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.

 

You have all been duped.

page: 12
1
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Seems to me Frosty if the US gov is using the ufo myth deliberatly to cover up top secret military aircraft then they defeat their purpous.
At the same time they debunk the ufo idea, telling folk they dont exist?
what purpous developing top secret aircraft if they are so secret they cant be used?
Why after 60 years of it have they not developed many fantastic military aircraft? and if they have, why are they not using them? saving them for a special occasion?
Why have we not heard ufo reports from over the middle east? russia? in recent times? Why did the US gov not use these fantastic military craft in iraq? afghanistan?
Perhaps they will use them to invade another western nation, like Australia, or Europe, utterly wipe it out then blame the ufo.s the claim dont exist?
Perhaps they will use these never seen, top secret highly advanced aircraft to totally overtake the middle east? Folk in the middle east will beleive their flying saucers from planet x right? Then in marches US with conventional craft to "restore order" (read "occupy)?

What are these secret craft being tested for Frosty, why have they not been used in military conflict?

Edited to show humor >


[edit on 103131p://221210 by instar]




posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by thelibra

Shorty - Swamp Gas! It was all Swamp Gas! No, but seriously... You bring up an interesting subject. Now when you say thousands, I'm assuming you're including people that no one would remotely take seriously, such as the homeless, the mentally insane, and whatever country's equivolent of rednecks. Or are you talking about credible witnesses who have a normal job, function well in a normal society, or otherwise aren't prone to fantastic tales or visual hallucinations?

As for the abductions, again it could be explained as illicit high-tech medical experiments by our own government, or corporations, or private research facilities. Medical experiments such as would be performed on someone would likely require clean suits, and perhaps some special high tech goggles with a visual overlay system of some sort (goggles to avoid getting infectuous fluids in the eyes). Seen from the perspective of a panicked, heavily drugged patient, I could see how these two bits of equipment might make someone look like one of The Grays. The lab itself might be full of extremely high-tech equipment not seen in your average hospital.

Who knows why such experiments would be performed though. Maybe it's simply to test out new drugs medical equipment in the early stages before FDA or AMA approval, before they can legally obtain test subjects.

Now, floaty tractor-beam thingies also must be considered, since those often enter into abduction scenarios. Perhaps using a combination of mind-affecting chemical gasses and hypnotic light patterns, one can give someone else the sensation of floating. The gasses wouldn't neccesarily be visible, and the hypnotic light patterns could be the "tractor beam". This could keep the person stunned enough that the lab techs could strap them into whatever gurney or table is needed, and after a simple injection to knock them out, they can be safely stowed and moved until they are in the lab itself.

While this is not exactly a pleasant scenario either, it's one way to possibly explain abductions without requiring actual aliens or flying saucers.


You also raise good points and yes i include everyone under the son the mad, sad and homeless but could the govt get away with this for so long? I doubt it their is always some guy who wouldn't keep it to himself and so called alien abductions take place across the world. Thats alot of bad sceaming govts/corps.

Most abductions can be explained away by differant dream states but the ones in which scoop marks appear, again, are less easy to dismiss.

Also, it has taken place through out history the Victorians had tall grey gouls apear and take them from their homes, the Tudors had elves ect. Can these be explained away with govts and corps? Simple answer being a loud resounding NO!!!!

I have heard about the float theory before but again it cant explain all abductions.



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 11:56 AM
link   
You are absolutely right shorty. The would always be someone in military or government who would blow the whistle, and what do ya know, someone has! Actually more than 500 have! It's called the disclosure project www.disclosureproject.org...

Now all you have to do is change your position and start debunking everything from Colones to 5 star generals, it should be a walk in the park. I know for some here IN THE ALIEN forum who couldn't read the sign when they walked in, would have no problem what so ever dismissing 500 witnesses, which ofcause explains why they keep saying things like "it's far from proven", "there are no evidence", "nothing has ever been proven", "that one has been debunked" over and over.

"Investigation comes before dismissal, not the other way around" -- Brian Zebeaune

Hey, this is not a personal attack, take it with a good sense of humor, that's the state of mind I'm in right now



Sincerly

Cade

[edit on 20-12-2004 by Cade]



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frosty
NO, the US is for the people as it is "by the people", we elect you, you serve us. If the US didn't care for its people it wouldn't spend $370 billion a year on defense.


