merit the claims have. The evaluation stands or falls on the quality of evidence from the incident itself.   

Edited June 15, 2023 by exchemist

[Alex_Krycek]

8 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Aha, I thought as much. So you are trying to drag in other - unrelated - reports, over a period of years, as evidence that this incident must have involved an alien landing,

But of course, it's called context.  How can you make an informed judgement about reality if you don't take into account the entire holistic context, i.e. all the events that impact on a particular topic?  

8 minutes ago, exchemist said:

even though the evidence from the incident itself is pisspoor? I'm afraid it doesn't work like that. We are discussing this one incident, to see what merit the claims have. The evaluation stands or falls on the quality of evidence from the incident itself.   

In my view the evidence of this incident is pretty solid.  Multiple eye-witnesses, multiple video recordings of the UAP.  Video footage of the creatures.  Enough for me.  

[exchemist]

5 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

But of course, it's called context.  How can you make an informed judgement about reality if you don't take into account the entire holistic context, i.e. all the events that impact on a particular topic?  

In my view the evidence of this incident is pretty solid.  Multiple eye-witnesses, multiple video recordings of the UAP.  Video footage of the creatures.  Enough for me.  

There are no recordings of any "UAP" , only of the fireball which was widely reported and has a completely conventional explanation. 

Edited June 15, 2023 by exchemist

[swansont]

9 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

It always seems to be the implication.  Every "normie" involved in the incident is hallucinating and can't be trusted.  The family who video taped the creatures - they're imagining what they saw, there's no way they could be credible witnesses or the video they took legitimate.  It's the usual dismissive posture people take and have taken, for this incident and many others.

What does this have to with my point that the multiple views were of the fireball, not the alleged aliens?

Though there is something to look at here; everyone agrees that there is a fireball, because it’s bright and green. Quite obvious. But we don’t know how fast it’s moving or how big it is, because we don’t know how far away it is. Any estimates on that will vary; if it’s 100m away or 1000m away, the numbers you’d get would differ by a factor of 10..

As for the back yard, the video has been “enhanced” and we don’t know how it was altered. We don’t have any “control” video to see what kind of visual artifacts show up with this enhancement under similar lighting, but where everyone agrees no aliens are there.

These are the kinds of things that have to happen for these to start to be considered scientifically rigorous.

 

8 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

In my view the evidence of this incident is pretty solid.  Multiple eye-witnesses, multiple video recordings of the UAP.  Video footage of the creatures.

But nothing connecting the UAP and the alleged creatures.

8 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

  Enough for me.  

The lack of objectivity is the problem.

[TheVat]

3 hours ago, Eise said:

And you are ignored again... Even from the video, it seems pretty clear this a fireball. I have seen one 2 times in my life, pretty impressive.

And I fully agree that the quality of the videos is not better then messages of the devil if you play music in the wrong direction... 

+1 for all your posts here, that were ignored.

I also thank @exchemist for his fact-check on the interstate fireball sightings.  And I am surprised that intelligent people can ignore the human penchant for pranking, fakery, and tall tale telling - which is often on display after any dramatic atmospheric phenomenon tweaks the public imagination.  

I would only add that a second Avatar movie, which happened to feature ten foot tall aliens was released about four months before this Vegas sighting.  

Like Agent Mulder, @Alex_Krycek wants to believe.  🙂

[mistermack]

I'm willing to accept the argument that they are aliens. But so long as they are in the country legally, they can make a valuable contribution to society. 

[TheVat]

And deportation to Ross 128b is really expensive.  Even with the warp drives they helped us reverse-engineer.

[swansont]

On 6/15/2023 at 1:05 PM, TheVat said:

And I am surprised that intelligent people can ignore the human penchant for pranking, fakery, and tall tale telling - which is often on display after any dramatic atmospheric phenomenon tweaks the public imagination. 

Or just imaginations run wild. They see some light shining off animal eyes in the shadows, and with a little mental escalation, it’s a monster. Then you have the fish-tale embellishment in the retelling.

[swansont]

Short twitter history thread; an anecdote of what happens re:UFOs when people get a bit of an adrenaline rush 

Lots of fake sightings, and chasing Venus.

 

[Alex_Krycek]

On 6/15/2023 at 10:28 PM, swansont said:

The lack of objectivity is the problem.

Yes, from both sides of the debate.

On 6/16/2023 at 12:05 AM, TheVat said:

Like Agent Mulder, @Alex_Krycek wants to believe.  🙂

That's a convenient way to patronize those with a different viewpoint.  

Frankly, until recently I had reserved judgement on this topic as I didn't have a vested interest one way or the other as to veracity of the UFO/Alien claims.  Like many I thought the most logical possibility was that life definitely exists out there somewhere, but had not visited Earth yet.

However, unlike you, who refuses to take this topic seriously or objectively review the evidence that is available, I kept an open mind, and based on the weight of the evidence that has been documented, have adjusted my viewpoint.  

