Talk:Unidentified flying object

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Paul R. Hill's book Unconventional flying objects[edit]

It's a book which provides a math and science based analysis of various UFO cases. Hill was a leading Nasa scientist in the 40s to 70s..his book is clearly a math and science based analysis. I'm surprised there is very little info on this man and his book. I think that book is the gold standard of UFO case analysis because it doesn't go around day dreaming, but uses clear cut math and physics to dissect the cases. I think there should be a paragraph dedicated to that book.

Foo Fighter[edit]

No explanation as to why it belongs under Extraterrestrial Hypothesis. See Foo fighter; no connection to ETH. Does not belong in that place. Kortoso (talk)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2017 to Studies: Text Amendment Suggested[edit]

I recommend that the following text be amended. The quoted range of 5 to 20 percent of reports being unexplained is considered significantly higher than published data: 'Between 5% and 20% of reported sightings are not explained, and therefore can be classified as unidentified in the strictest sense.' Suggested replacement text: 'Confirmed unidentified sightings are relatively rare, James E McDonald concluded [1] that about 0.5 to 2 percent of raw UFO reports could not be identified as being caused by conventional objects and phenomena.'

Thank you for your consideration.

References 129. Druffel, A. (2006). Firestorm: Dr James E. McDonald’s Fight for UFO Science. 2nd ed. Columbus, USA: Granite Publishing, p.13. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AntC55 (talkcontribs) 23:34, 13 February 2017 (UTC) AntC55 (talk) 23:42, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Going Forward[edit]

With the availability of 'consumer' drones, (1), reported sightings of UFOs will most assuredly sky-rocket, and (2), sightings will routinely be attributed to 'consumer' drones. How's that for irony! 66.81.105.18 (talk) 08:57, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Why aren't we seeing more UFOs?[edit]

In this new "video" era with countless millions of mobile phone cameras, security cameras, dashboard cameras, drone cameras, etc, we would surely expect many of those cameras to be capturing footage of UFOs. Should it be mentioned in the article that UFO sightings have not kept pace with the thousand-fold increased in the prevalence of cameras worldwide?

On another unrelated topic, the images of UFOs (or of anything else) in this article seem to be about as rare as real-world UFO sightings. Only five images in a page of almost 13,000 words – that's got to be a world record, and one that makes this very long article appear exceedingly dull. Come on, folks – an image here and there would help a lot. Ian Fieggen (talk) 22:34, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ 129