The all-sky cam is a very good idea. Such cams are used for meteor tracking right now and are very useful for the purpose.
You need a time stamper to get good (ideally GPS based, or at least NTP based) time signatures on each frame. Otherwise your images are going to be of limited value even for the meteor hunters.
An infrared all-sky cam would also be helpful, but such cams have very poor resolution right now (think 256 x 256 for a $5k unit) and that is not really going to be very helpful.
If you want to spring for a second all sky cam mounted a few km away from the first cam, this will improve the utility enormously. With GPS time stamps on both cams, you will be able to triangulate the height of the object(s) seen, whether meteors, aeroplanes, balloons, or whatever.
The other posts in this thread about "fitness for purpose" are outside of my knowledge. A lawyer would be the required person to provide those opinions, and for a fee.
@Colin: interesting read - a mini summary of some of the points raised in the book I linked.
Btw, UFOs exist. Anything that is a Flying Object that isn't identified is by definition a UFO. Now, it's much more debatable if any UFOs are from aliens though...
They are out there. To believe otherwise reflects a very narrow point of view. Considering the way in which we treat each other, in all possibility other worldly beings are more likely to be far more advanced and treating us with smirking distain after viewing the US elections and the recent spate of terror attacks. (Like kids looking into the Sea Monkey jar) You don't necessarily have to believe, rather retain an open mind to the possibilty.
They are out there. To believe otherwise reflects a very narrow point of view. Considering the way in which we treat each other, in all possibility other worldly beings are more likely to be far more advanced and treating us with smirking distain after viewing the US elections and the recent spate of terror attacks. (Like kids looking into the Sea Monkey jar) You don't necessarily have to believe, rather retain an open mind to the possibilty.
Belief is not proof.
Facts,not science fiction is required for your statement.
After 30 years of observing the day and night sky
I can honestly say I have seen nothing that cannot be logically
explained.
Cheers
Belief is not proof.
Facts,not science fiction is required for your statement.
After 30 years of observing the day and night sky
I can honestly say I have seen nothing that cannot be logically
explained.
Cheers
Probabilities are important in Science. Odds are heavily stacked in the affirmative even based on our limited knowledge of the universe.
Blanket denial and cynicism as demonstrated in some of the responses here is just naive... or worse. Harks back to a universe "created" for our pleasure by some omnipotent bureaucrat. Simply ludicrous... but plenty had die proving the opposite.
Anyone who wants to have a go at proving it, using proper scientific methodology, has my blessing and they should be respected as long as they don't get whacko about it like some of the numb-nuts on the net.
I find it somewhat surprising that so many people are so sceptical here. True, whilst the chances of an alien race visiting us may be remote, it's not impossible. We have been a technological civilisation for only a few generations and before people like Newton came along, we knew surprisingly little about how things work in space. Since then, our understanding has grown considerably but we are basically babies at this stuff. Heck, I may live long enough to see an image of another stellar disk.... My kids will probably see the planets around some stars... if we can avoid wiping ourselves out..
Who knows what another 1000 years, let alone millions of years, of development may bring. Based on the little I know, the planetary catalogue Kepler has popped in the think bag, and what we know about the resilience of life here, it seems to me that there are possibly millions of "advanced" civilisations in our galaxy alone. I can't even imagine what some of them may have achieved. Indeed, a trip across thousands of light years may be no big deal to "them". Of course, our understanding of science sets limits like the speed of light but there have been so many limits broken in the past that I see no reason why "trans-warp drives" don't exist somewhere. Perhaps there is a branch of Science yet to be discovered that allows such things. Its happened before, (Think, radio, infra-red, X-Ray and now Gravitational wave astronomy). What, I wonder, will quantum computing enable us to achieve?
The question I have often thought about is, "So why haven't they contacted us? Well, a couple of possibilities include:
1/ "They" have a principle like the "prime directive". Logical, considering the history of more advanced human societies contact with other groups. (ie) the Spanish in South America. Undoubtedly, "they" would have learned the hard way as well.
