Discovery Institute doesn’t believe in nuts&bolts aliens

I don't take Grusch seriously at all.

I do think the radar readings and sightings are interesting but the latter seem to often be disks, spheres, cubes, triangles and other assortment of basic shapes. And their flight patterns are more akin to what we see described in paranormal cases.

Can there be a technology that lets an alien race travel across light years without undergoing time travel AND defy known physics on Earth? I doubt it but I see it as possible.

As such I'm not against pressing governments for disclosure, but my guess is reports will not deviate substantially from the reports we already have save perhaps for some military personnel themselves experiencing some of the Deep Weird stuff that haunts the UFO/UAP subject across history.

Merely interesting? I think the crux of the matter is straightforwardly engaging specifically in detail with the better classic UFO encounters, where the encounter was very clearly with a material and sometimes radar-reflecting and electromagnetic signal-emitting object, that had the optical appearance of a saucer or cigar or large triangular or small spherical, vehicle. So what if the shapes happen to be these? We know nothing about the technology involved, and the point could just as easily be applied to the question of why human-made aircraft typically have the fuselage with tail and wing shape. It's obviously because form always follows function and the technology available. 

These events clearly actually occured in space-time as observed and recounted by the witnesses, and need to be plausibly explained away. What is required from the skeptic is credible specific detailed "normal" counter-explanations. 

The flight patterns as observed in for example the Nash-Fortenberry case very much resemble hyper-advanced flight characteristics of some sort of hyper-advanced vehicle, not something paranormal. That applies to the very quick right angle turns, other high accelerations, and extreme velocities typical of these objects.

Merely interesting? I think the crux of the matter is straightforwardly engaging specifically in detail with the better classic UFO encounters, where the encounter was very clearly with a material and sometimes radar-reflecting and electromagnetic signal-emitting object, that had the optical appearance of a saucer or cigar or large triangular or small spherical, vehicle. So what if the shapes happen to be these? We know nothing about the technology involved, and the point could just as easily be applied to the question of why human-made aircraft typically have the fuselage with tail and wing shape. It's obviously because form always follows function and the technology available. 

These events clearly actually occured in space-time as observed and recounted by the witnesses, and need to be plausibly explained away. What is required from the skeptic is credible specific detailed "normal" counter-explanations. 

The flight patterns as observed in for example the Nash-Fortenberry case very much resemble hyper-advanced flight characteristics of some sort of hyper-advanced vehicle, not something paranormal. That applies to the very quick right angle turns, other high accelerations, and extreme velocities typical of these objects.

So there are these ET vehicles that have a variety of shapes, even where the majority shape seen switches from circles/disks to triangles.

And the disks, and triangles, and spheres, and cigars, and at least one sphere inside a cube...all of these are built for functional reasons? Did the advanced physics used by the aliens itself keep changing and thus requiring all these shapes?

Looking at the case you mention:

Almost immediately we perceived that it consisted of six bright objects streaking toward us at tremendous speed, and obviously well below us. They had the fiery aspect of hot coals, but of much greater glow, perhaps twenty times more brilliant than any of the scattered ground lights over which they passed or the city lights to the right. Their shape was clearly outlined and evidently circular; the edges were well defined, not phosphorescent or fuzzy in the least and the red-orange color was uniform over the upper surface of each craft.

Within the few seconds that it took the six objects to come half the distance from where we had first seen them, we could observe that they were holding a narrow echelon formation, a stepped-up line tilted slightly to our right with the leader at the lowest point, and each following craft slightly higher. At about the halfway point, the leader appeared to attempt a sudden slowing. We received this impression because the second and third wavered slightly and seemed almost to overrun the leader, so that for a brief moment during the remainder of their approach the positions of these three varied. It looked very much as if an element of "human" or "intelligence" error had been introduced, in so far as the following two did not react soon enough when the leader began to slow down and so almost overran him.

All together, they flipped on edge, the sides to the left going up and the glowing surface facing right. Though the bottom surfaces did not become clearly visible, we had the impression that they were unlighted. The exposed edges, also unlighted, appeared to be about 15 feet thick, and the top surface, at least, seemed flat. In shape and proportion, they were much like coins. While all were in the edgewise position, the last five slid over and past the leader so that the echelon was now tail- foremost, so to speak, the top or last craft now being nearest to our position.

