It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


UFO's over house, son scared to play in the backyard

page: 16
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 11:58 AM

Originally posted by Boockelbee

Also why would your son say ''flying shields'' it just doesnt fly...


There could be several cues triggering such a comment on the part of a 7 year old boy.

1. the craft could have behaved in some ways similar to cartoon examples of Captain whoever's shield.

2. the shape could have been similar.

3. the color could have been similar.

4. the child could have gropped vainly trying to come up with something in his memory or vocabulary which matched the craft and failing, at a loss for any other similar term--arrived at the Captain whoever's shield.

5. the boy could be a great fan of the shield and found it a merely handy metaphor for a very rapidly flying craft that was not a normal plane etc.


Comes across to me as more supposedly awesome mindreading expertise . . . greatly exaggerated . . . unreasonably flaunted.

There's the hoax.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:09 PM
15 pages long and still really no discussion on what happened...just attacks.

A therapist would would suggest a site like this because talking about ones experience is Therapy. Like a group situation....Too bad he didn't get much of that here.

My 9 year old uses photoshop6 and ms paint all the time....and when i refer to these drawing i say things like look what my kid drew. Now I know he said it was done in water-colors, but if he doesn't know what his kid watches on tv, he may have made a mistake. [i admit this is a weak argument] but no more than labeling this thread a Hoax....

Personally if I ever had a UFO experience, I would not post it here. If I wanted this kinda abuse, I would get back with my x-wife.

I have had feelings for a long time that there are many disinfo agents here on ATS, but IMHO its getting much worse. I have not posted anything here for a long time, because it seems that here like most conservative talk radio show, that there is this need to attack the poster....rather than discus the issues.

Im not saying that Hoax's don't happen here, they do. But I do expect a certain amount of responsibility and accountability which to this point there is none. If a super mod labeled this thread as a hoax without any proof, IMHO they should no longer be a super mod. Trust! and Respect! or more and more people will stop posting here as much like I have, and as the OP has stated....

Byrd where is the proof that this drawing or whatever it is was done by a adult and not a child.... Its a put up or shut up type of thing. I hate it when it seems like the mods here wanna debunk everything here, but then not back it up....Now they are labeling threads as Hoaxes without any proof.

Sorry if i was to blunt, but its much less stressful lurking here than posting here.

Its been said that the only way ppl would believe in UFO is only if one landed on the WH lawn, but truthfully I don't think that would be good enough for ATS.

Also have you noticed that most posters that post here have only become members here in the last year.

Deny Ignorance
uh sure ok

ok im finished ranting....

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:10 PM

Originally posted by Texas_Longhorn
The area I live in is rather..."diverse" shall we say, so my neighbours usually don't associate with one another. I've never seen anything like these before in my life. Next time I go to visit my Uncle I'll ask him if he has ever seen anything like that before, but he'll just call me a nutcase or something

Here again he has used the British spelling of neighbor.

Originally posted by Texas_Longhorn
I've started to double check everything my son watches on TV to see if there is anything like this.

As to the picture, I think I may have used photoshop to resize if it that means anything. I understand where you guys are coming from though, so I'll try to help anyone I can in clearing things like this up.

Why would you double-check what your son is watching on TV if you've already witnessed the "shields" for yourself and therefore know your son is telling the truth?

Also notice that when questioned about the picture, he tries to leave himself an escape route. "I think I may have"... doesn't get much more ambiguous than that, does it?

Originally posted by Texas_Longhorn
Sorry thought I'd add this. I'm not sure who the red man is supposed to be. Like I said, he told me he just started to draw and this is what he made.

Again he is referring to drawing as opposed to painting.

Originally posted by Texas_Longhorn
Oh I asked him if I could have some of his pictures to show you guys, and he is really excitied and he's drawing some just for you.

Nothing really substantial, but this just seem fishy to me. He's drawing some just for us?! Hooray!

Originally posted by Texas_Longhorn
The picture has been resized more times then I remember trying to fit in on disks and what not. If it's distorted, that's why.

