/sci/ - Science & Math

The debunking of the of the most popular debunking theory, the cruise ship theory.
http://turkeyufocase.blogspot.com/2013/02/multiple-reasons-suggest-turkey-ufo-was.html?m=1

>In Conclusion:
>There is no sufficient evidence to support the theory that a distant cruise ship is responsible for the objects captured on film in Turkey between 2007 and 2009.
>1. Triangulation shows the unknown object was too high above the horizon to be a ship or yacht.
>2. Alcione incorrectly labeled the cruise ship marina's location.
>3. AIS ship traffic reports do not list a cruise ship in the area.
>4. No eyewitnesses can confirm seeing a cruise ship in the area at the time of the sightings.
>5. Alcione only compared one frame from May 13, 2009, but 23 different video segments from 2007, 2008, and most of 2009 are not similar to the cruise ship photo.
>6. Cruise ships have a lot of lights at night not seen in the Turkey video.
>7. Some of the UFOs were filmed above land areas.
>8. Instances of light ball phenomenon are too high above the horizon to be cruise ship

>>11966435
>one image of plotted coordinates of AIS data
>more in the link

>something weird found by anon that seems to show the object opening up at which point "figures" can be seen. Otherwise, the object is closed.

>Images of occupants that appear to be moving
>Something is moving, but it's impossible to tell what and any resemblance to "beings" is pareidolia

>>11966485
>Gif of slowed frames showing movement in the opening of object.

>>11965978
>>11965832
>When the pilot activates the top secret counter-phased anti-noise sound generators hidden in the exhaust slots, the flight noise will by reduced by more than 98%.

>Source?

Unfortunately this is top secret. Just like the alleged freon injection system in the exaust gases of the B-2 when an AIM-rocket appoaches. To cool down the hot gases from the jet engines so that the aircraft becomes invisible for the heat seeking warhead of the rocket. .

>>11966735
I commend you for continuing your LARP anon and fooling the more gullible posters.

>>11966427
>2020
>Mankind has telescopes, cellphones that can film in full HD 4K, drones that can obtain 360° high quality footage, high resolution cameras, satellites that can spot people suntanning naked
>every single UFO video still looks grainy and shaky as fuck

>>11966745
Why?

Active counter noise technology is absolutely probable for skunk-phantom-works to make aircrafts and UAVs silent.

Even old "Blue Thunder" movie with the silent helicopter used this technology, inspired by rumors that real military is researching on that topic.

>>11966427
I still think it's just a lighthouse or something similar on the other side of the sea. The distance is just about right to make a thing like that visible when the conditions are exactly right.

>>11966776
Video is from 2007 - 2009.
Also, get your 2020 smarphone right now, go outside, set your camera to zoom, and try to film the moon or a plane. It's going to shake like a motherfucker. Unless we find some new technology for cameras, this will always be the case.

>>11966797
There is no lighthouse and land isn't visible from that location. Lighthouses also produce lights. The object produces no light at night, which makes the whole purpose of a lighthouse pointless.

>>11966795
>Why?
Because you've obviously never seen a schematic of a jet turbine or the physical explanation of how one works.

>>11966800
Give me drone footage like this.
Enough of the shaky cam hoax videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWmVG-XGbds

>>11966735
There is nothing scifi about this, it's just a mic and a speaker that plays the recorded noise with inverted phase. I suppose it needs a lot of precision and fine tuning to make it work exactly right (and actually supress the nouse instead of adding more) but it isn't anything very complicated or hard to figure out.

>>11966735
>>11966795
B-2 and F-117 nighthawk are declassified now. According to Steve Justice, who spent several decades at Skunkworks working on the F-117 and other projects, and also worked in a top leadership position, the triangle UFOs are not anything he has ever seen. An argument from authority for sure, but I'll take his word for it over someone else's.

>>11966826
Drones are actually very stable. Human hands are not, especially when you're zoomed in.

>>11966810
There seems to be a lighthouse on the other side, the photo from it suggests that land could be visible during very clear weather, and what do you mean there is no light? It's a massive shining object with what appears like a person blocking the light. (Might be sone other object though)

>>11966870
Yeah and if UFOs were "constantly being spotted" we would have drone 4k resolution pictures of one.

>>11966873
>here seems to be a lighthouse on the other side
There's no lighthouse and no the other side is not visible.

>>11966892
Most people are not flying 2020 drones with 4k cameras.

>>11966776
>4K
What you need is optical zoom and large sensors that can capture good photos at low light. Someone with a 4k phone wouldn't have been able to capture the Turkey UFO as clearly.

>>11966932
Actually due to economic and population growth and the spread of technology being exponential there are more people flying 4K drones today than people with VCR cameras in the 1980s.

