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.
originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: CardDown
No one is forcing you to accept any video as evidence of anything, try to remain calm. All I'm saying is that, for a genuinely open-minded person, his story is plausible. He doesn't necessarily have to drive me out there and introduce me to living ETs. If his tale is as absurd as you claim, there shouldn't be the need for so many, absent an antidisclosure agenda, to press so hard to assure nobody believes a word of it.
originally posted by: AgentShillington
a reply to: UnderKingsPeak
That opinion has little basis in reality, but it does point squarely to what the article is about. Usually, the veracity of the debunkers is in direct proportion to how zealous the adherents are.
Internal Objectivism is lost on believers because they believe. Once you believe in something, you lose objectivity.
]Your assumptions about what I may or may not have witnessed isn't the point of the thread, and I would kindly ask you to keep those assumptions to yourself when not applicable.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: AgentShillington
]Your assumptions about what I may or may not have witnessed isn't the point of the thread, and I would kindly ask you to keep those assumptions to yourself when not applicable.
But you assume everyone is mistaken, prankin', or subject to delusion. I know that from our pervious discussion. So my comments stand.
So others see I have to stand up and be counted as contrary. Don't get me wrong either, i debunk here al the time. I am also looking for truth. You have your mind made up. Theres a difference.
originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: sheepslayer247
Yes, I would expect someone to make a duplicate/toy of the alien in the photograph for the purposes of debunkery. The problem is that people aren't all grotesquely stupid so as to be fooled by that. Apologies.
OBVIOUSLY the government made those dolls AFTER they met the aliens. Make a toy from the image of an alien, thus discrediting anyone who ever posts any pictures of the real aliens. It’s so obvious.
originally posted by: sheepslayer247
originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: sheepslayer247
Yes, I would expect someone to make a duplicate/toy of the alien in the photograph for the purposes of debunkery. The problem is that people aren't all grotesquely stupid so as to be fooled by that. Apologies.
Wait a second here. Do you realize how illogical and loony that is? It's funny because at my source they quote someone from another site that said almost the exact same thing.
OBVIOUSLY the government made those dolls AFTER they met the aliens. Make a toy from the image of an alien, thus discrediting anyone who ever posts any pictures of the real aliens. It’s so obvious.
When does common sense come in to the picture here? It is much more likely that this guy took pictures of an alien doll than it is that it was a real alien.....and someone quickly made a doll in it's image and got them on the shelves at Walmart.
a reply to: liteonit6969
Sure...it was made after just to discredit this guy. Please. It's the same doll in the pics and this is just crackpottery.
I do have to add that my source said it was sold in walmart, and another sates that the doll in the pictures was actually purchased at a kmart in 1997. Either way, I find that to be much more logical than what you or others have posited.
It is that sort of approach displayed here that has killed Ufology and exactly what the OP's source was describing.
originally posted by: sheepslayer247
a reply to: draknoir2
Interesting. Do you have a link to the thread post and/or image?
originally posted by: liteonit6969
a reply to: AgentShillington
No, what i am suggesting is the empirical research that you advocate has not worked and thus does not work. This same tech you want to use to research may appear to them as the those prophets appear to us.
What i suggest is to stop looking down on those who are in touch with their spiritual side as offering nothing on the subject when your own ideas have offered nothing but doubt and ultimately looking to blame someone else for their failures.
When pointed out that chris ratkowski has so much experience and head ufology groups etc for many years would this not answer his question? Maybe his kind of research which have gained so little rewards is the wrong approach and he is finally seeing this?
originally posted by: AgentShillington
a reply to: liteonit6969
What you are suggesting as a viable alternative to empirical research is directly analogous to the Prophetic religions of Abraham.
Answer this, if you would.
Advanced being talks to only a few and their information cannot be verified and must be trusted. Am I talking about a thousands of years old religion, or modern day UFOlogy believers?