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.

 

THE skeptics should understand this FIRST

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 12:09 PM
link   
in a civilized society to have enough order (lack of disorder) certain things must be surpressed be it (knowledge, or immaterial, or ufos/things that may panic people) even if and when they do exist, and they will surpress these things at every turn whatever it takes in intrests of national security and to prevent the spread of

1. uncontrollable subjective immaterial information
2. information released not in a controlled way that otherwise will threaten the present power structure which would pose a threat in the form of too much disorder
3 things that cause uncontrollable panic ( such things if known about ) would not be released to the public (we are on a NEED to know basis) unless are very lives are threatened beyond there abilities to confidently defend us

this is why the major media is bought and paid for

this is why society is more materialistic and that the physical sciences are funded things can be seen and at least agreed upon to EXIST. and there is less disorder interpersonal and social. and the mystic sciences considering consciousness and other intriguing things are not. the information
creates a high potential for social disorder. if everyone understood this there would be less skeptics, and more intelligent people looking into the true secrets in this world

this is why people who make discoveries out of the realm of what people need to know and try to speak about it (make it mainstream) are furiosly attacked, discredited, and "black listed". doesn't this make sense to people

now tell me somebody's only reply will be to correct a spelling error

this to me is the flaw of most skeptics to not understand this basic principle. and why should they, this is not taught in school (it is on a need to know basis) and the ptb don't think you should know

and don't get me wrong many people get carried away with believing anything but when you see how anything really could be possible , you must often give things a chance which are a load of crap and unless you are well rehearsed in the subject people can unfortunately get carried away. not to mention half of the intelligence agency's create disinformation in order to keep these things ( that are on a need to know basis) very confusing to anyone curious enough to dig deeper but one can find the way, but trying to make it mainstream knowledge well that is a very very bad idea

the meaning of this post was to get people to see a persective which would show them why somethings will always have a co-ordinated effort to be discredited and surpressed, and how to keep society in order, there have to be conspiracy's , because the government can not allow people to know everything, and most people can't handle the truth, and if they did there would be great disorder , especially to the powers that be

the other reason was to get skeptics to be more realistic and hope that by doing so the truth movement could utizilize some of the best anayltical minds out there and uncover some S***

[edit on 3-7-2007 by cpdaman]




posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Now I would like to add there are a lot of empirically based and objective and materialistic theories-Roswell UFO crash, paleocontact, etc. that are also attacked by the skeptics.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I think it depends on the degree to which one is skeptical. I've seen 4 'UFOs' and am still highly skeptical, whether by my own logic or by government influence.

Some people are willing to believe that anything is possible assuming they can see it with their own eyes -- me


Some are simply not willing to alter their mindset one iota, no matter what. And giving them a crash course in political 'truisms'/rationality isn't going to change them because they simply will not listen to that either



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 12:20 PM
link   
I think the skeptics, while vocal, are still a minority and are not happy about the fact that they are.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 12:31 PM
link   
i think beleivers are mad becuase in 60 years theyve produced no proof of ETs visiting earth.

and you must admit now were in 2007 with millions of commercial airline flights day & night- evrybody with mobile phones, many more cctv cameras still nothing.

you would think the evidence would get better- not worse

what i think alot of believers dont realise is the lengths people will goto to make money or get their 15 mins of fame. Just look at all the hoaxes- mj12 documents-alien autopsy-billy mier-steven greer- david sereda-frank kaufman the list goes on & on

[edit on 3-7-2007 by yeti101]



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
i think beleivers are mad becuase in 60 years theyve produced no proof of ETs visiting earth.

and you must admit now were in 2007 with millions of commercial airline flights day & night- evrybody with mobile phones, many more cctv cameras still nothing.

you would think the evidence would get better- not worse

what i think alot of believers dont realise is the lengths people will goto to make money or get their 15 mins of fame. Just look at all the hoaxes- mj12 documents-alien autopsy-billy mier-steven greer- david sereda-frank kaufman the list goes on & on

[edit on 3-7-2007 by yeti101]


There's only not proof if you discount the obvious such as the Roswell memo and the mountains of paleocontact data.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
There's only not proof if you discount the obvious such as the Roswell memo and the mountains of paleocontact data.


