UFOs Are Real And Scientific

[Kahalachan]

It's IFOs that I have a problem with.

If someone says "I can't identify that flying object", it's wonderfully scientific. We await evidence and reason to identify that object.

When people say "I identify that object is an alien spaceship" is when I have issues.

I know this is just semantics :p

[Civilized Worm]

Couldn't agree more!

[Warge]

I agree wholeheartedly. A UFO can be anything - a plane, a bird, a star - and to be fair, an alien spaceship even if it's very unlikely.

I wonder how it came to be that UFO = alien spaceship?

[rjh01]

Because people believe
Unknown = my pet theory

[Monza]

I agree wholeheartedly. A UFO can be anything - a plane, a bird, a star - and to be fair, an alien spaceship even if it's very unlikely.

I wonder how it came to be that UFO = alien spaceship?

It is quite a large leap to go from "strange lights in the sky" to "a spacecraft piloted by beings from another galaxy". It's amazing how so many people become instant experts in astronomy and aircraft. "No, it couldn;t have been Venus or an ultra-light aircraft."

I have always wondered why more astronomers don't report UFO sightings. Here are people who make a living looking at the sky. And yet, they don't tend to report more UFO sightings than other occupations. Could it be that they are more apt to correctly identify strange lights and aerial phenomena?

[Denial]

I totally agree with the OP. I suspect the term UFO is corrupted beyond salvation, though. You can hardly say UFO without people immediately thinking of small green men/reptilians/Pierce Brosnan's head on a dog.

[JoeTheJuggler]

OK, I'll take on the OP's premise.

Aside from the semantic issue that terms mean what they do by convention (and it does seem more and more conventional these days to let "UFO" stand as a short hand for "alien space craft"--I've even seen that usage in a recent Skeptical Inquirer), there is the following.

At least a great number of "UFOs" are not real in that they are not Unidentified Flying Objects.

Venus or the Moon can not in any realistic way be said to be "flying" objects. Reflections and other strange optical illusions can't even be said to be "objects". Even magnesium flares when seen as hovering UFOs, aside from the launch, would more accurately be described as falling objects not flying.

Swamp gas or related sorts of phenomena similarly are not flying.

So seeing some apparent light in the sky and jumping to the term UFO is already claiming more knowledge than is warranted in most cases. (Since the "U" is undisputed, I'd say that leap is almost always unwarranted. Without knowing what you're seeing, there's really no way to know for sure much of anything about it.)