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.

 

What you have to believe in order to be a 'non-believer

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2005 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Yes Divergence, the person who was in the Navy was correct about one thing. There are higher then top secret security levels. As for the knowledge of UFO or aliens I cannot confirm or deny such information. Was he by any chance an IS or CT?


-Aza





posted on May, 23 2005 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Since UFOs are only seen on Earth, why do we assume they came from thousands of light years away?

As weird and unlikely as the phenomenon of life is, why do we assume its a normal chemical reaction that can spontaneously happen anywhere else?

I believe we are in fact alone.



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 08:27 PM
link   
The possiblity of other life is too great then just one single fluke. Billion upon billions of stars with millions upon millions of worlds out there. Heck we even have species of animals on this planet that even defy all explainations. Namely the worms living off live volcano heat vents underwater. Sure they are underwater but that water is well beyond boiling point for a human.


just my opinion though

-Aza



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azathoth
Was he by any chance an IS or CT?


He was an ET (no pun intended). He maintained all of the Crypto Gear so he had access to the Radio Room but more importantly, I believe, the spooks who worked there.

It was a brief conversation with a lot of over the shoulder looking and hushed tones. This man was my friend and shipmate and I really have no valid choice but try to accept that what he said is true.



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 08:53 PM
link   
They have a special formula for calculating the amount of life in the universe: galaxies * stars/galaxy * planets/star * %life-sustaining planets * chance of life spontaneously generating

I always come up with 0, because no matter how many googles of planets there are, life just does not spontaneously generate.



posted on May, 24 2005 @ 03:36 AM
link   
One of the better topics I've seen recently. The participants have made such a diversity
of subtopics that this discussion could turn into a book. To me, the most interesting
interchange was the result of Gazrok ammending the original topic "non-believers beliefs".
Jonna came in and made a rather "from the heart" attempt to answer these. At least it reads that way.
Shai then sorta slams the non-believer Jonna but in an incredibly insiteful way. The real question now
becomes :: Does Shai understand his own insite ??

quote Shai :
"Or it means you do not know or are incapable of discerning the difference between a claim and hard physical, touchable and visible evidence."

Let me re-state it so the insite is more in focus.

To make a claim, the onus (burden of proof) is on the claimer.
Once upon a time, the Army Air Force made a claim. The burden of proof fell on the various iterations of Bluebook. Unable to prove the claim,
they ceased the effort.

Now, UFOlogists have taken up the claim. The burden of proof is on them. Many of these folks blaim the AAF (government cover up)
for hiding the evidence they need to prove what is now their claim. You cannot legally shift the burden of proof once you accept it.

Now, with that insite, go back and re-read: mpeak, Skibum, and SkipShipman on page one. They are almost on the same page as I am.
The only true topic response so far was Jonna, and a good one at that. Your response to him made me think I was in the religion forum.

So, an idea to test this. The converse of this topic would be - what do believers believe? I think they believe it is possible to
pick cherrys in an apple orchard. Shape, color.......um yes if it quacks like a duck, its a cherry.



posted on May, 24 2005 @ 07:03 AM
link   
I'm kind of curious as to why there has to be a divisive edge to this topic. Frankly, as I've stated before, I want to believe, but to me, the proof that these UFOs are from a different planet(s) doesn't exist.

However, that is not my point. It is interesting that Shai put a "classy" slam on Jonna. It is interesting that in the field of "belief" that Shai and Gazrok (whose writings I read in total) have differing thoughts, concepts, and beliefs (i.e. cattle mutilation).

There is much to this particular phenomenon to be discussed and dissected while looking for the "truth", which appears to still be subjective, particularly among the believers.

My question here is, why does it matter to Shai, from an apparent perspective of superiority, what I or anyone else "believes"? In my heart of hearts, I know that some day the effect/truth regarding UFOs will come out. It will be one of four possible outcomes, in my paradigm.

1. Aliens who have come and gone on a continual basis for aeons.

2. Aliens who in various steps of "evolution" from different planet systems are going through the known or attainable parts of the universe exploring and experimenting as they become technically/spiritually/physically able... And perhaps some day in the future, out time will come when evolutionarily it is our turn.

3. The phenomena that we have been witness to are a natural part of a universe that we have such a barebones beginning of understanding about.

4. The phenomena that we have been witness to are a huge non-event brought on by an extremely large amount of wishful thinking on the part of the observers.

In other words, my particular application of belief, as with both Shai's and Gazroks, as well as the belief of thousands and millions of others will, in no wise, change the outcome. They either is or ain't ... Something.

