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.

 

Military Disclosure Of The Factual Truth Of ETs

page: 5
25
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: Tangerine

The title of the report was "UFO's and Defense, what we must be prepared for?"

The conclusion of the report was 5% - 10% of all UFO's were truly unexplained by any phenomenon on earth, and given that these were top scientists and military officials they were aware of many possible explanations the layperson was not aware of.

NO EARTHLY EXPLANATIONS.

So give me an explanation that doesn't involve the above.

If you can't, that just means you are incapable of making a logical inference.





So, 5-10% of all unidentified flying objects remain unidentified. UNIDENTIFIED does not mean extraterrestrial. It means UNIDENTIFIED. Now explain to me, please, how jumping from unidentified to extraterrestrial while skipping over testable evidence proving extraterrestrial origin is logical.


Maybe the title of their report gave me a clue.

Again, here it is "UFO'S AND DEFENSE, WHAT MUST WE BE PREPARED FOR" ?

Do you think they would use words like "what must we be prepared for" if they thought they were looking at space junk? They would use those words for swamp gas, temperature inversions? But they ruled all of those out, didn't they?

So, you refuse or can't answer my question?

They ruled out any EARLTHLY explanations.

I'm waiting for your take on the truly unidentifiable 5% - 10% of all UFO sightings.

Here is a link again for those that missed it, the explosive COMETA report published by high ranking military, scientific and governmental officials in Europe:

COMETA report on UFO's
edit on 7-2-2015 by PlanetXisHERE because: addition




posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: Tangerine

The title of the report was "UFO's and Defense, what we must be prepared for?"

The conclusion of the report was 5% - 10% of all UFO's were truly unexplained by any phenomenon on earth, and given that these were top scientists and military officials they were aware of many possible explanations the layperson was not aware of.

NO EARTHLY EXPLANATIONS.

So give me an explanation that doesn't involve the above.

If you can't, that just means you are incapable of making a logical inference.





So, 5-10% of all unidentified flying objects remain unidentified. UNIDENTIFIED does not mean extraterrestrial. It means UNIDENTIFIED. Now explain to me, please, how jumping from unidentified to extraterrestrial while skipping over testable evidence proving extraterrestrial origin is logical.


Maybe the title of their report gave me a clue.

Again, here it is "UFO'S AND DEFENSE, WHAT MUST WE BE PREPARED FOR" ?

Do you think they would use words like "what must we be prepared for" if they thought they were looking at space junk? They would use those words for swamp gas, temperature inversions? But they ruled all of those out, didn't they?

So, you refuse or can't answer my question?

They ruled out any EARLTHLY explanations.

I'm waiting for your take on the truly unidentifiable 5% - 10% of all UFO sightings.

Here is a link again for those that missed it, the explosive COMETA report published by high ranking military, scientific and governmental officials in Europe:

COMETA report on UFO's


How could they possibly rule out earthly explanations when they're talking about UNIDENTIFIED flying objects? Do you understand that is is impossible to prove a negative.



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: Tangerine

The title of the report was "UFO's and Defense, what we must be prepared for?"

The conclusion of the report was 5% - 10% of all UFO's were truly unexplained by any phenomenon on earth, and given that these were top scientists and military officials they were aware of many possible explanations the layperson was not aware of.

NO EARTHLY EXPLANATIONS.

So give me an explanation that doesn't involve the above.

If you can't, that just means you are incapable of making a logical inference.





So, 5-10% of all unidentified flying objects remain unidentified. UNIDENTIFIED does not mean extraterrestrial. It means UNIDENTIFIED. Now explain to me, please, how jumping from unidentified to extraterrestrial while skipping over testable evidence proving extraterrestrial origin is logical.


Maybe the title of their report gave me a clue.

Again, here it is "UFO'S AND DEFENSE, WHAT MUST WE BE PREPARED FOR" ?

Do you think they would use words like "what must we be prepared for" if they thought they were looking at space junk? They would use those words for swamp gas, temperature inversions? But they ruled all of those out, didn't they?

So, you refuse or can't answer my question?

They ruled out any EARLTHLY explanations.

I'm waiting for your take on the truly unidentifiable 5% - 10% of all UFO sightings.

Here is a link again for those that missed it, the explosive COMETA report published by high ranking military, scientific and governmental officials in Europe:

COMETA report on UFO's


How could they possibly rule out earthly explanations when they're talking about UNIDENTIFIED flying objects? Do you understand that is is impossible to prove a negative.



