Identifying this triangular UFO

MetaRoo

New Member
Hi everyone,

I am new to the forum and I'm quite a skeptical person when it comes to UFOs. I have a photo to share that I captured myself with an iPhone SE (original model) last year. I live in a rural location with almost no artificial light and it was a dark night. I looked out the kitchen window to see these three lights in a triangle formation.
IMG_2448.JPG
2021-06-07_22-35-35.jpg

My reason for posting this is that I hope to learn how the more experienced image analysts here would go about identifying this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MetaRoo

New Member
Hi Mick,

It was completely static. And none of the 3 lights blinked. I should mention that I know what it was but I'm trying to learn how you guys go about arriving at a conclusion when trying to identify something like this so that I can improve my process of elimination and identification skills.
 

JMartJr

Senior Member
Just bumped the color intensity, which confirms what I thought I was seeing -- a green tinge to the light towards picture-left. Looks consistent with port and starboard red/green wing lights.
IMG_2448colorbumped.jpg
 

MetaRoo

New Member
I thought some of you might have fun trying to identify this and that I'd learn a bit about your process, but I guess not. I already got my first dislike after one day of joining. So I'll reveal what this UFO actually is. It's simply a car parked in the distance with its lights on. It just happened to be sitting directly below the light outside my neighbour's garage. My phone camera was tilted slightly when I took the photo. Neither my eyes nor my phone's camera picked up anything but the lights. It was a very dark night in a very dark location. But I knew what it was, obviously, because I live here.

However, those three lights created the triangular shape and it occurred to me that if I did not have inside knowledge (ie. that I know the light is my neighbour's garage on the other side of the field) and I wasn't familiar with the land around where I was and didn't know that the ground sloped up towards where the lights where, I might for a moment be tricked into thinking it was a glowing triangle hovering up in the sky.

So many UFO sightings come from a lack of information. The brain tries to fill in the gaps. I think this is why some people claim to have seen giant black triangular ships silently moving across the sky. They are probably seeing individual points of light and their brains are connecting them and making them see a triangular outline.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2448 b.JPG
    IMG_2448 b.JPG
    105.4 KB · Views: 101

JMartJr

Senior Member
I should mention that I know what it was but I'm trying to learn how you guys go about arriving at a conclusion when trying to identify something like this so that I can improve my process of elimination and identification skills.
Hiya --

I hope this does not come across snippy -- I'm not feeling that while typing this -- but anyway, maybe a bteter way to go about that is to go read some of the threads where some of the actual "unknown" cases are dissected and analyzed, opinions formed, discarded, evaluated. I'd recommend the Turkish UFO thread
which is a very long thread but fascinating in terms of how new hypotheses come in and find either support or refutation, sometimes reaching a consensus, sometimes not.

For a thread where the challenge was maybe a bit less, and therefore the thread a little less dense (and lengthy) try maybe the Green Triangle Bokeh thread
(And now we'll find out if I used the link feature correctly!)

Creating a thread like this is likely going to annoy some folks, who will feel like their time is being wasted, or that a "gotcha" is being attempted, whether or not that was your intention.

Don't feel TOO bad about the dislike -- one of my first posts got deleted! It happens.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I thought some of you might have fun trying to identify this and that I'd learn a bit about your process, but I guess not. I already got my first dislike after one day of joining. So I'll reveal what this UFO actually is. It's simply a car parked in the distance with its lights on.
Creating a thread like this is likely going to annoy some folks, who will feel like their time is being wasted, or that a "gotcha" is being attempted, whether or not that was your intention.
It annoyed me, slightly. Because it's a waste of time. I assume people posting cases here are genuine, and that factors into the assessment of the data.

In a shot like this, one technique is to take the same photo in daytime, and see what is there. I didn't suggest this because
I live in a rural location with almost no artificial light and it was a dark night.
which implies that you'd know what was in that direction, and this was something unusual you had not seen before.
 