2/ "They" may be using transport and communication methods so different from ours that its akin to us trying to understand machine code using a charcoal stick and clay tablet. They may be screaming at us, "Are you deaf?", in a wavelength we haven't even tried yet...
3/ "We are being studied like the "proverbial microbes in a drop of water"
The history of Science is resplendent with examples of people who have been scoffed at and ridiculed for ideas that have subsequently become mainstream, (Darwin, for example). That's a lesson we should always put front and centre when confronted with "fringe" ideas!
This bloke may indeed be pissing his money away, (he wouldn't be the first ), but I've decided to take the "Never say never" stance and I'd advise the bloke according to what I previously said, based on how these things may move, and what kind of data I'd want to collect to record and support my observations.
He may achieve nothing more than a catalogue of observations that can be used to "eliminate" further misleading "sightings" (useful), or discover something like "sprites" which have a history worth reading about... OR he may get a "WOW" moment that rattles the planet.
The key here is to apply critical scientific analysis to any claims of success rather than blanket cynicism.
Tolerance is a virtue and may save some of us having to wipe egg off our faces in the future
I'd add one more word for those about to scoff. SETI!
Belief is not proof.
Facts,not science fiction is required for your statement.
After 30 years of observing the day and night sky
I can honestly say I have seen nothing that cannot be logically
explained.
Cheers
Well.. in my forty plus years of observing under skies ranging from the nullabor, haute provence (southern French highlands), Calar Alto (Max Planck institute) mainland China, Thailand, (every country in Europe) Singapore, Malaysia, high in the the Swiss alps, Hong Kong, Romania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Turkey and both sides of the American divide, I can state with all honesty that I have never EVER come across an amateur astronomer called Ron, to the best of my knowledge.
There is no rational explanation for this,
Therefore, I conclude that there is no such thing as an amateur astronomer called Ron, and all who believe otherwise are bat5hit crazy conspiracy theorists.
Maybe I need to get out more?
Last edited by clive milne; 01-01-2017 at 09:47 PM.
Anyone who wants to have a go at proving it, using proper scientific methodology, has my blessing and they should be respected as long as they don't get whacko about it like some of the numb-nuts on the net.
Well.. in my forty plus years of observing under skies ranging from the nullabor, haute provence (southern French highlands), Calar Alto (Max Planck institute) mainland China, the Swiss alps, Hong Kong and both sides of the American divide, I can state with all honesty that I have never come across an amateur astronomer called Ron.
Therefore, there is no such thing as an amateur astronomer called Ron, and all who believe otherwise are bat5hit crazy conspiracy theorists.
Well.. in my forty plus years of observing under skies ranging from the nullabor, haute provence (southern French highlands), mainland China, the Swiss alps, Hong Kong and both sides of the American divide, I can state with all honesty that I have never come across an amateur astronomer called Ron.
Therefore, there is no such thing as an amateur astronomer called Ron, and all who believe otherwise are bat5hit crazy conspiracy theorists.
Come on, the mere fact that you are conversing with Ron yields a lot more proof of his existence than has ever been provided by aliens. That's not a fair analogy.
Come on, the mere fact that you are conversing with Ron yields a lot more proof of his existence than has ever been provided by aliens. That's not a fair analogy.
-Markus
Yes, Markus, I concede that is a valid argument..
but you do understand the logical fallacy I was pointing out...?
I don't have a horse in this race other than... I wont be told that two plus two doesn't equal seven - because motorbikes don't have ash trays...
and not expect me to call (the argument) for what it is.
Last edited by clive milne; 01-01-2017 at 10:44 PM.
but you do understand the logical fallacy I was pointing out...?
I think so.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. (No proof of aliens yet, therefore there are no aliens)
But as far as the UFO hunters go, they have an equally valid point that in the absence of any evidence that Aliens don't exist, it's possible that in fact, they may.
