UFO & Aliens & The Physical Evidence

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

As Zeta above just said you going against the t&c's here by posting a known hoax..

You have just proven that you dont check your sources and are being amazed by any old rubbish on Youtube.
Did you even read the article you posted?

Your article clearly states that a gear rail was found in coal.
Your video is of a supposed screw in a meteorite.

This picture below is what the article is about, a gear rail embedded in a lump of coal.


As ive said before stop believing every video on Youtube is telling the truth because obviously their not.


I suggest that you do proper research on a subject before posting

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian

How is calling people willfully ignorant and imagining that they didn't watch the stupid videos on topic? Its because you are avoiding the discussion about how there is no evidence to be found, only claims of evidence. That is WI.

Hey, my daughter is a Wisconsin resident!

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

They could be man made, but why would anyone implant someone against thier will?

Who says they did?

People get stuff embedded under their skin all the time and often are completely unaware.

It happened to me multiple times. The most memorable instance was when while working on a robot I leaned on part of the base where a Petri dish had broken. Didn't notice a thing until my elbow swelled up like a breast a couple of days later. Went to the doctor, nearly as creepy a guy as Leir, and had him drain the infection. Small shard of glass [silica-based transducer Alien implant] was the culprit. It was then and there when I remembered leaning on the place where the glass had broken. I was pretty close to blood poisoning at that point.

I've had innumerable instances of metal shavings, splinters, and shards embedded under my skin where I never noticed the entry.

Check this out.

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord



They could be man made, but why would anyone implant someone against thier will?

Who says they did?



People get stuff embedded under their skin all the time and often are completely unaware.



It happened to me multiple times. The most memorable instance was when while working on a robot I leaned on part of the base where a Petri dish had broken. Didn't notice a thing until my elbow swelled up like a breast a couple of days later. Went to the doctor, nearly as creepy a guy as Leir, and had him drain the infection. Small shard of glass [silica-based transducer Alien implant] was the culprit. It was then and there when I remembered leaning on the place where the glass had broken. I was pretty close to blood poisoning at that point.



I've had innumerable instances of metal shavings, splinters, and shards embedded under my shin where I never noticed the entry.



Check this out.

OMG that happened! I looked at the news story and its a pretty strange one, thanks for sharing. You may be correct on many of the implants, who knows. I have had a few things in my skin too like splinters, its a case by case thing, some believe they were implanted with alien objects, some think they are making it all up who knows the truth? I cant say for sure but its all an interesting topic to me because its discussion of physical evidence. Whatever it may be there is evidence and through testing it we can see, oh it was a piece of glass, or thats a piece of metal in your arm or whatever, but its still evidence. Maybe not evidence of ET but evidence of something else.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: tanka418

Your first link doesn't work...it links to a document, NOT Hipparcos data.

So it does. Apparently you have to access that page from the query page, which is here. Go there and type 54 Piscium into the appropriate field. When you finish, check the other entries previously mentioned.

The quoted variability threshold is around 0.012 of actual magnitude.

The threshold itself varies depending on several factors, as mentioned in the document. That's why it is given as a graph, not as a number. Again, see fig. 2.1.1.

While I have little need to use your link for this data; your link states:

Data for 54 Pisc...
H0 : H Catalogue (H = Hipparcos, T = Tycho)
H1 : 3093 Identifier (HIP number)
H2 : Proximity flag
...
H48 : Reference flag for photometry
H49 : 6.02 Mag at max, Hp (5th percentile)
H50 : 6.04 Mag at min, Hp (95th percentile)
H51 : Period (days)
H52 : Flag (variability type)
H53 : Flag (variability tables)
H54 : Flag (light curves)

As can be seen in this bit of data...there is NO VARIABILITY associated with 54 Pisc. And, that the overall variability of the star is only 0.02, which is well within the thresold of detection...according to the graph you insist on using. By the way; that graph plots threshold vs stellar magnitude. You should note the max and min magnitude listed in the data. the difference, or change in magnitude is n the order of 0.33%, and while that is about 3 time more "variability" than sol, it still doesn't constitute a variable star. Course, this argument could be further clarified IF One could find a reliable specification on "WHAT" constitutes a variable star in the first place.

