Show us ONE, just one UFO pic or ANY evidence that can be proven as evidence of visitation.

Hey there old dagger

Your first statement on this thread is true. The net is full of fakes, frauds and idiots. I don't know how these people have this much time but I only caught a few comments that interested me. I know MUFON does not have a perfect record bu we are one of the few organizations that have a strict guideline of investigating. One problem is that the ET factor seems to always get plugged into the definition of ufology and it is unfortunate. On the other hand as a scientist I can not ignore that hypothesis.

Not enough science is begin practiced in the field and MUFON is starting new programs and stepping up to the plate to handle this issue. When it comes to the objective research of the phenomenon nor the believers or the cynic have it right. On the believer side many do not have the correct concept or the discipline to understand true objective thought and on the cynic side they are no different than the believer in that they are always trying to prove they hypothesis by testing it with their hypothesis. This is not science nor rational or objective thought.

The word debunker or skeptic is often misused and labeled as a negative thing when it is not. People with cynical views are often called skeptics when they are not.

Personally I support the findings and hypothesis of the COMETA report. Granted our physical evidence is limited and where collected has been mishandled or incorrectly analyzed. In the Florida MUFON newsletter I placed an article written by a Field Investigator who was also a NASA/Air Force/Contractor physicist who wrote the true perspective of how simplified field investigation or any UFO case should be handled. You will find it on page 3.

docs.google.com...

I would like to know your perspective on the COMETA report and the provided article. Critical thinking is a welcome sight in the UFO research field.

reply to post by OldDragger


What are you expecting here? Any video or photo can be discredited, or put enough question marks around it that it will not convince... those types of evidence are basically worthless these days with CGI.

Look up the Fermi Paradox. Realize there are people smarter than you or I that are already to the point where, juxtaposing the newfound minimal requirements for life on this earth with the measurements and nature of the galaxy around it, they are no longer asking if we are alone but why we have not been contacted. Stephen Hawking is a genius and said to him aliens were a mathematical certainty.

And why do witnesses not count for you? In Witness to Roswell they recount eight military men who confessed to seeing nonhuman bodies on their death beds recently--were they all lying? On their death bed? What would the motivation be? All eight of them went senile? And that is just the recent military death bed testimonials. Check out the book Witness to Roswell: they uncover 600 more testimonies in it!

The Phoenix Lights incident had TONS of video.... and the flares excuse was discredited by many sources, including the governor of the state, a former trained pilot who said it was an alien craft and in no way a set of flares. He said he saw it up close.

In fact the amount of credible people talking about UFO experiences is overwhelming. Do I really have to play the quote game? Tons of astronauts say they saw something. Former astronaut Scott Carpenter says at no point wee they alone when on a flight mission, that craft were watching them the entire time...

Some say we access them through altered consciousness. Look at the book The Spirit Molecule, where people are given '___' by a doctor and almost all the subjects have alien abduction type experiences.

"The notion of finding an alien to sit down and talk with you might be as culture-bound as the idea of surfing the galaxy for a fine Italian restaurant."--Terence McKenna said something along these lines that stuck with me.

I think you have to think outside the box on the alien issue. Plus, did you really think we were gonna capture a craft itself? We have people, pictures and videos. We have everything but the recovered craft on hand and made viewable to the public. Of course the government would lie to us about this. The truth is smacking us right in the faces so it is funny to me that some people are still demanding proof at this point.

People tell me that i breathe oxygen i can't see it,smell it,touch it,or feel it yet thats what i'm told should i not believe it? i see a picture of the Mona Lisa i've never seen it but the person that took it say's it's there is their some reason i shouldn't believe that it's there because i haven't seen it for myself in person the person that took it is a professional photographer and very creditable just as i believe that alot of the people that say they have seen or been involved with UFO research are as creditable as that photographer some things are taken on faith and just what you feel rather you want to believe it or not is solely up to you. There is no doubt that alot of charlatan's and fakers are out there take a look at other thing's that involve the same type of people not just UFO research to me their is way to much evidence to just dismiss it out of hand and way to many creditable reports and people not to believe that their is something to it if thats not enough for you so be it i don't see how that gives you the right to come on a forum for this very subject and basically make fun of those who do believe in this subject shows just what kind of person you are. Just to be clear i've never seen anything in the sky that i couldn't indentify. Now we wait for your very predictable reply.