Why are you trying to twist the rules of logic? People use logical inferences everyday in their lives, they are accepted in all walks of life, scientific, judicial, educational.......etc.

Anyway, it is not just me saying it, it is the high ranking officials in the COMETA report:


Certainly, this subject still sometimes elicits amused skepticism, if not a certain mistrust with regard to those who mention it seriously, but in the absence of explanations for the phenomena sighted, the hypothesis of an extraterrestrial origin can no longer be ruled out.


Source

So I'm curious as to why these high ranking, respected, credible officials are willing to consider the extra-terrestrial hypothesis, yet you are not?



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

Did I say that what they're saying isn't true? no.
we have no evidence to either support or debunk their claims, so I guess we can assume they at least believe in what they're saying, and that alone should guarantee further investigation.


Try not to let your emotions get the best of you bro, I mean the best for everyone, and think we are all one on some level or another, so I have no hate commin from my end.
I looked at your post and didnt see it reflect anything but distaste for Greer, when he isnt even the one doing the Disclosure in the videos. He may be there but its not about him, I would at least expect people to comment on the material the military is talking about if they are going to comment.

When having a discussion on military disclosure and no one mentions what the military is disclosing it takes away from a informative conversation.

Sure many may dislike Greer but hes not the main one speaking in the videos, however most of the comments are about him, rather than the content of the disclosures of the military persons.


well. that's what happens when Greer is involved. lesson learned, I think?

also, I'm not even sure about Greer. those interviews could be the turning point I guess, but I'm not familiar enough with his history to be sure. did he cross the line and then decided to became a fraud to save his life? possible. did he think that as a public figure he'll be untouchable, then got blackmailed and had to destroy his own reputation? not that far fetched.

or he was working for the black ops all the time, they new people are willing to come out and say things, so they gave them Greer, then he ruined his reputation on purpose, in an attempt to discredit those he was working with.

you think it doesn't matter? look at any thread on ATS where Greer is involved. I think establishing his true agenda and what really was happening around him, is as important as the message of those people.

I don't think it's likely that Greer is just some regular fraud. and what alternatives do we have? either he's on the dark side from the very beginning or he was forced to discredit himself. both scenarios add to the credibility of those witnesses.

and btw, you didn't provide any detailed summary of those videos - all you did write was a quote on tactical stupidity, you paste a bunch of videos with Greer visible, and you expect people to watch them all, not even respecting the fact that some may lack the bandwidth and/or time to do so. that's hot how threads roll here. of course it's bad that people are against anything Greer-related without analysing stuff themselves, but acting like you've found a holy grail and looking down at everyone else as a fool will really get you nowhere.



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: Tangerine

The title of the report was "UFO's and Defense, what we must be prepared for?"

The conclusion of the report was 5% - 10% of all UFO's were truly unexplained by any phenomenon on earth, and given that these were top scientists and military officials they were aware of many possible explanations the layperson was not aware of.

NO EARTHLY EXPLANATIONS.

So give me an explanation that doesn't involve the above.

If you can't, that just means you are incapable of making a logical inference.





So, 5-10% of all unidentified flying objects remain unidentified. UNIDENTIFIED does not mean extraterrestrial. It means UNIDENTIFIED. Now explain to me, please, how jumping from unidentified to extraterrestrial while skipping over testable evidence proving extraterrestrial origin is logical.


Maybe the title of their report gave me a clue.

Again, here it is "UFO'S AND DEFENSE, WHAT MUST WE BE PREPARED FOR" ?

Do you think they would use words like "what must we be prepared for" if they thought they were looking at space junk? They would use those words for swamp gas, temperature inversions? But they ruled all of those out, didn't they?

So, you refuse or can't answer my question?

They ruled out any EARLTHLY explanations.

I'm waiting for your take on the truly unidentifiable 5% - 10% of all UFO sightings.

Here is a link again for those that missed it, the explosive COMETA report published by high ranking military, scientific and governmental officials in Europe:

COMETA report on UFO's


How could they possibly rule out earthly explanations when they're talking about UNIDENTIFIED flying objects? Do you understand that is is impossible to prove a negative.



Why are you trying to twist the rules of logic? People use logical inferences everyday in their lives, they are accepted in all walks of life, scientific, judicial, educational.......etc.

Anyway, it is not just me saying it, it is the high ranking officials in the COMETA report:


Certainly, this subject still sometimes elicits amused skepticism, if not a certain mistrust with regard to those who mention it seriously, but in the absence of explanations for the phenomena sighted, the hypothesis of an extraterrestrial origin can no longer be ruled out.