You mean the $370 billlion a year defense that helped prevent 9/11? Oh, wait! Our defense didn't do squat on 9/11. I guess that $370 billion is being wasted since it can't protect us like it's supposed to.

You're amazing frosty, telling everyone here that we've all been duped. I don't know what you're hidden agenda is but it's not working. There are too many people who firmly believe in UFO's and aliens. So don't think for a second that you're right and we're all wrong.



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 01:28 PM
link   
I will give you the number one (logical) reason why the Roswel incident is both still secret, a national security concern and was covered up.

Something crashed in the desert.

WE do not know who made it, nor how they made, nor where it came from.

There has been NO additional contact and as of yet we have not been able to reverse engineer 90% of the technology involved in the "craft" that was recovered.

The Goverment in the interest of protecting society from breaking down because of the "unknown" has taken on the task on concealing the truth.

And the truth is they do not know. They do not know where it came from, who built it or even how it got here. They do not know if where it came from posses a threat to human kind.

They do know there has been "other" intrusions into the atmosphere, but at this time they have no means of deterring these "instrusions".

There you have it, the truth. The truth that what "it" is, is still a mystery to even the Goverment or the secret branch or whatever and whomever you think is still hiding "the" secret.



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Well heck, I could come up with a "What really happened is this," as could any of us... In point of fact, I'm 90% certain I know exactly what happened, and why it was covered up... the problem is in the proof... Not that there's a lack of proof, but rather sorting the truth from the disinformation, the misinformed from the hoaxers, and the reality from the perception. That's the whole thing about a "real" coverup. There's usually nothing left behind to ever indicate it happened, and if something gets out, the disinformation gets released by those covering it up. Then, shortly afterward, assuming there's enough press, you get real witnesses who don't have the full story, hoaxers who have just enough details to muddy it up. Finally, assuming you can even find one legit witness, who cannot be discredited, there's a good possibility that their perception of the events was also skewed.

However, I think RobertFenix probably has the best assessment on here I've seen. However, I'd alter one word. I'd change "What" to "Why".

The ops project that sent it knows -what- it was, because they built it. The problem is, they don't know -why- it crashed -there-. I'll leave it at that.



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   
There is proof that the military is lying. They have changed story several times. First they said it was a UFO, then a weather baloon, then experimental aircraft involving puppets. As they can't all be true at once, we know some of these stories are false so they could all be false.

This is proof the military can lie, has lied, it's now up to us to decide which story we wanna believe if any.

Who can look at this fact and trust the military? I would submit the claim that no organisation can ever be trusted, but you might be able to trust some or all the people in an organisation. It rests in the simple fact that only people can be trusted, and if you don't know any of the people in a given organisation, how can you know if you can trust them?

Trust people you know to be trust worthy, not because they hold a rank. How many individuals of authority has been caught steeling, lying, killing?

"To think that people of less integrity does not aspire for power is naive, to ignore the evidence of their misconduct is treason" -- Brian Zebeaune



Military personel follows orders before they follow truth.


Sincerly

Cade

[edit on 20-12-2004 by Cade]



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cade
There is proof that the military is lying. They have changed story several times. First they said it was a UFO, then a weather baloon, then experimental aircraft involving puppets. As they can't all be true at once, we know some of these stories are false so they could all be false.


Well, yes, but it's important to make a distinction between what is "false" and what is an outright "lie". Consider how disorganized military intelligence is nowadays, in the world of picture phones, satcom, and all our other groovy little toys, and how hard it is for them to get one story straight, and then approved through the Pentagon, before it ever hits the field... sometimes the troops in Iraq have to wait as long as 12 hours just for one single image to download before they can proceed with whatever objective they have at the time. Or even quartermastering, such as the incident with the truck and fuel that had to be delivered, but they had not enough trucks to deliver the fuel. They took what they thought was abandoned equipment (of which the military produces a lot) and made do, got the mission accomplished, then promptly got court-marshalled for theft of US Army property. Observe what you get when you have even 3 eye-witnesses to an accident, and you'll recieve 10 different stories on what happened.

