Generate New Template
If you haven’t read NASA’s report, I encourage you to do so:
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/uap_independent_study_team_-_final_report_0.pdf
NASA had a while to release this report, and it was delayed, delayed, delayed. Eventually it comes out and what we receive is worse than we could anticipate. At the very least, I expected a concrete strategy plan for their study into UAPs. Instead, what they delivered is IDEAS of how they may be able to contribute. The issue is that all of their ideas will amount to absolutely nothing. Let’s explore why:
NASA’s main ideas:
use their satellites to obtain imagery of UFOs create or acquire a public app where citizens can upload UAP videos in collaboration with AARO and other government agencies implement AI and machine learning leverage data from other Federal agencies
How they would come to an extraterrestrial conclusion:
” A vital part of NASA’s mission is to explore the unknown. Often, the most exciting aspect of exploration is discovering unexplained phenomena. After discovery, the next step in charting the unknown requires applying rigorous scientific approaches to understand an observation. This means scrutinizing our assumptions and intuition; transparently and diligently collecting data; reproducing results; seeking independent evaluation; and finally, reaching a scientific consensus about the nature of an occurrence. It was Thomas Jefferson who, in an 1808 letter, wrote: “A thousand phenomena present themselves daily which we cannot explain, but where facts are suggested, bearing no analogy with the laws of nature as yet known to us, their verity needs proofs proportioned to their difficulty.” Today, we summarize Jefferson’s conclusion as “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” “
” As a general principle, the data should support measurement that can rule out specific explanations or interpretations, leaving us with no choice but to embrace its opposite. In the case of UAP, the hypothesis we seek to reject (or “null hypothesis”) is that the UAP have phenomenology consistent with known natural or technological causes. “
” The scientific method challenges us to solve problems by stringently evaluating our own ideas, by being willing to be wrong, and by following the data into unknown territory—wherever it may lead us. As Carl Sagan wrote in The Demon-Haunted World, “science carries us toward an understanding of how the world is, rather than how we would wish it to be.” 25 Science is a process that reveals reality rather than sculpts it—no matter how unsatisfying or confusing that reality might be. That includes the question of whether UAP have an extraterrestrial origin. There is an intellectual continuum between hypothesizing that faraway extraterrestrial civilizations might produce detectable technologies, and looking for those technologies closer to home. But in the search for life beyond Earth, extraterrestrial life itself must be the hypothesis of last resort—the answer we turn to only after ruling out all other possibilities. As Sherlock Holmes said, “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” To date, in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, there is no conclusive evidence suggesting an extraterrestrial origin for UAP. When it comes to UAP, the challenge we have is that the data needed to explain these anomalous sightings often do not exist; this includes eyewitness reports, which on their own can be interesting and compelling, but aren’t reproducible and usually lack the information needed to make any definitive conclusions about a phenomenon’s provenance.”
Their plan is a partnership with AARO to study satellite sensor data and civilian uploaded videos of UAP. One has to ask- are they playing dumb or are they just seriously incompetent? I’d argue it’s a mix of both. On one hand, they argue that there is not enough data to be able to identify unresolved cases. On the other hand, they argue that in order to reach a conclusion in the unknown, they need “extraordinary evidence”. They then further confuse this statement by saying that the only way the will reach an ET conclusion is by ruling out every other possibility.
The elephant in the room:
The biggest issue is that the data that is necessary to apply scientific study into the phenomenon is CLASSIFIED. NASA nor AARO have the clearance needed to access this data. They try to address this in the report:
” In addition, much of the data collected by military sensors or intelligence satellites are classified—often because of what the imagery could reveal about U.S. technical capabilities to our adversaries, and not because of what is actually in the images. While essential for security, these classified observations enhance the sense of mystery and conspiracy surrounding UAP, and they present an obstacle to scientific inquiry.”
While I applaud their remark about the classified data being an obstacle to scientific inquiry, their statement that the images are only classified because of US technical capabilities and not because of what is in the images is baseless. This may be the position of the DOD (which NASA is working with) but if you are supposed to be studying this subject without bias, you shouldn’t trust anything except the data.
UAP assessments in the report:
These are the only 3 cases included in the report. The first one just takes AARO’s word for it and makes no definitive conclusion on the nature of the object. In the second object they admit that they do not have enough data to come up with a conclusion. The third however, is the most incompetent. Not only does a multibillion dollar agency use high school trigonometry to debunk the UAP and with unimaginable weather data resources at hand not bother to factor in wind speed, but this assessment long with the rest give a clear indication of what a colossal failure we are dealing with. Before they present this assessment, they previously mention the GOFAST object in the report,
” For many events, the data and metadata did not enable a conclusive characterization of the size, motion, or nature of the UAP. Yet, where it did, such as in the “GoFast” UAP video, the apparent anomalous behavior of the UAP can often be explained by the motion of the sensor platform”
in a small footnote at the bottom, they attribute this conclusion to- you guessed it- Sean Kirkpatrick of AARO. Great research NASA! Let’s just ignore the fact that they switch from this encounter having all the necessary data required to make a definite conclusion to not enough data in the span of a few pages.
What do Sean and NASA have in common? They base these conclusions based on data that they have available- that is the 20 second video that the DOD chose to release of this object. The video that is publicly available is obviously cut. No mention of the context of this encounter is mentioned in the report- That the pilots reported an entire fleet of these objects and that this encounter happened minutes apart from another video, the gimbal object. The data that should be studied is classified.
conclusion:
Just as a thought experiment, all these objects assessed ARE extraterrestrial. As they say of course, there is no evidence to support that they are, however there is no evidence that they aren’t. There is only assumptions based on publicly available data. How can they expect to reach any meaningful conclusions when the most crucial and potentially groundbreaking information is withheld? NASA’s report does not address a single video that is not sponsored by the DOD. The lack of concrete strategies, their omission of having limited access to classified data, and the dismissal of credible sightings raise questions about their commitment to uncovering the truth behind these phenomena.
submitted by /u/dicedicedone
[link] [comments]