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.

 

Ufo Cover-up within the community!!!

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 04:49 AM
link   
based on my paraphrased summary of this alledged event , namely :

man is lying in bed , man feels warm man scorches sheets , man is paralysed , man is levitated , man scorches ceiling , man passes through ceiling , man is levitated further ` outside `

i have a question :

what investigation was done on the building roof / attic space and was any evidence of thermal damage to the rafters , the loft insulation [ if present ] the roof trusses etc etc

i cannot find any mention of this IMHO bloody obvious line of inquiry [ hell if i ran the zoo that would be one of my first actions on site ]

LMHs vid doesnt cover it nor does the second vid - and no google results come back

anyone ?

it is a basic and obvious question - what is the condition of the roof above / beyond the ceiling scorch marks ?

[edit on 1-1-2008 by ignorant_ape]




posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 07:15 AM
link   
Hmm thats a quiet interesting ase you have there mate .... Still waiting for the uploads of the rest of those videos
Hope You manage to do that soon as I would love to hear the recolection of what happened on the ship


PS: Please start writing in paragraphs , its so hard to read it all at once



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


There is no "scorching mark" on the parts of the ceiling you have asked about, only on the ceiling part that faced the room below...that is what intrigued Linda molton Howe the most. And I stress once more that it was not scorched even though we can see burning marks. I guess it is well explained in the video.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by felipecb
 


Hello felipecb welcome to ATS,


Also the ETs wanted to leave some sort of "physical" evidence to help corroborate our contacts and "partnership" with them.


Would it have not been easier to give you a material object that was definitively alien in nature instead of rather circumstantial evidence ?

Do I understand you correctly that they want you to prove to the world that they exist ?

Thank you in anticipation for your answers.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by sherpa
reply to post by felipecb
 






Would it have not been easier to give you a material object that was definitively alien in nature instead of rather circumstantial evidence ?


I guess their purpose was to give some evidence of technology involved in the process of fabricating the disc shaped stones and the "scorched" bed sheets, obviously, they could have given us an unknown metal alloy or something of this nature. It would greatly facilitate our plight to prove ET interaction. However, they have not yet explained their full disclosure agenda. I personally believe that they act in this fashion in order to somehow " protect" us, for I am quite sure those that do not wish the truth to come out
would try to hinder our efforts to expose ET interaction with a group of independent civilians. Such cabal proof would endanger ourselves without a doubt.



Do I understand you correctly that they want you to prove to the world that they exist ?


Not the world, there are plenty of bona fide contactees around the planet. They wish to prove that we have a partership with their ET group. That to have such relation is not the exclusive right of Governments that do not represent their people. Many students of the phenomena believe that an "official disclosure" is necessary through "official channels", like Governments, Military, the UN....or even Scientific Associations... this is not necessary. They have been around since day one, they have been in contact with many, many people or groups of people forever..... Just because the Establishment always made sure this reality was hidden from the general public does not mean that it is a new phenomena. The difference today is that we have powerful communications tools such as the internet and independent forums, such as this one, that allow several of us with ET interaction experience to share our "know-how" of the phenomena. It is as simple as that.... thank you for your interest.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by felipecb
 


Thank you for your response felipecb, clearly I am new to the abduction phenomena so forgive my questions.


I am quite sure those that do not wish the truth to come out
would try to hinder our efforts to expose ET interaction with a group of independent civilians. Such cabal proof would endanger ourselves without a doubt.


Then my answer to that would be for the aliens to contact as many as possible, (making sure that the indivduals were comfortable with this first), because the greater the number the safer the individual.



J The difference today is that we have powerful communications tools such as the internet and independent forums, such as this one, that allow several of us with ET interaction experience to share our "know-how" of the phenomena.


Yes I can see that, but it seems to me whenever I read about paranormal or alien phenomena the most extreme appear to be on the South American continent, would you agree, and if you do why do you think that is ?

Thanks



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 04:30 PM
link   
felipecb

You said something about at you are "Contactee".

So i would want to know what kind contactee you are?

What kind E.T races those are if you remember? I would like to ask one more question more.