Doesn't make much sense. Why resize so much? He is trying to leave himself outs.

Originally posted by Texas_Longhorn
It is not a hoax. If the picture was altered it was either when I resized, or I may have increased or decrease the colour of the picture.

Again providing excuses as to why the image is computer generated, again he has used the British/Canadian spelling of color.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:10 PM

Originally posted by ExquisitExamplE
That brings up another thing, you seem to be a literate chap, wouldn't you have referred to it as a painting initially since it is done in watercolors using a brush? But you referred to it as a drawing, entailing pens/pencils.


Your ASSUMPTIONS are showing outrageously.

1. you evidently assume that the OP had the 100% IDENTICAL SAME VOCABULARY LEARNING EXPERIENCES AS YOU RE: "drawing," "painting," etc.

2. you evidently assume that after said learning experiences at whatever early age . . . 100% OF ALL the conditioning experiences since then have been 100% identical to yours.

3. you evidently assume that pristinely precise vocabulary use is 100% identically and precisely exactly as important to the OP as it is to you.

4. you evidently assume that in a heavily busy life about an emotional issue that the OP's psychology, vocabulary etc. brain structure and neural pathways are precisely operating 100% of the time 100% as yours would with 100% precisely the same ranked processing priorities your brain operates with.

# # # #

And you want me to think that your perspective on that score is scientific and worth bothering with.

Welllllll GTTM to that! Guffaws To The Max.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:17 PM

Originally posted by Tuning Spork

While the disecting of anomolies might have felt a bit too cutting at times, so did the cheering on. (Bo Xian, I'm looking in your direction....)

I suppose that's an understandable response.

My own perspective on my posting and stance re the OP is that I felt he deserved


Less than 12 hours from the OP to unceremonial sacred shredding was more than a lot too much cheekiness.

I also felt he deserved some other perspective on what he said


the INSTANTANEOUSLY RUTHLESS BLOOD LUST GLEEFUL SHREDDING of everything about his post and about his person including whether every hair on his eyelashes were in the proper direction, or not.

If that's cheering him on, so be it.


Either that or he's a very thin-skinned twerp who can't bring himself to acknowledge honest, passionate skepticism, and to patiently respect it's place in this old world. (Bo Xian, I'm looking in your direction..

Passionate skepticism does NOT REQUIRE him to be called a liar--or a twerp, for that matter--especially in less than 24-48 hours of his original post.

Who needs such blood-thirsty assaults? Life has enough hassles as is at best.


I don't blame him for taking his marbles home at all.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:33 PM
Is it just me, or has this thread now kind have developed into a form of infighting between members?

Look, what's happened here is that everyone has got very excited, some people have pointed out things that don't add up - as it usually the case - and some people seem to have taken offence at them doing that.

Yes, some people have been rude as the debate has got heated, but that's down to the staff to deal with - I ask everyone to calm down.

I really do feel that everyone has got caught up with the whole son idea.

as for going easy on a new member? I've never really seen that!

Seriously though, chill people or this infighting will damage the reputation of ATS.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:35 PM

Originally posted by Areal51

Whomever you are BO XIAN, you seem to be the kind of person that likes to ramble and meander on endlessly about what, he or she, doesn't like.

I do tend to be more of a stream-of-consciousness writer, than not. I'm confident most scroll buttons work well.

I don't know you and you do not know me, but for some reason you've taken to addressing me like I'm a five year old who's spilled milk on your favorite teen comic books.

Interesting intrepretation.

Not my construction on reality.

I'm merely replying from my heart and mind to what I experience as some outrageous assertions on the other sides of the issues. I think a lot of such contentions have been grossly knee-jerky; grossly thoughtless; grossly hasty; grossly unwell-thought-out to irrational pretending to be masterfully intellectual and scientifically precise when they are often more the opposite . . . .

What you could do is learn how to recognize questions.

Last I checked, my question screening synapses were functioning well enough. Personal, person-hood assaultingly harsh diatribes in less than 12-24 hours do not come across to me as questions.

