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.

 

official canadian investigation concludes UFOs"probably extraterrestrial"

page: 4
55
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Really now? Let's see what the dictionary has to say:

Nice try, but I wasn't referring to the definition of the words. In fact, if you go back and take another look at my post, you will notice that I highlighted the words in your sentences; in which you will be able to see.. my point.



Originally posted by SaviorComplex
You know, after reading the definitions, I can see where you would be confused.

No, you're the one whose confused. Perhaps (as I suggested earlier) you should go back and see what context I was speaking in. Certainly no dictionaries involved



Originally posted by SaviorComplex
it is near impossible for us to say whether it is credible or not.

No it's not, the cometa report is credible.


Originally posted by SaviorComplex
You did make reference to it, implicating that it was part of an official disclosure project. Further, quoting you:

I never implicated that this was part of some 'disclosure project'.. since you like to quote me, allow me to show you what I said in my very post in this thread;


Originally posted by Majorion
The Cometa Report seems to conclude that some ufos represent extraterrestrial craft. And that was in 99

Are we any closer to some sort of disclosure? .. Not really.


And in another post, I said this;


Originally posted by Majorion
Either way, I never said that this report represents, as you say 'mythical disclosure'..


Twist and burn



Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Here you imply that yes, it is official.


One look at the names; says it all. Call it 'unofficial' if you please


Again, nice try.. my "implication" there; was that it's 'credible'. And you can call it 'unofficial' if you please.


Originally posted by SaviorComplex
If anything, you were twisting your own words to worm out of position demonstrated to be wrong.

I haven't been demonstrated to be wrong on any level. But I just demonstrated such with you.




posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 10:24 AM
link   
I sent this to my dad, and I see they even cooked the books in those days.

First my Dad said him and Mom have never read such magazines and it was a fabrication, and he says it sure puts a different spin on the report.

Second this was also witnessed by an off duty RCMP who lived opposite us on the opposing hill on the opposite valley who was coming home after shift. There is no report of this in the report, which was mentioned in my fathers copy. Neither the incident report nor the one here in these archives matches my Fathers copy.

My Dad Quote:
(Also, there is no record of the RCMP officer who had viewed the same thing from the driveway of his home in the Silverwood area because he did not file a report)

Third, my dad also received a certificate from the Government that said he had indeed seen a UFO, and it was a case that could not be explained.

My Dad Quote:
(I did however, receive from Aeronautical Institute of Canada, a certificate stating that we had seen an unidentified Flying Object. They did not say alien ship, but rather it was an unidentified object.)


And then he mentions another one that is not in the archives.

My Dad Quote:
(That same year, there was a sighting in a field out the Royal by a farmer who said a craft had landed in the field behind his barn. His dog was going crazy and he took the shotgun and went out and blistered a few shots at this round disk as it was leaving. There was a round "burnt" area on the ground and it was as if the soil was cooked. He died a few years later from cancer which could have come from radiation exposure)

And my mom and I have talked a number of times there there are incidents she never has reported. She was up at all hours in those day, and when doing the dishes a few times she saw one hover over the neighbors farm house. About 4 years later when he died of cancer it was extremely violent and rapid, went in weeks.

So, all I am saying is take this archives and multiply by 5. And keep in mind they are most likely doctored and a shadow of the reality.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I understand it's not technically disclosure, just a file dump. I can get a bit carried away sometimes. I was really referring to the wave of UFO file openings from around the world, including Denmark, the U.K, etc. What's significant to me is that governments are releasing their conclusions as well.

I think these are steps along the road towards disclosure. I really think momentum is building. An optimist would call it pre-disclosure buzz.
A pessimist would call it nonsense to distract us from the economic crash.



I have to agree. If this is "disclosure" all Obama has to do is have some government agency post a bunch of 40 year old reports that are already in the public sphere on a website along with the contents of one of the fifty year old studies that concluded that some UFOs originate from other planets and voila, disclosure!! Maybe Podesta and company should just add a link on a government website to one of the online UFO databases and presto!


