It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Believer: What!?!?!? It simply CANNOT be anything but an alien space craft! You just don't want to believe it is because you are *various ad homs now follow*.
Originally posted by platosallegory
This goes without saying.
That doesn't stop you from weighing the evidence within reason and coming to the conclusion that the ET hypothesis is the most likely explanation for these things.
Nobody who supports this hypothesis on this thread has claimed to have some Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious type of evidence and that's the point that we are making about bogus or pseudo skeptics.
They want to debate extraordinary evidence (whatever that means) instead of the ET hypothesis. Nobody has claimed exclusive, 100% or absolute evidence, so why should we debate that?
Of course there can be other explanations but I think that the ET hypothesis is the most likely explanation for these things.
That's abduction cases, pictures, video, trace evidence, radar, eyewitness accounts, mass sightings and more.
When scientists are postulating the existence of something, they generally have a consistent body of evidence to work from that points to one most probable explanation. This is not true of UFOlogy. UFOs are cigar-shaped, or saucer-shaped, or dome-shaped, or ball-shaped, or triangle-shaped, or they change shape. They are every size from "basketball" sized to mile-wide. They have no lights, white lights, red lights, blue lights, green lights, rotating lights, blinking lights, or steady lights. They make no noise at all, a humming noise, a throbbing noise, a buzzing noise, or a loud roaring noise. Aliens are gray, white, green, blue, brown, sliver, or reddish brown, anywhere from 3 feet to 10 feet tall, and have solid black, glowing red, reptilian, yellow, green, or "human" eyes. Where is the consistency? Who can conclude what the evidence points to out of all that mishmash? There is no one common, consistent picture provided by the body of evidence to say what either UFOs or their occupants might be.
If UFOs are solid craft piloted by physical beings like ourselves, how can they appear, disappear, change shape, and perform maneuvers that would kill any human pilot? If they are biological entities, how can they appear metallic, have lights, show up on radar, and ricochet bullets? No one theory explains all, or even most, of the evidence.
There is simply no way I can see that a sensible, coherent hypothesis of what UFOs or the occupants are can be derived from the "evidence."
Originally posted by Heike
reply to post by platosallegory
No, I am not asking you to debate specific cases or specific evidence so that I can deny it. I am asking you to focus on evidence and theories rather than people or their mindsets.
For example, a great many UFOs have been seen going into or coming out of the oceans, and objects similar to flying saucers have been seen underwater and even tracked by military ships and submarines. This type of evidence leads ME to think that either they are from the oceans, or they have bases there. Apparently you don't agree. Why not? That's the sort of discussion/debate I was proposing.
But, since you didn't agree to the rules, I have nothing further to say here. Good bye for now. If you ever get over wanting to discuss how ignorant and closed minded certain people are and actually talk about UFOs or ETs, you know where to find me.
Originally posted by platosallegory
Of course I didn't agree to the rules. Why would I?
I don't put life or the universe into a box that has to begin and end with earth.
Originally posted by rocksarerocks
Post your best possible proof. I mean the BEST you have, and I'm not talking about blurry dots on youtube.