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.

 

Question for Phage, Internos, Chadwickus and Easynow...

page: 11
132
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by hermantinkly
Skeptics simply do not know how to listen to their hearts. We are entering a new age now that favours right-brain faculties like intuition, imagination and creativity. Those abstract, linear thinking habits associated with right-brain faculties are going to be obsolete in the not so distant future.

[edit on 12-7-2009 by hermantinkly]


wow some very astute thinking here friend!

i tend to agree with this line of thinking.




posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by hermantinkly
 


Ok, i appreciate this step from you:
this is what i've said in this thread, it's the only post by me:
====================================
I apologise for being so late, I really couldn't post before. I would like to state beforehand that i don't believe to be better than anyone else here: i'm just some guy who loves the subject matter: and if one really loves, for example, his house, then he should NEVER allow the garbage to invade it. Since i love this subject matter, here's why i i try to find out the more i can about every case worthy to be studied: And NOT, i'm NOT happy whenever i find out that something is a hoax, CGI, misinterpretation etc.: actually, i'm not happy at all after finding a mundane explanation to (or "debunkig") something: it's sad, but all in all it's the only way we have to realize WHAT are actual UFOs, to get closer to the truth, to deny ignorance, to have a realistic idea about the actual dimension of the phenomenon: and to those who believe me to be some blind sceptic, listen here: i do believe in the existence of extraterrestrial intelligent forms of life, i have NO doubts about it, despite the lack of any conclusive proof. But to believe is VERY different from to know, and to base our thoughts just on our beliefs is way less intelligent than to base them on knowledge.
Now, the question in the OP is very straight,

Have you ever came across vids and pics that had you completely stumped?

and it deserves a straight answer. The Nellis footage is (in my very humble opinion) one of the best "stand alone" evidences, most likely one of the best ever: maybe many will disagree, this is just my humble opinion: the point is that nothing mundane comes to mind as possible explanation. Another very interesting footage is the one taken in Great falls on 1950:

The Mariana UFO Incident occurred in August 1950 in Great Falls. Nicholas "Nick" Mariana, the general manager of the Great Falls "Electrics" minor-league baseball team, and his secretary observed two "bright, silvery spheres" move rapidly over the city's empty baseball stadium. Mariana used his camera to film the objects; the film was one of the first ever taken of a UFO. The incident received widespread national publicity and is regarded as one of the first great UFO incidents in the United States. In 2007, the Great Falls White Sox were renamed as the Great Falls Voyagers to commemorate this event. The team logo features a green alien in a flying saucer.


www.ufologie.net...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...


Do not start to analyze this: it is merely a MPEG compressed file. Analysis have already been performed by experts commanded by USAF, (read about it in this file) those analysis were done on the original photographic movie.

Right click the link and save it on your local hard disk for a comfortable view:
Location: Great Falls, Montana, USA
Date: August 05, 1950
From: Nick Mariana
Source: TNT TV
Size: 583 KB
Length: 10 sec
Format: MPEG

Download

Obviously there is more footage. Here is a "second film" I located. Did I find again the images suppressed by the Air Force?
Right click the link and save it on your local hard disk for a comfortable view.

Download 2



Some other visual evidences look to be negligible at first glance, but once you put them in their real contest, they raise to some higher level:
a good example is the picture of the triangle taken in Petit Rechain on 1989 and kindly posted by easynow at page # 1.
The photo by itself wouldn't be impressive, but after you put it in its own contest then it can be considered extraordinary.
Another example is the video taken in Parma on August 10, 2007:

It wouldn't be that great evidence, if it wasn't about a MASS sighting:

and basically everything mundane was ruled out: since the police was alerted, investigations were made and the presence of military airplanes dropping flares was ruled out, as well as you can obviously rule out sky lanters and many, many other possible explanations.
Basically, the lights appeared from nowhere and vanished to nowhere: and during their apparition they looked to be "nailed" in the sky.

