It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Truth about Aliens and What could Really be Happening

page: 14
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 09:20 AM
I have mentioned it on this thread before but I think it would be worth doing. In the forces you have OP, operating procedures.

If disclosure is an event it would have to have one written.

It would include the use of in the UK NARO given that most reports of UFOs close up involve aspects of radiation.

It would involve at the first level the emergency services for casualty treatment and potential fires. This is borne out by the OP for fire services in the US i think it was describing what you should expect on contact with a crashed UFO - "your vehicle and other electrical devices may experience difficulty and or complete failure" - "your vehicle may fail all together".

It would include the provision for moving troops fast and the instigation of decontamination processes.

I would suggest that it might be possible given our collective knowledge that we could write our own with steps that would be followed starting at incident start - who would be called who would be informed.

I suggest to you gentlemen, that if you do that, you will not be far off the mark and could then have a framework with which to work back from to see who would have to be involved.

If you can then place all those people in the same place and time, then you would have start point from which the procedure was first implemented as the standard for all to follow if an "event" were to take place.

Once that is done - you will be able to work it forward to work out when its going to happen as things on your procedure happen.

"the queen is rushed away from the palace"
"supermarkets told to order extra provisions"
"water companies told to increase water filtration and decrease output" mass maintenance.
Radiation trained monitors recalled from leave
Soldiers told to no leave for certain dates
Sudden increase on road widths despite public and press outcry at wasteful spending and environmental damage for animals habitats. After which the road seems little used. A30 Cornwall for a start. They even destroyed a wooden, older than the stone one, henge. Just outside of Bodmin. Its on the maps. But no, it was not saved just re burried. With the A30 running through it.
Demolition of grade 1 listed housing worth thousands to build more of a runway STANSTEAD - but an hour down the road Heathrow and Gatwick.
Arguments in politics over Nuclear Disarmament. The two main well informed parties suggesting it is madness to make do. The new comer looking odd and confused as to their adamant claims. Something he does not know perhaps. Its common sense to maintain a cold war type platform from which to fight. And yet Brown on another issue pleads with Clegg that fighting styles have changed. We have to meet them at the coal face instead of a distance battle - precisely what the subs were for - and to protect the sea lanes because we are an island and import so much food.

There are many things that they would have to account for. These would leave traces everywhere in the public domain. Just got to add up the dots, based on what you know would have to happen. If you cant do that through lack of knowledge about the military way of doing things, then your never going to know till it happens i guess.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 09:28 AM
reply to post by Stormwind™

I suspect that I am on ignore for Stormwind, so he/she won’t reply to this. Mind you, he/she did describe ATS as a blog, so I suppose they have made it so by disregarding any contrary conversation.

So much for discussion…

Anyway, I will reply – and briefly – to this:

So I have to ask myself what kind of person would get worked up over wanting proof, no DEMANDING and then getting nasty when they dont get it.

What sort of person? The sort who regards ufology as important, unfounded theories promoted as real being diversions, and UFO sects as potentially dangerous. What’s wrong with that?

No, skeptics are not the self-appointed internet police, here to guide people safely away from the perilous world of highly tentative ufology. What we do want is some logical balance; a means to address both sides of the story, but without the unsettling interjection of sheer fantasy.

Being open minded should be encouraged.

Allowing blatant manipulation to taint the subject matter is not being open minded.

A loony, or a government individual who is trying to discredit someone's post to all that will listen stirring up the herd to trample.

You’re very quick to accuse and throw insults around, aren’t you? By the way; see the warning you've received? I reported you for your insulting post to Jokei.

Consider this as an alternative to your idea of dis-info agents existing on ATS; what if Greer, Muassan and the GFL etc. are the real dis-info agents?

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 09:33 AM
reply to post by GORGANTHIUM

See, thats what i thought, all ET's might not be good. But then i realize that theyve been here so long, that if they wanted us gone, we would be gone by now

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 09:36 AM

Originally posted by mossme89
reply to post by GORGANTHIUM

See, thats what i thought, all ET's might not be good. But then i realize that theyve been here so long, that if they wanted us gone, we would be gone by now

thats my main reason for believing they may not want to hurt us

posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 08:14 AM
reply to post by True-seer

Cool, quite simply, as other's have stated, if you're to make claims of Truth, Fact or Evidence you will be expected to support it. This can be done in a variety of ways, posting links to news sources, original research, or others research etc... if it's just say a speculative topic eg: "Does anyone think aliens are evil" or whatever, that sort of thing is a more open-ended debate and would not require verification, but you could quote external sources to back up your view point.

In the instance of this thread, you've claimed to have done research to support what you have claimed as Truth. Quite simply post those links please, perhaps highlighting examples in them that you think support your argument.

I don't mean to be harsh and I don't think I can make it any more clear, just link us to what you have used as the basis for your argument.

To your further response - the one with the quote, you either said you wouldn't answer any more or you didn't... and you've not answered the most pertinent question, that of showing your research, that you've claimed to have done - the posting of which will at least prove you're telling the truth about having done the research. Currently you're saying one thing then doing another.