Originally posted by hjs5656
People tell me that i breathe oxygen i can't see it,smell it,touch it,or feel it yet thats what i'm told should i not believe it? i

That's a joke, right? There are instruments you can detect oxygen levels with. You touch it all the time because its in your lungs. There's a myriad of instruments and methods of detecting oxygen and it is not limited to only a small group of people. Its also something observable and testable by anyone. Deprive a mammal of oxygen and see what happens. If you took high school science, then your science teacher showed you different experiments with oxygen, carbon dioxide....seriously, joke comment.

Anyway, OP is right....there is zero evidence of alien visitations and pointing it out or questioning hoaxes or poor sad excuses for evidence, seems to piss off the natives here.

Of course there's evidence of visitation. Pictures, videos, eyewitness accounts and alien abductions are all evidence of visitation. It's funny how skeptics abandon all reason and they act as if eyewitness accounts and alien abductions are meaningless.

This is crazy because eyewitness accounts are valued to convict criminals and cops use them everyday to arrest people in line ups or picture line ups. I was just watching the show 48 Hours where a guy and his friend were robbed. His friend was killed but 1 survived. He then identified the 2 gunmen and they were arrested and charged with murder.

The way you falsify eyewitness accounts is through an alibi or impeaching the eyewitness. The UFO skeptic acts like no weight should be given to eyewitness accounts and the credibility of the witness means nothing. Again, you can't just stick your head in the sand and say, there isn't any evidence. What you can do is make a subjective statement and say there's no evidence that I'm willing to accept.

Again, after you have a credible eyewitness, this is evidence of visitation. It's not conclusive until it can be objectively verified. For instance Copernicus presented evidence of his Heliocentric model but it wasn't conclusive and it had to be verified as technology advanced.

So there's evidence to support visitation. More evidence then there is for many theories in science today. There just needs to be more objective evidence like more on alien implants from abductees or look to DNA. Can you find skulls or bones with DNA foreign to earth. Can you find objective evidence of panspemia or directed panspermia?

So there's overwhelming evidence of visitation, there just need to be more objective and conclusive evidence.

So theories are based on evidence that's then confirmed or discounted through objective and conclusive evidence that can be replicated. There's evidence for visitation there just needs to be more objective and conclusive evidence that can be confirmed or discounted through falsification and replication.

For instance I can walk outside and see my car and the trees around my car are wet so that's evidence that it rained until my wife comes out and says she had set up the sprinkler earlier and then the evidence that it rained has been falsified.

Look at Alien Implants. This is a subject that's just dismissed by psuedoskeptics and debunkers because they have no interest in the truth because their minds are made up. If people were serious and objective about this there would be a serious 5 year study of abductees with implants. They would test the credibility of the abductee and test the implant. Could it be some kind of tracking device? How else could it had gotten there? The fact is most people who claim to be skeptic and the debunkers will just ridicule people for even asking the question and also try to personally go after people like Leir and others. Again, they have spent years not trying to seek the truth but they go after people personally, ridicule and blind dismissal at even the mention of the subject. Here's a couple of videos on implants.

I haven't read the entire discussion, so I don't know if anybody else has provided these videos. I think there are some ( and I mean ONLY some ) UFOs shown that can be proof of intelligent control, therefore extraterrestrial visitation. They cannot be anything else. The others are merely camera lens debris, IMO.

Originally posted by FormerSkeptic
UFOs shown that can be proof of intelligent control, therefore extraterrestrial visitation. They cannot be anything else.

Even if the claim of intelligent control could be proven without a doubt (and there is plenty of doubt), the default explanation is still not "aliens." There are still plenty of other potential explanations higher on the list than aliens, including unknown black project aircraft, time travelers, transdimensional glimpses, etc. And higher than all those remains "unknown." And unknown by no means equals aliens. Now, if we had clear positive proof that a particular kind of aliens exist, and that they were in some way responsible for a specific sighting, that would make logical sense.

But that old "we don't know what it is, so it must be aliens" thing just doesn't fly.

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Originally posted by FormerSkeptic
UFOs shown that can be proof of intelligent control, therefore extraterrestrial visitation. They cannot be anything else.

Even if the claim of intelligent control could be proven without a doubt (and there is plenty of doubt), the default explanation is still not "aliens." There are still plenty of other potential explanations higher on the list than aliens, including unknown black project aircraft, time travelers, transdimensional glimpses, etc. And higher than all those remains "unknown." And unknown by no means equals aliens. Now, if we had clear positive proof that a particular kind of aliens exist, and that they were in some way responsible for a specific sighting, that would make logical sense.

