UFO & Aliens & The Physical Evidence

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: Specimen
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

So what evidence have you come up with?

Start with page 1 look at the OP and move on from there.

As there is zero evidence in the OP, moving on from zero evidence we find that no evidence at all.

Remember, all because you saw it on the internet does not mean it is true....

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Its not about me, this thread is about the evidence in the videos or any other evidence people may find and come upon. Like I said your welcome to stick around but please discuss the evidence and not me, because this thread isnt about me and there is no need to start going off topic.

I think the videos posted here that are obvious hoaxes, followed by people pointing that out followed by your insulting comments and off topic you tube videos is on topic since that is very unique response. It seems to be some sort of psychological defense mechanism. Its not really a pattern specific to you but to people in general that want to believe something so badly that they can rationalize just about anything to fit their beliefs.

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Its not about me, this thread is about the evidence in the videos or any other evidence people may find and come upon. Like I said your welcome to stick around but please discuss the evidence and not me, because this thread isnt about me and there is no need to start going off topic.

I think the videos posted here that are obvious hoaxes, followed by people pointing that out followed by your insulting comments and off topic you tube videos is on topic since that is very unique response. It seems to be some sort of psychological defense mechanism. Its not really a pattern specific to you but to people in general that want to believe something so badly that they can rationalize just about anything to fit their beliefs.

As I said before please discuss the suggested evidence in the videos and not me, thats what we are here to do.

originally posted by: tanka418

Well than...I'll just have to give you that one...the horizontal offset is not what I thought...My bad.

I don't buy the lens flair part though...looks more to me to be a vehicle in the mid distance...say 100 yards or so. Looks very much like vehicles at my gate after dark...

Here's what MUFON has to say about it:

www.mufon.com...

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: tanka418

Well than...I'll just have to give you that one...the horizontal offset is not what I thought...My bad.

I don't buy the lens flair part though...looks more to me to be a vehicle in the mid distance...say 100 yards or so. Looks very much like vehicles at my gate after dark...

Here's what MUFON has to say about it:

www.mufon.com...

I certainly agree that it's not evidence of much of anything except lights of unknown origin, but the opinion of someone at MUFON is hardly definitive. All MUFON does is gather reports and magically decide whether they're credible or not. They claim to use scientific methodology but do no such thing. In other words, "MUFON says..." carries no weight.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: tanka418

Well than...I'll just have to give you that one...the horizontal offset is not what I thought...My bad.

I don't buy the lens flair part though...looks more to me to be a vehicle in the mid distance...say 100 yards or so. Looks very much like vehicles at my gate after dark...

Here's what MUFON has to say about it:

www.mufon.com...

I certainly agree that it's not evidence of much of anything except lights of unknown origin, but the opinion of someone at MUFON is hardly definitive. All MUFON does is gather reports and magically decide whether they're credible or not. They claim to use scientific methodology but do no such thing. In other words, "MUFON says..." carries no weight.

Same with "NASA says" around here.

Looks pretty obvious to me, so I don't think it's a wild stretch regardless of who's saying it.

"ALIENZ!", on the other hand...


Would you trust the manufacturer of the game camera as a valid source?

www.nbcnews.com...

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

As I said before please discuss the suggested evidence in the videos and not me, thats what we are here to do.

As I was saying, a number of the videos are obviously hoaxes and some videos are just plain misleading. The thing that is missing is the actual documentation that shows that any evidence exists. You are correct that it is only "suggested" evidence since no actual evidence was provided. The name calling and insulting responses that follows when the lack of evidence is pointed out is very fascinating to me and, I think, warrants discussion in a thread comprised entirely of obvious hoaxes and misleading information and insults. You are welcome to respond in a non insulting manner that is also free of off topic you tube videos. However, I can't and won't stop you from doing so.

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

As I said before please discuss the suggested evidence in the videos and not me, thats what we are here to do.

