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.

 

Compilation: The Evidence For EBEs

page: 7
22
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Data, as defined by Dictionary.com:

da·ta ~ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[dey-tuh, dat-uh, dah-tuh] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a pl. of datum.
2. (used with a plural verb) individual facts, statistics, or items of information: These data represent the results of our analyses. Data are entered by terminal for immediate processing by the computer.
3. (used with a singular verb) a body of facts; information: Additional data is available from the president of the firm.

That's just the first entry, the other ten are here:
dictionary.reference.com...

Quality controls were set up in this thread in its initial post, here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
"There are only two criteria,
1) That 'Evidence' exists, some form of physical data that can be scrutinized here. A pic, a clip, etc.
2) That this 'Evidence' pertains directly to an EBE (Extraterrestrial Biological Entity), ie a pic of an alien, or video of one. "

I elaborated on this here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

also, please not the last sentence in the post you quoted of mine:
"Thanks Masisoar, you were totaly right."

That's how I'm defining data or 'evidence' in this thread. Each post has links to other ATS threads where you may debate the evidence in full.




posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 10:22 PM
link   
what you have missed, with respect, is the constant requirement for data to deal with FACTS. Facts as opposed to fiction have independent verification of some kind.

Absent a psychotic break from reality, it is common ground for normative people that there is a distinguishable difference between fact and fiction. The degree to which fact and fiction blurs is exactly proportional to two factors:

1. the deliberate deceit involved

2. the unintentional or self-deceit involved

A muppet show episode is not as persuasive or factual in any sense as originally classified gun camera footage.

It's sad to have to, but let's recapitulate some data collection 101:

open source information needs confirmation to be relied on.

classified information originally generated for a known purpose where that purpose is not some form of propaganda or mind control is more reliable than youtube, obvious hoaxes and wish fulfilment fantasies.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by DogHead
what you have missed, with respect, is the constant requirement for data to deal with FACTS. Facts as opposed to fiction have independent verification of some kind.


Actually, data can deal with anything. Your own particular attitude toward this thread or any piece of data presented within it is up to you. If you'd like to lump everything presented here into a fiction pile in your mind, so be it. That's your call, but to classify something like a possible ET signal from Saturn as fiction is just plain ignorance. What it is, is DATA. Data can be analyzed, compared, contrasted. Data is not partisan, and it's the only tool we have to examine the cases and claims presented herein.

Have you ever heard of 'fraud'? Do you know what the legal term implies? I suggest doing some research. You'll find several court cases in US Case Law at: www.findlaw.com...

Fraud is proven in court using evidence. To be perfectly clear, DATA IS THE DETERMINING FACTOR, when determining fact from fiction in a court of law. To criticize the data itself as fiction, one must address each piece individually, you haven't done that. There are threads to do that in existence. They are all linked for you, it really can't get any simpler.

I'm not sure what you mean by independent verification, since I'm NOT CLAIMING ANY OF THIS TO BE AUTHENTIC. Really, it's quite difficult to have a conversation with you when you don't actually read what I post. In the last post, I linked SEVERAL posts, already in existence in this thread. In EACH ONE I stated in clear English that I DO NOT SUPPORT ANY OF THIS AS AUTHENTIC. To continue to act as if I'm trying to convince you that any of this is real is plain and simple stupidity (it's no longer ignorance, because I've directly informed you).

I'm here to compile this data, and to get a look at the reports in bulk form. I'm sorry that concept seems to be beyond your scope of thinking thus far on these issues.


Originally posted by DogHead
Absent a psychotic break from reality, it is common ground for normative people that there is a distinguishable difference between fact and fiction. The degree to which fact and fiction blurs is exactly proportional to two factors:

1. the deliberate deceit involved

2. the unintentional or self-deceit involved


Do you understand that this paragraph is accusing me of deliberately posting fiction as fact?

If this is really what you think I'm doing, after my taking the time to explain it to you (after taking the time repeatedly to explain it to others in the same thread), then by all means, report me to the moderating staff of this forum.

If you can't read what I've posted, perhaps having them re-iterate it for you might clarify things for you.

I don't appreciate personal attacks, and if you continue with them, I assure you I WILL inform the forum moderators.

If you want to challenge any piece of this evidence, DO IT! I've linked the relevant ATS Threads for you in each case! Nobody is stopping you, in fact, if you've got ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL, we're glad to hear it. But unless you are here to do a case report on possible EBE Evidence, why are you posting in this thread? In the first post I outlined how responses to this thread should be formatted.


