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.

 

This is for all the `ufo skeptics` must read

page: 7
29
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 02:21 PM
link   
I'm not sure why we're focusing on this balloon video, Wasn't the original post regarding "undeniable proof"

The balloon across the front of the moon video is NOT undeniable proof is it? You don't even have to be a one eyed sceptic to see that. It does seem though, that you have to be a one eyed believer to not accept it for what it is, a balloon.
Internos has given you a whole bucket load of proof as to why its not an alien space craft and all you guys are coming back with is "but it changes direction", even with scientific fact showing how it can appear to change direction. Where is your research and investigation to prove otherwise?

Like I said in an earlier post and what Internos said in his previous post, go have a look at some of his threads..he even names them for you:


threads about The Height 611 UFO Crash, The RB-47 UFO Encounter, The strange story of JAL 1628


What more do you want?




posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by weneedtoknow
 


There are so many interesting cases to study that discrediting ufology has become extremely difficult. They have to reach to all kinds of LOONEY EXPLANATIONS to debunk authentic footage. They use every dirty trick in the book and most people still manage to see through the smoke screen.

People are not stupid, just misinformed. Now that millions of people have internet access they don't have to rely on mainstream media anymore and they can see any video or picture they wish. Are all the cases legitimate? Definetly no as there are many misinterpreted objects and perhaps a few hoaxes but to use this as an excuse to discredit ufology is totally absurd and only heightens our suspicions. It would be better if governments come out and tell us the truth, once and for all, even if the truth is not what we want to hear. I commend the mexican government for taking a bold step forward and hope other governments follow suit. I believe the belgian air force also released some footage a few decades ago.

You started a hot topic OP and taking some flak. This was to be expected though so don't get frustrated or angry. These people are doing their job which is denying evidence.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by sechmet
The video is excellent. Everybody with just "primary school knowledge" and brain should ask some questions after watching it.

I think, for sceptics everything is to be a fake.


Unequivocally false. At no point has any skeptic here said anything was fake. We offer other viewpoints or explanations, but we don't say every single case is a hoax or faked. Proving another explanation is not equivalent to saying something is fake.


Originally posted by sechmet
Its all about consciousness, about open mind and the real world.


Proclaiming that all skeptics think a certain way, even when a single skeptic here has not demonstrated such thinking, betrays who has the open-minds and who does not.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by argentus
p.s. a true skeptic is not your enemy, even if they believe your beliefs are false or unfounded.


The problem with many vocal skeptics and in fact many believers as well is not the skepticism itself, but when they label somebody as gullible, ignorant or stupid because of their beliefs, or conversely, when they use their own position as a safety blanket for their ego.

Whoever does this, skeptic or believer, does not advance the truth. Although they may advance what they think is their "reputation" at the cost of others.

A skeptic position is never supported by evidence simply because of the logical impossibility of proving negatives. No evidence can come forward that proves the nonexistence of anything. An agnostic position on the other hand is the position that one can take in the absence of evidence: a position of non-belief but willingness to admit new evidence and reconsider one's position.

That being said, for a person to pursue research in any subject (such as UFO's), belief is a required step, because the scientific method requires in one of it's steps to formulate a hypothesis (which is nothing but a belief that is about to be tested) A person with no inclinations to any belief is unwilling to pursue research. So for any research to happen, a momentary state of belief is required. This state of belief may become permanent later if good enough evidence is found. We need believers, specifically *slightly uncertain* but actively researching believers. That is the best state of all in my opinion.

I think that when most people say "true skeptic" what they really mean is an agnostic, someone who at the moment holds no belief, but is willing to consider evidence and change their mind, this is different from a person who vocally and adamantly promotes the absence of a belief or mundane (but poorly researched) explanations for sightings and other graphical forms of evidence.

Rather often the skeptic that makes the most noise in these forums is the one who does not really fit this definition of true skeptic, which leads to the common mis-perception.

In the end I think *what you do* is more important than *what you believe*. People who sit on an armchair and give opinions (for or against) versus people who contribute their time to researching hypotheses (even those that happen to "disprove" things)

-rrr

[edit on 19-10-2008 by rickyrrr]



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlySolo
My original point to this thread is, if your going to be a true skeptic and pull out answers disproving alien craft, then you must also debunk your own answer. I haven't seen that attempt from any skeptics at this site. Therefore, the skeptics here are biased and their data is flawed.


Your logic doesn't follow. Myself and several others, at least, are only offering more probable explanations--we are by no means making definitive claims. That's a little gotcha with logic that believers mess up an unbelievable amount of times, but it's always worth the entertainment value to see the "it's not fair" card invariably get pulled. Don't want it to be like that? Quit creating threads like "Undeniable proof of flying unicorns in Andromeda!!"

