The Three Clinchers for Proof of Alien Life

page: 6
82
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic_al

Originally posted by Revolution-2012
To the poster;

Don't waste your time trying to beat the debunkers, it can't be done.



Of course it can, all that it needs is some proof that is not circumstantial.

A shakey picture of a light supposedly in sky is not proof
A fuzzy picture of something in sky is not proof
Somebody writing about an event is not proof

If there were only 1 or 2 sightings a year world wide it would be more
believable. But there are literally hundreds of reported events world wide
per day!!. With so many buzzing around everywhere, surely there would
be some undisputed physical evidence by now, but there is zippo. And then
multiply that figure by, say 50 years. But then the Ufologists just hide behind
the "It's like a Government cover up, Man"



I don't believe the last part of your post is true, Ufologists only have what is before them to try and prove events and sightings, However Debunkers and skeptics, draw on everything possible to say it's not true.

So IMO it's the debunkers who have the most to prove, and are losing their own battle, some of the explanations given by skeptics, are a lot crazier than the events themselves, it's so easy to say it's a bird, or it's photoshop, it's always others who are at fault in their collection of evidence.

There is absolute zero evidence that cave paintings are of ET, ok that's fair enough, but is there any evidence that they ever painted anything different than what they actually saw? not as far as I am aware, the explanations given, are just opinions and how they have been perceived by those studying them, same as Ufologists, but do the official explanations make sense either?

The NASA recordings, well as far as I am concerned, they are a done deal, they cant be undone, they where said, I am also certain that they know what space junk is, they need to if they are to survive, otherwise, why are they trained so hard just to miss out important information? yeah right, again others are labelled as hoaxers, because it couldn't possibly be what was said could it?

The star map, drawn before the system was discovered, but called lucky, so those who speak of it just being an accident, let someone else trustworthy draw a similar map, and then lets see you match it up if you are so adamant it was just a lucky guess, not hard to do really is it? someone draw a map, post it on this thread, then lets see them go at it, we can check if it works right off the bat, as soon as someone finds a match, then I will believe Betty's map was just a fluke.

We spend too much time worrying what debunkers and skeptics think, we always seem to be looking for proof for them, we don't need to really, they are running out of anything like feasible explanations, trying to convince someone who has already made their own mind up, is like flogging a dead horse, nothing is going to change but the smell, eventually the evidence of the horse will vanish, but the process stinks to high heaven.

Just like NASA recordings, pictures, video's, the only part of the puzzle missing IMO is why, why is it being covered up, like the LA event, what type of blimp can take direct hits from artillery, and stay airworthy? in fact show me any Air plane that can take that kind of punishment and stay aloft? even with today's technology it isn't going to happen, and I'm not talking about a glancing blow, I'm talking hovering and being blitzed, just like back then.

So there two challenges for the skeptics, here is your chances to shine, a random star map, and a Plane than can withstand repeated blows from anti aircraft fire and stay aloft, if it's possible, then show us.




posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
I always think that forcing a present day interpretation to thousands of years old drawings and carvings is not proof of anything.

The "astronaut", for example, looks like the drawings my brother used to do when he was four years old, and no, he was not drawing astronauts, everybody looked like that on his drawings.

Do you think civilizations/cultures in general 10,000 years ago were dumb? Or had a level of evolution that can equate to brains of a four year old kid today? Are you sure?

OK, check this out. Advanced technology more than 10,000 years ago! Is this fiction too? Stories written under influence of exotic drugs? The Samara Sutradhara is a scientific treatise dealing with every possible angle of air travel in a Vimana. There are 230 stanzas dealing with the construction, take-off, cruising for thousand of miles, normal and forced landings.

Hallucinations?

In 1875, the Vaimanika Sastra, a fourth century B.C. text written by Bharadvajy the Wise, using even older texts as his source, was rediscovered in a temple in India. It dealt with the operation of Vimanas and included information on the steering, precautions for long flights, protection of the airships from storms and lightning and how to switch the drive to "solar energy" from a free energy source which sounds like "anti-gravity."

The Vaimanika Sastra (or Vymaanika-Shaastra) has eight chapters with diagrams, describing 16 materials from which they are constructed, which absorb light and heat; for which reason they were considered suitable for the construction of Vimanas.

