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.
Originally posted by grover
Oh please spare me... just because YOU believe in UFO's uncatagorically still does not mean they exist.
Originally posted by yeahright
Originally posted by grover
Oh please spare me... just because YOU believe in UFO's uncatagorically still does not mean they exist.
Are you seriously suggesting that there are no UFOs? That everything flying around in the skies has been identified?
Now THAT's what I'd call a faith-based position.
Originally posted by DigThat
I dont understand the people who labels themself as "skeptics" in the world of ufology. I'll make an comparison..
I don't believe that Vampires or Bigfoots is/has been real because there arent any proof of it, right? This make me a "skeptic" of Vampires and Bigfoot, yes? I don't spend time trying to convince anyone that might think they are real. Why I don't do that is because I think that would be a big waste of my time - cause the people who believes that they do exist will do so regardless of what i say.
Now people who claims they are skeptical that Unidentfied Flying Objects - or more precisly, "flying saucers" is something that is real; why would they then spend so much time on the subject, if they didnt think there would be anything to it? I mean what would be the point? I'm also skeptical to stories of indivduals I dont trust. Does this make me skeptical if flying saucers exist? No, it doesnt..
When you have witness testimony by multiple, experienced, credible, proffesional trained pilots - and on top of that in some cases got both ground and airborne radar confirmation to back them up. To then dismiss it as some weather phenomon, swamp gas, cooks or hoaxers wouldnt make them skeptical, it would make them ignorant.
Originally posted by JIMC5499
First. Stop calling them UFO's. UFO means Unidentified Flying Object. It means that there is something in the sky and you don't know what it is. If you want to refer to alien space vehicles call them something like ETV (Extra Terrestial Vehicle) or ETE (Extra Terrestial Entities).
Second. Stop misusing the word "Skeptic". A "Skeptic" is someone who's mind can be changed. I know, I happen to be one. "Close Minded" is a good term for someone who won't be convinced no matter how much information you present to them. For those who actively work against those who are trying to collect information, I prefer the term "Debunker".
Last. Stop using terms like "Evidence" and "Proof". Untill something like in the movie "The Day The Earth Stood Still" happens there is no "Evidence" or "Proof". You show up with a body or find a wrecked ship, that's "Proof". With the advances in technology, these days pictures are not "Proof". I am not calling all pictures fakes or misrepresented objects, I am just saying that there is no way to reliably confirm images these days.
Originally posted by makeitso
Anyone care to read what the U.K. Ministry Of Defence has to say about UFOs?
Per the report, the phenomena of seeing something exists, but sise there is absolutely no physical evidence, they post no threat, nor show signs of intelligent life. So it is likened to a plasma ball, or weather phenomena that is not understood at the time of writing.
Is that report skeptical/dangerous?
Originally posted by DigThat
If you don't believe, then why the hell are you wasting your time?
Originally posted by Togetic
The word skeptic, in this context, does not have the same meaning as the conventional context. At least, it doesn't for me. When I call myself a skeptic, I mean that I don't jump to conclusions, seek facts before blind belief, and don't let wishful thinking interfere with careful investigation.
And yes, you're right, I wouldn't be here unless I thought sincerely that there was something to all this. I believe that what are flying around in the sky are craft. But I would like to think that I can prove this upon a preponderance of the evidence using the evidence available: burn marks on the ground, soil samples, video, pictures, and the credible testimony of military witnesses. I would not, however, cite people like Steven Greer, to support a claim that aliens have in their possession solutions to all of our energy problems, because his "evidence" is based on unsubstantiated testimony that I personally deem to be without credibility and his alleged conversations aliens that I also personally deem to be without credibility.
Originally posted by Reality Hurts
Now having said all of that, I can admit that i have seen a ufo. Two in fact. Together. Up close (less than 100 yards). With 5 other witnesses.
Yea, I totally agree. Ignorance is something that you must keep reminding yourself to stay clear off.
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
the "dangerous" people are at both far ends of the spectrum
Originally posted by DigThat
Originally posted by Reality Hurts
Now having said all of that, I can admit that i have seen a ufo. Two in fact. Together. Up close (less than 100 yards). With 5 other witnesses.
Then we both have something in common. Seeing is believing?
I agree, never claimed otherwise. Well, I dont know if I would say that 99.9% are false but certainly most of em are.
Originally posted by Reality Hurts
That doesn't mean that every blurry pic on the internet is proof. Which is my while point.
99.9% are still, most likely, false.
Originally posted by Reality Hurts
99.9% are still, most likely, false.