But that old "we don't know what it is, so it must be aliens" thing just doesn't fly.

Fair enough, but black project SPACECRAFT of which nobody informs NASA?!

Time travelers? From where? Earth again? From when? The future no doubt? For what purpose now? To advise Obama? How exactly, by landing on the front lawn of the White House?!

Transdimensional glimpses? Of what? Of birds? Of flying monkeys?!

Then even ignoring the ton of evidence elsewhere that show extraterrestrial visitors are already here, what "higher explanation" can there really be? Vampires making sharp turns in lower orbital space?

Does anything "higher" really make any better logical sense?

It's easy and takes less effort, of course, to just stop thinking about it and keep saying "unknown."

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Even if the claim of intelligent control could be proven without a doubt (and there is plenty of doubt), the default explanation is still not "aliens." There are still plenty of other potential explanations higher on the list than aliens, including unknown black project aircraft, time travelers, transdimensional glimpses, etc. And higher than all those remains "unknown." And unknown by no means equals aliens. Now, if we had clear positive proof that a particular kind of aliens exist, and that they were in some way responsible for a specific sighting, that would make logical sense.

But that old "we don't know what it is, so it must be aliens" thing just doesn't fly.

I really don't see how it's rational to doubt that these UFOs are under intelligent control.

Performing highly evasive manoeuvres with our most advanced military jets, hovering, accelerating, making right angle turns without decelerating, blinking and static lights, projecting lights onto the ground, etc.

Where is there doubt in there for their being under intelligent control?

Originally posted by FormerSkeptic
It's easy and takes less effort, of course, to just stop thinking about it and keep saying "unknown."

On the contrary. That's the hardest thing of all. To look at the available evidence, recognize its shortcomings, and understand that we just don't have enough solid, positive evidence to reach any sort of conclusion about anything, much less settling on hypothetical aliens. The only reason time travelers is higher on the list than aliens is that we at least know that humans exist, and that we're clever, and given enough time we might figure out how time and consciousness and reality all mash together so that something might exist where and when it has no reason to. UFO experiences tend to happen on a human-sized scale, too. We don't see flying saucers the size of Texas in our skies.

As it is, looking at all the available evidence for over 40 years, I've come to realize that there isn't really anything linking UFOs to hypothetical aliens any more than UFOs are linked to leprechauns.

Sure, we have evidence. I won't deny that. Evidence of things that sort of "exist," then vanish. But after all these years, we don't have a single solid clue as to what it's evidence of. "Unknown" still tops the list. That doesn't make anything easier. People like to have answers they can live with. That's why so many settle on aliens. Which aliens? From where? Don't know. I've come to think that maybe the solution to the question is as incomprehensible to us as the idea of income taxes is to a cat. The way we perceive reality and define things and communicate -- limited by our biology and type of intelligence -- might just be insufficient for us to understand what's really going on.

Originally posted by Brighter
I really don't see how it's rational to doubt that these UFOs are under intelligent control.

Performing highly evasive manoeuvres with our most advanced military jets, hovering, accelerating, making right angle turns without decelerating, blinking and static lights, projecting lights onto the ground, etc.

Where is there doubt in there for their being under intelligent control?

I guess it depends on how you want to define "intelligent." A house fly can make highly evasive maneuvers. Bugs of all kinds can hover and rapidly accelerate. They can even generate their own lights. It's way too easy to project what you think qualifies as intelligent control onto something, also to try and equate it with human intelligence. Because that's all we know. Until a UFO skywrites a smiley face in the sky, the most you can say is that their actions appear to be at the level of bugs or fish, or perhaps some kind of robotic device operating at a very low level that a human intelligence could certainly program. Zorgon's plasma-based "sky critters," a supposedly natural phenomenon, is a better explanation for that evidence.

But again, we're only able to perceive what we can understand, and that's what we cling to. But if you think about it, UFO behavior really makes no sense at all. Human beings travel from Point A to Point B because we need something. UFOs? We never know where the hell they come from, where they end up, or why they're traveling. You can say "another planet," but that's not a real answer. Which other planet? Don't know. Just making things up.