So no...we're not all biased and our data is not flawed--that claim, by the way, simply doesn't follow from its preceding statement. Why don't you work on the basics a bit more before responding again.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by silver6ix
 


By the way, gravity already *is* wrong in as much as it can be. There exist no unified theory of gravity that is consistent with both quantum mechanics and GR.

In science "right" is merely the lack of inconsistencies. If there existed a direct way to know the "true science" decoupled from the potential error of our own minds, logic and instruments, then we would not need any science we would just tap into this direct knowledge source instead.

Given that, science will always be subject to some degree of uncertainty and always depend on constant verification and re-evaluation.

-rr



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
I'm not sure why we're focusing on this balloon video, Wasn't the original post regarding "undeniable proof"

The balloon across the front of the moon video is NOT undeniable proof is it? Internos has given you a whole bucket load of proof as to why its not an alien space craft...


Exactly. If there data has to be intepreted, or if there is any room for reasonable, valid disagreement over the proof, then it is not undeniable.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by silver6ix
 


Did you read the statement from the man who made the video of the balloon?

Can you produce any other source of the Battle of LA "video"?

[edit on 18-10-2008 by Phage]


If you want sources on the battle of LA, go to the references section at the bottom of this wiki page. There are 16 references.

en.wikipedia.org...

-rrr



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by silver6ix
 



This is ridiculous. There was no "live national TV" in 1942.

I have no doubt the L.A. incident occurred and the radio broadcast may be genuine, but since you're obviously manufactuing the alleged TV evidence, why should I believe anything you say?

In addition, while some very good evidence exists to support the existence of UFOs, none of the "evidence" you provide in this thread is persuasive and most of it has been debunked.

If you want anyone to take you seriously, you need to do some really serious reseach.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by rickyrrr
 


Thanks. I've seen those references.
I was asking for the source of the supposed motion picture of the battle as featured in the disclose.tv video.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by silver6ix
How many TV sets had nothing to do with it only TV cameras and as far as I know during WAR TIME the news would be broadcast 24-7 if need be, remeber this was 1942.


Ohhh and in the UK we still only have five stations so whats the problem with the number of stations on the air?

You dont need 800 Tv stations for one incident.

Either way it happened


Care to explain the two Italian ones since one over LA isnt enough?

[edit on 18-10-2008 by silver6ix]

[edit on 18-10-2008 by silver6ix]


During WWII, TV news was NOT broadcast 24/7 in the US. In fact, during the war, development of TV technology was cut back. It was an infant technology and resources were directed toward the war effort. It wasn't until after the war that R&D picked up again.

There were no national TV networks in the US until sometime in the 1950s. There were broadcasts to limited regions from individual stations, most no more than a four hours per day, if that. The resolution was not very good, either.

As I said, better evidence of UFOs does exist, but nothing you've mentioned here is compelling or even convincing. Most of it has been debunked.

Have you delved into any sources besides the Internet? Are you at all familiar with real UFO investigators/investigation? No real investigator would buy the tales you're spinning here. This is a subject that deserves some serious research. By faking all this stuff and making fabulous claims, you're only ensuring that it will never be taken seriously.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far you haven't presented any. You might start by looking at the "unsolved" cases in Blue Book. Some of those, reported 40 years ago, still can't be explained.

Chgowriter



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by thrashee

Originally posted by FlySolo
My original point to this thread is, if your going to be a true skeptic and pull out answers disproving alien craft, then you must also debunk your own answer. I haven't seen that attempt from any skeptics at this site. Therefore, the skeptics here are biased and their data is flawed.


Your logic doesn't follow. Myself and several others, at least, are only offering more probable explanations--we are by no means making definitive claims. That's a little gotcha with logic that believers mess up an unbelievable amount of times, but it's always worth the entertainment value to see the "it's not fair" card invariably get pulled. Don't want it to be like that? Quit creating threads like "Undeniable proof of flying unicorns in Andromeda!!"

So no...we're not all biased and our data is not flawed--that claim, by the way, simply doesn't follow from its preceding statement. Why don't you work on the basics a bit more before responding again.


Basics to what? Is that another typical back door retort? Much like swap gas and balloons? Further, I would respectfully ask you to withdraw your comment about flying unicorns. Trying to lump me into the same category as those who create laughable threads is only an attempt to distract. Its a typical ad hominem remark and has nothing to do with what I said.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
You know, the op claims that skeptics are always insulting the believers, but you know whats funny? The people who are actually insulting are the UFO alien believers. If you don't agree with them your obviously under mind control, your too simple to understand the idea, or you never experienced anything amazing.

