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.

 

UFO Hunter Admits And Proves WIth Video Evidence He Has Been Filming Glowing Nocturnal Birds

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: DebtSlave

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DebtSlave



By saying witnesses are unreliable, you are also giving the impression that all witnesses to the paranormal are unreliable and therefore all UFO paranormal sightings ARE a coincidence. You are a hard person to talk to.

Not if you actually read what I write.
I did not say that all eyewitnesses are unreliable. I said, once again, that eyewitness reports are unreliable.

A reliable person is perfectly capable of misinterpreting what they think they have seen.


WTF is the difference between a witness and the witness reports? WTF is your point man?


A witness is a person. A report is a report.
If you haven't gotten the difference, or my point, by now, you probably still won't.


Alright, I'm gonna get a pizza. Good talking to you all.




posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: DebtSlave

Would you consider yourself reliable? Are you capable of giving unreliable testimony based on an event you perceive wrongly? The difference is evident.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: game over man
Glowing birds sound fascinating! I've never heard of such a thing except for fireflies. The one account arguing with everyone seems like a troll...obviously has not done any research and there are tons of threads about the best sightings. He obviously believes everything the government tells him and think's the government wouldn't cover up alien visitation.

Where is your proof there are not aliens visiting our planet right now? Don't tell me you base your opinion on the Drake equation...


Im not replying to your bating. Sorry. I've given detailed explanations in the last 5 pages about what you asked. Sorry, it is game over man for me, replying to you.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: DebtSlave

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: DebtSlave

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DebtSlave



By saying witnesses are unreliable, you are also giving the impression that all witnesses to the paranormal are unreliable and therefore all UFO paranormal sightings ARE a coincidence. You are a hard person to talk to.

Not if you actually read what I write.
I did not say that all eyewitnesses are unreliable. I said, once again, that eyewitness reports are unreliable.

A reliable person is perfectly capable of misinterpreting what they think they have seen.


WTF is the difference between a witness and the witness reports? WTF is your point man?


A witness is a person. A report is a report.
If you haven't gotten the difference, or my point, by now, you probably still won't.


Alright, I'm gonna get a pizza. Good talking to you all.


Bon appetit. I'm going to start working, like i should have done when i first opened this thread. D'oh



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: autopat51
i have to wonder if we would know the proof, even when we saw it?
or would we cast it aside as being more fakery or cgi.


CGI is easy to spot. Even the best stuff can be discerned from real life fairly easily to people who do it every day, like me!

edit on 21-3-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014
i guess my point was..perhaps we have already seen proof..but didnt believe it.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Replied to wrong post
edit on 21-3-2016 by In4ormant because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

There you go again, more sarcasm towards the paranormal community witnesses and witnesses evidence.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: DebtSlave

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Your confusing evidence with speculation mate.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DebtSlave

I have not, in this thread, used any sarcasm.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: DebtSlave

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Your confusing evidence with speculation mate.


No, he's talking smack to me for no reason. What is wrong with the EVP evidence that Ghost Adventures provides? How were you not being sarcastic?


Pizza time! Later all.
edit on 21-3-2016 by DebtSlave because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: DebtSlave

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: DebtSlave

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Your confusing evidence with speculation mate.


No, he's talking smack to me for no reason. What is wrong with the EVP evidence that Ghost Adventures provides?



Thats not proof mate. That's the trouble. Its some persons account of what they saw/witnessed.

Evidence and proof are not loose terms.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: DebtSlave

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: DebtSlave

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Your confusing evidence with speculation mate.





No, he's talking smack to me for no reason. What is wrong with the EVP evidence that Ghost Adventures provides? How were you not being sarcastic?


Pizza time! Later all.
Did you quote the wrong post?
But I was referring more to "if you want to believe." Wanting to believe something is not a good starting point for analyzing information about it. Such a point of view does not encourage critical thinking.


edit on 3/21/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: DebtSlave

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: DebtSlave

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Your confusing evidence with speculation mate.


No, he's talking smack to me for no reason. What is wrong with the EVP evidence that Ghost Adventures provides?


I have seen enough of Phages posts to be able to say that he says what he means. I've never seen him LOL or make a joke, or exaggerate etc..in fact all i've seen him do it provide hard facts and good information. He might be a Vulcan, i dont know....but i do know he doesn't talk smack or antagonise people for no reason. Don't get your back up over this non existant issue mate.

(just kidding Phage)
edit on 21-3-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-3-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: DebtSlave

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Your confusing evidence with speculation mate.


Ive got some pretty decent evidence. Some of it i honestly dont even know what it really indicates. Some of it requires context to understand.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 10:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: OneGoal

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: DebtSlave

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Your confusing evidence with speculation mate.


Ive got some pretty decent evidence. Some of it i honestly dont even know what it really indicates. Some of it requires context to understand.


If it requires context to understand them that's s bad start in my opinion.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 10:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DebtSlave

I have not, in this thread, used any sarcasm.

The weird thing is that when sarcasm is used, it is often mistaken for a real comment. It is rare that straight, to the point, unambiguous sentences are mistaken for sarcastic comments. I may try that from now on.

Anyway, I believe this is a video of birds.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

That's too bad you assume a question is bating, what happened to people agreeing to disagree...I read the entire thread and chimed in, you even said you believe some sightings remain unexplained. It's crazy to think that we have never been visited when science predicts when we will visit other stars one day.

In your CGI career, you never had to predict or forecast anything in your work to advance your career and increase your work? You don't have goals that you believe in? Where is your proof of already accomplishing those goals beforehand? There is no proof you will accomplish your goals until you accomplish them.

Both science and pseudo-science believes/predicts/has goals set to discover alien life, alien visitation, and past alien visitation. They don't have proof either.

So you are believing/predicting that we have never been visited. You are also using no proof.

It's really up in the air, both sides of the argument have no proof.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: OneGoal

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: DebtSlave

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Your confusing evidence with speculation mate.


Ive got some pretty decent evidence. Some of it i honestly dont even know what it really indicates. Some of it requires context to understand.


If it requires context to understand them that's s bad start in my opinion.



Youre kidding right? I specifically said only some of it, a lot of it is straight forward. Besides, you do realize a lot of detective work hinges on knowing context. Bad start eh?

Alright buddy.
edit on 21-3-2016 by OneGoal because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: DebtSlave
The guy admitted that he was wrong. Good deal.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join