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.

 

Irrefutable UFO evidence. ( Nobody can say prove it ever again! )

page: 2
36
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by libertytoall
 


Great post and I think you worded it perfectly.

It is Irrefutable U.F.O. Evidence. The evidence in the clip can't be refuted and alot of evidence can't be refuted as it pertains to U.F.O.'s (Unidentified Flying Objexts).

Like they said at the end of the video, there's no debate if U.F.O.'s exist.

I have debated those in scientific circles and non scientific circles and they all agree that U.F.O.'s exist. The debate is over their origins.

You can't refute these things with maybe there's another explanation. Maybe there's another version of me in a Parallel universe that's not typing this right now.

The point is, you can't refute actual evidence with wishful thinking. If evidence is found that rebutt's the evidence then present it. This nonsense that it could be another explanation is meaningless unless evidence is presented to support the counter explanation.




posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Assuming everyone in this story is telling the truth, we have something extraordinary here.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Mon deu you have built this thread up to be knocked down. The only way I would ever give a thread the title you have given this one is if I had an one on one interview with an alien, inside his ship, wearing a "I have met the aliens tea shirt" with a recorder in one hand and a hd camcorder in the other, even then I would probably doubt myself



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 06:30 PM
link   
I liked this case particularly because it came off as an extraterrestrial event more than anything else. I dont think it was a hoax, it is very genuine and well documented yet the presentation by ParanormalTV was quite absurd. The fact that it takes place in France reinforces the possibility that the ETs dont just visit the USA.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by libertytoall
 


sigh. while this is some decent evidence, a lot of people are going to say "prove it came from an extraterrestrial spacecraft" and you still wont be able to.

you won't get *irrefutable* evidence unless you have a live alien or something very very obviously engineered and extraterrestrial, like a piece of what is obviously a mechanical device beyond our technology and put together using alloys or isotopes that are extraordinarily rare or impossible on earth, or better yet a functioning unit.

[edit on 18-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majorion
I liked this case particularly because it came off as an extraterrestrial event more than anything else. I dont think it was a hoax, it is very genuine and well documented yet the presentation by ParanormalTV was quite absurd. The fact that it takes place in France reinforces the possibility that the ETs dont just visit the USA.


reinforces the possibility? you mean there are people who seriously think UFOs only visit the US? do they not read?

most of the best cases all happened in other countries. Shag Harbor, Rendlesham, the Belgian Triangles...

not to mention, why the hell would extraterrestrials care about lines humans draw on their maps? do you care about which dog's territory you're walking through when you walk down the street?

[edit on 18-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale
reinforces the possibility? you mean there are people who seriously think UFOs only visit the US? do they not read?


Oh lets be careful between saying "UFOs" and "ETs". But yes, there are people who argue that the supposed extraterrestrials only visit the U.S, but that is mostly them trying to debunk, as they dont get exposed to cases like this one or Tehran Iran, or Rendlesham as you stated, and so on.

And some people just dont buy into the ET explanation. There are people who believe UFOs are real, but they dont accept the extraterrestrial-hypothesis. So be careful between the difference, its a very big difference, ETs have not been proven. A UFO does not mean "extraterrestrial craft".

Regards,



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 06:53 PM
link   
that's the most fake looking ufpo video ever lol. French people speak French to each other, not English.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majorion

Oh lets be careful between saying "UFOs" and "ETs". But yes, there are people who argue that the supposed extraterrestrials only visit the U.S, but that is mostly them trying to debunk, as they dont get exposed to cases like this one or Tehran Iran, or Rendlesham as you stated, and so on.

And some people just dont buy into the ET explanation. There are people who believe UFOs are real, but they dont accept the extraterrestrial-hypothesis. So be careful between the difference, its a very big difference, ETs have not been proven. A UFO does not mean "extraterrestrial craft".

Regards,


i'm aware of that and i rarely assume the ET hypothesis when presented with UFO evidence, but honestly - no matter what their origin, it should be plainly obvious this is a worldwide phenomenon. Heck, during WW2, they were most frequently seen over Germany (foo fighters, which were in all likelihood a german experimental weapon).



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Viper0hr
that's the most fake looking ufpo video ever lol. French people speak French to each other, not English.


it's a docu-drama. that's not original footage...



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Irrefutable does not apply to the videos presented and others that have preceded them. As usual such claims to being irrefutable are hoisted as a means to head off objective review of content being presented. In reality no one should have to post such a headline. The proof presented should speak for itself and in so will present itself as irrefutable.