Source

So I'm curious as to why these high ranking, respected, credible officials are willing to consider the extra-terrestrial hypothesis, yet you are not?[/quote
-------------



I must have missed the logical part in the inference.

In science, testable evidence is used to determine fact. It often doesn't produce results that are implied and inferred by expectations or desires. That's exactly why testable evidence is relied upon.

Can you be specific about which high-ranking, respected, credible officials? For example, the person who has repeatedly been referred to as the Minister of National Defence is not. Respected? That's a matter of opinion. Credible? That's also a matter of opinion.

I didn't notice that they were "willing to consider the extra-terrestrial hypothesis". It seemed to me that they reached the conclusion that ETs exist and visit earth. That's vastly different. I am willing to consider the possibility that ET's exist and have visited earth. However, I have yet to see any testable evidence proving it. Considering that 70 years of "research" hasn't produced any testable evidence, I think it makes sense to look at other possibilities without discarding that one.
edit on 7-2-2015 by Tangerine because: ....separates my answer from the previous poster's comments



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: jedi_hamster

I agree with your post. I have to wonder if the people who post these videos actually watch them. One of the people in one of the videos has repeatedly been referred to by the OP as the Minister of National Defence (Canada). He's not. I don't think there are any active military personnel in the video yet there are repeated references in these posts to military disclosures.



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 09:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: Tangerine


originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE


originally posted by: Tangerine


originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

a reply to: Tangerine



The title of the report was "UFO's and Defense, what we must be prepared for?"



The conclusion of the report was 5% - 10% of all UFO's were truly unexplained by any phenomenon on earth, and given that these were top scientists and military officials they were aware of many possible explanations the layperson was not aware of.



NO EARTHLY EXPLANATIONS.



So give me an explanation that doesn't involve the above.



If you can't, that just means you are incapable of making a logical inference.











So, 5-10% of all unidentified flying objects remain unidentified. UNIDENTIFIED does not mean extraterrestrial. It means UNIDENTIFIED. Now explain to me, please, how jumping from unidentified to extraterrestrial while skipping over testable evidence proving extraterrestrial origin is logical.




Maybe the title of their report gave me a clue.



Again, here it is "UFO'S AND DEFENSE, WHAT MUST WE BE PREPARED FOR" ?



Do you think they would use words like "what must we be prepared for" if they thought they were looking at space junk? They would use those words for swamp gas, temperature inversions? But they ruled all of those out, didn't they?



So, you refuse or can't answer my question?



They ruled out any EARLTHLY explanations.



I'm waiting for your take on the truly unidentifiable 5% - 10% of all UFO sightings.



Here is a link again for those that missed it, the explosive COMETA report published by high ranking military, scientific and governmental officials in Europe:



COMETA report on UFO's




How could they possibly rule out earthly explanations when they're talking about UNIDENTIFIED flying objects? Do you understand that is is impossible to prove a negative.







Why are you trying to twist the rules of logic? People use logical inferences everyday in their lives, they are accepted in all walks of life, scientific, judicial, educational.......etc.



Anyway, it is not just me saying it, it is the high ranking officials in the COMETA report:




Certainly, this subject still sometimes elicits amused skepticism, if not a certain mistrust with regard to those who mention it seriously, but in the absence of explanations for the phenomena sighted, the hypothesis of an extraterrestrial origin can no longer be ruled out.




Source



So I'm curious as to why these high ranking, respected, credible officials are willing to consider the extra-terrestrial hypothesis, yet you are not?


They dont look or listen to the military testamony which doesnt fit into thier candy coated reality.
Which is why they have nothing to add to the conversation, they have no idea what is even discussed in the videos, its pretty evident.



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Double post. See below.

edit on 2/7/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

Correct. Paul Hellyer is not the current Canadian Minister of Defence. He was Minister of Defence in the early-to-mid 1960s.

As I mentioned in a post above, Paul Hellyer has repeated said that his beliefs in alien visitation is a personal belief, and not due to any kind of secret information about aliens that he was privy to during his time in office. He has said that his beliefs are based for the most part on the same information that the rest of us have access to -- except for one conversation that he had with a former U.S. General in which the general provided some second-hand information about UFOs and aliens.

However, Hellyer never learned any "smoking gun" information while he was Defence Minister. He is simply a man similar to many people here on ATS who simply happens to have a belief in alien visitation.


edit on 2/7/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 10:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
a reply to: Tangerine

Correct. Paul Hellyer is not the current Canadian Minister of Defence. He was Minister of Defence in the early-to-mid 1960s.