Originally posted by DogHead
A muppet show episode is not as persuasive or factual in any sense as originally classified gun camera footage.


This is a true statement, as the muppet show is intended for entertainment purposes and clearly advertised as such. I have not posted an episode of the muppet show here as evidence of EBE existence, so it's not exactly relevant either. Those cases of fraud involving puppetry found within these posts has been clearly labeled as such by myself and other posters.
They are here because they are commonly confused, and clarification was deemed necessary.


Originally posted by DogHead
It's sad to have to, but let's recapitulate some data collection 101:

open source information needs confirmation to be relied on.


I'm sorry but WHAT? I'm not new to Open Source Intelligence, in fact, CONFIRMATION OF SUCH INFORMATION IS THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD!

"Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) is an information processing discipline that involves finding, selecting, and acquiring information from publicly available sources and analyzing it to produce actionable intelligence. In the Intelligence Community (IC), the term "open" refers to overt, publicly available sources (as opposed to covert or classified sources); it is not related to open-source software. OSINT includes a wide variety of information and sources..."
en.wikipedia.org...

Yes, this is what we're trying to do here, analyze the data that's out there! We're attempting to link it together with any evidence that debunks it, AND we're also including ATS links where you can go to debate the data personally, making the system 'actionable'.

It seems to me like you just don't get it. This is the data, this is me compiling the data, this is ATS analyzing the data. This is what ATS is all about.

I don't expect you to believe anything that hasn't been thoroughly vetted here at ATS to your own personal standards. PERIOD. In fact, I don't really care whether you believe any of it or not.


Originally posted by DogHead
classified information originally generated for a known purpose where that purpose is not some form of propaganda or mind control is more reliable than youtube, obvious hoaxes and wish fulfilment fantasies.


Gee, you think? So how about lending us your credentials on how you can personally determine what IS propaganda and/or mind control in another thread, this one is about collating data, and reporting it for ATS Analysis.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:49 AM
link   
The thread seems to be more of the nature of some kind of OCD power trip to be honest... Just uncritically listing stuff for no real reason. The forum has a search function, and it even has a superb tag function. Searching turns up loads of hits on the subject matter, and from there the basic databasing takes over. I am not really converting into a fan of clumsy subjective reiteration so I will leave you to it.

My credentials: multidisciplinarian analyst with 20 years experience. Like it matters- the point I and the other poster made is essentially at the level of bare common sense.

But hey- it's your thread and I will leave you to it mate.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by DogHead
 


Doghead, thanks. Seriously. I don't share your view (and being human I tend to bristle a bit at being labeled 'on an OCD power trip'), but I appreciate your honesty.

To be perfectly honest with you, I use the search function every day. It's the best tool we have. It does bring relevent results most of the time, and usually lists several threads pertaining to the case I happen to be researching.

Tags help too, you are totally right.

Unfortunately, that's not enough for me. When I get into a conversation with someone about a casefile, I'm the type of researcher who likes to have all of the data in one place. That way both myself and the person I'm debating will also have a shared source of data, making conversation much easier.

No matter how 'crazy' the data may appear to some, I feel that labeling data 'crazy' is unscientific. If it's crazy, the data itself will show it, through testing if not before. I also feel that linking is essential. If you and I were for example having a debate on say, the Bob White artifact, we would both necessarily need to be constantly searching ATS and the internet in general to find each piece of data we want to use to illustrate our points.

I'm a big fan of putting all of the data in one place, and sourcing it there. That way I dig for it only once, instead of every time I need to find it. Making the database public here (in thread form) at ATS allows others to add data to appropriate casefiles.

I hope you can understand these concepts as a researcher with extensive experience, as you appear to be.

I suppose we can agree to disagree on whether or not wanting to compile and analyze this data in this manner makes me crazy or OCD. I'm okay with that.

Thanks for respecting my right to be 'crazy' (or as I like to call it, 'thorough') I respect your right to believe I'm nuts too



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
I would imagine this has already been brought up but if not, just thought I'd run it by you.


Would it be helpful to have a photo gallery of all of the EBE's photo's and images in this collection you are gathering where each photo would be linked to the relevant post in your thread on that photo? This would be an enormous asset to have included with this compilation of EBE photo's where members would have an easier time looking up information they are searching for in this category without having to go through every page in this thread to find the photo they are looking for.