Now roll it all back 50 years... to a time when having one guy with a backpack radio was considered a high-tech platoon, and messages got relayed slowly, with very little communication between the branches outside of war-time, and each branch has to play the "telephone gossip game" where the story changes with each person who is informed. By the time you reach the end of each branch, the story has become aliens, no, weather balloons, no, experimental aircraft, no, the Russians!

It's easy to see how different stories came up from the branches and military intelligence, and probably took a long time to sort out what actually happened. And what actually happened was probably classified highly enough that those who were allowed to speak on it were just told to handle it. And so the press was given whatever story they managed to piece together.

In the end, did anyone lie? Or simply withold the truth? Or was it such a confused jumbled mess of an experiment that whoever was responsible got canned and the Government let it slip into obscurity for 30 years... It's hard to say. But conflicting stories released at different times isn't hard evidence of a cover-up, only for bad communication channels.


Originally posted by Cade
Trust people you know to be trust worthy, not because they hold a rank. How many individuals of authority has been caught steeling, lying, killing?


Quite a few, throughout history, from the ancient Babylonians to the present day Superpowers. At times it was considered wrong, at other times it was considered right. But for every figure of authority that did it, there have been at least a thousand who did the same who were no different than you or I...

I'm not really arguing here, just posing a counter-viewpoint.



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by thelibra

Originally posted by Cade
There is proof that the military is lying. They have changed story several times. First they said it was a UFO, then a weather baloon, then experimental aircraft involving puppets. As they can't all be true at once, we know some of these stories are false so they could all be false.


Well, yes, but it's important to make a distinction between what is "false" and what is an outright "lie". Consider how disorganized military intelligence is nowadays, in the world of picture phones, satcom, and all our other groovy little toys, and how hard it is for them to get one story straight, and then approved through the Pentagon, before it ever hits the field... sometimes the troops in Iraq have to wait as long as 12 hours just for one single image to download before they can proceed with whatever objective they have at the time. Or even quartermastering, such as the incident with the truck and fuel that had to be delivered, but they had not enough trucks to deliver the fuel. They took what they thought was abandoned equipment (of which the military produces a lot) and made do, got the mission accomplished, then promptly got court-marshalled for theft of US Army property. Observe what you get when you have even 3 eye-witnesses to an accident, and you'll recieve 10 different stories on what happened.

Now roll it all back 50 years... to a time when having one guy with a backpack radio was considered a high-tech platoon, and messages got relayed slowly, with very little communication between the branches outside of war-time, and each branch has to play the "telephone gossip game" where the story changes with each person who is informed. By the time you reach the end of each branch, the story has become aliens, no, weather balloons, no, experimental aircraft, no, the Russians!

It's easy to see how different stories came up from the branches and military intelligence, and probably took a long time to sort out what actually happened. And what actually happened was probably classified highly enough that those who were allowed to speak on it were just told to handle it. And so the press was given whatever story they managed to piece together.

In the end, did anyone lie? Or simply withold the truth? Or was it such a confused jumbled mess of an experiment that whoever was responsible got canned and the Government let it slip into obscurity for 30 years... It's hard to say. But conflicting stories released at different times isn't hard evidence of a cover-up, only for bad communication channels.


Originally posted by Cade
Trust people you know to be trust worthy, not because they hold a rank. How many individuals of authority has been caught steeling, lying, killing?


Quite a few, throughout history, from the ancient Babylonians to the present day Superpowers. At times it was considered wrong, at other times it was considered right. But for every figure of authority that did it, there have been at least a thousand who did the same who were no different than you or I...

I'm not really arguing here, just posing a counter-viewpoint.


You wouldn't think the truth would be so hard to "get straight"...

Why would the truth need collaboration?

Are you saying that the reason the military first came out with the UFO story, then the weather baloon story, then the experimental craft story is because 10 different eyewitnesses can see 10 different things? That what happened in Roswell was simply different depending on which of the "witnesses" you would ask? So now we can choose, lies or incompetence.

This explanation could also be used on the 2001 pentagon attack, it was a missile, no an airplane, no......

You say they were told to "handle" the press because it was classified, so you do agree with me?
Or is it only "bad information channels"? So this means that when something crashes, because of bad information channels, we might have to wait 30 years before the military itself knows what crashed?