Hallucinations?

Extract from a post by Indigo_Child:

Ancient Indian literature is teeming with references to flying vehicles, weapons of mass destruction and advanced technology. Now, modern man has called this mythology. However, the writers of these ancients’ epics and documents call it history. As soon as one discards this unfounded arrogance, and is ready to test the veracity of this literature as history, he/she will discover that the advanced technology is described in a practical and empirical sense as opposed to the theoretical or fictional sense. Not only that, it accords in large degrees with modern scientific principles and technology.

Aeuronautics

We have flying vehicles described over and over again in ancient Indian literature. The Vyanmaika Shastra(VS) gives us technical and schematic information on propulsion, energy, weapons, flight tactics, pilots food and clothes and metallurgy. This is the most ground-breaking document ever and has been studied by many scholars, engineers and scientists from Europe and India from the early 20th century and onwards. It is currently being studied on the highest level of the Indian government and scientific community, at the Aeronautical Development Agency(ADA) of the Indian Ministry of Defense. Indian scientists have been able to successfully recreate the prescribed alloys according to the formulas in the VS.

The flying vehicles, are called Vimanas, and used throughout vedic literature to denote flying vehicles of the gods and the ruling class. They contain various yantras(machines/devices) with various functions in various parts of the vimanas. All of the major onboard yantras are comprised of darpanas(mirrors or lenses), manis(crystals) and naalis(channels and outputs). The machines function on various sources of shakti(power).

There are 8 Darpana Yantras and belong to 4 types of functions:

Television.
Optical stealth, holography and cloaking.
Laser and directed energy weapons.
Energy generation.


The mirrors are manufactured through special chemical processes using highly optically sensitive organic and inorganic substances.

The 5 main Darpana Yantras are:

1) Vishwa kriyaa darpana:

This device is used to obtain high resoluton real-time imagery of all activites around the Vimana, while in flight, and projected onto some screen. These lens are placed in a special arrangement with crystals, special mirrors and through a combination of solar, electric and mercury power are projected through some mechanism.

2) Shaktyakarshana darpana:

This device is used as a protection to neutralize harmful radiation in certain atmospheric zones. It is made up of 6 crystals positioned in a special arrangement that attract the harmful radiation and then gradually covert it to heat before it dissipates into the atmosphere.

3) Vyroopya darpana:

This is tactical device used to project battle field holographic images to confuse the enemy or to change the appearance of the Vimanas with a special deflecting mirror.

4) Guha garbha darpana:

This is a weapon device and used to harness the energy from the sun, winds, and ether and to redirect it to incapaciate the enemy via a special redirecting mirror; essentially a directed energy weapon.

5) Rowdree Darpana:

This is also some kind of directed energy weapon device. It combined Rodwdree beams(?) with solar rays and produces a high heat intensity ray that can melt anything it is directed on.


Here’s something more, this time about an American Indian ritual…


Dr. Joao Americo Peret took these photos of Kayapo Indians in 1952,
when no one had any idea how astronauts dressed. The Indians wear
these ritual robes in memory of the appearance of the heavenly being
Bep Kororoti.
Pic: Joao Americo Peret



Well read the rest in the link below. It would either blow your mind or, as usual, you would brush it off as imagination of deluded souls high on pot!

They weren’t that dumb after all!

Cheers!


* You can get the VYMAANIDASHAASTRA AERONAUTICS by Maharishi Bharadwaaja, translated into English and edited, printed and published by Mr. G. R.Josyer, Mysore, India, 1979. Mr. Josyer is the director of the International Academy of Sanskrit Investigation, located in Mysore, India.

Proof: Advanced Ancient Indian Civilization existed.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by azzllin

Originally posted by skeptic_al

Originally posted by Revolution-2012
To the poster;

Don't waste your time trying to beat the debunkers, it can't be done.



Of course it can, all that it needs is some proof that is not circumstantial.

A shakey picture of a light supposedly in sky is not proof
A fuzzy picture of something in sky is not proof
Somebody writing about an event is not proof

If there were only 1 or 2 sightings a year world wide it would be more
believable. But there are literally hundreds of reported events world wide
per day!!. With so many buzzing around everywhere, surely there would
be some undisputed physical evidence by now, but there is zippo. And then
multiply that figure by, say 50 years. But then the Ufologists just hide behind
the "It's like a Government cover up, Man"



I don't believe the last part of your post is true, Ufologists only have what is before them to try and prove events and sightings, However Debunkers and skeptics, draw on everything possible to say it's not true.

