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: 9
29
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


I haven't read any skeptic in this thread make any looney claims. On the contrary.

Testimony alone is not undeniable evidence.

Skeptics presented with scientific evidence will accept the conclusions. Believers even when presented with evidence of hoaxs or reasonable scientific explanations for phenomenon, get defense and claim that the skeptic is a disinformation agent, under mind control or an idiot ALL the time.

I agree with you there is a difference between a true skeptic and the ones who just like the believers work in absolutes. A true skeptic will examine both sides fairly. The vast majority of skeptics on ATS are logical in thier viewpoints.

Real skeptics are not the enemy, most want alien visitations to be real. They are just not able to make the blind leap without a scientific basis.




posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 06:52 PM
link   
You see this is what I was saying about "Balloon Theory". Balloon theory will always come up with the one theoretical scenario that could be balloon related.

You say a balloon would burst, they will google and tell you "not if the balloon was made of neopolykryptonicplasmagel!!".

You say ok well then a balloon couldnt move like that, they will google and tell you "yes, in theory if there was a hydrosonic power wind fluctuation from the east when venus crossed the seventh eliptic plane while the magnetic field was x-y to the power of z then it could happen".

Balloon theory will never consider the odds against a freak balloon made of the only kind of material on earth that could not burst being in that position at the exact moment the freak earths forces were applied to it...no no of course that would be rediculous


As for the comment on skeptics provinding proof, yes on SOME occasions they do, many of you though just debunk based on what you think not matter how unlikely or unrealistic it is, and call that proof.


"reasonable scientific explanations"

What defines reasonable? What the poster determines is reasonable? If its a "reasonable" scientific explanation that has outside odds of a gazzillion to one to be possible then I wouldnt call that an explanation at all, id call it a convenient way to avoid considering other options.

[edit on 19-10-2008 by silver6ix]



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by silver6ix
You see this is what I was saying about "Balloon Theory". Balloon theory will always come up with the one theoretical scenario that could be balloon related.

You say a balloon would burst, they will google and tell you "not if the balloon was made of neopolykryptonicplasmagel!!".

You say ok well then a balloon couldnt move like that, they will google and tell you "yes, in theory if there was a hydrosonic power wind fluctuation from the east when venus crossed the seventh eliptic plane while the magnetic field was x-y to the power of z then it could happen".

Balloon theory will never consider the odds against a freak balloon made of the only kind of material on earth that could not burst being in that position at the exact moment the freak earths forces were applied to it...no no of course that would be rediculous


As for the comment on skeptics provinding proof, yes on SOME occasions they do, many of you though just debunk based on what you think not matter how unlikely or unrealistic it is, and call that proof.


"reasonable scientific explanations"

What defines reasonable? What the poster determines is reasonable? If its a "reasonable" scientific explanation that has outside odds of a gazzillion to one to be possible then I wouldnt call that an explanation at all, id call it a convenient way to avoid considering other options.

[edit on 19-10-2008 by silver6ix]


hehe ya. Now they are trying to get me backed into a corner regarding bloody physics. Twist twist turn turn avoid avoid...

Let me take a look at Zorgon's skepticnazi flow chart again and see how much longer this will go on.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Bet none of you have even seen the 'Disclosure Project' that an earlier member stated and even if you did you would try to come up with some lame ass rebuttal as to why the people have no credibility even though they are anyone and everyone who is/has run our country

I sometimes wonder if other ppl got their intelligence out a cracker jack box





posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 07:15 PM
link   
I don't really see why there's this whole thing about one side being the believers and one side being the skeptics. Everyone wants the same thing - the truth. The skeptics would believe if there was enough reasonable evidence.

I reckon you should just try and uncover whatever the truth is, no matter how much you would like/dislike whatever truths they may be.

[edit on 19-10-2008 by GodCoffin]



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by drock905
 


Basically it depends on WHO says WHAT! If the majority of our well meaning(but scared) scientists were willing to openly declare extra-terrestial aliens are visiting earth then we would have lots of proof and more importantly the credibility issue would finally be put to rest.

The way things stand now, as I understand them, is that a very few select people are working on these extremely classified projects and ALL have signed non-disclosure agreements meaning absolute silence. If they break the agreement they either go to jail(probably solitary confinement) or get killed in some unusual accident. Many have suffered trying to get the truth out but few are willing to listen. Very unfortunate!

See Project Camelot for more details.....I don't necessary believe everything but it does seem to answer many questions.


[edit on 19-10-2008 by EarthCitizen07]



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlySolo

hehe ya. Now they are trying to get me backed into a corner regarding bloody physics. Twist twist turn turn avoid avoid...

Let me take a look at Zorgon's skepticnazi flow chart again and see how much longer this will go on.


Im simply saying you come up with the only possible chance of a balloon surviving to fit your theory, you dont actually consider the possiblity of that balloon actually being there at that time and moving in that bizarre fashion.

To you its theoretically possible so thats it, an explanation. The only balloon on earth that could fit doesnt matter, its good enough for skeptics.