I don't recall how much your particular posts were of that ilk but my best sense is that your assertions were somewhat in that ball park or I'd not have chided or ranted at what you said.

Everything I said is in fact "perhaps" or "maybe", it is all a question.

I much appreciate such qualifiers. If I have hastily blackwashed all your statements and none of your statements were harshly blackwashing the OP too hastily, then I apologize for lumping you overmuch in with the harsher posters.

If you know what an argument is,

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, is this an example of one of your gentle benign statements? I think the warm fuzziness got lost in the translation.

then you would not resort to the quarrelsome behavior that you have exhibited, at least as relates to comments you've made addressed to me.

Maybe this has been covered . . . . if the shoe fits . . . wear it. If it doesn't ignore it. Not trying to insist that all naysayers, debunkers are totally equal in their harsh blackwashing of the OP.

I do not think I've been fractionally has hard on the debunkers as the debunkers have been on the OP and they with a LOT LESS justification.

All of the personal attacks about me debunking, and making assumptions, and jumping to conclusions, and your usage of caps in your forceful attempt to make yourself appear to be more correct than I am.

Wellll, I hope you don't quite your daytime job for the mind-reading one. Your mind-reading leaves tons to be desired. You can ASSUME that's got something to do with some psychodynamic need on my part to leave you appearing less correct--but that's silly, to me. It's merely my effort to emphasize a part of my perspective without the capacity to raise my eyebrows, look more intensely into the reader's eyes; raise the volume of my voice; increase the timber in my voice etc.

My use of CAPS is part of my passion as well as my passionate preference for diversity as well as emphases in text on such a medium as online forums.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:46 PM
The topic of discussion:

» Aliens & UFOs » UFO's over house, son scared to play in the backyard

Please keep the responses focused on the Actual topic, and avoid comments directed towards your fellow member's person or character.

Thank you.

NOW, back to:
» Aliens & UFOs » UFO's over house, son scared to play in the backyard

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:49 PM
Hallejuah - a voice of reason...

Well done Mod!

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:53 PM
Label me pro or con stance if you wish but I haven't chosen sides at this point.

I am curious as to why it took 5 months for the outdoor fear to set in if it is really caused by the flying shield event. The only picture associated with the event is at least that old.

From the OPs post:

When he was showing me I noticed some pictures he made, and one made my blood ran cold. I asked him what it was and he said he didn't know he just drew a picture and this is what he made.

He doesn't say it is what is flying over the yard. He drew a picture. Maybe dad assumed it was the shield event. Of course some will say it's obvious it is about the yard, but may be it isn't.

If the shields are appearing on daily or weekly, basically quite often, then I think someone else would have witnessed something this strange and reported it. By this I mean that if these are truly not of this world objects.

Could it be that a young imagination has used the comic book material as the substitute for another reason to not want to be in the yard. There could be many other reasons and some research would be required to find it out unless of course it is not longer happening. It's an very populated area, many things are possible. Situations can come and go.

Edit: quote fix

[edit on 8/21/2007 by roadgravel]

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:56 PM
I am not trying to cause any fighting or fight with anyone myself, I just didn't want to see a new member ran off. But I guess that has already happened so I doubt we will see Texas Longhorn again.
It could be a good thing, if it was a hoaxer who was getting his story unraveled and to avoid sticking his foot in his mouth anymore he just vanished.
It could be a bad thing if it was genuine and he was really looking for help and felt disheartened by the wolf pack here.

Personally I was a little concerned because I also have a 7 year old son and if my son was terrified of things flying around the backyard, I would also be worried about it. I would not take the same approach as this guy but I am a person of faith and understanding of what aliens are, and he might not be.

I also believe that animals have a 6th since for things that do not belong in our world or that might be evil, so the part about the dog refusing to go somewhere that something otherworldly has been was concerning.
(Assuming that the beings have actually touched that ground or that they were hovering overhead in cloaked vessels)

But then again that part might have been added to make the story sound more creepy and maybe more believable. I don't think we will ever know though because TL is most likely long gone.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:57 PM
Imagination is a powerful thing in anyone - not just the young.