LarryLobster

New Member
EDIT
This is not intended to be impolite, but what you did is annoying.

I was going to complete this post tomorrow morning by positing that the video I shared is some kind of plane with odd looking wings in the shape of an arrow head given some of what's revealed by the flashing lights, but that it (nor, ostensibly, the OP's "UFO") is not following aviation lighting standards because the front of the craft is lit up, and the left is not red, the right is not green (reversed).
But now I realized that my time was wasted because, as I alluded to in my opening statements, it could have been anything, like a picture of the lights on my microphone in the dark...
OR A CAR OF YOURS PARKED.

as I predicted before you revealed the answer (presumably because I thumbs downed your comment), you had more info, your story was not really commensurate with the claim that you wouldn't (and a lie, which, due to the politeness policy I was trying to avoid saying), and it could have been anything with 3 lights in the dark like that.

But I already did all of this darn analysis, so while it's incomplete, here you go. Hope that gives you some insight into at least my thinking processes. Enjoy.




There's not very much that submits to analysis here given that it's just a picture of 3 lights in triangular formation over a black backdrop. Some more information would be useful if you can provide it. For this reason, respectfully, I do not like the presentation of your post w/respect to your goals for it.
  • Image analysis is a wonderful thing, but it is necessarily limited by the amount of information in the image(s) being analyzed. Here, we are given a 1600x1200 photo of 3 different colored lights oriented in a triangle against a pitch black backdrop and a part you zoomed into.
    • It is virtually impossible to gauge the object's distance from the observer given the complete lack of anything in the photo that we can use as a reference. Thus, it is really impossible to estimate the object's size. The size of the glare from the light passing through your lens could be used, but all we've been told is that you've taken a photo w/your iPhone. I have a microphone with lights like those that I could take a photo of similar to this one.
  • Imagine analysis is performed much more effectively when other forms of additional data are supplied. In total, you have specified that:
    • Nothing was blinking; the object did not move; you live in a dark rural area.
      • This information can give us clues as to what it could be and/or what it couldn't be (moreso the latter in this case), but those approximations are speculative at best.
  • Once again, with all due respect, I am skeptical that you have provided us with all of the data that you have. Either your investigation into the methods of skeptical image analysis is poorly constructed, or something else - perhaps a test or gag of some kind - is going on.
    • You present your original post as if you were going about your nightly business, somehow noticed a pattern of lights in the sky through your kitchen window, and then came outside and took 1 photo of it. It presents as though you yourself are a UFO-skeptic who has limited information/useful skill for debunking and need help from people from whom you hope to better improve your ability to solve these things on your own.
    • You later provide what would have been useful anecdotal information from the beginning and state that you in fact know what it is.To me, this implies:
      • You have more information about these lights than you have shared, or
      • You were already aware of what these craft were before the sighting happened / someone made you you aware of they are conclusively by showing them to you.
  • Originally I wondered why you would not have recorded a video. I'll ask then if you have:
    • Any video of the craft? Or at least additional photography? Assuming you didn't know what it was at the time of witnessing it, it's odd that you only took 1 photo.
    • Any additional information to provide about where it eventually went, how far away you thought it was (no reference = hard to tell), whether or not it made noise or caused any disturbance noticeable to you from inside your house (how did you stumble upon it from your kitchen window)?
ALL THAT NOT WITHSTANDING -
Here is my initial analysis:

Some preliminary thoughts:
It resembles whatever craft this is, reported with video and single eye witness testimony in a news article on leicestermercury
1623195388673.png
Here is your photo for comparison:
1623195134090.png

Photographic similarities:
  • Both feature single greenish, reddish, and white(-ish?) lights in triangular formation.
  • both are fairly invisible against the night sky, save for the three lights (obviously).

