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: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:38 PM
reply to post by schrodingers dog

that's good - what an interesting idea

that is what's happening

we're always moving back and forth between our gut and analytical thought - and coming to some kind of conclusion about what's real - what makes sense

everyone's credibility is on the line one way or another here - doesn't matter which side you're on

it's one of the things that interests me most about all of this - (you'd think it would be the aliens) is how ego driven each one of our versions of reality seems to be

is anyone capable of true objectivity? we're always defending our sense of self and our own reality

maybe this is the only way we can come to understand anything - with a constant back and forth argument - claims and accusations - it's evidence/it's lies - a confrontation between instinct and rational thought

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 03:39 PM
There is evidence and there is proof. The best thing to do is collect evidence and have it analyzed. The best way to state this is:
Evidence: Landing sites, physical and medical evidence, radiation, photograph and video, etc. There are thousands of pieces of evidence that has been gathered.
Proof is a much higher and is harder to obtain as stated here:
The aliens land in a major city or a UFO crash lands and is covered by the media.

There is no absolute proof UFOs or paranormal exists, but there is plenty of evidence. I hope I am making myself clear on this.

It is also interesting that some people are convicted of murder on circumstancial evidence without there being proof.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 03:46 PM

Originally posted by kidflash2008
There is no absolute proof UFOs or paranormal exists, but there is plenty of evidence. I hope I am making myself clear on this.

I would venture to go as far as to say, on an existential level, there can never be any "proof" that anything exists.
But within the context of ufology, solid evidence seems a reasonable expectation.

I would also like to point out the following:
"I don't know" is never a bad answer.

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

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 03:52 PM
reply to post by schrodingers dog

With the paranormal there is the possibility of recording the phenomena. You are correct that a UFO space craft is a physical object (although there is argument that some are projections). I just wanted to make the difference between proof and evidence. I think there is much evidence out there but no absolute proof (barring the government having any hidden proof).

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:06 PM

Proof. .. I agree there really isn't proof of anything when the question about proof remains.

Evidence is key. The more the merrier, but the power is in belief and consensus. This aspect of human society is what makes the military-industrial-MEDIA complex soooo powerful.
People are conditioned in the instant-access-info world to only believe what talking heads tell them. The impetus for original exploration/research is stymied by an overabundance of info and disinfo. I often abandon lines of inquiry when too many people with agendas other than pure understanding get in the "game," so to speak.
Proof is a dirty, dirty word in the natural sciences. Nothing is proved. It's argued, accepted or marginalized. Never static.
***Unfortunately, people do regard the scientific method as it stands as an end all. That belief is UNscientific!!!****

Control of consensus and belief.
Propaganda is very dangerous.
Suprisingly, the powers that be have only to make the slightest effort to totally bamboozle and distract the masses. The statistical majority, that is.
Good example: I started a thread on here about Mars anomalies in Sinus Meridiani. It is ignored, yet the images are very compelling if for no other reason that the bizarreness, devoid of an attempt to explain or categorize them.
People are lazy. They actually HATE to make decisions, so it's fairly easy for control to be established. All you need is an arsenal of pacifiers.

You may disgaree with me, but I believe it is exacty the type of people on ATS who in the end determine the course for the majority.
There are always catalysts and skeptics in the minority and that is wonderful and absolutely necessary for survival of the species. Long live the malcontents, dreamers and dissidents!!!!I believe we are in the midst of a positive paradigm shift. The Cold War game is ending and a new and scarier world is beginning. I love it. We need to keep having this dialogue.

Sorry for the fruity soliloquy, but this topic is near and dear to my heart. I spend considerable time each day telling people about Mars and UFOs. Most of the people I communicate with are ignorant of the "truer" situation, but not closed minded, only distracted and misinformed.

[edit on 28-6-2008 by djerwulfe]

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:09 PM
I'm pretty much convinced that even if Aliens landed in front of the White House and met with the President, the skeptics would come up with a conspiracy theory of the Aliens being leprechauns put in fake suits.

It has gone too far, 500+ UFO reports and images/video just isn't good enough for them.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:16 PM
I have seen a [insert terminology for anti-gravity craft here] and can confirm that the technology is real. It can hover in a perfect standstill and accelerate out of view in a fraction of a second. This is fact.

On the other hand, I have never seen anything to incline me to think that the technology is ET other than Hollywood movies and media propaganda.

I am waiting for evidence of ET as much as the next guy but I will confirm that [insert terminology for anti-gravity craft here] is a technological reality.

I hope this clears some things up for those that were on the fence.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:23 PM
I've been visiting these forums for a few months now and have to agree with the OP. I think there is no proof that can be provided that anyone would accept as genuine. Videos of airplanes I've taken look like planes but only because I know it was a plane I was making a video of. I get the feeling if I posted a video here saying "I don't know what this is" I'd get 10 "thank you for posting" responses and 100 "fake" responses and maybe one person saying "hey, that's a plane".

