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.
Where is a good source for information on UFO's
page: 1share:
I do not think that it is far fetched to believe that there is life on other planets and that some of that life may be intelligent. There are
literally billions of stars, most of which have planets, and at least some of which can support life as we know it or may not know it. However, much
of the information about UFO's and aliens is pure garbage. Even the biggest believers have to admit that there are a lot of kooks, frauds, and
charlatans in the believer tent.
Is there a good source for information about UFO's. I would be interested in one that is highly critical of all UFO sightings and willing to debunk a large fraction of them as a large fraction of them are either frauds, can be explained as resulting from earthly phenomenon like aircraft or weather balloons, or made by people with low credibility.
Thanks for the help.
Is there a good source for information about UFO's. I would be interested in one that is highly critical of all UFO sightings and willing to debunk a large fraction of them as a large fraction of them are either frauds, can be explained as resulting from earthly phenomenon like aircraft or weather balloons, or made by people with low credibility.
Thanks for the help.
Clearly, you have aready found the answer to your question by coming to ATS. You will not find a better source for UFO reports and debunkings.
Always remember that there is a vast gap between this premise and the theory that UFO's are piloted by ETs.
Yes, we know for a fact that there are misperceptions, fraunds, and delusions. This has been proven. It has not been proven that ETs exist let alone that they pilot UFOs. Without definite confirmation one way the other, then, one can only conclude that any UFO is an instance of the former, and that the latter cannot be more likely. The extraordinary claim that UFOs are piloted by ETs requires extraordinary evidence. That evidence has yet to be offered.
Just about every notable/important UFO case has been discussed on ATS, and new videos and reports come up constantly. Read the comments; people take a shot at debunking everything. The reason that the debate continues, however, is that there isn't a satisfactory explanation for everything. There are genuine UFOs, in the sense that they are an unidentified aerial phenomenon which resists explanation by an expert who has analyzed all available data. These are the cases that keep this area of discussion alive, and are the most interesting.
[edit on 2/13/10 by OnceReturned]
Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
I do not think that it is far fetched to believe that there is life on other planets and that some of that life may be intelligent. There are literally billions of stars, most of which have planets, and at least some of which can support life as we know it or may not know it.
Always remember that there is a vast gap between this premise and the theory that UFO's are piloted by ETs.
However, much of the information about UFO's and aliens is pure garbage. Even the biggest believers have to admit that there are a lot of kooks, frauds, and charlatans in the believer tent.
Yes, we know for a fact that there are misperceptions, fraunds, and delusions. This has been proven. It has not been proven that ETs exist let alone that they pilot UFOs. Without definite confirmation one way the other, then, one can only conclude that any UFO is an instance of the former, and that the latter cannot be more likely. The extraordinary claim that UFOs are piloted by ETs requires extraordinary evidence. That evidence has yet to be offered.
Is there a good source for information about UFO's. I would be interested in one that is highly critical of all UFO sightings and willing to debunk a large fraction of them as a large fraction of them are either frauds, can be explained as resulting from earthly phenomenon like aircraft or weather balloons, or made by people with low credibility.
Just about every notable/important UFO case has been discussed on ATS, and new videos and reports come up constantly. Read the comments; people take a shot at debunking everything. The reason that the debate continues, however, is that there isn't a satisfactory explanation for everything. There are genuine UFOs, in the sense that they are an unidentified aerial phenomenon which resists explanation by an expert who has analyzed all available data. These are the cases that keep this area of discussion alive, and are the most interesting.
[edit on 2/13/10 by OnceReturned]
There is no actual good research definitely proving the existence of alien life but some cool websites are the seti institue website.
Bluebookarchive.org is a fun one also. Heavens-above.com is a good site for tracking satellites to avoid confusion and mix up claiming you saw a ufo
or anything, if you are ever looking. Those are all I can think of off the top of my head. I recently a couple months ago decided to throw away my
true belief in aliens and just go back to thinking it is fun. But do enjoy your time researching. Good luck and have fun.
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
go to this sites home page theree should be a thread first on the list first one being advertised called mysterious and scariest abductions i've got some good vids posted in there and if u want more tell to post more in that thread!
go to this sites home page theree should be a thread first on the list first one being advertised called mysterious and scariest abductions i've got some good vids posted in there and if u want more tell to post more in that thread!
