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.

 

UFOs: Seeing Is Believing (Part 2) show info! Mark your calenders!

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 02:14 AM
link   
Interesting.

But my aprehension always goes "up" when a big national tv channel airs ufo shows like these.
Why? Because in the end they dont contribute to real ufology, however they do contribute to the continuation of riddicule of this subject.

There's always a scientist on these shows that tells 'us' how impossible it would be for another species from another planetary system to come to us.
And as everyone knows, scientists are all knowing....Right?

Just because someone has a scientific background doesn't mean they know what they are talking about, or how things really work out here in the real world.
Not all scientists are like this, but most of them are, sorry to say.
They are starting to get the "Dr.Ego".

But one can hope that they bring something to the table on these shows.




posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by reconpilot
 


It's like the media just likes the stories but could care less about the facts or getting to the truth most of the time. They aren't in the business of investigating any more...lazy



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Balez
Interesting.



Just because someone has a scientific background doesn't mean they know what they are talking about, or how things really work out here in the real world.
Not all scientists are like this, but most of them are, sorry to say.
They are starting to get the "Dr.Ego".

But one can hope that they bring something to the table on these shows.


exactly, lets face it, they pay thousands of dollars to go to school to learn what? something thats already predetermined corriculum. not evolving knowledge, most of the guys have to learn the basics for years, and then venture on their own to make new discovery. its all systematic,hodge podge. Im not saying having an education is a waste of time, but paying gobs and gobs of money is a waste.

"i dont want to study UFO's for the sake of my carreeeer!" - boo hoo scientist

bio engineer some testical fortitude why dontcha

i wont respond to the abc special in a negitive why i promise, because i have the ability to know whats being thrown at me in spite. lets just be glad we have a special on public tv. but rest assured going into the near future, we will have a local channel head who will begin to embrase the phenomena with the importance of 60 min. thats my hope anyway.




posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   
To learn more about UFO sightings, watch "UFOs: Seeing Is Believing" on a special edition of "Primetime" tonight at 9:30 p.m. ET.

im looking forward to it I hope it is some what good.



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
I'm always kind of amused by the bashing "science" and "scientists" occasionally take in this forum. "Oh, we all know scientists are evil, brainwashed puppets of the status quo, and they don't know anything!"

As opposed to what? What is a good alternative? A lot of dubious or distorted misinformation gathered from the Internet?

"Yeah, science can go to hell, because I've got info from the blog of the rebel outcast scientist "crakpot1999" that says they're all wrong! I may not know math and physics, but I know what I like!"


Just because somebody points out and pokes a logical hole in your little UFO hope balloon, that's no reason to decide all science and scientists are evil and wrong and big meanies, to boot. The flaws in the evidence should be recognized and reasonably considered. They're every bit as important (and maybe even more important) as the gee-whiz descriptions or computer re-creations.

[edit on 16-9-2008 by Nohup]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ufo reality
reply to post by reconpilot
 


It's like the media just likes the stories but could care less about the facts or getting to the truth most of the time. They aren't in the business of investigating any more...lazy


Yep ,cheep sensational sound bites to grab your attention with denial sewn in to keep you on their rail car to hell . Business as usual my friend .
But not everyone in show biz is bad .



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nohup
I'm always kind of amused by the bashing "science" and "scientists" occasionally take in this forum. "Oh, we all know scientists are evil, brainwashed puppets of the status quo, and they don't know anything!"

As opposed to what? What is a good alternative? A lot of dubious or distorted misinformation gathered from the Internet?

"Yeah, science can go to hell, because I've got info from the blog of the rebel outcast scientist "crakpot1999" that says they're all wrong! I may not know math and physics, but I know what I like!"


Just because somebody points out and pokes a logical hole in your little UFO hope balloon, that's no reason to decide all science and scientists are evil and wrong and big meanies, to boot. The flaws in the evidence should be recognized and reasonably considered. They're every bit as important (and maybe even more important) as the gee-whiz descriptions or computer re-creations.