>>11966873
Shouldn't lighthouses have revolving lights?

>>11966921
There are lighthouses, just search lighthouses in google maps while looking at the area.
>>11966964
I think they are just tourist attractions now.

>>11966427
>Heh if UFOs are real why hasn't anyone caught one on film, there are cameras everywhere these days
>video of UFO
>REEEE that is obviously fake

Human beings are fucking hopeless

>>11966941
Source? And source on average person filming the sky at higher rates?
>>11966978
The object looks nothing like a lighthouse in terms of its geometry or material, nor does it display basic features of a lighthouse such as... a light. The major ships in that area are using AIS for navigation anyway.
>>11967039
This is true, but can you blame us? If we catch an Ayyyylmao on video, it's going to be so crazy and insane that I think most will deny it unless their authority figures (religious leader, scientific experts, or presidents/prime ministers tell them)

>>11967039
>2020
>Commercial satellites can spot people sunbathing naked
>Commercial satellites regularly show classified American X-plane projects
>Google Streetview Cars have imaged much of the planet
>Still no solid UFOtard proof other than shakycam grainy videos

>>11967051
>Source?
https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/02/business/camcorder-cd-sales-may-double-in-1986.html
>517,000 in 1985
>At the end of 2019, there were 990,000 recreational operators registered and an estimated 1.32 million recreational drones in the United States (FAA)

>>11967058
Satellites need to told where to look, otherwise mysteries like Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 would be solved instantly. They don't magically see everything everywhere at once. Not to mention crafts advanced enough to behave like UFOs could likely thwart conventional methods of detection without much of a problem.

And what about the recent mainstream media stories of Air Force pilots seeing these things all the time? And the Pentagon released video? ETs aren't necessarily at play here but there are things that happen on Earth that we just don't understand

>>11967058
>>Commercial satellites can spot people sunbathing naked
Maybe they're not looking for UFOs then.
>>Commercial satellites regularly show classified American X-plane projects
They do?
>>Google Streetview Cars have imaged much of the planet
Street..
>>Still no solid UFOtard proof other than shakycam grainy videos
We've had photographs of UFOs since the 19th century.
To play devil's advocate, you're assuming Ayyylmaos use the same tech that we do. Interestingly, the USS Roosevelt battle group didn't start detecting UFOs and leading to the 2015 UFO encounters until the fighter jets and other installations were upgraded to the latest sensor system. According to Lts Accoine and Graves, both of whom are aerospace engineers as well as fighter pilots for the US navy, they could detect objects on their systems but could not always seem them visually even if the objects were in eye distance. You can draw some interesting speculation from this.

>>11967083
>Satellites need to told where to look
Yeah, which could explain how they would miss a one-off UFO event, but not how they could miss the "constant UFO reports" as per the UFOtard claims. Satellites are mapping the Earth 24/7. Surely, they would spot the "UFO fleets" reported by the pilots in the 2014 videos.

>Not to mention crafts advanced enough to behave like UFOs could likely thwart conventional methods of detection without much of a problem.
So they can thwart our most advanced satellites but not some hairy Turk with a camcoder?

>And what about the recent mainstream media stories of Air Force pilots seeing these things all the time? And the Pentagon released video? ETs aren't necessarily at play here but there are things that happen on Earth that we just don't understand
That's why they are called UNIDENTIFIED, it doesn't mean they are aliens, it means some anomaly, radar failure, weather balloon, secret project or aircraft that failed to be properly identified.

>>11967072
What about the phone or camcorder operators in 2019?

>>11966941
How many drones are instantly operable at any given time?

>>11967098
>how they could miss the "constant UFO reports" as per the UFOtard claims
Who claims this? We can estimate how many reports we get due to groups like MUFON, but most people don't report their sightings. So I am not exactly sure what you mean by "constant".
Your argument rests on the assumption that things are always reported when they are not. How many times did satalites or other devices you're referring to report SR-71 black birds, b-2 spirit bombers, or F-117 nighthawks? Or any other classified military devices?

And thanks to mods for keeping the thread up, and /sci/fags for keeping the thread going. Very interesting so far. Let's have a good discussion and post a few memes lads.

>>11967094
>Maybe they're not looking for UFOs then.
Commercial satellites map the entire Earth.
They are not "looking" for anything, they are just mapping. Other, more specialized satellites, are definitively looking for aircraft, heat signatures, radiation, oceans, etc, etc.

Surely, among the thousands of satellites put by Humans in the sky, at least one should've picked up some interesting UFO footage, if we assume this is a regular phenomenon that is worth investigating.

>They do?
Yeah, see pic.

>Street..
Wasn't the video in the OP filmed at street level?