There are some differences between what you claim the object does and what the similar looking object does in the video. However, given that the only concrete information about your case that I have is the one photo you provided, I'm going to tentatively base my analysis off of my findings from the video. They are fundamentally the same image.
At the very least, I want to demonstrate that if these things are planes, they are not following aviation navigation light standards at all (will address below).

Here is a screengrab of the article itself so you know what you're clicking into:
Article





Here is a full recording of the video present. The object moves slowly and somewhat silently in the night sky before sort of pivoting.
This looks fairly similar to the screenshot you sent.

Notice how the red light in the back is blinking:




Here's what I found:

  1. The red light is not constantly shining. Rather, in the video it blinks in bursts of 2. Between this burst of red-light blinks, the pale green and white light flash in tandem with each other once.
    1. When the white light flashes, an additional light, which is adjacent to it and looks lime green in the recording, flashes too.
    2. 1623194658824.png



Personally, at first I thought it looked and acted like a propeller based drone of some kind, but now I'm leaning more toward some kind of non-commercial airplane or a commercial airplane not following aviation lighting guidelines, for some reason


There is also some significance in the color of the lights
.
1623192144258.png
1623192239421.png
 

Attachments

  • 1623144266106.png
    1623144266106.png
    143.8 KB · Views: 76
  • Triangle full.mp4
    22.6 MB · Views: 0
  • triangle.mp4
    1.7 MB · Views: 0
  • 1623192735664.png
    1623192735664.png
    62.7 KB · Views: 56
  • 1623194636779.png
    1623194636779.png
    116.5 KB · Views: 57
  • 1623195113990.png
    1623195113990.png
    37.9 KB · Views: 56
  • 1623195119999.png
    1623195119999.png
    37.9 KB · Views: 72
  • Triangle full_Slomo.mp4
    9.8 MB · Views: 0
  • Triangle full.mp4
    22.6 MB · Views: 0
  • Triangle full.mp4
    22.6 MB · Views: 0
Last edited:

Domzh

Active Member
I thought some of you might have fun trying to identify this and that I'd learn a bit about your process, but I guess not. I already got my first dislike after one day of joining. So I'll reveal what this UFO actually is. It's simply a car parked in the distance with its lights on. It just happened to be sitting directly below the light outside my neighbour's garage. My phone camera was tilted slightly when I took the photo. Neither my eyes nor my phone's camera picked up anything but the lights. It was a very dark night in a very dark location. But I knew what it was, obviously, because I live here.

However, those three lights created the triangular shape and it occurred to me that if I did not have inside knowledge (ie. that I know the light is my neighbour's garage on the other side of the field) and I wasn't familiar with the land around where I was and didn't know that the ground sloped up towards where the lights where, I might for a moment be tricked into thinking it was a glowing triangle hovering up in the sky.

So many UFO sightings come from a lack of information. The brain tries to fill in the gaps. I think this is why some people claim to have seen giant black triangular ships silently moving across the sky. They are probably seeing individual points of light and their brains are connecting them and making them see a triangular outline.
this effect happens also with large ships on the ocean or a combination of actually airborn light sources combined with something static on a hill.

people assume its the same object because three lights no matter what will form a triangle. same happened here, people just assumed the three lights belong to one object.

hence why we only hear about triangle ufo's at night (i mean whats the idea anyway if you are an alien overlord who only choses to fly around at night to hide but then decides to put them lights on :) )


@LarryLobster dude chill.. its not his fault you didnt asked about his position and checked the environment or asked him some questions first.

@ everyone, he clearly stated it was "a game". he made it clear and it was your choice to invest time in this game or not.
if you choose to play it and just random guess planes without asking clarifying questions first and demand evidence that supports his claims, thats maybe bad investigation technique..

no need to feel offended just because it wasnt a plane and you feel "played". we shouldnt allow our egos go in the way, this will only increase chances of falling victim to confirmation bias, because you are so attached to a certain hypothesis / idea. thats not good.

