It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Show Proof of the Existence of ONE Alien Being

page: 11
12
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2014 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yes, this was Captain Mantell apparently thought when he died chasing a balloon. I'm sure he wouldn't have given his life in "pursuit" if he realized it was just a balloon, but people are easily fooled, more easily than most of us like to admit, but just look at any collection of optical illusions, which is really a collection of ways showing how easily our senses are fooled.

This was also done by astronaut Gordon Cooper in his jet fighter days:

I chased one, one time in an airplane. Boy, it really looked like a big saucer very high and I had an afterburner going and got as high as I get in this airplane. As I started pulling up along close to it, I had a very shamed face look on my face when I realized it was a big weather balloon with the radio package hanging under it.

Even someone that's supposedly a "trained observer", as some believers argue, can make mistakes identifying objects from a distance.
--------------------------------------------------

a reply to: tanka418

If you give me complete, free "run" over MUFON's database...to the extent that I can redesign said database, and I'll provide you the "proof" you want...right down to the pictures...

Or........... you can make it really easy on yourself and do what has already been asked of you and others numerous times-
*Physical Earthbound events... Crashes, landings, interactions, abductions... These are your own claims. Post your personal best irrefutable physical evidence cases of each.




posted on May, 14 2014 @ 12:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
Or........... you can make it really easy on yourself and do what has already been asked of you and others numerous times-
*Physical Earthbound events... Crashes, landings, interactions, abductions... These are your own claims. Post your personal best irrefutable physical evidence cases of each.


As I have already indicated, and you seemed to acknowledge, personal experience is un-usable as evidence. And, since you will not accept any other evidence; it would seem to be a bit pointless at this time. Now, when you are ready to actually "look" at and evaluate evidence you might try www.ufoevidence.org... After that do a simple Google search for physical trace of UFO's and ET...sift through the results; you will find plenty of excellent material.

Alternately you might try re-thinking your views on evidence, UFO / ET phenomena, scientific procedure. It would seem that your ideas of what constitutes evidence is a bit skewed...you might want to review "rules of evidence" as well.

Again, my personal "best" ET experiences are all personal, and, you of course won't accept "stories". Though, IF you did; I might tell you about a conversation I had with a starship commander a few days ago. The actual content is irrelevant, but, I asked for a "sign" that this telepathic conversation was "real". He told me to look for a "solar flare"...within a few hours a solar flare appeared; more or less where he indicated it would. Of course I can't "prove" telepathy quite as easily as I can the solar flare.

Now then, please don't condemn me for my wee story; we all know it's not acceptable. Just toddle along and continue with your "muddle", perhaps someday you'll catch up with the rest of the Universe. You are like so many others; you demand something you know you will never get, and because of this; you never start.





posted on May, 14 2014 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Ya know, listening to you, One almost has to wonder 'if' you are capable of inference. I mean you don't seem to be able to apply the simple login and common sense required to infer the existence of ET. It's almost as if you were; "Inference challenged".

But, I presume you can walk, feed yourself, probably drive a car, and many other physical activities that all require the ability to infer. Yet in this single area, one that isn't really all that important to your continued survival, your ability to infer logically seems to enter some sort of exception (error) state and shut down.

It sees more likely (probable) that folk like you are simply too afraid of the reality you find yourselves in, and find ways, even if illogical, to avoid confronting that reality.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 02:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

As I have already indicated, and you seemed to acknowledge, personal experience is un-usable as evidence. And, since you will not accept any other evidence; it would seem to be a bit pointless at this time. Now, when you are ready to actually "look" at and evaluate evidence you might try www.ufoevidence.org... After that do a simple Google search for physical trace of UFO's and ET...sift through the results; you will find plenty of excellent material.

Alternately you might try re-thinking your views on evidence, UFO / ET phenomena, scientific procedure. It would seem that your ideas of what constitutes evidence is a bit skewed...you might want to review "rules of evidence" as well.

Again, my personal "best" ET experiences are all personal, and, you of course won't accept "stories". Though, IF you did; I might tell you about a conversation I had with a starship commander a few days ago. The actual content is irrelevant, but, I asked for a "sign" that this telepathic conversation was "real". He told me to look for a "solar flare"...within a few hours a solar flare appeared; more or less where he indicated it would. Of course I can't "prove" telepathy quite as easily as I can the solar flare.

Now then, please don't condemn me for my wee story; we all know it's not acceptable. Just toddle along and continue with your "muddle", perhaps someday you'll catch up with the rest of the Universe. You are like so many others; you demand something you know you will never get, and because of this; you never start.



I'm of course familiar with a majority of cases on these UFO websites. Not many on this site aren't. I don't come to ATS un-knowledgable and uninformed spouting off my skepticism (or whatever you want to call it), just because. So, pointing out a website to peruse so I can all of a sudden become enlightened and/or informed isn't going to happen. Most likely, I've already seen, read, and studied it.

