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.

 

UFO's, Aliens - the likelihood of their existence

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2004 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by project_pisces



You see they are so small and take Extreme maneuvers that any body would be vaporized in an instance with the enormous G-Force.



There is always the possibility there is a Electro Magnetic Field within the craft that prevents this. You probably would only feel a +1 or-1 G

The kind of maneuvers you refer to.


www.rense.com...


Yea I saw that one really amazing
thanks for the answer really good, controlling the Gravity surrounding the object would create mass less gravity or 0 gravity so, there can’t come any G-Force with nothing to build it on. And that’s beautiful technology




posted on Jun, 3 2004 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Well said Facefirst. Our problem is defintately the evidence, as discussed - in that light, we must give certain witnesses at least some credibility. However, as we know, verifying their statements is an incredible task. So here we sit, on the fence, unable to make many conclusions.

As for your statement about at least a screwdriver being available, I agree; it is logical to presume that some shred of evidence should have been leaked from the many alleged UFO crashes. However, as a member of the Military, I know how thourough we are, and it would not surprise me if, so far, the Military has managed to prevent hard evidence leaks.

However, the latter does is not consistent with the genuine? Top Secret document leaks in circulation, so your position on this matter becomes stronger.

"And a great deal of what I read on their claims was often hearsay or distorted and exagerated by others."

Can you give me some examples? Also, what is your opinion on the statements of the two retired Air Force members that came forward in regards to the Randlesham incident?

Furthermore, what is your opinion about, for example, the leaked MJ-12 documents? These leaked documents are hard to dismiss, no? Also, can you tell me more about that CIA director?

Best Wishes.

[Edited on 3-6-2004 by Plasmamembrane]



posted on Jun, 3 2004 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Plasmamembrane
Well said Facefirst. Our problem is defintately the evidence, as discussed - in that light, we must give certain witnesses at least some credibility. However, as we know, verifying their statements is an incredible task. So here we sit, on the fence, unable to make many conclusions.

As for your statement about at least a screwdriver being available, I agree; it is logical to presume that some shred of evidence should have been leaked from the many alleged UFO crashes. However, as a member of the Military, I know how thourough we are, and it would not surprise me if, so far, the Military has managed to prevent hard evidence leaks.

"And a great deal of what I read on their claims was often hearsay or distorted and exagerated by others."

Can you give me some examples? Also, what is your opinion on the statements of the two retired Air Force members that came forward in regards to the Randlesham incident?

Furthermore, what is your opinion about, for example, the leaked MJ-12 documents? These leaked documents are hard to dismiss, no? Also, can you tell me more about that CIA director?

Best Wishes.

[Edited on 3-6-2004 by Plasmamembrane]


As far as distortions or exagerations of statements, one does not have to look too far. The CIA Director "Briefing" by Dr. Greer is a perfect example. (the following paragraph is from a post I previously put up at ATS)

[Greer went around saying that he "briefed" the former CIA Director James Woosley on the ET subject back in the 90s. Later, Woosely sent out a legal note to Greer and others saying that Greer distorted what actually happened and made the "dinner party conversation" seem like something it was not. I really like the Disclosure Project's purpose, but Greer tends to get a little "out there" and exagerates a bit. At least it seems that way to me. IIRC, even Edgar Mitchell asked to have his name not associated with Greer anymore. (if you do a google on the legal note, you should be able to find it)]

That being said, there is always the possiblilty that Greer is telling the truth and Woosley was not expecting Dr. Greer to go public, which in turn made Woosley feel the need to seek out his attorney's assistance. Or that Greer was not telling the truth and that Woosley wanted to maintain his reputation.

You never know. But I tend to lean towards individual exageration in that case. Greer has made some other fairly grand claims in the past. Most recently was his "discovery" of an energy device that did not need any fuel. (needless to say, the device never materialized)

There seems to be a tendency of certian individuals to over-exagerate the importance of their info or even to go as far as to embelish the facts/possibilties. It seems to me that some people want to believe so badly that it clouds their ability to look at facts objectivily. I too, like to let my mind wander in regards to this subject, but I feel that I must always use and maintain a "tempered enthusiasm."

