Hacker News Comments on
"Pyramid UFO" - NEW FOOTAGE. It's Just Bokeh, not a Pyramid
Mick West
·
Youtube
·
52
HN points
·
5
HN comments
- This course is unranked · view top recommended courses
Hacker News Stories and Comments
All the comments and stories posted to Hacker News that reference this video.Someone posted this video here then deleted it. (I'm pretty sure he was an alien)It's just bokeh:
⬐ gfodorThis video is easily debunked and it's weird that it is in the mix because its the Nimitz report that is interesting.
The linked video in the article showing how a triangle iris creates triangle ufos is brilliant, and seems obvious after you see it.Debunking this stuff is not as exciting as believing in aliens, which is why it’s a never ending battle. But the problem is when people who can make policy get duped.
Again, we need better science education and should demand such for those we elect.
⬐ 13yearsThis is why those we elect should never be involved in science. It was never supposed to be the role of government. The expectation that those we elect should be knowledgeable over the entire domain of knowledge that represents important things we care about is unreasonable and is why they always fail our expectations. Instead, the domain of their responsibility should be very limited as to not impact everything in our lives.⬐ crazydoggers⬐ jk7tarYZAQNpTQaHow can we limit the domain of their responsibility so severely?Take climate change. Ultimately we need elected officials to enforce regulations. If we limit their ability to do so, then you’ll have a power vacuum, and those with the most money power and influence will be making the rules... again with science losing.
I don’t think we need to expect them to have expertise in every field. Instead even basic critical thinking skills, basic ability to asses scientific method vs pseudoscience. I feel like that should be a low bar to hit.
⬐ 13years⬐ slverAnd yet, when they get involved it completely distorts what is known. https://www.livescience.com/56396-americans-misinformed-on-c...⬐ crazydoggersWell yes, because we’ve chosen poorly, and the bar is so low on basic scientific knowledge in this country.So then how do you combat climate change? Why would those making billions to pollute the environment care about science if we don’t elect officials who can enforce regulation. At least now we have some pull and some percentage of elected officials making rational decisions. Without even that, what do we have?
And back to the article at hand. Elected officials need to be at least in charge of military response I would assume you would agree. Is it not best that they can understand it’s not an alien or “commy” conspiracy when they make decisions?
⬐ 13yearsBefore regulations, pollution was solved by strict property rights enforcement. Courts eventually stopped enforcing property rights because it allowed for zero pollution. Regulation agencies were created to allow pollution, but in a manner that would be acceptable to balance business needs.In effect, regulations have only outsourced the creation of pollution to elsewhere. How much better have we actually gotten vs just making the optics look better?
However, ironically if politics weren't involved, there might actually be more universal public opposition and pressure on companies as before political involvement in climate change the belief in climate change was about equal among left and right.
Military response should require an act of congress which requires debate and discussion which should also involve the public.
Congress has given up its role in this endeavor to the executive branch, but that is how it is supposed to be. With more open debate and discussion at least your more likely to stay within the realm of rational.
⬐ crazydoggersI think I used to agree with you in principle, but perhaps I’ve become more jaded. I don’t have a lot of faith in people to do the right thing, and I see libertarianism (which I believe you’re kind of arguing for, and which I used to support) as a very imperfect solution since it doesn’t deal effectively with parasitic elements in our society.The world has also become too global, property rights for instance, are no longer simple issues. Also relying on them simply pushes the requirements for understanding science onto the judiciary branch.
Does 5G for instance trample my rights to have an EM free property zone? If it does, does that mean regulation allows 5G EM pollution along with air pollution? The rational voice says of course not since 5G is not pollution and yet we have a wave of people believing it also caused Covid.
Ultimately I’d argue still that better science education for all is a must in an increasingly complicated and connected world. I don’t think anyone could argue against that. We can fix whatever government issues we might have without also having to battle poor thinking and irrationality.
BTW, thanks for the insightful comments. Even if we disagree on some points it’s refreshingly not another conspiracy theory or idiocy, but actually well thought and articulated. So thanks!
⬐ 13yearsAgree, it is great to have a rational discourse on social media. It is very rare."as a very imperfect solution since it doesn’t deal effectively with parasitic elements in our society"
I think this is a very deep subject specifically and probably would require substantial dialog. In brief, I somewhat agree, but at the same time would suggest that almost all alternatives are not "effective" either and they only result in moving the problem from one domain to another.
I look at such issues as whether they are even meant to be solved. As a frame of reference for my perspective. If you are familiar with waterfall method of software engineering. It was an attempt to solve the problem of planning and software design. However, it turns out that it was an unsolvable problem. Agile was essentially the answer, but not the solution as it didn't solve the problem of planning and designing a large project upfront. It accepted that can't be done, and therefore it led to a completely different method which avoids solving that problem. So, where I'm going with this is that maybe parasitic elements will always exist, eliminating them is fraught with problems just as regulation results in regulatory capture. Maybe we need to think about this differently.
