What equipment would you need to hunt UFOs?

[Slawomir (Suavi)]

Originally Posted by Ric

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?

Cheers.

Let's not forget to mention that dwellers living on this blue rock tend to shoot first at things they do not understand/fear and ask questions later...

[Robair (Robert)]

Originally Posted by jenchris

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.

Hi jenchris

My point was that maybe we are on the pedestal. Whether we deserve it or not is open to the individuals own interpretation as to just how successful we are as a civilisation. Personally I hope the pedestal is not our space to occupy, however, the possibility should at least be entertained.

Cheers
Rob B

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by Robair

Hi jenchris

My point was that maybe we are on the pedestal. Whether we deserve it or not is open to the individuals own interpretation as to just how successful we are as a civilisation. Personally I hope the pedestal is not our space to occupy, however, the possibility should at least be entertained.

Cheers
Rob B

I think it unlikely we were to occupy that position anymore than there being the "omnipotent bureaucrat" who built it all for us. After all, the sun is only middle aged and there are way more stars much old than the sun, not including those that have already popped the cork. Any space faring races that old would certainly have left the building in time.

[AstralTraveller (David)]

When considering life elsewhere in the universe we, unfortunately, have only one analogy to follow. Without forgetting this we should try to understand as much as we can from that example.

Firstly, life arose quite early on Earth and that by about 3.7 billion years ago bacterial colonies existed. We also know that life can use a variety of chemical-energy sources, not just photosynthesis. This is just as well because (I've heard it said) photosynthesis is an unlikely two-step reaction which has evolved just once in the history of the Earth: green plants co-opted the reaction which evolved originally in cyanobacteria. By contrast sight, hearing, locomation and flight have evolved multiple times. This suggests that life may be reasonably common, at least on goldilocks planets, but the chance of it using photosynthesis is lower. "It's an ecosystem Jim, just not as we know it."

Second, it took about another 3 billion years before solid-bodied species arose and another few hundred million for animals to start colonising dry land. We, of course, have only existed for an instance. Even in a 'busy' universe the chance of an alien civilization having spotted us are exceedingly low. In truth, the chance of them existing at the same time as us is exceedingly low. If species come and go on other worlds as they do on Earth why should we even be around at the same time? Evolution only has to run a different course or at a different pace for us to miss each other by a billion years. Not only space but also time is vast.

Third, we have no evidence that the fundamental limit of the speed of light can be broken. Each intelligent species may be trapped on its own world, forever fated to wonder what else is out there. They too may wish to boldly go like Captain Osifdhf or travel time like Dr Fafc but be equally clueless as to how to achieve it (and have their own problems at home).

So for me it's: chance of life elsewhere, ~100%; chance of what we might consider intelligence, very low; chance of meeting or detecting them, vanishingly small; validity of trying to find them, very high; chance the discoverer will walk into kittenshark's store and ask for instructions, laughable.

[csb (Craig)]

This discussion seems to be flowing through 2 pathways.

1) Is there other intelligent life in the universe.

2) Is Earth being visited by "space craft" built by other beings.

I think 1) is a good possibility.

I think 2) is unlikely. There are many obvious reasonings that point to the improbability of others beings travelling here. These out way the fewer reasonings that may support the possibility of space craft visiting Earth.

Personally, I think all UFO sightings are mistaken conclusions, wishful/hopeful thinking, deceitful reporting, fame/attention seeking, etc.

This is certainly an interesting and enjoyable discussion.

[sharpiel]

Originally Posted by kittenshark

I really need an answer.

Customer asked this question with a straight face. They have money.

ZWO camera? 20" dob? 16" Go-to scope? Mini table-top scope with a sticker of a spaceship in the eyepiece?

Bear in mind they may come back to return all the things because they can't find/photograph said UFO.

Back to the OP before her thread got hijacked by all us "rude ignoramuses" (to coin someone else's phrase)...I'm really intrigued to know what you ended up selling to the customer Cheryl-Ann?

[PeterM]

Originally Posted by sharpiel

Back to the OP before her thread got hijacked by all us "rude ignoramuses" (to coin someone else's phrase)...I'm really intrigued to know what you ended up selling to the customer Cheryl-Ann?

Hallelujah.

[astroron (Ron)]

A number of suggestions where made re the original question,and on that score not much could else be added to that advice.
In other words the question was answered.
That the thread moved into away from that is a natural progression of such a question on an Astronomical forum.
Cheers
PS the people who call other posters ignoramuses must have a very high opinion of themselves.
Cheers and happy New Year to you all.

[csb (Craig)]

This thread mostly stayed on topic until about Post #30. No posts from the OP since #1.

Yep Ron, natural progression of this particular discussion

[PeterM]

Originally Posted by astroron

A number of suggestions where made re the original question,and on that score not much could else be added to that advice.
In other words the question was answered.
That the thread moved into away from that is a natural progression of such a question on an Astronomical forum.
Cheers
PS the people who call other posters ignoramuses must have a very high opinion of themselves.
Cheers and happy New Year to you all.

Agreed Ron, I think there has been some poor form shown by other posters in relation to fellow astronomers here. I bit mylip at "Never seen a Ron". I hope we do hear from OP as to the outcome and if this thread has in anyway proven useful.

[astroron (Ron)]

Originally Posted by PeterM

Agreed Ron, I think there has been some poor form shown by other posters in relation to fellow astronomers here. I bit mylip at "Never heard of Ron". I hope we do hear from OP as to the outcome and if this thread has in anyway proven useful.