>To play devil's advocate, you're assuming Ayyylmaos use the same tech that we do.
No I don't.

>Interestingly, the USS Roosevelt battle group didn't start detecting UFOs and leading to the 2015 UFO encounters until the fighter jets and other installations were upgraded to the latest sensor system. According to Lts Accoine and Graves, both of whom are aerospace engineers as well as fighter pilots for the US navy, they could detect objects on their systems but could not always seem them visually even if the objects were in eye distance. You can draw some interesting speculation from this.
All sorts of speculations, no concrete proof.

>>11967098
Satellites move in predictable patterns around the Earth. It would be trivial for advanced aircraft/spacecraft to avoid being photographed by one. And why would they care about some hairy Turk with a camcorder? 95% of people would not be inclined to believe him, even with footage. This is exemplified by your own skepticism.

And I agree that the presence of UFOs do not mean aliens are at play, but the fact that they exist is virtually beyond doubt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUrTsrhVce4

Unless you are willing to say the latter video is was faked as part of a government conspiracy, these things definitely exist

>>11967099
Billions with HD quality. Yet they aren't spotting anything like the OP.

>>11967102
Taking the 1+ million number in the US, the worldwide number is probably at least 2 million?

>>11967108
>Who claims this?
One of the pilots of the 2014 video reported "a fleet" appearing on his radar.

>>11967120
>And I agree that the presence of UFOs do not mean aliens are at play, but the fact that they exist is virtually beyond doubt.
Everytime you scratch beneath the surface this is admitted. But then you proceed to start another thread with the assumption that it's aliens all over again...

>>11967125
I have never made a UFO thread, I am just curious about what they actually are

>>11967122
>Taking the 1+ million number in the US, the worldwide number is probably at least 2 million?
That's not what I mean by instantly operable.

>>11966460
>>11966485
>>11966495
Looks like an Ayyylmao, rofl.
Anyone debunked this?

>>11967122
>One of the pilots of the 2014 video reported "a fleet" appearing on his radar
He didn't claim there were constant UFO reports.

>>11967039
>random grainy object on camera
>ITS ALIENS

>>11967141
Yeah, it’s a cruise ship in the dark.

>>11967190
from 600 meters away?

>>11967196
Where is your source that it is that far away?

>>11967196
It’s the lower deck, not the upper

>>11967217
Then the ship would have to be even closer.
>>11967202
Stellarium and trigonometry.

>>11967226
>believing the time code of a fucking fake ufo video

>>11967122
>One of the pilots of the 2014 video reported "a fleet" appearing on his radar.
Video is from 2015, and yes, the pilot and co-pilot saw other UFOs on their ASA page as well the Gimbal object, according to Lt Graves and Accione.
You should read the NYT article where Graves, Accione, and 4 other pilots from the Roosevelt go on record.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/26/us/politics/ufo-sightings-navy-pilots.html
Keep in mind, more pilots from their battlefleet saw these things but did not want to go on record. There is no benefit for them to do so, they end up looking insane especially when still active duty.

>>11967190
Cruiseship theory is debunked for like 10 reasons. Why do you keep pushing this nonsense?
>>11967217
Not according to the debunkers. Why would a lower deck be visible only, without any light source other than the moon? This is such a fucking cope mate.

>>11966427
The alleged timing in the videos doesn’t make sense. It’s dark at 4 pm in August. Frankly the quality is to bad to assess, if it can’t be identified. The case is inconclusive.

>>11967349
The object is filmed over several different time periods. But I agree with you, it's definitely a real UFO. Something we can't identify. Does not mean space aliens...

>>11967360
>But I agree with you, it's definitely a real UFO
Officially it’s just an UFO if there is enough data to make a judgment. Inconclusive cases are a separate category.
>something we can’t identify
We only call something a UFO, if there is enough data and experts can’t figure out what it was.

>>11967196
>>11967226
Based anon debunking /sci/ and proving that we are facing a real UFO here.

>>11967242

>>11967446
Based anon. Not saying it's Ayyyys, but I just want /sci/ to admit they can't debunk it.

bump

>>11967493
So sad, sci fags probably doing their summer camp homework.

>>11968706
>doing their summer camp homework
Is this a thing?

>>11968842
No but they do it anyway.

>>11967493
yes we can't. Now happy?

>>11969290
>Now happy?
Yes.

>>11967190
>cruisehip with no lights
Never been on a cruise ship before or seen one?

>>11969324

>>11967190
All ships have port and starboard running lights, red and green. Nothing like that is visible.

>>11969330
Maybe they were sleeping

>>11967446
I can't be bothered looking into it but something about this analysis just seems off. The object seems to very clearly have the bottom of it obscured by a perfectly flat horizontal line which seems very much like the horizon. Also in all the other videos it appeared at the horizon.

