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
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.