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.
I stopped reading after this sentence, so let me ask you this. Where is there any evidence of extra dimensions? Not only evidence of the actual dimension, but living beings in that dimension?
Originally posted by platosallegory
It's not like we are coming to this conclusion about these things in a vacuum. There's alot of evidence to look at that supports extra-terrestials or extra-dimensional beings.
Originally posted by platosallegory
How many skeptics have walked on the moon?
How many skeptics have carried out the double slit experiment?
How many skeptics have seen a wormhole or a blackhole?
How many skeptics have tested the Casimir Effect?
I can go on and on and the point is that the skeptic try and say eyewitness accounts, mass sightings, pictures, videos, trace evidence abduction cases and more do not matter and that's just a lie.
We always use testimony and evidence from others to weigh evidence within reason. We do this in all walks of life but the skeptic has taken the red pill when it comes to things like ufology and the paranormal and everything is backwards.
If a reporter is going to town to investigate a murder and he/she gets 3 different stories that point to the same person they are going to look into the person even if the eyewitness testimony may be different.
If have a video a skeptic may say it's a weather balloon no matter what the eyewitness said and no matter how the object is moving in the video. If you examine the video and a weather balloon has been ruled out then it moves to the unexplained column.
Think about it. How can you ever have evidence if all the evidence has to fit your pre-existing belief and if it doesn't it's unexplained forever. It's unexplained until you find an explanation that fits your belief about these things.
Every sighting is fake or mistaken
Every video is fake or mistaken
Every picture is fake or mistaken
Every abduction case is fake or mistaken
Every trace evidence case is fake or mistaken
How can you ever have evidence for extra-terrestrials or extra-dimensional beings if you don't weigh the evidence within reason? It's illogical. We can always use varying testimony and reason to come to a conclusion as to what is most likely. The skeptic wants weather balloons, chinese lanterns, unexplained, unidentified, kite or anything else to have an equal possibility of being true when logic doesn't work that way. We weigh the evidence. Some things are more likely to be true while others are less likely to be true.
The question I asked the skeptics can extra-terrestrial or extra-dimensional beings be the most likely explanation for eyewitness accounts, mass sightings, trace evidence , videos and more.
If no, please explain why.
It's like saying, give me evidence of an airplane and then an airplane flies by or is captured on picture and video again and again and you say that's not a plane it's unidentified, now show me evidence that a plane exists.
Well if you can't weigh eyewitness accounts, mass sightings, abduction cases, ancient manuscripts, trace evidence and more within reason then of course you will never have evidence for extra-terrestrial or extra-dimensional beings. If the evidence "looks too good to be true" then how can you have evidence of anything?
If you set up an illogical premise that "blinds" you to the evidence, then how can you ever "see" the evidence?
Using logic and common sense against believers is useless, you can't convince those who already made up their mind. Believers are close minded. I'm open to any explanation because I don't know what's going on. Nothing would please me more than knowing the truth.
Only a few reasonable people dare oppose the propaganda machine and think for themselves. Someone has to. There are so many incompetent thinkers, so many irrational believers. Someone has to do actual research.
You have no idea. Some people, including those who had incredible experiences, are skeptical of the Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis. Please read Jeff Ritzmann's thread me and "them". After all he has endured, he says he doesn't believe in extra-terrestrial. Go ahead and read the entire thread, it's one of the best ever. But it's a long thread, so if you don't want to read it all, his opinion about ETs and skeptics is on page 9. I respect and admire the man for his honesty and courage. I respect his beliefs. Even though I don't have any.
Originally posted by spiritualevolution
id like to just see all ufo skeptics die
if we stick together
we can stamp out this virus
Originally posted by platosallegory
Let me ask the skeptics a question, can extraterrestrials or extra-dimensional beings be the most likely explanation for these things?
If no, please explain why.
Originally posted by Malcram
But it's deeply hypocritical. In fact, by saying this you are attacking our supposed motives...rather than dealing with the subject itself.
Originally posted by nerbot
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar
The battle for LA is hardly the basis for a good explanation. Evidence but NOT proof.
Have you actually studied the case, analysed the (1) photo and read the reports and articles thoughroughly. Leaves a LOT unanswered and raises some interesting questions regarding the military actions at the time (pearl harbour) and possible experimentation with/within the event.
C'mon, you can do better than that.
Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Not hypocritical in the least. As you claim you are doing with skeptics, I am discussing the tactics used by a certain group of believers in order to inoculate themselves from any sort of questioning. Now, if I was discussing the motivations and tactics of a believer instead of the case they were presenting, then yes, it would be hypocritical; however, in this discussion, I am talking about the case being presented.
I addressed you in another thread, and noticed you have not answered.
Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Originally posted by Malcram
But it's deeply hypocritical. In fact, by saying this you are attacking our supposed motives...rather than dealing with the subject itself.
Not hypocritical in the least. As you claim you are doing with skeptics, I am discussing the tactics used by a certain group of believers in order to inoculate themselves from any sort of questioning. Now, if I was discussing the motivations and tactics of a believer instead of the case they were presenting, then yes, it would be hypocritical; however, in this discussion, I am talking about the case being presented.
If anything, I have exposed your hypocrisy.
I addressed you in another thread, and noticed you have not answered.
Originally posted by Malcram
I have no idea which thread nor know of anyway to find out. I'm not that adept at using ATS features. Perhaps you tell me?
Originally posted by Malcram
So, which Nablator are you, the page two dismissive, curt and closed-minded Nablator, or the reasonable, open-minded 'seeker' type Nablator of page four?
I am almost speechless that this paragraph could in all seriousness be offered as supposedly being representative of the 'skeptical camp', as they bravely oppose the hordes of unthinking, ill informed, UFO 'believers'. Unbelievable.
OK, I haven't read the thread, but I will. However - and do correct me if I'm wrong - you appear to be describing a man who has had several personal experiences which he discounts as being ET related, rather than someone who has studied the full range of evidence that is available outlining the worldwide UFO phenomenon. I don't really see that as relevant. But, I'll read the thread, maybe I'm wrong.