Believe it or not, I want to find evidence that ET exists. However, when members such as yourself, post on this board and speak with such conviction that extraterrestrials are here or have been here- Just look at this evidence- I question it. When the evidence they speak about is supposedly tangible/palpable, and this evidence is based on information from biased sources or questionable study, it should be challenged. Far too often it's openly accepted as factual evidence. Look at the people that still accept Dr. Roger Leir's alien implants on his word. This is without any serious unbiased scientific study. The starchild skull is still argued to this day 15 years after the fact. They just need to eek out another million dollars to further their study. But...... the fathers DNA could be... 'we just have to keep them hanging on to something'.... I can go on, but, I continue to waste my energy on people that would rather discuss a belief than a fact.

I'm not going to condemn or mock your story.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 02:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Ya know, listening to you, One almost has to wonder 'if' you are capable of inference. I mean you don't seem to be able to apply the simple login and common sense required to infer the existence of ET. It's almost as if you were; "Inference challenged".

But, I presume you can walk, feed yourself, probably drive a car, and many other physical activities that all require the ability to infer. Yet in this single area, one that isn't really all that important to your continued survival, your ability to infer logically seems to enter some sort of exception (error) state and shut down.

It sees more likely (probable) that folk like you are simply too afraid of the reality you find yourselves in, and find ways, even if illogical, to avoid confronting that reality.


You seem to want to isolate me to make your point with a silly little snub that- *I just don't have the capability to understand the world around me.... Yet, I can still function in that world!* Amazing how I can do that, isn't it? Hmmmmm.. I guess that goes for a majority of the scientific community, skeptics/debunkers/non-believers as well? Big crowd of people lacking login[sic] and common sense. Also, don't forget... We're afraid to address the reality that aliens are on Earth, so we have this internal struggle and have to deny the overwhelming evidence and project out irrational and ridiculous excuses in order to survive and hide our true feelings because if we didn't, we'd have a nervous breakdown. 'Bout right? It must be horrible to be us... Ya?
Third verse... Closing time.....



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 03:02 AM
link   
Let us turn off the bongos and continue with facts and evidence.

Scientist believes evidence of alien life on Mars was destroyed
by Jason McClellan


Astrobiologist Richard Hoover spent more than forty six years working at NASA. In that time, he established the Astrobiology Research Group at the NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center, and became internationally known for his research on microfossils in meteorites. Hoover has published many papers in which he asserts the discovery of extraterrestrial life in meteorites.

Hoover no longer works for NASA, but he continues his controversial research and is currently an astrobiologist at Athens State University and a visiting research professor with the Centre for Astrobiology at the University of Buckingham. Hoover discussed his research in a lecture at the 2014 International UFO Congress. At the event, Hoover sat down with journalist Lee Speigel of the Huffington Post. Speigel asked Hoover to explain what it is that convinces him that life is not restricted to Earth. Hoover responded, “I am absolutely convinced that life is not restricted to the planet Earth because I have found the remains of lifeforms that are absolutely, conclusively extraterrestrial.”




Speigel pointed out that Hoover’s findings have met with harsh skepticism by critics. But Hoover stands behind his research. He replied, “These critics will not debate me in an open scientific forum. I would be perfectly willing to go to the Cosmos Club in Washington, to go to any university and have an academic debate and scientific discussion.”
During Speigel’s interview, he also asked Hoover about a possible organism photographed by NASA’s Opportunity rover. Hoover explained,

"Opportunity rover in 2004 took an image of a fascinating structure on Mars that shows structural features that are consistent with organisms on Earth known as crinoids . . . Crinoids are echinoderms, like starfish . . . so these are animals! And I’m saying that Opportunity took a photograph on Mars that shows features that are consistent with what we know of crinoids . . . Now, the fascinating thing is here you have a possible fossil of a very interesting organism in a rock on Mars, and three hours and a half after that photograph was done, that rock was destroyed by the rock abrasion tool."



Hoover claims that he asked NASA astrobiologist David McKay to explain why such an interesting structure was destroyed. He was told that it was done “to look at the inside looking for carbon.” But Hoover has a problem with this answer. He explains, “Well, the problem is, anyone who does much in the field of paleontology knows that you don’t have to find carbon to find fossil.” To further explain his confusion by the decision to destroy a potential fossil, Hoover offered this analogy: “If a paleontologist finds on Earth a rock containing an interesting fossil, they collect it. You would never have a paleontologist say, ‘Gee. That may represent a new genus of life on Earth. Where’s my rock hammer? I want to smash that to bits.’”
Although Hoover is not the first to question this 2004 event, it is interesting to hear the opinion of someone formerly associated with NASA.


