• GladiusB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    The Air Force? There are definitely UFOs. Now are they local? Or otherworldly? Not sure.

    • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      In this case op is clearly referring to aliens.

      Otherwise saying UFOs are confirmed real is bit of a conundrum. It’s like saying not knowing the contents of this closed box are confirmed real.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem is the terminology doesn’t match. When others use UFO to refer to any unidentified object, and they have proof, that proof doesn’t mean alien UFOs have proof.

        • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          UFO absolutely holds connotations of aliens, and has for half a century. That’s why the term UAP began use, to separate official documentation for the implication of aliens. And OP clearly referring to aliens.

      • GreenMario@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Was definitely referring to aliens. Catching “balloons of unknown origin” aren’t as exciting unless it’s shot down by a F22.

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well yea. Failing to identifying what it actually is makes it unreasonable to say it’s not an alien craft.

        • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s debatable. Are you saying that a closed box has an equal chance to contain an alien than any other object? Is it reasonable to say there is a chance that any closed box is containing an alien? I would say the answer is no.

          • GladiusB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s a weird way to phrase a question. It’s unknown. Being unknown it could be remote controlled, secret, or not of this world. What is in there? Only who or what is inside would know.

            • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You are suggesting that any flying object, prior to identification, can reasonably be suggested to be of alien origin?

              I’m saying that it is unreasonable, because we currently have no evidence to suggest that any flying object has been of alien origin. There is no evidence of land based objects with alien origin. There has been no hard evidence in the history of human record to suggest that even a single thing on Earth has ever been linked to extra-terrestrial intelligence.

              Yet, you are saying that it’s completely reasonable to suggest that any flying object that is yet to be identified by one or more observers has any likelihood of being of alien origin.

              By extension you have to admit then that any object (whether flying or not), while unidentified, could reasonably be suspected of being of alien origin. So whatever is in that box could be extra terrestrial.

    • Blue and Orange@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think people sometimes get confused on the term. “UFO” does not mean the same thing as “alien spacecraft”. Anything in the sky that can’t be identified is a UFO.