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.


Has the bar for "proof" been made unreachable?

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 10:41 PM
This post is born out of frustration.

Between ATS' aliens & UFO forum and several paranormal/ghost forums I visit which frequently feature people posting various pictures, videos, and audio recordings they've made of EVPs and strange sounds (literally things that go "bump" in the night), I have seen virtually every theory conceivable and some inconceivable to debunk or discredit virtually every piece of evidence ever collected and shared. I have seen comments run the gambit from the benign "I believe the ghost face we're seeing in this photo is the result of pareidolia" to downright accusatory "You've used photoshop to produce a hoax." I will admit, there have been many hoaxes and, when something is clearly a hoax it should be called such and the perpetrator should be called out. However, I can't help but wonder if we've set the bar for "proof" at such a high level that it will be impossible to ever reach, regardless the evidence.

Between the ease and regularity some people dismiss any photographic or video evidence with, claiming CGI as being responsible for anything not easily debunked with the old favorite "It's just an airplane" or "it's a car on a mountain road" postion, and the ridiculous claims that the authorities have holographic projectors pointed at the heavens to trick the people, it's getting to the point that I have to question the sanity of anyone willing to share what they believe to be "real" evidence of the unknown. Why open yourself up to these idiots if you know they're guaranteed to mount a full fledged assault on your credibillity and paint your evidence (which I'm sure you would take a tremendous amount of pride in if you believed it to be real) as being disingenuous?

Back to the opening line of this post, I'm not frustrated with honest to goodness attempts at debunking or sincere litmus tests of any evidence. What frustrates me is I have the sinking feeling that if UFO's landed at the White House tomorrow and every television and media outlet around the globe covered it, there would still be a sizeable camp of people out there who would vehemently deny the reality of the situation and make blanket statements like "It's a hoax arrainged by the government and their MSM puppets." In many ways, I find those who make blanket statements of "fact" which are actually opinionated theories (ie: "That is obviously CGI... any retard could create that picture." in reference to a photo which is NOT "clearly" CGI and does fit the description of a UFO merely by the fact that it appears to be an airborn object of unknown origin.) to be every bit as distastefull as the kid that creates an elaborate Photoshop of an alien peering through his window and tries to pass it off as real.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:12 PM
Good thread. Yes, I think the bar has been reached where actual, factual proof could slap us in the face and it would be debunked. I think that applies to most CT, UFO, etc. I can no longer imagine what absolute proof would entail. I know what would prove it for me.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:24 PM
Well, perhaps you should look at it from this far as UFO pictures go, a conservative estimate is that 90% of them are so called explainable....therefore they are no longer "unidentified."

And just because 55 people on ATS think a UFO picture is a bird and 5 don't, doesn't mean you have to believe the majority. Believe what YOU want.

If they can show you proof that it most LIKELY is a bird, beyond a reasonable doubt let's say...from blowing the picture up and pointing out the blurry motion of the wings, showing other, similar photos of birds that LOOK like a "UFO" then show the blurry motion of THOSE bird's wings, then what is wrong with that? If you still want to believe that it's a UFO, no one is forcing you to believe it's a bird.

Don't you want to know if the photo IS really a bird or one of the 10%, a UFO? Or would you rather we all said "OH WOW cool photo of a UFO, good job!" On every single ridiculous and non ridiculous picture that gets posted in the UFO section? Would you rather the UFO section was just a place to post photos and ridiculous youtube "UFOS" and "captured aliens" etc and we all ooh and ahh over them?

I've seen some of the NASA space footage totally analyzed to death on ATS by both sides, with ex NASA people jumping in, people with a physics background weighing in, were they ice crystals, were they UFOs were they space garbage etc...I certainly wasn't offended by this at all, I loved it! I like seeing all sides explained and analyzed and I am still not sure what to believe on the NASA videos...but it certainly didn't hurt me to read page after page of people trying to explain what was going on in the video, even the ones saying ICE crystals they are ICE crystals CLEARLY or lens flair, or whatever...

