Scpetics dont have a leg to stand on

After reading several of the major UFO cases:

The 1942 'Battle of Los Angeles
Betty and Barney Hill Abduction Case
Travis Walton Abduction Case
The Shag Harbour Incident

(Just to name a few)

how can one refute presents of alien/UFO ?, i can understand being extremely cautious not to back a case that mite be a hoax. BUT when you have Army anti-aircraft batteries firing nearly 2,000 rounds of 12 pound of high explosive shells in full view of hundreds of thousands of residents thats abit hard to pass off as swap gas or Venus. So scpetics please by all means deny the existence alien/UFO, BUT dont say its "cause there is just no hard proof".

[edit on 12-4-2006 by helium3]

Originally posted by helium3
how can one refute presents of alien/UFO ?, i can understand being extremely cautious not to back a case that mite be a hoax. BUT when you have Army anti-aircraft batteries firing nearly 2,000 rounds of 12 pound of high explosive shells in full view of hundreds of thousands of residents thats abit hard to pass off as swap gas or Venus. So scpetics please by all means deny the existence alien/UFO, BUT dont say its "cause there is just no hard proof".

[edit on 12-4-2006 by helium3]

the army do training in viewing range of the civillians all the time.

Originally posted by The Collective

Originally posted by helium3
how can one refute presents of alien/UFO ?, i can understand being extremely cautious not to back a case that mite be a hoax. BUT when you have Army anti-aircraft batteries firing nearly 2,000 rounds of 12 pound of high explosive shells in full view of hundreds of thousands of residents thats abit hard to pass off as swap gas or Venus. So scpetics please by all means deny the existence alien/UFO, BUT dont say its "cause there is just no hard proof".

[edit on 12-4-2006 by helium3]

the army do training in viewing range of the civillians all the time.

I take it you have never read about the 1942 'Battle of Los Angeles'

www.ufoevidence.org...

Please this is really my point, it seems to be that scpetics are just uneducated on UFO cases

[edit on 12-4-2006 by helium3]

Collective, you would be well advised to research topics before you post your opinion on them.


Yep, there is a lot of hard proof for UFO's, but as I have never seen one with my own eyes, I will remain a skeptic. But to say that they don't exist because of a lack of hard evidence is just silly.

Originally posted by watch_the_rocks

Yep, there is a lot of hard proof for UFO's, but as I have never seen one with my own eyes, I will remain a skeptic. But to say that they don't exist because of a lack of hard evidence is just silly.

This is a reasonable statement and follows a clear logtical train of though. But major UFO skeptic's just deny everthing to the point where i think there working for the same govenments cover it up. I really cannot see any clear logtic in calling UFO's swamp gas.

hmmmm...I live in la, or oc I should say, yet I've never heard of that "battle". Seems like if it did happen it would be pretty well known. Just my two cents

Originally posted by edwardteach
hmmmm...I live in la, or oc I should say, yet I've never heard of that "battle". Seems like if it did happen it would be pretty well known. Just my two cents

They have an Annual Re-enactment every year, in which there is a Blimp substituted for the UFO!

Here's a pic from the re-enactment taken 2 years ago.

Considering supposed eye-witness accounts are one of the most useless pieces of evidence claimed I would say the non-believing crowd has quite alot to stand on. Then add the fact that few reasonable scientists would ever put stock into UFO theories and also the prevelance of hoaxes for attention and I would say the tables are indeed turned and that the UFO believers are the ones without a leg to stand on, since they have to fight to try to prove their point and the opposition has to only point to the rampant flaws and inconsistencies in most claims of UFOs.

Bentwaters/Rendlesham Forest is the definitive UFO event IMO.

There is no logical explanation other than alien visitation.

Originally posted by Schaden
Bentwaters/Rendlesham Forest is the definitive UFO event IMO.

There is no logical explanation other than alien visitation.

