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.

 

"I know what I saw"---Full video Embed(REMOVED)

page: 8
130
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Pathos, it saddens me to see you getting piled on here, by the MegaChurch of TrueBeeleever in the SpaceBrothers. I'm about ready (if already so) to take a long if permanent vacation from ATS, as it seems nearly null and void of critical scientific thinking and rational civilised dialog, much less disagreement. All these wide-eyed children must not be knowleagable of the history of ufology. I would bet my next year's entire money, that no one here has read any of Jacques Vallee's books. They probably don't know John Keel from Spaceship Ruthie. And have any of you ever heard of James Moseley or Karl Pflock? LIKELY NOT. Too much hard work, there.
I'm also willing to bet that ATS is --largely-- overrun with teenagers (young boys) and those under 21. I can tell, by a lot of the posts. Thats fine. But it keeps you all from educating yourselves with the schollarly works about the history of the ufo phenomen.
I have been into this ufo subject since 1978, after a series of my own ufo sightings, preceding a sighting of the classic men-in-black high strangeness and other odd paranormal like goings on. But D***, I MISS Phillip Klass. (Oh, who is that, you ask? Well, Uh, er....) Oh never mind.




posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by simonecharisse
I'm also willing to bet that ATS is --largely-- overrun with teenagers (young boys) and those under 21. I can tell, by a lot of the posts.



by the MegaChurch of TrueBeeleever in the SpaceBrothers.



All these wide-eyed children


And resorting to name calling and ad hominem attacks is very mature. Right.



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Pathos
 



As a result, the easiest thing to do with UFO evidence is to ignore it, which is what most people do. Much harder is to confront it honestly, whether this means accepting or debunking it. That is, accepting into one's worldview something as "far out" as extraterrestrials is not easy for many people, especially when one's official culture finds little more than ridicule in the subject.
But honest debunking is very, very difficult, considering the compelling nature of so many UFO cases. Personally, I am close to the position that it is impossible to do this honestly, but will leave the benefit of the doubt to some exceptional, as yet unfound, individual.

The problem with nearly all skeptical arguments against alien visitation is that, quite simply, they fail to look at the UFO evidence. They all sound great in theory, but fall apart when presented with a few good reports. In the end, skeptics are forced to fall back upon their most often-used weapon: claiming a UFO event was a hoax.

keyholepublishing.com...



Please tell me how you have arrived at the conclusion that all these incidents and reports involve man-made aircraft:


The RB-47 Incident:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


The Portage County Incident:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


The Coyne Incident:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


The Tehran UFO Incident:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


The Colares Incident:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Flight JAL 1628 Incident:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


The Gosford Incident:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


The Lakenheath Incident:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


The Redmond Oregon Incident:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Flight N3808H Incident:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Reports from ICBM sites and Nuclear Weapons Storage Areas
www.nicap.org...


Specific Police reports:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Specific Pilot reports:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by simonecharisse
 


Bye bye... try using paragraphs sometime as well. it is, after all, only polite..

Before you go just remember this. Science never got anywhere without people taking risks and being outcasts for daring to suggest there was another way of seeing things. testing those hypotheses and seeing if they held water..

The truth is, after 60 years of objects being sighted, displaying the same, or similar, maneouvering characteristic what are the chances that they are actually man made, but not one person has ever come forward to say...They are built by...?

20 years ago, if you had suggested that, the first extra solar planets to be discovered, would be a pair of them orbiting a Pulsar star. You'd have been carted off in a straight jacket. However, there they are.

I'd hazard a guess that, the chances of fonding a planet orbiting a Pulsar were considerably less than most people though the chances we have been visited by beings from another world are.

there is a world of difference between saying. I beleive there is a phenomenon that is very real behind the reports of UFOs and i believe we are being visited by creatures from another part of our Universe.

For instance, whio is to say that. Millions of years ago some advanced civilsation sent out ships to the farthest parts of this galaxy that were robot driven and self repairing and upgrading, using nano technology. That, their mission was to search for signs of life, then catalogue and observe it wherever it was found.?
In other words we have met their technology, but not them? It's a perfectly feasible scenario. We might actually never meet them, their civilisation, might be, long dead by now bu their technology keeps merrily running along doing the job it was designed to.

Take string theory, how it postulates that we actually inhabit a multiverse, thus explaining why gravity is the weakest of the forces. There could be aliens popping in and out of our universe like we take a bus. Again a theory that is now mainstream that was, just 30 years ago liable to see you sectioned.

Scientists use to wonder what the chances of life elsewhere was> Now the wonder what the chances are there isn't life elsewhere, all in the space of 2 decades.

That's not to say they have visited us, but anyone who, outright, denies the possibility, nowadays, is actually the person who is, increasingly seen to be, pedalling pseudo science.