I do not understand why anyone would want to go on believing in a "UFO" picture that ISN'T a UFO.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by LateApexer313]

[edit on 27-6-2008 by LateApexer313]

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:26 PM
ah yes I understand your frustration. We went through this quite recently with another thread asking what the skeptics would accept as proof.

by and large most of the die hard skeptics ignored the thread and refused to state what they would accept as proof of aliens or a true UFO.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:37 PM
honestly for 99% of people the only way they are going to believe is if they see it for themselves. I never believed in aliens or anything paranormal until a silent craft was hovering outside my window and i had a telepathic conversation with someone who wasn't from this planet.

Every pic that goes up here has 20 people saying its a fake. Even if there was a legit pic of an alien being standing outside his spaceship, it would be called a fake. I guess you really have to see one to believe.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:03 AM
reply to post by bringthelight

Well, I haven't been on this site as long as a lot of you all have, but there are some videos and pictures so far that I have seen on here that I believe can be labeled as UFOs, at least in my mind. Since I haven't seen enough proof AGAINST them being unidentifiable. And there are a few that I've seen TONS of debate on, pro and con, that I still think could be maybes...because they can't be proved, either way.

It depends on the topic, video or picture for me. So I think you may be right bringthelight....if I had an experience like you, where I saw a craft hovering out of my window and had a telepathic conversation with an actual being inside the craft, I would then believe completely, but then I wouldn't expect anyone else on here to believe me, unless I had proof. It's just human nature. Like people who believe in God, to them there is tons of proof, to others it's a complete leap of faith, and they demand proof, and they don't believe the "believer's proof" and probably won't until "God" speaks to them etc.

I still don't understand why, as a forum, we cannot analyze photos and videos presented to US for just this same scrutiny and give our own opinions, without making people angry?

It's one thing if someone submitted a video they took and said in the post: "Here's what I saw and what I filmed and I don't give a darn what you all think, it's an alien craft and nothing you say can change my mind and here's the proof, accept it as I have their ARE aliens."

Most people posting ASK our opinion, so why are people getting angry when people give their opinions as asked?

Edited to add, I am not directing this post only at you, I just wanted to respond to what you said about 99% needing to see, to believe LOL...the rest is just an "in general" why oh why do people get mad at their photos and picture's being analyzed?

[edit on 28-6-2008 by LateApexer313]

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:06 AM
reply to post by LateApexer313

I like your reasoning in your post. As this thread: Been on this a site a long time and now I get pics
The OP posted this:

There has been no blasting of me and I would not expect less of a group firering questions off trying to find the flaws in my truth.
but, I get accused from OTHER people of making accusations, when I am simply asking questions. If you can't stand up to debate, you shouldn't start a thread.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:10 AM
reply to post by jhill76

Thanks jhill...but what's the thread you posted in this one have to do with what we are talking about? Going to read this thread you posted to see why you brought it up here....and by the way, I noticed you made me a foe lol...I don't think I've chapped your buttski lately...but it seems as if you're asking me too

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:14 AM
reply to post by LateApexer313

I tried clicking on profile and accidentally hit Foe. I brought that thread up because I can be almost certain that is what kind of sparked this thread. I seen the OP post in there, then came here and started this one. I could be wrong, but am leaning towards the former.

Also, everything you state has to do with that thread.

[edit on 28-6-2008 by jhill76]

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:22 AM
reply to post by LateApexer313

I completely agree LateApexer, I have just seen people instantly call out a fake too many times. Most people on these boards are open minded and thats why i keep coming back. Seeing is believing for most people and maybe actual proof will come from this site, or one like it ,when something comes around with multiple witnesses that wins over even the most hardcore of skeptics.

I just hope im alive to see the day when we can stop being scared and learn from these highly advanced beings and better our society.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:55 AM
Like I said in the OP, I'm not frustrated by sincere questioning of any and all evidence. The scientific method dictates that everything must be tested or else we're stuck without ever having "proven" anything. Where my issues lie is when someone enters one of these discussions and attempts to pass off their opinion as fact coupling that with what basically amounts to a blanket insult or public shaming of anyone who disagrees with their opinion. Statements like "That's obviously a bird, anyone who can't see that is a blind idiot." are not constructive nor do they do anything but hurt the overall goal of any UFO/alien hunter.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:07 AM
reply to post by burdman30ott6

Yes I totally agree with you about the members that just do a "drive-by" skeptic 2 liner post...."That's obviously a bird any idiot can see that, and why can't you tell it's a bird" or "That's not even good CGI you could or should have done this or that" with no explanation or intelligent critique or proof to back up the statement made.