By contrast, it seems to me that you're acting from a position of subjective bias, where you:

• A.) won't take the topic seriously to begin with 
• B.) won't review the evidence that exists and
• C.) therefore must trivialize the topic and patronize others who actually have done A and B.

So, you can believe you're being objective, but someone who can't seriously investigate a topic or suspend judgement for even a minute can't logically claim to be that.

Edited June 18, 2023 by Alex_Krycek

[exchemist]

2 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Yes, from both sides of the debate.

That's a convenient way to patronize those with a different viewpoint.  

Frankly, until recently I had reserved judgement on this topic as I didn't have a vested interest one way or the other as to veracity of the UFO/Alien claims.  Like many I thought the most logical possibility was that life definitely exists out there somewhere, but had not visited Earth yet.

However, unlike you, who refuses to take this topic seriously or objectively review the evidence that is available, I kept an open mind, and based on the weight of the evidence that has been documented, have adjusted my viewpoint.  

By contrast, it seems to me that you're acting from a position of subjective bias, where you:

• A.) won't take the topic seriously to begin with 
• B.) won't review the evidence that exists and
• C.) therefore must trivialize the topic and patronize others who actually have done A and B.

So, you can believe you're being objective, but someone who can't seriously investigate a topic or suspend judgement for even a minute can't logically claim to be that.

On the contrary, once you have determined the real explanation for the fireball, there is nothing left in the incident we are discussing, apart from an uncorroborated report from some panicky people. Nothing. It’s just like someone seeing the Blessed Virgin on a piece of toast. 

[swansont]

8 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Yes, from both sides of the debate.

If you could point out where the lack of objectivity is, that would be great. Asking that the evidence presented rise to the same standards in other areas of science is objectivity. 

8 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

However, unlike you, who refuses to take this topic seriously or objectively review the evidence that is available, I kept an open mind, and based on the weight of the evidence that has been documented, have adjusted my viewpoint.  

I know that people have asked for evidence in previous discussions, and the response has been rather tepid. We get grainy pictures and videos. We never get this weighty evidence. I’ve pointed out the shortcomings in regarding these as scientific evidence.

[TheVat]

10 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

That's a convenient way to patronize those with a different viewpoint.  

If you post under the moniker Alex Krycek, you should be prepared for a bit of teasing.  It wasn't patronizing, just joking.   You have any idea how many booze jokes or lab monster jokes I've weathered (at three message boards) due to being a vat?   

10 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

However, unlike you, who refuses to take this topic seriously or objectively review the evidence that is available, I kept an open mind, and based on the weight of the evidence that has been documented, have adjusted my viewpoint.  

I've spent time, on and off over nearly fifty years, reviewing evidence, taking reports from trained observers with the seriousness they deserve.  My mind is open that there is something anomalous out there.  But nothing has led me to zoom in on the ET hypothesis as deserving more weight than others.  AFAICT, that's how open minds work - they don't jump to conclusions when some tall tales of LGM and BEMs (often closely timed with documented fireballs, bolides, satellite reentries, thermal inversions, alien invasion blockbuster movie releases, etc) come their way.

 

[Genady]

If "they" are so advanced then they are over an original excitement of discovery and exploration and perhaps just trying to dump their criminals away, like British used to send their convicts to Australia.

[Moontanman]

Personally I think this "sighting" is a hoax, the fireball was real but the aliens are flat out a hoax. 

[swansont]

5 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Personally I think this "sighting" is a hoax, the fireball was real but the aliens are flat out a hoax. 

The thing is, I’m not sure what evidence there is that this is a hoax.

[Moontanman]

18 hours ago, swansont said:

The thing is, I’m not sure what evidence there is that this is a hoax.

Well for one thing the landing "circle" in the back yard can be shown on google maps to have been there weeks before the "landing". 

[exchemist]

19 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Well for one thing the landing "circle" in the back yard can be shown on google maps to have been there weeks before the "landing". 

That’s odd. They looked like tyre tracks to me. Is there so little going on in that yard? 
 

I’m inclined to think it’s not so much a hoax as a bunch of credulous true believers putting 2 and 2 together and getting 5.75.

Edited June 21, 2023 by exchemist

[Sensei]

On 6/9/2023 at 7:36 PM, Moontanman said:

A cop caught it on his body cam and the people who saw it said the aliens were 8 feet tall! 

Lie! The aliens are not so stupid to use the imperial unit system..

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by Sensei

[swansont]

2 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Well for one thing the landing "circle" in the back yard can be shown on google maps to have been there weeks before the "landing". 

Still not evidence of a hoax.

It is evidence that whatever comprised the fireball was not a craft that landed in the yard, but it was already pointed out that there was no evidence tying the alleged sightings to the fireball, other than the possible activation of imagination gone wild.