As I was saying, a number of the videos are obviously hoaxes and some videos are just plain misleading. The thing that is missing is the actual documentation that shows that any evidence exists. You are correct that it is only "suggested" evidence since no actual evidence was provided. The name calling and insulting responses that follows when the lack of evidence is pointed out is very fascinating to me and, I think, warrants discussion in a thread comprised entirely of obvious hoaxes and misleading information and insults. You are welcome to respond in a non insulting manner that is also free of off topic you tube videos. However, I can't and won't stop you from doing so.

As I said before discuss the evidence in the videos not me period.

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord


As I said before discuss the evidence in the videos not me period.

Nobody was discussing your period.

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord


As I said before discuss the evidence in the videos not me period.

Nobody was discussing your period.

LOLz

As I said before discuss the evidence in the videos not me period.

There is no evidence in the videos hence the lashing out when that is pointed out!

It took me minutes to find explanations for the deer and the Capitol photos. And I'm pretty sure those demanding an explanation to sneer at have a similar connection to the interweb. If they were truly interested in getting to the bottom of things they could have done so in the span of a few posts.

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: tanka418

Well than...I'll just have to give you that one...the horizontal offset is not what I thought...My bad.

I don't buy the lens flair part though...looks more to me to be a vehicle in the mid distance...say 100 yards or so. Looks very much like vehicles at my gate after dark...

Here's what MUFON has to say about it:

www.mufon.com...

I certainly agree that it's not evidence of much of anything except lights of unknown origin, but the opinion of someone at MUFON is hardly definitive. All MUFON does is gather reports and magically decide whether they're credible or not. They claim to use scientific methodology but do no such thing. In other words, "MUFON says..." carries no weight.

Same with "NASA says" around here.

Looks pretty obvious to me, so I don't think it's a wild stretch regardless of who's saying it.

"ALIENZ!", on the other hand...


Would you trust the manufacturer of the game camera as a valid source?

www.nbcnews.com...

I'm not disputing the explanation. I was justing pointing out that MUFON has no special credibility.

originally posted by: Specimen
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

What kind of aliens are there?

As I'm sure you already know, there are a lot of different stories and opinins, a few of them have a little science in them, most don't...

While we can't, say that there are definitely aliens visiting, we can say with rather good assurance that there are aliens. Science is beginning to come around to the notion that planets are ubiquitous, science is also beginning to think that life also is ubiquitous. Although, we probably shouldn't speculate too much on the nature of that life, at least on some planets.

Many would think that we have no evidence for life on other worlds, but, they fail to understand the nature of both Nature herself, and probability.

Anyway, we can, with some degree of accuracy speculate on "possible" alien visitors, and where they are from.

Ancient myth tells us that there is life to be found in at least 3 places; Sirius, Orion, and the Pleiades. Unfortunately, life can not exist in any of those places, I have a theory that Terrestrial Humans weren't any more clever back in the day than they are now, and probably got things a little "off". Not really confused, but, not quite accurate.

No life at Sirius, Sirius is a class "A" star some 400 million or so years old, not quite old enough to actually have planets... So One would have to wonder "why" early Humans thought there were visitors from there. Visitors from Sirius also have a rather "rooted" tradition in Terrestrial myth, and it crosses both time and space; the myth about Sirius appears in ancient India, ancient Egypt, ancient Sumer, the Dogon tribe, and several others...its almost surprising how far spread it is.

With a wee bit more Right ascension, and a little less Declination, and out about 64 light years is a star; Nu 2 canis Majoris. It is a class "K1" star with one confirmed planet. The planet is a "water vapor Jovian" that is believed to exist in the habitable zone at approximately 1.9 AU. It has been stated that this planet is a good candidate for an exomoon, and a good candidate for life.

The Dogon people called them "Nommo", the inhabitants of Nu 2 Canis Majoris. They were described as being "reptilian" in nature, and amphibious. They were said to have "Green" skin, but also to be able to change color like a chameleon.

In ancient India there were "visitors" or "Gods" from above. They too were of a different color, though in that case it is Blue. These people of the Ancient Indians were also from Sirius, or rather Nu 2 CM.

Is this a real species Not enough data at present to truly say one way or the other. But, so far, the science tends to support their the idea of their existence.

So there is one kind of alien that actually has a viable probability of "being".