Yes Peter,it always saddens me when people denigrate others on IIS
but then again they probably do it quite happily in their everyday life.
Cheers

[AussieTrooper (Ben)]

On a serious note, a previous poster mentioned thermal cameras. These things have now dropped in price to be similar to other pieces of astronomical equipment. You can get something like a 4x thermal camera for about $3,000. It was only a few years ago that these things were huge and over $10k.

On the topic of UFOs, the simple fact is that people are absolutely terrible at identifying something that they haven't seen and had explained to them before, or that they weren't expecting. There are countless examples of this. There has been a staged mugging during a law class, where pretty much every student gave a wrong ID of the 'offender'. A large number couldn't even tell whether he was black or white.

Today, almost every single person has a video camera with them. There must be thousands of sky cams, and absolute hordes of surveillance cameras. So why hasn't the number of photos/videos of UFOs increased much? Could that be because the number of hoaxes hasn't increased?

It would be unscientific to completely dismiss the possibility of UFOs existing, but given the sheer volume of surveillance and still the lack of reliable evidence, the chance of them existing has become vanishingly small.

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

Many years ago, a member of the Cairns Astronomy Group was also a member of a UFO society. She asked if she could bring members around to look through my telescope. I showed planets, nebula & galaxies, but there was a complete lack of enthusiasm by the visitors. I late learnt that they had been expecting to scan the skies looking for UFOs.

During the visit, I was also exposed to some trails of thought by these UFO enthusiasts. Some of the members believed aliens were living amongst us and disguised themselves as humans. (And this was before Men In Black was a movie). Others in the society rejected this completely and were apologetic about such opinions.

So interestingly, there a lot of thought 'constructs' re UFO and aliens, but no incontestable evidence.

I had another friend who really insisted that she had seen a UFO when she was 18. She said, I will never forget it as this was the first night that she ever had an alcoholic drink. Hmm.

But never say never. When I was 13, I bet a friend that they will never prove UFOs are aliens. He took the bet and then said, U will never collect because there is no end date, whereas, if it is ever proved, I will lose the bet. Silly me, so though very, very sceptical, I now realise that we can not prove every sighting is not an alien in a UFO, so the negative case also remains unproven. Still, the scientific onus is really on those who believe to provide extraordinary proof for their extraordinary claims.

[sharpiel]

Originally Posted by astroron

A number of suggestions where made re the original question,and on that score not much could else be added to that advice.
In other words the question was answered.
That the thread moved into away from that is a natural progression of such a question on an Astronomical forum.
Cheers
PS the people who call other posters ignoramuses must have a very high opinion of themselves.
Cheers and happy New Year to you all.

I agree that threads morph. Much like language does over time. "Rude ignoramuses" was only used by me 'tongue in cheek' as it was a phrase once used against myself lol. By John Bumbury I think. Anyway...that's irrelevant of course now.

Despite all the excellent advice given by us all to Cheryl-Ann, only she can actually tell us what she did. Wish she'd let us know...hate being left hanging! Has been a brilliant thread none the less

[thunderchildobs]

I would suggest the following, 2 different brand cameras, each with a different lens and gps mounted side by side on a stable tripod. Should make dust, lens flares , dodgy pixels, camera artifacts, focus issues easily detectable. If it is not the same in both cameras, it is not there. It is a lot harder to fake if there a multiple simultaneous images. The biggest advantage is getting to sell twice the amount of equipment

If the customer gets bored with ufos, the same setup could also work with ghosts and yetis.

Additionally some astronomy software showing stars and satellites wouldn't go astray.

[kittenshark (Cheryl-Ann Tan)]

Geez, I left you guys alone for a couple of days and you can't behave!

I re-open shop on Thursday. Still recovering from the silly season sales and catching up with housework and taking care of the fish the past 2 days.

No word from the customer yet. I sent him away with a 2x barlow for his existing scope which he couldn't figure out how to use.

I'm not sure if he's ready for a ZWO camera yet.

Some days you think you can make it up as you go along but no....

If he wants to hunt yetis I can sell him night vision goggles, but I'm more tempted to send him to the local hunting store and let them deal with him!

[Atmos (Colin)]

I thought Yeti's lived in perpetually cold climates, gotta go to Canada or something for them

[AussieTrooper (Ben)]

Originally Posted by kittenshark

If he wants to hunt yetis I can sell him night vision goggles, but I'm more tempted to send him to the local hunting store and let them deal with him!

If you've ever had to deal with the staff at most hunting stores, you'll realise what a mean thing to do that would be!
Think of the good service that you generally get from astro stores. Then replace 'good' with 'condescending/arrogant' and you'll have a fair idea.

[kittenshark (Cheryl-Ann Tan)]

Originally Posted by AussieTrooper

If you've ever had to deal with the staff at most hunting stores, you'll realise what a mean thing to do that would be!
Think of the good service that you generally get from astro stores. Then replace 'good' with 'condescending/arrogant' and you'll have a fair idea.

I've never had the pleasure, unfortunately, though in a parallel universe I might take up hunting and fishing.

There are some birding people who refuse to go to hunting stores for their sports optics because "they shoot innocent birds", so they feel more comfortable in a store that does more astro gear and have binoculars as a sideline rather than a shop that sells guns and have binoculars as a sideline.

I haven't sent him there yet (no need to) but let's hope he's just happy with just a barlow and his own telescope. Sorry to disappoint.

[clive milne]

Originally Posted by kittenshark

let's hope he's just happy with just a barlow and his own telescope. Sorry to disappoint.

Cheryl Ann, would you be so kind as to clarify a point here...

Did you recommend (or sell) a barlow lens to aid in this person's endeavour?