The vast majority of these photo's are not well known other than ones like the Ikley Moore Sighting or the Alien Autopsy or the famous Alien Interview... those one's are well known but most do not have recognizable titles to them. So for this reason, I'm just suggesting that a pictorial index be considered instead of a text-based content index.

If you want, I could compile these photo's into a gallery but you would need to tell me how you want it organized. I have use of a gallery that comes with my server but there are also a number of free gallery's out there too.. or there used to be...need to check that out. Let me know ok? I think you're doing a great job here and thanks so much for putting all of this information together in one place!



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Palasheea
 


That's a great idea Palasheea, and I can certainly understand that some people are more visually geared than others. If you do make such an image collection, I would love to see it linked here.

For me personally, the associating data pertaining to each case is also very important. I like to know who said what and when, and I like to have a collection of places where discussion is underway that I can quickly visit via link to get the most up to date arguments.

Having said that, I can totally understand how that in and of itself is a LOT of data, and might be too much for some to comb through.

I also agree with you, that if you're having a debate about a certain image, it would be remarkably easier to be able to say, "Reference Palasheea's Image Compilation, Page 3, Image #49) than to compare/contrast possibly different images (as with happened on accident between you and ArMaP once, on the Glowing Alien Beings on the Rooftop Thread I believe). A shared data set is a good thing to have, and an image only version would only be an asset to this thread's intent.

You always come up with something I don't think of Palasheea. It's one of the main reasons I enjoy your work here so much. You ask questions I would never think of, and I think that variety makes for a more thorough and comprehensive investigation.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by WitnessFromAfar
reply to post by Palasheea
 


That's a great idea Palasheea, and I can certainly understand that some people are more visually geared than others. If you do make such an image collection, I would love to see it linked here.

For me personally, the associating data pertaining to each case is also very important. I like to know who said what and when, and I like to have a collection of places where discussion is underway that I can quickly visit via link to get the most up to date arguments.



Well, the purpose of having a PICTORIAL INDEX in this case would be for the photograph of the EBE shown in this 'INDEX" to be linked DIRECTLY to the post with information on that photograph that you have in this thread.

Because the majority of those photographs you are showing in this thread, do not have any recognizable identifying TITLES associated with them like for example THE ALIEN INTERVIEW... a PICTORIAL INDEX would be the most logical kind of index that would be needed for this type of compilation for research purposes.

Say for example, someone remembers seeing a photo of an ET in a thread in this forum sometime last year or so but they can't remember much detail about that photograph other than what it looked like. Even though they do remember a detail or two about that photo i.e. what country it was found in, who's to say that anyone tagged that thread with that photo in it with any tags to specifically identify that particular photo other than the word "ET" or "ALIEN"... not much help there. So it would seem that a Pictorial Index is the way to go with this type of photo-based collection you have gathered here in this thread.

This would be the main purpose of having a PICTORIAL INDEX.

But it would be better anyways to see how you organize the general text index for this collection so that if you want to have a PICTORIAL INDEX for it -- both index types need to be organized in the same way so as not to cause confusion for those researchers who are searching for information using this thread.

So for now, I'll wait until you have your regular index up and will take it from there if you want a PICTORIAL INDEX also.


PS -- in the meantime I'll just go ahead and put together a PICTORIAL INDEX for this thread and from there we can work together to have set the same way you will have your regular text index further down the road.


[edit on 10-1-2008 by Palasheea]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   
[edit on 10-1-2008 by Palasheea]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Interesting thread.

Even though most of what you have put together are hoaxes, clips from music videos, CGI, or just...blurry...I think its a good effort to catalog the "evidence" that has been claimed to be authentic.

I had no idea the amount of bunk out there circulating as proof.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by lee anoma
Interesting thread.

Even though most of what you have put together are hoaxes, clips from music videos, CGI, or just...blurry...I think its a good effort to catalog the "evidence" that has been claimed to be authentic.

I had no idea the amount of bunk out there circulating as proof.


That's correct Lee -- most of these photo's are dud's but look how many new people sign up to this forum and post a photo an alien where they are asking if it's real or not?

So regardless that most Alien photo's out there are out and out hoaxes, at least this thread will enlightened those new members about just how many hoaxes there are out there. Lol...



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 01:20 PM
link   
WFA... I'm getting the impression that you prefer that this thread just be another option for someone to browse through when they do an ATS search on EBE's.

