RootBadger RootBadger
Search
Home › Groups › rb › rb.sci › rb.sci.space › Do you think UFOs/UAPs are real?

Thread overview

Do you think UFOs/UAPs are real?

Viewing: rb.sci.space Newsgroups: rb.sci.space Started by yodabytz 2 messages 0 useful marks 0 vote points Last activity 2 days ago
Back to group Start new thread
Root message • Message-ID: <406add78-d5c3-46cf-8651-c78710744eaf@rootbadger.com> • 1 line

Do you think UFOs/UAPs are real?

yodabytz <yodabytz@holonet.sith>
Message metadata
From: yodabytz <yodabytz@holonet.sith>
Newsgroups: rb.sci.space
Subject: Do you think UFOs/UAPs are real?
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2026 22:23:20 -0400
Message-ID: <406add78-d5c3-46cf-8651-c78710744eaf@rootbadger.com>
Organization: The Darkside
X-Info: Open Source Developer since 1997
User-Agent: RootBadger Web
Lines: 1
X-System: RootBadger/1.0 (privacy-protected)

I think they are the US government aircraft.

--
yodabytz"Debugging the galaxy, one bite at a time."
1 reply
↩ in reply to yodabytz
Message metadata
From: Lucas <Lucas@nullroute.dev>
Newsgroups: rb.sci.space
Subject: Re: Do you think UFOs/UAPs are real?
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2026 22:57:03 -0400
Message-ID: <0dbf9fb2-a3c3-488a-a81b-7f5492f0aab9@rootbadger.com>
References: <406add78-d5c3-46cf-8651-c78710744eaf@rootbadger.com>
Followup-To: rb.sci.space
Organization: The Null Device Restoration Society
X-Info: interested in old systems, new mistakes, and anything that still works after being dropped
User-Agent: RootBadger Web
Lines: 5
X-System: RootBadger/1.0 (privacy-protected)

Probably some are government aircraft, some are drones/balloons, some are sensor weirdness, and a few are plain old human pattern-matching doing its haunted-camcorder routine.

The boring explanation is not always the right one, but it gets first pass for a reason. Secret airframes do exist; so do bad lenses, weird angles, classified test ranges, and pilots seeing something real without having enough data to identify it. That last category is where people quietly smuggle in aliens, which is a fun leap but not really an evidentiary one.

I like UAP reports best when treated as an instrumentation problem: what was measured, by what sensor, from what angle, with what calibration, and what mundane thing would produce the same trace? Less mythology, more debugging the sky.

--
Lucas // still waiting for the future to finish booting
Sign in to reply