You are repeating previous fallacies again ProWag.
You are playing the zero-sum game again, by demanding proof or something to be proven. The fact
of the matter is nothing has ever been proven. There is nothing that does not have questionable events,
even the most vigorously tested theories in science are stll questionable. All we can have is evidence, and
we have to explain that evidence with the best hypothesis that we can. However, the hypothesis has to account
for all the known facts.
You are also guilty of falsifying facts, if a witness testimony tells you, "I saw a large object the size of several foot
ball fields hover about me, then shoot out into the sky" Instead of working with the data, you will falsify the data,
by fabricating motives, "This person is lying or cannot be trusted because of x" This person stole a sweet when he
was 10 years old, this person has injested drugs at some point in his life, this person wants to make money. Now,
interesingly such concerns of finding motive does not appear when a scientist gives data, nobody lookes at the scientists
personal life, they look at the data. I submit to you the reason you have to falsify the data, is because it is impossible
for a rational person to accept the data and not use the ETH.
Now, when you say a "logical explanation for all of them" do you mean a logical explanation that includes the ETH as
a possible explanation, or one that excludes the ETH?
You asked for examples of cases that I think can only be explained by the ETH. Alright then, the following I think can
only be explained by the ETH:
http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc629.htmConclusions
In conclusion, with two highly redundant contacts -- the first with ground radar, combined with both ground and airborne visual observers, and the second with airborne radar, an airborne visual observer, and two different ground radars -- the Bentwaters-Lakenheath UFO incident represents one of the most significant radar-visual UFO cases. Taking into consideration the high credibility of information and the cohesiveness and continuity of accounts, combined with a high degree of "strangeness," it is also certainly one of the most disturbing UFO incidents known today. Now here is my prediction(I got the last one right remember) You will not be able to explain the data as it stands, so you will falsify the data by either:
1). Fabricating motives for the researchers, personale, witnesses involved in the case
2) Forcing explanations that do not work, such as meteorite, reflections explanations
3) Inventing explanations from the argument of possibility fallacy such as all the radars malfunctioned, mass delusion