So IMO it's the debunkers who have the most to prove, and are losing their own battle, some of the explanations given by skeptics, are a lot crazier than the events themselves, it's so easy to say it's a bird, or it's photoshop, it's always others who are at fault in their collection of evidence.

There is absolute zero evidence that cave paintings are of ET, ok that's fair enough, but is there any evidence that they ever painted anything different than what they actually saw? not as far as I am aware, the explanations given, are just opinions and how they have been perceived by those studying them, same as Ufologists, but do the official explanations make sense either?

The NASA recordings, well as far as I am concerned, they are a done deal, they cant be undone, they where said, I am also certain that they know what space junk is, they need to if they are to survive, otherwise, why are they trained so hard just to miss out important information? yeah right, again others are labelled as hoaxers, because it couldn't possibly be what was said could it?

The star map, drawn before the system was discovered, but called lucky, so those who speak of it just being an accident, let someone else trustworthy draw a similar map, and then lets see you match it up if you are so adamant it was just a lucky guess, not hard to do really is it? someone draw a map, post it on this thread, then lets see them go at it, we can check if it works right off the bat, as soon as someone finds a match, then I will believe Betty's map was just a fluke.

We spend too much time worrying what debunkers and skeptics think, we always seem to be looking for proof for them, we don't need to really, they are running out of anything like feasible explanations, trying to convince someone who has already made their own mind up, is like flogging a dead horse, nothing is going to change but the smell, eventually the evidence of the horse will vanish, but the process stinks to high heaven.

Just like NASA recordings, pictures, video's, the only part of the puzzle missing IMO is why, why is it being covered up, like the LA event, what type of blimp can take direct hits from artillery, and stay airworthy? in fact show me any Air plane that can take that kind of punishment and stay aloft? even with today's technology it isn't going to happen, and I'm not talking about a glancing blow, I'm talking hovering and being blitzed, just like back then.

So there two challenges for the skeptics, here is your chances to shine, a random star map, and a Plane than can withstand repeated blows from anti aircraft fire and stay aloft, if it's possible, then show us.



Here's the thing

There are those at ATS that see a Ancient Picture and immediately think
WOW, that's a UFO or a Alien without looking at the history and beliefs
of those at the time. They are just believing what they want to see.

It's also possible that one person in a room full of people, can convince or
change other peoples perception of what they saw. So when you have
a group of people together seeing the same object, their descriptions tend
to match exactly. If there not in group their descriptions are totally different.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 



SUMMARY – A study of the work “Vymanika Shastra” is presented. First, the historical aspects and authenticity of the work are discussed. Subsequently, the work is critically reviewed in respect of its technical content. It appears that his work cannot be dated earlier than 1904 and contains details which, on the basis of our present knowledge, force us to conclude the non feasibility of heavier‐than craft of earlier times. Some peripheral questions concerning dimensions have also been touched upon.


There's an interesting Indian academic report on the book here:

cgpl.iisc.ernet.in...

I am cherry picking, but it's still interesting re. names dates etc. even if you disagree with the conclusions.

I find the evolution of mathematics fascinating.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by jkrog08
 
It washed ashore in what is now Ibaraki, and it contained an occupant; A young woman who spoke a strange language and who carried a strange box.... it is all very strange ;-)




I would have to agree that this is a good start for those beginning their quest...

I like the "Box"...as I have come across this before in my journeys and specifically having to do with the "Roswell Incident"...some of the greys were described as having little "Black Boxes" held closely to their sides or chests...I came across some further information that these little "Boxes" were used to calm those around them who had violent thoughts towards them...quite interesting indeed and thanks for the post...

and Jkrog...I have to admire your Courage in the use of the word "Proof" as you are asking to be torn a new one by some "Know it All" that will inevitably come out swinging...unfortunately...this is the current mentality that we have to contend with...but all the best in your journeys...always a pleasure to grow and delve a little deeper with fellow travelers...



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Here’s something that’ll set the debunkers thinking. This looks like ancient astronauts and a UFO in this Fergana cave painting, Uzbekistan.