"The" Roswell memo? There are many memos related to Roswell, including some even Stanton Friedman says are fake. I do think Roswell is a pretty good case--not because of any individual piece of evidence, but because of the preponderance of people who have discussed it. The latest book, "Witness to Roswell" has several new witnesses, the total of which is several hundred now. Recommended reading. Spend the $10.19 so Schmitt can buy half a cup of coffee.

As for the 'mountains of paleocontact data," That is just about worthless. We have no idea what petroglyphs or cave paintings mean and there's no one around to tell us. It's not even close to evidence.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   
i understand some people dont "get it"

they will cling to there beliefs even unknowingly because subconsiously they know the WORK that is required and CHANGE that ensues when one reconstructs a belef system

THERE WILL NEVER BE ANY GOVT PROOF OF THINGS THAT REALLY EXIST that you DON"T need to know about. BECAUSE the RESULTING DISORDER WOULD shake the ORDER of society to unstable and threating conditions ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE CURRENTLY REAPING THE REWARDS of being ON TOP, as well as the MASSES. sorry for all caps, mods do what u need 2, but i think this should be drilled into ignorant and naive minds, because once you open yourself up to the right perspective's WHY something real will be surpressed , the MIND can OPEN, but it's gotta be done carefully and slowly. it is a fun adventure with many learning experiences on the way.

[edit on 3-7-2007 by cpdaman]



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 02:45 PM
link   


There's only not proof if you discount the obvious such as the Roswell memo


brilliant post, second only to the guy who posted "case closed then" in the C2C drone thread.

p.s roswell is one of my favourite subjects


schuyler im dissapointed you would think "new witnesses" 60 YEARS after the event & 29 years after the story first surfaced would be regarded as good.

i could even make up a roswell story and make it fit in with all the others, everyone knows the drill & what theyre expected to say. Why not make some money and write yourself into urban myth hmm

heres my tip on roswell. Goto the interviews with the primary witnesses 1947 & 1978-1980. Becuase evrything after that is skewed & disorted beyond all recognition.


[edit on 3-7-2007 by yeti101]



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by cpdaman
this to me is the flaw of most skeptics to not understand this basic principle.


Well, of course, things can be kept secret for a number of reasons. Human beings love to keep secrets.

But here's a little bit of logic you might not be understanding, yourself. Just because something MIGHT be kept secret, doesn't mean that it actually IS being kept secret, or that it even exists in the first place.

For example, let's say that the Moon is overrun by purple rabbits. Now, NASA and the government MIGHT be keeping that a very closely guarded secret because the sheer absurdity of that truth would cause rioting in the streets, the abandonment of religion, etc. There are plenty of good reasons to keep the absolute reality of purple Lunar rabbits a very deep secret.

But do they exist? Can you prove they DON'T exist? After all, they are secret, and rumors to the contrary, there has never been a single verifiable piece of evidence presented that proves these purple rabbits exist.

See, absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence, but neither is it evidence of existence. And you're in the difficult position of needing to prove something exists (alien UFOs) in order to prove your original hypothesis that there is a cover-up in place to keep them secret.

Good luck on proving either.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by cpdaman
this to me is the flaw of most skeptics to not understand this basic principle. and why should they, this is not taught in school (it is on a need to know basis) and the ptb don't think you should know

[edit on 3-7-2007 by cpdaman]



What basic principle is this? No where in that rant was one elucidated. Is this just an unecessaily confusing rehash of that tired old "science as pure social construction" nonsense?



