UFO evidence is no longer acceptable. Conspiracy?

When I first arrived at ATS I saw a ton of conversations about UFO evidence being discussed.

Lately, primarily since the discovery of the Haiti UFO hoax, no video, photo or story is being deemed as acceptable evidence.

To me this is putting off UFO researchers because they can not trust their own eyes any longer and are dismissing compelling evidence.

I will play devils advocate here. What if the introduction of really good video that turns out to be a hoax was purposely introduced to the research community for this exact purpose? If researchers are loosing interest because of a massive amount of hoaxes, that would work in favor of those who would like to see this information dismissed, and thus become covered up due to lack of interest.

[edit on 1-1-2009 by robwerden]

Ive been saying this for ages now, with the amount of morons out there posting crappy CGI and hoax videos, how can UFO researchers and sighting sbe taken seriously?

And sometimes I think ATS and other conspiracy sites are instigators, allowing such crap to pollute the internet

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Ive been saying this for ages now, with the amount of morons out there posting crappy CGI and hoax videos, how can UFO researchers and sighting sbe taken seriously?

UFO Researchers can be taken seriously by doing good scientific research, and presenting their research for review.

Sightings on the other hand, I’m not sure they were ever, just by themselves, taken seriously.

And sometimes I think ATS and other conspiracy sites are instigators, allowing such crap to pollute the internet

On a thread long ago, I suggested it would be in everyone’s interest to create a separate forum, or a sub-forum, dedicated to UFO research. The other part, or sub-forum, could continue to be used for posting people’s accounts, theories, photos and videos.

A photograph in and of itself proves almost nothing, especially today when access to a PC and just a bit of photographic software knowledge is all that is needed to produce a picture that can't be determined to be fake with the naked eye, and sometimes even with analysis if the hoaxer is especially skilled. The same can be said about video, although to a somewhat lesser extent since faking video is more difficult than faking a single frame. But still, it isn't tremendously difficult.

It is the story surrounding a photograph or video that makes it believable above all else. Most of the time if you can establish that a witness is lying that tells you right away that their photographs are certain to be dubious. Also, if everything checks out about the story given then there is a pretty good chance that the visual evidence will be genuine as well.

To date I haven't seen too many crisp photographs that had an equally credible story attached to them. It appears to be a very rare occurrence. Instead many of the seemingly good cases have pictures which are far off, indistinct, blurry. A few exceptions are the Belgium photograph from the late 80s/early 90s wave that is very close up and sharp, the McMinnville photograph, the Trindade Island pictures, and best of all in my opinion, the Lago de Cote aerial photograph. But ones of this quality seem to be rare.

[edit on 1-1-2009 by Wickerman1972]

Pretty much any UFO video or photo after the advent of modern personal computers is automatically suspect...it has to be.

To consider that alone as evidence is a big leap of faith. Now, couple that vid with numerous eye witness accounts and some documentation ruling out other terrestrial causes, and then you've got something...

For me, the government's own slip ups in the paper trail are still the best indicators for what's going on...vs. any photos or vids.

[edit on 2-1-2009 by Gazrok]