As I mentioned in a post above, Paul Hellyer has repeated said that his beliefs in alien visitation is a personal belief, and not due to any kind of secret information about aliens that he was privy to during his time in office. He has said that his beliefs are based for the most part on the same information that the rest of us have access to -- except for one conversation that he had with a former U.S. General in which the general provided some second-hand information about UFOs and aliens.

However, Hellyer never learned any "smoking gun" information while he was Defence Minister.



Correct, but as you know, the OP has consistently referred to him as the Canadian Minister of Defence (implying that he is currently holding that position rather than having held that position 55 years ago) and the OP has consistently insisted that the military disclosed facts about ETs in the video: none of which is accurate. It's this sort of deception that needs to be vigorously countered otherwise ATS becomes nothing more than a forum for "Who Can Tell the Biggest Whopper" contest.



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

a reply to: Tangerine



Correct. Paul Hellyer is not the current Canadian Minister of Defence. He was Minister of Defence in the early-to-mid 1960s.



As I mentioned in a post above, Paul Hellyer has repeated said that his beliefs in alien visitation is a personal belief, and not due to any kind of secret information about aliens that he was privy to during his time in office. He has said that his beliefs are based for the most part on the same information that the rest of us have access to -- except for one conversation that he had with a former U.S. General in which the general provided some second-hand information about UFOs and aliens.



However, Hellyer never learned any "smoking gun" information while he was Defence Minister.







Correct, but as you know, the OP has consistently referred to him as the Canadian Minister of Defence (implying that he is currently holding that position rather than having held that position 55 years ago) and the OP has consistently insisted that the military disclosed facts about ETs in the video: none of which is accurate. It's this sort of deception that needs to be vigorously countered otherwise ATS becomes nothing more than a forum for "Who Can Tell the Biggest Whopper" contest.


Heres a big whopper you most likley havent watched the videos your talking about because you havent talked about what they are disclosing at all.



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

They have "disclosed" that they believe ET is visiting Earth.
So what? You've disclosed that too. A belief is not necessarily a fact.
edit on 2/7/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

a reply to: Tangerine



Correct. Paul Hellyer is not the current Canadian Minister of Defence. He was Minister of Defence in the early-to-mid 1960s.



As I mentioned in a post above, Paul Hellyer has repeated said that his beliefs in alien visitation is a personal belief, and not due to any kind of secret information about aliens that he was privy to during his time in office. He has said that his beliefs are based for the most part on the same information that the rest of us have access to -- except for one conversation that he had with a former U.S. General in which the general provided some second-hand information about UFOs and aliens.



However, Hellyer never learned any "smoking gun" information while he was Defence Minister.







Correct, but as you know, the OP has consistently referred to him as the Canadian Minister of Defence (implying that he is currently holding that position rather than having held that position 55 years ago) and the OP has consistently insisted that the military disclosed facts about ETs in the video: none of which is accurate. It's this sort of deception that needs to be vigorously countered otherwise ATS becomes nothing more than a forum for "Who Can Tell the Biggest Whopper" contest.


Heres a big whopper you most likley havent watched the videos your talking about because you havent talked about what they are disclosing at all.


They? Who are THEY? The military? Really? Which military personnel revealed something in the video?

What testable evidence was revealed? I didn't notice that any testable evidence was revealed. You watched it also, I presume, so you tell me which military personnel (names and ranks) revealed what specific testable evidence proving that extraterrestrials exist and have visited earth.



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 10:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

They have "disclosed" that they believe ET is visiting Earth.
So what? You've disclosed that too. A belief is not necessarily a fact.


Amen. And THEY aren't the military.
edit on 7-2-2015 by Tangerine because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 01:11 AM
link   


They? Who are THEY? The military? Really? Which military personnel revealed something in the video?

Haha you just proved me right orange guy, if your asking what military then you havent watched the videos like I said.
Classic posting on a thread without educating yourself on the topic being discussed.
Cmon you can do better than this cant you?

edit on 8-2-2015 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-2-2015 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 04:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agnost
What do you think of the testimony of John Callahan, the FAA Division Chief of the Accidents and Investigations Branch, regarding the 1986 JAL Alaska UFO incident? Credible?


originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
Good stuff, like I said earlier theres evidence everywhere if we only open our minds and eyes to it.