@MetaRoo please send us a picture for proof in daylight and the coordinates of your POV. otherwise its fair to assume it was indeed a plane and you made your explanation up, to not be "debunked".

i must admit the way the lights look i have a hard time to believe it was indeed a car and a window, the sizes, halo and shape look too similar than i would expect a window compares to a car headlamp or positioning light.

thank you

EDIT: im not gonna delete my original post but i must admit i was too quick with my statement. OP did not made clear in his opening post that he already knows what it is, this info was shared later when other possibly already invested time. sorry for that! i agree, foul play!
 
Last edited:

LarryLobster

New Member
this effect happens also with large ships on the ocean or a combination of actually airborn light sources combined with something static on a hill.

people assume its the same object because three lights no matter what will form a triangle. same happened here, people just assumed the three lights belong to one object.

hence why we only hear about triangle ufo's at night (i mean whats the idea anyway if you are an alien overlord who only choses to fly around at night to hide but then decides to put them lights on :) )


@LarryLobster dude chill.. its not his fault you didnt asked about his position and checked the environment or asked him some questions first.

@ everyone, he clearly stated it was "a game". he made it clear and it was your choice to invest time in this game or not.
if you choose to play it and just random guess planes without asking clarifying questions first and demand evidence that supports his claims, thats maybe bad investigation technique..

no need to feel offended just because it wasnt a plane and you feel "played". we shouldnt allow our egos go in the way, this will only increase chances of falling victim to confirmation bias, because you are so attached to a certain hypothesis / idea. thats not good.

@MetaRoo please send us a picture for proof in daylight and the coordinates of your POV. otherwise its fair to assume it was indeed a plane and you made your explanation up, to not be "debunked".

i must admit the way the lights look i have a hard time to believe it was indeed a car and a window, the sizes, halo and shape look too similar than i would expect a window compares to a car headlamp or positioning light.

thank you
Not offended. Not even sure how offense factors in as annoyance =/= offense. It just defeats the purpose of threads like this because, as Mick, who, even in his mild temperament was slightly annoyed, said: the honesty of people's claims and requests are taken as granted here. Thus, I gave him the benefit of the doubt as to his description of at least some of the more believable events he described in his interaction w the thing (that it was in the sky at night).

So I started an analysis on the basis of this benefit of doubt, even tho he said he knew was it was.

I dont care that it's not a plane or whatever I thought it was after accepting any amount of his story; I just feel as though someone took advantage of the good faith of a metabunk member (me).
 

jarlrmai

Senior Member
If it were a car near the ground, would the headlights not light up the ground, I too want to se a daytime shot of the location from the same POV with or without the car is fine.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
If it were a car near the ground, would the headlights not light up the ground, I too want to se a daytime shot of the location from the same POV with or without the car is fine.
the ground, even if lit up by headlights, is much darker than the headlight itself
like how, at night, the ground is darker than the moon, even though it is lit by the moon
there is nothing strange about the light being visible from a distance but not the ground
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
Just bumped the color intensity, which confirms what I thought I was seeing -- a green tinge to the light towards picture-left. Looks consistent with port and starboard red/green wing lights.
IMG_2448colorbumped.jpg
It looks like the green color is an artifact?
possibly caused by the camera adjusting its white balance based on the red light and the reddish garage light that may be an incandescent bulb?
and that adjustment makes a "white" white look greenish?

turning a green tinge on a white light into a green navigation light seems like an error
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
i agree, foul play!
yea UFO means "FLYING". so lying to people about lights in the sky... that were not in the sky, and asserting those lights were flying vs say a radio tower in the distance, is foul play. and a waste of people's time.
 

MetaRoo

New Member
Hiya --

I hope this does not come across snippy -- I'm not feeling that while typing this -- but anyway, maybe a bteter way to go about that is to go read some of the threads where some of the actual "unknown" cases are dissected and analyzed, opinions formed, discarded, evaluated. I'd recommend the Turkish UFO thread
which is a very long thread but fascinating in terms of how new hypotheses come in and find either support or refutation, sometimes reaching a consensus, sometimes not.

