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.

 

The Science of UFOs: Fact vs. Skepticism

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 05:08 AM
link   
Found this interesting report linked from the Rockefeller briefing document:


Stereotypes die hard. The myth among scientists that UFOs are a "nonsense problem" without any substance was firmly established more than 50 years ago and persists until this day.

Among the deeply embedded misconceptions of scientists are:


*UFOs are nothing but vague fleeting lights seen at night,

*No trained or experienced observers have reported truly puzzling UFOs,

*UFOs are prosaic objects or phenomena that are converted into spaceships by "believers,"

*A religious-like "will to believe" in salvation from the outside drives the entire UFO phenomenon, and

*Nothing of substance has been reported that science could investigate even if it wanted to.

These notions all are demonstrably false. They are "psychological road-blocks" that need to be cleared away so that discovery of UFOs can proceed.


It then goes on to list some truly interesting cases of highly credible people witnessing actual unknown,intelligently controlled,structured craft-like objects.
web.archive.org...

As Stanton Friedman is fond of saying,UFO cynics seem to employ four major rules when dealing with this subject:


What the public doesn't know, we certainly won't tell them.


Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up.


If one can't attack the data, attack the people. It is easier.


Do one's research by proclamation rather than investigation. It is much easier, and nobody will know the difference anyway.

www.v-j-enterprises.com...

Do scientists lose all objectivity when looking into this (taboo) subject?
Many are still under the false impression there is no evidence for UFOs when in fact there is..

Circumstantial evidence
Radar/sonar evidence
Ground Trace evidence
Government documentary evidence
Photographic/video evidence

..just no unequivocable proof.

There are some excellent UFO cases,quotations and lists of existing international UFO agreements and resolutions here if anybody wants to discuss the subject.
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

Also the French government's Cometa report makes for some very revealing reading:
www.ufoevidence.org...

I tend to agree with the man assigned by the US government to debunk the subject (but who then completely reversed his position) Dr J.Allen Hyneck:


"There exists a phenomenon... that is worthy of systematic rigorous study... The body of data point to an aspect or domain of the natural world not yet explored by science... When the long awaited solution to the UFO problem comes, I believe that it will prove to be not merely the next small step in the march of science but a mighty and totally unexpected quantum jump."
J. Allen Hyneck




[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]




posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 05:33 AM
link   
Nice post


For me Its a no brainer that aliens are real.. I mean can being alive get any more strange?

Some simple things one can not DEBUNK

God
Evolution

and im not talking darwin here... I saying If we as humans do have a god.. then well why bother asking in the first place? we are alone get over it..

Evolution = came from soup.. very simple only problem there is that We dont have the LINK for us to be in that soup "of found it"..

So what shall i think? logicaly? Hmm well Seens as im here "try work that out in maths and see how far you get" and then think of aliens or another you on another planet talking about the possiblity of life doing what you are "living".. Remote heh? well it happend once, can i prove it did? Yep becouse im talking lol

we ask such DUMB things


but no one ever understands what it is they are asking..

WHY is the the thought of aliens? WHY? who cares...

Understand you are here and the YING AND YANG to that is they are there.. cant have the idea without some fire / smoke to fule it..

Even IF the idea is crazy " i make it a posiblity" by just asking it.. "theoreticly ofc"

Im theoreticly here.. so is god so is everything we uderstand..

So why are aliens such a big deal? i thought being alive was nuts on its own merits... putting aliens in the equation is nothing new

or shall i turn on my tv and see humans killing each other over dirt.. dirt

sad sad sad.. its in the MINDS of MEN .. well just some





posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 05:35 AM
link   
The problem is even if there are some radar or classified documented evidence of mysterious craft, that still doesn’t mean aliens exist. It still doesn’t mean aliens are piloting these craft. So when you think ufo’s you should be thinking secret government projects.



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by theresult
 


Just do to ur head in abit more here "skeptics"

the question you ask us ufo "nuts" is the same reason we ask why is there aliens..

We think You are nuts..

See how it works? its THE QUESTION thats the problem... We Understand that NOTHING can wizz about in the air that WE made.. "not that we know of . public" and what if it IS goverment black projects...