For me theres as much chance of that being ETs grandad as your balloon but thats just me being sensible.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Don't you people get tired of claiming the government is covering this up with no proof. You say the government will jail, kill past employees or those that will break the secret out in the open. FACT: there are several employees from governments coming forward and nothing has happened to them. FACT: if the government wanted this to be hidden so bad..they would have eliminated anyone who dares to bring this forward. The government most likely has nothing to hide but secret military craft and are happy when someone comes forward claimng what they saw is alien spacecraft. Whats the best coverup that has come forward to hide thier secret technology...ALIENS & THIER CRAFT ARE HERE...with all these people running around claiming to have been abducted or have seen a alien spaceship...the government must be laughing thier butts off. They don't have to do anythin, pay anyone because of the people who do thier coverup story for for free. The government employees that do cme forward are either pay government disinfo agents or ones that did not have the clearance to such black op porojects and are as cinfused about this military craft as the next guy. Not saying this is true...but it one possibility out there...don't deny it because it is all specualation as is the aliens visiting us hypthothesis is.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by EliteLegends
Bet none of you have even seen the 'Disclosure Project' that an earlier member stated and even if you did you would try to come up with some lame ass rebuttal as to why the people have no credibility even though they are anyone and everyone who is/has run our country

I sometimes wonder if other ppl got their intelligence out a cracker jack box


No one is saying these people have no credibility. However, they have no evidence to back up their claims. Lacking evidence to prove or disprove all we are left with is a story.

But credibility of these witnesses has nothing to do with it. If credibility was the issue, you would believe the government and military officials who say extraterrestrials are not visiting the planet, or that the government is not covering-up such visitation. However, you don't, because they are not saying what you want to hear.

I am sure you could say those same government and military officials are lying. But that begs the question: if you believe the government and military are lying, why do you suddenly believe them once they are saying what you want to hear?

And please, do not throw around insults; we are all adults here, we can have a reasonable disagreement and discussion with resorting to insulting each other's intelligence.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

No one is saying these people have no credibility. However, they have no evidence to back up their claims. Lacking evidence to prove or disprove all we are left with is a story.



Exactly the same as saying its a balloon or a bird 99% of the time then isnt it? Theres no evidence to prove or disprove that and all you have is a stroy you are quite willing to accept as fact, whats the difference?



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 07:57 PM
link   
sorry to be an ass but some people are just slow

theres overwhelming evidence but unless youve touched it , then it isnt evidence ..... if thats your beliefs then so be it but dont expect to have a serious discussion when theres obviously no logic included



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by riggs2099
 


I don't think they jail/kill everyone that comes forward with second or even first hand knowledge. Many factors come into play such as level of proof and experience said person possesses and also how much info has he/she already divulged.

The last thing government(s) want is making martyrs out of every single whistle blower. In other words they are probably selective. Don't quote what I say as fact, I am only expressing my opinion based on what I have read/heard from various sources.

As for mistakening military craft for ufos its certainly possible. Now-a-days it can be hard to distinguish spy-craft and reverse enginereed craft from bonafide inter-gallatic alien craft. Anything is possible but I think the majority is indeed extra-terrestial in origin!



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   
IF there is a cover up, globalisation, media, internet and extensive communications has made killing and threating a far more risky strategy.

Why bother? All they need to do is discredit the entire field, create the illusion of UFO belief to be a crackpots field of interest and hey presto they blinded the masses without lifting a finger.

Its an amusing statement really because it has already been done to American by your own leaders. How quickly you forget the cold war it seems?

They turned "communism" into lepresy right under your noses and had everyone looking for the "evil commie in the closet", theres proof definative of exactly how easy it is to completely brainwash an entire population with nothing more than propeganda.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by riggs2099
 


A very plausible hypothesis! Really, in many cases though, we are just comparing our assumptions to each other based on what we know as individuals. Its a futile dance by both sides to convince the other in many cases. I like to think I sit in the middle somewhere. The argument isnt simple enough to be black and white. Im a shade of grey(pun intended).

The govnerment knows, or it doesnt. Theres a coverup, or there isnt. Alien life exists, or it doesnt. People are either convinced, or they arent.

UFO's? Well thats a far bigger question. To me, they exist. I have seen things that conventional physics, biology and technology cannot account for(yet). That does not equate to alien, likewise it doesnt equate to terrestrial. They dont necessarily equate to technological, likewise they dont necessarily equate to a natural/biological phenomenon.

How does it all fit together? We ALL have a hypothesis. All of them based on our individual knowledge, experiences, assumptions and beliefs. I suggest EVERYONE give up trying to convince anyone of anything. Share the knowledge, explain the sources, make no assumptions, and let the other individuals draw their conclusions.

In short, screw everyone elses theories, focus on your own and draw your own conclusions. Noone needs anyone to believe them to exist in this universe, and the answers are probably so bizarre, complex and convuluted its just as likely noone will be correct anyway.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by weneedtoknow

Originally posted by spacebagel
reply to post by weneedtoknow
 


Show me an alien spacecraft. You can't. Show me an alien. You can't. Show me a piece of an alien spacecraft. You can't. Show me one place on this earth where space aliens have landed. You can't. Show me some impact that space aliens have had on this planet. You can't. End of story.


show me jesus
show me physical evidence jesus.. whom billions of people believe in existed,,,, you cant can you!


