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.

 

Why MUST we believe? Is it threatening to NOT believe in alien visitation?

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldDragger
Why is that? You post that "non-believers' are closed minded, ignorant of the "evidence", Etc. Baloney.
There is absolutly no evidence that aliens ever, or are visiting us!
[edit on 17-6-2010 by OldDragger]


Wow! Bloody incredible! You make a statement about the "believers" and then you prove their point.

There is quite a large body of evidence that ET exists, none of it conjecture, but cold-hard evidence. All you need to do is look for it, and be able to recognize when found.

Etharzi od Oma.




posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
 


No, there is no evidence. Just UFO lore, "sightings", eyewitness accounts,
anecdotal accounts( like radar), stuff like that. And above all, BELIEF. MOST ufo lore is simply an accumulation of stories that has built up upon itself for decades. Were you reading ufo lore in 1965? I was.
But I don't CARE if you believe, I'm not trying to convince you, YOU are trying to convince me!!



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


Since this came up hours after the "ALIENS DO NOT EXIST!" thread, and the moronic author makes a flat out claim that anyone who belives in UFOs is being fooled, and that those UFOs are actually created by the The Powers That Be.... I'm taking a moment to answer you.

I took offense to his ultimatum of knowledge; my offense at his thread had NOTHING to do with his belief in UFO/aliens or not, it has to do with his outright, unbending belief and telling me I have to believe what he does. I couldn't care less if he believes or not, but as a person who has been abducted since the age of 10 and has seen the blackness of space through a ship window - he is ignorant to make a blanket statement that he simply can't prove.

The alien/UFO forum has been waning recently - maybe his point was just to rile things up? who knows.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


The alien/UFO forum has been waning recently - maybe his point was just to rile things up? who knows.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure whatever. wait, is that your point, or his? Hmmmmm




posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
 


No, there is no evidence. Just UFO lore, "sightings", eyewitness accounts,
anecdotal accounts( like radar), stuff like that. And above all, BELIEF. MOST ufo lore is simply an accumulation of stories that has built up upon itself for decades. Were you reading ufo lore in 1965? I was.
But I don't CARE if you believe, I'm not trying to convince you, YOU are trying to convince me!!


You are wrong; DNA Evidence talked about here. There was a metalurgical analysis of a metal sample from a ship, unfortunately I can't find it on the Internet, was done by Dr. Marcel Vogel circa 1980. There is also a plethora of pre-cgi photos around.

I'm not even going to try to convince you, if you don't want to see the light of day, then keep you eyes shut tight! It is your right to remain ignorant.


Etharzi od Oma



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
 


if you don't want to see the light of day, then keep you eyes shut tight! It is your right to remain ignorant.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

THAT is exactly the type of thing I'm talking about! Bingo!

There is nothing like righteous indignation! HILARIOUS!



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
 


Even with the evidence that there is, it is no proof that UFOs are piloted by ETs. Throughout history UFO claims have been attached to beings that have claimed to be angels, demons, elves, dwarves, fairies, djinn, trolls, etc. The ET claim is just the most current in a long line and there is no proof that it is true. It just seems like the UFO phenomenon bases itself off the current paradigm accepted at that time. We happen to live in a period where science reigns supreme and we have turned our attention from the mysteries of Earth to the mysteries of the cosmos, so aliens make the most sense to us. I bet if we ever prove Multiple Worlds to be correct I guarantee the pilots of UFOs will claim to be residents of another reality. In the end I doubt we will ever have all of the answers, so to make absolutist claims like UFOs have to be piloted by ETs ignores a large portion of the phenomenon's history and the most interesting aspects of the entire thing.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


I agree completely. The most mundane explaination is aliens!



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Remember there are 38 levels above Top Secret:

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 17-6-2010 by manta78]



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by manta78
 


No there isn't. Top Secret is the highest level. However, just because someone has Top Secret clearance doesn't mean they have access to all Top Secret documents. They can only view those that pertain to their post. This way all information is compartmentalized and no one person has access to anything.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply by manta78

Security levels
"Security clearances can be issued by many United States government agencies, including the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Energy (DoE), the Department of Justice, and the Central Intelligence Agency. DoE clearances include the 'L' and 'Q' levels. DoD issues more than 80% of all clearances. There are three levels of DoD security clearances[3]

Confidential

Secret

Top Secret

Information above level 'Top Secret' is on a case by case basis and identified only by code words."

Source: en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by manta78
 


They are still labeled as Top Secret. They are simply different compartments within Top Secret. One is not more secret than the others, it just matters on what your position and duties are that determine what compartments you have access to. Even though they are not the best examples considering the controversy surrounding them, the MJ12 documents do give a decent enough example. They are classified as Top Secret, which is then followed by the word MAJIC, which indicates the compartment.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
OP, your comments regarding there supposedly being "no evidence" is as ridiculous as some of the statements you attack.