Who or what put that IDEA into the minds of MEN to think of other biengs in space.

What is GOD? can you say he is real? even if it is a HE god seems more alien than an alien???

atleast the lil grey guys are wizzing about in a ufo9000 we aint.. one day tho aye lol>.

point being you flame at us who look at this topic and have open MINDS and dont ask WHYYYYY we try to UNDERSTAND.

this was a preflame for skeptics lol becouse you knew the question and the answer didnt you!!!

; )

S+F 4u btw



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by andre18
The problem is even if there are some radar or classified documented evidence of mysterious craft, that still doesn’t mean aliens exist. It still doesn’t mean aliens are piloting these craft. So when you think ufo’s you should be thinking secret government projects.


The problem is both ways, no definative proof of UFO's being secret government projects.

One thing that is definative, proof is hard to prove by either side of the issue.



Cheers!!!!



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by andre18
 


You dont get it.. its not about "aliens" its about LIFE as we understand it..

Or dont you read books?

ALIENS ARE REAL very very real.. you want proof??

You are sat here just like me HOW MUCH MORE does one need?

Or do you await the rapture and wrath of the one!! ?

unlogical.. does not compute.. ect lol



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by theresult
ALIENS ARE REAL very very real.. you want proof??

You are sat here just like me HOW MUCH MORE does one need?

I would say yes and alot more.

The OP said that there is a ton of evidence but no proof... Which is correct. Well in a way. Its hard to say that something is evidence for aliens when you really have no idea what it is. Radar/sonar evidence for example, I dont see how one conclude evidence of aliens from a computer generated dot that shouldnt be there.

Also, the thread title irks me on a personal level... I'd say The Science of UFOs: Fact vs. Skepticism vs. Fiction


[edit on 5-1-2009 by merka]



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by merka

Originally posted by theresult
ALIENS ARE REAL very very real.. you want proof??

You are sat here just like me HOW MUCH MORE does one need?

I would say yes and alot more.

The OP said that there is a ton of evidence but no proof... Which is correct. Well in a way. Its hard to say that something is evidence for aliens when you really have no idea what it is. Radar/sonar evidence for example, I dont see how one conclude evidence of aliens from a computer generated dot that shouldnt be there.

Also, the thread title irks me on a personal level... I'd say The Science of UFOs: Fact vs. Skepticism vs. Fiction


[edit on 5-1-2009 by merka]


Ok look why does one need to Prove anything? Do can you Prove there is god?

No you cant .. Can i Porve life is on other planets YES how? MATHS.. why maths?

becouse we are stuck in a loop if you had not noticed PI and odd numbers are a very big give away..

Can you Calculate how we got here?? try its fun YOU CANT..

Now we base our UNDERSTAND on life with maths or a form of mathamatical stuff....

You ask the question becouse YOU know the answer already.. if WHy ask in the first place??

its not so much a matter of aliens its more about How you understand what you read and what is being show to you as "logical"

did we go to the moon? if yes we used maths.. everything IN life we understand to get from point a to point b and point b is aliens..

Logical and mathamaticaly POSSIBLE why? becouse you are here.. and i read that in alot of maths book..



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by andre18
The problem is even if there are some radar or classified documented evidence of mysterious craft, that still doesn’t mean aliens exist. It still doesn’t mean aliens are piloting these craft. So when you think ufo’s you should be thinking secret government projects.


Hi understand what your saying, But a lot of these craft are seen entering our atmosphere. They could of launched in say Russia left the atmosphere, then headed over another country and re-entered the atmosphere. But I think one of the space stations would of picked up on that by now. This problem is over 50 years old.

I don't believe for one second that every UFO case out there is a ship being piloted by an Alien. There will be a lot of top secret craft out there trying to sneak into a rivals air space to see if they are detected. Or even just flying around and being mistaken for an Alien piloted craft. But I do believe there are Aliens buzzing around in our airspace.



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


Nice Post karl 12!

However, I do agree to a certain degree with one of the statements you sighted in the Op.


A religious-like "will to believe" in salvation from the outside drives the entire UFO phenomenon


While NOT driving the entire UFO phenomenon, it certainly drives a lot of people that I see at ATS and other forums, YouTube and various dedicated web sites such as Ashtar Command and so on.