[edit on 16-9-2008 by Nohup]


Many smart intelligent people are unwilling prostitutes in this game of power . Perverted science got us in this mess though and all to often scientists are cowed and manipulated . Insecure and ego driven ,many of them sell out for funding . Kind a like debunkers...



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ufo reality
 


Thanks for the reminder!

The first one must have brought them some ratings eh? For part 2 to come along!



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by LateApexer313
 


Yes I was told that the original brought very high ratings. If this one is not up to par like the original, I'm sure ABC will get a ton of email and letters just like with the original...



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ufo reality
 


I never mind if these types of general "for the masses" type of shows are "good" or not, as long as they are fair and don't butcher the facts too badly or giggle and snicker at the stories.

I usually get a few friends in real life to watch them, people that have no clue or little clue about UFOs and gauge what they think about them, since most of us interested in UFOS on ATS have seen and heard it all, ad nauseum


That reminds me I have calls to make about tonight



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Nohup
 




I'm always kind of amused by the bashing "science" and "scientists" occasionally take in this forum. "Oh, we all know scientists are evil, brainwashed puppets of the status quo, and they don't know anything!"

However, that was quite amusing.
They probably know alot about the subject they are studying, probably they are experts in their area.

Here is the difference though "in their area", most scientist ain't experts in ufology, but because they are labeled to be an scientist people are more likely to take their "word" for it even if they are wrong.



As opposed to what? What is a good alternative? A lot of dubious or distorted misinformation gathered from the Internet?

And what differs this from what a scientist can conclude?
They could as likely be spewing out disinformation as any other person can.


Just because somebody points out and pokes a logical hole in your little UFO hope balloon, that's no reason to decide all science and scientists are evil and wrong and big meanies, to boot. The flaws in the evidence should be recognized and reasonably considered. They're every bit as important (and maybe even more important) as the gee-whiz descriptions or computer re-creations.

Well if it looks like a balloon, behaves like a balloon, even a scientist should be able to discern that it is a balloon.


For you who watched this show, was it any good?



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 06:23 PM
link   
3rd most viewed on ABC.com

abcnews.go.com...

I hope this show isn't a waste of my time...



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Balez
And what differs this from what a scientist can conclude?
They could as likely be spewing out disinformation as any other person can.


Agreed, that's always been a problem in UFO research. There have been experts in meteorology and astrophysics and military weapons development who may or may not have the necessary expertise to talk intelligently about UFOs, since we don't know what UFOs are to begin with. And even the most learned experts on time travel or multidimensionality are so far at the fringes of regular science that what they say must be taken with a grain of salt.

But that still doesn't answer the question. What's the alternative? At least with science we have a chance at working within a reasonable, logical framework to develop hypotheses and test them. It sure beats coming to a conclusion (they're alien spacecraft), then twisting and pushing the data to try to fit the conclusion.

My personal opinion is that a lot of UFO activity deals with things that don't currently fit within our current conceptual frameworks. But we're going to have to start with what we know now and work with science toward expanding our concepts and fitting in the unknowns, not jump to a wild, unproven and possibly unprovable conclusion, then blaming science for not keeping up or obstructing the Truth.



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 10:23 PM
link   
I watched this show just now, and i was favorably impressed. No, there weren't any new ideas, or new information. It was a rehashing of what many of us have discussed for a very long time. The ideas expressed, both for and against the concept of UFOs being "real", whatever that word means, were old news.

But, this time around, there wasn't the smirk in the voice, the unspoken yet deafening ridicule, that has almost always been a part of these type of shows. There was an air of mystery, as well there should be; a sense that"mainstreet" was finally wanting some real answers. Even the skeptics seemed to understand this shift, and appeared less confident, more on the defensive; to sound like they were now the ones trying to hold on to ideas that no one believed.

Overall, it seems that this broadcast, maybe for the first time since Kenneth Arnold dubbed them "saucers", took the approach that here was a mystery worthy of investigation. Sure, there were places when the old "they wear tinfoil hats" mantra was sounded; but nowhere did this sound like the "hit piece" we all know and loathe.