For a thread where the challenge was maybe a bit less, and therefore the thread a little less dense (and lengthy) try maybe the Green Triangle Bokeh thread
(And now we'll find out if I used the link feature correctly!)

Creating a thread like this is likely going to annoy some folks, who will feel like their time is being wasted, or that a "gotcha" is being attempted, whether or not that was your intention.

Don't feel TOO bad about the dislike -- one of my first posts got deleted! It happens.
Thanks for explaining why my post annoyed some people in a kind, polite and informative way. I really appreciate that approach to communication.
 

Domzh

Active Member
yea UFO means "FLYING". so lying to people about lights in the sky... that were not in the sky, and asserting those lights were flying vs say a radio tower in the distance, is foul play. and a waste of people's time.
no i meant not stating in the first post he knew what it was. because then its up to anyone to decide if he wants to invest time in a game (and not to help someone else out making sense of a sighting) or doesnt.

i see no problem when the lights appear do be in the sky but arent, thats part of the debunking process to identify the location, time, weather and what could have caused the phenomenon to be perceived like this
 

MetaRoo

New Member
It annoyed me, slightly. Because it's a waste of time. I assume people posting cases here are genuine, and that factors into the assessment of the data.

In a shot like this, one technique is to take the same photo in daytime, and see what is there. I didn't suggest this because

which implies that you'd know what was in that direction, and this was something unusual you had not seen before.
I understand. Sorry for wasting anyone's time. I thought a forum full of people who enjoy trying to indentify unidentified objects would be an ok place to post a challenge like this. I expected people to make various suggestions as to what it could be and then I'd reveal the answer and they would then be aware of one more ordinary explantion for such a configuration of lights that may not have been seen on the forum before, while I would learn about how they come to their conclusions. I thought it would then lead to an enjoyable conversation. But I somewhat understand why it was received poorly, especially thanks to JMartJr's reply. I can't say I really understand why LarryLobster found it so offensive and was so upset by it. That seems like somewhat of an over reaction. A newbie mistake of mine, I suppose.
 

Domzh

Active Member
my friend the explanation was shared a couple of times already: "some members didnt want to invest time for a challenge but believed they would invest time to help someone else by figuring out what they could have seen. you didnt revealed it was simply just a challenge and not an issue, hence why you got downvoted"

again, could you please post a daylight photograph from your perspective as proof that the window lights from your neighbour match distance and height from your home? google earth coordinates would do it as well i guess.

without one might believe it was a plane after all and you just came up with the car and house idea to "debunk the debunker" and have a giggle (might the the forum that auto crops images but ratio and resolution of you iphone se pic doesnt match those of an iphone se?)
 
Last edited:

MetaRoo

New Member
this effect happens also with large ships on the ocean or a combination of actually airborn light sources combined with something static on a hill.

people assume its the same object because three lights no matter what will form a triangle. same happened here, people just assumed the three lights belong to one object.

hence why we only hear about triangle ufo's at night (i mean whats the idea anyway if you are an alien overlord who only choses to fly around at night to hide but then decides to put them lights on :) )


@LarryLobster dude chill.. its not his fault you didnt asked about his position and checked the environment or asked him some questions first.

@ everyone, he clearly stated it was "a game". he made it clear and it was your choice to invest time in this game or not.
if you choose to play it and just random guess planes without asking clarifying questions first and demand evidence that supports his claims, thats maybe bad investigation technique..

no need to feel offended just because it wasnt a plane and you feel "played". we shouldnt allow our egos go in the way, this will only increase chances of falling victim to confirmation bias, because you are so attached to a certain hypothesis / idea. thats not good.

