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.

 

Is there an organized effort to undermine the Aliens and UFOs forum?

page: 36
94
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Paperjacket

“The straight line, a respectable optical illusion which ruins many a man.”
― Victor Hugo




posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Paperjacket

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: Paperjacket
a reply to: draknoir2

Anyway it deserves good explanation.


Picture is worth a thousand words, PJ.


Next lesson involves perfect circles and a rope.


even a 200 meter diameter crop circle is not comparable with a nine mile straight line at all.


There is no limit to the distance one can walk straight ahead.

Seriously poor choice for proof of Alien influence. The second simplest of things to make, the first being a point.
edit on 23-1-2015 by draknoir2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: EnPassant

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: EnPassant
a reply to: Tangerine
It is not about proof it is about evaluating the evidence.


Can you give us some of the evidence that, when evaluated, leads to the ETH rather than, say, interdimensional beings or faeries as the cause?


Some argue that the faeries myth comes from early abductions - there are remarkable similarities, such as stealing babies etc.


That's not an answer to my question. My question concerns evidence not speculation.


Again, evidence proves nothing. It is neutral. It is the interpretation of the evidence that matters. There is a mountain of evidence pertaining to the ufo phenomenon and it is the interpretation that leads to the ETH. If you find flaws in this interpretation tell us what they are but don't speculate on faeries or what COULD be. Try to focus on what is the most coherent interpretation of the evidence.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: DelMarvel

Hypnosis is not a royal road to truth but themes emerge from hypnosis that should not be ignored. For example, at the beginning themes about sexual encounters with beings and military elements emerged - to the surprise of the investigators. Initially these reports were left out of books and were not published. But abductees kept reporting these things until they could be ignored no longer. It was only then that they were published. What is that telling you?
edit on 23-1-2015 by EnPassant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: Paperjacket

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: Paperjacket
a reply to: draknoir2

Anyway it deserves good explanation.


Picture is worth a thousand words, PJ.


Next lesson involves perfect circles and a rope.


even a 200 meter diameter crop circle is not comparable with a nine mile straight line at all.


There is no limit to the distance one can walk straight ahead.

Seriously poor choice for proof of Alien influence. The second simplest of things to make, the first being a point.


You can try 50 meters but make sure it is straight before you come to the conclusion "There is no limit to the distance one can walk straight ahead."

As simple as they are, lines are used because they are the best choice. The lines themselves have nothing to do with proof of extraterrestrials while what the lines stand for does.




posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: EnPassant

Again, evidence proves nothing. It is neutral. It is the interpretation of the evidence that matters. There is a mountain of evidence pertaining to the ufo phenomenon and it is the interpretation that leads to the ETH. If you find flaws in this interpretation tell us what they are but don't speculate on faeries or what COULD be. Try to focus on what is the most coherent interpretation of the evidence.

What also matters is what you consider evidence. Asserting a mountain of evidence exists that can only be interpreted as ET doesn't mean a whole lot to people. The only evidence for this "mountain" is the repeated assertion that it exists. So First thing is to define what you mean by this "mountain of evidence" and where I can find it to look at it objectively. In other words, it must be quantified. You tube videos, hoaxed photos, random unverified quotations, alien abductions reported while under hypnosis, etc.., will not be accepted.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: EnPassant

Show me your best UFO story wich requires ET to work, please.

I am so tired of witness testimony and lights in the sky.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: EnPassant

Hypnosis is not a royal road to truth but themes emerge from hypnosis that should not be ignored. For example, at the beginning themes about sexual encounters with beings and military elements emerged - to the surprise of the investigators. Initially these reports were left out of books and were not published. But abductees kept reporting these things until they could be ignored no longer. It was only then that they were published.

Any "evidence" obtained from people while under hypnosis is totally unreliable and can be discarded.


What is that telling you?

That books about sexual encounters with aliens sell and that people are willing to believe things without questioning their source. Honestly, can you provide a source for anything? Just stating that its somewhere in a book by Jenny Randles doesn't really count.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: EnPassant
a reply to: DelMarvel

Hypnosis is not a royal road to truth but themes emerge from hypnosis that should not be ignored. For example, at the beginning themes about sexual encounters with beings and military elements emerged - to the surprise of the investigators. Initially these reports were left out of books and were not published. But abductees kept reporting these things until they could be ignored no longer. It was only then that they were published. What is that telling you?


It tells me exactly what I said before: researchers and authors often ignore experiencer reports that don't match their narrative.

Also, I'm not sure what you're talking about when you say "military elements" in reports surprised investigators. Which investigators? Well known theories about the alleged involvement of the military with UFOs go back at least to Keyhoe in the fifties if not earlier. It's hardly surprising that such reports would emerge under hypnosis.

By the way, I'm curious if you've read what Vallee has said about hypnotic regression of witnesses.
edit on 23-1-2015 by DelMarvel because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-1-2015 by DelMarvel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Paperjacket


That looks like someone used a ruler to draw straight lines and not a real representation of "straight" lines drawn by ancient aliens. If you provide me a giant ruler with giant purple and green markers and a giant white sheet of paper...



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Paperjacket

The Nazca lines were drawn to get the attention of the gods etc that primitive man created to explain things they did not understand YES MAN created god it happened all over the planet!!!

As for straight lines over vast distances NO PROBLEM!


SETTING OUT STRAIGHT LINES
edit on 23-1-2015 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: EnPassant

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: EnPassant

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: EnPassant
a reply to: Tangerine
It is not about proof it is about evaluating the evidence.