[edit on 7-10-2009 by FireMoon]

[edit on 7-10-2009 by FireMoon]



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   
great documentary .. congrats



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 



Take string theory, how it postulates that we actually inhabit a multiverse, thus explaining why gravity is the weakest of the forces. There could be aliens popping in and out of our universe like we take a bus. Again a theory that is now mainstream that was, just 30 years ago liable to see you sectioned.


no unfortunately string theory states matter cannot transfer from one universe to another. It breaks the theory, you would be saying string theory is wrong and need a completely new theory to replace it.



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by yeti101
 


Who said it was matter? You assume that is the only way to travel? Anyone who has done psycho-reactive drugs/ deep meditation exercises knows all about that. Hence, we see they want to us to see?



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by yeti101
 


Yeti -I'd be interested to hear what you think the nature of the object involved in the Tehran case actualy was?

Testimony from by Pilot Parvis Jafari at 05:00



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Thanks DD for the post. I have been eagerly awaiting its release.

Ugggghhhgg!!!!!!
I find it so frustrating when so many ATS resident "expert" analyzers and skeptics throw around their reasons why they believe "there is nothing there." Things like senility in the elderly, or gold diggers, fame seekers and book sellers, or how about the always plausible CGI. And then a dose of "why always too blurry pictures" , water drops, confabulation, shadows, camera anomaly, delusions, and so many other explanations that seem so ridiculous when in the face of so many compelling cases??

My frustration is taken a step further when these critiques are adamantly stated and minds are made up after an hour of watching, when no credence or credit is given to the years of hard work of the researchers. Wide strokes paint every film maker or ufologist as having other agendas.
There is a line of reasoning that many ardent scientists take that is so over the top negative, so objective that it is subjectively subversive to the undiscovered "what if" possibility. These skeptics are like insurance companies who say they got your back but reject all of the claims both good and bad.

You can't theorize away these cases. They are far too compelling.
When you have a collective of astronauts, Generals, pilots, radar readings, thousands of mass witnesses, and high resolution photos how can one be seriously objective and not say yeah maybe.

When these highly trained and experienced professionals who have held positions of Text privilege come out, take risks and say "Yes", you can't just say, " Ahh, No, I don't think so, he sounds this or is delusional like that", and actually think we will believe you.

All of us here are so far removed from the realities that these witnesses have experienced in their past professional positions that we can't come close to accuracy when saying yes or no. Fox chose only the most compelling and heavily weighted cases. The collective intelligence, experience, and evidence with these cases are difficult to deny. Anything less seems laughable, almost like that skeptic who Larry King always has on James MacGayhe. In the face of truly great evidence he explains it all away by saying culture of fantasy and science fiction. What about his culture of ignorance, obstinacy and stupidity? Just ridiculous.

If we all followed these lines of reasoning, we couldn't safely say or believe we each have a pair of eyes. After all any one person can't truly see their eyes, only see through them. I can just hear them saying, "Ahh, no those aren't real eyes, that's CGI or shadows, maybe water drops, those can't be real eyes its confabulation and delusions of vision. Ophthalmologist or not I can't take your word for it. You're just trying to make money off the myth that humans might, just might have eyes. That's just an interpretation of what eyes might look like. As much as I would like to take your word for it I can't accept a thousand witness assurances that I have eyes, I still can't accept that I have eyes. Don't hand me a reproduction reverse mirror reflection image, it's not accurate only a cheap trick hoax, not my real eyes at all."

We have eyes and we have ufo's

We also have governments undermining, disinfo distracting, and ufo's that interfere with our technologies and our physics paradigm.

How many mile wide boomerang silent floating to light speed ships do you think the military has in it's arsenal??



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by simonecharisse
 


The guy has a point.

Although I might be one of these "wide-eyed "children", I like to maintain some sort of critical thinking towards this phenomenon. I still agree with the Brit DOD researcher, that probably 5% of these cases are real. Most of them just misinterpretations and hoaxes.

On the other hand it would be just stupid to throw away these evidences of the real cases.

It's actually very cool that we have so many "wide-eyed children"



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Lets put this in perspective... The guy mentions 25,000 reports post Blue book over a period of however long. That's just the USA.. if we say 50% of sightings are reported and in my experience the more extreme the experience, the less likely people are to report it, that means 50,000 sightings. So 5 % is something like 2,500 without an obvious prosaic explanation. So say 50% of them can be explained by natural occurrences that leaves 1250..

That 1250 is still a huge figure and that's in the USA alone. Put it another way, how many people do you know have said they have seen a UFO? Then how many people, alive right now, have seen have ever seen a Tiger in the wild?

It, sort of, puts it into proportion, the fact is, there are, a relatively huge number of, genuinely unknown, sightings world wide.

That's not saying they are ET, but those who deny their is a substantial data base are just not being honest.



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by sparrowstailHow many mile wide boomerang silent floating to light speed ships do you think the military has in it's arsenal??


0


I'd be willing to bet my life savings. Some UFOs like the ones that are a mile wide simply defy logic and our current understanding of physics until proven otherwise.



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tryptych
The guy has a point.


Which is? That there's a lot of true believers here? Yes, there are.

That sometimes there's no "critical scientific thinking" or "rational civilized dialog"? Yes, sometimes.