@MetaRoo please send us a picture for proof in daylight and the coordinates of your POV. otherwise its fair to assume it was indeed a plane and you made your explanation up, to not be "debunked".

i must admit the way the lights look i have a hard time to believe it was indeed a car and a window, the sizes, halo and shape look too similar than i would expect a window compares to a car headlamp or positioning light.

thank you

EDIT: im not gonna delete my original post but i must admit i was too quick with my statement. OP did not made clear in his opening post that he already knows what it is, this info was shared later when other possibly already invested time. sorry for that! i agree, foul play!
Thanks for the comments. I think you understood my intentions well, which were innocent and coming from a good place. I will be happy to take a daytime photo but I'll have to wait until the car is parked in the same place, which is not a usual occurrence because he usually parks it in the garage. I'm not willing to post the coordinates as that would mean sharing my home address on an internet forum. I don't understand why some are accusing me of taking a photo of a plane and lying, pretending it's a car parked under a light. I don't understand what the goal would be with such an exercise. And I feel this is all getting a bit out of hand now. I genuinely thought this would be a fun thread and did not want it to turn out this way.

What I have learned here is that when visiting this forum, stick to serious analysis only and do not initiate any 'guess the UFO' challenges. Thank you to all who made this clear to me. It's not quite the welcome I was hoping for (getting dislikes, being called a liar and so on) but hopefully I can be forgiven and can continue to participate in this community. I have been a subscriber of Mick's youtube channel for years and I've been debunking unsubstantiated claims on social media comment sections and other forums for many years also, especially in the area of health. I felt like I wanted to contribute to the UFO debunking community too, which led me to the forum.

Thanks to the kind people who understood my intentions and sorry to those I angered.
 
Last edited:

MetaRoo

New Member
Not offended. Not even sure how offense factors in as annoyance =/= offense. It just defeats the purpose of threads like this because, as Mick, who, even in his mild temperament was slightly annoyed, said: the honesty of people's claims and requests are taken as granted here. Thus, I gave him the benefit of the doubt as to his description of at least some of the more believable events he described in his interaction w the thing (that it was in the sky at night).

So I started an analysis on the basis of this benefit of doubt, even tho he said he knew was it was.

I dont care that it's not a plane or whatever I thought it was after accepting any amount of his story; I just feel as though someone took advantage of the good faith of a metabunk member (me).
I never said it was in the sky. And everything I said about it was completely true.
 

MetaRoo

New Member
It looks like the green color is an artifact?
possibly caused by the camera adjusting its white balance based on the red light and the reddish garage light that may be an incandescent bulb?
and that adjustment makes a "white" white look greenish?

turning a green tinge on a white light into a green navigation light seems like an error
Yes I believe you are correct. I believe the green is caused by the camera, not the headlights themselves, because the headlights were a warm white (I think).
 

MetaRoo

New Member
yea UFO means "FLYING". so lying to people about lights in the sky... that were not in the sky, and asserting those lights were flying vs say a radio tower in the distance, is foul play. and a waste of people's time.
I didn't say the lights were in the sky. I didn't say they were flying. Look at my posts more carefully. You must have made that assumption. Maybe there was a useful lesson in this thread after all, that it's important to read what someone is claiming carefully before deciding how angry to get at them.
 

FatPhil

Active Member
I didn't say the lights were in the sky. I didn't say they were flying.

Thread title is: "Identifying this triangular UFO". Look carefully at that initialism, in particular its middle letter.

Look at my posts more carefully. You must have made that assumption.

We did. And we did. And we were right.
 

MetaRoo

New Member
Thread title is: "Identifying this triangular UFO". Look carefully at that initialism, in particular its middle letter.



We did. And we did. And we were right.
You are correct that my thread title uses the acronym 'UFO'. I should have written "UO". It is my mistake when I said that I did not mention it was flying. I forgot about the F in the title, sorry. The term UFO is used so abundantly and incorrectly by so many people that I used it without even thinking about the F. It did not naturally come to me to write UO or just "object" instead. To not upset people I should have written "Identifying this UO which isn't a plane, isn't in the sky and isn't flying or hovering", but that would have given too much information and defeated the point of the thread.