In that case, I can see why an index of any sort would not be needed in this case. And I'm sure most people who log onto this thread would be looking through the pages of it just out of curiosity to see what's here.

I'm just saying that I see your point! So I will hold off from doing a Pictorial Index on those photo's in this thread.




[edit on 10-1-2008 by Palasheea]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by lee anoma
I had no idea the amount of bunk out there circulating as proof.


I Know!!! I had no idea either until I began compiling the data.
I also found it amazing how many repeat threads there turned out to be.
The data certainly did not reveal what I thought it would, and I was equally as surprised by the amount of fraudulent data.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Palasheea
 


Palasheea, I'm so sorry, I got caught up with other work and didn't realize you were still active in this thread today.

Just so you know, I completely agree with your suggestions here. And I definitely see the value in your proposal. I also agree that searching through just the pics would be easier, and it would be great to have the 'case pic' from such an index link directly to the post in the thread.

It's a great idea, I'm sorry I didn't 'get it' on my initial reading.
I'll think on this, and on ways it could be easily accomplished. If it does go forward, I'd need to ask a moderator to post a link to it as an edit to this thread's first post, so that anyone interested in just flipping through the 'case pic' index can find their file that way.

Once again, you're manner of thinking is quite different than mine, but combined our ideas blend well, and compliment each other! Thanks for seeing a great angle here that I didn't see, and pointing out a way to make this database even more organized.

I'll do some digging and see if I can find a good free site to host such an index. I know of several photo sites, but not one offhand where I can set the image to link to a specific URL...

Rest assured, this will be in my thoughts today. You rock Palasheea!



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Anytime you're ready! No harm in having an index like this. Afterall, you did put a lot of time and effort into this project so I'm sure members here would appreciate a Pictorial Index of some sort for quick look ups and quick photo comparisons too!



[edit on 10-1-2008 by Palasheea]



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 12:08 PM
link   
hey guys and gals

Witnesfromafarive I looked for the thread for this incident from brazil that you said that you could'ent find anything on it.....Varginha well i found a link that explains a bit so here it is ...and i found it by accident while looking for another video.

www.metacafe.com...



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   
The music video one is just that, a music video. I can't remember the guys name, but he's also done commercials for the Sony Playstation featuring an alien girl. He's really good with effects and uses alien imagery a lot in his work.

The backyard encounter one was proven to be a hoax a long time ago. They're bendable toy aliens. Notice the legs are always out of view? You never see the full legs. That's because they were used to prop them up on the fence and then pictures were taken of them from different angles to make them appear further away when they're actually a couple inches to a foot away from the camera and around 4 to 6 inches tall. I used to have a few of them that looked exactly liked them. I used to have them sitting on top of my old computer monitor and I gave them different poses.

I bought them at KayBee Toys and they were very detailed and looked like the aliens seen in the X-Files. You could even bend each finger. Usually in these bendable figures you can't move each finger seperately like that. I always wanted to make a stop-motion video of them but never got around to it and no idea what I did with them.

[edit on 12-1-2008 by nightmare_david]



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by ST SIR 86
 


Thank you very much! It's hard to find any solid data on that case, ie, pics, video, even testimony that isn't secondhand. Thanks for helping, I'll certainly check this link out.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by nightmare_david
 


David, thank you for your personal experience with those toys. That seems to be the case on that picture set. You are certainly right about the videos too. The Alien Girl video is also here in this thread.

Just curious, did you find the information you posted by following the links in the case reports, or were you just adding information? Just curious, I'm wondering how well this thread is working, and guaging feedback helps.

Thanks for checking in, feel free to submit any new cases you may find in your searching!



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Palasheea
 


Palasheea, I tried to set this up today using several different photo sites, and haven't really found a way to make it work.

Most photo sites will allow you to 'tag' your pictures, but I can't tag with a URL (direct link to the post ID where the case is mentioned in this thread) because the 'tags' don't recognize the . symbol. So the tag doesn't transfer properly as a URL.

I know that someone with servers of their own could put up a page with the pictures, and have each image serve as a link to the page id. I'm not a person with servers though
. Oh well.

I suppose it would be possible to make a companion thread here at ATS, where the post could be simplified to just include the picture and a link to the proper post id from the original thread...

Sorry, wish I were better at this sort of thing, but I'll keep looking, perhaps I'll find the right image hosting site yet, or someone at ATS might recommend one. I just joined Imageshack, since most ATS users seem to use it, but the tag problem is there too...



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join