posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 12:00 PM
I do understand and accept your point about people who ask for better evidence and then raise the bar so that any evidence presented doesn't quite
meet the standard. I've met some of them here, and other places.
However, there's another side to the story, in my opinion. There are people who, although they are not entirely believers or skeptics, have been
asking for the same type of evidence all along, since the beginning, and it's never been provided.
In many respects, many UFO sightings have much in common with other paranormal and cryptozoological sightings. The line between "spirit" orbs and
"UFO" orbs is unclear, and seems to be getting fuzzier all the time. In fact, it begins to seem that whether an orb is a ghost or an ET probe
depends on whether it is a ghost hunter or a UFO hunter observing it!
UFOs share other characteristics of the paranormal, one of the primary ones being their apparent ability to change shape, size, and density as well as
appear and disappear. UFOs have been reported to be connected to Bigfoot and ABC's (alien big cats) as well as other anomalous critters like the
Flatwoods monster, which would obviously be categorized as part of the bigfoot-mothman-dover demon-bray road beast family if not for the presence of
the UFO "craft" during the episode.
I agree that UFOs are something. That is to say, they aren't mass hysteria, imagination, crazy people, lies, fiction, or all hoaxes. They are a real
phenomenon. However, I see little evidence to separate many UFO sightings from other paranormal sightings, and that makes it rather difficult to
accept the ETH as being the most likely explanation, unless I should also decide that ghosts, mothman, the Jersey Devil, hellhounds, ABC's, etc. are
I would like to see some fairly definite evidence that conclusively separates UFOs from these other phenomena and clearly points to them being
extraterrestrial as opposed to paranormal. For example, test results from part of a craft which show it to be composed of physical substances or
compounds not found on Earth. Or a DNA sample which is clearly different from Earth DNA. Or even a live alien who points to a star in the sky and says
"that's where I'm from."
I know there are accounts from abductees and contactees which claim an ET origin, but even many respected UFO researchers shy away from those,
especially contactees, because some of them are obviously hoaxes or other things which are more a manifestation of the human brain (sleep
paralysis, false memories, hallucinations, etc.) and it becomes very difficult to draw a line between "genuine" abductions and Blossoms or Billys.
I/we are not asking for extraordinary evidence that UFOs exist, or that they are not all hoaxes, lies, figments of imagination, or misidentified
natural phenomena. What we are asking for is any kind of definitive evidence that sets them apart from other paranormal phenomena and points to an
I can agree that many top-flight UFO reports show intelligent control of the observed UFO. However, many other paranormal things and entities show
intelligence also, so this is not an adequate dividing line. UFOs sometimes leave physical traces; but so do some "ghosts," bigfoots, ABC's, and
"demonic" entities. UFOs and their occupants can affect physical objects and make changes - so can poltergeists. UFOs affect electrical fields, kill
batteries, and cause lights to flicker - so do ghosts.
I know that some of you will be outraged by this post, but I wish you'd step aside from your ETH for a moment and look at the other side objectively.
Many UFO reports have more in common with what the average person would expect from a report of something paranormal than what they would expect from
a report of a physical alien spaceship manned by intelligent EBE's.
I suggest that some ETH believers are just as closed-minded as the debunkers, and are unwilling to consider the evidence that points to UFOs being
another type of paranormal phenomenon rather than ETs visiting from another planet. Their claims that skeptics require "extraordinary" evidence or
are looking for 100% absolute proof before weighing the evidence are denial just as much as the debunker's refusal to consider that a bright white
light in the sky isn't just Venus or a human black ops project.