Does Anyone Deny the Existence of U.F.O.s?, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times

reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 03:25 AM by open_eyeballs

reply to post by jd140

Do I think everything in the sky that is a piloted object made by humans? Yes I do.

OK, but you do recognize the fact that there are anomolies that indicate something other than human piloted craft (or at least there is evidence and accounts that defy traditional human powered craft), is that correct?

The fact is that we really don't know what we are able to accomplish technology wise. There is technology that is top secret and I would think that some of that, if made public, would change our perspective of what we are able to do in the sky.

I absolutely agree. There are unknowns even within our own private sector (never mind different governemnts around the world) that throws a huge monkey wrench in things.

reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 03:27 AM by jd140

reply to post by open_eyeballs

1. I agree.

2. Apply that the first part.

reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 04:16 AM by yizzel

Obviously UFOs exists. Here's how I know..

I spotted something strange in the sky earlier today. Surprise-surprise, it was a UFO !!
Moments after I initially spotted the UFO, my eyes focused in on the object only to discover it was just a seagull

So there you have it. I just proved (even if it was only for a split second) that UFOs are real...

reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 12:03 PM by open_eyeballs

reply to post by yizzel

I think yo umay be mis-understanding in which the question is being presented.

Of course, there are things in the sky that may not be identified right away. That does not make an object a U.F.O.

It is when they defy conventional ways of movement. When they are captured on film and still can not be identified. When gravity does not seem to affect them in the same way if affects everything on earth in the way we know it affects things.

Certainly, there will be times even when all these features mentioned above seem to be characteristics of something recorded, but once the video can be analyzed accordingly, a conclusion can be made that in fact makes it identifiable and not a U.F.O.

But there are many accounts and recordings that poiont to something other than something common and mundane as a bird, plane or weather baloon.

These are the objects that I am referrring to.

And as I mentioned, there seems to be an overwhelming majority that understands and believes tha these objects are not of conventional technology.

reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 12:30 PM by menguard

Not at all a lot of times those are GODS THOUGHTFORMS coming in to change the vibration of Earth. Through the mental construct of the minds potential to create.

Just by entering The Earths Mind it has already changing the thoughtpatterning of the planet.

[edit on 2-7-2009 by menguard]

reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 09:43 PM by Visiting ESB

It's hard to believe anyone still thinks they don't exist. It must be the ultimate self-delusion in light of the evidence. When you think of it, there's more evidence for the existence of UFOs than there is for "god".

reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 11:22 PM by yizzel

reply to post by open_eyeballs

Perhaps I was a little too literal with my definition of UFOs but even flying objects that defy conventional ways of movement may have a mundane explanation. I think too many people just want to believe in extraterrestrials so much that they don't want to explore other possibilities because that may conflict with their beliefs.

reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 11:35 PM by open_eyeballs

reply to post by yizzel

thats absolutely correct, and I agree mundane explanations could be attributed to certain U.F.O.s.

Also, it is an unfortunate consequence of the widely available information provided by the internet. People will believe anything they hear or read.

So, is it safe to say you believe all U.F.O.s can be explained with conventional explanations?

You would be the first so far.

reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 11:37 PM by TeslaandLyne

No.
But has anyone ever seen one.
Except like some metallic dual wok with a strange electrical presence
or dark shape or bright static lights.
No one can say except for a Triangle and Wing given great witness
descriptions for graphics in Unsolved Mysteries.
The ET is denied.

reply posted on 2-7-2009 @ 11:56 PM by yizzel

Originally posted by open_eyeballs
reply to post by yizzel

So, is it safe to say you believe all U.F.O.s can be explained with conventional explanations?

No I wouldn't go that far. But even unexplainable UFOs don't necessarily mean they must be ET in origin. There may be some other unknown phenomenon at work. Though I wouldn't deny the possibility that ET may be behind it either.

reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 12:03 AM by open_eyeballs

reply to post by yizzel

Ya, if you read my posts, you won't find anywhere where i claim anything to be of e.t. origin. While I do consider it a possibility, I feel theres more of a chance there being some ultra hush hush technology at play more so...

thanbks for your input though..

i still havent had anyone come in here and say flat out all U.F.O.s can be explained with conventioanl means...Again, like I stated in my OP im not surprised at that. i believe the overwhelming majority of people today find it much easier to consider alternative theories about the nature of U.F.O.s

reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 12:13 AM by zorgon

Originally posted by open_eyeballs
It seems here, that there is somewhat of a mis-perception of how many people do not "believe" U.F.O.s exist when it comes to the percieved consensus from the general public.