In any case, the Hipparcos does not define 54 Pisc.as a variable star, nor any of the others in question.

The same sort of contradiction between the actual data and what you want to believe, exists for the other 3 stars.

So...thank you for supporting my argument with our data. Although, I didn't really need you to link Hipparcos...I have a copy.

Also...that page that you sent as a correction...will not accept the identifier "54 Piscium". 54 Piscium is NOT a HIPP identifier, nor is it an HD identifier, nor Tycho.

a reply to: tanka418

Clearly you and your computer live in a different world from the rest of us. Have fun with your researches.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: tanka418

Clearly you and your computer live in a different world from the rest of us. Have fun with your researches.

I invite anyone interested in the reality of this to do your own Hipparcos search. Use the Hipparcos identifier 3093...that is 54 Piscium, this can be verified by doing a simple Google search.

@Astyanax...you are either completely misunderstanding or deliberately misrepresenting the data...either way you are wholly wrong!

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: iDope

So which is scarier? Aliens existing and visiting Earth, or a government that would pay to spread disinfo in order to accomplish some GIANT task to soak us all up into a NWO?

I am going with C. Navy Generals, Pilots and Government Officials hallucinating on the job.

I have hallucinated many times and would never give testimony as to what I saw was tangible and existed in our dimension (other than my own mind). So if you believe that pilots are hallucinating while flying, and then believe they see these spacecraft orbiting around their plane and can give accurate descriptions of the size shape and velocity of that aircraft, then land the plane, all while hallucinating, you sir have never hallucinated.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: iDope
a reply to: draknoir2

No, they all came out on the subject once they were retired. Look at The Disclosure project 1st of all. There is also a book entitled UFO's: Generals, Pilots, and governent officials go on the record by Leslie Kean. these people interviewed were all within the military and such that went on the record, true testimonials that they experienced these phenomena. Sure many people will scoff testimonials off as possibly being paid for by the government, but if this were true, the government must and most certainly would have a plan to use this information against us. So which is scarier? Aliens existing and visiting Earth, or a government that would pay to spread disinfo in order to accomplish some GIANT task to soak us all up into a NWO?

Testimonials don't mean crap. They aren't testable evidence. Where is the actual testable evidence?

How does one test a memory or experience. Plus, being involved in the military or state government would be a reason and necessity by the government to hide and shroud all correlaing data from the sighting. Which is why so many speak their voice once they are retired, and the government could really care less for the reason that they have no tangible prrof to back it up because all records dating back to it are either classified or destroyed. Much like the moon landing footage.

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
They could be man made, but why would anyone implant someone against thier will?

Well then why would any alien implant someone against their will? If your only argument is motive, it fails... theoretically, if anyone is being implanted, it would likely be by other humans, to monitor them in secret. MKUltra successfully implanted brain electrodes in bulls in the 70s, and could control their behaviour.

a reply to: iDope

you sir have never hallucinated.

I have a feeling I would win this pissing contest but its not something I brag about. Your personal experience is all well and good but there is a wealth of well documented studies on the topic to draw from. The Strassman study is most notable since that dealt with an endogenous chemical and could explain some of the more elaborate sightings. Even when these subjects took this substance, the hallucinations were so vivid and real that the subjects believed they were seeing into another reality. Obviously, my comment wasn't meant to be taken that literally but it is an obvious consideration that you left out. Point is there are more choices than Aliens or government conspiracy. There is no way to rule out Psychophysiology type explanations. They aren't easily proved either.

But we don't even need to get into that. Regular ol' misperceptions are pretty well documented too. Misperceived type UFOs are described with the same enthusiasm and detail as any other sighting with the only difference being one becomes identified. These types of cases are essentially "dumped" and disregarded by Ufology. So what we are left with is a bunch of UFO stories and no real attempt at analysis.

