This renewed interest in UFOs – excuse me, “UAPs” – is honestly pretty fascinating.

It’s clear that a nontrivial amount of UFO reports over the years have been “real” in the sense that there was really something there to be seen, but I’d figure most do have a completely mundane explanation – anything from prototype aircraft to weather balloons (har har.) Then there’s a few that seem to completely defy explanation, which is the fascinating part. Lately there’s been more official clips released, so it seems like it’s not quite as taboo of a subject and likely to kill your career as a pilot or whatever as it has been.

  • ericjmorey@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Interesting to see that they’re insisting on traditional academic journals instead of priority towards open access journals.

    • interolivary@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You’re referring to this bit from their ground rules?

      The data or its analysis will be released through traditional, scientifically-accepted channels of publication, validated through the traditional peer-review process.

      Personally I just read that as something along the lines of “we’ll be releasing through scientific journals as opposed to newspapers or tin foil hat zines” and didn’t take it as meaning they wouldn’t submit to open access journals

      • ericjmorey@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah. I’m sure it due to incentives in that academia industry. Publish or perish means publish in journals with established credibility.

        But it’s good that they don’t plan to release findings through news media.