As for Orion and the Pleiades; unfortunately both places is populated with very young "B" class stars (less than 500 million years). B class stars tend to have very short lives...so in reality, they will be quite lucky to have any sort of life at all, and what they do evolve will be simple life forms.

I tend to think there are also species originating at Zeta 2 Reticuli, Tau Ceti, and perhaps one or two other places. Still searching data for other indications. We all need to keep in mind, that while life may be plentiful, Space-faring races will be quite few.

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: tanka418

Well than...I'll just have to give you that one...the horizontal offset is not what I thought...My bad.

I don't buy the lens flair part though...looks more to me to be a vehicle in the mid distance...say 100 yards or so. Looks very much like vehicles at my gate after dark...

Here's what MUFON has to say about it:

www.mufon.com...

I certainly agree that it's not evidence of much of anything except lights of unknown origin, but the opinion of someone at MUFON is hardly definitive. All MUFON does is gather reports and magically decide whether they're credible or not. They claim to use scientific methodology but do no such thing. In other words, "MUFON says..." carries no weight.

Same with "NASA says" around here.

Looks pretty obvious to me, so I don't think it's a wild stretch regardless of who's saying it.

"ALIENZ!", on the other hand...


Would you trust the manufacturer of the game camera as a valid source?

www.nbcnews.com...

I don't know IF NBC's image is complete, but, I still think vehicle lights...as opposed to eye reflections. Unfortunate without the original image, we can't do a reflection analysis.

a reply to: tanka418

I'm sorry all. Not used to providing much by way of reference around here...something I should change.

Nu 2 Canis Majoris: Hipparcos and XHIP star catalogs, adsabs.harvard.edu...

Nu 2 Canis Majoris b: adsabs.harvard.edu...

General Mythology references may be found with virtually any casual Internet search. These are well known myth and legend.

Dogon: www.unmuseum.org...

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

Thanks for that, ZR. Right, so we now know tanka418 has already been shown he's wrong but insists he's right anyway.

We can discount his contribution.

Still not the faintest physical evidence for alien visitation, then.

a reply to: tanka418

54 and 107 Piscium are both main sequence stars.

Does this mean they're not variables? Are you saying that main-sequence stars can't have variable visual magnitudes?

You disqualified yourself from participating in any reasonable discussion about astronomy right there.

Admittedly, 54 Piscium is only a 'suspected' variable. The magnitude of 107 Piscium varies between 5.14 and 5.26.

Gliese 67 has a red dwarf companion, HR 483 B. Margaret Turnbull may think it could support life, but others disagree.

Tau 1 Eridani is also a binary.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: tanka418

54 and 107 Piscium are both main sequence stars.

Does this mean they're not variables? Are you saying that main-sequence stars can't have variable visual magnitudes?

You disqualified yourself from participating in any reasonable discussion about astronomy right there.

Admittedly, 54 Piscium is only a 'suspected' variable. The magnitude of 107 Piscium varies between 5.14 and 5.26.

Gliese 67 has a red dwarf companion, HR 483 B. Margaret Turnbull may think it could support life, but others disagree.

Tau 1 Eridani is also a binary.

Okay...so show us your source!

My source is the Hipparcos star catalog, and XHIP (extended Hipparcos)...if anyone wants a link just ask.

And, by the way; Gliese 67 is in the HABCAT table...meaning that it is thought to be a star that can support a habitable environment.

So now, you tell me just HOW I disqualified myself. Was it because I used real data that contradicts yours? Sorry, take it up with the university of Strasbourg (sp?) that is where Hippcaros is available from, or maybe the European Space Agency.

No sorry...but One can not be disqualified by using the correct data. Your data is incorrect, perhaps fraudulent, either way you were taken in.

And, while I'm not an astronomer, I do believe that being a "main sequence" star also means that it is not a variable star. Though, even variable stars can have planets and life. Perhaps you should update your astronomy database (knowledge).

I'm thinking we should be discounting your contributions rather than mine.

Here is an analysis of the Hill map...



Its a bit old, but no less accurate.

a reply to: tanka418

While we can't, say that there are definitely aliens visiting

Why not? Are you no longer an alien?