What is more angst provoking, the "bad information channels" explanation or the "lies" explanation?

I don't know when it has ever been considered "right" for anyone, authority or not, to steal, lie or kill?

I appreciate your counter viewpoints, but do they offer a more realistic explanation? a more becalming explanation? Or do they simply explain away the dreadful thought that our authorities are no more truthful than the person behind the rank?

Lot's of thoughts to ponder...


Sincerly

Cade



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cade
You wouldn't think the truth would be so hard to "get straight"...
Why would the truth need collaboration?


I agree, the truth shouldn't be hard to get straight, but oftentimes it is, because every successive person who relays it will spin it in the direction of their own thoughts on the matter, or perhaps add or drop a detail depending on their listening skills. And as for the truth needing collaboration...well...that's just the way it is in the military. If Private X finds out sensitive detail Y, and he doesn't have the permission to talk to the press about it, or make a judgement call, he has to relay it to Sergeant Z, who then relays it to Captain A, who then relays it to General B, who relays it to Military Intelligence, who then informs Officer C, who appoints Officer D to give the press a statement on the matter.

Most of the time, the lines of communication are not clear, or fast, or efficient (outside of a combat scenario). I'm not saying that this is a good thing or a bad thing, it's just the way it is, and was. So I can see why the truth could become garbled without ever intending to lie.


Originally posted by Cade
Are you saying that the reason the military first came out with the UFO story, then the weather baloon story, then the experimental craft story is because 10 different eyewitnesses can see 10 different things? That what happened in Roswell was simply different depending on which of the "witnesses" you would ask? So now we can choose, lies or incompetence.


I'm saying it's a possibility that something similar to that occurred, in lieu of outright lies. Rather than incompetance, though, I'd say "inefficient communication". Though to be perfectly honest, they could be outright lying through their teeth. I'm just presenting a counterbalance for consideration.


Originally posted by Cade
This explanation could also be used on the 2001 pentagon attack, it was a missile, no an airplane, no......


Bingo! Although I'm inclined to believe it was an airplane.


Originally posted by Cade
You say they were told to "handle" the press because it was classified, so you do agree with me?


I'm neither disagreeing or agreeing. Things can be "handled" without lying, and with lying. If my fiance gets angry at me for something, I can "handle" the situation, using not a single lie.


Originally posted by Cade
Or is it only "bad information channels"? So this means that when something crashes, because of bad information channels, we might have to wait 30 years before the military itself knows what crashed?


Wellll.... yes and no. It really depends on how classified the thing that crashed is. If what crashed was a black project that shouldn't even be possible, then you can bet it'll be many decades before the truth comes out, if it ever comes out. Because while the military is trying to sort out what happened, those in charge of the project will have sent in a Clean Team, scooped up all traces they can manage, and disappear back to wherever it is the project needs to go. Since there is then almost no evidence left to examine, and the eye-witnesses could all give different accounts, the military is left to draw their own conclusions...

If, however, it was non-classified, we'd probably know as much of the truth as the FAA could find out, as they release the details to the press.


Originally posted by Cade
What is more angst provoking, the "bad information channels" explanation or the "lies" explanation?


Personally, the "bad information channels" irritates me more, because it seems unneccesary and inefficient. However, I say that as a civilian who has never served in the military... so it's easy for me to say. There might be a good reason for it. The only comfort I can draw from this is that it slows the military down enough so that it can't make truly horrific decisions on spur of the moment.


Originally posted by Cade
I don't know when it has ever been considered "right" for anyone, authority or not, to steal, lie or kill?


You'd have to be a fan of history to see it, but there are numerous examples where it was not only considered allowable, but heavily encouraged. Now, later on down the line, people decried the actions of those in charge, but during the time it happened, it was considered "right". That's the important difference.


Originally posted by Cade
I appreciate your counter viewpoints, but do they offer a more realistic explanation? a more becalming explanation? Or do they simply explain away the dreadful thought that our authorities are no more truthful than the person behind the rank?


Eh, I've never really considered any authority to be anything greater than a human being. Perhaps they were more qualified for their role, but they are not neccesarily a better person, or more enlightened. So I guess it just doesn't come as all that shocking to me that the authorities are just as capable of incompetance and inefficiency, as they are of lying and conspiracy.



