Latest activity

It's deliberately obfuscatory - it comes with the easy out of "but we never said it was an alien" for a reason.

Agreed and rampant use of partial or full AI in copy generation without serious editorial effort is exacerbating the problem. The only thing you can do is follow the quality sources (and support or subscribe to them which is what matters in...

My thought was that it provided some layer of safety if claims made under oath that SOUND like aliens do not, in fact, mean aliens. A recovered downed aircraft that had crashed after hitting a duck might be "advanced technology" and would have...

Journalists are not scientists. And, as has been pointed out, the fact that a word is used in one discipline does not give them exclusive possession of an uncopyrighted word. That's as true for "biologics" as it is for "aliens" or "orbs". Trying...

@Gaspa well the most robust empirical result of ~80 years of UFO research is that under similar observing conditions, individual humans have a high propensity to make the same errors of observation, interpretation, and attribution that humans...

As much a fan of recognizing our biases and blind spots as I am. I really have to ask. Is it really biased if it tracks with reality? How many times has this story played out? Am I being biased by siding with the skeptic, here? Not saying...

Military pilots are trained to identify other aircraft by their known visual characteristics (also ground or maritime targets, depending on role). It's a fair assumption they have good eyesight, are in good health, are bright, pay attention to...

Scott Kelly, astronaut and 'trained pilot', observed an unidentified object which his back seat observer was convinced was a UFO. Kelly circled back and found it was a Bart Simpson Balloon. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-65771398

Bear in mind that while pilots may be more familiar with airplanes than most people, there ARE no individuals who are trained to identify alien craft.

How long do you reckon identifying balloon training is?

Can you provide any evidence to support your claim? To me, this sounds very similar to the "trained observers" argument often used by the UFO community when there's no real evidence to back up a claim. I could give you a long list of examples...

There does seem to be a pattern... Garry Nolan and Peter Skafish from Sol Foundation, Matthew Szydagis from UAPx. Loeb's colleagues. Shermer as the token skeptic

I guess there are exceptions... https://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/17/travel/canada-disoriented-pilot

This caught my eye, as well. I have nothing against "young" scientists...but if something is being implied about them being superior for this, seems worth mentioning...

As for the "Why Shermer, instead of West?" question, I'd say, why not both?