UFOs, not Aliens: The Difference and Why it Matters.

NVM. It's not possible to have an intelligent discussion about UFOs
on ATS, except in the rarest of circumstances.

a reply to: karl 12

I can see this thread going far...but that first vid you supplied in the OP ("UFO's, not Aliens"), and the only one I viewed in this thread so far, was frankly --- quite laughable --- The narrator sounded like one of those Christian evangelicals that George Noory occasionally hires to be a guest on Coast2Coast, who spreads Christian evangelical religious doctrine, intent on demonizing the UFO enigma; with comparisons to the unmitigated trash that Jacques Vallee spews out.

a reply to: 111DPKING111

I think the real problem with the subject is lack of interest/apathy. We can debate whether Hudson Valley was military or alien, but the real question is shouldnt we really know? It was a mass sighting, anyone who is familiar with the case knows something was there. Why didnt the public/media demand to know what was flying over public airspace ? Just like the 20 trillion dollar national debt, not enough people care.

Personally, I don't think it has as much to do with lack of caring or interest as much as it does with lack of knowledge and understanding, as it's a multi-faceted topic.

I believe that many UFOs are military aircrafts that we're not privy to information on AND I believe there are spiritual beings who are able to manifest themselves and other objects into our physical world to influence us. Something similar to Bigfoot. Many people have seen them and interacted with them, but no one has been able to capture one or prove it. These beings are able to manifest themselves back and forth into both worlds. Even the Bible tells us that Jesus manifested into physical form when he came to talk to his disciples after his bodily death. He walked through a door that was locked. The Bible describes all of us as having these abilities in the next life.

By the way, I'm not hear to preach, I am only here to explain why I believe that such things exist, regardless of what anyone believes.

1 Corinthians 15:42-51

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:

43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:

44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.

48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.

49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

a reply to: Erno86

I take it you are not a fan of Vallee.

originally posted by: Baablacksheep
a reply to: Erno86

I take it you are not a fan of Vallee.

Neither am I a fan of the late J. Allen Hynek...

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I disagree. I have observed some intelligent and meaningfull discussions.

originally posted by: St Udio

UFOs are a product of Religious writings...

UFOs and Apparitions are made of the same 'stuff' : ap·pa·ri·tion-> the appearance of something remarkable or unexpected,

UFO/Apparition = a self reinforcing circle/cycle placed into our human mind, probably at the neural network creation level...

As a student of the Occult for nearly 50 years, I was taught, and continued to think; that apparitions were composed of Ectoplasm.

During this time, I worked with UFO researcher Marcel Vogel (also a senior scientist for IBM) who showed me a bit of metal he said was from an alien craft, I never did see any test reports though. I also, much more recently, jumped through the hoops to evaluate the Betty Hill event...it kind of indicates that ET is a real, flesh and blood being of some sort.

And, of course, as a life long scientist and engineer, I always apply scientific proceedures to everything I expirence, so; there is no "self-reinforcing" element...

Finally, as an "expirencer" I have had the opportunity to apply modern psychological knowledge, and at least some brain research/knolwdge to the whole issue. So...sorry man, UFO's and apparitions are not made of the same stuff. An apparition may be little more than a hallucination, a UFO is probably a natural event (sprite, ball lightening, etc.), though some are Government projects, and some are Extraterrestrial technology. And, there is far more evidence that UFO are NOT any sort of "religiophilosophic" manifestation.

a reply to: Deetermined

I believe that many UFOs are military aircrafts that we're not privy to information

Very reasonable, BUT the Hudson Valley sightings occurred over public airspace, with cars pulling over to see why this thing is just hovering in the sky. If you are going to operate the thing in plain sight over a busy intersection, people have a right to know whats going on. And it wasnt just an isolated occurrence, it kept happening. Its not like the military isnt without their own testing grounds, I woundnt think twice about the case if it occurred over Area 51.

If it was military, its almost as if they were messing with these people.

