Some brief considerations about

Wednesday, December 14, 2016

Jeremy Thomas December 13 at 6:42pm -- Simplicity versus Obfuscation.

December 13 at 6:42pm

Simplicity versus Obfuscation. 

The success of Mathematics in almost any field of human activity is due to many factors, one of these factors is its intrinsic use of "parsimony" or the explicit use of "economic of thought" or the tendency to use a minimal set of assumptions(axioms) trying to "explain" a given result. 

The success of the mathematical approach in natural science and in Physics in particular implies that Reality should be "working" along the same minimalist principles and many physical "laws" can indeed be deducted from variational/minimalists mathematical principles. 

That is why in Science "simple" explanations are preferred over convoluted/obfuscated ones and that general approach obviously had great success. 

But the blind use of this reductionist approach can backfire and as a matter of fact the current situation regarding the incapacity of Official Science to acknowledge the reality of Anomalies is due in part to the incorrect use in general of this philosophical approach and the incapacity of the Science's Elite to recognize the intrinsic limitations of reductionism, pointed in part by the Godel's incompleteness theorems in Mathematical Logic. 

The failure of Official Science and Traditional Ufology on the reality of Anomalies can in fact be linked on one side by the blind use of simplicity by Official Science and the overly use of obfuscation by Traditional Ufology. Reality appears to be somewhere in the middle of these two extreme approaches.

Thursday, December 8, 2016

Jeremy Thomas updated the description of the group Advanced Anomalies study group.

Jeremy Thomas

Description of the group Advanced Anomalies study group.

If you had not done personally atmospheric observations with high magnification equipment do not request to join this group, your request will be denied, your name, background, academic/job title is irrelevant here, only direct experience count.
This group is dedicated to the study of autonomous anomalous objects or sky critters as were named by Trevor J Constable, or simply Anomalies.
The main aim of this group is to advance the systematization of the knowledge about these real anomalous objects that have been video recorded all over the world, their reality is supported by an overwhelming amount of consistent observations.
Only people with known experience doing atmospheric observations with HIGH optical magnification cameras or telescopes in daylight or at night are allowed, infrared spotting is a big plus.
We only consider Second-Generation Data: Footage/pictures where structure details of the objects under consideration are given. 
This group should be considered like a very "Advanced" ongoing graduate course in Anomalies studies and like any elective graduate course in any University it has "prerequisites" to be admitted. 
UFO recycled and unconfirmed claims are not welcome here, only claims supported by consistent observational data. If you are a "UFO believer" this group is not for you. Preconceptions always imply a narrow minded outlook to reality.

Jeremy Thomas December 8 at 8:33pm -- Noise vs. Signal

Jeremy Thomas
December 8 at 8:33pm

Noise vs. Signal

For many people it is very hard to discern between "noise" and "signal", or in other words: between things with real information content and others that do not have information content.

This area of Anomalies Studies is full of examples showing that:

- Many people will "see" a craft in a glowing dot at night but are blind to anomalous manifestations in daylight with plenty of details.

- Many people will get lost thinking that a still picture present evidence of "interdimensional" objects/crafts and by doing that they are really killing the real cases of anomalous manifestations that they may have, these gems will be buried in a mountain of noise.

- Many people will believe personal accounts and many times gives these anecdotal accounts higher relevance than to hard evidence: noise vs. signal again.

Visiting any UFO site or channel online will provide an unlimited source of more examples, if you really pay attention you may find very few "signals" in there but these signals are usually buried in tons of noise, and as a rule the "noise" is a lot more "popular" than the "signals".

Jeremy Thomas December 6 -- Message sent to some SETI scientists

Message sent to some SETI scientists:

trevor james constable