Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2012 1:20:49 GMT 1
Hello meldrew,
Yeah, especially when you've got a military guy reading the alphabet stamped on the surface of a craft that dings like a muted bell when it gets rapped on. Nessie could have been in the town square and no one would notice LOL.
|
|
Aelius
Researcher
Deep Thought.
Posts: 178
|
Post by Aelius on Nov 18, 2012 11:29:47 GMT 1
I'm am going to agree with Meldrew about what Orbs fall into as a category. I believe what you're thinking/referencing to orbs with UFO's is the circular pattern of light on a camera lens which is heavily distorted, giving the light refraction an orb-like appearance. That'd be the ONLY connection to be made in my opinion. Other than that, my definition of Orbs would be exactly this... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orb_(optics)Edit addition: I just saw those videos that another member posted. Sure you can call them Orbs of light but that does not make them Orbs. Remember, Orbs in still photography are mostly naked to the unaided eye. The orbs of light you see in the sky are just that, circular lights at a distance, thus appearing in an orb-like shape. That's all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2012 15:29:19 GMT 1
Hello Aelius,
So....Picking orbs as an example for laying out a research project wasn't the best. That's because this thread is about laying out a research project. NOT about researching the orbs themselves. I would be glad to explain this as many times as it takes for your light to go on.
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Nov 19, 2012 18:22:57 GMT 1
Hello meldrew, You are right of course. As was dbh who started the whole thing. Which brings up an interesting point. That being how did he get out of it and me get stuck with it? maybe I am of a higher intelligence? no that is not it....
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Nov 19, 2012 18:38:54 GMT 1
Sorry... step away for a few days and I have a few hours of catching up...
The fact that we cannot truly identify ORBs and any specific manor... to me... indicates that they should be something that is considered unidentified.
Now, just because they are unidentified, does not mean they are extraterrestrial.
I think we are mixing the two…
But getting back to Hiflier original topic
I am not going to say they only way… but to find highly creditable reports with high strangeness is to ask very detailed questions. Record the data than analyze.
|
|
Aelius
Researcher
Deep Thought.
Posts: 178
|
Post by Aelius on Nov 20, 2012 5:20:57 GMT 1
Hello Aelius, So....Picking orbs as an example for laying out a research project wasn't the best. That's because this thread is about laying out a research project. NOT about researching the orbs themselves. I would be glad to explain this as many times as it takes for your light to go on. Then we agree to attempt at another topic?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2012 22:41:21 GMT 1
Hello Aelius, Hello Aelius, So....Picking orbs as an example for laying out a research project wasn't the best. That's because this thread is about laying out a research project. NOT about researching the orbs themselves. I would be glad to explain this as many times as it takes for your light to go on. Don't see why not. Is there something that has caught your interest over the years? Maybe something you would really like to sink your teeth into and pick apart for a project? I've been delving into Black Triang;es and so far the research method I've outlined in this thread has served me well. I can provide some examples if you care to see some. Then we agree to attempt at another topic?
|
|
Aelius
Researcher
Deep Thought.
Posts: 178
|
Post by Aelius on Nov 21, 2012 5:06:12 GMT 1
Well, Black triangles to me are just a type of "sighting" seen by witnesses. There's really not much evidence to look over other than looking for that particular type of UFO seen. Everything else is hearsay. As for other topics, let me think about that. I'll come back to you once I think of a great one that even I will take part of.
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 21, 2012 10:22:07 GMT 1
Well, Black triangles to me are just a type of "sighting" seen by witnesses. There's really not much evidence to look over other than looking for that particular type of UFO seen. Everything else is hearsay. As for other topics, let me think about that. I'll come back to you once I think of a great one that even I will take part of. sounds good to me, the stand out topic to research would in my opinion be pilot sightings.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2012 23:04:10 GMT 1
Hello All,
Would any of you like to see a sample of my research data on BT's?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2012 23:25:39 GMT 1
Hello meldrew,
Go for it. I would suggest though that some form of data recording be in place so that you have a place to organize the information. Simply because the file will be quite large and remembering all the details of all the reports would be near impossible even though all the details wiould be necessary to create a proper assesment report of your own.
|
|
Aelius
Researcher
Deep Thought.