If Aliens exist, they know we're here. If they are an intelligent species, and have been around for any time at all, then certainly they have scanned and explored the entire galaxy or universe by now.

We can already detect Earth-like planets in our galaxy. Within 1,000 years, we will have observed and cataloged all of the planets in the Milky Way and probably most in other galaxies. At that point it's just a matter of sending out self-replicating probes, Within another 5,000 years, they would have explored all of the Milky Way for life.

Assuming another civilization exists (it may very well not, given the improbability of advanced intelligence developing through evolution), and has any age on it at all, then certainly they are aware of of us and have visited us in the past and will do so in the future.

This all assumes non-relativistic speed travel. Obviously, we will likely develop such relativistic speed travel so that opens Pandora's Box.

1. If intelligent life exists anywhere in the galaxy (and probably, the universe), it knows we're here.
2. I'd also say it's a legit 50/50 that any other intelligent civilization ever developed in the universe.

>>11971139
my point with this rant is to show that you can't hold two contradictory opinions:
1. intelligent alien life probably exists in the universe
2. the aliens don't know we're here or haven't visited us

You can't get to 2 if you believe 1.

>>11966485
Fake and more than usually gay. Be ashamed.

>>11966495
I'm not seeing movement there, just image artifacts of expanding the frames several times more than the data will support.

>>11971150
Except your jump from #1 to #2 is full of assumptions that may not necessarily be so. Consider that...

1. The universe is fucking huge. Signs of industrial Human civilization would only be seen from 100 light years away at most. Any alien located more than 100 LY away would see Earth as an ordinary rocky planet, perhaps they would know it's hosting life because of oxygen but nothing that indicates advanced life.

2. Other alien civilizations may be even more primitive than us.

3. Related to #2, the universe is very young. We may be the first intelligent species on this entire Galaxy.

4. There may be a hard limit that prevents FTL travel. We don't know if it's theoretically possible.

5. There may be a great filter of sorts that prevents advanced civilizations from developing.

6. Life may be extremely, extremely rare and perhaps even a one off event.

You need to answer why we haven't seen anybody out there. You can't handwave this. For 50 years Humans have scanned space with radiotelescopes, space telescopes, antennas, and other means and have found no conclusive signs of intelligent life in our vicinity. This doesn't mean there is no intelligent life but it certainly raises the question of why wouldn't they develop space activities in space if they are so advanced and able to travel here.

>>11971012
Probably worth noting that basing elevation of the "object" on degrees-of-elevation between it and the moon assumes that the date stamp in the camera is accurate. If it is NO, we have no idea of the elevation above the horizon.

What makes me skeptical is largely that he filmed the UFO repeatedly n different nights over several years, always oriented the same way in relation to him, and nobody else around a populated tourist area has corroborating video, or reports from anybody other than some guys there with him as he was shooting his vid.

Vids seem to come in two sorts. First, a distant cluster of orange lights that look a lot like mast lights on a freight ship, I think we can set those aside. Second set is the classic glowing arc with Ayy heads in the middle. Looks to me like something you could fake by putting a lighted curved object below a tilted sheet of glass and filming though the glass towards the moon/horizon. Which would explain why nobody elsewhere around the bay or on a ship ever filmed it.

Then we have all the "If I enlarge the images to the point of insanity, and dick around with the levels, and make weird digital artifacts, I can suddenly see ALIENS!" crap, nonsense which muddies the water of what the video actually shows, and creates confusion and baseless claims.

None of that PROVES it's fake, but it was enough for me to lose interest in it. But if it intrigues you, keep at it. Maybe with continuing research on the vids you or somebody will pull out something amazing. Maybe some tourist from the area at that time will come forward with corroborating video.

>>11971139
>1. If intelligent life exists anywhere in the galaxy (and probably, the universe), it knows we're here.

I don't see that at all. We KNOW of one intelligent species, and it does not know if anybody else is out there or not.


>2. I'd also say it's a legit 50/50 that any other intelligent civilization ever developed in the universe.
Number pulled from ass, based on no data.

>>11971188
FTL is pretty much guaranteed impossible, anyone who genuinely thinks that humans will somehow go faster than light has double digit iq from believing all the pop sci shit on YouTube. All modern theories accept causality, warp drive is a cool thought experiment other than the fact that negative energy doesn’t exist and riemannian geometry is only an approximation for space time

>>11966427
How do you debunk a fucking smudge? This could be a video of my own dick and I wouldn't be able to tell you what the fuck is going on.

>>11971244
Tell us about your glowing flying dick! Inquiring minds want to know...

>>11966427
>this entire thread
Fuck off, Zach.