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.

 

Are ETs that stupid?

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 07:34 AM
link   
I come here as a firm believer in the possible existence of extraterrestrial life but I have an open question for those who argue that UFOs are so readily visible.

The US military openly admitted to using Stealth technology some years ago. Stealth is, as far as I understand it, simply a way of altering the way an object interacts with RADAR wavelength electromagnetic radiation (EM) so that the object is actually or nearly invisible to instruments which detect RADAR wavelength reflections.

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that Stealth is not really that new. In other words, the public announcement of Stealth Technology almost certainly came a number of years after it was implemented by the US military.

As I understand it, RADAR relies totally on reflection of the particular wavelengths of EM that are emitted by the detection equipment. Similarly, the visibility of objects to our eyes relies mostly on reflection of visible wavelengths of EM. A small part relies on shadowing, i.e. where an object is backlit and in this sense visible detection differs from RADAR.

However, given that RADAR and visible light reflection/detection are based on the same physical principles, is it very far-fetched to think that military science is not already close to visible Stealth? If we concede that, then how likely is it that an advanced alien civilisation does not have the technology to render its spacecraft invisible?

My own opinion is that any advanced civilisation would be able to do this and I’m inclined to wonder why such a culture would allow its craft to be seen by us. Furthermore, if the intent were for us to see them, why are their appearances so vague and poorly-recorded?

My own opinion is that extraterrestrial civilisation is probable rather than merely possible but I’ve never been convinced that any UFO sightings are due to alien spacecraft. Does anyone have a line of evidence or reasoning that can confidently rule out Chinese lanterns, lenticular clouds, Venus and secret military aircraft or is there merely a supposition based on unsubstantiated witness reports and a prevailing theory?




posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 07:51 AM
link   
It is basically the 'where is everyone' point.

To answer to your question about stealth and not being invisible - they probably just do not care about being seen.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Tayga,

This point has been brought up before in similar terms, so somebody may direct you to an exhisting thread, I hope not though.

I think you make a great point here, and although you are not totally correct on the emitting and detecting of radars, you are basically there. For a very long time I have thought as you do. I was part of a test and evaluation squadron of F 18's even, and have yet to see any evidence that could not be a multituse of other things, none of which would be alien.

You see, I think people see things they cannot wrap their brains around and then make the quantum leap to, "Ohhh, it must be alien then", but really, it is not; yes maybe a UFO but that's a term for Unidentified....NOT Alien.


However, not jumping to either side here but you really have to ask why anybody does what they do. Who knows why an alien species may want to be detected in an obscure way?? Yes, I agree with you completely but we just don't know. I doubt there is any visitation either, and I think our militaries have more technological secrets and capabilities than we can even imagine.....we probably don't even want to know, right!?

Anyway, nice post...I hope the discussion goes well and does not turn into another bashing event! Peace, Mondo




posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alphard

To answer to your question about stealth and not being invisible - they probably just do not care about being seen.


I understand your point but if that were the case wouldn't we have clearer recorded evidence by now? All the suggested video and photographic evidence available is sufficiently vague and indistinct to be questionable. Yet rare animal species which are supposedly rarer and more elusive than alien spaceships have been photographed with outstanding clarity.

See, for example



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mondogiwa

You see, I think people see things they cannot wrap their brains around and then make the quantum leap to, "Ohhh, it must be alien then", but really, it is not; yes maybe a UFO but that's a term for Unidentified....NOT Alien.


Exactly. Thanks for your supportive comments.


I'm not surprised that this has been discussed before but I defend my starting of a new thread based on the fact that I think I hold an uncommon position not as one who dismisses ETs but rather as a doubter of the attribution of UFOs as ET craft.

In fact, I'm of the opinion that acceptance and promotion of poor data does more harm than good to the notion of the existence ETs.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Its a question I often ask myself too, though not always in relation to stealth.

Many people cry "UFO! ALIENS! SAUCERS!" at every video, but I ask questions, of which one is common: is there any logic behind it? Often there is no logic. No intelligence. Why supposed ETs capable of building intergalactic spaceship drive their ships like drunk 8 year olds with bricks tied to their feet is beyond me and there are really two answer:

- Yes they are THAT stupid.
or
- Its not aliens.

[edit on 8-1-2008 by merka]



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by merka
...there are really two answer:

- Yes they are THAT stupid.
or
- Its not aliens.