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 03:30 PM
link   
suicide vius i understand exactly what you are saying and it often seems like we are chasing are own tails here again and again

especially when it comes to" proving" it in a way that puts it on the MAINSTREAM MEDIA or in Gov't history books so that every joe shmoe reads it and is enlightened

thankfully most are not

most are not trying to "proove" things to anyone. they are just trying to see if other people's belief systems are willing to give the idea a chance, and then build and brainstrom from there. the proof is within

most don't try to prove things and make them mainstream, ONLY THE NAIVE DO.

unless a cover up, or surpession of something will likely cause many deaths which are deemed unnecessary , and in that case it takes a very heroic person to sacrifice his own credibility, and even life for the benefit of others

then there are those who work to spread disinformation and use deflection techniques to keep things on a need to know basis for National security puposes, these people are the real beauties, protecting secrets and lying to do so.

[edit on 3-7-2007 by cpdaman]



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by cpdaman
suicide vius i understand exactly what you are saying and it often seems like we are chasing are own tails here again and again

especially when it comes to" proving" it in a way that puts it on the MAINSTREAM MEDIA or in Gov't history books so that every joe shmoe reads it and is enlightened


I understand you have a bone to pick with the mainstream media. I get that. But what difference does it make, really? Somehow, you still managed to gather the information you think is necessary to prove, at least to yourself, that these UFO aliens exist, or whatever. There is apparently enough non-mainstream media available for you to have done that.

So what's your problem?

Are you concerned that other people don't believe the same things you do? That if they'd only listen to reason, and read what you have, that they would go along with what you say? Maybe then they would recognize your superior intelligence, or something?

Well, all I can say to that is welcome to the club. I'm personally not a big believer in Jesus and all that stuff. But something like 70 percent of the American public does, and all the mainstream media in the world isn't going make them change their minds about it. So people don't believe the same things I do. Why should that frustrate me? Just because I'm right and they're idiots. There isn't a whole hell of a lot I can do about it.

People get to a certain comfort level in their beliefs and then stay there, even to the point where they're willing to fight to the death about it. Unlike yourself, I've not decided what I think about UFOs. I don't know what they are. I'm comfortable with that, and you're not. You decided to decide it's all true about the aliens, and that's that. There's not a whole hell of a lot I can do about you, either.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by cpdaman
now tell me somebody's only reply will be to correct a spelling error
Well, it would help if this was written in a more legible way.

I know that I may not be a good judge for the legibility of you post, after all nobody taught me how to write in English, but I know that the way your post was made makes it hard to understand (at least for me), not because of its content but because of the way it was written.


THERE WILL NEVER BE ANY GOVT PROOF OF THINGS THAT REALLY EXIST that you DON"T need to know about. BECAUSE the RESULTING DISORDER WOULD shake the ORDER of society to unstable and threating conditions ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE CURRENTLY REAPING THE REWARDS of being ON TOP, as well as the MASSES.
OK, one thing I never understood is why should the knowledge of those supposed truths would result in disorder.

Most people don't care about almost anything.

And one thing that most people should remember is that their own country is not the only country in the world.

What can be considered a question of national security in a country can be considered a good weapon against that country by its enemies, why aren't they using it?

But I more or less agree with one thing, the best way of keeping people under control is keeping them uninformed.

Here in Portugal, during the dictatorship that lasted 48 years, one Cardinal used to say that people should not learn more than enough to just sign their own name because knowledge (and not information) is a very strong weapon. The government, at the time, used to promote what was considered the best and most unique things in Portugal at the time, the three "F"; Fado, Football and Fátima. Those things were used as a way to keep people thinking just of that and not of all the other things that the government didn't want us to think about.

PS: sorry if this post is a little mixed up, but its 00:30 here in Portugal and I am too sleepy to make much sense.



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by cpdaman
1. uncontrollable subjective immaterial information


Not a comment on spelling, but context. What the heck does that sentence mean?

So is this another excuse for the lack of solid evidence in the UFO field? Well, we can't get the good information because someone hides it from us.


this to me is the flaw of most skeptics to not understand this basic principle


What is your basic principle?



