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.

 

Why do people lie about aliens? An in-depth look at why we can discredit near all stories

page: 7
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: antar

Aliens have been coming here long before man. They continue to have a presence on Earth as well as other plants in this region of space.

Interdimentional travelers are also a mainstay of this planet.



Even though I think the accusation of the whole thing being lies is a bit overboard, to state that as fact is pretty out there. In general I think people posting here believe what they post and are mostly honest and I'm wondering what proof makes you believe that is a fact?

Proof? I've never seen any.

There are boards we all know about that seem to be in role playing mode, pretending things like that are true, but never any proof of any kind, just claims. What can you offer as evidence?




posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

I don't have much of a problem with your reasoning for the *possibility* - but the probability is low for me because of the lack of evidence.



posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 08:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom(....)
But the odds of life in the Milky Way would never be zero, because we're here. And like I said in the above post, I have a really hard time believing that humans or the Earth are that unique or that special. It would be like dealing over 100 billion hands of five card stud and only seeing one royal flush. It could happen, but the odds would be very much against it.

The odds would be against it, assuming it's not intentionally that way. Maybe God created us or a higher civilization and we're the only ones? Odds do not make a monopoly gameboard or the empire state building--a factory does. It's not chance alone, anyway. It's intelligent design.

Otherwise, we have ot understand the origins of life to determine odds. I think we do have some ways to go. If it was all figured out, we'd have a very good idea what to expect out there--CAN we ever know everything?

Just think about that. There's so much news about the origins of life topic. We're discovering and learning everyday. It brings us closer and closer to the kind of confidence we need when considering life elsewhere.

Looking in my origins of life folder, I have a few favorites. Here's a recent one:
phys.org - Chemists claim to have solved riddle of how life began on Earth...

Scientists have debated for years the various possibilities that could have led to life evolving on Earth, and the arguments have only grown more heated in recent years as many have suggested that it did not happen here it all, instead, it was brought to us from comets or some other celestial body. Most of the recent debate has found scientists in one of three chicken-or-the-egg first camps: RNA world advocates, metabolism-first supporters and those who believe that cell membranes must have developed first.

The chemists with this new effort believe they have found a way to show that all three arguments are both right and wrong—they believe they have found a way to show that everything necessary for life to evolve could have done so from just hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen cyanide and ultraviolet light and that those building blocks could have all existed at the same time—in their paper, they report that using just those three basic ingredients they were able to produce more than 50 nucleic acids—precursors to DNA and RNA molecules. They note that early meteorites carried with them ingredients that would react with nitrogen already in the atmosphere, producing a lot of hydrogen cyanide. By dissolving in water, it could have very easily come into contact with hydrogen sulfide, while being exposed to ultraviolet light from the sun. And that, they claim, would have been all that was needed to get things going.

We have to remain open the possibility life is rare elsewhere. Or conversely to the possibilty it's numerous and spread widely.

We will know more and more, assuming we do not become extinct. I believe chances are good we'll survive at least for hundreds of years. In that length of time we should answer some of our present burning questions. I give us credit for our achievements and persistence and believe it's a lot harder than thought by many to prevent us from advancing forward. I suppose it's possible a runnaway greenhouse effect or supervolcano or large asteroid impacting Earth or skynet or (insert something) could set us back or possibly kill us off, but I think the fear of extinction is probably more dangerous than the possibility. Yet some fear is probably healthy.
edit on 14-6-2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 10:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: redtic
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

I don't have much of a problem with your reasoning for the *possibility* - but the probability is low for me because of the lack of evidence.


I know I said I was going to get off this thread, but a curious thought occurs and I hope you will indulge me.

I think we can agree that testimony is a form of evidence. Certainly in a courtroom, but also in everyday life. Your teacher tells you something, that's testimony. You watch the news, that's testimony. Your friend tells you something, that's testimony.

We judge this testimony based on several factors. How reliable is the person? Is what they're saying reasonable? Does anyone corroborate what they say? If we have any doubts, we may look for other evidence. But on a day to day basis, we tend to take testimony at face value if there is no reason to doubt it.

If the importance of the testimony is high, we scrutinize it very carefully. For me, I would consider it very important if someone's life was at stake, like if I was on a jury and someone could get the death penalty. If six eyewitnesses give the same story about the defendant, and there is nothing to contradict their story, I'm probably going to vote guilty.

So, if six eyewitness tell me they saw little green men, and I've got no reason or evidence to doubt them, I might take the story at face value. No money out of my pocket, and nobody's going to the gas chamber.

So, my standard of evidence for believing a story about little green men is probably less than my standard for sending someone to the gas chamber. I get the impression your standard would be higher. You would require more evidence to believe a story about little green men than you would need to convict someone of murder. That's cool, I understand that.

I don't think this is a new concept to most people here.

So I'm curious to see if we can quantify this. How many people, telling the same story, would it take to convince you of a little green man story? If everyone in the world, about 7 billion people, were to tell you the same or similar story about aliens coming to Earth, would you believe it? How about 6 billion? One billion? 100 million? Could you put a number on it?