See more information and videos here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

And so when they get the evidence 'we' are looking for 'they' destroy it - Maybe they are working for the Reptilians?
[Note: Reptilians are a hypothetical alien race; My current hypothesis is that you will see them on internet forums such as ATS working as professional debunkers - with an agenda to obscure the data].
edit on 14-5-2014 by AlienView because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 04:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan
The Drake Equation is scientific proof ... IMHO
Proven via math. The Drake Equation
You can't argue with math. It is what it is, ya' know?

Exactly, you can't argue with math, and math counters with the fact that interstellar travel is impossible.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 04:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Thain Esh Kelch




and math counters with the fact that interstellar travel is impossible.

Does it ? , I'd like to see your source for that.
Interstellar travel isn't impossible it's just very slow if you're traveling at sub light speeds , just because we can't travel to other star systems doesn't mean others out there haven't found a way to do it.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 06:07 AM
link   
"and math counters with the fact that interstellar travel is impossible. "


When will people stop thinking that they already know all the ways. There is no "distance" for advanced beings..

Don´t you get that?








Q: Yeah, I see. The propulsion of your ships is it like teleportation, or. . . ?

B: In your terms, I’ll say, very good, closer to that idea, yes. When there is a hyper-leap, ‘tis truly teleportation, there is no traveling. Realize, however, that it is simply a slightly different version of regular motion anyway, seeing as how you create yourself over and over and over and over and over again, every moment of time that you exist, so fast that you think you are one fluid motion. And so you are really teleporting from moment to moment to moment. We simply remove a few of the moments in between. You follow me?

In a sense; understand that light is what everything is in third density. You follow me? You are light.
Simply, our craft allows the manipulation of light so that the energy of its connection as the barrier
between one dimension and another is released. We use the doorway, the gateway aspect of light and
simply amplify it in many different ways, so that the craft is immersed in a field that is represented by
the doorway aspect of light. And once in that field, it is then, as a craft, disconnected from any particular
universe, and so we may wind up, anywhere and “anywhen” we wish it to.


Q: Regarding your spaceships again. This method of propulsion that you were talking about, which is
similar to teleportation, can that occur right from the planet’s surface, or do you have to go out into
space first before you apply it?
B: We will find that we will remove ourselves, to a degree, from a large gravitational source in order to
initiate what you term to be a hyperjump. Although there are phase shiftings in a sense, which can
3alternate a ship from parallel universe to parallel universe, while still in proximity to a gravitic body. Do
you follow me?
Q: Yes. But in general, you have to leave the planet’s surface then?
B: In general, I will say, it’s simply safer, as you will find that the field created ‘round and about the ship
will have a tendency to take with it what is nearby. We would not want to be pulling up chunks of real
estate with us. Do you follow me?



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

... continue with facts and evidence.


They found something on mars that could represent life.

Someone made a decision to "destroy" it in order to look for carbon.

This guy didn't like the decision

Anything beyond that is not a fact.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 08:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

Now then, please don't condemn me for my wee story; we all know it's not acceptable. Just toddle along and continue with your "muddle", perhaps someday you'll catch up with the rest of the Universe. You are like so many others; you demand something you know you will never get, and because of this; you never start.




Note how he didn't condemn your "wee story" even as your request is followed by a thinly veiled insult.



I, on the other hand, have no qualms about using your wee story, along with others from your previous incarnations to indict your credibility on the subject. I'm just not as nice as Ecto.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 08:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8

You seem to want to isolate me to make your point with a silly little snub that- *I just don't have the capability to understand the world around me....


Well, actually I didn't say that, now did I?!?? I didn't say that you lack capacity to understand. I said you lack capacity to "Infer"; large differences there. But apparently, that extends into our ability to understand as well...



Yet, I can still function in that world!* Amazing how I can do that, isn't it? Hmmmmm.. I guess that goes for a majority of the scientific community, skeptics/debunkers/non-believers as well? Big crowd of people lacking login[sic] and common sense. Also, don't forget... We're afraid to address the reality that aliens are on Earth, so we have this internal struggle and have to deny the overwhelming evidence and project out irrational and ridiculous excuses in order to survive and hide our true feelings because if we didn't, we'd have a nervous breakdown. 'Bout right? It must be horrible to be us... Ya?
Third verse... Closing time.....


Yes, I can see that you manage to "function", etc. that's what is interesting...you manage to do everything else quite well, and with great efficiency, yet, when it comes to what appears to be a single subject...ALL YOUR LOGIC, INTELLIGENCE, COMMON SENSE, SCIENTIFIC PROCEEDURE, ETC. seems to break down and give more gibberish as a response than logical thought.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: AlienView
Let us turn off the bongos and continue with facts and evidence.

Scientist believes evidence of alien life on Mars was destroyed


Well, I'll try to put the drums down...