I agree. True disclosure is not some low-key press conference on a Tuesday morning. "Uhhh, we intercepted some craft ten years ago."
It would be a worldwide event. An initial press conference followed by questions for days and weeks. True disclosure won't come about until there are mass sightings worldwide.

As James Gililand says (don't know if you guys think he's for real or not)
true disclosure will come from the skies, not the governments.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluestreak53
From ,my point of view, we are probably getting further away from making any sense of UFO phenomena...


In a certain way, I have to agree. Unless the phenomenon is a collection of natural phenomena, misidentification, hoaxes, mistakes and so forth*, I don't think we will ever begin to understand it.

(*And even then, there will always be room for doubt. Our grandchildren will probably be having this same conversation).



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Good job canada , were are the debunkers now debunk this for change ?


The sky is falling.....Well maybe calling?



[edit on 11/02/2007 by 0bserver1]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majorion
Nice try, but I wasn't referring to the definition of the words. In fact, if you go back and take another look at my post, you will notice that I highlighted the words in your sentences; in which you will be able to see.. my point.


This is what you wrote:


Originally posted by Majorion

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
There was no hesitancy on the part of the French government; they were explicit this report was neither commissioned by the government nor stated official government policy.

Explicit = Hesitancy


And your point is?


Originally posted by Majorion
No it's not, the cometa report is credible.


Have you read the report? If not, you cannot make that determination, even on the basis of the title and positions of those who authored the report.

I would recommend you read Kadinsky's post in this thread regarding the subject; he points out some flaws in the methodology.


Originally posted by Majorion
I never implicated that this was part of some 'disclosure project'.. since you like to quote me, allow me to show you what I said in my very post in this thread;


Originally posted by Majorion
The Cometa Report seems to conclude that some ufos represent extraterrestrial craft. And that was in 99

Are we any closer to some sort of disclosure? .. Not really.


You tied the two together, an implication that the Cometa Report was associated with disclosure, a step towards disclosure, albeit a stagnated stepped.

How tying a report to disclosure is not an implication that the report does not represent disclosure, I don't know.


Originally posted by Majorion
And in another post, I said this;


Originally posted by Majorion
Either way, I never said that this report represents, as you say 'mythical disclosure'..


And if you will notice, at first I did not say you did. I made a general statement. However, since you insisted to be obtuse (purposefully so, I might add), I had to point out that yes that is in fact what you are implying. Try to lie and worm your way out of it all you want, but that is what you are implying.


Originally posted by Majorion
And you can call it 'unofficial' if you please.


Again, the use of quotation marks around "unofficial," in fact your wording in that statement implicates that it is official and that I am wrong in saying it is not.


[edit on 17-2-2009 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by 0bserver1
Good job canada , were are the debunkers now debunk this for change ?



What is there to debunk?

"I have conclusive proof these documents do not exist! It's a hoax!"


[edit on 17-2-2009 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
an implication that the Cometa Report was associated with disclosure, a step towards disclosure, albeit a stagnated stepped.

And this is why you've been relentlessly attacking me in this thread? and attempting to personally discredit me and the cometa report?

All because, of an allbeit-stagnated stepped insinuation; which you created/misinterpreted on your own?



Originally posted by SaviorComplex
How tying a report to disclosure is not an implication that the report does not represent disclosure, I don't know.

Well perhaps I can help you understand. Because you seem to be struggling with this, why don't you read ATS' official statement at the top of this page:


Discussion topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to lean in favor of the existence of extraterrestrials and the related conspiracies, scandals, and cover-ups. Members who would seek to refute such theories should be mindful of AboveTopSecret.com's tradition of supporting the examination of the "extraterrestrial phenomenon" on the related conspiracy theories, cover-ups, and scandals.


