A lot of guns? for the often stated peaceful, love, feminine energy etc that's a part of the Skywatcher schtick
thats what i got too.The trailer end shot is from around here
is that whats at the top of my notepad? not sure what you mean by decimal.Just share the coords in decimal
i know but Google Earth is better i think for 3d. (especially since i cant personally even get my google maps to tilt anymore.and/or a Google Maps weblink
Looking for? Or summoning?Are they seriously just standing around in the Texas scrublands looking for UFOs?
It's not as if they're less likely to find real flying saucers there than, say, the Scottish Highlands...View attachment 78335
Are they seriously just standing around in the Texas scrublands looking for UFOs?
I see a rather poor attempt at an anaglyph, but since they did it top to bottom instead of left to right, it doesn't work very well. And yes, I've got my red-blue 3-D glasses handy!I just realized that Skywatcher has apparently chosen an illustration of an out of focus point of light as their logo…. Fitting
![]()
(considering their budget is enough to get their hands on two helicopters),
Yeah I'm using chatgpt to quickly convert between minute+second and decimal. It's weird that Google Maps on map points gives it to you in decimal but if you navigate to a location from the decimal coordinates it converts it on the UI to minute+second form. I wish there was a preference setting to tell it to just use decimal for everything. And a similar setting for stellarium.paste in here then we can copy to Earth or Maps or Bing or whatever, if you need to convert AI is pretty good at converting co-ord formats.
That is because google maps uses EPSG:3857, the Web Mercator Projection, which converts WGS80 to Mercator(ish) for map use, because Mercator is a good projection for the thing google maps is mostly used for: navigation.Yeah I'm using chatgpt to quickly convert between minute+second and decimal. It's weird that Google Maps on map points gives it to you in decimal but if you navigate to a location from the decimal coordinates it converts it on the UI to minute+second form. I wish there was a preference setting to tell it to just use decimal for everything. And a similar setting for stellarium.
External Quote:
Everyone,
We want to share an update and address some of the questions we've seen online.
We believe that Skywatcher has made real progress in understanding the Phenomenon.
While we can't respond to every comment, our top priority is to validate our work and then effectively share and communicate those findings with you.
Upcoming Releases
Releases have been slightly delayed, and we acknowledge that. We're dealing with a highly complicated subject that involves us both trying to simultaneously manage our operations and compose media that accurately communicates our progress.
Despite the silence, progress has been tremendous. We are working to improve our systems and processes to communicate more effectively moving forward.
We want to share our work with you as much as you want to see it. We also acknowledge the criticism that is inherent with this topic. We don't want to put out work that we are not proud of, and that we cannot stand behind. Our entire team has been working around the clock in an effort to make meaningful progress towards our objectives.
Here is the final immediate release schedule:
We'd also like to provide some clarity by briefly addressing comments we've seen online:
- The Skywatcher Disclosure Framework whitepaper will be released next week.
- Skywatcher Part II (video) is complete and will be released the following week (April 7th).
Our Intent. Our commitment is to engage with the Phenomenon peacefully and with a spirit of collaboration and discovery. Our focus is on data collection and understanding—nothing more, nothing less. There will be no hostile actions taken toward anything in the sky.
@theprojectunity
raised an important point about concerns over defensive postures. Any protective measures you may notice are strictly for safety in the face of unknown or unforeseen circumstances. We are working in real-time with an unpredictable Phenomenon, and ensuring a secure environment for all involved is essential.
Our interactions with the Phenomenon are governed by a clear ethical framework rooted in peaceful engagement. We approach this work with a commitment to honesty, collaboration, and responsible stewardship of any information or experiences that may arise. Every team member maintains full presence and intentionality during observations, balancing open-minded curiosity with critical thinking. While we maintain a strict non-aggression policy, we acknowledge the importance of appropriate boundaries. Our engagement is characterized by patience, emotional composure, and a recognition that truly understanding the Phenomenon requires us to embody the same integrity and respect we hope to establish in any potential interaction. This ethical foundation guides every aspect of our work, from data collection to public communication.
Our Process. We are continuously refining our approach and taking every necessary precaution to ensure the integrity and safety of our work. We are private citizens engaging in a research project out in the open for the public to see. We do not claim to have all the answers about the Phenomenon. We are in pursuit of that knowledge, the same as you, and we intend to share what we find with all of you.
Our Approach. At Skywatcher, we are committed to rigorous scientific principles in all our work. Our methodology adheres to the fundamental tenets of the scientific method: systematic observation, measurement, experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses. This is why we're taking the time to ensure our data collection and analysis meet the highest standards of scientific inquiry. Exploring the unknown requires a careful, deliberate, and measured approach.
Going forward, we are dedicated to empirical evidence, peer review, and transparent reporting. We understand that advancing our knowledge of the Phenomenon requires methodical, evidence-based investigation that can withstand scrutiny from the broader scientific community. This commitment to scientific rigor guides every aspect of our work, even as we push the frontier and take on a uniquely challenging mission of exploration.
Media. Some have asked why we need a full-time producer. The reality is that this subject has been heavily stigmatized. If we want to engage not only those who already believe but also those who are justifiably skeptical, we need to present our findings in a way that is clear, compelling, and responsible.
For those wondering why we don't simply "release the data," the truth is—it's not that simple. The Phenomenon appears unpredictably, sometimes only as a brief flash of light in the distance, often evading traditional detection. This isn't a "point-and-shoot" situation. If you've ever tried to capture something fleeting at great distance, you'll understand why raw data alone isn't always meaningful or convincing.