Posts: 178
|
Post by Aelius on Nov 21, 2012 23:32:20 GMT 1
Here's the thing about Black Triangles.
What new information could you possibly obtain from witnesses other than it was black, a triangle, when they saw it, what way it went, and/or size and sound?
I'm quite positive if they have any more extra information on the "Why" portion of questions, then they are most likely to lose credibility in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 21, 2012 23:44:37 GMT 1
have you heard of jnap 146, a law the prohibits pilots from going public about UFO sightings, with pretty harsh penalties, as far as I am aware no one has ever been prosecuted for breaching jnap 146, so you have to ask how many pilots haven't reported UFOs due to this ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2012 23:58:15 GMT 1
Hello Aelius, Here's the thing about Black Triangles. What new information could you possibly obtain from witnesses other than it was black, a triangle, when they saw it, what way it went, and/or size and sound? I'm quite positive if they have any more extra information on the "Why" portion of questions, then they are most likely to lose credibility in my opinion. Depends on what the data as whole brings to light. Nothing will surface if no one does anything and that is the point. You sound like you've been around the UFO subject for a while with your Forum experiences but it also sounds like you've given up somewhat on the subject as well. Were you to dive back into it what might be your course of action? For me, of all the different reports WRT shape over the years it became apparent to me that the BT's were the ones most likely to solve.
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Nov 22, 2012 0:03:26 GMT 1
My black triangle sighting:
1974 Cissbury clump (about 1000yds from Cissbury ring, Findon, A24 north of Worthing, Sussex)
September about 3.45am on a nightwatch
While looking towards the tree ring on the hill, myself and a friend had that ''It's behind you '' feeling. We were laying on our stomachs, rolled over on our backs and looked behind us. Just behind and above us was a large triangle shaped black object, the point was coming over our heads and the rear edge we thought was about the length of 3 football pitches, there were no lights on the object and the only way you could make out it's shape was by the stars it blocked out, it made no sound and seemed to be very low. End of report because we ran away, fast!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2012 0:06:36 GMT 1
Hello meldrew,
Pilot sightings have one drawback that I can see as a research endeavor. And that would be that in the end one would still have 25 different shapes to wade through which IMHO would leave one at the beginning. The beginning being that one would have to pick a shape to study and put the reports into some kind of order to establish any rhyme or reason as to where they might show up and most importantly WHEN. That may very well be a by product or even a goal in categorizing time, date and location. I mean in what still looks like random events I have real trouble thinking that they are indeed random events. I believe patterns of activity exist and only true cronologies would show that possible feature.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2012 2:51:35 GMT 1
Hello bazmatic,
Amazing. The deltas must be something to see indeed. Let me guess, little if any wind. I had an experience myself about a month ago. Still researching it. Don't know what to make of it. Looked like a plane, clear sky no wind. Came over my building and out over the water in front of me. Lights on, white tips with red "nav" under fuselage looking normal but NOT blinking (against FAA rules). I'm 20 minutes from large international airport. Here's the catch, coming over my eight story building I expected to hear the engines as it crossed over and moved away. There was nothing as I watched it and tried to listen until it went beyond the area. I'm one of those people who has NEVER seen anything strange- ever. It was the lack of sound that was the oddest.
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 22, 2012 20:32:09 GMT 1
I wrote a post earlier on this, but scrubbed it, but the gist was this.
going by what baz has said, a sighting of a triangle UFO in 1974, when then was the first recorded triangle ufo, notice I left the word "black" out of the question, is black triangle UFO different to a triangle UFO ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2012 22:04:27 GMT 1
Hello meldrew,
It would seem so in most cases. The research has shown reports of fully illuminated sightings of a particular color like yellow or blue, sometimes red if you can believe them. I'm focusing on black as I'm focusi ng on the military surveillance aspect of things. It'sthe choice I made for this particular project brcause I think there are just as much in the way of hoaxes and disinformation as in other fields of OFO research.