Even getting the government to capitulate and admit that there is something is not going to change the outcome. I, personally, am relatively certain that they know something. Can they control it? Probably not. Can they define it to our collective satisfaction? Probably not. So, if they possibly can not define or control it, and our particular set of belief systems can not change the outcome, why is it so very important to convert non-believers, and fence sitters, like myself? Why does it become important, as in Shai's putdown, to make derisive comments about people who are not jumping in with both feet and the kitchen sink to try and prove something that has been unproveable for years, centuries, and perhaps, aeons.

I guess I don't get it.

Sorry, if this came off soundling like a rant, I did not mean it as such. Simply trying to put a perspective on it that I am comfortable with. After all, isn't that what belief systems are about?



posted on May, 24 2005 @ 11:37 PM
link   
Now here is a commendable bit of logic:

"Even getting the government to capitulate and admit that there is something is not going to change the outcome.
I, personally, am relatively certain that they know something. Can they control it? Probably not. Can they define
it to our collective satisfaction? Probably not. So, if they possibly can not define or control it, and our particular
set of belief systems can not change the outcome, why is it so very important to convert non-believers, and fence sitters, like myself?
Why does it become important, as in Shai's putdown, to make derisive comments about people who are not jumping
in with both feet and the kitchen sink to try and prove something that has been unproveable for years, centuries, and perhaps, aeons.


I guess I don't get it. " == sigung86


I think you do !!



posted on May, 25 2005 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightwing
Now here is a commendable bit of logic:

"...
I guess I don't get it. " == sigung86


I think you do !!



See... This is what I mean. Start off with a silly comment... End with a silly comment. No illumination between. This kind of stuff is what takes someone like myself, and puts me on a fence. Whatever I may or may not believe regarding the great UFO conspiracy, is not pertinent. I am asking why you folks feel the need to punch out at people like me. People who may like to believe, but don't want to be party to the slam-fest that these kinds of things can turn into.

I simply wanted to understand why it matters to anyone if we believe or not, and basically, why the need to be irritating about it all is felt to be the proper modus operandi for so many folk involved.

Insofar as logic goes, you will see that I have, essentially, restated the case several different ways to see if you happen to have some real input.


Thanks

[edit on 25-5-2005 by sigung86]



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 02:58 AM
link   
"See... This is what I mean. Start off with a silly comment... End with a silly comment. No illumination between.
.......I am asking why you ..feel the need to punch out at people like me. " == sigung86

Now I am curious. Have you had so little praise for your writing that you do not recognize it when you get it ?
My first silly comment was a commendment of a remarkable thought sequence.

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
www.m-w.com...
Commend Adj : commendable
1 : to entrust for care or preservation
2 : to recommend as worthy of confidence or notice
3 : to mention with approbation : PRAISE


Lets see, next you say that I had no illumination between.....your quote does leave out your own words.
I quoted them for a reason. Lets just say that I felt you summarized what may be the end of the rainbow
for UFO researchers, and as eloquently stated as I have seen.

The last silly comment was of course my bad. Thats where I usually go wrong. I made an assumption...........
about you based upon the eloquence of the thoughts.

"I simply wanted to understand why ......." == sigung86

Then read your own words, dont delete them. If you can explain something so well for others, then why
are those words meaningless to you ?



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightwing
"See... This is what I mean. Start off with a silly comment... End with a silly comment. No illumination between.
.......I am asking why you ..feel the need to punch out at people like me. " == sigung86

Now I am curious. Have you had so little praise for your writing that you do not recognize it when you get it ?
My first silly comment was a commendment of a remarkable thought sequence.

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
www.m-w.com...
Commend Adj : commendable
1 : to entrust for care or preservation
2 : to recommend as worthy of confidence or notice
3 : to mention with approbation : PRAISE


Lets see, next you say that I had no illumination between.....your quote does leave out your own words.
I quoted them for a reason. Lets just say that I felt you summarized what may be the end of the rainbow
for UFO researchers, and as eloquently stated as I have seen.

The last silly comment was of course my bad. Thats where I usually go wrong. I made an assumption...........
about you based upon the eloquence of the thoughts.

"I simply wanted to understand why ......." == sigung86

Then read your own words, dont delete them. If you can explain something so well for others, then why
are those words meaningless to you ?


I AM WLL AND TRULY FIRED!!!

And you have my sincerest apology for not recognizing irony! Hopefully we can be friends now?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join