WTF?! When did I say that I belive in the Jesus crapola?

WHEN?

How did you came up with that ridiculous conclusion? Seriously what were you on?



[edit on 19-10-2008 by spacebagel]



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by silver6ix
Exactly the same as saying its a balloon or a bird 99% of the time then isnt it? Theres no evidence to prove or disprove that and all you have is a stroy you are quite willing to accept as fact, whats the difference?


The difference is Sagan's Law: extrordinary claims require extrodinary evidence.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 08:27 PM
link   
I'm a total skeptic on this stuff, but it's not because I'm afraid or stupid. I'm skeptical because I've had enough actual training in real science to understand that seeing unexplained stuff and deciding that it is of alien origin is a HUGE jump, logically speaking. The argument would gain a little more weight IF some sort of life was discovered on another planetoid. Alas such a discovery has thus far eluded us.

I agree with the logic that states that if there is life on this planet there is probably life somewhere else in our vast universe. But what's lacking here is the proof. Until there is proof I'm afraid that the reality of the situation is that we're alone. This is by no means meant as a difinitive statement. I am merely stating the fact that until some concrete evidence can be found to suggest that life exists elsewhere then the accurate statement is that as far as we know we are the only planet with living beings inhabiting it.

I fully realize that you are well versed in all of the circumstantial evidence (videos, sworn statements, etc.,) concerning the alleged extraterrestrial visitors. For my part I too have seen some strange things in the sky in my 50 plus years on this planet, but I do not rush to judge them as being craft from another planet. I freely admit that I doi not know what it was that I saw those nights, nor do i possess enough knowledge of what they could potentially be to even hazard a guess.

The universe is a vast place and, for me, the notion that intelligent beings from another planet are just popping in and out like it was just another run to the convenience store is really rather absurd. I know that there are all kinds of fantastic theories as to how these beings were even able to find our needle-in-a-hay-stack planet and how they are able to transverse the unimaginable distances between our world and theirs in a reasonable time to make the journey even practical, but again, where is the proof of all these notions? There simply is none.

And then there's all this abduction baggage (the Whitley Striber stuff). How is it that they have the technology to span lightyears in a vessel but they still can't figure out how to clone all that DNA they've already collected so they can stop having to steal people out of their homes on a regular basis?

I'm sorry, guys. I'm sympathetic, really I am, but until some hard evidence comes along to actually lend some real support to your interpretations of all this unexplainable phenomena, I'm afraid that I'm going to have to assume that it's something other than what you want to believe that it is. No offense, I'm just a skeptic. If you tell me that there's gold in the middle of your oak tree I'm going to need to see the gold before I believe you.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
No one is saying these people have no credibility. However, they have no evidence to back up their claims. Lacking evidence to prove or disprove all we are left with is a story.

But credibility of these witnesses has nothing to do with it. If credibility was the issue, you would believe the government and military officials who say extraterrestrials are not visiting the planet, or that the government is not covering-up such visitation. However, you don't, because they are not saying what you want to hear.

I am sure you could say those same government and military officials are lying. But that begs the question: if you believe the government and military are lying, why do you suddenly believe them once they are saying what you want to hear?


Unfortunately credibility has always been a big issue with many "skeptics". If the majority of scientists say ufos do not exist and a few say the opposite who is more likely to be believed? Also consider the probability that 99% of the scientists have no access to classified material and thus are easily mislead by debunkers and disinfo agents. The few that know do not speak BECAUSE THEY CAN'T!!!



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by silver6ix
Exactly the same as saying its a balloon or a bird 99% of the time then isnt it? Theres no evidence to prove or disprove that and all you have is a stroy you are quite willing to accept as fact, whats the difference?


The difference is Sagan's Law: extrordinary claims require extrodinary evidence.


Sagans "law" should be renamed Sagans bull#, for a man who believes in string theory he of all people shouldnt be talking about extraordinary evidence, and he also believes in gravitons and despite building a matter crasher they STILL havent been able to find any of the mythical particles that the theories are based on. They are as real as aliens.

Science is very good at hypocrisy which is why its best minds were all outcasts who were branded lunatics, its why anyone daring to claim the world was round and the sun didnt orbit the earth was a heretic and a madman......science is BUILT on extraordinary claims so maybe Sagan should talk less and think a little more



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by silver6ix
Why bother? All they need to do is discredit the entire field, create the illusion of UFO belief to be a crackpots field of interest and hey presto they blinded the masses without lifting a finger.


The government has no need to do that. The UFO believers do it themselves. Take a look at some of the posts in this forum. The government has not turned UFOs into a joke, it is the UFO believers themselves.

That being said, the government did engage in a campaign to disinformation campaign in regards to UFOs. But it was not to cover-up extraterrestrial visitation, but because it was felt constant UFO sightings may reduce our readiness or be a cover for a Soviet invasion.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join