Another interesting visual evidence are the photos taken by William Rhodes from Phoenix, AZ on July 7, 1947 (the same day of the Roswell's crash):




1947-July 7- William Rhodes of Phoenix, Arizona allegedly saw a disk circling his locality during sunset and took two photographs. The resulting pictures show a disk-like object with a round front and a square tail in plan form. These photographs have been examined by experts who state they are true photographic images and do not appear to be imperfection in the emulsion or imperfections in the lens. Often called the "Roswell UFO." some info taken from: www.nicap.org



www.ufocasebook.com...




These images, often called "the Roswell craft" photos, (as it is widely reported that the Roswell craft was not a saucer, but a "delta" winged craft) appeared in several Southwestern newspapers around the time of Arnold's sighting and match his basic description of a heel shaped, domed flyer; These images were photographed the same day as the Roswell crash which took place in the evening of July 7, 1947, just one state away, in New Mexico.


www.rense.com...





Although the reliability isn’t quite as high as the pictures taken in McMinnville, two shots taken in Phoenix do rank right up there. William A. Rhodes, a self-employed scientist living in Phoenix, reported that he had taken what might be considered the first good photographs of one of the flying discs. Rhodes said he had been on his way to his workshop at the rear of his house at the rear of his house when he heard a distinctive "whoosh" that he believed to be from a P-80 "Shooting Star" fighter jet. He grabbed his camera from the workshop bench and hurried to a small mount in his backyard. The object was circling in the east about a thousand feet in the air.

www.theufochronicles.com...





On July 7, 1947, William Rhodes took photos of an unusual object over Phoenix, Arizona.[45] The photos appeared in a Phoenix newspaper and a few other papers. According to documents from Project Bluebook, an Army counter-intelligence (CIC) agent and an FBI agent interviewed Rhodes on August 29 and convinced him to surrender the negatives. The CIC agent deliberately concealed his true identity, leaving Rhodes to believe both men were from the FBI. Rhodes said he wanted the negatives back, but when he turned them into the FBI the next day, he was informed he wouldn't be getting them back, though Rhodes later tried unsuccessfully.[46][47] The photos were extensively analyzed and would eventually show up in some classified Air Force UFO intelligence reports.

www.thepetitionsite.com...

www.roswellproof.com...



UNIDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS,
WILLIAMS FIELD, CHANDLER,
ARIZONA.

14 July 1947

MEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:

On 8 July 1947, this Agent obtained pictures of unidentifiable objects, (Exhibits 1 and 2) from the managing editor of the Arizona Republic newspaper. The pictures were taken by Mr. Williams Rhoads, 4333 N. 14th St., Phoenix, Arizona, at sunset, on 7 July 1947. The subject object flew at unconveivable speeds, making three circles in the vicinity of Mr Rhoads' home. The pictures were taken with a box camera, size 620. The photograph (Exhibit 1) was taken at as the object passed in front of Mr. Rhodes, and Exhibit 2 as the object turned towards Mr. Rhoads. The height of the object was estimated at 1000 feet.

AGENT'S NOTES: See Exhibit 1 and 2, photographs of unifentifiable objects, enlarged aproximately 20 times. No further reports have been received by this office of objects seen by military personnel.

Lynn C. Aldrich, Special Agent, EIC - AAF, FDTRC.

www.rr0.org...


www.rr0.org...



Maybe this sighting was unrelated to the one of Roswell, but there's a very interesting resembleance with what was sighted by Kenneth Arnold:


Another interesting video would be the one taken in Kibbutz Hatzor, Israel, on 1996:

If there were some grounded points of reference, then this video would be extremely interesting:
in this screenshot (showing Bruce Maccabee) there's something that looks to be some grounded lights:

but if there isn't any point of reference, the video would fall into the "inconclusive evidences" basket.
Also the "Battle of L.A."