Do you understand the difference between evidence and proof?

There is a truly titanic mountain of evidence. If that evidence doesn't yet constitute proof for you, then that's fair enough. That's your conclusion and you're entitled to it, just as others are entitled to their conclusions.

When people say silly things like "there is no evidence" I have to conclude that they are completely ignorant of the subject, or dishonest, or simply don't understand what the word 'evidence' means.

Further, if you say silly things like that then, of course, people are going to respond rather negatively to you here. This is the "UFO and Aliens" forum, after all, and flatly denying the very existence of any evidence is not going to down well with those who have spent a great deal of time examining and compiling that evidence.

[edit on 17-6-2010 by Malcram]



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


When people say silly things like "there is no evidence" I have to conclude that their are completely ignorant of the subject, dishonest, or simply don't understand what the word evidence means.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Now that's tellin' me!
Whew!

Please, spare me the intellectual routine. Gee, if everyone were only as intelligent as......never mind.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to
Now that's tellin' me!
Whew!

Please, spare me the intellectual routine. Gee, if everyone were only as intelligent as......never mind.


Are you just here to bait?

Have you bothered to look up the word 'evidence' yet? Are you prepared to concede that there is indeed evidence, but that you just don't feel it constitutes proof?

Are you prepared to show even a little respect for those intelligent people here who have examined that evidence (and some who have spent much time presenting it here in a very dedicated and methodical fashion) and who have reached a reasonable conclusion based on it, even if you don't share their conclusion?

Or are you simply here to make snide and sarcastic comments?

Judging by your performance so far, I think the negative response from 'believers' you have complained about might be more to do with your manner of posting and attitude than the fact that you don't share their beliefs.


[edit on 17-6-2010 by Malcram]



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 

Nonsense? really? Your response was more than rude it was hostile.
Yes I do know. I won't apologize for that. It certainly was not something I chose.
Ask any of us that have had unpleasant experiences and you will find that you are misguided in your hostility.
I have seen you state furthermore that no evidence exists that is just pure ignorance of the topic you are discussing. There are numerous ancient artifacts as well as documented sightings in the distant past that prove you are incorrect. Unless you consider Christopher Colombus to be an unreliable source or how about Alexander the great? Both have documented UFO sightings. You argue this as if you want to be convinced and then in the same breath you chastise any who rise to the occasion. Should I not state the evidence for fear of fulfilling your original accusations? Should I leave your further claims unanswered? It is a catch 22.
If I didn't know better I would think this thread was a deliberate attempt at trolling the UFO forum, but that is not your intention right?



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by NephraTari
First of all, not all people who know the truth can be called believers. Believing is something that is done without evidence. Knowing is entirely different and you are sweeping Knowers in with believers and labeling them all the same.
Based on those categories, I'd have to add another one: People who think they know, but don't. An example would be people who "know" how to tell which crop circles are manmade and which aren't.


Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


I certainly hope the alien fans have better reading comprehensionin reading "alien' accounts then they have shown in understanding my posts!

I WAS interested for 40 years, I finally came to the conclusion that it all amounted to..nothing!
I wouldn't say it amounts to nothing. There is a lot of evidence, it's just not very conclusive and you hve lots of company of ex-believers who looked at the evidence and found it lacking in proof, but it's still evidence. Just like the glove in the OJ trial was evidence, it's all in how you interpret it. It either shows it wasn't his and proved his innocence, or he put on a good show making it look like it didn't fit in which case maybe he wasn't innocent. Same evidence, two different interpretations. But it doesn't prove anything.

I don't think it's reading comprehension issues, but confirmation bias that believers in paranormal phenomena have:

Confirmation bias


One study showed how selective memory can maintain belief in extrasensory perception (ESP).[29] Believers and disbelievers were each shown descriptions of ESP experiments. Half of each group were told that the experimental results supported the existence of ESP, while the others were told they did not. In a subsequent test, subjects recalled the material accurately, apart from believers who had read the non-supportive evidence. This group remembered significantly less information and some of them incorrectly remembered the results as supporting ESP.

-from Russell, Dan; Warren H. Jones (1980), "When superstition fails: Reactions to disconfirmation of paranormal beliefs", Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (Society for Personality and Social Psychology)



posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


I would say that your standards are too high, lower them and voilà





posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   
This thread is no different than the ones ranting about the supposed evils of skeptics. They are arguments not about facts or evidence but personal belief. They serve no purpose nor provide us with any deeper understanding of the phenomenon.



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 09:10 AM
link   
If you want to live in a make-believe dream world denying reality that is certainly your choice.

It would be interesting to know how much effort and time you have put into the research and exploration of these matters, what information in the topic you have viewed/read, why you did not find the information convincing and what you would require to convince you.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join