Can you give us some of the evidence that, when evaluated, leads to the ETH rather than, say, interdimensional beings or faeries as the cause?


Some argue that the faeries myth comes from early abductions - there are remarkable similarities, such as stealing babies etc.


That's not an answer to my question. My question concerns evidence not speculation.


Again, evidence proves nothing. It is neutral. It is the interpretation of the evidence that matters. There is a mountain of evidence pertaining to the ufo phenomenon and it is the interpretation that leads to the ETH. If you find flaws in this interpretation tell us what they are but don't speculate on faeries or what COULD be. Try to focus on what is the most coherent interpretation of the evidence.


A mountain of evidence, yet you are unable to cite any of it. Hm. You are also unable to explain how you interpret this mountain of evidence and why it is the most coherent interpretation of this evidence. Hm.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: EnPassant
a reply to: DelMarvel

Hypnosis is not a royal road to truth but themes emerge from hypnosis that should not be ignored. For example, at the beginning themes about sexual encounters with beings and military elements emerged - to the surprise of the investigators. Initially these reports were left out of books and were not published. But abductees kept reporting these things until they could be ignored no longer. It was only then that they were published. What is that telling you?


It tells me that you think this is true. Nothing more.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: EnPassant

Again, evidence proves nothing. It is neutral. It is the interpretation of the evidence that matters. There is a mountain of evidence pertaining to the ufo phenomenon and it is the interpretation that leads to the ETH. If you find flaws in this interpretation tell us what they are but don't speculate on faeries or what COULD be. Try to focus on what is the most coherent interpretation of the evidence.

What also matters is what you consider evidence. Asserting a mountain of evidence exists that can only be interpreted as ET doesn't mean a whole lot to people. The only evidence for this "mountain" is the repeated assertion that it exists. So First thing is to define what you mean by this "mountain of evidence" and where I can find it to look at it objectively. In other words, it must be quantified. You tube videos, hoaxed photos, random unverified quotations, alien abductions reported while under hypnosis, etc.., will not be accepted.



I don't know about you, but I'm not clearing my calendar in anticipation of being presented with a mountain of evidence to examine.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: moebius
a reply to: EnPassant

Show me your best UFO story wich requires ET to work, please.

I am so tired of witness testimony and lights in the sky.


Right to the point. Well said.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

i guess i cant say 100% its not from around here, but i think some one who has alittle common sense and does there due dilagiance with research in to the subject and has a passion for normal aviation should be able to tell normal, exotic, or even unexplainable flight characteristics

but like i said i believe, sceptically

alittle mystery is never a bad thing

edit on 23-1-2015 by penroc3 because: sp



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 10:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: penroc3
a reply to: Tangerine

i guess i cant say 100% its not from around here, but i think some one who has alittle common sense and does there due dilagiance with research in to the subject and has a passion for normal aviation should be able to tell normal, exotic, or even unexplainable flight characteristics

but like i said i believe, sceptically

alittle mystery is never a bad thing


I think there's a big difference between concluding that something is unlikely to known aircraft and concluding that it is of extraterrestrial origin. There are other options: secret military craft, natural phenomena, multi-dimensional origin, optical illusions, delusions, temporal lobe epilepsy, artifacts of the collective unconscious, paranormal events, etc.. The reason I think extraterrestrial origin is the least likely explanation is because it would be entirely physical and leave physical evidence. The ET thing has been pursued for almost 70 years with no real evidence. I agree that a little mystery is never a bad thing. In fact, I think it's better than conclusions reached without conclusive evidence.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 10:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: duaneology
I'm new here so please correct me if I'm way off base. I just seem to notice an active effort by a number of ATS posters to discredit and belittle anything and everything posted here along with this sections regular contributors.

I'm not going to link them and give the agitators more attention but I've seen it in the Stanton Friedman thread and many others. Not only here but all throughout ATS I read disparaging remarks about this forum and those who post here.

It makes me feel like an attempt is being made to have the topic viewed as fringe and flaky as possible.

Your thoughts?


Yes.

STM



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 10:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

i think were in the same boat. i never said it was aliens just something not normal(secret military craft, natural phenomena, multi-dimensional origin, optical illusions, delusions, temporal lobe epilepsy, artifacts of the collective unconscious, paranormal events)

hopefully if it is et they will get out and say hi on t.v one day and short of me seeing one in the flesh i would still be sceptical



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: seentoomuch

originally posted by: duaneology
I'm new here so please correct me if I'm way off base. I just seem to notice an active effort by a number of ATS posters to discredit and belittle anything and everything posted here along with this sections regular contributors.

I'm not going to link them and give the agitators more attention but I've seen it in the Stanton Friedman thread and many others. Not only here but all throughout ATS I read disparaging remarks about this forum and those who post here.

It makes me feel like an attempt is being made to have the topic viewed as fringe and flaky as possible.

Your thoughts?


Yes.

STM


I don't know that the topic is fringe but if you've ever attended a UFO conference or other event you will be hard-pressed to conclude that many of the people interested in the topic aren't flakes. That's not to say that all are. What, specifically, did you see in the Stanton Friedman thread that led you to conclude that the topic is viewed as fringe and flaky?

I'm not sure whether you regard those who make claims of fact about the topic without any supporting evidence to be the flakes or whether you regard those who demand evidence to back up claims of fact about the topic to be flakes. Could you clarify?




top topics



 
94
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join