But pilots really deal with a lot more than your typical misperception. Honestly, mistaking something as a UFO is the least of their worries. GLOC is one. Its not responsible for any UFO sightings that I know of but losing consciousness and hallucinating mid flight comes with the territory.

en.wikipedia.org... Relative incapacitation is the period in which the consciousness has been regained, but the person is confused and remains unable to perform simple tasks. This period averages about 15 seconds. Upon regaining cerebral blood flow, the G-LOC victim usually experiences myoclonic convulsions (often called the ‘funky chicken’) and oftentimes full amnesia of the event is experienced.[1] Brief but vivid dreams have been reported to follow G-LOC. If G-LOC occurs at low altitude, this momentary lapse can prove fatal and even highly experienced pilots can pull straight to a G-LOC condition without first perceiving the visual onset warnings that would normally be used as the sign to back off from pulling any more gs.

a reply to: iDope

How does one test a memory or experience.

You cant. That's the point. But we do know that people misperceive things and we do know that memory can change and be influenced by others even to the point of being a completely false memory. There is no way to distinguish between a "real" sighting and something like misperception as your comment implies.

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

I really do understand your point of view, but it is very hard for me to dismiss a widespread amount of testimony from witnesses who have an in depth knowledge of aircraft. Plus, many witnesses have seen them from the ground, which would refute your argument of GLOC. I'm not saying that these people are smarter or more advanced than anormal person, but what I am stating is that they have more knowledge about the technologies available and tested by the government. So when they see an aircraft that is not supposed to be even miles from them, and it is circling their plane, and then accelerating faster than any jet known to man, I think they would have knowledge of it was man made or not.

Sure, these types of craft could be time travelers, but why would Air Force personel be put at risk by their own government while flying test missions of some unknown, reverse enginered spacecraft? Even commercial pilots with hundreds of lives on board? There are plenty of no fly zones within America to test such space craft, so to go out and beyond, to tease other planes and such would be pointless, unless there was a conspiracy to spread the fear of aliens.

There are more people that see UFO's from the Earth than in the sky, but those that do see them from the sky obviously know how to fly and the parameters in which the craft is able to maneuver and accelerate. When a jet fighter has two craft on wither side of it and is flying at Mach 2, and these spacecraft toy with it, then accelerate to 10k+ mph and disappear as a blip, how does a pilot explain that or is not relieved from duty when aking such accusations while in air?

The only point I am trying to make is that all testimony for seeing unidentified aircraft can not be explained. I have had several myself and I am not a pilot. I know what I saw, I can explain it in the most detailed way I can, and in no way does it correlate witbh any type of plane, helicopter, drone, etc. That is one of the main reasons I believe, and it is because of what I have seen, and the research I have put into the subject to help me better understand.

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

Reporting a sighting as soon as it as seen has little chance of distortion. I saw a craft I couldnt explain on New Years eve this last year and immediatley wrote down everything I could so my memory couldn't elaborate on the fact. My writings will never be influenced by outside sources as they were written within minutes of the sighting. I included as much information and coordinates that I could, the most detailed descriptions possible for a 30 second experience, which ended up being 4 pages of writing and two hand drawn pictures. However, if I were to allow anyone to read my description and show them the hand drawn pictures, they would not believe me, they would see it as fiction. And at the same time I would argue, "I have nothing to gain by this, I only have my own sanity and credibility to lose. So why would I forge it, or proclaim fiction as truth? I will not convert people by making this claim, as they must witness it themself. I don't take one persons word on anything on any subbject to pursuay my beliefs, so I don't expect anyone else to accept my claim to change their own judgement." I have not gone seeking for attention, yet I will always proclaim that what I saw was not of our technology, and I don't ake these proclaimations unless the subject arises and I am able to speak as if needs to be told.

Often when a pilot sees a craft in the air when it shouldn't be there, the pilot will relay to base to see if there are any other craft in the area, when they find out there are not, and look out their side window and see a craft next to them, they would easily know that it is not one of theirs. From this point they communicate with base what they are seeing, and often they are told to ignore it and to never talk about it. Why is that? They are clearly in danger, they clearly have seen somehting out of the ordinary, and yet they are forced to never speak of it. So whom are we to believe?

a reply to: iDope

I really do understand your point of view, but it is very hard for me to dismiss a widespread amount of testimony from witnesses who have an in depth knowledge of aircraft.