Easier said than done of course. Along with finding out what happens after death, ET contact would be the greatest Human discovery of all time, so I just try my best to keep an even-keeled outlook. I really want to believe beyond my current outlook, but I must reserve my change of opinion to be motivated by evidence that is beyond compelling.

There are more examples out there, but I feel that the Greer situation I presented seems to describe it very well without going into multiple examples. (though there are a few more examples out there that paint similar pictures)

As far as Randlesham, I have only delved into that particular case slightly. There seem to be some very compelling claims and testimonies there, but at the same time, there is also some discrepancies between witness accounts. But that is to be expected 24 years after... just as witnesses to a car accident can have varying recollections of the actual events. I did recently see a documentary that took two of the main US AF personel witnesses back to the now defunct base and tried to follow the steps of what happened. Very interesting, but again, I do not have enough info to truly make an informed opinion. Not enough from a few internet interviews and one TV documentary, which unless you were in the editing room, the viewer cannot know if and how the story and it's content was "shaped" or "modified" for presentation and appeal.

With regards to MJ12, I have done a fair bit of reading on them. Stanton Friedman presents some theories that do seem to make sense at first glance, but I must point out that by the very nature of how the papers were obtained and the exact Truman signatures along with the fact that the actual papers were never examined lends me to put the papers in a suspicious light. (the MJ12 documents were photographed and came from 35mm film/no actual paper docs) Though, on an interesting note, Friedman's research did reveal a reference in an actual US Goverment paper to an MJ12 "Creative Group." (I cannot recall which branch of Goverment the paper came from, but I believe it was from the Eisenhower era) The difference is that Friedman had the actual paper this time. But it is unclear what the MJ12 "Creative Group" is or what the paper is referencing to MJ12. That itself seems to be worthy of a follow-up. But so far, there has been no word from Mr. Friedman.

As you said, here we are sitting on the fence, unable to come to many conclussions.... it is frustrating, but then again the facts dictate that those are the conclusions we must come to. With that said, you mentioned facts and evidence can be witheld or even obscured...I do subscribe to that view as well.

But one thing that is having a new and possible profound effect on the proof possibility is technology. Camera phones, internet, video and several other communication innovations are making it more and more difficult to hide or suppress information. The recent US Iraqi prison scandle comes to mind as a recent example. Hopefully, this technology will allow some individual, somewhere out there to finally get the "money shot."


.

[Edited on 3-6-2004 by Facefirst]



posted on Jun, 3 2004 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Well said Facefirst. I presume you have no trouble agreeing with the following statement: For every good UFO lead there are two bad ones.

True, believing can, at times, construe logic. However, when logic is applied, Alien existence is probable. As for the myriad of testimonials of people, I would just rather spend my time reading a book or exercising rather than scanning the 1000's out there. Also, in the context of poor evidence and shifty witnesses, I have yet to see one solid UFO video. Note that I have just started my research into this topic but have arrived so far at the latter point. Perhaps the Aliens are just that good, perhaps not.

I also presume you can agree that the MJ-12 doc's, for instance, a fairly compellling. I have just began looking into these documents and am trying to determine who authenticated them and, if the person(s) who did it did it for the sole purpose of doing it or for publicity. Do you also agree that the Governments (US) behavior regarding UFO's is odd?

Let's take a quick look at the MJ-12 documents, since these are substantial pieces of evidence. I have a theory about particular Top Secret documents. Perhaps the US Government has a policy about these certain documents: that all UFO related Top Secret Ultra documents and the like are to be written in a fashion that makes them appear to be fake - the ultimate fail safe mechanism. My question is where did these documents come from? When were they leaked? As stated earlier, I have had a chance to analyze them. Two things come to mind. First, both the content and the dates of particluar letters "fit" into what I conceive as the logical progression of events that the US military would initiate had there been a UFO crashing/sighting. For instance, that letter by Einstein and Oppenheimer, providing their views on Aliens inhabiting earth around the time of Roswell. Plus the other documents around at that time. It seems that, if these were to be faked, someone went to an awful amount of trouble to do it.

Though I am not a trained document authenticator, the MJ-12 letters appear to my (somewhat
intelligable eye as authentic: there rough condition, the teletype, the signatures, the blacked out areas, etc.