So in short - those who preach to the choir may will find common ground. But for those familiar with this overused tactic, it's just more of the same - simply repackaged.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by libertytoall
 


This event happened. Evidence was gathered and showed unexplained phenomenon to the trace chemicals and other compounds found at the location. It was shown to be from intelligent and unknown origins and in the opinion of highly qualified and educated professors and scientists, this could not have been a hoax.

Too many have experienced the reality of UFO's to deny their presence. To many have seen them, touched them or have been involved in a circumstance where they were observing or interacting with them, from scientists to military/NASA personnel.

In my opinion it is not a matter of believing in these craft or intelligent beings or proving they exist anymore, it is a matter of these debunkers and these long time protectors of religious factions who fear the full disclosure to prove that they do not.

They do exist without any doubt, but by any means possible they will prevent the truth and keep absolute knowledge.





[edit on 18-6-2009 by arizonascott]



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by arizonascott
 


Then show us the proof and the documents...i want to see the documents and i want to see the credentials..........im so tired of this crap.......thats why no one takes it seriously....



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


I am sure you would need everything from all technical documents describing every engineering aspect of these craft all the way down to a handshake from a Grey before you would believe.

I and millions of others do not need that. Like I said, many of us have seen, touched or experienced that which cannot be denied. The ignorance that emits from a race that would rather destroy, autopsy and control that which they don't understand is there any wonder why these beings keep at a distance and force many to doubt or questions their existence.

The only attempt at contact by anyone who is at the "official helm of control" has been to capture, hide and assimilate their technology for defense purposes.

Gee whiz, I wonder why we are still in the dark and questioning this subject after 60 years. We here on Earth have only had real technology for what about 70 years, and you expect to understand something that must be thousands if not many more years advanced from any concept we have unraveled to date. And let us look at just how fast our technology has developed in this short time. I think it is more than just coincidental.

I can tell you for a "FACT" that what I experienced and saw over 20 years ago - there is still nothing like that in any air force or private development sector that can match the speed and maneuverability of these objects. And it wasn't a sprite, swamp gas or any other natural phenomenon, it was under intelligent control and here for a reason.

Perhaps when the rest of the world wakes up and stops attacking and instead embraces the truth, then we will all know!


Go on and deny what millions already know and believe, but what do you get out of that? I know what we get out of it



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by libertytoall

In the Trans-en-Provence case of January 8, 1981, discussed also in the previous section (Bounias, 1990; Vallee, 1990; Velasco, 1990; see Section 15), the Gendarmerie took one sample 1.5 meters from the center of a ground trace on January 9 and another sample, 20 meters from the center, on January 23. On February 17, 1981, investigators from GEPAN/SEPRA visited the site and took a series of samples beginning at the center of the ground trace and ending 10 meters from the center. Bounias examined the samples in his laboratory. The principal procedure for biochemical analysis was that of determining the chromatograms of the pigments. This yielded information for a number of biochemical components (chlorophylides; xanthines; oxychlorophylls; lutein; chlorophyll A; chlorophyll B; pheophytins; and ß carotene).

In samples taken from the periphery of the ground trace, the chlorophyll A content had been reduced by 33%, the chlorophyll B content by 28% and the pheophytin content by 31%. Bounias also found that the ß carotene content had been reduced by 50-57% and the violaxanthine content by 80%. The above changes, which normally occur as the result of aging of a plant, were found both in the samples removed by the Gendarmerie within one day of the event, and by the samples taken by the GEPAN/SEPRA investigators 40 days after the event. As one may see from the article by Bounias (1990), the biochemical changes show a strong correlation with distance from the center of the event. It appears that the magnitude of the effect is associated with a specific quantity (the difference in free enthalpy) associated with the biochemical change. According to Bounias, the glucide and amino-acid content of very young leaves had been changed to become nearer the content characteristic of old leaves.

Bounias carried out certain experiments to try to determine what form of trauma may have been responsible for these biochemical changes. As a toxicologist, Bounias rejected the hypothesis that the changes could have been caused by a deliberate act involving chemical poisons. Bounias also found that some of the changes could have been caused by powerful microwave radiation. However, microwave radiation by itself would not explain the photosynthetic breakdown or certain other characteristics of the injuries. Bounias found no evidence of effects that one might expect to be produced by ionizing radiation. This is consistent with the fact that there was no trace of radioactivity at the site.

Velasco also reported the GEPAN/SEPRA investigation into the "Amarante" case that occurred at Nancy on October 21, 1982. The witness, who is a biologist, reported that an ovoid object descended into his garden but did not descend lower than 1 meter above the ground. The witness observed the object for 20 minutes before it took off vertically into the sky. The witness did not hear any sound or feel any heat during the encounter, nor were there traces on the ground. However the witness reported that, just before the object departed, the grass blades stood up straight. Subsequent investigations showed that this phenomenon could be reproduced in the laboratory by using very intense electric fields (several tens of kV/m).