But simonecharisse is complaining about this regarding people "piling on" Pathos in this thread. Read the thread and check the responses to Pathos and see if he's accusation is warranted.

He then brings up a name like Philip Klass, one of the most known pseudoskeptics. A guy who, almost invariably, would dismiss everything as a hoax or some misidentification without actually backing it up, and frequently lacking any scientific reasoning in his own conclusions.

I understand simon's frustration, I do. I frequently feel frustrated when faced with some of the crap that goes on here and in the UFO field in general. In this particular situation, simon is wrong in his assessment.



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ufo reality
I'd be willing to bet my life savings. Some UFOs like the ones that are a mile wide simply defy logic and our current understanding of physics until proven otherwise.


Interesting as it may be, and I agree with you that it is, it's still a long way from being proven that it was an alien craft.

I think some people should do a better job of holding judgment. It's ok to simply say that it's interesting and as of now it is unknown. Because let's face it, we can and might suspect the origin of it, but bottom line is we don't know.

Not directed at you in particular



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by sparrowstail

You can't theorize away these cases. They are far too compelling.


Compelling does not equal true. Compelling equals dramatic.

I could whip up some random hoax in ten minutes, put a creepy musical track and write up a schlocky introduction, then at the end put "Alien? You decide." and get 80% of the people on these boards to eat it up.

I agree that Fox chose some very good cases, but the problem I have is that while they're very "compelling" and they've yet to be officially debunked, they don't prove anything alien.



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by EsSeeEye
the problem I have is that while they're very "compelling" and they've yet to be officially debunked, they don't prove anything alien.


I agree. But knowing all those things, that they're compelling and intriguing, don't you think cases such as those deserve at least an investigation? Which is something the Government refuses to, at least publicly, admit to do.



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by converge
 


Forget the government. Even if they did investigate the cases, do you think anybody would believe the outcome unless it was "Yep, aliens exist! Here's one right here!"

We hold no power over the government's decision to investigate (or not) these or any other cases, but the government also has no power to stop us from investigating them. Do we just sit on our hands and wait for disclosure that may or may not exist, from an entity that may or may not care to give it to us?

Yeah, that requires people actually work for it. It would require people to use their own resources, knowledge, time, and effort. Things like ATS are a great start, as it gets others involved, but that's not enough. I think people around here (especially the blind, doe-eyed believers) need to realize that unless they do it, it won't be done.

That said, good luck. The believers spend all their time bagging on the very people that are helping them cut out the chaff to help them find their jewels. It would require people working together and caring enough about the subject to take off the rose-colored glasses and look at things with a realistic, critical eye.

[edit on 7-10-2009 by EsSeeEye]



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   
The reason why James Fox made this documentary is because he did his homework. Anyone else who actually does the homework has no other choice but to come to similar conclusions. It really is as simple as that, and for anyone doubting the information in the video, you haven't really gone deep enough into the matter to even formulate an educated opinion. What I'm trying to say is, there isn't a question of reality to the subject anymore. Educated researchers into the subject already know this. It's a question of, when are you going to accept it, and what are you going to do about it?



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by EsSeeEye
Forget the government. Even if they did investigate the cases, do you think anybody would believe the outcome unless it was "Yep, aliens exist! Here's one right here!"


I'm proposing this not necessarily because I would believe a Governmental investigation per se, but getting the Government publicly investigating this would send the message to everyone, including the scientific community and academia, that UFOs were worthy of investigation.

That's why they shut down Project Blue Book. The Government understood that investigating UFOs, whether pretending or not, would give the impression that there was something to it and it was OK to talk about it.

Public Government involvement would also help to change mentalities and likely, eventually, end the ridicule factor that probably prevents many people, with either information or new perspectives and ideas, of getting involved.

Once the mood of the public changes a lot could be accomplished. Congressional hearings for example. And when you have hearings with subpoena power, you'll get some information.



posted on Oct, 7 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by EsSeeEye

Originally posted by sparrowstail

You can't theorize away these cases. They are far too compelling.


Compelling does not equal true. Compelling equals dramatic.

I could whip up some random hoax in ten minutes, put a creepy musical track and write up a schlocky introduction, then at the end put "Alien? You decide." and get 80% of the people on these boards to eat it up.

I agree that Fox chose some very good cases, but the problem I have is that while they're very "compelling" and they've yet to be officially debunked, they don't prove anything alien.


He never once said or implied that all the sightings were "alien". He talked about both alien AND secret military craft and asked people what they believed them to be.

Also, I highly doubt 80% of ATS would "eat up" any hoax you made. You think too highly of yourself and underestimate the "blind believers" (as you call them) of ATS. The UFO in Spain thread would prove you wrong on your little theory here. Take a look at that and how many people called that a hoax compared to how many thought it was real.

Can't you make a single post without calling anyone a "blind believer"?

And people wonder why some believers get really sick of the skeptics.


[edit on 7-10-2009 by nightmare_david]



new topics

top topics



 
130
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join