Originally posted by True-seer
Well its time to say my Farewell till the 6th of may when i will be back to gloat i was right or in the small offchance it doesnt happen then i will get on my knees and let you Decapitate me......Gday

[edit on 25/4/1010 by jokei]

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 07:59 AM
reply to post by jokei

True-seer is now recounting his UFO sighting here.

Perhaps this is the source of his "secret" knowledge and the inspiration for his hours of research?

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 08:40 AM
reply to post by Beamish

It would be ungentlemanly of me to roflmao or lol at this, so I assure you I am doing neither...

Still, it does seem to imply some kind of definite thought process on the part of the OP.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 08:54 AM
reply to post by jokei

lol, nice reply

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 09:19 AM
reply to post by True-seer

Hey, I see from your other thread you arecapable of posting links.

Any danger of you showing us your "research" then?

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 09:33 AM
reply to post by jokei

Danger to myself yes, I`m just another crackpot untill then. But you wont understand and i dont expect you

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 09:39 AM
reply to post by jokei

I think that True-seer needs to define “research”.

I think, and am willing to be corrected here, that he has done a lot of reading, and made a decision as to how he views UFOs, aliens and a potential end-of-the-world scenario according to the information he has read.

And that’s fine, but he should bear in mind that not everything you read on the internet is true. Lots and lots of it is made up.

The comment he made that I am still curious about is the information he “cannot” divulge.

Now that needs explaining.

edit: spelling.

[edit on 26-4-2010 by Beamish]

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 10:09 AM
reply to post by Beamish

I can divulge the information but the fact is this.

1) i cant back it up because what i have percieved over numerous months in dream to me may seem very real.....but to everyone else they just nonsense.

Hope that makes some sense i have no proof of the stuff i wont talk about because only i know what i have dreamt and seen.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 10:18 AM
reply to post by True-seer

Ah, that explains it!

You dreamt your information.

Once again, that’s fine.

But you should have said so earlier. Saying that you have further information, but can’t divulge it is something we have all heard before, and it won’t endear your cause to anyone as invariably other people saying that are full of it.

Now you’ve clarified what you meant, we can move along.

By the way; if you hang around this subject long enough – read it, eat it and sleep it – then you are bound to have weird things turn up in your dreams.

I’ve never seen a real UFO, but I’ve seen some fantastic things up in the sky when I’m asleep.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 10:22 AM
reply to post by Beamish

I was reluctant to say anything well mainly because, well were i come from you either get laughed at or get grilled for his kind of dream....

But i`ve been lucid dreaming for 3 years aswell but nothing was as intense as the dreams i`ve been having lately. they all so wierd i`ve been explaining them to a guy in u2u if you want to hear about them just ask.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 10:34 AM
reply to post by True-seer

Will you post your research, or do we just label you a hoax?

You seem to be fulfilling the criteria of the occasional hoaxer we get, although not one of the better ones.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 10:46 AM
reply to post by jokei

What research do you want. and i`ll get it asap.

Unless your asking for my research on the 200% rise in disasters because as someone said in an earlier post my source of using wiki is not good enough to base a good calculation on. Which i must agree with now.

But anything else and i`m happy to post.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 11:08 AM
reply to post by jokei

I won't go so far as to say the OP is a hoaxer.
Instead I think he just jumped in feet first to ats without realizing how we do things.Using the GFL as a source???No experienced atser would do that.
How bout cutting the guy a break as its his first thread and everybody makes mistakes.
He said he is willing to come back to this thread when its time and admit he was wrong or admit he was right and that seems to me to be an admirable quality that he is willing to be held accountable.

He has addressed your question of research and has admitted his error.
Its a learning curve and we have all been thru it and have all made mistakes.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 11:13 AM
reply to post by DrumsRfun

Thankyou for your post.

just so you know in my short week here i've learnt more than i have in the last 19 years of my life.

From helpful members to people like jokie that even tho at first can be taken as griefers turn out to have very valid points which i didnt pick up on and now i`m up to several threads. Every bit of criticism and every bit of praise has gone towards me bettering myself and my contribution to these threads.

Now if i dont deserve some slack dont worry.


Because it was my fault for jumping straight in and like a mod told me in a u2u message this forum is different to alot of others.

I`ve learnt that now.

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 11:41 AM
reply to post by DrumsRfun

Well, previously a lot of slack has been cut - I've offered help and advice on posting links to research in this thread many times. The guy has claimed to have done research - I'd personally still like to see it - to mooch through and form my own opinions on it - especially the 200% increase stuff, that seems to be the crux of the OP in the first place.

I applaud True Seer for saying "Oops" - but I still doubt that the research has been done I'm afraid.

reply to post by True-seer

See above

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 03:47 PM
reply to post by jokei

Well i cant convince everyone and your entitles to your own op. so stick with what you believe to be true thats what i've always done.

look at my new avatar
i got aliens to write a message in space for me

new topics

<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in