Is there any possibility to meet those E.T face to face sometime like this year or this month or sooner at their spaceship?

Can you tell something about them too, because you said at they are kind, but i need to know how kind and what way kind and so on they are. Just tell about from themselves so much as you can, because i want know what kind they are who are meeting you and other contactees from earth, or do these E.T contact only group who are there, or is it worldwide contact?

There was some questions for you, now bye.

[edit on 3-1-2008 by Silenteye]



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 06:07 PM
link   
I just want to point out that this case is considered among ufologists a known hoax:

www.ufowatchdog.com...

Check the links in this site for full information on scientific analysis conducted on the case.

Additionally, everyone here in Brazil knows Urandir Oliveira is a known hoaxer, being exposed several times, including by the mainstream media:

www.seattlechatclub.org...



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by borek
I just want to point out that this case is considered among ufologists a known hoax:

www.ufowatchdog.com...

Check the links in this site for full information on scientific analysis conducted on the case.

Additionally, everyone here in Brazil knows Urandir Oliveira is a known hoaxer, being exposed several times, including by the mainstream media:

www.seattlechatclub.org...




Ok folks!! Here we are again!! That is what I mean by "Ufo Cover-up within the community"... The gentleman this person is refering to as one that had done research on the case is Mufon local director (Brazil) A.J. Gevaerd and his "partner" Charlotte Lafevre of the Seattle Chat club. A. J. Gevaerd has never done any local research of this case whatsoever. Nevertheless, he undertook a smear campaign to discredit the case saying that it was a hoax and that the bed sheets were burned with a candle and that the disc shaped stones were "natural" rock stones from the region. Ludicrous!! This was easily proven by Linda Moulton Howe´s local research and results shown in the video. This is what I mean by "information control". My friend, just what Linda´s video and you will see for yourself that all info coming from the aforementioned sources are fabricated lies. If you are a sincere seeker of the phenomena obviously. On the other hand, if you are one of A.J. Gevaerd´s many "collaborators" you do not belong here.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 02:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by felipecb
On the other hand, if you are one of A.J. Gevaerd´s many "collaborators" you do not belong here.

Why doesn't he (or she?) belong here?

Does it mean that only Urandir Oliveira's "collaborators" belong here?

As far as I am aware, anyone belongs here, regardless of the side he/she is on, that is the whole idea of a discussion forum.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


I agree with you fully!!!! However, if you are not a truth seeker and are here to manipulate and twist around the FACTS as A.J. Gevaerd and his posse do, you do not belong here... These people have been trying to supress this case since the beginning without ever doing any research whatsoever!!!!! This I find outrageous!! The only researcher that did an independent and thorough research, had access to all evidence and had them analysed in independent US labs was Linda Moulton Howe.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by felipecb
 


Well, since I'm not anyone's "collaborator", I guess I belong here and have the right to discuss this issue further. As I said, here in Brazil, Urandir has been extensively discredited by all the media and he's a known hoaxer. Some of his tricks, like bending forks and glowing hands, are just laughable.

For an example, to Armap and those who can read Portuguese, here's a link to an overview made by a weekly magazine called ISTOÉ, a few years ago:

www.terra.com.br...

In the particular case discussed in this thread, that link I posted:

www.ufowatchdog.com...

has other scientific reports that contest Linda Moulton Howe's conclusions, and those reports seem pretty accurate to me. So I guess one can choose to believe in either side of the story. Since Urandir is a known hoaxer - while this would not be enough to dismiss the case presented in this thread - I tend to believe in the reports that show the scorches are just another one of his hoaxs.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by felipecb
 


hi - i watched her vid - and did not see / hear them mentioned

can you please give me the time codes on the vid where this issue is addressed - then i do not have to watch the entire thing again



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 11:25 AM
link   
My question is: if the effects of an alledged abduction can reproduced by human means, does that necessarily make it a hoax?



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT51
My question is: if the effects of an alledged abduction can reproduced by human means, does that necessarily make it a hoax?