I've posted this account at least a couple of times here over the years. 20 years ago, I think '98. Could be wrong. I was outside. For some reason I looked up. Very, very high up I saw a black triangle followed very closely by 2 jets. Like a formation. Anyway, I am quite sure the black triangle was military. And I am convinced that ALL black triangles are military.

a reply to: 111DPKING111

I agree with that as well. In my opinion, the military, even rogue black projects wouldn't risk a test over populated areas. If it malfunctioned and crashed, and people picked up pieces of it they could find part marks and other things that would expose it as man made and thus they would be hunted and hounded for accountability. Everything in aerospace manufacture, even black budget stuff has part marks and numbers stamped on them for traceability, quality control.

Seems a very big risk for something that has no visible pay off or value in testing something like that, in a populated area.

a reply to: mirageman

MUFON, despite their resources and mission statements, seem to have embraced the 'commercialization' of Ufology and introduced very sci-fi like elements as part of their conferences.

The problem is I dont think their resources are so good, they basically had to give complete control to the History channel to make Hangar 1 happen. The History channel went for themed based shows like UFOs that attack or UFOs with super powers and often times the cases had virtually no evidence, but they fit the theme ! And the cases that looked promising never got the attention or follow up they deserved.

However I found out about many cases I havent heard before and for most people, MUFON is the only game in town. Who else are you suppose to go to for answers? At least they are trying to identify their best cases on their website

a reply to: karl 12

certainly don't want to insult people's intelligence but I don't think anything is 'patiently obvious' when it comes to speculating about UFO origin (nothing is self evident and we can assume nothing).

That aside, I really can't see any sane, objective (and agenda free) person objecting to 'a more focused, data conscious debate on UFOs'

No offense was taken Karl, but I think most people will see through the charade of trying not to assign a source to any really good sighting like Belgium.

Certainly there are many sightings on this site that are nothing more than blurry images of something, but I would hope a case like Westall where govt ppl swoop in right afterwards to confiscate photos/camera and provide a cover story means it was something they made or something aliens made.

In the case of Hudson Valley, if it wasnt humans operating that huge V(and maybe it us), is it so crazy to assume it was aliens?

However if calling them UAPs or whatever gets more eyes/funding on it, go for it.

I happen to agree strongly with the EDH. I saw a UFO in central Texas in the mid-80s. It was daylight, on a moderately trafficked thoroughfare. We stopped and got out of our car to see it, and so idid other motorists. The think was smooth and maybe metallic. It was thicker than a disc, and "thicker" top to bottom than one of the saucers in our cupboard. The think descended like a falling leaf. Any hominid inside of that ride would have been violently nauseated. A person with a party from another vehicle shouted, "Look! Aliens! And all of us n the crowd responded by saying, "No, that couldn't be it..

I happen to agree strongly with the EDH. I saw a UFO in central Texas in the mid-80s. It was daylight, on a moderately trafficked thoroughfare. We stopped and got out of our car to see it, and so idid other motorists. The think was smooth and maybe metallic. It was thicker than a disc, and "thicker" top to bottom than one of the saucers in our cupboard. The think descended like a falling leaf. Any hominid inside of that ride would have been violently nauseated. A person with a party from another vehicle shouted, "Look! Aliens! And all of us n the crowd responded by saying, "No, that couldn't be it..

originally posted by: karl 12
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

I've got a lot of respect for Neil DeGrasse Tyson in his chosen field - also with other people like Seth Shostak, Bill Nye and even Michael Shermer - the thing is when it comes to discussing the UFO subject they are completely (and wilfully) ignorant of the information collated on the subject - this is also touched upon in the main video.