LOL. I suppose that while there are drunken pilots flying British Airways planes and astronauts trying to murder competing lovers, it's always possible that we're witnessing drunken ET teenagers on their Saturday night out.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:51 AM
link   
If something is seen in OUR atmosphere, looking like a machine,in our scale of size and "ship-looking" by our creative standards and principles, then one would be inclined to think that they are in fact OURS. But then, "ours" sound like these craft would be a part of our culture. Which it is not.
If i have a secret in my backpocket, it is not "ours". Not until undisclosed and possibly available to the earth commmunity. So any way you put it, it's theirs. The supposition, however, that they are ET:s, just because they have certain aspects of stealth to their operations, does not imply they are from out of space.
Would some of them be, however, this would again increase the chance of earth-based "saucers", with so many centurys of possible crash retrievals and subsequent back-engineering.
The ET:s, by the way, may have perfectly sound reasons for NOT beeing "cloaked". For all we know, there may be laws against it. On the other hand, stealth may be mandatory to them, but ignored by human versions of the saucers. This may be to sinster global crypto-politics. Just look at how they massively exposed Usama, when the agenta said so. And then they hid him under the rug again when same agenda called for it.
And since E.T could well be the next Al-Qaida as to it's geopolitical driver function, one is sceptical as to what one is seeing, is one not?
events such as the Phoenix lights are really good examples. No stealth, no contact. Just inuendo.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthDweller
If something is seen in OUR atmosphere, looking like a machine,in our scale of size and "ship-looking" by our creative standards and principles, then one would be inclined to think that they are in fact OURS. But then, "ours" sound like these craft would be a part of our culture. Which it is not.


Now that's a pretty bald claim. How would you know whether one of these objects is of our culture or not?



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by tayga
I come here as a firm believer in the possible existence of extraterrestrial life but I have an open question for those who argue that UFOs are so readily visible.


I may have a possible answer. I'm not an expert in optics, or in light propagation. Having said that, I've read enough Einstein to know that Gravity (and/or Mass, he wasn't that specific) bends light.

If a potential ET Craft is operating with a propulsion system that influences Gravity (and/or Mass) we can expect light to bend around the craft as a byproduct when the propulsion system is functioning. ~This could account for the invisibility/partial invisibility witnessed in some cases.

It is also reasonable (from theory) to further extrapolate that when 'parked' the craft would betray a (somewhat) constant visual image, even though the light is bent around it, it's still giving off a shape of some sort. ~This could account for the blurry pics in some cases.

It's also reasonable to theorize that on such a craft, the propulsion system is not always actively engaged (as your engine is not always combusting if you drive an electric/gas hybrid such as the Prius). This could account for the visible moments...


Originally posted by tayga
My own opinion is that any advanced civilisation would be able to do this (make their craft invisible) and I’m inclined to wonder why such a culture would allow its craft to be seen by us. Furthermore, if the intent were for us to see them, why are their appearances so vague and poorly-recorded?


I think your own example is a perfect illustration of the answer to your question. You posted the link to this pic:


I'm certain animals like this tree kangaroo are captured all the time by wildlife cameras they are not even conscious are present. I highly doubt an ET craft is going to take the time to map out the locations of every video camera on the planet before swooping in for a closer look.

I agree with the 'oblivious' and 'uncaring' theory proposed above on this point. It's highly likely a sufficiently advanced civilization has no need to fear our 'modern' weapons. It probably isn't high on their priority list to be either seen or unseen. I would equate it to asking whether or not a human fears being seen by a meerkat in a cage at the zoo...


Originally posted by tayga
Does anyone have a line of evidence or reasoning that can confidently rule out Chinese lanterns, lenticular clouds, Venus and secret military aircraft or is there merely a supposition based on unsubstantiated witness reports and a prevailing theory?


See I was with you on your questions until that one. I'm sorry, this is ATS. YES OF COURSE WE CAN PROVIDE SUCH EVIDENCE!

Really, I'm not trying to be rude here, I think your questions show that you are really thinking about this topic. I like people who do that. I think you are on the right track. But this last question can be answered simply by an ATS search. Many 'UFO' cases here at ATS exibit characteristics impossible for your described explanations. None of the objects you described (with the possible exception of secret military aircraft) can perfoms feats of inertial impossibility as seen in several of the compilations available here at ATS and at Youtube. Some of these objects make 90 degree turns, and then burn out of our atmosphere at speeds we do not have the available energy (in fuel form) to reproduce.

I highly encourage you to search for this evidence, you will find it. A good place to start is Gazrok's UFO compilation, linked in my signature.

There you will find 'The Battle of Los Angeles', a perfect example of a UFO that COULD NOT BE a Chinese Lantern, lenticular clouds, Venus, secret military aircraft, or (yes I'm going to say it) Swamp Gas.