I sometimes run on from the garden after going for a cigarette because I've completely freaked myself out by looking at the sky thinking about something I've read or watched, and then a cat has jumped over a wall or something...

I mean, I'm 28 and well educated and still get freaked out by things I've read or watched...Imagine what it's like for a kid???

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:05 PM
I have had something similar to this only, I didn't see the craft. But my camera did.

I think though that they are nothing to worry about. A child who sees something unexplainable wille be scared. Same with animals. I have kids and they are no longer scarred. They are both teens (please pray for me
They are both curious. Like me.

PS this is my first post here. I'm so glad to be here.

Good Luck

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:07 PM

Originally posted by pjslug
And you wonder why people are getting upset at you

Uhhhhh, perhaps you could document the mind-reading session wherein you presume such 100% accuracy as to what I was wondering???

I don't recall wondering why people are getting upset at me--AT ALL.

for yelling at their opinions and their take on the story? You are allowed yours, why isn't someone else allowed to share their ideas, opinions, and feelings?

Where have I advocated that they not be allowed to share their ideas, opinions and feelings?

I have strongly suggested that ruthlessly blood-thirsty, harsh personal, person-hood assaults on posters in less than 12-24 hours . . . is unwarranted, unfitting, unkind, counter-productive etc.

Interesting that you'd equate the latter with the former.

With that kind of attitude (referenced in the quotable portion above), I'm amazed you have any clients at all.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh another excellent example of pristine sanctified, most holy, most accurate, most anointed ASSUMING.

1. Who said I currently have any clients at all? I don't. I teach part time and am semi-retired helping watch over my 84 year old step-dad.

2. Where's the documentation, the videos showing that I relate to clients in such regards remotely the same as I relate to harsh blood-thirsty, arrogant diatribes hereon?

3. Where's the documentation, the research that your assumptions about my attitude(s) about ANYthing are very robust, much less very multi-dimensional AT ALL?

4. Where's the documented evidence that you have assessed my mentality, perspectives, values, priorities more than 5% accurately?

If they disagree with something you say, do you nail them to a crucifix?

1. Where's the documentation that I've nailed anyone to a crucifix?

2. Where's the research that proves that hanging harshly personally assaultive diatribes on their own Captain Hook hooks is EQUAL to nailing someone to a crucifix?

3. How is it that harshly personally assaultive diatribe flingers so ruthlessly addicted to obsessively nailing new posters in less than 12 hours on obscure minutae of debatable priority . . . how is it that such blood spillers should be immune to being nailed to their own bloody clubs?

Aside from that, your grammar in this post thusfar is far from exemplory

More flawed assuming.

1. Where did I declare that grammar was a priority to me in this context?

2. Where did I declare that I cherished an identical fascination with grammar to yours?

3. Where did I declare that I had any beliefs and priorities about grammar identical to yours?

so I can only conclude that you didn't get the highest marks in your English classes.

I love it. It would have been difficult for you to have written anything further from the truth on the topic.

1. I was always in ADVANCED ENGLISH classes even in univ.
2. I taught English in Asia for 15 years.
3. I persistently got amongst the highest grades given in my English classes, if not the highest.
4. However, grammar has never been a very high priority to me--at least--not the prissy kind of English teacher obsession with grammar that some are so given to.
5. I do try to write mostly clearly and therefore pay SOME attention to grammar most of the time.

What other subjects did you receive less than average grades in? Psychology perhaps?

Actually, no. My rather intense PhD program classmates and profs voted me into the Who's Who in Colleges and Univ's thing. BTW, the grad program I was in would remove anyone with less than a B grade in any course.

However Bo Xian, you and I would agree on the following:

Oh, dear. Let me sit down. LOL.