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 12:28 PM
link   
All though I believe there is a good chance that it was a UFO that crashed at Roswell there is no proof at least none in any hands that will admit to it. While there is quite a bit of evidence there is no proof. It is a long strech to say the military is lying, which of course they were, and saying that its proof that a UFO crashed.

While we have MOUNTIANS of evidence that does not amount to PROOF. For that you need a UFO or an Alien (dead or alive) Which IMO the government DOES have but still not open to the public.

As I have said dozens of times, ALL the stories dont have to be true, JUST ONE. There is a hell of a lot more evidence for UFOs then was used to convict Scott Peterson


But alas evidence and proof are not the same, if we had proof we would not even be arguing about it. Does anyone argue about the exsitance of Bears? No. Because we have PROOF of bears, we argue about Bigfoot because we only have evidence.

So to boil this down I would bet that SOME (a very small fraction) of the stories are true and the PROOF is out there we just havent found it.



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 01:32 PM
link   
[edit on 7-12-2004 by PanzerDiv]


Just an example:

Area 51 housed the stealth bomber and fighter...and we know this now. For a fact. So we know for a fact that the base was at least partially used as a high end military aircraft test facility. Now, what we don't know, or have any proof of, is that it was ever used for alien cover-ups or testing.

Thats just one example of many. So I ask you , where is YOUR proof?

[edit on 7-12-2004 by intrepid]

Why couldn't they just take some stuff off of the B-51 and say hey ... look here it is the palne we been working on all this time. ... HAHAHA yeah right it is because there is something else there that is way more important. they just couildn't release any information on it b/c if they did it would cause us the people to want to know everything. They had to keep it where we wouldn't want to know everything but again we would. if they would have said something about aliens for sure there would have been millions just start running for Area 51. Can you imagine millions of people going to one place that the government and every news source knows about. With the right news cove3reage Area 51 would be over. And yes now it is over . When they make a Game about it it is over with . !!! Just for all of you who have no clue.



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Couple of questions for whomever?

Why would the aliens be worried about our reception to them, why the hush hush? Are they concerned about our welfare and thusly not wanting to cause world wide caos with their revelation?

Are the aleins in cohoots with all governments or just ours?

How did they choose with whom to conduct their affairs with?

If the government is aware of aliens, why have we not had a paradigm shift towards good will, or at least an non-millitary stance with our neighbors of this world? Surely we would find aliens more of a threat then say, the middle east or Korea! And surely our military folks in the know would like us to perhaps save some of our military might, should we have a falling out with the ET's. Or perhaps another cold war build up. Or star wars build up.

Why would ET's travel light years to HIDE? Surely were not indicating that light travel for them is a mere hop, skip, and a jump, even as technically advanced as they are. This question is because we spend several millions of dollars to have an american presence in small countries, what must they spend to hover over a planet for who knows how long to gather what, intell, on a more primitive planet.

If their watching us, do you think they couldnt do it without us knowing? I.E. hovering very high over us.

Lastly isnt all the information we have on ET's from the net, or from books? This is important because weather you want to admit it or not we are spoon feed all the info. we get. Nothing you read is unique nor not having the ability to have been tampered with. Everything we read is profread by someone. So im interested as to what one could have read, and by whom, pics too, that would lead one to believe that ET's exist.

I dont think many people realize the magnitude of what it means that people from other planets exist. I would think it would be a celebration not a cover up.

Then agian, the day aliens do visit, I wont go to work ever again!
Why? Won't everyone be trying to get off this rock, or at least let their inhibitions out.

OH THAT MAY BE WHY THE COVER UP. ALL THE BLUE COLLAR WORKERS WILL STOP WORKING!

ps
forgive the grammer and spelling.
ill take a back seat now.



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 03:39 PM
link   
How has this gone on for so many pages?

The initial post was the assumption that the entire UFO phenomenon was concocted by the military to cover for top secret aircraft testing.

Since the phenomenon existed prior to such programs, the base argument is invalid.



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Thank you Gazrok

Can it be locked now?

Pretty please


guess not



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 04:20 PM
link   
but used it just the same. The millitary didnt need to create it. It was already created they just used that already gulliable, empty part of society.

Look for God, not aliens.