Really, I mean no offense here, but you should know that there are a lot of people here who have done the research to answer that last question, and much of that research is posted as Sticky threads at the top of page 1 of the Aliens/UFO Forum. This knowledge is key in pondering these issues. You seem to have a great mind, and are asking the right questions, I highly recommend that you read about the existing data too!



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by tayga

Originally posted by EarthDweller
If something is seen in OUR atmosphere, looking like a machine,in our scale of size and "ship-looking" by our creative standards and principles, then one would be inclined to think that they are in fact OURS. But then, "ours" sound like these craft would be a part of our culture. Which it is not.


Now that's a pretty bald claim. How would you know whether one of these objects is of our culture or not?


It's not that bald my friend. OUR culture is what we all share, that is what i meant. It could be, of course, a result of the aspirations and workings of a cabal sprung FROM our culture. But do you really think black-op space-mongers consider themself part of your culture? But i ask for your forgiveness, my statement was a bit fuzzy, hope we understand each-other better now!



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by WitnessFromAfar

...This is ATS. YES OF COURSE WE CAN PROVIDE SUCH EVIDENCE!

...I highly encourage you to search for this evidence, you will find it. A good place to start is Gazrok's UFO compilation, linked in my signature.

...

Really, I mean no offense


None taken and thank you for such a considered and informative reply


Investigating this whole area further is exactly why I came ATS.

I’m inclined to think that Roswell, in particular, is more likely to be a deliberate act of misinformation to cover up military secrets than it was to be a genuine ET craft crash. Of course, the balloon/Mogul thing is nonsense but that just lends more credibility to the underlying ‘real’ cover story, if that’s what it is.

Thinking that these people are stupid when they allow a message to be included in a photo could be just naïve. If as Nick Cook (The Hunt for Zero Point) suggests, the US inherited Nazi military research after WWII, it probably also inherited the counter-intelligence mechanisms to protect it. Let’s face it, if you wanted to keep something hidden, what better way than to make it look like something outlandish which attracts people who can then be labelled as wackos. The argument and all the attention shifts to the wrong point in the chain of evidence and the real secrets are safely buried beneath layers of security apparatus.

I’m not original in these thoughts but I might be rarer in thinking that the universe probably contains ETs AND Earth military technology AND a group of people that places secrecy above everything else.

Still, I haven’t studied UFO incidents anything like as deeply as many of you here and it would be stupid and entirely disrespectful of me to waste the opportunity to read the excellent summaries that Gazrok, Dulcimer and WitnessFromAfar have prepared in case I find something new to me. I’m working my way through these now. In the mean time, I’d like to throw out another question:

Why do you think that the US has more than its fair share of UFO sightings?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthDweller

...OUR culture is what we all share, that is what i meant.

...But do you really think black-op space-mongers consider themself part of your culture?


OK, then I'm right with you there. This was just as question of semantics and not a disgreement at all



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by tayga
Still, I haven’t studied UFO incidents anything like as deeply as many of you here and it would be stupid and entirely disrespectful of me to waste the opportunity to read the excellent summaries that Gazrok, Dulcimer and WitnessFromAfar have prepared in case I find something new to me. I’m working my way through these now.


You know, whatever else happens to me today, no matter how many times someone does something that upsets me, I'm already having a really good morning.

Thank you very much, for understanding and actively engaging in this process. Sometimes here at ATS (and elsewhere) it can feel like talking to a brick wall, it really brightens my day to read an intelligent person's views who is actually thinking about the issues, and who is willing to examine the available evidence.

I should warn you, there is a TON of crap in the Evidence for EBE Compilation. Don't get me wrong, I still feel it's worth reading, just as I feel the research to create it (thus far) was very much worth doing. But there is a lot of crap out there, masquerading as 'authentic', and I've included the most popular (and seemingly believable) cases of this with solid debunking evidence and links to ATS Threads, so that you can form your own opinion on these issues, and get all the data available on each case.

My favorite case of the moment, besides the Battle of Los Angeles, is the Bob White Artifact that Mike Singh and Hal9000 both have had extensive threads on here at ATS. This object is currently undergoing testing by a metalurgist, and Springer himself is seeing it done. I recently finished a four page report on this case in the Compilation: Evidence for Alien Technology thread.

Thanks again for the honest and thoughtful conversation, and for being open to new lines of reasoning. It's so rare nowadays, and so wonderful to experience. I can guarantee that I'll be considering any arguments you put forth in this forum when making my decisions.