I did not say that the object was in the sky. I did not mention the words up, high, in the sky or anything else to suggest that it was in the sky. I think people looked at the photo and made the assumption that they were looking up at lights in the sky. One of the main points of my post was to demonstrate that people often get it wrong and make assumptions about what they see.

I'm quite surprised at the hostility, or at least the unfriendliness from some people here towards a new member. It's not what I expected at all. I promise I'm not a horrible, mean person out to annoy people. I don't think this kind of hostility is healthy.
 
Last edited:

jarlrmai

Senior Member
You are correct that my thread title uses the acronym 'UFO'. I should have written "UO". It is my mistake, sorry. The term UFO is used so abundantly and incorrectly by so many people that I used it would even thinking about the F. Again, sorry. But I did not say that the object was in the sky. I did not mention the words up, high, in the sky or anything else to suggest that it was in the sky. I think people looked at the photo and made the assumption that they were looking up at lights in the sky. One of the main points of my post was to demonstrate that people often get it wrong and make assumptions about what they see.

I'm quite surprised at the hostility, or at least the unfriendliness from some people here towards a new member. It's not what I expected at all. I promise I'm not a horrible, mean person out to annoy people. I don't think this kind of hostility is healthy.
The word UFO here means Unidentified Flying Object. Generally it's more common incorrect usage is using to mean "alien spaceship" rather than that the object was not flying.

If you tell us it is a UFO of course people are going to "assume" you saw it flying, in the sky.

People put a lot of work in here to identify things and we generally assume OPs are genuine, so it's unsurprising people might be a bit annoyed, but I don't see any real hostility to you here.

People are being direct and to the point but that is about it.
 

MetaRoo

New Member
The word UFO here means Unidentified Flying Object. Generally it's more common incorrect usage is using to mean "alien spaceship" rather than that the object was not flying.

If you tell us it is a UFO of course people are going to "assume" you saw it flying, in the sky.

People put a lot of work in here to identify things and we generally assume OPs are genuine, so it's unsurprising people might be a bit annoyed, but I don't see any real hostility to you here.

People are being direct and to the point but that is about it.
All good points. I personally think that if you played this game with a group of people you'd just met in person, say at a dinner with a new significant other's family, or on your first day at a new office and they responded to a well intentioned 'guess the object" challenge in the way some members here have, it would be considered my most people as somewhat hostile and inappropriate. Social norms on the forum must be different.
 

MetaRoo

New Member
I'm going to wish everyone here all the best. I won't be participating in the forum any more. Take care, everyone.
 

jarlrmai

Senior Member
All good points. I personally think that if you played this game with a group of people you'd just met in person, say at a dinner with a new significant other's family, or on your first day at a new office and they responded to a well intentioned 'guess the object" challenge in the way some members here have, it would be considered my most people as somewhat hostile and inappropriate. Social norms on the forum must be different.

A forum dedicated to investigating unidentified phenomena is different to a dinner party.

I can imagine if you turns up to new partners family meal and say the father was a mechanic and you made up that your car had a weird knocking noise and asked him what it was back and forth for 40 mins and then said "oh I know what it was it was a loose golf ball in the trunk" he would maybe think your were not the best match for his child.

Also the history of UFO sightings is rife with charlatans and hoaxers so there's already history there that will negatively affect you if you play that game.
 

LarryLobster

New Member
You are correct that my thread title uses the acronym 'UFO'. I should have written "UO". It is my mistake when I said that I did not mention it was flying. I forgot about the F in the title, sorry. The term UFO is used so abundantly and incorrectly by so many people that I used it without even thinking about the F. It did not naturally come to me to write UO or just "object" instead. To not upset people I should have written "Identifying this UO which isn't a plane, isn't in the sky and isn't flying or hovering", but that would have given too much information and defeated the point of the thread.