I mentioned 'disclosure' in my very first post, because the topic is called "official canadian investigation concludes UFOs"probably extraterrestrial" and the follow-up was focusing on disclosure. In case you haven't noticed..I denied there being any relation between this and disclosure, I'll quote myself again for you:


Originally posted by Majorion
Are we any closer to some sort of disclosure? .. Not really.


Satisfied?


[edit on 17/2/09 by Majorion]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Now I am not sure if you are referring to the same documents I saw, but I will tell you, it is a little strange to remember the day coming home from school and two men in Air force uniforms interviewing your mom. And the report says RCMP, if they were RCMP they had strange uniforms. And then many years later to read the report they wrote with all of the information, it kind of plays with your mind.


Originally posted by SaviorComplex
"I have conclusive proof these documents do not exist! It's a hoax!"
[edit on 17-2-2009 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majorion
And this is why you've been relentlessly attacking me in this thread? and attempting to personally discredit me and the cometa report?


I was not attacking you; I was pointing out an mistaken-impression of the Cometa Report.


Originally posted by Majorion
All because, of an allbeit-stagnated stepped insinuation; which you created/misinterpreted on your own?


You are confusing the order of the wording. The insituation isn't a "stagnated step," rather you implied the Cometa Report disclosure...if it was a step to disclosure, I said it was a stagnated one.


Originally posted by Majorion

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
How tying a report to disclosure is not an implication that the report does not represent disclosure, I don't know.

Well perhaps I can help you understand. Because you seem to be struggling with this, why don't you read ATS' official statement at the top of this page:


Discussion topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to lean in favor of the existence of extraterrestrials and the related conspiracies...


What does one have to do with the other?




Originally posted by Majorion
Are we any closer to some sort of disclosure? .. Not really.


Again, the by tying one to the other, it is implied that the Cometa Report was a step towards disclosure, further reinforced by your attempts to tell us it was an official report.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SoulOrb
 


You do realize I was joking, right?



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by C-JEAN
 

Now THAT is an interesting read!
The man explicitly states twice that he is not looking for a job by telling them this information. He is interviewed by 3 people.
The first 2 find him to be genuine. He even offers to take them to the underground facility in Germany.
The last concludes that the man is a liar and is trying to land a job.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by bluestreak53

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Except this wasn't disclosure of anything. We're known for years that various governments at various times have investigated UFOs or at least kept some record of sightings. This is not disclosure of any secrets or a change in official policy regarding the phenomenon. It's nothing but a file-dump of material the Canadian government does not deem necessary to national security.


I have to agree. If this is "disclosure" all Obama has to do is have some government agency post a bunch of 40 year old reports that are already in the public sphere on a website along with the contents of one of the fifty year old studies that concluded that some UFOs originate from other planets and voila, disclosure!! Maybe Podesto and company should just add a link on a government website to one of the online UFO databases and presto! The mob will hail this as the dawn of a new and long awaited era of contact with extraterrestrial civilization....


Exactly...This is what I was getting at in my post. If this is "disclosure", then the Americans disclosed long ago.

All the Canadians have done is released 40 and 50 year old reports of government scientists saying that UFOs may be ET in origin. This is old news. There have been no new conclusions drawn. There were U.S. Government scientists saying the same thing back in the 1950s.

[edit on 2/17/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
There have been no new conclusions drawn.

And this is why it's not a 'disclosure' per say. Had there actually been anything disclosed.. maybe then, we'd be having a different conversation.



Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
There were U.S. Government scientists saying the same thing back in the 1950s.

And since the 50's till now, nothing has really been disclosed. At least, not on an 'official' basis.

But I'd keep my eye out for James Fox's new film 'Beyond The Blue'; in which he interviews president Jacque Pattinee(I think his name is) of CNES - the French equivalent to NASA.

[edit on 17/2/09 by Majorion]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
Exactly...This is what I was getting at in my post. If this is "disclosure", then the Americans disclosed long ago.


Right, this is the equivolent of being able to dig in the Project Blue Book files. It's nice to see the rest of the world catching up to the United States.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majorion
And since the 50's till now, nothing has really been disclosed. At least, not on an 'official' basis.