We are using the best technology available, but detecting and documenting high-speed aerial phenomena remains a challenge. Our goal is to capture a robust, high-quality dataset that can be independently analyzed and evaluated.
Together, we stand at the threshold of confirming profound truths about our reality. This journey requires a global community of open minds and rigorous thinkers.
Skywatcher aims to serve as the vanguard of this collective effort—join us as we seek a deeper understanding of our universe and our place within it. Follow our progress, engage with our findings, and be part of this historic exploration.
I can't help but roll my eyes whenever excuses are given for why raw data can't be released. You release the data you work with so that people can perform their own analyses and see if they reach conclusions similar to yours, especially in these kinds of experiments where "peer review" will rarely result in someone getting the necessary conditions to replicate your experiment (it's not like there's many organized groups of skeptics that are willing to go to the middle of the desert, spend a couple of nights there recording points of light, presumably with their own psionic summoner and then see if their findings match).External Quote:
The Phenomenon appears unpredictably, sometimes only as a brief flash of light in the distance, often evading traditional detection. This isn't a "point-and-shoot" situation. If you've ever tried to capture something fleeting at great distance, you'll understand why raw data alone isn't always meaningful or convincing.
We are using the best technology available, but detecting and documenting high-speed aerial phenomena remains a challenge. Our goal is to capture a robust, high-quality dataset that can be independently analyzed and evaluated.
You're correct, of course. But--after giggling through nonsense like "...the highest standards of scientific inquiry,"I can't help but roll my eyes whenever excuses are given for why raw data can't be released. You release the data you work with so that people can perform their own analyses and see if they reach conclusions similar to yours, especially in these kinds of experiments where "peer review" will rarely result in someone getting the necessary conditions to replicate your experiment (it's not like there's many organized groups of skeptics that are willing to go to the middle of the desert, spend a couple of nights there recording points of light, presumably with their own psionic summoner and then see if their findings match).
If they really want to release their videos to better argue their point given that the data in itself is just distant points of light then fine, but I don't see why they can't just release the data in parallel.
The phenomenon ...er, excuse me, the capital-P Phenomenon... is spoken of as if it's a discrete thing. That's an old, old trick. If they would have the honesty to describe things as they see them, as "those lights in the sky", it might cost them some of their devotees, so there's this attempt to pretend that all their various sightings are just parts of a whole, instead of miscellaneous and unrelated satellites, stars, out of focus planets, night-flying birds, beetles, kites or balloons, spots that only one person claims to have seen "and my camera battery went dead", and things that go bump in the night.External Quote:Our commitment is to engage with the Phenomenon peacefully and with a spirit of collaboration and discovery.
There's "...a brief flash of light in the distance" ?The phenomenon ...er, excuse me, the capital-P Phenomenon... is spoken of as if it's a discrete thing. That's an old, old trick. If they would have the honesty to describe things as they see them, as "those lights in the sky", it might cost them some of their devotees, so there's this attempt to pretend that all their various sightings are just parts of a whole, instead of miscellaneous and unrelated satellites, stars, out of focus planets, night-flying birds, beetles, kites or balloons, spots that only one person claims to have seen "and my camera battery went dead", and things that go bump in the night.External Quote:Our commitment is to engage with the Phenomenon peacefully and with a spirit of collaboration and discovery.
They're selling a tall tale, that's all.
There's a "...a brief flash of light in the distance" ?
Sure, it may totally seem to be absolutely, 100% nothing at all...
but what if I told you that you were actually experiencing our magic "Phenomenon"?!?
I think they're telegraphing how incredibly low the bar is going to be,
for interpreting virtually anything, as actually something important.
I am warming up to clap, to saveTinkerbellThe Phenomenon...
Yeah, I agree. Judging them purely based on their actions and the history of "believers", my bar is way down on the ground and even then I'd be surprised if they can cross it."compelling" & "convincing" people with "open minds" that they're really on to something extraordinary. They seem to be trying to soften folks up, in advance, that if you seek
Just the idea that they are claiming to have policies to deal with entities that peopleYeah, I agree. Judging them purely based on their actions and the history of "believers", my bar is way down on the ground and even then I'd be surprised if they can cross it.
But it's just interesting that even analyzing the tweet completely devoid of context, as in, as someone that has no idea what "the Phenomenon" is about or has never even heard of ufology, it has glaring contradictions, such as claiming they want open scientific discourse shortly followed by a refusal to share raw data.
A bonus contradiction is their mental gymnastics for wanting to make peaceful relations with "the Phenomenon" while also having weapons to defend themselves (I don't even particularly mind that they have guns, though it certainly is not doing the image of the stereotypical American any favors)
Well, yes, on one hand, the seem to be trying to throttle down expectations...This use of the term "Phenomenon" is a great way to lower expectations. At first it sounded like they will going to be interviewing live aliens on CNN, now they will just be claiming those lights in the distance (presumably attached to a drone flown by "persons unknown") are a fantastic revelation and absolute proof of something or other.
You have to admit, it's a great supervillain name. Tracking down The Phenomenon...The phenomenon ...er, excuse me, the capital-P Phenomenon... is spoken of as if it's a discrete thing.
My conclusion is that their "data" is probably not in a releasable state, just shoddily archived and badly documented. Why would they need boilerplate like "...the highest standards of scientific inquiry," except to cover up that their actual standards are low?If they really want to release their videos to better argue their point given that the data in itself is just distant points of light then fine, but I don't see why they can't just release the data in parallel.
They could be right... I bet their scientific investigation, if rigorous enough, will actually confirm a profound truth about our reality...: there's nothing out there. Could their minds be open enough to accept it?Wow! So, possibly confirming profound truths about our reality...or another nothingburger?
Place your bets.