I see it that for obvious reasons these are what all the energy of the public should be focussed on due to the absence of intergalatic screwdrivers.

Finally, and somewhat unrelated, is that comment you made about the advent of technology. Do you think the springboard that technology has encountered is the result of Alien technology? I of course do not, but the possibly is there I grant. Having said that, and this returns to UFO sightings, I also believe it possible that Militant technology in the 20th Century may have been far greater than any of us could think. As such, the Roswell incident could, as I have said, just been a Government ran experiment, testing some next-gen probe. Thus, maybe it is just us, and we can congratulate ourselves for doing it without the help of gray's, pink's, etc.

As a footnote, Pennywise has this chorus that goes, "We're the Aliens."



posted on Jun, 3 2004 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Plasmamembrane
Well said Facefirst. I presume you have no trouble agreeing with the following statement: For every good UFO lead there are two bad ones.

True, believing can, at times, construe logic. However, when logic is applied, Alien existence is probable.

I also presume you can agree that the MJ-12 doc's, for instance, a fairly compellling. I have just began looking into these documents and am trying to determine who authenticated them and, if the person(s) who did it did it for the sole purpose of doing it or for publicity. Do you also agree that the Governments (US) behavior regarding UFO's is odd?

When were they leaked? Plus the other documents around at that time. It seems that, if these were to be faked, someone went to an awful amount of trouble to do it.


I do agree with you opening sentence. I also agree that mathematically speaking, I would not bet against inteliigent life in the rest of the universe. Based on the projected numbers of planets out there, any bookie would label me a fool to bet against it.

The real question is, are they here?

I do find the MJ12 docs to be compelling at first, but the fact that they were take from an undeveloped roll of 35mm film that was sent in a no-return address envelope puts the authenticity of the papers in a dubious light. Yet in a fascinating way, it also places the MJ12 docs in the possible realm of cloak and dagger. The papers have their good and bad points, but I still lean towards a hoax. Having said that, I am also no expert in cryptology or secret communications and I have to trust the evidence presented to me as best as I can understand it. My imagination wants the papers to be bona-fide, but my gut tells me someone is having a good laugh on all of us. Stanton Friedman's books are without a doubt, the most thorough and informative of the MJ12 books, even if biased though. Do a google on Stanton and you will find a myriad of links. He has spent almost 20 years investigating the papers. As for his intentions, only Friedman would know.

Was the MJ12 leaked? Entirely possible.

I do agree that the US Goverment's behavior regarding UFOs is odd. Part of it, I suspect rose out of the practice of using UFO reports during the Cold War to the Govt's advantage.(esp the CIA) This has recently come to light during the last several years. What better way to cover up the then top-secret SR-71 or other classified projects then let people who have seen it flying think it is a UFO? It looks like nothing on the planet at the time...it muss be dem dere' marr-shins! Another possiblity is that certain agencies can reveal everything they have via FOIA without compromising their intelligence gathering sources and techniques.

But as we have both agreed, perhaps the Govt knows something? As you mentioned, there are lots of stories, witnesses and videos. I have yet to see any verified beyond face value belief.

The best case to date IMO, was the Belgian AF UFO flap of the late 80s, early 90s. It has been one of the few times that a Govt admitted in a news conference that something was in their airspace and that they could not identify or intercept it. Refreshing. The recent Mexican AF encounter has a similar feel, but it is too early to tell for sure.

Who knows for certain what is going on in our skies? I sure don't, but I am still watching and waiting.

.



posted on Jun, 3 2004 @ 10:37 PM
link   
I dont know what the likelyhood is of them being here. 50/50 is my guess, either they made contact are they have NOT.

I would die happy if i got to meet and become friends with an intelligent ET life form. Who wouldn't, I bet there a some crazy and cool characters thriving all over this universe place.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 03:05 AM
link   
Even the Belgian UFO Flap is contested, see:
Belgium 1990

I, too, am in the wait and see modus. I am really baffled. On the one hand, it seems incredible to me that the sheer amount of sightings are all either hoaxes, mistaken identity or secret government aircraft, and, on the other hand, it seems incredible that with all the cases around, not one single case has lead to an uncontested "smoking gun". In the first case, it tells me there must be ufos (as being real craft and not ours), in the second case, it tells me it is all a mistake, myth or delusional.