I must admit though, very few outright flames. Although, that is probably because the mods don't take kindly to that kind of stuff.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:30 PM
reply to post by Spoodily

I hear you. This is ongoing. I get really excited when people discuss retro-engineering. Most technology, even theoretical without working prototypes, can be basically understood with a little algebra and elementary physics.
I blew up at some kid (I'll call him a kid, but?) a while ago on here becasue he was convinced fibre optics was/were alien tech.
He was claiming to be drafting a in-depth anaysis of various technologies that he believed were alien in origin, but couldn't understand why i suggested that he/she take some chemistry classes before running to the publishers with his, and I quote, "Theories and Findings."

I felt like aprick, but people like that REALLy hurt "us."

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:33 PM
reply to post by Spoodily

Doesn't exactly clear anything up.

There are also problems in explaining the sightings of UFOs over the course of history - particularly during the second World War, and earlier accounts of UFOs in history and ancient history.

And, as a member of the U.S. Navy, I know quite well that if you were in a position to have witnessed such a craft and know it was of our own design, you would not be talking about it because you would also know of Echelon, and that they will revoke your security clearance so fast and have you hauled off to Leavenworth, here in Beautiful Missouri, in about two hours.

I could come visit you if you would like - It's only about an hour's drive from here. It's even pretty cool today - yesterday was pretty hot and humid. But, once they let you out in about 20 years, I know some great spots to go in the Ozarks - beautiful part of the country, and some pretty good fishing, too.

I knew a guy in A-school who got carted off because he shot his mouth off on the phone talking to his friend, talking about a plan to kill the president or something..... he got hauled out of there within an hour by the FBI. Not sure if he did any time - but they scared the hell out of him and discharged him from service, for sure. Echelon picked him up... though it officially doesn't exist...

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:46 PM

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by Spoodily

Doesn't exactly clear anything up.

There are also problems in explaining the sightings of UFOs over the course of history - particularly during the second World War, and earlier accounts of UFOs in history and ancient history.

And, as a member of the U.S. Navy, I know quite well that if you were in a position to have witnessed such a craft and know it was of our own design, you would not be talking about it because you would also know of Echelon, and that they will revoke your security clearance so fast and have you hauled off to Leavenworth, here in Beautiful Missouri, in about two hours.

I agree that the historical references to unexplained phenomena are strange. I am just speaking of my own encounter. I have no reason to believe that ET was involved. That would be pure speculation. I know there were occupants because it had windows down the length of it and red light on inside.

Also, I was delivering pizzas when I saw the craft. I looked at it for about four seconds before it shot away. I had just gotten out my car with the pizza in the customer's driveway. I don't think I can get put anywhere for delivering pizzas and looking in the right place at the right time. I looked up to look at the moon which was very pretty that night. I got lucky when the red lights from the craft caught my eye. No men in black came to see me afterwards...

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:20 PM
reply to post by Spoodily

Not to be rude.... but how do you know it was our own?

Furthermore, if such craft were of our own design... why so many? Unless they are ridiculously cheap and easy to produce... much less hide.... why go through all the effort to create so many different designs and so many of these designs.... only to fly them around over populated (and unpopulated) areas and stir up excitement?

While I would bet we have been working to develop our own craft that can perform similarly to the reports of UFOs (we worked like crazy to build nuclear warheads when we thought the Germans had them.... don't see why we wouldn't develop a craft to do what the UFO reports indicate) - but even taking into account the tendencies of zoomies and fighter-jocks to show off and bedazzle their fans on the ground.... it doesn't quite fit with the UFO phenomena that has been witnessed over the decades.

Of course, hell if I know why aliens would be drawing pictures in the crops, abducting cows, people, chickens, etc - as well as doing fly-byes.

Unless they are just their equivalent of teens screwing around with the ants on an anthill (now that's encouraging). But even then....

It doesn't quite fit in with human intelligence and motives.... nor does it all fit in with natural phenomena and "overactive imaginations" - and since defining the nature and objectives of an alien intelligence is difficult for us to do.... I would have to say that it makes more sense than most other things (in a number of instances - of course there are most of those reported incidents that are misinterpreted aircraft, ball lightning, etc).

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:33 PM
reply to post by Aim64C

As anyone who has recenlty served in Iraq or Afghanistan would tell you if they felt comfortable doing so, we have a wide range of drones with a variety of functions and forms.

I've heard top brass say that there really aren't too many instances where we need troops on the ground anymore. It many be argued that infantry and security patrols not engaged in covert ops are really only a Pysch-Ops
tactic, police. In any real offensive with an unknown chance for meeting military objectives it's been argued that those missions can nearly be completely handled with drones, remotes, satelites, etc.

This is actually a debate in the Pentagon and Government.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:39 PM
I think a clear picture that shows both a low flying UFO and other witnesses, combined with lots of witness testimony would do it. It would have to be a picture that just couldn't be denied, given the onlookers and documented testimony of many people. It also needs to come from a prominent country. Anything coming from 2nd/3rd world countries would carry a certain amount of doubt with it.

[edit on 28-6-2008 by Dronetek]

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:42 PM
Thanks for your point of view. I have never had any kind of encounter of anyting I could put my finger on. But some of the things I have seen on the web bullcrap aside like some NASA footage how can you arguewith that. thanks

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:43 PM
To the OP. The standard for evidence has never been raised.