Not necessarily. But then, the effects cannot really be considered proofs of the abduction, and ultimately we would have to trust in the the story told by the abductee. Then, if we know the abductee is getting rich with his strange stories and with some known previous hoaxs (presented in a serious prime time TV show), those alleged effects are quite even more suspicious to accept and could be considered to be just more hoaxs.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Not necessarily. But then, the effects cannot really be considered proofs of the abduction, and ultimately we would have to trust in the the story told by the abductee. Then, if we know the abductee is getting rich with his strange stories and with some known previous hoaxs (presented in a serious prime time TV show), those alleged effects are quite even more suspicious to accept and could be considered to be just more hoaxs.


Again, I can see that you have no idea whatsoever about the subject. If you watch the video carefully, Linda Moulton Howe proved, according to her research, that the "effects" of the abduction CANNOT be reproduced utilizing our technology, thus an off-world technology was indeed employed. Moreover, none of these people that you have mentioned ever did any local, on site investigation about the case and they have not performed any reserach on the material at all. How can they assert that it is a hoax? The Brazilian Mainstream Media is not interested in divulging the truth about Alien interaction and is not credible when it comes to this kind of subject, I guess we all know that.... I have been investigating the Corguinho case and Mr. Urandir, along with several local and international independent researchers for the past 10 years. I can assure you that Mr. Oliveira is a genuine case. The Corguinho, Brazil Vortex is somehow like Sedona in the USA, there are many people who go there and have UFO & ET interaction. I have interviewed and researched dozens! Again, that is why I named this thread "Ufo Cover-up within the community"



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by felipecb

How can they assert that it is a hoax? The Brazilian Mainstream Media is not interested in divulging the truth about Alien interaction...


Perhaps, but that does not change the fact that the tricks performed by Urandir were shown and explained by the media / several ufologists. Those are facts and not journalists' opinions. Anyway, another link that shows the entire controversy:

www.rense.com...

Ultimately, one can believe in whatever they want regarding Urandir and Projeto Portal. But now people here on ATS have all the different views and facts concerning this topic.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Perhaps, but that does not change the fact that the tricks performed by Urandir were shown and explained by the media / several ufologists. Those are facts and not journalists' opinions. Anyway, another link that shows the entire controversy:

www.rense.com...

Ultimately, one can believe in whatever they want regarding Urandir and Projeto Portal. But now people here on ATS have all the different views and facts concerning this topic.


What you call "tricks" were never proven by the "Media" simply because he was never "tested" by them. The ones you call "ufologists" are A.J. Gevaerd´s posse. They have never bothered to do a serious research of the case properly. The Jeff Rense interview was given by Mr. Urandir and I. Jeff invited us to give the interview and he liked it very much. Since our interview with him, A. J. Gebaerd bombarded Jeff with e-mails demanding to be heard and claiming that the case was a cheap hoax. How can someone that acts this way enjoy any credibility? He has never researched the case, how can he affirm that it was a hoax?

I concur with you fully on your last statemet. I see ATS as a free, independent forum. Anyone is entitled to have their own view and opinion about the phenomena. All I am asking is to pay a little attention on Linda´s research of the case for she was the only investigator that actually did her job and come down to perform a local, on site research.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   
You people who are defending MUFON are absolute BUNK. A while back, I submitted my own UFO close encounter to MUFON. I took great care in composing my submission, describing every detail with no spelling or punctuation errors. I spent several hours describing my encounter as concisely as possible.

After I submitted a description of my encounter, I waited for several days without seeing my submission. Finally, after about five days later, a watered down version of my encounter appeared on MUFON. Bad english, spelling and punctuation errors were littered throughout. The location of my encounter was changed, along with the meat of my story - which totally discredited my claims.

There is indeed a massive disinfo campaign being waged inside of the UFO community. Some of the henchmen are no doubt on ATS and in this thread participating. I am hereby debunking all of you as counter-productive to the human race.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by HaveSeen4Myself
There is indeed a massive disinfo campaign being waged inside of the UFO community. Some of the henchmen are no doubt on ATS and in this thread participating. I am hereby debunking all of you as counter-productive to the human race.
I think you must do something more to debunk those supposed henchmen than just saying that you are debunking them.

If you have any proof, share it with the other members (and readers) on ATS.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join