Give me a break.

The skeptic is the greatest asset to the UFO debate. Don't you think being a skeptic is a good thing? Or do you just believe anything in a grainy youtube video or a website? Without objectivity in any debate no conclusion can be reached.

I know its hard to accept because people are so emotionally invested but there is NO undeniable scientific proof that aliens are visting our planet in flying saucers. If there was this debate wouldn't be happening.

Blindly accepting something without real proof is not science it is FAITH. The UFO alien debate demands extraordinary proof not faith, it is NOT religion.

I have seen weird stuff, we all have.

I DO NOT MEAN TO INSULT ANYONE BUT,

Saying that millions have seen UFOs and been abducted is not proof. Maybe you don't realize it yet, but many people in this world are LIARS, HOAXERS, CHARLATANS or simply CRAZY.
Again I am not saying anyone here is any of those things, just that they exist.

With all that said,
Is it possile aliens are visiting? Of course it is. Anything is possible.

I have an open mind, but I'm also open to the fact that they are not.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
It's not that we're blindly accepting something , more so that we actually use rationality and common sense ....

Posting this from another thread


Originally posted by EliteLegends
Why would people stop believing ? There's really no discussion to be had.
Anyone who's not a tard should know there is other life out there , it shouldn't matter if we see it or not.

I don't understand all the drama that comes with the subject ..... like there is 2 sides to the topic or something

God gave us brains and if i had to guesstimate i would say 1 out of 5 folks use them and that may even be generous.

Seriously people need proof


I can see the aliens now
@ us


sorry if it seems so judgmental but the chance of us being alone in the universe is probably 1 in the billions , and the chance that the civilizations that are out there have better tech than we do most likely because they are an older colony or civilization I would guess is fairly good

I don't have to see everything to believe it , you can have the best of both worlds of faith/skepticism , just don't be blind.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by drock905
The people who are actually insulting are the UFO alien believers.


I'll help with some support for that;


    ive had just about enough of you insulting our intelligence
    imature skeptics
    i did it....ive silenced the skeptics...at last
    a powerful amount of mind control on them
    their little brains can't handle some of the material
    the usual imature remarks or unprovoked personal bashing
    Skeptics....intelligent yet lost closed minded, locked down people.
    They just don't know any better,
    LOONEY EXPLANATIONS


These, just from this thread. I've seen nothing but reasoned, clear-headed responses from those who could be considered "skeptics".



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by EliteLegends
 


I never said that I didn't believe alien life exists. I said there is no undeniable proof that aliens are visiting earth.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrPenny

Originally posted by drock905
The people who are actually insulting are the UFO alien believers.


I'll help with some support for that;


    ive had just about enough of you insulting our intelligence
    imature skeptics
    i did it....ive silenced the skeptics...at last
    a powerful amount of mind control on them
    their little brains can't handle some of the material
    the usual imature remarks or unprovoked personal bashing
    Skeptics....intelligent yet lost closed minded, locked down people.
    They just don't know any better,
    LOONEY EXPLANATIONS


These, just from this thread. I've seen nothing but reasoned, clear-headed responses from those who could be considered "skeptics".



Granted, some comments like that don't help. But honestly, sticking to an obvious answer without further investigation doesn't necessarily prove clear thinking either. Have you tried to answer why the object travels up in the last part of that clip? This part puzzles me the most considering it has plateaued in elevation up to that point.

[edit on 19-10-2008 by FlySolo]



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlySolo
Basics to what? Is that another typical back door retort? Much like swap gas and balloons?


The basics of logic. I was addressing how your conclusion did not follow from your statements. I don't know what exactly you mean by back door retort, but swamp gas and balloons are two phenomena that have actually been proven to be the cause of many UFO sightings, so to dismiss them outright because they are cliches seems fool hearty to me.



Further, I would respectfully ask you to withdraw your comment about flying unicorns. Trying to lump me into the same category as those who create laughable threads is only an attempt to distract. Its a typical ad hominem remark and has nothing to do with what I said.


I didn't say that specifically to you. It was a rhetorical reply to the oft-heard complaint by believers that skeptics never have the same burden of proof that believers had. And what exactly makes such threads laughable? Where do you draw the line between obvious belief in nonsense, and rational beliefs supported by bona fide evidence?



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by weneedtoknow
 


If this was truly written by an alien, wouldn't you have used correct, grammatical English??? I don't deny the fact that there are UFOs out there, nor deny all the thousands of sightings. Hell, there are even aliens living among us! But I DON'T believe this posting was from an alien...



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join