These are just examples, and as we can see some informations are always needed: a video, or a picture by themselves will hardly prove anything: and now everything is getting even more complicated:
too many attention seekers with much time to waste are invading the internet with hoaxes: now there's photoshop, Vue, Maya, Blender, After effects etc: almost everyone can hoax an ufo video/picture. While before, there were basically two ways to hoax them: double exposure or models.
This is why we should (in my humble opinion) always talk about cases, not just videos or pictures. An anonymous video upped to YouTube should never be taken seriously unless corroborated by something else: media coverage and/or multiple (and reliable) witnesses, and/or radar tracking etc...

Another interesting case with visual evidence is The 1978 Kaikoura UFO sightings







Paradoxically enough, the (in my humble opinion) best cases are not corroborated by any visual evidences, i will mention just some of them:


The strange story of JAL 1628
The Height 611 UFO Crash
The 1976 Teheran UFO incident
The Coyne incident, Mansfield, Ohio, 1973
The RB-47 UFO Encounter | 1957

As said, my humble opinion is no more value than anyone else's one, every member can be a very precious resource: some of my favourite posters are ArMaP and IsaacKoi,
but also the contribute of people like Mikesingh (for example), who spend much time and puts much efforts in order to share their stuff, is indispensable: this is what makes ATS unique.


Originally posted by Molan27
Also isn't Internos the guy who runs ufoskeptic?? I could be wrong..

No, i'm not.

Thanks to the OP for this thread, and to all those who added their valuable contribution.

=============================

You are entitled to argue with it, because i do think and know that i can be wrong.
You would be surprised if i'd say to you how many alien advanced civilizations i think do exist: i'm not exactly what you would call some close-minded guy


[edit on 13/7/2009 by internos]



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by hermantinkly
 


But why would you use another member to make a point? I am speaking from experience here friend. I did it ONCE, and regretted it, even though I agreed with my point, I went about it wrong. Make your point another way, why do you have to use names? You are a new member so obviously have not had time to read through all the posts here, that was brash to say the least.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   
Thx Internos


Much appreciated!!



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by hermantinkly
 


In case you haven't figured it out most skeptics want to believe the only difference is they want facts. There not willing to take faith as a legitimate answer prove your point. Ive seen a lot of UFO threads that show glowing balls and say thats proof of aliens. Sorry but its proof there was something there but it doesn't prove aliens. I myself would love to come on ATS one day find that one thing that proves to me were not alone in the universe. But I'm not willing to fool myself either so any evidence must pass my own personal test to determine validity.

My dad worked at NASA i grew up in the space program often went to work with my dad at Goddard Space Flight Center whenever i could get the chance. And because of this i happened to learn a lot about NASA and what it does. So one of my biggest pet peeves is when people try to use blatant lies about NASA to prove there right. So in that regards I'm a skeptic however that doesn't mean i wouldn't want to see an alien before i die.


...Nicely said



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 





I really do not see why some people try to bash internos and call him a 'closed minded skeptic''.


Isn't 'closed minded skeptic' an oxymoron. A skeptic by nature is ready to take various explanations into account whereas a 'believer' imho rather deserves to be called 'closed minded' since he/she is mainly focused on a paranormal, etxraterestrial 'truth'. Sometimes even without the readiness to solve the mystery behind. Most of the skeptics would welcome to be convinced by some irrefutable evidence, I think.

Why use your 'heart' when you can use your brain first. This is the main quality which makes men unique on earth.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by necati
 


Hey, like your avatar,lol.

You are referring to pseudobeleivers and pseudoskeptics. So no it is not an oxymoron, I was just quoting what that poster said or implied anyways. Most skeptics are called closed minded, which is wrong. Believers are also called closed minded sometimes, that too is wrong, unless of course either side meets the criteria needed to be considered a 'pseudo' of their side of the 'UFO Spectrum'. Like I have stated many times the definition of a skeptic in many is skewed and errounious. I am a pretty hardcore 'believer' but have been called a skeptic because I debunked obvious bs 'UFOs' or 'aliens'. Again, like I have stated many times, a true Ufologist is neutrally balanced between the classic 'skeptic' and 'believer' views. In reality there are no skeptics or believers (again, unless they are pseudo in nature), just truth seekers using science and thus empirical evidence to disseminate the facts of UFO cases.