One interesting point I noted was with the SETI folks. One of them made a statement to the effect that SETI wouldn't be bothering to look for aliens if they were really already visiting us. I noted it because to me it seemed this person was saying that to admit to even the possibility of aliens coming to Earth was to invalidate the life work of these people. And therein lies the problem for so many in science.

For science to embrace the concept of aliens here in our skies would be to admit that they, the self styled "Big Brains", might not have near the answers they wanted everyone to think they had. And to admit it would also make them, at least in some ways, feel unneeded. It sounded as if there was more resistance in their minds based on ego than scientific curiosity. It may not be "the church" which has as much to lose as the body scientific; and they know it.

Just my impressions, and by no means any final word on the subject.





As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


[edit on 16-9-2008 by NGC2736]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Yep, I just watched UFOs: Seeing is Believing also. I especially liked the last segment about the pilots' sightings and found them quite interesting. Like most, I did not agree with the "official" Project Blue Book Roswell disclosure or the sleep paralysis condition to explain away alien abductions. (Too many variables not covered in the program: i.e., what about people taken from their cars?)

Overall, certainly not a terrible show, but nothing we haven't really seen before, maybe with exception of the Seti team's plans for expansion. I'd recommend this show to friends who haven't studied the UFO phenomenon to any great extent. I want my teen to watch it, and we'll talk about it afterwards.

Of course, we have to keep in mind that mainstream media only lets us know what big bro wants us to know. That's always a given. With the latest UFO "news reporting/investigative-type" shows, the lingering question remains: What are we being primed for? A disclosure of information that could possibly rock the foundations of humankind, perhaps?



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 11:46 PM
link   
sleep paralysis is not the same as getting abducted when they step out of their car. come on now...



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Nohup
 




But that still doesn't answer the question. What's the alternative? At least with science we have a chance at working within a reasonable, logical framework to develop hypotheses and test them. It sure beats coming to a conclusion (they're alien spacecraft), then twisting and pushing the data to try to fit the conclusion.

Well usually scientists works with theories, many theories stay just that because there is no way to test them factually, or there are no funding to test them.

And when they can not test a theory they stay with what is known the "facts".
That's where the problem starts, with known science of today, travelling to another star system is impossible within a reasonable time frame.
Here is where the logic starts to break down when applying something with what we know "today", when there could be spacefaring species out there who has been travelling the stars before mankind took their first steps.

That is not a possibility to be counted out of it, and it's not defying logic at all, that conclusion is only defying known science, that would not be the first time that happened.

Now if you apply some logic of what can be found from radar reports, where objects have been making manuevers that our own air craft today can not make.

Ofcourse they could be millitary aircraft, but i highly doubt that, since the forces applied onto the craft by the acceleration, drastic course changes, sudden stops would tear the craft appart.
I'm still not counting out a millitary explanation on this though.

But other than that i agree completely with what you saying, UFO's are unknowns.
And when dealing with unknowns you have to compile the existing data and see where that is leading you.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 01:42 AM
link   
Tonight's tv show was just a reduced and repackaged version of the 2005 Peter
Jennings documentary, this was a deception. They only inserted new stuff like
Stephenville and Mar Phoenix but the same old story just remixed.

ABC News waited three years just to present the same show disguised with a
new dress and a new conductor a David Muir (Who?) I don't get it.

For those of you that missed tonight's ABC Primetime you just saved 1½ hour
of your precious time.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 07:22 AM
link   
I made sure to watch the original on YouTube yesterday. And when I started to watch last night I honestly thought a mistake had been made and that they were just showing the old one again.

I was partially correct.

I found the show thoroughly worthless as far as it being 'new' is concerned. And it looked like Stanton Friedman got cut out once and for all this time.

It has a redeeming ending, of course, in that they kept in the Michio Kaku segment.

Beyond that... quite disappointing; I was expecting it to be all new and it quite simply wasn't



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 08:54 AM
link   
As I suspected it was a total waste of time. Although I must tell you that someone I know that saw the debris and bodies from Roswell said the beings depicted in the beggining were correct but the ship debris was NOT. Just an FYI



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join