Trust me, he's looking for you and a lot easier to find.

Those of you, hoping, wishing, and wanting aliens to exist, have an empty hole to fill.

The bible you so willingly throw out will fill that void.

PS.
What could an alien tell you that would satisfy your need to believe in them so much?

Because frankly none of you have said anything more enlightning than, oh say the Bible, which is just as crediable as all your whitty posts, and fictional, evidence that is most likely fake.

Funny, how it all rests on faith.

Faith in Aliens, what a laugher!!!

Now we can lay this to rest.



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Decided to stop the Quoting confusion


I am not convinced that military comunication is based on chance.
I do to not believe that the military could ever work if they were not able to agree on simle facts.
I cannot see how their chain of command would allow for such counter explanations.

If we create some doubt on the nerve wrecking thought that the military is lying, are we more at ease?

If I post in this forum that I was born in Europe, then years later post I was born in the USA, then years later that I was born Asia. How many of you would call me a lier? Untrustworthy?

What would the motive behind turning a blind eye to the military conducting itself in this way be?

Now, perhaps a sharp minded person will point out that my comparison was a single person (me) against the military (a lot of people, not very good at comunicating)?

But doesn't someone, one person, somewhere stand there at that crash site who saw what it was?

Are we to believe that our highest commander within the military has been unable to find out from his subordinates what happened in the Roswell dessert? No trustworthy report could be made because different soldiers saw different thing when looking at that crash site?

Where is the proof of such a miscomunicated military?


Sincerly

Cade

ps. even if someone miscomunicates, it is still untrue, even if it's not a deliberate lie.



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
All though I believe there is a good chance that it was a UFO that crashed at Roswell there is no proof at least none in any hands that will admit to it. While there is quite a bit of evidence there is no proof. It is a long strech to say the military is lying, which of course they were, and saying that its proof that a UFO crashed.

Yes it's obvious that they have lied, but how could this ever prove which of their explanations is the right one? if indeed any of their explanations is the right one? All we know is that they lied. Who could use statements from liers to support any possible explanation? I agree 100% with what you are saying.



While we have MOUNTIANS of evidence that does not amount to PROOF. For that you need a UFO or an Alien (dead or alive) Which IMO the government DOES have but still not open to the public.

As I have said dozens of times, ALL the stories dont have to be true, JUST ONE. There is a hell of a lot more evidence for UFOs then was used to convict Scott Peterson


Very logical, very true.


But alas evidence and proof are not the same, if we had proof we would not even be arguing about it. Does anyone argue about the exsitance of Bears? No. Because we have PROOF of bears, we argue about Bigfoot because we only have evidence.

I like your the way you have helped us define these two words PROOF and EVIDENCE I believe many of us have thrown these words around not fully understanding their real meaning. Let's all start reminding others of the true meaning of these words...as they are used a lot in any forum about aliens




So to boil this down I would bet that SOME (a very small fraction) of the stories are true and the PROOF is out there we just havent found it.


Well, I think there is a lot of proof. But just like the guy in the bible who would not believe that Jesus had risen from the dead untill he saw the holes in his hands, different people require different levels of proof. Remember, many still believe in the "magic bullet theory" from the warren comission, while some of us requires a little more proof in the case of who killed JFK.

They are here, they are real...the rest is just a matter of time.


Sincerly

Cade



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by CrossBone

Look for God, not aliens.

Trust me, he's looking for you and a lot easier to find.

Those of you, hoping, wishing, and wanting aliens to exist, have an empty hole to fill.

The bible you so willingly throw out will fill that void.


Prove it.



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cade

They are here, they are real...the rest is just a matter of time.


Sincerly

Cade


I agree 100% on this, but there is still that proof thing. There is an excellent show on Sci-Fi channel about a group combing the Debris Sight outside Roswell that I am watching right now, THIS is what we need more of, is the scientific method being used to back up the evidence with proof.

Like you said the two words seem to be interchangable in some arguements but they are not the same. I strongly believe that they are Aliens out there and think there is a good bet that Roswell MAY be the "Smoking Gun" and have seen a BUNCH of evidence that points to it. But to date I have seen no proof. I believe its there we just havent found it yet

[edit on 21-12-2004 by Amuk]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join