So a set of disks flying in formation. This to me isn't definitively indicative of alien craft.

I do realize that the details beyond which I've quoted can suggest craft, such as becoming brighter to speed up as an expenditure of energy. However there are also paranormal claims involving physical craft like ships that are part of the UAP/UFO history, so not seeing this as a definitive proof of ETH.

I guess to me if seems any evidence of ETH also fits the Weirder cases but not vice-versa. Add to that the question of FTL travel, the odd relationship the craft have to terrestrial physics, and the varied issues with attempts at ETH disclosure like the recent faked photo, and it feels like there is little reason to take ETH seriously until some really good evidence is shown.

So there are these ET vehicles that have a variety of shapes, even where the majority shape seen switches from circles/disks to triangles.

And the disks, and triangles, and spheres, and cigars, and at least one sphere inside a cube...all of these are built for functional reasons? Did the advanced physics used by the aliens itself keep changing and thus requiring all these shapes?

Looking at the case you mention:



So a set of disks flying in formation. This to me isn't definitively indicative of alien craft.

I do realize that the details beyond which I've quoted can suggest craft, such as becoming brighter to speed up as an expenditure of energy. However there are also paranormal claims involving physical craft like ships that are part of the UAP/UFO history, so not seeing this as a definitive proof of ETH.

I guess to me if seems any evidence of ETH also fits the Weirder cases but not vice-versa. Add to that the question of FTL travel, the odd relationship the craft have to terrestrial physics, and the varied issues with attempts at ETH disclosure like the recent faked photo, and it feels like there is little reason to take ETH seriously until some really good evidence is shown.

This reminds me of the old saying, "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and poops like a duck and also looks like a duck, it probably is a duck."

This reminds me of the old saying, "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and poops like a duck and also looks like a duck, it probably is a duck."

I think that when the UFO/UAP phenomenon is properly examined, it doesn't seem very duck like at all.

Or we could imagine some new species of duck, say ones that glow in the dark. And while these ducks seem like ducks from a distance, close encounters with said ducks reveal bizarre paranormal situations.

Then someone tells you there are real, actual glow in the dark species of the ducks but also spirits or some other Weird entities taking the form of the glowing ducks.

Yet any attempt to get evidence for a physical duck runs into a remarkable amount of fraud/scamming.

At some point...isn't it just likely that the glowing ducks are not ducks at all?

I think that when the UFO/UAP phenomenon is properly examined, it doesn't seem very duck like at all.

Or we could imagine some new species of duck, say ones that glow in the dark. And while these ducks seem like ducks from a distance, close encounters with said ducks reveal bizarre paranormal situations.

Then someone tells you there are real, actual glow in the dark species of the ducks but also spirits or some other Weird entities taking the form of the glowing ducks.

Yet any attempt to get evidence for a physical duck runs into a remarkable amount of fraud/scamming.

At some point...isn't it just likely that the glowing ducks are not ducks at all?

Please explain how the detailed reported encounter you quoted for the Nash-Fortenberry case does not closely resemble an encounter with extraordinary flying vehicles of some kind piloted by some intelligence. And please cite any other observations made during this encounter that instead indicate bizarre ultraweird paranormal causes. Remember, I'm considering for the time being just this specific encounter, rather than an assemblage of all UFO-related cases of all types.

I'll quote it again:
L

Almost immediately we perceived that it consisted of six bright objects streaking toward us at tremendous speed, and obviously well below us. They had the fiery aspect of hot coals, but of much greater glow, perhaps twenty times more brilliant than any of the scattered ground lights over which they passed or the city lights to the right. Their shape was clearly outlined and evidently circular; the edges were well defined, not phosphorescent or fuzzy in the least and the red-orange color was uniform over the upper surface of each craft.