Originally posted by jkrog08
I would personally seriously start here:
The ATS UFO/Alien Chronological Thread Directory
Shameless plugging of your own thread
Oh wait...my threads are included on that
For historical review of UFO presence on Earth, I like this website:
UFO Evidence
...which should bring you up to speed on the background of UFO sightings in the modern world.
Another site I like is:
UFO Casebook
...which keeps you rather abreast of ongoing UFO sightings.
These two sites are fairly unbiased, compared to the foaming UFO sites and the hypercritical skeptic sites, neither of which really add anything to the debate except for negativity, venom and narrow-mindedness.
— Doc Velocity
UFO Evidence
...which should bring you up to speed on the background of UFO sightings in the modern world.
Another site I like is:
UFO Casebook
...which keeps you rather abreast of ongoing UFO sightings.
These two sites are fairly unbiased, compared to the foaming UFO sites and the hypercritical skeptic sites, neither of which really add anything to the debate except for negativity, venom and narrow-mindedness.
— Doc Velocity
Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Is there a good source for information about UFO's. I would be interested in one that is highly critical of all UFO sightings and willing to debunk a large fraction of them as a large fraction of them are either frauds, can be explained as resulting from earthly phenomenon like aircraft or weather balloons, or made by people with low credibility.
Well this is ATS so of course my favorite resource is this:
The ATS UFO/Alien Chronological Thread Directory
It may be one of the best UFO resources on the net. I see Jkrog already posted it while I was typing it, but it's worth repeating. The OP of cases in that list usually states the facts of the case, then the comments come from both believers and skeptics so you can weigh all the comments yourself.
If you want a particularly skeptical view, there are several sites, but I've never found one good comprehensive site with a skeptical view of all the major cases.
One site that discusses a limited number of cases is www.debunker.com... so with a domain name like debunker how can it not be skeptical?
Another site you may want to check out is www.caelestia.be...
CAELESTIA sees it as one of its major tasks to find out to which extent reports of unidentified sky phenomena can be explained by natural causes and man-made objects. We think that both the scientific community and serious UFO investigators can benefit from such an approach.
Another site that may interest you is this one:
www.ufowatchdog.com...
They have a hall of shame and a hall of fame. People on the hall of shame, are unreliable sources.
But I don't necessarily trust everything said by everybody on the hall of fame. For example, I like Stanton Friedman, but I think he's wrong about some things.
And last and perhaps least, I plug my own thread: The Oldfield UFO Film - Evidence that some UFOs are mirages which only gives a couple examples.
It would be nice if there was a site that had as many UFO cases explained as possible, but then you have to worry about falling into the Phil Klass or Steuart Campbell trap of saying every UFO can be explained, not all of them can be or have been explained.
When someone reports a fuzzy dot in the sky, I may not know what it is, but I don't get too excited about it. But there are a few UFO cases that really puzzle me, where I will probably never know the true explanation, and they remain "unidentified". But many have been identified, like the video of flares in Phoenix for example.
[edit on 13-2-2010 by Arbitrageur]
Take a look at Project Blue Book Special Report #14. This was a study commissioned by the U.S. Air Force in 1955 and carried out by the Battelle
Memorial Institute.
www.ufocasebook.com...
Any of the big studies you look at come to about the same conclusions: Anywhere between 80% and 95% of reports are typically found to have conventional or natural explanations. Somewhere between 5% and 20% are found to have no conventional explanation. Most of the studies I've looked at or read about tend to agree that hoaxes and frauds constitute a very small percentage of UFO reports, usually 1-2%.
The Battelle study ended up with about 21% of reports categorized as "unknown" - meaning that the appearance and maneuvers of the object reported could not be fitted to the pattern of any known object of phenomenon.
Another interesting fact about Special Report #14 is that UFO reports that were considered to be of "excellent" quality - meaning those from the most reliable witnesses, containing the greatest amount of information and displaying highest degree of internal consistency - were significantly more likely to be categorized as "unknown" than were reports deemed to be of "poor" quality or the total body of reports taken as a whole.
To put it another way, while 21% of all the reports studied were declared "unknown," if you look only at the reports in the "excellent" category, you find that 33% of those reports are "unknown."
Additionally, reports that did not contain enough information to allow investigators to identify the object were not put into the "unknown" category, but were instead relegated to a separate category labeled "insufficient information."
The study also utilized an analytical tool called the "chi square test" which determines "the independence of two criteria of classification of qualitative data." I'm not a statistical expert, so I don't claim to understand the exact ins and outs of this test. But as I understand it, the test determines the statistical probability that two categories are qualitatively similar; in this study, it was used essentially to determine whether the objects in the "unknown" category, as a whole, were likely to simply be "unidentified knowns." The probability of this turned out to be less than 1%; in other words, the unknowns - as a group - were qualititively different than the knowns.