Whenever I find a case on the internet that looks promising, I can quickly find other opinions on the internet to the contrary. Yes, as stated above, just too much information.

Intelligent life out there? Absolutely. Current estimate as to the number of galaxies in the universe: 125 billion. Are they here? Possibly. Proven? IMHO the jury is still out...



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 03:22 AM
link   
Plasma membrane what are these documents that u speak of? They may just be fabrications, to hide advanced technology. Deterrence is also a good way to make people scared. For instance when the nuclear bomb was dropped on Japan, it was also a way to show the USSR that we have nuclear weapons capabilites now and that war with the United States would be catastrophic



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 03:33 AM
link   
Our Government Leaders are only human, and they will harbor skepticism and doubt over the existence of extraterrestrials also. As in the interest of the nation all possible scenarios must be planned for in the military. Just because the military has a plan for the possible crash landing of UFO's does not mean that is proof of their existence.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:10 AM
link   
UFO's, Aliens - the likelihood of their existence

I'd say the liklihood of their existance is no greater than that of ours. We are most likely on different frequency waves therefore, we do not acknowlege one another and when we do, it is only due to either pure accident or their technology being far beyond what ours is enabling them to enter into our dimension however, only for short periods of time due to various reasons.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:37 AM
link   
My opinion is that this discussion, though obviously interesting, is pointless if one's goal is to come to some kind of conclusion. Anything that isn't experienced first-hand can be hoaxed, or looked upon as one - in one way or another. And first-hand experiences could be hallucinations. It gets even worse when it has something to do with "things out-of-this-world". So, we have to go with our gut feeling. Ask yourself, what would you need to really believe that we are being visited by et's? Would it be enough if someone you really trust would tell you about a first-hand experience? Probably not. They could always be hallucinating, right? Ok, how about a ufo-screwdriver? Would you really know what it was if you saw one? Let alone tell that it was made on another planet? Seriously.. Photographs and videos can easily be hoaxed. If you saw something you didn't recognize as anything you've ever seen - does that mean it's from outer space? It could very well be an experimental aircraft - right?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that in this case, for everyone to believe, the only proof that would really do is if the government came out on national tv showing evidence and admitting that it is in fact real. On the other hand - that could be a cover-up of something else...

Question: how come scientists still use reasons based on limits in our technology to explain the impossibility of travelling a few hundred light years? Kind of patronizing, I think..



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Durden:

Thank you for replying. While we all value your comments, you have not added anything to this discussion other than reiterating, in your own words, what has been said. As for your comment about scientists grappling with technology, you fail to see the larger perspective. The perspective is this: we are cattle used as a means to acquire money for the Government. The Government, then, in turn, uses that money to buy power. Power is purchased through technology and technology is purchased through money and great minds, perhaps alien. We are the sprinkling on the substratum that is the US Military, among other allies - a dichotomy if you will.

We would be naive and foolish if we thought that reputible scientists doing work at Universities "up here" are even close to what scientists are doing "down there." If you do not take on this perspective, then as a free entity, you have the choice. Can we all agree here that we are in the dark with regards to the NWO and the workings of our Governments underneath? I thought that intellectuals like yourselves unequivically accepted that. Now, please do not take offence to this, I am merely surprised.

As for the documents I refer to, it is the MJ-12 documents. Facefirst provided an excellent reference in regards to information about their authenticity.

Lastly, a little more on why this discussion is not a waste of time. SImply, in it a rigorous thread detailing what course of action us "guys" up here should take, together, in regards to ascertaining whether Aliens exist, as guys who have little to no security clearances in conjunction with the absence of evidence and large numbers of fake UFO sighting reports.

Thank you for considering this information.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Plasmamembrane, I think you misunderstood where I'm standing in this matter. My gut feeling is that the whole alien thing is very real. Though I'm a bit frustrated about how easy it seems to debunk evidence of alien contact, just because it is so incredible. If one decides not to believe, well then there's really no proof that would be enough. We are left with our gut feeling as long as there is a slight doubt. And I guess I haven't come to any conclusion. Then again I never said I would.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Plasmamembrane,
What can we little guys do? How about signing the UN petition to encourage member nations to disclose information?