Hi Form,

I ask because:
"According to Callahan, the officials (representatives of the FBI, CIA and President Reagan’s Scientific Study Team, among others) considered the data to represent the first instance of recorded radar data on a UFO."
Source: wikipedia (I also remember seeing a video with him stating this)

So, if Calahan's statement is credible, then the others aren't, are they?

Not dismissing anything here, just pointing out something.
Regards.


edit on 8-2-2015 by Agnost because: removed sth



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 07:26 AM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord




just cover thier eyes and speak nothing of the topic which is being presented.


Is that like you dismissing that you speak falsely about Paul Hellyer.

Here,




The Canadian Defence Minister talks about the different types of alien races, thats important at least we know what ETs are working with the US government, and most likely working with other countries as well.


I assume you are talking about Hellyer,

When was he defense minister?

He is not one now, he was a former defense minister in these videos, which have been discussed and scrutinized many times at ATS.

Is what he says in these videos his opinion based on no first hand knowledge or is it? Is it his opinion or he saying it as fact?

Its an easy question which most know the answer to, however I think the answer doesn't mean squat to you because research for so many that are as readable as you do their research via YouTube or other video sites that post PROOF ALIENS ARE HERE vidoes





Apollo 14 astronaut Dr Edgar Mitchell also claims we have have had contact with ETs for over 60 years and have been keeping the truth from the public.



Yes even astronauts can make claims, are his first hand or again are they his opinion based on hearsay?
edit on 8-2-2015 by InhaleExhale because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 07:26 AM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE





The conclusion of the report was 5% - 10% of all UFO's were truly unexplained by any phenomenon on earth, and given that these were top scientists and military officials they were aware of many possible explanations the layperson was not aware of.

NO EARTHLY EXPLANATIONS.


Buy "any" or 'any known' phenomena?

Or are you going to contradict the idea that there might still be things to learn and explore about our own planet ?




So give me an explanation that doesn't involve the above.

If you can't, that just means you are incapable of making a logical inference.



It could be Extra terrestrial, it could also be unknown earthly phenomena or unknown to the officials and scientists that their allies or enemies have such technology.




If you can't, that just means you are incapable of making a logical inference.


Thinking it means its ET only or proof of ET lacks any logic what so ever.





Maybe the title of their report gave me a clue.

Again, here it is "UFO'S AND DEFENSE, WHAT MUST WE BE PREPARED FOR" ?

Do you think they would use words like "what must we be prepared for" if they thought they were looking at space junk? They would use those words for swamp gas, temperature inversions? But they ruled all of those out, didn't they?

So, you refuse or can't answer my question?

They ruled out any EARLTHLY explanations.



Any known earthly explanations at the time of the report, What do you think what you keep saying means, that its evidence of ET?

I guess time will tell, hopefully sooner than later because the ignorance is getting quite bad and if later too many minds will fail to grasp the answers and keep it together.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 07:32 AM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord




Haha you just proved me right orange guy, if your asking what military then you havent watched the videos like I said.
Classic posting on a thread without educating yourself on the topic being discussed.
Cmon you can do better than this cant you?




So i guess that is all you do is watch videos?

Do you do any research into the subjects you want other believe like you do?

Who is a current serving person giving anything first hand other than what they believe, similar to what you do here on ATS?

Talk a lot but never really say anything other what you believe and insinuate your beliefs are also a fact but never attempt to prove them as facts other than showing use your YouTube history.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: stirling

originally posted by: jonnywhite
Steven Greer has not credibility whatsoever. And a bunch of those names have a lot of mixed up stories which I don't feel have any credibility either. What's left is maybe a few tales which don't have easy explanations, but it does not mean aliens are visiting Earth. Evenso, I knew someone who told me he saw a ufo when growing up. Apparently it was dramatic for him. This person was in the military at one point in his life, so why should I doubt him? There're lots of people with those kinds of stories. And yet I also have a relative who claimed they saw Jesus. There're people who say they've spoken to deceased individuals. There're people.....

Stories and unprovable bits of evidence does not make it all true. Unlike these alleged truths, science and reality can prove themselves. Which side would you choose, if it meant life or death? I wonder about these things all the time, but I know who I'd trust when it counts. I'd put my money on SETI or NASA with confidence if it had any weight. Putting my money on Ufology or the "Disclosure Project" is like throwing most of it away.





Go ahead and live in a cave....your outlook is certainly primitive enough.....
You obviously don't have an open mind on the subject and are repeating what you hear from those who claim to be experts....
what you don't quite get is most of them are disinfo experts....




top topics



 
25
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join