I'm always glad to find people who know little about this topic beginning to take an interest. You are right about one thing, there is a lot of garbage out there associated with UFOs. It's all about using common sense and logic to sift the wheat from the chaff.
Here's some stuff to get you started:
The Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects, held in 1968 by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science and Astronautics.
www.ncas.org...
If you read nothing else from these procedings, read the tesimony of James McDonald.
The UFO Evidence, published in 1964 by the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena.
www.nicap.org...
NICAP was one of the big civilian investigatory bodies of UFO reports during the 1950s and 1960s. This publication is essentially the "unknowns" from their files.
And, if you are willing to read a book on the subject, read "The UFO Controversy in America" by David Jacobs. This is a great and relatively objective history of the phenomenon written by a professor at Temple University.
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1/186-7096547-4135516?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1266124450&sr=1-1
Best of luck.
www.ufocasebook.com...
Any of the big studies you look at come to about the same conclusions: Anywhere between 80% and 95% of reports are typically found to have conventional or natural explanations. Somewhere between 5% and 20% are found to have no conventional explanation. Most of the studies I've looked at or read about tend to agree that hoaxes and frauds constitute a very small percentage of UFO reports, usually 1-2%.
The Battelle study ended up with about 21% of reports categorized as "unknown" - meaning that the appearance and maneuvers of the object reported could not be fitted to the pattern of any known object of phenomenon.
Another interesting fact about Special Report #14 is that UFO reports that were considered to be of "excellent" quality - meaning those from the most reliable witnesses, containing the greatest amount of information and displaying highest degree of internal consistency - were significantly more likely to be categorized as "unknown" than were reports deemed to be of "poor" quality or the total body of reports taken as a whole.
To put it another way, while 21% of all the reports studied were declared "unknown," if you look only at the reports in the "excellent" category, you find that 33% of those reports are "unknown."
Additionally, reports that did not contain enough information to allow investigators to identify the object were not put into the "unknown" category, but were instead relegated to a separate category labeled "insufficient information."
The study also utilized an analytical tool called the "chi square test" which determines "the independence of two criteria of classification of qualitative data." I'm not a statistical expert, so I don't claim to understand the exact ins and outs of this test. But as I understand it, the test determines the statistical probability that two categories are qualitatively similar; in this study, it was used essentially to determine whether the objects in the "unknown" category, as a whole, were likely to simply be "unidentified knowns." The probability of this turned out to be less than 1%; in other words, the unknowns - as a group - were qualititively different than the knowns.
I'm always glad to find people who know little about this topic beginning to take an interest. You are right about one thing, there is a lot of garbage out there associated with UFOs. It's all about using common sense and logic to sift the wheat from the chaff.
Here's some stuff to get you started:
The Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects, held in 1968 by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science and Astronautics.
www.ncas.org...
If you read nothing else from these procedings, read the tesimony of James McDonald.
The UFO Evidence, published in 1964 by the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena.
www.nicap.org...
NICAP was one of the big civilian investigatory bodies of UFO reports during the 1950s and 1960s. This publication is essentially the "unknowns" from their files.
And, if you are willing to read a book on the subject, read "The UFO Controversy in America" by David Jacobs. This is a great and relatively objective history of the phenomenon written by a professor at Temple University.
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1/186-7096547-4135516?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1266124450&sr=1-1
Best of luck.
Just google John Lear and Steven M Greer! The latter will even tell you about the Lilliputian aliens he often meets! And JL will give
you complete details of the 'soul collectors' constructed on the Moon by them aliens! (Achtung!! Your soul's on the line too! )
Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Just google John Lear and Steven M Greer!
Yes they are both on the UFOwatchdog "Hall of Shame" list I mentioned. But in fairness, so is pseudoskeptic Phillip Klass who thought every UFO can be explained.
Originally posted by jkrog08
I would personally seriously start here:
The ATS UFO/Alien Chronological Thread Directory
Hey! You forgot about the March 30, 1990 Belgium Triangle Starship
seen by thousands of people. The pic everyone sees was actually
taken April 4, 1990. The F-16s looked like toys compared to the
Triangle Starship.
or if you're lazy like me and want info spoon-fed to you can start here...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
then you can start researching the interesting (to you) cases...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
then you can start researching the interesting (to you) cases...