To those who think this will bring nothing - well, maybe but apathy will bring guaranteed nothing.... A bit like the guy who prayed to God every night for a big win at the lottery, until one night God answered telling him "Give me a break, buy a ticket".



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Reasons to Believe that Aliens do not exist:

1. Well, simply, there are other formidable explanations at hand regarding both famous and less famous UFO/Alien sightings. A quick example will illustrate the point: Roswell, 1947. The American Air Force encouters a "disc", as stated in the Ramey memo which details information about the said event, in New Mexico. The US Government said that it was a crashed ballon from Operation Mogul, a Top Secret op' testing survellience equipment. Others said it was a UFO that resulted in the seizure of a UFO and its crew. To my knowledge, there is little evidence to suggest anything of the sort. In fact, a better explanation is that it was a crashed device from the Mogul op'. There is more evidence to suggest the latter than to suggest that it was Aliens.

Let's take a quick look at some of the evidence at the site that led people to speculate about UFO's. For instance, the purple shapes that appeared on some of the crashed material. It was later said that it was toy tape used to hold peices of the device together. Why not accept that?

A: Why not accept it? Let's see, we're supposed to accept that the senior intelligence officer of the highest clearance base (i.e. the one housing the world's only nuclear bomber wing at the time), is going to mistake balsa wood and tin foil for a crashed flying disc? Now who's naive???


Accept it we should. One main reason is that, rather than it coming from an alien ship, it came from the Americans. Why would the American Government want to put clear, Enlgish markings on such a device: what if it crashed over the Soviet Union? Surely the Americans would not want them to find out the probe was from them. So the markings leave the Soviets guessing, not being able to conclusively pin the probe on the Americans at that time. Remember, this was an experiment, so they were expecting these things to crash.

A: Again, senior intelligence officer...you don't think he'd recognize the Russian Cyrillic alphabet when he saw it? Especially a specialist in foreign aircraft?

What's clear is that, in the Roswell incident, there are other, more likely explanations at hand in comparison to Alien explanations.

A: What about the government's claim the bodies were dummies? This was already proven to be dummies related to tests done YEARS later, not the Roswell era? Still taking the government's word as Gospel?

2. Why are Aliens, who are supposed to be so advanced, crashing into Earth? You think with their technology that such events were rarely, if ever, happen. Us Humans even have sophisticated, man-less probes that we send into space, why do the Aliens risk coming to Earth when they clearly are not interested in being "made"? If there were an Alien probe, one can imagine how sophisticated and long range it would be.

A: They didn't use or know about primative radar, and it's interference with their gravitic wave propulsion system. Not to mention, you wouldn't dare compare a modern Corvette to a Model T, yet guess what, they still crash....


3. How do Aliens get their small ships into our Atmosphere without detection? Granted, their technology maybe so great they have found a way around our Satellites, but the problem still exists for them.

A: This is giving them way too much credit...hell WE can get aircraft in undetected...maybe you've heard of it, it's called Stealth


4. There are too many flaws in Alien sightings, which leads back to 1.

A: But there are also many common attributes, from different cultures, people, and eras



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Everything you have said is valid and I agree. Be careful when splitting someones post, however, as you can take the said post out of context. I agree that everything said in that section has a likely Alien explanation in the wings, as stated. I am like you - in the dark. I am merely speculating in the absence of evidence. We just don't know. As for the Aliens coming into our atmosphere detected because they are unaware of our primitive radar - it is a likely explanation but not necessarily the case: you have no proof, neither do any of us, so the explanation gets shelfed with the rest.

Rather than trying to reach incredible conclusions, speculate we must. You guys are intelligent and most, if not all of the explanations you have offered are compelling and valid. Remember James Pierce: we stockpile our explanations and choose the most likely of the bunch in relation to some aspect of a particular sighting.