There are many who throw all logical thinking out the window and believe whatever happens to 'resonate' with their 'beliefs'. They need no proof and they are willing to take the word of some stranger over the internet or 'alternate press' they don't even know. There is a large element of faith and/or stupidity involved. Take all the people here who blindly believed the Blossom Goodchild hoax as a case in point. It clearly pointed to a 'need to believe' in many as there was certainly no tangible proof present.

I could go on & on but I shan't.

IRM


[edit on 5/1/09 by InfaRedMan]



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by karl 12
Stereotypes die hard...


Speaking of stereotypes, this list is in itself a stereotype that believers have of skeptics. The type of skeptic described here only exists in the mind of believer, who thinks that somehow skeptics are their enemies, and if wasn't for those damned skeptics, we'd have the proof we need to convince the world.

[edit on 5-1-2009 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by RFBurns

Originally posted by andre18
The problem is even if there are some radar or classified documented evidence of mysterious craft, that still doesn’t mean aliens exist. It still doesn’t mean aliens are piloting these craft. So when you think ufo’s you should be thinking secret government projects.


The problem is both ways, no definative proof of UFO's being secret government projects.

One thing that is definative, proof is hard to prove by either side of the issue.


Yes but, the most common and valid (valid only to ufo enthusiasts) form of evidence of ufos is testimony by the public. And that testimony is ALWAYS craft that they presume to be out of this world because it’s way beyond the conventional technological standard we see in the public eye today.

Well consider that the government has always had secret technologies way beyond what is realised to the public because of course the threat of national security. The government is always going to have technology way beyond the general public standard – that’s obvious.

The proof either way, well aliens or military projects can surely be swayed to military projects by common sense. What’s more believable, surely just some new military toy? It makes sense that the military is always making new war machines and it makes perfect sense that such secret crafts are sometimes being sighted by the public every so often.



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by andre18
Yes but, the most common and valid (valid only to ufo enthusiasts) form of evidence of ufos is testimony by the public. And that testimony is ALWAYS craft that they presume to be out of this world because it’s way beyond the conventional technological standard we see in the public eye today.


Well consider that the government has always had secret technologies way beyond what is realised to the public because of course the threat of national security. The government is always going to have technology way beyond the general public standard – that’s obvious.

While of course some UFO sightings can in fact be secret military craft, this secret craft theory also has flaws in my opinion.

Take the Theran 1976 UFO case for example. The fighter aircraft that were scrambled to intercept were so heavily outclassed they could not do anything to harm or even approach the UFO. Same goes for the Belgium UFO wave from 1990.

Now what you are saying is that "they" (USA or Russia?) have had advanced propulsion cigar and/or triangle shaped craft fully operational since atleast 1976. But the wierd part is they are not openly using them even after more then 32 years. Why?

I mean this would be somewhat like fighting WWI with those paper planes and at the same time secretly having Spitfire attack aircraft but not using them openly.

This would be a conspiracy in itself, secretly having advanced propulsion craft for over 30 years atleast. If this is indeed the case another weird thing is that they have been building outdated conventional aircraft for decades, instead of these new advanced propulsion craft that are superior in every way..


So to summarise I think secret aircraft are sometimes mistaken for UFOs, but thinking every UFO is just some super secret military craft is to easy in my opinion.




posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
There are many who throw all logical thinking out the window and believe whatever happens to 'resonate' with their 'beliefs'. They need no proof and they are willing to take the word of some stranger over the internet or 'alternate press' they don't even know.


IRM Thanks for the reply

Doesn't the above comments also apply to wilfully ignorant armchair UFO cynics who do absolutely nothing to objectively educate themselves about the subject (and thus have a hard time holding informed,balanced opnions)?

Hysterical cynicism and lazy prejudice usualy play a large part but its common for debunkers just to shoehorn in their own rather cynical preconceptions whilst obstinately disregarding contradictory evidence/ glaring discrepencies/witness testimony.