We live in an interesting time and we're faced with an interesting challenge. Over here we have scientists telling us that they're
99.99% certain that Life exists elsewhere in the Universe, and that a good fraction of it could exist contemporaneous with us and a good fraction of
that may even be intelligent!
Hey, even by the Drake Equation, there are supposed to be about a thousand intelligent species out there in our galaxy alone, alive right now.
So, Science and scientists are pretty much convinced that Life and even intelligent Life exists elsewhere in this Universe.
ON THE OTHER HAND, most scientists are not convinced that we have ever been visited by offworld intelligence. Scientists are among the hardest skeptics who still believe.
Our challenge is to somehow draw a correlation between Science's 99% certainty of Life in the Universe and the 100% certainty of UFO sightings. Because these two things should go together, if they're real.
Unfortunately, the UFO Believers out there tend to make this extraordinary jump, a leap of reasoning from "Honey, I saw a glowing disc in the sky" to "Honey, I saw an extraterrestrial spaceship in the sky".
See, man, that is a HUUUUUUUGE leap of reasoning, based on no evidence, no proof whatsoever.
So, you see that Science has to acknowledge the UFO phenomena here on Earth — it's not 100% fake. Can't be, because I've seen the things, and I can be just as skeptical as anyone. These things certainly exist, but the real question is WTF are they?
If they belong to us, that's great, I'm glad to hear it. But if they belong to somebody else — an extraterrestrial intelligence — we need to know for our security as well as peace of mind, yes?
Frankly, the likelihood of a separate, intelligent species even approximating our own intelligence is very low. If we encounter a spacefaring species, they're going to be a million years ahead of us, right? No question. That's IF we ever encounter a spacefaring species.
Now, I'm sure that we are going to find life all over our solar system. Microbial life, maybe even a few coelenterates and echinoderms or whatever passes for jellyfish and starfish on Europa. We ARE going to find other Life in this solar system.
But intelligent life? No. Nothing like us. Nothing like even a cat or a mouse out there in local space.
What we need to focus on is communicating with the Life that we KNOW exists on Earth. This is an unparalleled opportunity to build up our skills for communicating with "aliens" eventually.
I mean, if we can learn how to converse with a centipede, we'll have a better chance of communicating with an alien species. It's gotta be a learning experience.
— Doc Velocity
[edit on 2/14/2010 by Doc Velocity]
Hey, even by the Drake Equation, there are supposed to be about a thousand intelligent species out there in our galaxy alone, alive right now.
So, Science and scientists are pretty much convinced that Life and even intelligent Life exists elsewhere in this Universe.
ON THE OTHER HAND, most scientists are not convinced that we have ever been visited by offworld intelligence. Scientists are among the hardest skeptics who still believe.
Our challenge is to somehow draw a correlation between Science's 99% certainty of Life in the Universe and the 100% certainty of UFO sightings. Because these two things should go together, if they're real.
Unfortunately, the UFO Believers out there tend to make this extraordinary jump, a leap of reasoning from "Honey, I saw a glowing disc in the sky" to "Honey, I saw an extraterrestrial spaceship in the sky".
See, man, that is a HUUUUUUUGE leap of reasoning, based on no evidence, no proof whatsoever.
So, you see that Science has to acknowledge the UFO phenomena here on Earth — it's not 100% fake. Can't be, because I've seen the things, and I can be just as skeptical as anyone. These things certainly exist, but the real question is WTF are they?
If they belong to us, that's great, I'm glad to hear it. But if they belong to somebody else — an extraterrestrial intelligence — we need to know for our security as well as peace of mind, yes?
Frankly, the likelihood of a separate, intelligent species even approximating our own intelligence is very low. If we encounter a spacefaring species, they're going to be a million years ahead of us, right? No question. That's IF we ever encounter a spacefaring species.
Now, I'm sure that we are going to find life all over our solar system. Microbial life, maybe even a few coelenterates and echinoderms or whatever passes for jellyfish and starfish on Europa. We ARE going to find other Life in this solar system.
But intelligent life? No. Nothing like us. Nothing like even a cat or a mouse out there in local space.
What we need to focus on is communicating with the Life that we KNOW exists on Earth. This is an unparalleled opportunity to build up our skills for communicating with "aliens" eventually.
I mean, if we can learn how to converse with a centipede, we'll have a better chance of communicating with an alien species. It's gotta be a learning experience.