Those we elect are not “involved in science”. Still you’re supposed to have higher bar for representatives, instead of saying “representatives are dumb”. You realize this essentially says those being represented are also dumb. Or there is a systemic flaw to address⬐ 13yearsGovernment is involved in science everywhere. Through both policy and investments. Everyone always points out how some politician has failed to understand some aspect of technology or some particular deep domain of knowledge. This problem is never going to get better because it isn't feasible that those who spend their lives mostly trying to understand how to campaign and influence you to vote for them are going to deeply understand anything about complicated subjects of the world.It is the entire reason the original role of government was essentially to protect your liberties. Not decide how you should live your life or what is true or false in the realm of deep fields of knowledge.
What that video doesn't tell you is that a triangular object will also produce a triangular bokeh. Bokeh is like a hash function, it destroys information. So there's no way to know if the original object was triangular in nature or not.Also, this thread: https://twitter.com/4Eridani/status/1387157151232167936
⬐ crazydoggersAgain I can only lament the lack of science education in this country.Triangles show up as triangular bokeh... therefore... must be aliens?? Im sorry that Twitter user thought it was denigrating those in the military.. but that’s a red herring argument and nothing to do with anything.
This is a much better read than Twitter...
https://www.amazon.com/Demon-Haunted-World-Science-Candle-Da...
⬐ jk7tarYZAQNpTQa>Again I can only lament the lack of science education in this country.What country exactly?
> Triangles show up as triangular bokeh... therefore... must be aliens??
No. But, "Triangles show up as triangular bokeh" completely disproves the sentence "it's just bokeh, not a pyramid". Additionally, when people talk about UFOs, they don't imply it must be aliens (even though it's the most probable explanation for several top members of the US government).
> This is a much better read than Twitter...
Agreed. Most reads are better than Twitter. But let me recommend you to read something on the UFO phenomenon, so that you get a better understanding of it. For example something from Jacques Vallée, who has been applying data science to it since the 70s.
⬐ crazydoggersI know Vallée, he was the inspiration for the character in Close Encounters.His thinking is marked by significant logical errors including but not least..
Observational selection: basically ignoring the large body of observational evidence against UFO as paranormal or alien
Appeal to ignorance: Saying since we can’t 100% disprove ufos are alien or paranormal, they must be
Straw man: Blaming hard to explain data on some “invisible entity” attempting to deceive mankind
Special pleading: He can’t explain why crop circles exist. So “watch out. It is probably psychological warfare”
If you read Carl Sagan’s book, you’ll quickly realize that the “science” of Vallée is not that at all. And it’s not just Carl Sagan, the vast 99% of scientist with a firm understanding of the scientific method would concur.
Ultimately, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and that is precisely what UFO phenomena fail to generate in regards to alien or paranormal explanations.
I'm not sure what incident you're referring to. e.g. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-r2oaQWmqkk, there's no swooping, and no indication that the ship was "on maneuvers." Navy ships and aircraft can't help being near commercial aircraft much of the time, and vice versa, since flight paths crisscross the whole world.But whether they "deserve to be shot down" or not (a highly questionable moral position I think), it would be pragmatically unwise to do so. You will either create a domestic political crisis that will shake up the whole military, or an international incident, depending on the carrier.
⬐ ncmncmNobody said "deserve to be shot down", so the quote marks are at best disingenuous. Since I unambiguously referred to an incident reported when naval ships were on maneuvers, you imagine some entirely other time, place, and circumstance. I will leave my response to your speculative moralizing to the reader's imagination.
Note that by "legitimate" they mean "actually taken by Navy personnel," not "actually alien spacecraft."In this particular case the media UFO hype machine seems to have discovered a case of bokeh[0].
⬐ TechBro8615So perhaps the better question is, why is The Pentagon encouraging the speculation by "confirming" the videos exist? Surely they've concluded the same as the linked OP. I can only assume that The Pentagon is either incompetent or being intentionally misleading.⬐ weare138This theory fails to explain the accompanying details of the incidence. The objects were also observed by Navy personnel and estimated to be hovering above the USS Russell at an elevation of 700ft. Plus the assertion that the US Navy can't differentiate between a star and an aircraft is or is not able to identify a 747 is a reach, especially considering there was an official Navy inquiry into the incidence.⬐ nabla9Tyler Rogoway and To The Stars Academy are not happy if this information spreads.⬐ mikewarotI agree, it's just BokehBut, if you want, for fun, you can make your own Triangle shaped floating object, you just need a high voltage power supply, and some common household items.