When a new technology is adopted by the masses, we learn of it's manipulative abilities and quasi-instantaneously (the smart ones at least) make the bar of proof beyond the ability of this technology.

Human nature is too either be too trusting or too distrusting. There is no naturally occurring middle ground.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:52 PM
Absolutely not. The bar for proof needs to be high indeed. I would say that real proof should be absolutely irrefutable by all. You cannot deny the existence of light bulbs because they light your home. When proof is finally found it will be something we can all agree on. To do otherwise is to make the entire issue religious and cult-like. Science is provable and reproduceable, religion is faith based. We all know UFOs exist, the question is who is controlling them. The real question we are all looking for the answer to is; is it extraterrestrial, human or natural phenomenon ? Hell, the airforce admits that UFOs exist, they just won't or can't explain who's at the wheel.

The issue becomes, is this a scientific question or a spiritual one? If it is scientific then the bar for proof must be high.

[edit on 28-6-2008 by hammanderr]

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:57 PM
A couple more gross generalizations about proof.

That is the Element of the Absurd. Anomalous phenomena defy convention.

Physical UFO evidence, when it can be obtained is USUALLY limited to unusual alloys with uncertain and irrational origins. Some of these "lumps" would be very expensive to manufacture and often have no known commercial application. Hoaxers would have to have access to top-notch synthesis labs and money.

Anomalous radiation. There are often readings of mysteriously elevated radiation or eloctromagnetic-radio levels. More often than not, detected in locations without any reasonable source. These reading have been reported by objective techicians who sometimes were wholly unaware of the nature or purpose of his or her surveying.

EM. Errr... how do I say this? Ah, I'm finding in my digging, interviewing, visiting that there may be a pattern I haven't heard discussed before.

I first noticed it in a Moon Township, PA incident around 2000. There was a mass UFO sighting, but as I scrounged for testimony/info I found that it wasn't just a wave of UFO sighting, but that it was in fact a wave of anomly sightings. An ANOMALY WAVE, if you will. I will be pursuing this further, but I bet you can think of some other instance like this . . . West Virginia?

I got off topic. Proof. There seems to me, (now this is personal and though I could justify it with literature, but please just allow me this break from ATS decorum).. There seems to me to be a reflexive sort of self-correcting factor to everyday reality.

Say you have a high energy event. anything. A suspot kicks off a chain reaction of highly improbable events within the Biosphere. I believe if highly improbable events take place it may create a ripple effect followed by a normalizing force as in basic Newtonian Physics, only this feature is specifically observable in the physical manifestation of stable matter that weroutinely deal with. High levels of unfamiliar, or difficult-to-observe in Nature or the lab for that matter, Energies may actually be able to manifest physical anomlies that conform to observer or observers unconscious expectations...

But this absurd element and nonsense evidence is the microcosm of the larger issue. In essence: The Evidence of UFOs is Real (the effects after-the-fact), but the causative element itself, (i.e. the UFO) is NOT, by our accepted standards, Real. A paradox. The effects are real, but the causative element falls outside our model of what is "real" and therefore, is not real.
This line of thought does not hold for every case, arguably. But it is my attempt to justify the deliberate and decidely Unscientific attitude in mainstream academia and science of poohpooing UFOlogy, this absennce of causative elements is the only thing I can come up with.
It pisses me off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'lll shut up now.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:59 PM
reply to post by Aim64C

The red coming through the windows is the most outstanding clue to me that a human presence was on board. Any aviator or someone who has used one of those L-shaped military flashlights knows that you use the red filter to read maps/etc. so your eyes don't have to re-adjust to see in the dark.

The reason for the secrecy, in my opinion, is for the new "final solution". Reagan once said that the one thing that would unify the world is an outside threat. What better way to solve the world population crisis and activate the NWO than to have "aliens" eliminate 5 billion people?

With such technology and an artificial enemy you can remove the bulk of the world population and "recover" the "alien" technology from "downed" ships after humans "win" against them to bring in the futuristic age under a unified world government. The remaining people would be sad about the loss of life but happy they lived to benefit from the technology gained.

It sounds a little out there but this scenario is the easiest way to solve a number of problems and bring advanced technology to the remaining public in the shortest amount of time. I don't think the people left alive will be a completely random selection either.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 07:14 PM
reply to post by burdman30ott6

There are just so many stories about UFO's now it's ridicules.
If all these stories were true their would a alien in every suburb.
With so many aliens about you would think somebody would have
some physical proof either biological or material. But there is
absolutely nothing, no physical proof whatsoever. A video of a
light in the sky is not physical proof.

Most of these stories, and that's all they really are, are just begging
to be debunked or called fake. And at least 95% are just so easy to
prove Fake it's not even funny anymore. There's probably only 1% of
all reports that can't be explained. But that doesn't mean a Grey
Dude is driving it, it is a Unidentified Flying Object. Some people think
because it's Unidentified it must be an Alien at the Wheel.

It's really going to take more than a shaky, blurry image of
something before I'll admit defeat.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in