But does anyone care what people like that say? I don't. Unless they can back it up with proof or reasons why they say that. And then I might not care or believe them if their proof won't stand up to intelligent questioning as well lol.

Yes and I park our cars in the same garage....If you had made a thread, posting your story about the craft, and communicating telepathically with the alien entity in it, no photos, just your story....I probably wouldn't post anything about it in your thread, not really much you can say back to a thread like that unless people reading it, have had similar experiences's a subjective story, you either believe it or you don't, since there's no photo to go along with your "proof"etc.

Now if you had posted your story, ALONG with a photo snapped off your cell phone of a blurry dot, I might ask you a few questions like, did you hear anything before you began to telepathically communicate with it, how low was it, where are you in the world geographically, what was the date, was it in your papers, did anyone else see it with you etc etc...I am sure you wouldn't mind answering these questions...

But if someone said "What a LOAD of HOGWASH, you have a blurry dot in the night sky that's OBVIOUSLY the International Space station, gimme a break!" That's a horse of a different color...

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:20 AM
reply to post by burdman30ott6

Proof is proof! When real verifiable proof is presented there will be no denying it. Unfortunately in this day and age photographs and video can hardly be considered evidence as we all know what can be accomplished via CGI.

Now if a UFO lands on the White house lawn and it is carried live by every major media outlet on the planet i imagine the majority of the population would consider that as proof!

[edit on 28-6-2008 by TheShadow]

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:28 AM
Thank you, THank you, Thank you!!!!!!
What we are dealing with here are people who are having their perceptions of reality threatened. These people are violently defending
their reality at any and all costs.
What confuses me most is that these are the same people who claim to be so open minded.
I have given up the hope that everyone will one day be on the same page. There will always be a group (however small) that will not see reality no matter how obvious it is. It is very much like trying to tell your best frienf that his wife of 20 yrs is being unfaithful. He will only lash out at you for saying such awful things, because what you have just told him does not fit into his head. It is out of his percieved reality and threatens his percieved reality.

I give up.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:32 AM

Originally posted by TheShadow
reply to post by burdman30ott6

Now if a UFO lands on the White house lawn and it is carried live by every major media outlet on the planet i imagine the majority of the population would consider that as proof!

[edit on 28-6-2008 by TheShadow]

sadly you hit the nail right on the head there
the majority, noit everyone

thats the sad thing, for some, nothing will ever be proof positive

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 02:10 AM
Science has become a belief system as opposed to a procedure for defining the operation of the universe.

People have come to place their purpose and life's values in the explanations of modern science and our own theories - people are using science to fill the gap of religion - and as such, many theories and concepts are treated as fact far before they are able to be verified by the scientific method.

Example: the Big Bang.... "In the beginning, there was nothing.... which exploded...." - yeah, we've got a few more things to work out there.

But By-Newton, the Big Bang happened, and is where our universe came from. How dare I mock and question the intelligence of a bunch of monkeys who have been studying the universe for one-one-millionth of the time their planet has been around? What authority do I have?

Similarly, this goes into UFOs, Extra Terrestrials, Ghosts, Possession, etc. It endangers their system of values and beliefs, thus they will deny it in the most simple ways possible.

Furthermore, it hits home on a very human level.

We are screaming to the stars "Is anyone out there!?" - and the mere thought that there would be beings that come down and draw pictures in the crops, poke and rape us, then bugger off without so much as a "take me to your leader" makes us feel like we are some sort of interstellar prank - some hangout for celestial teenagers to go get their kicks and grins.

That idea just pisses us off, that we aren't even worth being formally acknowledged. Many among us will simply dismiss it simply for that reason. It doesn't make sense because we place so much value on social interaction and life, in general. We assume a completely alien intelligence would do so, as well.