Skeptics, like myself, have many other explanations that are just as logical as alien visitation. You simply stop looking beyond the alien visitation explanation. There are other things out there beside aliens (who NO ONE has found any real evidence of that is irrefutable)... And the truly interesting thing is that some of the other possibilities are just as way out, if not more so, than alien visitors from the planet munimula. And, in my mind, (I have opinions, just like the believers), some of the more "way out" explanations, may, in fact, have more of a grain of truth than the "Aliens" that everyone, who is not a skeptic, seems so sure of.

Originally posted by alternateheaven
Considering supposed eye-witness accounts are one of the most useless pieces of evidence claimed I would say the non-believing crowd has quite alot to stand on

so when a few 1,000 people see the same thing its just useless evidence ?, someone better call the justice departments of the world and inform them that "eye-witness accounts" are just "useless pieces of evidence" and no longer include them as a form of vital evidence. Also we better get dump the old police line cause this is just "useless pieces of evidence" and has never help to convicts any criminals

Originally posted by alternateheaven
Then add the fact that few reasonable scientists would ever put stock into UFO theories

Thats only because no scientist wants there funding to come to a sudden holt.


The bottom line is the evidence is there in plain view, its if you choose to accept it.

[edit on 12-4-2006 by helium3]

I am not the most skeptical, but I'm probably in the top ten percent, particularly with some of the ludicrous threads here. And reasonably aware people cannot deny some of the claims made here are simply made up to get a rise out of posters and stir the 'goof soup' pot.

That being said, I have seen things that are not explainable as planes, helicopters, balloons, etc., so I'm certain somethings up.

I completely agree, if you take a critical look at certain cases. i.e. Rendlesham, Roswell, Betty and Barney Hill, you must conclude, we don't know everthing.

NC

Time is the enemy of eye witness information. If you write or record (!clearly!) as something happens its generally good information provided you sober and of sound mind. The greater the ammount of time between the documentation of a sighting and the actual sighting the greater the margin of error and the chance for the mind to second guess itself and inject things that may very well have not been there or blow things out of physical proportion. Lots of eye-witness reports and other such evidence has put people in jail for a long time only to be found innocent later with the advent of DNA testing, so would you be willing to put your faith in something that has put innocent people in jail before? I sure wouldnt!

Originally posted by watch_the_rocks
Collective, you would be well advised to research topics before you post your opinion on them.

Point taken, and helium is right sceptics dont have a leg to stand on. im a believer but i have to remain scepticalto filter out the amount of missled or missinterpreted information.

innocent people in jail ?

Please how many innocent people do you really think are there in jail 1:100000000 ?

[DELETED]

[edit on 12-4-2006 by The Collective]

alternateheaven,

This is just the common Line, its over 40+ years old.

I'm reminded of Dr. Lincoln LaPaz. One of the Most respected Astronomers in his time. He was excellent at taking Eye-witness accounts and using them to plot trajectories and find Meteorites.

He himself witnessed a UFO with his family on July 10th 1947 just North of Roswell ,NM. His UFO account was recorded by J. Allen Hynek and also featured in Time Magazine.

He also investigated UFOs for the Army Air Force and the Air Force for several years.

Now, here is what the Condon Report was designed to do , ingrain "the common Line" into the public perception as outlined by Dr. Robert Low of the Condon Committee three Months prior to the beginning of the UFO investigation.

www.cufon.org...

Dr. Robert Low to university officials on August 9, 1966

"Some Thoughts on the UFO Project"

Our study would be conducted almost exclusively by nonbelievers who, although they couldn't possibly prove a negative result could, and probably would, add an impressive body of evidence that there is no reality to the observations. The trick would be, I think, to describe the project so that, to the public, it would appear a totally objective study but to the scientific community would present the image of a group of nonbelievers trying their best to be objective, but having almost zero expectation of finding a saucer. One way to do this would be to stress investigation, not of physical phenomena, but rather of the people who do the observing - the psychology and sociology of persons and groups who report seeing UFOs. If the emphasis were put here, rather than on examination of the old question of the physical reality of the saucer, I think the scientific community would quickly get the message... I'm inclined to feel at this early stage that, if we set up the thing right and take pains to get proper people involved and have success in presenting the image we want to present to the scientific community, we could carry the job off to our benefit.(30:211)