On another note, the OP does have a point. I agree with him in regards to his statement that we often come across as if we are on witch hunts. . . . . They are unaware of the methods we employ to shred a story to bits even when that story may be true, so we should tell them humbly what we plan to do before we thoroughly tear him down.

[edit on 8/21/2007 by pjslug]

WHY should there be ANY agenda to tear a PERSON down.

Fine, tear the propositions down. Tear the story down. Tear the assertions down.

Calling him brazenly and cheekily a liar was uncalled for--especially less than 12-24 hours after the OP.

Persistent blood-lust ruthlessness of the same harsh attitude and assertions were exceedingly uncalled for.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:12 PM

Originally posted by Quantum_Squirrel
what disturbs me is we seem to have a 'Guilty until proven innocent' culture going on.
. . .
Clearly some skeptics doing analyzing are not unbiased in the slightest they are just clambering over each other to get the recognition.

You have stated well the reasons for my angst, anger and my own diatribes.

The silliness is that such wholesale near blind analyses from such fierce biases

are then offered

as intellectually pristine, wonderfully objective; purely kosher and sacred observations of HOLY FACT.


posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:14 PM
reply to post by BO XIAN

Let it go BO XIAN,

Be the stronger person and just let it go...

LEt's get this thing back on topic...

Welcome White Wolf, hope you're enjoying it so far, LOL.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:19 PM
Stay on the topic damn it; We just had a mod step in and remind us as to the nature of this forum, and you are still using this thread as a soapbox to lambaste people you don't agree with.

Hell, now I am doing it too.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:23 PM

Originally posted by Havalon
BO! you had a long spell there and disected almost every post that disagreed with you, (some seemed valid, some seemed vitriolic,)

Evidently they did to you . . . probably some others.

I didn't feel vitriolic when I wrote such. I CAN be vitriolic. I don't think you want to see that. What I wrote hereon was mild.

I take very seriously unwarranted, unmerited assaultiveness on indivuals who have not remotely asked for such. Sometimes I feel extremely passionately about such unmerited harsh, blood-thirsty assaults. Persons are wonderous creatures, to me.

walk away from the computer now and again, take a deep breath, DO NOT SHOUT OR CALL NAMES! it should be beneath you, after you have been trained.

Actually, my PhD program was very intense . . . a lot of the best therapists from the whole USA retired to that region and taught part time at the univ. They also tended to be pretty passionate.

But, I don't recall calling anyone names. I certainly didn't call anyone "liar" as the OP was repeatedly called in less than 24 hours of posting.

I tried hard to limit my outrage to assertions, points, hypocrisies of statements etc.

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:23 PM
Come on now, we were told to not get into more infighting and although I think we are on the same page, this is exactly what you are doing.
The bottom line is that if Texas Longhorn never returns then the story ends like this. Either no more evidence to prove his story or no more lies strung together to broaden the fraud. I am not claiming to know either way but if he sees us going back and forth like that then a true story of someone in need might just be lost.
I know that the reaction of defending ones self is natural, but in most cases I say to just let the blind be leaders of the blind.

(Unless that leader is John Lear)

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:30 PM

Originally posted by justyc
one has to wonder why the psychologist recommended ats knowing that the poster would have his claims microscopically scrutinised and picked apart by the members here (whatever did the psychologist hope to achieve here?).

Good point . . . as it turns out.

I doubt he will again--especially without super warnings and a hazmat suit.

But there's been a lot of assuming about the therapist.

It's quite plausible that he merely suggested ATS because it's a great resource on the topic. He evidently wasn't thinking about the recent blood-lust tendencies hereon.

I ASSUME he has a number of other suggestions for the OP. In any case, he sounds quite accessible for later contacts.

if he's telling the truth then his story should stand up under member scrutiny (or fall if its a hoax). to run off so quickly screams hoax and follows the usual pattern of ats hoaxes.


Likely means that he merely is disinclined to put up with the harsh, mean, hateful assaultiveness any longer. That he has better things to do with his life and emotional capital.

new topics

top topics

<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in