Within the few seconds that it took the six objects to come half the distance from where we had first seen them, we could observe that they were holding a narrow echelon formation, a stepped-up line tilted slightly to our right with the leader at the lowest point, and each following craft slightly higher. At about the halfway point, the leader appeared to attempt a sudden slowing. We received this impression because the second and third wavered slightly and seemed almost to overrun the leader, so that for a brief moment during the remainder of their approach the positions of these three varied. It looked very much as if an element of "human" or "intelligence" error had been introduced, in so far as the following two did not react soon enough when the leader began to slow down and so almost overran him.

All together, they flipped on edge, the sides to the left going up and the glowing surface facing right. Though the bottom surfaces did not become clearly visible, we had the impression that they were unlighted. The exposed edges, also unlighted, appeared to be about 15 feet thick, and the top surface, at least, seemed flat. In shape and proportion, they were much like coins. While all were in the edgewise position, the last five slid over and past the leader so that the echelon was now tail- foremost, so to speak, the top or last craft now being nearest to our position.

Please explain how the detailed reported encounter you quoted for the Nash-Fortenberry case does not closely resemble an encounter with extraordinary flying vehicles of some kind piloted by some intelligence. And please cite any other observations made during this encounter that instead indicate bizarre ultraweird paranormal causes. Remember, I'm considering for the time being just this specific encounter, rather than an assemblage of all UFO-related cases of all types.

I'll quote it again:

Oh if there weren't so many issues with Nuts & Bolts, I would be more willing to say these are alien craft. My key issue - beyond the fakery/scamming - is that we have a class of cases that cannot easily be folded into ETH but all the ETH cases can be folded into the Weird cases.

Consider the times when owls have been associated with UFO/UAP/Aliens. Do you think there are super intelligent owls out there living on Earth or are some other entities playing at being owls?

If you assume the latter, then you see how I feel about these craft.

Oh if there weren't so many issues with Nuts & Bolts, I would be more willing to say these are alien craft. My key issue - beyond the fakery/scamming - is that we have a class of cases that cannot easily be folded into ETH but all the ETH cases can be folded into the Weird cases.

Consider the times when owls have been associated with UFO/UAP/Aliens. Do you think there are super intelligent owls out there living on Earth or are some other entities playing at being owls?

If you assume the latter, then you see how I feel about these craft.

You insist that the UFO phenomenon must be unitary in origin and basic nature, without any definite justification. Just to consider one ramification of your assumption, why then does whatever this unitary phenomenon is choose to display itself sometimes as definite physical piloted craft, while at other times and places as different kinds of deeply weird paranormal-like events? This difficulty is just as great as the mystery of why (if it is the case) the basic nature of one class of encounters (apparent physical vehicles) is fundamentally different than the other class(es).

You insist that the UFO phenomenon must be unitary in origin and basic nature, without any definite justification. Just to consider one ramification of your assumption, why then does whatever this unitary phenomenon is choose to display itself sometimes as definite physical piloted craft, while at other times and places as different kinds of deeply weird paranormal-like events? This difficulty is just as great as the mystery of why (if it is the case) the basic nature of one class of encounters (apparent physical vehicles) is fundamentally different than the other class(es).

Oh there doesn't have to be one explanation, just that Nuts & Bolts isn't a good explanation.

I just don't see a good reason to believe that extraterrestrials from other planets discovered FTL travel to come here. 

There is just too much to explain, and too little evidence, of such a claim.

Oh there doesn't have to be one explanation, just that Nuts & Bolts isn't a good explanation.

I just don't see a good reason to believe that extraterrestrials from other planets discovered FTL travel to come here. 

There is just too much to explain, and too little evidence, of such a claim.

I just have to go back to that one of the best examples among the early classic UFO encounters, the Nash-Fortenberry case, to ask for a credible alternate explanation for this specific encounter (that is, alternate to actual nuts-and-bolts material ETI). I think alternate "deep weird" or paranormal explanations will appear rather strained and violate Occam's Razor principle of parsimony that the simplest explanation is probably the correct one.

I think alternate "deep weird" or paranormal explanations will appear rather strained and violate Occam's Razor principle of parsimony that the simplest explanation is probably the correct one.

The simplest explanation is in the eye of the beholder.