I suspect these people also just want to fervently superimpose their 'presupposed worldview' on reality and often throw the dispassionate,analytical,rational,objective way of thinking out the window.
In a way these hysterical UFO cynics are just as bad as people who think 'everything is a UFO.



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by theresult
No you cant .. Can i Porve life is on other planets YES how? MATHS.. why maths?

This is about "the science of UFOs", not the mathematical propability of alien existance.

The irony is that if the first is fact (ie alien UFOs are real), then it automatically proves alien existance. However, even if you can mathematically prove life on other planets (and for a second assume its the ultimate truth without considering the fact its just a mathematical theory) then it does not automatically mean alien UFOs are real.

Basicly, you're working from the wrong end.



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   


Speaking of stereotypes, this list is in itself a stereotype that believers have of skeptics. The type of skeptic described here only exists in the mind of believer, who thinks that somehow skeptics are their enemies, and if wasn't for those damned skeptics, we'd have the proof we need to convince the world.


Not realy-true open minded scepticism is a very healthy thing and essential for impartial,objective analysis.
The trouble is that many 'self proclaimed UFO debunkers' are in fact just noisy 'pseudosceptics' who engage in fuzzy logic/cynical prejudice.

The list does apply to mainstream science and I'd be interested to hear which specific bits you disagree with (if any).



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Radar/sonar evidence for example, I dont see how one conclude evidence of aliens from a computer generated dot that shouldnt be there.


I see your point but its a bit more than just a blip on a screen.
Actual unknown objects have been captured,plotted,tracked (and visualy corellated) on sometimes multiple radar/sonar screens travelling at unheard of speeds and executing unprecedented flight characteristics and aerial manouverability - some have also been witnessed by pilots whilst being tracked on the airplane nose radar.



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fastwalker81
While of course some UFO sightings can in fact be secret military craft, this secret craft theory also has flaws in my opinion.

Take the Theran 1976 UFO case for example. The fighter aircraft that were scrambled to intercept were so heavily outclassed they could not do anything to harm or even approach the UFO. Same goes for the Belgium UFO wave from 1990.

Now what you are saying is that "they" (USA or Russia?) have had advanced propulsion cigar and/or triangle shaped craft fully operational since atleast 1976. But the wierd part is they are not openly using them even after more then 32 years. Why?

I mean this would be somewhat like fighting WWI with those paper planes and at the same time secretly having Spitfire attack aircraft but not using them openly.

This would be a conspiracy in itself, secretly having advanced propulsion craft for over 30 years atleast. If this is indeed the case another weird thing is that they have been building outdated conventional aircraft for decades, instead of these new advanced propulsion craft that are superior in every way..


So to summarise I think secret aircraft are sometimes mistaken for UFOs, but thinking every UFO is just some super secret military craft is to easy in my opinion.


Good post
Theres quite a few cases of unknown flying objects where the 'secret military craft' explanation sounds untenable.
To just write of all actual unknowns as black military projects without looking at specific case histories seems a little presumptuous (and self serving) to me.
Government documentary evidence also seems to suggest they are just as perplexed as everybody else when it comes to rationaly explaining the origins of some objects reported in their airspace.



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by karl 12
Not realy-true open minded scepticism is a very healthy thing and essential for impartial,objective analysis.


I have found that believers often employ "open-minded skepticism" as code-language for "agreeing with me." There is no real desire for impartial, objective analysis. When questions are asked or criticisms raised, the believer then employs the charge of "pseudoskeptic" and accuses the skeptic of not being open-minded or objective. To the believer, there is no real "true, open-minded skeptic," all are "pseudoskeptics," as evidenced by the claim below.


Originally posted by karl 12
The trouble is that many 'self proclaimed UFO debunkers' are in fact just noisy 'pseudosceptics' who engage in fuzzy logic/cynical prejudice.



Originally posted by karl 12
The list does apply to mainstream science and I'd be interested to hear which specific bits you disagree with (if any).


If you are referring to the list you quoted, then I disagree with every bit of it. As I said in my previous post, that sort of person does not exist in reality, and ignores the fact there is a "will to believe, as IRM pointed out, seeking instead of blame skeptics for pointing it out.



posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   
I have a very simple question. What is the point of this thread?



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join