[edit on 7/13/2009 by jkrog08]



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 





I am a pretty hardcore 'believer' but have been called a skeptic because I debunked obvious bs 'UFOs' or 'aliens'.


I would also call myself a 'hardcore believer' based on personal experience

However, this isn't something which serves as anykind of convincing proof at all. Can't expect anybody to believe me.

Will try to sort out this 'pseudo' thing. I'm a little bit confused about that right now. Thanks for the reply...........



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by necati
reply to post by jkrog08
 





I really do not see why some people try to bash internos and call him a 'closed minded skeptic''.


Isn't 'closed minded skeptic' an oxymoron. A skeptic by nature is ready to take various explanations into account whereas a 'believer' imho rather deserves to be called 'closed minded' since he/she is mainly focused on a paranormal, etxraterestrial 'truth'. Sometimes even without the readiness to solve the mystery behind. Most of the skeptics would welcome to be convinced by some irrefutable evidence, I think.

Why use your 'heart' when you can use your brain first. This is the main quality which makes men unique on earth.



Yes, you are certainly right to an extent. However, the faculties of the left-brain/mind are also what have indirectly contributed to the decline of mankind and overall destruction of mother earth. For example, the world economy was a system that favoured abstract, mathematical values governed by left-brain faculties. Not to mention, the destructive qualities of the human ego, which facilitates all types of hazardous thought habits like competetiveness, negativity, fear, doubt, anxiety, depression, etc., is also a product primarily governed by left-brain faculties. In general, the mind is an insiduous survival tool that was evolved millions of years ago to seek out danger by noticing the similarities and differences in the environment and giving the primate alternatives. It would rather be right than you be alive.

Thinking with your heart means being in intuition. Intuition (whether you believe or not) is our connection to source -- our own personal knowing, and a product of the right-brain half. During the Catholic Inquisitions in the 1500s, many millions of women were killed for having this trait: if they knew something and couldn't provide evidence for how they got to knowing it, they were deemed witches and dragged, stabbed, hanged, burned at the stake, etc. Intuition thereby began losing it's prophetic, divine value overtime from that point on, and it was done purposely by the rulers, since intuition meant knowledge; knowledge meant power, and the rulers wanted ALL the power.


[edit on 13-7-2009 by hermantinkly]



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 02:08 AM
link   
reply to post by hermantinkly
 

Allow me to join the OT fest.

So what you're saying is that being "left brained" is an anti-survival trait. I wonder how we've managed to pass our genes along to the better adapted "right brained" types for so long. You'd think we would have extincted ourselves a long time ago.

[edit on 7/13/2009 by Phage]



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 02:23 AM
link   
reply to post by necati
 


www.abovetopsecret.com...

There is a great thread explaining the 'pseudo' side of ufology. But as Phage stated, this is highly off topic so I will digress from any further commentation on this subject.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by VitalOverdose
 


Well we know what publically known human craft look like and are capable of, even given a 20 year curve. Of course if you subscribe to the inside rumors of the military being about 2500 years ahead of public technology levels and development times then I guess you have a strong argument for the UFOs (that can not be explained) being secret craft like the TR3B, TAW-50, or many other unnamed spacecraft.

There are many good pictures(pictures are NOT everything) of UFOs, but you also have to review the stories, witnesses, and other evidence (ie;trace,radar,etc). For example the Lakenheath-Bentwaters UFO Incident of 56' has NO PICTURES, but has confirmed multiple UREs (Unknown Radar Echos) by two bases (Lakenheath and Bentwaters) using three different radars, as well confirmed visuals on the air and ground by many military officials and civilians, AS WELL confirmed radar lock by a fighter jet scrambled to intercept, which then was CHASED by the UFO until the jet neared its base. This was all on radar and also seen, there is NO official explanation other than that "there appears to be at least one genuine UFO". I mean you had URE hits of objects going up to Mach 25 (around 18,000 mph) and then stopping and going, then merging into one object and so forth. Ask some radar operators about the "fast movers" they see, especially around the north pole, if they are willing to talk. And no they are not satelittes because their altitude is way to low.