Courtesy: K Pax. Dan Mirahorian

But some will contend that it's just a rock painting by a moron under the influence of pot!
Oh yeah!

Cheers!



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


When you claim to have the "clinchers" for proof of UFO evidence, what do you expect? What I've gathered from this is:

1. Drawings are far from conclusive.
2. Given the number of star systems out there I could probably accidentally draw one too.
3. Seems the transmission you used as an example was hoaxed? How then can we accept any of the others?

I'm hoping for good evidence. But this ain't it.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:14 AM
link   
The discovery evidence is by far the most compelling - I'm discovering a lot of stuff from Nasa/Shuttle/Apollo missions that has obviously been covered up/denied.

There is obviously stuff that has been seen/recorded by astronauts on missions - but could be lots of other explanations for a lot of it.

My only qualm is with the guy saying 'we have the alien space craft under surveillance' - I'd say it actually being an 'alien' space craft is very unlikely...

A couple of other possible explanations:

1) Alien Spacecraft is a code word for something like Aurora - the shuttle was observing an Aurora test flight or something similar maybe...

2) The guys at Nasa wanted to yank our chain... Pretty sure these guys aren't above joking around...

3) They are referring to a UFO - but 'alien spacecraft' is just the astronaut in question being facetious... And there are many other NASA transmissions, video, photos, accounts that mention or allude to UFO's. Which could be anything from atmospheric phenomena, meteors, anything...


The real question here which is the interesting bit - is if this is all innocent - then why do NASA cover it up. NASA have undoubtedly covered up all kinds of transmissions/video, edited photos from the moon/mars - WHY?



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


This one?

www.ufologie.net...



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by DataWraith

Besides apparently there are at least 57 different species ( accordingf to net sources and here on ATS)


I would like to sincerely ask, that if you happen have these links handy and if it is not too much trouble could you please direct me on where to find this...I guess I could just use the "Search" function here on ATS...as this is something that I have been meaning to go more in depth on...thanks in advance...

Cheers...



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


Thanks for dropping by Mike!You came with some excellent information,especially the last post.It is obvious that the evidence is everywhere.I mean Indian spacesuits,ancient aircraft capable of advanced flight we are researching today,cave drawings from all ages of man depicting UFOs,aliens.Thanks for bringing that information to light,I didn't know about some of that.Hey what date was that cave drawing dated Mike?

[edit on 4/5/2009 by jkrog08]



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by jackphotohobby
 


Copied from this one?



Which in turn is copied from the original cave drawing?



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:30 AM
link   
I see this page as really taken off,I am glad to see that.We have some good discussions here.I am just not however going to accept that the starmap is mere random chance(like even Sagan said,but Sagan did not believe in the abduction phenomena).Here are a few reasons...........one:We can not even begin to see or catalog all the stars(not even half) in the Universe due to our position and light pollution from the other foreground stars.two:Even with the vast number of local stars for Betty to draw a complex and that accurate representation that matches perfectly to a real star system(with multiple stars lining up) the odds would be unreal and is just not what happened.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


Can you link me the site for that drawing?



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


I don't know, you know my views on it, but if it is ancient, regardless of arguments over what it portrays it's very interesting because it includes perspective. AFAIK perspective is quite new. It blows me away that we consider perspective second nature/self evident, but some very clever people in the past didn't.

Looking at it I think it's too good to be true. Unless the paintings were destroyed I'd have thought the use of perspective alone would make them an interesting study, and I'd expect to see far more photos of it. That said, I haven't found conclusive proof they're hoaxed either, just references to second and third hand sources saying that they are. I can't form an opinion on that, other than my existing views on the subject.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I think the Nazca lines were meant to be seen from the air but perhaps not in the way most people here expect. This article details a prehistoric balloon: www.nott.com... Flying machines are not necessarily evidence of ET visitation although I do not discount that people may have seen things they didn't understand. Whether or not those observations were of extraterrestrial craft is still debatable. I am open to the idea but where the Nazca lines were concerned, there are other explanations that do not involve UFOs. sealwyf.wikispaces.com...