Real honest skeptics do have value and are required for real honest UFO research to succeed. I've seen a UFO - 1988, Orange Sphere with "a bite out of the top". Can I prove it - No. Do I believe?- Is the Pope a Catholic?
The UFO controversy won't be settled without the rigour of true and honest skeptics and verifiable documentation.
The shootout over LA is legendary. Absolute classic case of: so where are the bodies and craft? Even in photos and on radar these events were there... but that isn't proof in this world. Nope. Even the Belgian and shuttle/Mir/ISS stuff is pretty convincing. Nope - not good enough by half.
Actually, a great many "skeptics" and "believers" seem to make "data" fit their stories a little too easily and this is a problem for both sides of the debate and serves to take the credibility factor out of it for all of us.
With a few exceptions there is no documentation at all - this "gap" of empirical data both qualitatively and quantitatively leads to "scraping the bottom of the barrel" scientifically speaking. That cookie jar don't even have crumbs left.
Some really good work has been done but it isn't enough - not proof enough. Not baseball bat in the face-enough.
Now on the bright side, the anecdotal evidence is MASSIVE in every measurable way. If even one is "true" then - well you know - all the datums get reset. I'm of the opinion that more people do "believe" than don't - but I can't prove that either. The change since the '60s is evident to me.
On a sad/happy note, many people who really do "know" are entering their senior years and starting to pass on. I speak of those of "The Greatest Generation" astro and cosmonauts, pilots, techs, right down to the person who swept the floor, all brave and sworn/bound/pressured to silence. That's sad. Happily, these folk do "know" and I'm sure at least one has the "goods" and will leave "it" to be discovered. "It" may be something quite innocuous, plain, something in a shoebox, or files, but whatever it will be it will be a start - a key - toward the final version of the "truth" that skeptics, with strong legs to stand on the shoulders of these giants, will in time turn this key and open the door and be able to honestly point out in the light and say, "Truth."
There are possible alternatives that short-cut this "outting" like having a live televised Alien land an enormous saucer in a population center like NYC and say take me to the (your nation here) Embassy I want asylum.
'Nuther one would be a saucer crash with survivors captured by say a group like the Amish - or children with video cameras, like the Girl Guides.
My favorite "confirmable contact" would be that in the not too distant and dangerous human nuclear future the big (alien craft shape here) comes down and shuts off all the nukes gettin' ready to fly (like the Malmstrom/Rendlesham/Big Sur/Vandenberg UFO events) - everywhere permanently. Pleasant non-grotty smartly attired aliens hop out and want to meet (your favorite human or dolphin here) and listen to U2 tracks and then save this sorry planet from us with out the following nasty stuff; killing/eating/subjugating/chipping/abducting/impregnating/infecting/altering/mind control/messing with the timeline and especially NO ANAL PROBING us - Nolo Anulus Proboscum. I'd like that for this Friday afternoon at 1:30 EDT with my Poutine fix in the big office on the main monitor on my desk.
Hey ET/EBE/Krlll/43-good buddies you got your "echelon" ears on - comeback?

PS. ET/EBE/Krlll can you tell us who/what really killed Forrestal/JFK/RFK/MLK Jr./Reagan/Sal Mineo/Bob Marley/Sadat/Tupac/Biggie/Diana/Arafat/the 8 Bandidos and Proof?

Thanx again, Alien species dude/dudette(s) 'hope you are smarter and more wise and merciful than we humans are right now... I'll be watchin' Friday.


[edit on 13-4-2006 by V Kaminski]

Originally posted by sigung86

Originally posted by Schaden
Bentwaters/Rendlesham Forest is the definitive UFO event IMO.

There is no logical explanation other than alien visitation.

Skeptics, like myself, have many other explanations that are just as logical as alien visitation. You simply stop looking beyond the alien visitation explanation.

Have you read much about this case and the details ?
What is your explanation ?

Hi Schaden what is your explanation for Bentwaters/Rendlesham? Light house? Natural phenom?