But ultimately it will take a mass landing or disclosure to have absolute prof, but cases like that one and many solidify the UFO phenomena as real and likely not of human origins.


Your right of course. Dont get me wrong,Im not a UFO skeptic , there have been some amazing sightings over time with some very convincing evidence. The latest one being the object that was caught on film by a police helicopter over Cardiff in the UK. Because the police filmed it they are not allowed to sell the rights for profit so for once its made its way onto the net.

The object is filmed with normal film and with infra red..his is possibly one of the most credible videos i have ever seen.


[edit on 13-7-2009 by VitalOverdose]



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 07:00 AM
link   
Great thread,I too enjoy reading the named members posts.Only you left out another favorite member regarding the ufo topic here at ATS. And his name is Gazork.

There are many informative threads by Gazork that have to do with famous ufo cases.My personal favorites are the 1967 Shag Harbor case(here at ufo casebook),and the ever famous Rendlesham Forest case(The Rendlesham Forest Incident website)

The Rendlesham case is what led me here to ATS a few years back.But since then have read about many more puzzling cases,like the 1977 case in Brazil where villagers were being attacked by ufos(ATS thread).

Star and flag,great idea for a thread OP!



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Akezzon
 

The OP says "completely stumped". That is English (American?) idiom for something more than "puzzled". It implies that all mundane explanations have been eliminated. Puzzled, on the other hand, can imply ambiguity.

Maybe if I say it like this it will help. Videos which lack context or enough "clues" (background, points of reference, etc.) can be puzzling. But because there is not enough information, I prefer not to speculate about what they might be because a process of deductive reasoning cannot be used. I can't say what it is (or might be) or what it isn't.

[edit on 7/12/2009 by Phage]


But...wha...hey....uhmm....AARGH!!

So, you mean that when you stumple upon a clip you can't explain you put it aside since you don't want to speculate because there is not enough information?
Oh well.
I guess I just wanted to see the clip that had a "Wow, cool clip..." Phage post. =)
But from what you are saying we will never see such a post from you, which is quite alright.

And please don't take this wrong, cause I enjoy your posts and your points of views are very much needed here.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by VitalOverdose
 


I've seen quite a few people refer to that video as "one of the best pieces of evidence out there", etc...

IMO this video however is a perfect example of why everyone needs to be more of a skeptic first and really open their minds to consider all mundane possibilities before making such a bold statement.

At first glance, yeah it looks pretty spectacular doesn't it - oddly shaped, moving "incredibly fast" and associated with a well-publicized UFO event that had many corroborating witnesses.


But there are several problems with this:

- First off, this video is NOT from the 2008 Cardiff incident - it was filmed over Brighton several years earlier. Welcome to the internet - a giant game of broken telephone where misinformation travels faster than the speed of light (pass it on).

- Next, it is most likely the object is not moving very fast at all - this is just an illusion created by the moving background as the helicopter filming it passes by and circles around it. From the video it seems the helicopter made several passes to capture different POV - so it couldn't have been moving that fast.

- Lastly, now that you can account for it's (lack of) speed - take note of the fact this thing looks EXACTLY like a chinese lantern. It's cylinder shaped, and it has a bright, hot "flame" at the bottom.

...
Can anyone say with ABSOLUTE certainty it's just a chinese lantern? Probably not - but there's definitely enough there to warrant moving it from the "most credible ever" pile to the mountain of ho-hum internet videos that often get way too much credit without enough proper scrutiny.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In other news - Internos, I'd never heard of that Parma incident until you mentioned it on this thread - that looks like good stuff right there


[edit on 13-7-2009 by mc_squared]



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by hermantinkly
Skeptics simply do not know how to listen to their hearts.
I know how to do it, but it only says "thump-thump, thump-thump..."



