The video and news report seemed designed to fill up news time with a sensationalistic story, but the footage might be good enough to identify the object, which is probably a UAV surveillance craft–at least I think so.

No hope for the case if Maussán gets a hold of the video, except perhaps to gain more publicity for the subject.

The comments are supposed to be a forum for anything the readers want to discuss (within the subject bounds of the original post.) No need to worry about yours.

I agree with you about the sorry state of UFO research, but most people are tracked to investigate what they are seeking, and not what may have actually happened, unfortunately.

Good on you for including an investigative category about “any other anomalous phenomena(dreams, feelings of receiving thoughts, poltergeist).” This is an important and often ignored facet of UFO sightings/ interaction.

MUFON plays to the audience and their financial base, so it’s not surprising that they would include articles on the “starchild” skull, although I wish I’d written the piece on the contactees!

The Socorro object was described as being “egg-shaped.” Was there some other detail of the sighting that reminded you of the “hockey puck” shape?

It is possible this is a UAV but, in that case, I doubt it would have been silent. Most of the little ones utilize the Coanda Effect to fly. This takes a lot of energy and usually produces a lot of racket (as in this video):

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DW0cgBoWGVM

The one thing about the Costa Rica video that does not look like a UAV is the way the object banks onto its side before disappearing. UAVs fly with a pretty flat trajectory - they don’t bank to any extreme because they would lose lift.

Atthis point, I still have to lean toward this being a digital artifact of some kind. The video somehow has that quality of being just a little too convenient to be true.

S

misteranderson is right. Without those kinds of information the report leaves us with nothing, since the video is not really that impressive. The witness says the Ufo disappeared, but that’s hard to discern since all the movement of the cel phone doesn’t let us appreciate that.

And also the recreation of the event is puzzling. Looks like the witness wasn’t that far away of his friend who could have confirmed the sighting, I have been in a lot of buildings under construction because of my work, and the sound of a drill is not that loud that it would prevent you from hearing the yelling of a guy that close to you.

But, there could be other events like this in the following months, so we should be attentive.

I wish these sightings could go through what I would call a “tight epistemological grid”:
-careful vetting of eyewitnesses
-exact measurments of apparent size, time of day, position in the sky, weather
-at least some kind of brief psychological assessment
-report of any other anomalous phenomena(dreams, feelings of receiving thoughts, poltergeist)
-statement validity analysis of witness statements

I like UFO’s for the fun of it, but I’d sure like to at least know the truthiness of witnesses & cases. I just got done with reading Karl Pflock’s ROSWELL, & I am so disgusted with the poor quality of investigation in UFOLOGY. I subcribed to MUFON so I could get there magazine, & the magazine is a bunch of new age fluff with bullshit about a starchild skull & the possibility that some of the 1950’s contactees might have actually been telling the truth after all.

Just a little vent…thanks for listening…..