Best Wishes.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:26 PM
link   
I refer the right honorable speaker to the remarks i made some moments ago:

blogs.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 05:04 PM
link   
i think aliens from other planets do exist. what are the chances of earth being the only planet in the universe to have the ability to harness life. it doesn't have to be like earth. carbon dioxide kills us but plants live on it. shows you that "life will find a way" ( i know i know... jurassic park) maybe theres a race of aliens that live in hydrochloric acid.

but aliens coming hear to earth is another thing. hear are the four main reasons why i don't think it would happen on purpose

1. if they've been watching us they would have seen that we are not a peacefull species and worked out that it would probably be better if they didn't give us dangerous technology
2. how would they find us? they would have to scan every single planet capable of holding life for inteligent beings.
3. how would they get here they'd have to have provisions for hundreds of generations unless they could travvel at the speed of light which is highly unlikely
4. why bother once they know where here thats it really we meet 'em they go home and tell there people life goes on



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 05:46 PM
link   
dr_strangecraft:

Very interesting post. However, your claims are too absolute in regards to aliens - the facts are we don't know much about them, meaning how can we make any conclusive claims about their technology? As for your numbers (i.e. the chance of an Earth like planet forming are 1 in every 20 billion years) is interesting. However, the lack of study regarding other star systems in problematic. Also, and I admit an extremely unlikely explanation, but still possible, is that these Aliens are from another Universe, be it a parallel one or another one entirely, travelling back in time, or whatever. As such, your numbers don't have any bearing on the possibility of other life forms in this universe.

As for the scientific method, it is sound. However, I understand somewhat what you said about a new dimension of a method, but you lose me toward the end - can you make it more clear?

At this point, we all know there is little to no physical evidence at hand, we all know UFO sightings are shady at best, and we all know how powerful the Government is. Now, looking at my first post, our focus should be on choosing the best explanation in the absence of proof. The most stimulating questions surrounding this issue are, "Why is the Government so secretive about questions posed to them about UFO's?" For example, they changed their Roswell story, which is suspicious. What about leaked CIA documents? What should us guys make of them?

The bottom line: the latter questions are all we have to go from which is keeping this issue alive. To make statements proclaiming knowledge about the inside of UFO crafts or their level of technology knowing that you have never seen such things first hand neither can you verify any of those claims is not helping our mission. We all must be swift and logical throughout, dismissing claims where dismissing need be and shelfing possible alien explanations where they need be. Remember, alien explanations do fit in some cases logically, but we just do not know. That is science - it is not an argument but rather a quest for truth, and all likely explanations should never be dismissed until certainty comes in.

That said, every explanation offered in this thread is, upon my inspection, likely; to what degree is another matter.

I also aknowledge on theory of "everything" here. This goes back to something I stated earlier. Us guys ("us guys" refers to you guys here on the forums, my gandmother, and the like: all of us sods, some determined more than others to take back our America!). Here is the theory: that all these sightings and underground facilities are just a product of human invention - Top Secret experiments and technology so advanced that, for obvious reasons, our Government must keep it quiet. Also, perhaps they are in an absurd breech of our Constitution; however, in order to progress, the US Government, among others, must breech it. For example, doing Nazi like grotesque experiments to further knowledge of some particular medical phenomanen.

The best course of action, in my humble opinion, is to proceed logically. In the case of UFO sightings, those are, for many reasons, difficult situations. Of course, all cases should be taken seriously. In the case of Aliens living in Underground Military institutions, that too is problematic - problematic because many so called workers in these places have come forward and given details about the situation in these places, but the evidence keeps coming up nil. What we need, of course, is a video tape and/or leaked documents. Until then, the wheels keep spinning on this matter at the same speed.

As for our technology and whether we can attribute it to aliens or not is interesting. We could start here, debating why or why not it is a result of aliens. Also, another focus we should depart on is the US Governemnts attitude toward aliens and UFO's. Lastly, opinions regarding the already in our possession leaked documents.

Thank you for considering this information.



posted on Jun, 7 2004 @ 03:48 PM
link   

As for the Aliens coming into our atmosphere detected because they are unaware of our primitive radar - it is a likely explanation but not necessarily the case: you have no proof, neither do any of us, so the explanation gets shelfed with the rest.


I'll grant you the status of "speculation" on this one point...the others however, are factual and logical conclusions based on evidence. I should have added, that there are numerous documents and testimonials by government officials that support the radar interference angle of the early crashes...(majesticdocuments.com is a good source)....so it isn't just an out of the blue theory.....



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join