The premise of your question is flawed

"Does Anyone Deny the Existence of U.F.O.s?"

No one can deny the existence of Unidentified Flying Objects

What you meant to ask and what some assume you asked is not the same thing

If there was an Alien spaceship it would be an IFO, just like and airplane is an IFO

All UFO's are not Aliens... We won't know what they are until they are identified

Later Gator

reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 12:15 AM by yizzel

reply to post by open_eyeballs

Yep I agree. It's unlikely you'll find anyone that will say all UFOs can be explained with conventional means. Oh and I wasn't implying that you claimed anything about ETs. It's just that UFOs and ETs seem to get lumped together..

reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 01:01 AM by open_eyeballs

reply to post by zorgon

crack the whip...(whooopsh)you got me...But I am assuming you can get the jist though?

That being...
The idea that the majority of people these days don't write off the fact something above us is going on. And not all of it can be explained by conventional means.

Most people recognize the fact either A) there is some technology that is being deployed that is not commonly known or understood, and can defy the laws of physics at will or B)there is a chance soem sort of extra dimensional, extra terrestrial, non human intelligence, angels, demons, whatever you wish to label it force is at play.

Was that clear? Are you gettin what im gettin at there big Z?

reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 01:12 AM by JaxonRoberts

reply to post by open_eyeballs

I can't deny the existence of UFO's because I've seen one! That is unless we have a satellite that can make 90 degree turns and speed up to twice it's original speed! (Originally traveling west to east, then turned sharply to the north and doubled it's speed! Damn, goosebumps just remembering it!)

reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 03:12 AM by tim1989

UFOs as in flying saucer shaped craft that use anti-gravity technology? They absolutely exist. Some of them are our own and some are alien. Our flying saucers aren't as advanced as the aliens though. Mostly because of the complex building requirements. I've heard you need to build the craft in the vacuum of space, something to do with the nanotechnology.

After all these years, do people think we haven't made progress in our propulsion systems? Do people think the combustion engine/ turbines and fossil fuel are as advanced as we're ever going to get? Get the best scientists in the world together, with unlimited funding for 50+ years researching in secret and I'll bet you any money that you could create a anti-gravity device.

reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 05:59 AM by tristar

Originally posted by tim1989
UFOs as in flying saucer shaped craft that use anti-gravity technology? They absolutely exist. Some of them are our own and some are alien. Our flying saucers aren't as advanced as the aliens though. Mostly because of the complex building requirements. I've heard you need to build the craft in the vacuum of space, something to do with the nanotechnology.

After all these years, do people think we haven't made progress in our propulsion systems? Do people think the combustion engine/ turbines and fossil fuel are as advanced as we're ever going to get? Get the best scientists in the world together, with unlimited funding for 50+ years researching in secret and I'll bet you any money that you could create a anti-gravity device.

Perhaps a quick click should put you in the right direction. You will find other threads linked into that which will keep you sane rather than insane.

reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 10:23 AM by franspeakfree

I don't believe there is a single member here that can say with their hand on their heart that UFO'S i.e flying suacers don't exist. Whether or not they are made off this planet thats another question that has to be asked.

I am lucky to have witnessed personally a SILENT silver metallic disc hovering above a field very close to the ground.

I am 100% convinced that this was not human made and if it was what would be the purpose of keeping such a craft secret? for all these years? why would TPTB have such technology and not use it in everyday life in order to make even more money and wield even more power?

Once you (as in all) have an experience like this nothing seems to fit in to everyday life its as if you have seen something that is about 100 years in to the future? which is obviously why I am so passionate about the subject.

reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 10:32 AM by yeti101

reply to post by franspeakfree

well im one of those people. I dont believe flying saucers exist. But im always open to more evidence.

reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 10:40 AM by open_eyeballs

reply to post by yeti101

But do you recognize the fact not all U.F.O.s can be explained by conventional explanations? Considering the actual movement of some U.F.O.s and first hand testimonies captured from well documented sources.

this is the basic idea of the thread. Either you recognize there are true U.F.O.s (not speculating about the origins of said U.F.O.) or you believe everything (all aerial anmalies)can be explained with commonly known and understood technology or phenomena....

So, which side do you lie on?

As I have stated many times in this thread, i believe an overwhelming majority of public opinion believe not all U.F.O.s can be explained with conventional, commonly known means...and so far no one has come through and said, yes. all u.f.o.s can be identified and explained with conventional explanations.

I know..Im like a beating drum that never changes tune...

[edit on 3-7-2009 by open_eyeballs]

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^