The GEPAN/SEPRA investigators found that the amarante plants located near the object had become desiccated whereas similar plants further away were in normal condition. The fruit of plants from the vicinity of the object looked as if they had been cooked. Further biochemical analyses of the samples gave results consistent with what one would expect of plants that had been dehydrated.

The panel was impressed by the detailed information that can be obtained by laboratory investigation of samples of vegetation taken from the location of a claimed UFO incident. It appears that a great deal more could be done in the way of laboratory experiments to study the effects of various kinds of radiation upon vegetation.
Link


I find this very fascinating, that the chemical reaction produced by the supposed UFO affected the biochemical composition in young plants to take on biochemical composition percentages of the same plants as aged plants.

This is remarkable and interesting.

But could some genius here on Earth accomplish the same feat? I don't know. Maybe it's possible. But why? And for what purpose? And if you're gonna waste all that time, genius, and effort in aging a particular area of grassy plants, you would think such a person, who undoubtebly has a rather large ego, would want to display this event where there was a great chance that a lot of knowlegeable and intelligent people would witness the event. Say, like at a science fair/convention, I don't know, packed full of Nobel Prize winners. I don't think the same genius person would want to risk exposing the event in front of one lowly country person, who just by chance might have been looking the wrong way and then never observed his (or her) great accomplishment in the first place.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 08:41 PM
link   
I think it's becoming the minority position wether life exists in the universe. Maybe 50 years ago this was a valid question but not today.

Today we have found liqued water on Mars and signs of Microbial life. Water is suspected to be on other planets. There's billions of exoplanets out there and extremophiles show us that life finds a way in various conditions. We have red rain as well as bacteria that was found in our atmosphere that might have an extratterestrial source.

According to Panspermia and Directed Panspermia we could be the extraterrestrials.

You have Parallel universes and extra dimension studied and favored by many Physicist.

Dark matter/energy constituted 96% of the universe and we don't know what it is or what it's made of.

It doesn't make much sense to me to reduce life in the universe to earth.

You also have theories on Warp Drive so the question of how did they get here is becoming mute.

We know the universe is 13.7 billion years old but 156 billion light years across. Light didn't travel this distance but space can expand faster than the speed of light.

So if you warp space, then your ship would be moved by the expansion of space and therefore can travel vast distances.

You can check out one theory on Warp Drive here:
dsc.discovery.com...

U.F.O.'s exist. We need to get past this question because it's becoming a dogma.

This video is one of many. There's alot of cases like this and they can't be brushed off anymore in favor of a belief.

Over the past 38 years, specialized research into Close Encounters of the Second Kind has resulted in a wealth of reports in every major country of the world. CPTR files contain 3,189 trace/landing cases from 91 countries. I believe physical traces present us with the most direct approach to resolving the mystery of UFOs.

www.ufophysical.com...

Thiere's some interesting trace evidence cases on this sight.



[edit on 18-6-2009 by Matrix Rising]



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Irrefutable?

I always assumed that meant something that had no possibility of being debated.

This only proves there is unexplainable soil samples, nothing more. How many times has something been unexplainable in the past?

I myself have taken pictures that are unexplainable, and even went as far as to send them to a few scientists at Universities whom could not explain them either. Does this make them irrefutable evidence of UFO's? Hardly, what it makes them is unexplainable.

Here is the picture I sent to the scientists which to this point remains unexplainable. What is it? I have absolutely no clue, that however, does not qualify it as a UFO and does not mean that little green or gray men are going to be landing in my back yard and burning up my rose bushes (which would make me quite angry at those little twerps).




In all actuality, I would put my picture up against the video I just watched any day, and twice on Sunday; however, like I said, that does not qualify it as a UFO or Nibiru, or anything else specific, it just makes it a strange picture.

[edit on 6/18/2009 by DarrylGalasso]



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matrix Rising

According to Panspermia and Directed Panspermia we could be the extraterrestrials.


well, panspermia doesnt *necessarily* make us extraterrestrials. after all, we would have developed on this planet and adapted to this planet, also adapting this planet to us. the whole reason we have so much oxygen in the atmosphere was cyanobacteria pumping it out as a by product (like we exhale CO2) until it was overwhelming and new life had to adapt to breathe it instead.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Proves nothing. NEXT!



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Then show us the proof and the documents...i want to see the documents and i want to see the credentials..........im so tired of this crap.......thats why no one takes it seriously....


The only ones whom I know have documented this case are those behind COMETA, along with a host of other cases in France, very interesting read:

COMETA Report on UFOs - Part 1 (PDF)

COMETA Report on UFOs - Part 2 (PDF)

Regards,



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join