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 23, 2012 0:35:25 GMT 1
ok so when was the first black triangle ufo reported and where ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 1:40:30 GMT 1
Hello meldrew,
My research starts in Aug. 2004 and currently goes to Oct. 29, 2012. The first sighting I recorded in the data base was witnessed in Burbank, California in the morning their time. If you m,ean first sighting EVER I think it was in the 1940's and maybe one in the late 1800'S not sure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 2:15:30 GMT 1
Hello meldrew, I'm sure you have seen this data map. It was generated by the National Institute of Discovery Science, Robert T. Bigelow's old organization. It was created bt using data from MUFON's database consisting of BT sightings reported between 1990 to 2003. Can you tell me what is wrong with this picture?
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 23, 2012 12:22:50 GMT 1
I haven't seen that map before and I don't know whats wrong with it, you will have to tell me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 15:19:02 GMT 1
Hello meldrew, Ok, sorry, I thought you may have run acrross it. It's one of four that the NIDS created which came from three different databases. The fourth was a melding of the first three maps. This particular one shows the grouping of Black Triangles around population centers. The remarkable thing about this map and the others is the arrow icons that denote the direction the crafts were moving at the time of their sightings. What's bad about it? I looked at these maps for the first time almost two years ago. I've looked at them many times since and my conclusions are the same- Where are the dates? Where are the times? Where are all the criteria necessary to reduce the randomness? Well, it's not there. All the work gone into this map and the others and they are useless to research. There is no order, and it makes it seem like there are hundreds of them. That's what is wrong with it. The process for anyone doing private research is sucessfully thwarted by such data. I hope you see my point. This kind of thing is only a sample of what the public has gotten over the years- Take a look at Larry Hatche's CUFOS web site: www.cufos.org/announce.html The histograms are interesting and there is so much work behind the scenes but for real research by the public they are virtually unusable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 16:37:21 GMT 1
Hello meldrew,
I have a question for you. First of all, your idea for researching pilot reports is not without merit; I think it would be a valuable piece of research. No doubt too it would be a significantly large body of work depending on what you envision for a span of time for that research, i.e. from what year to what year if that is the approach. Do you know what the time reference is for these reports? Are they based on the time at the airport of departure or is a more universal time frame used? My take on those reports is that one, they should be categorized first by shape, then by order of event using a universal time criteria. I think shape should come first but that perhaps is not a true indication of the landscape of UFO deployment. Time maybe all that is needed. Characteristics such as color, size, direction, lighting, electrical impacts etc. would be beneficial if not a requirement in the research. Thoughts?
edited for spelling
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 23, 2012 18:02:45 GMT 1
I haven't thought to much about it, the reason I would go for pilot reports is the quality of the reports, they would give a lot of data, pilots are trained in all areas of natural occurrences, they wouldn't put in a report to make the front pages, quite the opposite in fact, the reports would be on file I would imagine, the thing about the shape, well I wouldn't look too much at that to start, things change shape depending on what angle they are viewed from. also I wouldn't expect that many if any pilot reports were fake/hoax, the time span is negotiable, as is the area. what ever subject is chosen will be a lot of research.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 18:11:32 GMT 1
hello meldrew,
All good points indeed. Would such a project be just for the sake of having things all in one place for reference or would the effort have a goal in mind?
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 23, 2012 18:31:57 GMT 1
I think that a core subject is a good idea, we all go off on a tangent when researching, and no doubt other information will come out of it, I'm not that regimental you see, another thing with pilot reports they know the difference between Venus and a UFOs, older reports would be better as files are released after 30 years, I don't have a goal in mind, just see what else comes out of it and follow my instinct.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 18:44:08 GMT 1
Hello Meldrew,
I understand what you are saying. It's all good. Ganging up on a subject definitely covers more ground as long as redundancies are kept at a minimum. I do think however that whatever the subject it is beneficial to have a point to the research. In my case I have at least a couple of end goals in mind. One being chronology. That is the main effort. The second I think will stem from the first. That being the ACTUAL quantity of crafts involved by illustrating coincidental events. The third goal will stem from the combination of the first two- prdicting future events. Will any of those goals be realized? To an extent yes. Will all of the goals be reached? Only the final assessment of the data will tell as in order to accomplish the third goal the data must be field tested. The third goal might even become apparent in the data itself but that remains to be seen as the project unfolds. My own question to myself is the third goal materializes what then?
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 24, 2012 19:50:19 GMT 1
|
|