— Doc Velocity
[edit on 2/14/2010 by Doc Velocity]
Looking for credible UFO-information sources is a minefield. Over the years, I've narrowed it down to a few that provide documents, images (when
available) and fairly objective discussion. One of them has been linked already, but it really is an excellent site...
Ufologie.net...the best site imo Reliable research, document archives, opinion pieces by credible experts. The site is the opposite of the flashy, ad-infested UFO sites that peddle BS and nonsense. It's 5-Star
UFO Evidence Very much the same tone and style as Ufologie. If there's a hoaxy or BS case on this site, I haven't found it yet. It's 5-Star
The Paracast Show Archives (required listening!) Every major UFO and paranormal researcher alive has been interviewed on the Paracast by Gene Steinberg and David Biedny. 2 hours per show. The credible guys...Knapp, Warren, Randle, Friedman, Redfern, Ecker, Maccabee etc. bring the subject to life. It's like a college course in Ufology! The disreputable guys...Greer, Hoagland, Bill Knell, Dr Leir get a rough ride and their BS is held to account. Lloyd Pye comes unstuck.
Flying Saucery Hardly anyone knows about this one. It's tough reading for believers because the guy dissects some popular cases. It's a good source of critical analysis and official documents to support his arguments. He also gets off his ass and interviews witnesses. On the skeptical spectrum...he's further to the right than I am.
Reality Uncovered: A look into UFO conspiracies These guys should be required reading. Their research is high-quality and spans Europe and USA. Whether people like or not...a lot of what we believe in Ufology has been manufactured by ex-CIA, shady guys and hoaxers with agency connections. Think Richard Doty.
PoliceUFO (Australia) and Prufo (UK Police UFO Sightings) Two good sites that focus on UFO sightings by Police Officers. Some interesting accounts in these sites.
UFO Afrinews (Cynthia Hind) The only UFO resource that has archived 22 years of African UFO stories and events. 22 pdf files compiled and released by Cynthia Hind before she died. It's a labour of love site and regrettably underused by UFO fans.
Water UFO (underwater/ocean sightings) Not an attractive site...very basic. Despite this, there are plenty of credible cases on there.
National Security Agency An archive of declassified UFO files from our friendly neighbourhood spooks.
National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena One of the most credible UFO researchers IMO....Dr Richard Haines. A mind like a bear trap. This a collection of pilot and aviation UFO sightings. Some of the analyses are what the subject should be built on. My all-time favourite Paracast interview with him...
Is that enough to going on with?
Ufologie.net...the best site imo Reliable research, document archives, opinion pieces by credible experts. The site is the opposite of the flashy, ad-infested UFO sites that peddle BS and nonsense. It's 5-Star
UFO Evidence Very much the same tone and style as Ufologie. If there's a hoaxy or BS case on this site, I haven't found it yet. It's 5-Star
The Paracast Show Archives (required listening!) Every major UFO and paranormal researcher alive has been interviewed on the Paracast by Gene Steinberg and David Biedny. 2 hours per show. The credible guys...Knapp, Warren, Randle, Friedman, Redfern, Ecker, Maccabee etc. bring the subject to life. It's like a college course in Ufology! The disreputable guys...Greer, Hoagland, Bill Knell, Dr Leir get a rough ride and their BS is held to account. Lloyd Pye comes unstuck.
Flying Saucery Hardly anyone knows about this one. It's tough reading for believers because the guy dissects some popular cases. It's a good source of critical analysis and official documents to support his arguments. He also gets off his ass and interviews witnesses. On the skeptical spectrum...he's further to the right than I am.
Reality Uncovered: A look into UFO conspiracies These guys should be required reading. Their research is high-quality and spans Europe and USA. Whether people like or not...a lot of what we believe in Ufology has been manufactured by ex-CIA, shady guys and hoaxers with agency connections. Think Richard Doty.
PoliceUFO (Australia) and Prufo (UK Police UFO Sightings) Two good sites that focus on UFO sightings by Police Officers. Some interesting accounts in these sites.
UFO Afrinews (Cynthia Hind) The only UFO resource that has archived 22 years of African UFO stories and events. 22 pdf files compiled and released by Cynthia Hind before she died. It's a labour of love site and regrettably underused by UFO fans.
Water UFO (underwater/ocean sightings) Not an attractive site...very basic. Despite this, there are plenty of credible cases on there.
National Security Agency An archive of declassified UFO files from our friendly neighbourhood spooks.