Thanks



posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 11:55 PM
link   
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

That's a bad theory. If 6 people said they see little green men, why not believe them? Because they have never been proven to exist. So you take it with a grain of salt. I'm not saying you disregard their story but you no way on this earth consider it true.

Do you need me to go look up testimonies of mermaids and dragons and unicorns and get them here? I think you'd strongly prefer if I did not.

The Judicial system is heavily flawed. Eye witness testimony in court is essentially one persons story against another persons story.

You said: "I saw him kill him" You were 100 meters away
I said: "Your honor during the fight he pulled a weapon and injured himself"

But I'm on trial, I'll be going to jail. And with rape cases that's many times worse. Eye witness testimony is the weakest form of evidence in existence. There's always two sides to a story, and people never tell the full story. I will admit at any point that in majority of stories I tell, I will cut maybe one or two small detail out because I judge them as unnecessary.



posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 11:59 PM
link   
a reply to: SuspiciousTom



There's always two sides to a story, and people never tell the full story.

But DNA helps. You know, actual evidence.
Actual evidence which has exonerated many convicted on the basis of eyewitness testimony.

Got actual ET evidence? Or did the dog eat it?

edit on 6/15/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 12:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: redtic

originally posted by: Scdfa
I have had direct contact with aliens, starting in 1966.


Aaaand, let me guess - nearly 50 years of *direct* contact with aliens and all you have are interesting stories, is that about right?


And what exactly would you expect an alien abductee to have other than his account of the abductions?

Are you one of those nitwits who expect me to swipe an ashtray? Maybe some alien magazines from the flying saucer's waiting room?

No wait, you're one of the bright guys who want me to set up a video cam, right?

Why don't you respond to me when you figure out how absurd those suggestions are.

Ask a guy in jail if he managed to take something from the cop car that picked him up.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: SuspiciousTom




Similar to the faith of christianity "I had an experience you can't see it believe it or to hell with you." I am not the ignorant one here, sir.


If you can't tell the difference between Jesus and aliens, I'm afraid you are, sir.

The United States Air Force didn't spend thirty years chasing Jesus.

And the ships these aliens travel in have been photographed for seventy years.
I'm not sure what Jesus drives.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 12:17 AM
link   
For me, the problem with accusing all "experiencers" of lying,
and rejecting their testimony completely,
is that it rejects all other possible explanations, that might be worth looking into.
Even if it is a psychological phenomenon...
If two people from different parts of the earth describe a similar experience,
Though they be in totally different circumstances, and not exposed to the same sort of cultural influence and media,
Then that merits some questions. -Even if one eliminates the alien hypothesis.

It could allow us to learn more about "collective consciousness",
or
life which exists within more dimensions than three.

To me there is a big difference between rejecting the evidence and rejecting the conclusions made about the evidence.

There could have been, in past times, many who testified witnessing some phenomena that we now know to be scientifically explainable, but because science was not as advanced at the time, they came to false conclusions about it and so their testimony was rejected altogether (sprites, sundogs, waterspouts...), instead of exploring alternate possibilities... and advancing our knowledge.

This is where the battle between believers is a waste of time and gets in the way of knowledge. Those who believe in aliens and those who believe aliens do not exist (or do not interact with humans on earth) getting caught up in their face off, while the opportunity to discover more is left behind and ignored.




edit on 15-6-2015 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 12:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
a reply to: Scdfa

Doom is pleased. I shall allow you to live.


Thank you my liege!

But I must give you a word of advice. You're never gonna beat the Fantastic Four. You can come close, you can beat them all one on one, but then they all team up on you, and yadda yadda, better luck next time. Reed is just plain smarter, so just let it go.

You should start up a tech company in silicon valley, your army of killer robots would make a great app.

Or maybe a reality show? Real housewives of Latveria? Keeping up with the Von Dooms?



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 12:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa
a reply to: SuspiciousTom




Similar to the faith of christianity "I had an experience you can't see it believe it or to hell with you." I am not the ignorant one here, sir.


If you can't tell the difference between Jesus and aliens, I'm afraid you are, sir.

The United States Air Force didn't spend thirty years chasing Jesus.

And the ships these aliens travel in have been photographed for seventy years.
I'm not sure what Jesus drives.


Interesting. You failed to understand an analogy. And what's more interesting, you a believer would simply disregard that the story of Christianity could be an alien experience.
edit on 15-6-2015 by SuspiciousTom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
Got actual ET evidence? Or did the dog eat it?


I have always said throw a dead alien up on my kitchen table and you got me as a believer...
edit on 15-6-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555

Even though I think the accusation of the whole thing being lies is a bit overboard, to state that as fact is pretty out there. In general I think people posting here believe what they post and are mostly honest and I'm wondering what proof makes you believe that is a fact?

Proof? I've never seen any.

There are boards we all know about that seem to be in role playing mode, pretending things like that are true, but never any proof of any kind, just claims. What can you offer as evidence?


Most of the lying comes from those who seek fame or monetary gains.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero



I have always said throw a dead alien up on my kitchen table and you got me as a believer...

Don't let Tucker (my dog) at it.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 01:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Scdfa


Ask a guy in jail if he managed to take something from the cop car that picked him up.