Originally posted by tayga
In the mean time, I’d like to throw out another question:

Why do you think that the US has more than its fair share of UFO sightings?


I'm really not sure about that. I've been researching the EBE and Alien Tech phenomemon mostly in my short time at ATS thus far. From what I understand though, these cases are pretty much world wide. Living in Southern California, I get a lot of news exposure from south of the border, and I can tell you for sure that UFO events are occuring with regularity in Mexico. There is video online about the 'fleets' of UFOs that appear in front of the populations of entire cities. Here is one such example:
www.youtube.com...

From the video alone, I suppose these could be armchair 'debunked' as balloons, but when put into context with the mass witnesses, the mass confusion, the mass verification through different cameras, and the fact that nobody has come forward to claim the 'balloons', and no events like that took place in the area at the time, things begin to get strange.

There is a lot of circumstantial evidence for UFOs frequenting other countries. I know of no other 'Battle of Los Angeles' type event outside of the US, but would love to learn about any if they've occured and someone out there has data.

Anyway, I'll be researching UFO events myself in the near future more extensively, and I'll be sure to share if I find something new. I'm glad to have you here doing the same. Well met, Tayga.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Thanks for a reply in the spirit of my own message. Debate and investigation are grown-up activities. I think that pigheadedness and personal attacks tend to come when people invest too much of themselves in a particular opinion. I’m for finding out the truth, not for proving myself right.

I work in scientific research and believe me, scientists are as bad as anyone else for being opinionated, biased and blind to evidence which undermines ideas on which their own status is based. The story of ‘Cold Fusion’ illustrates that. It’s human nature, I suppose, but it’s a crippling handicap in our advancement as a species.

Anyway…

I too am monitoring the thread on Bob White’s object and I agree that it could be a unique opportunity to gain real physical evidence of something unusual. I said there that a similar chance to examine some of the Roswell debris would blow this whole area open.

As for the video you linked in your message, I can only go on what I see and, unfortunately, I am in an armchair at the moment. I would say that this resembles a large number of balloons. There are three reasons I could give for this: the objects can be seen passing in front of the clouds and this limits their maximum height and therefore actual size based on distance and scaling; the objects are all moving in the same direction at the same rate from which I infer that they are drifting with the wind; despite the regularity of their movement, the objects are not arranged in any type of spatial order i.e. they are not flying in formation.

It is possible that they are small alien aircraft all moving in the same direction at the same rate but in no obvious formation, but not likely.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 02:53 PM
link   
I guess all the people who see huge black flying triangles are lying, or mistakenly saw a fictional "stealth blimp" which isn't so stealthy flying over populated areas..uhm no..but ok lets just ignor all those things. They are obviously stupid liars who cant tell a giant triangle from a 747..stupid people..

this is just another of those threads asking for "evidence" LOL if we had evidence we wouldn't be here would we?

Your best friend is the Search function.

shut this thread downnnnnnnn

[edit on 10-1-2008 by jainatorres]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by jainatorres
if we had evidence we wouldn't be here would we?


That's a shame because I was hoping to find some evidence here. I guess you're not reading from the same hymn sheet as the people who run the site, then?

Talking of hymn sheets, no evidence is what you find in religion. That's fine for faith but not for anything else.


Originally posted by jainatorres

shut this thread downnnnnnnn


Hardly a free speech-supporting sentiment. Specifically what have I said that's causing you such discomfort?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   
It can be said:


The man that thinks that the ETs are stupid is a good example of the inteligent abilities of mankind...

Though, to be fair. You might not be talking about inteligents as to anticontexual using the term "stupid", rather you might be talking about nieave.

In most cases the answer is No. They are far more inteligent then mankind.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by tayga
 


You brought up a very good point.

And many years ago, before i knew about stealth, i was wondering, why these UFOs even have lights, if they don't want to be detected..

I mean, during the night it's enough to turn the lights off, and you're basically invisible.

If you combine this with radar stealth and maybe even optical stealth, the only conclusion is, that either the UFOs are some explainable phenomenon, or they want to be seen.

Of course i realize many new agers will immediatelly jump on the latter option, but if they want to be seen, they might just as well make themselves completelly known and not just enough to cause speculation without any real proof. Otherwise believing in them is nothing more than a type of religion. And why would aliens want to do that?

And please, pretty please, don't mention channeling as proof, people...

[edit on 10-1-2008 by deezee]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Incarnated
They are far more inteligent then mankind.


And you know that because?

I will accept they must know more than us, if they really have the technology to come here.

But not because the Urantia book says so.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join