Yes, they know what other known aircraft look like and their flight characteristics. however nobody knows a thing about alien technology or if it even exists.

Plus, many witnesses have seen them from the ground, which would refute your argument of GLOC.

It never fails. I swear I was going to underline this part "Its not responsible for any UFO sightings that I know of" . And yes, people on the ground don't experience GLOC. I completely agree with you so that completely destroys my entire argument that everyone that sees UFOs is going so fast that they pass out. I am scared to read the rest of the post because I want to get to bed early. Thank you for the conversation.

You take the little shard out of the person, and then send it to an impartial, professional lab and destroy a piece of it in a chromatic gas analyzer. If the sample shows an isotopic signature that is not terrestrial, well then, you have something with legs. That alone is not even proof, because you cannot prove how it got in there. These are the tests that real scientists do, and if they are not being done, then all the videos, testimony and "material evidence" amounts to nothing more than an amusing story.

a reply to: iDope

From this point they communicate with base what they are seeing, and often they are told to ignore it and to never talk about it. Why is that?

Because the story was told by a ufologist? Perhaps it was embellished a little then retold several thousand times over the internet? I'm guessing there is somewhere around 5000 reasons why this statement isn't necessarily true or even based on facts.

a reply to: iDope

The only point I am trying to make is that all testimony for seeing unidentified aircraft can not be explained.

The point I am trying to make is that by calling unidentified things "aircraft", you have already identified them and explained them and disregarded other explanations. Its no different then me saying that these sightings of unknown things are hallucinations caused by an unknown type of endogenous brain chemical( I am not saying that.).

When a jet fighter has two craft on wither side of it and is flying at Mach 2, and these spacecraft toy with it, then accelerate to 10k+ mph and disappear as a blip, how does a pilot explain that or is not relieved from duty when aking such accusations while in air?

More of a concern is why friendly fire incidents due to pilot error aren't grounds to immediately relieve the pilot from duty without question.

www.stripes.com...
Lt. Gen. Rod Bishop, commander of the 3rd Air Force, will decide whether to take any action against the pilot, said Maj. John Elolf, an Air Force spokesman for U.S. Central Command Air Forces at Shaw Air Force Base, S.C.

reporting UFOs kind of pales in comparison.

originally posted by: iDope
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

Reporting a sighting as soon as it as seen has little chance of distortion. I saw a craft I couldnt explain on New Years eve this last year and immediatley wrote down everything I could so my memory couldn't elaborate on the fact. My writings will never be influenced by outside sources as they were written within minutes of the sighting. I included as much information and coordinates that I could, the most detailed descriptions possible for a 30 second experience, which ended up being 4 pages of writing and two hand drawn pictures. However, if I were to allow anyone to read my description and show them the hand drawn pictures, they would not believe me, they would see it as fiction. And at the same time I would argue, "I have nothing to gain by this, I only have my own sanity and credibility to lose. So why would I forge it, or proclaim fiction as truth? I will not convert people by making this claim, as they must witness it themself. I don't take one persons word on anything on any subbject to pursuay my beliefs, so I don't expect anyone else to accept my claim to change their own judgement." I have not gone seeking for attention, yet I will always proclaim that what I saw was not of our technology, and I don't ake these proclaimations unless the subject arises and I am able to speak as if needs to be told.

Often when a pilot sees a craft in the air when it shouldn't be there, the pilot will relay to base to see if there are any other craft in the area, when they find out there are not, and look out their side window and see a craft next to them, they would easily know that it is not one of theirs. From this point they communicate with base what they are seeing, and often they are told to ignore it and to never talk about it. Why is that? They are clearly in danger, they clearly have seen somehting out of the ordinary, and yet they are forced to never speak of it. So whom are we to believe?

Thanks for sharing your story, I too have seen some craft I think could have been ET or black projects, who knows.