And, of course, governments will dismiss the claims. They recall what happened when things like "War of the Worlds" were aired - people freaked the hell out. Any sort of "Yeah, aliens exist, here's a craft we found, and an autopsy we did..." would stir up all kinds of panic.

Many of the stories are also rather disturbing. Watching one of the programs on History International, right now, they are talking about abductions.... and living in the country, I know what it's like to be in the dark and confront some unknown creatures of terrestrial origin, and how that can freak you out....... I can't imagine an EXTRA-terrestrial, INTELLIGENT critter greeting me in the dark (or light), alone, would scare me #less. After my experiences in the military (limited as they are), I've gotten pretty good at managing my fear and apprehension.... meeting an ET would only be remotely "comfortable" for me if I was in a large group of people meeting one of these things completely separated from any gadgets it has.

And I'm sure most people can hear these accounts of other people and it's rather uncomfortable to consider that such things could actually happen, so they are simply dismissed.

It's just easier to say "you are imagining things" than to actually seek to fully explain the phenomena. Complicating the issue is the apparently random nature of the phenomena, which makes capturing it on video or still photo a "shot in the dark" - especially when you consider that the phenomena in question would likely disable our primitive devices if they deemed it necessary.

Further complicating this are people who hoax claims - especially groups that claim to have hoaxed various pieces of evidence. They make denial even easier for all parties.

What it all really boils down to is that some people will believe anything you show them, and others will never believe anything you show them if it conflicts with what they believe. There isn't much that can be done about it, aside from crashing a UFO onto their front lawn.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 02:14 AM
(Folks, I'm copying this post from another thread cause I think it's apt in this case.)

There are extremes everywhere.
There are people who would cry out hoax even if a spaceship landed in their kitchen and the aliens made them breakfast.
There are others who want that breakfast so much that they see aliens in their tea.
In the middle there are pragmatists armed with reason and hope.
There are also jokers, idiots, pranksters, and many people with way too much time on their hands with too many computer skills and not enough social ones.
Then a great mixing bowl such as ATS provides a forum in which to mix the proverbial above mentioned fruit.
Throw in a picture that could be anything from a firefly to galactic cruiser, and voila:
Dozens of people with different reasons and intents talking at each other with very little getting accomplished. Focusing on each other and not the subject at hand.
The fact is, it's just a bleeding light! You can look at it for days and and days and it's still just a bleeding light.
But no, moderators have to intervene from New Zealand, to calm people down.
What to do, come to your conclusions about whatever evidence is presented, post it, take a deep breath, and remind yourself that at the very least these people don't know where you live.
I don't even know if I'm even addressing your post now.
Serenity Now!

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 02:43 AM
It also occurred to me that the emotional and intellectual dynamics of threats based on analyzing photographs or video of potential UFOs, are very similar to the following endeavor: BBC

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 02:46 AM
reply to post by schrodingers dog

Hiyah shrodingers dog,

I like your sense of humor in other threads that I have read....

But what does this article have to do with this thread?

Guys dressing like boxing for chess?

Is it the obvious comparison, yet not funny one? Or am I missing a connection?

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 03:02 AM
reply to post by LateApexer313

They don't dress up like boxers to play chess. They play chess and box for real in alternate rounds. The idea, that only Germans can have, is to compete at both the intellectual and instinctual/physical level at the same time.
I was actually for once making a serious parallel with ufo threads which seem to take on the same dynamic. One post will be analytical followed by an attack, back and forth and so on.
Sorry if the article wasn't clear.

Structure and rules

A match between two opponents consists of up to eleven alternating rounds of boxing and chess sessions, starting with a four-minute chess round followed by two minutes of boxing and so on. Between rounds there is a one minute pause, during which competitors change their gear. The form of chess played is speed chess in which each competitor has a total of twelve minutes for the whole game. Competitors may win by knockout, checkmate, a judge's decision or if their opponent's twelve minutes of chess time elapses. If a contestant does not make a move in the chessround, he will be issued a warning by the referee. At the second warning the contestant will be disqualified.

[edit on 28-6-2008 by schrodingers dog]

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in