UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Nov > Nov 21

Re: Pilots & UAP

From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 21:55:23 EST
Archived: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 08:33:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Pilots & UAP

>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 13:09:25 +0000
>Subject: Re: Pilots & UAP

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 19:57:56 -0800
>>Subject: Re: Pilots & UAP


>Hello David,

>Thanks for the very worthwhile response,

>>Thus there can be many possible clues to distance, and hence
>>size and speed. It is simply NOT true that a pilot (or anybody
>>else for that matter) can NEVER estimate distance/size/speed of
>>an unknown object with any accuracy. That, unfortunately, is
>>just debunker propaganda talk. It is more accurate to say that
>>distance, speed, size cannot be determined with accuracy in the
>>complete ABSENCE of any cues.

>The point that I was making as I am sure you will appreciate is
>that in the absence of other cues that you mention in the
>snipped portion from your post, pilots are really no better than
>anyone else when it comes to estimating size/height/speed of an
>unknown object (as you imply in the final sentence above). There
>are many examples of people accepting such estimates without
>querying how they were arrived at, simply because the witness
>was somehow an "expert observer".

Your post seems to cleverly confuse the issue. A pilot _on_
_the_ground_ might be no better a witness than any other person
_on_the_ground. But we are not talking about observation from
the ground. We are talking about observation from the _air_
inside an aircraft traveling at perhaps 500 mph depending on the
aircraft and circumstances. You seem to be trying to assert some
absolute rule of physics here but that rule would be wrong.

Sight-lines from an aircraft in motion provide a continual
series of baselines which can triangulate an unknown object's
position, and thus its speed, distance and size, via something
that is roughly analogous to interferometry.

As an observation progresses over time a pilot in an aircraft
flying at say 500 mph can gain legitimate visual cues about an
unknown object's relative speed and position, which a stationary
observer on the ground cannot. Thus, equating the two
situations, ground and air, is not valid. Furthermore, with more
experience in making observations from the air, the better able
a pilot will be to process these dynamic visual cues.

The fact that a pilot may make mistakes in such situations
inside a moving aircraft, or that there may be a few situations
where no dynamic observational cues are perceived, are merely
the exceptions that prove the rule: The rule is that in general
pilots in flying aircraft <do> have an ability to perceive and
estimate size, speed, distance and relative position of unknown
objects in the sky, <unlike> observers on the ground.

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com