Actually, Project Blue Book ran until the end of 1969. Those files are available. It is a similar time-frame for the Canadian release.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by rickyrrr

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
The way I read the article, the Canadian Government is not "now" concluding the UFOs are ET in nature, but rather they are releasing documents from the 1950s and 1960s in which some government officials felt that UFOs are ET in origin.

Those are two totally different things.

If you asked the Canadian Government today if they think UFOs are ET in origin, they would proabably honestly say "We don't know". Releasing these old documents really doesn't change anything.

I'm sure you can find that there were U.S. government officials in the 1950s and 1960s who felt that UFOs could possibly be flown by ETs. That was not an unusual opinion to have back then -- not even for an educated opinion.
[edit on 2/16/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]


If it doesn't change anything, why do you think they bother? It costs taxpayer's money to declassify documents. Seven different countries have done the same in the last year or two. Do you have a guess as to why they're doing it if it doesn't change anything?
-rrr

Because classified documents have a "sunset" date and, by law, after so many years as "classified" the government is obliged to either re-classify them as secret, or de-classify them. It still costs taxpayer money to have those documents re-classified as "secret" for however many years -- in fact I think it perhaps costs MORE to keep those documents classified (security costs).

Classified documents are not simply "put away forever"....well, I'm not so naive as to think that some very sensitive ones are not "put away forever", but that would technically be illegal and the fact that many formerly sensitve documents are declassified every year makes me think that they are at least "attempting" to be lawful.

I DO understand that the Canadian Government spent some taxpayer money de-classifying these and creating that website -- but that's a bit meaningless. There are plenty of examples of seemingly superfluous U.S. government websites that cost taxpayer money...

...for example the "CIA Kid's Page" website. Why would the government spend tax dollars on that?



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Hi, we have a "confession?" to make.

I hope that, HERE, we will not be teased.

The father and the mother of my wife did see a UFO,
in the years around 1960, I think.
They are dead, now; normal deaths.
I am 62 and my wife is 59 years old. Parents born about 1920.

It was in Drummondville, Quebec, Canada.
And they said the UFO was staying over a factory,
making incandescent & neon lights, called: Sylvania.
I think it is still going on. . .

They told us it was all over the news papers, the days after,
one of them named: " La Tribune ". A sub "La Presse" unit.
I did long researches, but nothing. Maybe I am no good at that.

Now, I do not ask anyone to do the researches for me, BUT
can some one make suggestions? How to research, WHERE
to research, . . .etc. . .The most probable places this could
be registred, if it has been ??

Blue skies and, thanks.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Actually, Project Blue Book ran until the end of 1969. Those files are available.

Yes, it was an official Air Force investigation, but no disclosure. Since they left about 5% of the cases classified as 'unknown' or 'unexplained'.

Similar types of these 'unexplained' case files, are being released by the UK's Ministry of Defense over the next four years. One of these cases.. involves a pilot; Milton Torres, in which he was ordered to shoot down the unidentified object. Perhaps an inconclusive case, but interesting nevertheless.

Milton Torres is still alive, and he's told his story on Sky News, and other mainstream outlets, after the release of his file. He never talked about it before, because of all the secrecy.. but when the file was officially released..he could finally talk about it in public.

[edit on 17/2/09 by Majorion]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   
the way i see this is that certain Gov around the world know that with the amount of cameras , the internet , increased ufo activity around us , its just a matter of time before the citizens of their respected countries will want to know why they were lied too. The US always will claim it was for national defence reasons, where as other countries such as mine ,Canada , will not be able to pass this excuse off as we all now, the world loves us , lol. The disclosures by the countries , other than US, will be LIMITED, soft disclosures, for at this time the US does not want disclosure , and although most of these countries are freindly to the US , no one wants the US to be pissed at them . So until the US has mustered up a viable lie to tell its people, the disclosures will be such that doubts will remain . ..... and thats my 2 cents , or in Can money 1.6 cents.



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join