Has Tyson, Shostak, Nye, or Shermer been grilled on their level of knowledge on the subject? I wouldn't make a statement that their lack of knowledge on UFOs is why they don't take the phenomena seriously when it's highly possible that their research is actually the reason they are skeptical. Yes, it's easy to make a mockery of the subject. But this is caused by the decades long claims by thousands of physical landings, abductions, interactions and so forth with absolutely no physical evidence. So it's an easy go-to response not because of it's created by those skeptical, but because believers/supporter argue there is a UFO-alien connection. Also when any evidence is presented like trace evidence in the Delphos case, on the surface it looks fine but when you delve deeper into it, you discover the scientific findings were done by people like Erol Faruk or Phyllis Budinger who have a history of involvement in UFO, crop circle, or similar subjects. You don't take material that's possibly extraterrestrial or may have extraterrestrial properties and hire those already in the field of UFOlogy and expect a clear unbiased finding. This is how you get results that you want and fool those who won't do their own research.
Any scientist or scientifically minded skeptic will be the ones that do deep research into the claims, as I pointed out above. This is where the disingenuous nature of the subject is exposed and how it can't be completely trusted. Some may say deserving of mockery.

I just wanted to point out parts of this post may not be specifically aimed at you. I looked over your previous posts and see you mainly stay true to the separation between UFOs and aliens. These are two different subjects.

a reply to: 111DPKING111

Perhaps so. MUFON was also seriously destabilized by signing up for Bigelow's Star Team Impact Project.

What I see in the MUFON-BAASS relationship is active management of MUFON’s work, despite assurances from BAASS otherwise. By carefully controlling the purse strings with each contract evaluation period, they are ensuring they receive a constant flow of information from MUFON while also making sure that MUFON does not end up with operational funding to stabilize its long term financial well being

James Carrion - Former International Director MUFON

Source

They do however have a fairly large resource in terms of people. But again we have the same problem. What does all the data MUFON have accumulated actually tell us that we didn't know 30,40 or 50 years ago?

originally posted by: 111DPKING111
a reply to: Deetermined

I believe that many UFOs are military aircrafts that we're not privy to information

Very reasonable, BUT the Hudson Valley sightings occurred over public airspace, with cars pulling over to see why this thing is just hovering in the sky. If you are going to operate the thing in plain sight over a busy intersection, people have a right to know whats going on. And it wasnt just an isolated occurrence, it kept happening. Its not like the military isnt without their own testing grounds, I woundnt think twice about the case if it occurred over Area 51.

If it was military, its almost as if they were messing with these people.

That's why I mentioned in my post that I don't believe that everything we see is from the military.

I noticed that your Hudson Valley link mentions sightings over the nuclear reactor. This appears to be a common denominator too. There is plenty of information on the internet (including a documentary) to suggest that almost every nuclear power plant, reactor, and nuclear storage facility around the world has had UFOs seen hovering over them without being able to detect where they came from. Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever started a thread on that?

It is my personal belief that our Creator is very much involved in keeping us in check, as I don't believe that any military in the world has the ability to spy on such things without being caught, especially when we look at the high number of sightings around secured air spaces throughout the world.

a reply to: Baablacksheep

Oh I have too. But only in one a couple threads.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: 111DPKING111


They [Bigelow] do however have a fairly large resource in terms of people.

And I sure would like to know exactly what it is that all those people do every day...

Harry Reid's $22 Million is paying for something "tangible", is it not? (besides pushing all government UFO-related material out of FOIA reach). You don't need an army of people for that - a good DMS (Document Management System) and few clerks can handle that.

Material evidence (besides the now infamous metal shard)?

I wonder if the tunnel system will soon connect Wright Pat with Bigelow's facilities?

Curioser and curioser...

a reply to: Deetermined

I noticed that your Hudson Valley link mentions sightings over the nuclear reactor. This appears to be a common denominator too. There is plenty of information on the internet (including a documentary) to suggest that almost every nuclear power plant, reactor, and nuclear storage facility around the world has had UFOs seen hovering over them without being able to detect where they came from. Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever started a thread on that?

Problem with the Hudson Valley story about a huge V shaped object within 100 yards of Indian Point nuclear power station is that all the witnesses remain anonymous. The security videos mysteriously all malfunctioned and the only person that the story comes from is Phil Imbrogno. A man who has embellished his educational qualifications and history.

Of course it doesn't make the story false but it introduces a huge element of doubt. If it isn't true then how many other stories might not be true? Which means we come back to how do we decide the wheat from the chaff.