I did not say that the object was in the sky. I did not mention the words up, high, in the sky or anything else to suggest that it was in the sky. I think people looked at the photo and made the assumption that they were looking up at lights in the sky. One of the main points of my post was to demonstrate that people often get it wrong and make assumptions about what they see.

I'm quite surprised at the hostility, or at least the unfriendliness from some people here towards a new member. It's not what I expected at all. I promise I'm not a horrible, mean person out to annoy people. I don't think this kind of hostility is healthy.

I apologize for any of my vexation.

In addition to the reasons mentioned above, I think about reason for some of our vexation is the unbelievable abundance of mostly-sensationalized UAP media in the news. Most of us on here are just trying to separate the wheat from the chaff, and for some of us, it has been exhausting I'm sure and a bit stressful.

UFOtwitter and all their stupidity and vitriol, the TTSA circus, Pentagon boilerplate speaking, unskeptical sensational news coverage, random drops from Corbell, etc.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
What I have learned here is that when visiting this forum, stick to serious analysis only and do not initiate any 'guess the UFO' challenges.
we've had some not-so-serious challenges here
but they don't usually come false-flagged

I think if you had put the information in post #3 in your original post to begin with, your experience would have been different
I hope you'll be back!
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
I think about reason for some of our vexation is the unbelievable abundance of mostly-sensationalized UAP media in the news.
I'm not responding to you Larry directly, just to what you wrote.

My only mild vexation is the constant put downs of MB members. I don't like seeing other members insulted for no reason. I was a moderator here for many years and am familiar with the patterns of passive-aggressive trolling. Which is what this thread reads like.

I am very aware that newbies can accidentally come off sounding trolly. That has happened here too before.
If that is the case, and you @MetaRoo are an actual debunker, then hopefully you can get over your ego and forget this episode (like we all will in a week) and move on.

80% of the members on this forum can't stand me. :) and i can't stand 30% of members. Personality clashes are a part of life. I wouldn't let such trivial things stand in the way of your debunking interest.
 

Domzh

Active Member
thats the nice thing with debunking "facts dont care about feelings", so we can move on together.

focusing on debunking these lazy ass "investigated by the finest engineers" AATIP / Pentagon leaks :)
 
Last edited:

FatPhil

Active Member
My 2 eurocents - I think we've got a smart group of people here, all inquisitive, and with a varied range of skills - all nicely overlapping, so that input can be corroborated, which is very important - and that is *very* valuable, and something that shouldn't be wasted. So it's a shame we ran over a hedgehog here, but it was minor and it's past. I think the lesson here is to not try to fool other MB members, even if it seems like a good idea at the time. (Except on the pasta carbanana themed threads, of course.)
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Stefan Leahu Help identifying lights on the ocean surface, Pacific Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 3
jarlrmai Resource for identifying the area of the night sky shown in a photo Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
J Identifying the Mountains in JTolan's "Rocky Mountains" IR Video Flat Earth 31
Astro Predicting and identifying all future SDO eclipses Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Astro Identifying Sun and Moon Transits Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
ki_cz Help identifying odd flights Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 8
steve holmes Problems with Identifying Contrails in FlightRadar24 Contrails and Chemtrails 57
Trailblazer Identifying: faked image of Earth from space (artwork, not "official") Flat Earth 4
Lisa P Identifying a plane over San Francisco [B99988 - Gulfstream GL650] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 20
JesseCuster Identifying satellites Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 16
Mick West Identifying Landing Lights Reported as UFOs Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 45
derrick06 Any tips for identifying CGI in fake UFO videos? Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 4
M Bornong A little help identifying a flight? Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 12
Mark Dobson Help identifying this object [Bolide / Meterorite] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 10
JRBids Identifying chemtrail planes Contrails and Chemtrails 11
Gunguy45 Help identifying odd clouds General Discussion 18
Charlesinsandiego Another triangular aircraft, this time in Kansas [B2 Bomber] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 25

Related Articles

Top