We are entering a new age now that favours right-brain faculties like intuition, imagination and creativity.
And why do you think that being a sceptic implies that a person cannot be intuitive, imaginative or creative?

Although I consider myself a person with little imagination I also consider myself somewhat intuitive and creative, and my work as a programmer has shown to me that my creativity in solving problems has its use.


A lot of these people are very much going to die, especially when the full brunt of the economic collapse arrives and they are forced into a Mad Max-style, every man for himself-type scenario where intuition (right-brain faculty) is the ultimate key to survival.
I think you are giving too much importance to the economic crisis. A change to what you talk about would mean the end of road for the capitalists, and I don't think that will happen any time soon.


I remember watching a 9/11 documentary on t.v. and hearing how all the lawyers seemed to be completely lost after the plane struck and they got stuck up in the WTC building. Meanwhile, the custodians were calmly finding ways to escape and guiding them all out -- they just knew what to do next in the face of grave calamity. This is left brain vs. right brain.
Are you sure that was not a lawyers joke?


Some people will read this and feel a sense of fear.
Not me.



Death is an inevitable part of mortal life and should be viewed upon as waking up from a dream, as you will have another oppurtunity in your next life to learn and climb the ladder of enlightenment.
That I don't know (I am a sceptic, remember), but I do know that death looks inevitable, and I am not afraid of it, I have been expecting it at any moment since I was 8 or 9 years old.


Reincarnation is a natural spiritual law that everyone goes through in the universe, albeit kept secret by TPTB.
OK, we will talk about that in the after-live then.


Back on topic, please.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by crowpruitt
Great thread,I too enjoy reading the named members posts.Only you left out another favorite member regarding the ufo topic here at ATS. And his name is Gazork.

This is very true. Gazrok is one of those members that made of ATS the place that we all know. Also ArMaP has shown his brilliance in many circumstances, and in my humble opinion he's not a sceptic after all: he's a guy that needs to see proofs in order to believe in something: he works with binary code, so there's no way to convincer him of something not corroborated by proofs. Now, if this fits the definition of sceptic then he is, but anyway ATS would be very poor without ArMaP: i respect, admire and appreciate every single post from him. Another reaearcher that we should thank for what he did is IsaacKoi:
he's more a lurker than a poster, but whenever he posts you can bet that you are going to read about facts proven by hard evidences;
plus there are more relatively new members that are showing all their class with extremely well researched threads, the first one that comes to mind is jkrog08, but also easynow has shown to be able to add something of important, depending on his mood
.
I, I am one of the many ones, i am neither more intelligent nor stronger than anyone else. We can find resources that are hidden into ourselves, all we have to do is to use our brain and to don't fear.
ATS gives you the wings if you have something to say, but still i hear about people cklaiming to have been censored: there is NOT censorsip here, just people protecting their own business



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 



but also easynow has shown to be able to add something of important, depending on his mood.


Hey wait just a minute

i resemble that remark !







posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by mc_squared
 


When i say credible i mean that im pretty sure that it isn't a fake or some star someone caught on film by accident and have then tried to pass off as a UFO which is what happens all to often today.What i mean is that this is a real UFO im not trying to hold it up as evidence of alien craft. At least with this bit of film we can see its an object and not stars, swap gas etc.

Your right it could possibly be a very tall Chinese lantern seeing as the light is coming from the bottom.

Ive been told there was some audio that went with that video but i cant find it anywhere.

[edit on 13-7-2009 by VitalOverdose]



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
]And why do you think that being a sceptic implies that a person cannot be intuitive, imaginative or creative?


This?


I know how to do it, but it only says "thump-thump, thump-thump..."




I like this one....






[edit on 13-7-2009 by zorgon]



new topics

top topics



 
132
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join