The flip side of this is that the existence of Aliens can't be disproven for the same reason that the existence of Unicorns can't be disproven. Until there's more evidence, Aliens and Unicorns must inhabit a similar sphere of veracity.
I can only offer a mark 1 eyeball as reference to seeing two (not at the same time.
One was when I had a paper round - I would have been 13.
I was lying on the ground in midwinter (I kid you not) at 6.30ish AM in a local park enjoying the solitude and stillness it was still totally dark and my eyes were adapted.
I observed a steady red light (that's already unusual) vertically above me - now this is 1965 so no satellites to worry about - as I watched it for about ten seconds it slowly tracked across about 5 degrees of sky. No noise and no variation of light.
Then - it turned 90 degrees and continued on for about another ten second before suddenly winking out. The sky was crystal clear.
the ODD thing about that was the 90 degree turn was without a radius or change in speed. One second it was going right to left the next it was going up to down.
Unidentifiable I think.
The next was 4 years later about two months before Appollo landed for the first time.
I was standing in parade ground formation (I was in the services) perfectly still when above the building in front of me a shiny cylinder which I thought was a plane at first. As my eyes tracked it slowly across the sky I noted that no matter where it was in my vision, I could see no wings and no tail. No rotors no jets no noise nothing -
The object was the same at both ends - not tapered at all just rounded.
There were what looked like windows on it. Square windows. I didn't count them (it's hard to count regular items in a line )but there were approximately 10.
It eventually disappeared behind another building. I had and have never seen anything like it before or since and no pictures of aircraft ever seemed similar.
It wasn't for instance an aluminium plane like a douglas DC3.
Now add to that that the plane was headed nowhere near an airport and was only a few degrees above eyeline over what would have been Cornwall's moorlands, I think I can safely say it was a UFO.
I'm not easily fooled and quite sceptical and pragmatic.
Astronomers point their gear at a very small part of the sky and even their eyes aren't tuned to observing a wide field under normal circumstance. I know there's thousands of us and we look at a lot of sky but that doesn't mean we're likely to see much more than we expect.
Personally I think it is far more plausible that the Universe let alone our galaxy is not teeming with advanced civilizations for what ever reason are too shy to announce their existence.
The Fermi paradox was postulated at a time when the infinitely old steady state theory of the Universe was the mainstream theory.
An infinitely old Universe allows "enough time" for advanced civilizations to develop.
Given that it took 3 billion years for "intelligent" life to develop on Earth which is nearly a quarter of the age of the Big Bang it might be the Universe is simply too young to support a large number of advanced civilizations that are even technologically capable of communicating or visiting each other.
I happily subscribe to the train of thought that due to the sheer size and diversity of the universe there statistically has to be some form of life out there intelligent or otherwise.
Perplexity creeps in though when it is assumed that there is super intelligent life capable of interstellar travel which chooses to leave us alone for whatever reason.
I'd like to throw out there the assumption that our little blue dot holds the most intelligent life in the universe. That would certainly explain why we have never seen aliens overhead letting us know what a bunch of destructive gumbies we are?
The discovery of simpler life forms is our most likely scenario imho.
Cheers
Rob B
@Colin: interesting read - a mini summary of some of the points raised in the book I linked.
Btw, UFOs exist. Anything that is a Flying Object that isn't identified is by definition a UFO. Now, it's much more debatable if any UFOs are from aliens though...
There are very few objects that can be, or have been, confirmed to be flying while remaining unidentified at the same time. Anyting else is not a UFO as per the definition.
Puttong yourself on a pedestal are you?
We, the highest form of life?
We're self destructing so fast that I may witness the beginning of the end.
Intelligent.... not much.
They are out there, that's for sure. They just don't want to be involved with us.
Seriously if you pulled up at a planet that looked intelligent only to discover the way they are destroying, polluting and generally wiping themselves out, would you really want to drop in for a cuppa and a chat?
), but I've decided to take the "Never say never" stance and I'd advise the bloke according to what I previously said, based on how these things may move, and what kind of data I'd want to collect to record and support my observations. 
