Isn't the only proof required to validate UFOs exist just a...?

Question

single event where two or more people are unable to identify the same flying object?

Why is this so hard for some people to admit UFOs (whatever they might be) exist?

The British Defense Ministry is releasing their files of multi-corroberated sightings: http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Quirks/2007/12/23/britain_set_to_release_secret_ufo_files/3551/

If they don't exist, what is the British Defense Ministry releasing a list of?

What if two or more people identified this same UFOs flight pattern as silent, able to stop on a dime and shoot off faster than anything man-made?

Where is your proof that the Brits don't regard the UFO subject as the same as we do? Why would the Ministry of Defense catalogue it?

Here is a more detailed article where Nick Pope, of the Ministry of Defense, states that some of the sightings are are "highly credible".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/12/23/nufo23.xml

The French have also released some of their files.

As a scientist, I would want more data before making a conclusion I could not support. There is enough evidence to make an inquiry.

Answer 1

Sure, the British are releasing files of UFO's, but people don't really truly care about UFO'S, because even a jetliner is a UFO to some people. What we humans think about is the inevitable possibility that we are not alone out there. That is why the governments take it upon themselves to investigate such matters that could pose a potential threat to their citizens.

Answer 2

From 10,000 findings, only 5% are unexplained. That means that they are unexplained, not extraterrestrial. They are releasing a list because they are getting so many requests for the files that they thought it would save time if they just made all the files public. No doubt some people will jump on this claiming it is evidence of UFOs existence, but I imagine the files will be less than exciting. There will then no doubt be claims by disappointed new-agers that the "secret" files, which prove conclusively that UFOs exist, have not been released, and the rumour cycle will start again.
Why is it so hard for some people to realise that it takes more than just two people to see something that they can't explain for it to be considered proof of UFOs existence? With the advent of focus-free cameras and all mobile phones having cameras, why have all the photos of UFOs suddenly stopped. They should have increased.
UFOs are not extraterrestrials visiting Earth, they are just normal objects in abnormal places. Just accept it.

.

Answer 3

Labsci makes some really good points. "Unidentified" is in the eye of the beholder; what may appear as some to divine signs in the sky might be consider halos or sun dogs to the trained meteorological observe; what may look like some to be a strange glow might be understood to be the green flash to someone familiar with atmospheric physics. When I was a grad student (in astronomy), I was asked by the local police department to help them with a case...a local man kept calling, quite irate, that a really bright light, that had never been there before, was on the eastern horizon when he woke up at 4 am, and he was sure it was a UFO. It was the planet Venus, and since Venus revolves around the sun at a different rate from the earth, is not always in the same part of the sky.

I am not using this example to say that all reported UFO sightings are as prosaic as Venus, but to illustrate the point that much of the hysteria over UFO sightings comes from people not that familiar with observing the night sky, and from observing normal phenomena under unusual circumstances. I would LOVE for there to be real UFOs from other planets, and would love to see the evidence for them. But the key word is evidence...testable, reproducible...not hearsay.

Answer 4

Nobody doubts UFOs exist. Anything in the sky that can't be identified is a UFO. Lots of people have seen UFOs. I've seen a few myself. I've also seen unidentified things on the ground and floating in lakes and the ocean. I doubt any of these unidentified objects were from outer space.

All that list will prove is that people have seen things that they couldn't identify. So I guess that proves UFOs exist.

I think I know what your problem is.
You think UFO means a spaceship from another planet. That's harder to accept just on someone's word.

Answer 5

The nearest star is in the order of 14 years by the speed of light. Considering the effects of spaceflight at these velocities, differential time, would they bother coming at all without greeting us? I would suggest that these crafts are man made. Theory about magnetic resonance imaging ties in nicely to the idea of a magnetically driven craft, as the entire galaxy has magnetic flux throughout. The pictures of the little grey men with big eyes are interesting, but how would they have evolved? Perhaps through a disaster of some kind. History has shown that men love to have power over men. It is my understanding that the Dutch started the idea of intellectual property rights in around the 17 th century because of concerns about effects on their textile industry. The person most likely to have discovered the functional concept of space travel, same as UFOs is most likely to be Neils H Bohr, a man who described the theoretical workings of atoms. If they don't exist they are releasing a list of pirate sightings, because they have been said to abduct people, don't they?

Answer 6

Yes. Everyone knows UFO's exist. UFO means unidentified flying object. At one point, a little 3 year old could see an airplane from 3 feet away, not know what it is, and therefore rightfully classify it as an UNDEFINED flying object. A lot of Cold War craft were mistaken for ALIEN spacecraft, if that is what you mean.