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:55 AM
link   
I think your first two cases are weaker than the last one NASA transmissions. I think you would make a better case for the first one to add additional evidence such as Nuremburg incident on April 4, 1561 Incident:

Nuremburg 1561 UFO battle?

and the Basil, Switzerland Incident on August 7, 1566:

Basil 1566 UFO Incident!

and here is the link with other cases before 1940.

Pre 1940 UFO incidents

I think if you take the best of the ancient drawings and eliminate anything nebulous and add the best of the pre-1940 you will have a stronger and much more sustainable argument that stands the test of time.

I would scrap the 3 ideas and just have a chronologically order of the best evidence from the ancient drawings to the NASA recordings and including such things as 1942 Battle of LA, Roswell, etc. Just my 2 cents and IMHO!


PS - Great Thread!



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Heres an additional proof, one thats pretty well credentialled. I searched and found the memo that was obtained from the freedom of information act, pertaining to this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com... » UFOs DO Exist Government Documents ProveTruth Long Suppressed

www.realufos.net...

The memo was written by General Nathan Twining and J. Edgar Hoover which clearly acknowledges ets and ufos.

Strange how the smoking guns are buried.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 11:38 AM
link   
That UFO hunters episode on pg 2, pretty much debunks all of the NASA sightings and transmissions. I find it funny the OP posted it. Did you watch it?

Except for the one lady who "alledgedly says she saw some "airbrushing done", all of the famous STS missions were thoroughly debunked.

I watch the UFO hunters all the time, I've seen all the episodes, yay for DVR's; and with the exception of the old timer Bill, who always wears his UFO magazing or whatever it advertises, mufon hat. The other 2 guys and especially the effects guy always come away fairly convinced that the stories are debunked.

Except for the incident in Rendlesham Forrest(sp?). To me that's one of the better UFO cases documented. I'd put that on the list, also the Pheonix lights.

For the record I believe theres other life in the universe. Big Drake equation fan here, but have they visited us.... I don't think so.

I believe any solid or good UFO sighting is just new, black or Top Secret Military stuff.

Good thread though. S+F for your effort, and research OP



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikesingh
So What’s The Big Deal?

I mean, to the debunkers, what’s the big deal if ETs have visited Earth? It does get frustrating seeing the same old grinding arguments from them like a needle stuck in a gramophone groove or a tape recorder that’s lost its hinges.

Let’s see mathematically, (I won’t go into the details now) the odds of the existence of ETs. If the visible universe could be shrunk to the size of a golf ball, then it would take a sphere 850 light years across to fill it with these golf balls! Incomprehensible? Yes! That’s pretty mind boggling to say the least!

Now in all these trillions of golf balls that are universes, there could be more technologically advanced civilizations than all the grains of sand on Earth’s beaches plus some!

In this there could be millions of civilizations that are Type II and beyond that have mastered FTL space travel. According to Dr Michio Kaku, Type III civilizations could very well be flitting around and between universes as well as in other dimensions too!

Could a handful of some of these civilizations have visited Earth? Why not? They have the capabilities to do so.

So again, what’s the big deal if ETs have visited Earth? In this huge universe/universes, are we the only sentient beings? I think not!

Cheers!



I salute your reasoning.


Perhaps what gets the sceptics into their debunking mode is the willingness by some believers to take some very dubious "facts" presented by very dubious charlatans and hail it as proof of aliens.
NOT claiming OP to be dubious or a charlatan. OP is just running with the torch - he didn't light it.

Nazca lines. Alien? No. Signs for the Gods? probably.

Cave paintings and ancient figurines. Some of them are indeed very intrigueing. Some of them do seem to point towards aliens (or people from a previous civilization).
Am I wrong or were the aliens portraid very much different until we agreed on the apperance of The Greys? Before the greyes there were a multitude of different sizes and types. Only the most outlandish people still talk of crystal people and lizard people (even though they might be the ones who are right in the basic notion of aliens not having to look like humanoids).

Star map. Proof of alien origin? No way. Any number of randomly painted dots could be made to resemble star maps seen from somewhere in the universe. Confirmed by astronomers? A school teacher and amateur astronomer? Who else?
The three maps in OP aren't even close enough to be named "same". Painting lines in roughly the same pattern does not make the stars match each other any better.

NASA conversations. A tough one. Needs cooperating evidence. In a publicly held event where the astronout admits to having said those exact words. The context would be nice to know.






top topics



 
82
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join