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 11:10 PM
link   

ArMaP:
Well, it would help if this was written in a more legible way. (writing about cpdaman's writing style)
ArMaP you are making a lot of sense here! The mid 80' computer generation of young people (read computer geeks) in their forward thinking arogant way decided that computers were going to change the world and they were going to change the rules of written English at least while they were on the computer. If I had tried writing"computer English" at any stage of my education I would have been laughed at. They apparently got by with it and it somehow became the norm at least for their bunch. But it is difficult to read, unnecessary, distracting and on and on. But on the positive side it does mark the writer as a young person and you can better understand where they are coming from ie. less experience and a disregard for protocol.

by cpdaman:
this is why the major media is bought and paid for
Now I won't criticize your spelling cp because that's not my thing either and I'm supposed to be educated. But the reason I think the media is controlled at least at the upper levels is that:
1. It it bought and paid for by folks who are into control. Control freeks. Bilderburger types who have a history of behind the scenes shenanagans.
2. Keep us thinking about the 3F's as ArMaP pointed out. Simple earthy stuff like catastrophe's, football and who did what to whom (scandals).
3. Eliminate or tone down reporters who report out of the box phenomena like UFO's, free energy, conspiracies and stories that embarass the politicians they have paid to get into office who steer the agenda their way.
My opinion only but it helps explain a lot about the media!
Now remember, let's all try harder to use the English language properly! And I'll stop harping!



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 11:12 PM
link   
suicide virus good post

the only qualms i have is that i feel you are generalizing when you are commenting about my belief that i have already decided what i think about ufo's. that is vague and misleading

i should be more clear, i have decided that advanced beings are indeed real. I also believe some of them travel in craft that is not known to the public (UFO's) or they could be from the ocean as well. does this mean most ufo's are advanced beings? not necessarily a lot could be military as well. i don't have a problem per se. but if i have information that i beleive i myself would have wished someone to share with me a few years ago, i will share it with others in hope to do to them what i wish someone would have done for me in the past. I am also smart enough to say there are a lot of details about these beings that i do not know about.(Zero opinions on, yet) So i also like starting conversations with particularly a subset of people who believe but even the non-believers as long as they demostrate to me a critical thinking mindset and the ability to think creatively as well as share with me a few of the well thought out details in the advanced being puzzle that i am trying to put together.





[edit on 3-7-2007 by cpdaman]



posted on Jul, 4 2007 @ 10:30 AM
link   
plum ranch

i would say that because the dawning of the information age occured rather recently with the introduction of the WWW, that any age related differences in regard to experience and thus the assumed relationship with knowledge (while i may argue narrow minded ness)gained due to being of an older age is insignificant and a feeble attempt to retain some kind of beleif of a Inherent belief of a knowledge advantage against anyone under the age of (35 ?). it simply is naive .

p.s. disregard this post if part of your reply was NOT a snide attempt to create a blanket statement that "young people are inexperienced with these topics * and an assumption that this means they automatically have less TRUTHFUL quality knowldege.

i ususally dont reply to sly suggestions or assumptions unless i believe they may influence readers unjustly IMO about the quality of a message
especially in the context of a blanket statement

[edit on 4-7-2007 by cpdaman]



posted on Jul, 4 2007 @ 11:29 AM
link   
In the world we live everything is conditional. We can trust nothing and no one completely and absolutely, so this makes are world conditional instead of unconditional.

The only absolute are numbers and they prove only themselves.

Even our 5 senses can be deceived at any time, so why should anyone believe anything?

I am a person with an open mind, but I know my limitations and the physical body and mind has it's limits.

What the ultimate truth is will not be found in the physical realm, unless someone finds the "User Manual to Life" that most of us forgot coming in.


[edit on 4-7-2007 by Realtruth]



posted on Jul, 4 2007 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Aliens aren't real. I hope that clears everything up.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join