There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.
If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.
| Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.|
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with !
Debate:Are there any compelling UFO cases?
What do you folks think?
Do any of you feel that there any UFO cases that are compelling, even on an emotional level and if not what do you think UFO case would need to be, in order to be compelling?
Personally, I like to look at UFO cases out of curiosity. I consider myself to be agnostic regarding the paranormal. On the one hand it's interesting to hear from the people who witnessed what happen but on the other hand the explanation from the Skeptics always works as well. So what do you think?
- Ufologists are all quacks or cranks and not one case has any merit to it. For a compelling case, the Little Green Men would have to land in a public area in full daylight. ListenerXTalkerX 02:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- I agree, there will be no completely hard evidence on UFO's until they show up in a public place, in broad daylight; an interview of the crew wouldn't hurt either. However, I wouldn't jump to calling all Ufologists cranks. I haven't done much research, but for now I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Out of curiosity, do you have any specific reason not to? --Stilldeciding (talk) 02:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps....I had an experience with my cousin one night in the early 70's. We were on a rafting trip on the middle fork of the Salmon river in Idaho. We were watching Satellites passing overhead that night (in our sleeping bags). We watched several, two or three, pass overhead and disappear over the horizon. The next one was the surprise! It appeared on the horizon and I directed my cousin Tammys attention to it. It tracked along as the others had in a straight line, about the same speed , just a pinprick of white light same as the others....until it STOPPED....more or less above us in the night sky. It remained stationary for approximately 4-5 seconds and then split into 3 pinpricks of white light (all seemingly the same brightness) which did something odd. They engaged in a "dancing? jiggling?" motion around each other for 1-2 seconds.....they then did something really strange. They sped off from one another apparently trisecting (120deg from each other) the night sky and all were out of our sight within a second or two over the horizon. One of them had basically reversed direction, disappearing over the horizon in roughly the same area it had initially appeared. There was a moment of silence....."Did you see that?", "yes" she replied. This was pretty compelling to US. Csgt428 (talk) 18:05, 26 November 2014 (UTC)csgt428
So far, no, I haven't seen anything compelling. I'd be interested to see something that had merit, but despite years of listening to Coast to Coast AM, I haven't. Let me know if you find something.--Tom Moorefiat justitia 03:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC) Example: the Ghostbuster Gals.--Tom Moorefiat justitia 03:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- I highly doubt it.
So what you're saying is that we need better data, right? user Ryantherebel
- OK, so there's probably something out there - the law of large numbers suggests this but, until wormholes in space enable them to jump the vast interstellar distances - there simply too far away. Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space. Bob Soles 00:02, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
It is compelling that there are so many of them
I'd first search though all of these before coming to any conclusion. http://nuforc.org/webreports/ndxevent.html and the bluebook archive found here: http://www.bluebookarchive.org/ and all the cases reported to MUFON here: http://www.mufon.com/
Any reasonable researcher must practice due diligence, or else they risk being unsubstantiated in their conclusions, therefore making their argument invalid and inaccurate. Roo (talk) 18:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)