You mean like stealing the actual cop car they've been arrested in?


And what exactly would you expect an alien abductee to have other than his account of the abductions?

Are you one of those nitwits who expect me to swipe an ashtray? Maybe some alien magazines from the flying saucer's waiting room?

No wait, you're one of the bright guys who want me to set up a video cam, right?

Yeah, those idiots with their logical questions.

You said your neighbors were having a picnic one day and witnessed a UFO hover over your house during one of the abductions. Here's a group of people completely unrelated to your families personal experiences, with not only a chance to provide evidence to support your story, but their own of an alien spacecraft hovering over a neighbors house. That would be pretty amazing. No evidence of attempted photographs or videos? "Electronic interference" is only specific to video and handheld cameras and not TVs, computers, microwaves, lights, etc. I guess? All of the neighborhood was okay except cameras?

Witnesses outside of your family should be a big plus for your book. I'll go on the assumption that they have no evidence either other than stories to tell? But, hopefully you have verifiable testimony from at least one for those witnesses for readers that rely on that type of thing to help substantiate a story.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 04:49 AM
link   
I think most people start off with the right intentions (greer being 1) but then soon realise the potential money to be made by misleading people. It's a temptation that most fall for, even convincing themselves that these deceptions are good for the people and that they are morally correct. Once the public ufologists gain some power within the industry they then warp "facts" that conviently mirror that of their own be lives prior to being in the public eye ( greer says aliens basically use meditation to control technology). Point being that people often start off with the best intentions, until a career starts from it.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 06:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Scdfa

Why yes, a photo, video, or an alien ashtray (thought I can't imagine a race as advanced as that being stupid enough to smoke) would be a great start, but I am sure you have convenient reasons why that can't happen.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

In the casino example, yeah you can say you have a 1 in X chance of winning, but what probability says is that in the long run, you will lose. If you play a little roulette, you could win, you could loose. But if you keep playing (in an honest game) probability says you will lose. Like they say, Vegas wasn't built by winners.



The casinos always win In the long run and they are playing the same game with the same probability. That's why I only play poker because I always find people playing that have no clue about pot odds.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: redtic
a reply to: Scdfa

Why yes, a photo, video, or an alien ashtray (though I can't imagine a race as advanced as that being stupid enough to smoke) would be a great start, but I am sure you have convenient reasons why that can't happen.


They may be advanced enough to counter it(Smoking). But other than that, majority of times people don't take a look at where the human race is. If there were aliens on Mars then they'd sure as hell be puzzled about how advanced we here on earth are. We are a space faring nation to some degree. We have different types of people here, I doubt aliens would be monotonous in personality as if they were just machines(All smart, all scientists). People need to realize that earth could soon be heading to deep space. Soon meaning within the next 20 years at this current rate of technology advancement.

*Snip*
edit on 6/15/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8


You mean like stealing the actual cop car they've been arrested in?


Are you actually suggesting it boiling down to stealing the method of transport which would be the UFO itself? That would be equivalent to the cop car from your comparison. Now what would the average citizen even know about operating one? Well, we can strike that off of the list of things to steal. In fact, that should be the first strike. Sorry but cop cars are not equal to UFOs in terms of operation.


You said your neighbors were having a picnic one day and witnessed a UFO hover over your house during one of the abductions. Here's a group of people completely unrelated to your families personal experiences, with not only a chance to provide evidence to support your story, but their own of an alien spacecraft hovering over a neighbors house. That would be pretty amazing. No evidence of attempted photographs or videos? "Electronic interference" is only specific to video and handheld cameras and not TVs, computers, microwaves, lights, etc. I guess? All of the neighborhood was okay except cameras?


Two points to make here:
1. What makes you think that rendering any simple electronic device would be an issue for ET when we have UFOs on record leaving automobiles inoperable and disabling entire control panels of fighter jets scrambled to intercept them? If ET wants your vehicle's engine cut off to remain stationary, done deal. If ET doesn't want your military's jets firing any missiles, no prob. The ability to shut down any image capturing equipment would be like childs play. We have to give ET more credit than that.


2. In the event of a photo or video of a UFO being credited to ET even being captured, (and I ask this question repeatedly) which one out of the 1,000s has actually survived scrutiny? Skeptics might as well stop asking for this kind of evidence. And you're asking for images during an abduction? Good luck with that. I myself would firmly believe him but those images or video wouldn't survive 1 minute in this forum before being moved to the hoax bin. It may break the guinness world record for a moved thread. Debunkers here will swarm all over it like a flock of vultures around a dead carcass. Billy Meier tried showing pics and said "look, here's the UFO I was talking about" and look where that got him. Just anyones word of mouth with what will be perceived as an alleged photo or video isn't going to cut it.


Witnesses outside of your family should be a big plus for your book. I'll go on the assumption that they have no evidence either other than stories to tell? But, hopefully you have verifiable testimony from at least one for those witnesses for readers that rely on that type of thing to help substantiate a story.


And what good is eyewitness testimony going to do. Haven't you heard, that's no good around these parts. Not even multiple accounts. The old "witness misperception" attributed to these witnesses brought about it's demise.




top topics



 
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join