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.

 

Competing Hoaxes? Is This an ATS Game?

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by roadgravel
 


Excellent point, RG. You've stated the point I was trying to make much better. I, too, am withholding judgement on DT's thread and letting it stand on its own merit. However, I really believe that MWC's thread is just a silly joke.




posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by maria_stardust
 


I would suggest if it is a joke, or parody, it should be moved to the joke forum at the request of the OP. If it left where it is and eventually labeled HOAX, under the T&C he has knowingly posted false information which could result in a ban.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by garyo1954
 

True. However, both members are standing by their stories, and neither have been officially declared a hoax.

I'm not saying I believe DT's allegations, but I do think his story stands a little firmer than MWC. If either story is declared a hoax then that member will most likely be banned for violation of the T&C.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by maria_stardust
 


I don't know about DT's situation and haven't been reading the thread all the way through. I don't discredit his situation either.

I am at least trying to be proactive about my situation.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by roadgravel
 


Good points. So I'll level with you. I've obtained The Stan Romanek DVD.

It has testimonies from University of Nebraska professors and technological investigators from Cornell who have examined the evidence. It deals with the ufo sightings, the orbs, formulas, strange happenings, the implant, etc.

And I've been considering how I can present this issue where it gets a fair trial so to speak.

The problem I'd have is the stigma attached from all the false information that has been prefabricated to discredit the available evidence.

Any immediate reaction would include the term HOAX, would it not?



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by maria_stardust
 


I can understand that Maria. There is more flesh on that bone. And more pitfalls and stumble points.

Now sometimes I hate opening up my thinking on this board for fear it will be misconstrued or misquoted. But ask yourself this:

What is the norm when 'something' provides enough evidence to perhaps be provable?

It has been my experience that when 'something' reaches that level, there is a higher investigation done by the higher ups on this site. Yet, neither of these threads have reached that level of investigation.

And what does that tell us?

Now, I'll freely admit that alone does not scream HOAX, but it does indicate there is evidence is lacking. And that is indicative of something in my thinking.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Minnesotawreckingcrew
 


Actually, I like how you have presented your case. No unnecessary or constraining (bothersome things called) details. Facts are simple and effective.

You heard noises, went in, and discovered an alien exiting your bedroom window.

That is how a storyline should be. And I'm intrigued. And yes, it is plausible but without those bothersome details, it is one of those stories that need a walk to get to first base.

When it comes to aliens and UFOs I don't give walks.











posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by garyo1954
 


It has been my experience that when 'something' reaches that level, there is a higher investigation done by the higher ups on this site. Yet, neither of these threads have reached that level of investigation.


I agree that definitive evidence is going to be hard to cough up, so the validity of either claim still hangs in the balance. However, both threads are still relatively new. It may be that the higher ups are just withholding judgement and are waiting to see how things play out.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by garyo1954
 


There will always be those who choose a firm stance after post #1. I think many people wanted to see the background material on the evidence and third party comments on it. Most open minded people wanted more before attempting to take a stance. It might go over quite well with the majority here.

What is you take on the material?



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by roadgravel
 


Stan has a pretty amazing story when everything is put in proper context.

Those formulas look like scribbles until the professor starts breaking them down section by section and details how they relate to element 115, which is the same UUP Bob Lazar talks about.

I didn't know anything about the implant until I saw the DVD. The tech people present some information to confirm a possible circuitry.

There are UFO segments that Stan filmed as far back as 2001.

The DVD is a strong case that something is occurring.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   
If I may, the issue of HOAX or not is unresolvable in terms of the context.

How could you possibly 'prove' anything posting on a forum such as this? Every image is deemed either technically unsatisfactory or manipulated. Every claim is countered with 'give me proof' but no one dares explain what proof really would be.

I will not be the one to discount a story simply because my gut says so, unless I know that 'my gut feeling' is an acceptable substitute for reason. At the very most I'll express reservations, but it would be unfair to categorically deny someones experiences took place.

Having said this; I hope for DT's sake that this particular chapter in his families life has ended, and he never face such a horror again.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   
I completely agree with you OP on this one. I want to look at this a little deeper. The OP's of the two recent hoaxes most likely will not read this thread for fear.

Since I'm a pacifist, I do not like to upset the OP's, because sometimes they are sick or they are suffering through something in their lives, and this board is their only outlet for whatever is going on in their lives. I have substantial evidence that at least part of the threat, "Violent Encounter..." is indeed a hoax, or at least partly a lie.

1.) Common sense dictates, the Violent Encounter is entirely false. Any non-paranoid, non-schizophrenic, sane human can use logic to determine this.
2.) When the OP of "Violent Encounter..." uses his wife, he makes two mistakes identifying himself posing as his wife.
a.) Similar grammatical errors
b.) Same typing punctuation style, i.e a space after a sentence followed by a question mark. Trust me, that is a trait that only one idiot has.