I tend to agree with the scientist here...t did seem as though they were destroying possible fossil evidence of ancient life on Mars. However, that was on Mars! We don't currently have the kinds of test equipment needed to look for ancient fossilized life on Mars. So, in that respect; he over-reacted.

Now on to what should be thought of as the "real" stuff here, and that is fossil evidence of ancient life on Mars. The "destroyed" evidence on Mars, if we had the technology there to study it, might have gone a long way to supporting other data that indicates ancient fossilized life on (from) Mars. This wee bit of evidence combined with the existing body of data from meteorites, might tell a very important and interesting story.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 08:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Thain Esh Kelch

originally posted by: FlyersFan
The Drake Equation is scientific proof ... IMHO
Proven via math. The Drake Equation
You can't argue with math. It is what it is, ya' know?

Exactly, you can't argue with math, and math counters with the fact that interstellar travel is impossible.


Actually "Math" will tell you that interstellar travel s quite possible, and, y'all can even do it with existing science and technology...

Before you go making statements for "Math" you should learn some...math that is. Go and check out the "Kerr Metric", then come back ad tell us all "why" interstellar travel is impossible. (The Kerr Metric actually gives us a way to make any trip, of any length, nearly instant...without wormhole)



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
I'm of course familiar with a majority of cases on these UFO websites. Not many on this site aren't.



Indeed...Then tell us your opinion of the Peter Khoury case...please. And, "what", if anything did yo get out of it.



I'm not going to condemn or mock your story.
Thank you.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

Whether the DNA test was accurate is debatable, and I commented on that based on my experience dealing with many labs, in this post.

Even if it was a valid lab result (which I can find no evidence of), there is such a thing as a blonde-haired human Chinese girl. Here is her picture:

khmerconnection.com...


Not even alien. But I think it's far more likely that the dubious lab results are faulty than that there was such a girl or woman in the guy's bed whose nipple he bit off, which by the way, the nipple would have been better evidence than the hair.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

very good, someone who has at least "looked" at some data.

However; In the sparse report available, the subject was identified as a "rare" Mongolian DNA strain, as differentiated from simply "Chinese". Small details like that are important.

That being said; what you should have brought out of that bit of inquiry is: "insufficient data". The published "reports" do not contain enough data to make any sort of determination. Such things as mtDNA, Autosomal, and other markers should have been included in the report.

Concluding that the DNA was from a "blond Chinese" person is wholly incorrect, and not supported by the available data.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418
That being said; what you should have brought out of that bit of inquiry is: "insufficient data". The published "reports" do not contain enough data to make any sort of determination. Such things as mtDNA, Autosomal, and other markers should have been included in the report.
I thought I did point out the dubious nature of the lab report.

"insufficient data" seems to presume that we have reliable data but we need more. I make no presumption that the data we do have is reliable, without a way to confirm it.
edit on 14-5-2014 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I live in Russia. To the country where the tyrant Vladimir Putin governs. In this country there are no civil liberties and all information is exposed to cruel censorship. Nobody will publish that the tyrant and his servants won't want to publish. That I found on a site of NASA can change our representation about a life origin on Mars. These photos prove that life on Mars was reasonable and to a planet there lived humanoids. Billions years ago the last inhabitant of a planet was lost without having managed to depart from a planet. Now his skeleton lies among sand of a red planet. The publication on this site my last hope to tell about my find. From a site I enlarged photos and allocated artifacts. There is a video as on a site most to find this place. None of scientific NASA didn't pay attention to this find. At the end of December, 2013 on a site of NASA pictures of a skeleton of the alien and fragments of his space rocket were found. All pictures were made the office of NASA Curiosity and published on a site
I the first found these sensational pictures. The place of death of the alien on Mars can be found on NASA site in one minute.
These pictures are comparable with Yury Gagarin's flight. They prove to the world that we aren't lonely in space.
NASA site
mars.nasa.gov...




posted on May, 14 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
"insufficient data" seems to presume that we have reliable data but we need more. I make no presumption that the data we do have is reliable, without a way to confirm it.


Yet your representation of the case and data would seem to indicate something more than; a little bias. And while it is sad that we will not have the opportunity to do further analysis of the original sample. That data is still not wholly useless...provided we can get the full lab report. The work shown is necessarily secondary analysis...we need to see the primary analyses. These data will tell us far more than any "confirming" analysis done anyway, Though, yes, that confirming work would be nice to have...especially if it is done now, on modern equipment.

Unfortunately with that case, we have something like the "Starchild Skull"...something potentially interesting, but, no opportunity for "alt"party analysis...and just as unfortunate is the fact that nobody wants to do the work to confirm the original effort. So skeptics, and debunkers alike defame those who would attempt to apply science instead of actually evaluating the data.

You seem to have looked at and thought about the data at lease some...so I applaud you.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join