National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena One of the most credible UFO researchers IMO....Dr Richard Haines. A mind like a bear trap. This a collection of pilot and aviation UFO sightings. Some of the analyses are what the subject should be built on. My all-time favourite Paracast interview with him...
Paracast
April 5, 2009 — Dr. Richard F. Haines
Dr. Richard F. Haines, Chief Scientist for the National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena (NARCAP), speaks at length about airline sightings, airline safety, and his extensive research into these strange aerial mysteries.
Is that enough to going on with?
reply to post by seangkt
SETI is the type of source I am looking for. SETI is affiliated with UC Berkeley, which is one of the best research universities in the world. Unfortunately, the SETI people are only looking for broadcast signals and are not studying UFO's. I was wondering if there was some sort of institute that was part of, or was affiliated with a reputable research institute. I do not think it is foolish to think MIT, Caltech, Harvard, Cambridge, or Oxford might fund one chair to study UFO's.
SETI is the type of source I am looking for. SETI is affiliated with UC Berkeley, which is one of the best research universities in the world. Unfortunately, the SETI people are only looking for broadcast signals and are not studying UFO's. I was wondering if there was some sort of institute that was part of, or was affiliated with a reputable research institute. I do not think it is foolish to think MIT, Caltech, Harvard, Cambridge, or Oxford might fund one chair to study UFO's.
reply to post by Eurisko2012
Yea, that is because there hasn't been an in-depth thread made on the incident yet. Here is some external links to the case though:
www.ufologie.net...
www.ufoevidence.org...
Yea, that is because there hasn't been an in-depth thread made on the incident yet. Here is some external links to the case though:
www.ufologie.net...
www.ufoevidence.org...
reply to post by seangkt
eh?you know the us government has gone out on live tv and informed that ufos and such are 100%real right
eh?you know the us government has gone out on live tv and informed that ufos and such are 100%real right
new topics
-
Who guards the guards
US Political Madness: 1 hours ago -
Has Tesla manipulated data logs to cover up auto pilot crash?
Automotive Discussion: 3 hours ago -
whistleblower Captain Bill Uhouse on the Kingman UFO recovery
Aliens and UFOs: 8 hours ago -
1980s Arcade
General Chit Chat: 10 hours ago -
Deadpool and Wolverine
Movies: 11 hours ago
top topics
-
Lawsuit Seeks to ‘Ban the Jab’ in Florida
Diseases and Pandemics: 15 hours ago, 20 flags -
Starburst galaxy M82 - Webb Vs Hubble
Space Exploration: 17 hours ago, 13 flags -
CIA botched its handling of sexual assault allegations, House intel report says
Breaking Alternative News: 13 hours ago, 8 flags -
whistleblower Captain Bill Uhouse on the Kingman UFO recovery
Aliens and UFOs: 8 hours ago, 7 flags -
Deadpool and Wolverine
Movies: 11 hours ago, 4 flags -
1980s Arcade
General Chit Chat: 10 hours ago, 4 flags -
Teenager makes chess history becoming the youngest challenger for the world championship crown
Other Current Events: 12 hours ago, 3 flags -
Who guards the guards
US Political Madness: 1 hours ago, 1 flags -
Has Tesla manipulated data logs to cover up auto pilot crash?
Automotive Discussion: 3 hours ago, 0 flags
active topics
-
Candidate TRUMP Now Has Crazy Judge JUAN MERCHAN After Him - The Stormy Daniels Hush-Money Case.
Political Conspiracies • 623 • : network dude -
"We're All Hamas" Heard at Columbia University Protests
Social Issues and Civil Unrest • 202 • : network dude -
They Killed Dr. Who for Good
Rant • 64 • : Lazy88 -
Deadpool and Wolverine
Movies • 2 • : chiefsmom -
Has Tesla manipulated data logs to cover up auto pilot crash?
Automotive Discussion • 2 • : seekshelter -
Scientists Say Even Insects May Be Sentient
Science & Technology • 55 • : AdultMaleHumanUK -
-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- ---TIME TO SHOW THE WORLD--- -Part- --44--
Dissecting Disinformation • 610 • : Justoneman -
Lawsuit Seeks to ‘Ban the Jab’ in Florida
Diseases and Pandemics • 24 • : VariedcodeSole -
23,000 Dead People Registered Within a Two Week Period In One State
US Political Madness • 40 • : IndieA -
whistleblower Captain Bill Uhouse on the Kingman UFO recovery
Aliens and UFOs • 7 • : pianopraze