Now I hate to point fingers, but this "violent encounter" most likely never happened. Now from another perspective, it is possible something happened. If this is so than the OP of that particular thread, probably had his home invaded, had a lot of stuff stolen, fabricated this story, then posted it to make himself feel better. It is also possible that his wife/girlfriend was raped, or some sort of traumatic experience occurred, and he wrote out his own version of the story to help him escape, which I hope is not true because it truly is pathetic.

Best case scenario, he's just a kid wanting attention (probably isn't even married). They say there are two primary reasons for a hoax. For profit, career enhancement, or for attention. I think we've solved that first one.

I haven't read the other thread about the bedroom, but I'll be sure you look it over. Also to read another hoax, check out JKrog's Secret Black Projects Part 2. Great fictional read, and somebody already proved it to include elements from an entire season of Stargate.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by aerialview
 


Sure words equal evidence. This is true in a court of law. If I told you I had a poltergeist experience, you wouldn't believe it. If I signed a sworn statement you wouldn't believe me. If I passed a lie detector you would say I was insane. If I produced another witness, who was there and remembered my time base accounts of the incidents, you would say I brainwashed them. If I had a photo (I don't) you could say it was Photoshop.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by garyo1954
 


Star and flagged. I've been wondering this too lately. It seem in the last 2 months or so there have been outrageous claims with little or no real evidence. The dr in colorado, the competeing Area 51 threads, etc.

I wonder if there is a group running a competition?



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkelf
We need a new forum category on ATS. Whenever someone makes claims like this, it needs to go to the HOAX forum until the OP has provided definative proof. Once this has been met, the thread can be moved to the applicable category.


But isnt that what ATS Skunk Works is perfect for?

Non definitive proof, until proved otherwise.

[edit on 7-7-2008 by Denied]



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by garyo1954
 


Whats really sad is that if we really say what we want to say to these people that are craping all over this site, we will get banned. I have only been with ATS for a little while but in that short time the overall tone of the site has changed drastically. I dont like the flag system, you can flag it to push it higher to the top but you cant flag it to push is to the bottom. If we had a way to flag these post as nonsense(and those who thought they were true could flag otherwise) then I think we could put a stop to this. I do know this if things dont change quick, I will more than likely move on to a forum where true discussion takes place and this garbage isnt whats on the front page everytime you log on. DO SOMETHING ATS OR I THINK YOUR GOING TO LOOSE ALOT OF POSTERS(to bad its not going to be the bad ones either)



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by garyo1954
 


Instead of just good flags we need bad flags too, so we can boot someone out of the front page after thier friends have flagged them up with only 3 flags. The flags system is not working when 3 flags can make you the most important topic of the day......It needs a counter balance system.....Pls ATS try to implement a way that people who feel they are not news worthy can voice thier opinion, without having to leave a comment which then makes the forum look more important.....

[edit on 7-7-2008 by alienj]



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by alienj

I dont like the flag system, you can flag it to push it higher to the top but you cant flag it to push is to the bottom. If we had a way to flag these post as nonsense(and those who thought they were true could flag otherwise) then I think we could put a stop to this.


Thats a really good idea, so even if it had 80 flags, you might have 90 naysayers.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Denied
 


Thank you denied, I almost think we need to start a completly new thread on revamping the Flag system, I have noticed since it started how it can be abused by only 3 or 4 people flagging a comment.. It should take 10 to 15 flags to make a comment front page worthy with the number of people logging off and on to ATS



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by garyo1954
We currently have two threads dealing with alien encounters on the board.
So the reason for this thread is twofold.

First, I'm wondering if this is an ATS Game?
The second is because one of the OP has placed many people on ignore and prevented any open discussion by refusing to answer questions that would lead to some conclusion.

Now, that may be his right but it certainly doesn't help deny ignorance, nor does it lend itself to member participation when a member is undecided, or disagrees.

It does make for a great deal of congratulations and agreement which itself leaves no discussion on the possibility of the event being true.

And that is a bit appalling. It would seem if a party chose, he could use ATS, by way of these same tactics, to prove anything. He could even claim to others, and on other forums, he opened this for discussion on ATS and nobody could disprove it.

In my thinking, that is not what ATS is about. The two threads are here:

Violent Encounter with an Alien Being
Alien ran out of my bedroom window

Both these threads are based on the premise that an alien being was encountered in a home.

One has significant detail; the other has almost no detail.

In both these threads the alien is injured in some manner.

Both threads have drawings of the alien and picture evidence of a related object.

Both these threads appear to have one main player, and each player has a coach.

So are we playing an ATS game?
And if we are not, is anybody looking at the possibility I've raised?

What is everybody thinking about these competing hoaxes?




I knew exactly what you were talking about and what threads you were referring to without even clicking the link first. After reading these two threads I felt like they were some kinda inside RATS joke or test.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join