Major UFO experiences are specific to the observer

[Eburacum]

Well, you are all certainly free to interpret the event any way you'd like. I can just give the best accounting I can.

Indeed, but I hope that I have successfully demonstrated to you that at least one part of your account is in error, since the Moon is considerably smaller than a dime held at arms' length, and you also say the 'orbs' were each smaller than the Moon. That makes them considerably smaller than a dime. But this is a common error, repeated in many places on the 'net.

I may have mentioned that I have at least five fairly convincing UFO/UAP sightings in my long life, and I've managed to explain all of them in my own mind; a different observer may have come to different conclusions about any of them. Especially the alien that entered my room, which I am fairly sure was sleep paralysis. I also note that any or all of my 'explanations' for these events could be wrong, but that is true about almost anything.

 

[Todd Feinman]

Indeed, but I hope that I have successfully demonstrated to you that at least one part of your account is in error, since the Moon is considerably smaller than a dime held at arms' length, and you also say the 'orbs' were each smaller than the Moon. That makes them considerably smaller than a dime. But this is a common error, repeated in many places on the 'net.

I may have mentioned that I have at least five fairly convincing UFO/UAP sightings in my long life, and I've managed to explain all of them in my own mind; a different observer may have come to different conclusions about any of them. Especially the alien that entered my room, which I am fairly sure was sleep paralysis. I also note that any or all of my 'explanations' for these events could be wrong, but that is true about almost anything.

Your experiences have no bearing. Moon is a silly trick I could have looked up. I told you to look at illustrations. You all have indeed taught me a lot.
On a different note, I've enjoyed interacting with you, Eburacum, all these years. Take care and I hope you get to see a real UFO one day.

 

[John J.]

[replying to @Eburacum ] Take care and I hope you get to see a real UFO one day.

I think this arguably brings us back to the thread title, "Major UFO experiences are specific to the observer".

What do you (Todd) mean by a "real UFO"?
If in this context a real UFO is an exotic artefact of non-human origin or a visible phenomenon under non-human control, no "real" UFOs have been shown to exist, ever, although clearly some people are convinced that they have seen real UFOs.

This might be the downside of something being "undebunkable" (which I sort of equate with unfalsifiable), it is also indemonstrable. No testable evidence means that we are left with subjective accounts which cannot be tested.
This doesn't mean that the witnessed event wasn't accurately reported, or even that the witness was mistaken in their conclusions, just that we have no way of assessing this except by considering what is already known about similar reports.
None have been shown to be proof of ETI craft or other exotic phenomena.

So how do we decide which reports might be of "real" UFOs (using the above definition)? I guess many Metabunk threads address this.
Anecdotal reports and beliefs/ confidence of claimants are objectively (not necessarily subjectively) insufficient, they are not a sensible basis for changing how we view the universe or what should be printed in science textbooks. Many mainstream books about astronomy, spaceflight etc. discuss the possibility of extraterrestrial life, but I feel it would be a retrograde step if authors felt obliged to mention (e.g.) Antonio Villas Boas' account, or Kelly-Hopkinsville, as possible evidence of alien life along with, say, discussion of spectroscopy of planetary atmospheres, SETI and the Drake equation.

It seems the assessment of a UFO being "real" is a subjective matter of opinion -belief- and isn't dependent on testable or replicable evidence.
It is beyond doubt that many people believe that they have seen exotic flying craft/ phenomena and that they're certain their experiences can't be explained by any theories that don't involve non-human intelligence. I am sure Barney and Betty Hill believed their UFO was real.

Many equally credible people have witnessed ghosts, Bigfoot, chupacabras and been visited by figures from their religious traditions. In the past, many others attested to fairies, witches. Belief in the latter appears to have been widespread. But magic isn't real, so witches (in the historical sense) didn't exist (whether some people believed themselves to be witches is a different issue). Yet people were put to death because accounts of supernatural phenomena, and anecdotes connecting almost certainly unconnected events, were accepted as evidence and believed. Conviction that something is real is not evidence that it is, even if others share that conviction.

Major UFO experiences might be specific to the observer. How that observer interprets their sighting, and what they believe as a result, might also be subjective.
There is no testable, convincing evidence that anyone has ever seen a "real" UFO, though some people believe they have.

Stating that real UFOs exist to be seen, and implying those who don't see (or see but don't believe in) them are cursed, seems more faith- than evidence-based.