And it's foolish to just focus on the flying around UFOs that seem to be nuts and bolts. If you're going to try and explain everything, you gotta look at it all. All the weirdo cases with time dilation and psychic communicaiton and creepy creatures and blond muscle men and abductees and everything. I think the super strange cases help inform the mildly unusual "flying saucer appears from nowhere, zips by and then vanishes" stuff.

UFOs intelligent? *shrug*

why is the m oon red right now

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Originally posted by Brighter
I really don't see how it's rational to doubt that these UFOs are under intelligent control.

Performing highly evasive manoeuvres with our most advanced military jets, hovering, accelerating, making right angle turns without decelerating, blinking and static lights, projecting lights onto the ground, etc.

Where is there doubt in there for their being under intelligent control?

I guess it depends on how you want to define "intelligent." A house fly can make highly evasive maneuvers. Bugs of all kinds can hover and rapidly accelerate. They can even generate their own lights. It's way too easy to project what you think qualifies as intelligent control onto something, also to try and equate it with human intelligence. Because that's all we know. Until a UFO skywrites a smiley face in the sky, the most you can say is that their actions appear to be at the level of bugs or fish, or perhaps some kind of robotic device operating at a very low level that a human intelligence could certainly program. Zorgon's plasma-based "sky critters," a supposedly natural phenomenon, is a better explanation for that evidence.

But again, we're only able to perceive what we can understand, and that's what we cling to. But if you think about it, UFO behavior really makes no sense at all. Human beings travel from Point A to Point B because we need something. UFOs? We never know where the hell they come from, where they end up, or why they're traveling. You can say "another planet," but that's not a real answer. Which other planet? Don't know. Just making things up.

And it's foolish to just focus on the flying around UFOs that seem to be nuts and bolts. If you're going to try and explain everything, you gotta look at it all. All the weirdo cases with time dilation and psychic communicaiton and creepy creatures and blond muscle men and abductees and everything. I think the super strange cases help inform the mildly unusual "flying saucer appears from nowhere, zips by and then vanishes" stuff.

UFOs intelligent? *shrug*

edit on 24-12-2012 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)

Yet surely we can separate talk about the magnitude of an intelligence from its specific origin. Think of something sort of like a Turing test. I can be talking to an unknown entity that is behind a veil, and I can conclude that it's intelligent without ever knowing its nature. Say I ask it an enormously difficult math problem, one that no human could conceivably compute, and it answers correctly in less than a second. Now, I think I'd be justified in saying that this thing is 1) not a human, 2) more intelligent than a human and 3) shares some common problem-solving abilities with humans, but to a far higher degree. Even though I'm not justified in narrowing down what this thing is any more than that, I think that even the little information that we're justified in inferring is very telling. The point is that I can have evidence for something being more intelligent than a human without ever knowing or talking about its nature. At the same time, I can safely rule out that it's a housefly.

I'd also have to wholeheartedly disagree with the analogy of UFOs with insects. An insect doesn't have the intelligence to seek out military installations and shine beams of light into the bunkers, or to manipulate weapons launch codes, which would involve reverse-engineering a ridiculously secure encryption algorithm (not to mention the fact that they're apparently accomplishing this remotely from an anti-gravity craft). That to me is the sign of an intelligence that at the very least can not only understand the intentions of humans but can also outwit them. That's not to say that they aren't controlled by humans, but if they are, I think calling them 'advanced' is an understatement.

So the point is that I think we can conclude far more than you seem to think about the level of intelligence involved here, and we can even safely rule some things out.

This one from UFO In Sai Gon (Hochiminh City) - Vietnam is pretty good. Looks very real!



Found some info on above film

UFOs many times appeared in Vietnam?

VietNamNet Bridge – Unidentified flying objects UFOs, the mystery for the human being so far, were believed to turn up in Vietnam many times.

english.vietnamnet.vn...

Keep watching the skys! Thank you.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
... The only reason time travelers is higher on the list than aliens

There's one HUGE problem with time travel, and it's quite obvious if you think about it — the causality paradox. So in that alone you obviously haven't really given much effort to eliminate it as a possibility.

Time traveling intelligent creatures are much more IMPOSSIBLE than leprechauns.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
...I really don't see how it's rational to doubt that these UFOs are under intelligent control...

Don't get blinded by all the questionable data. Look at just the NASA footage and only at the slow moving space objects captured on video that turn direction or speed up or slow down.

reply to post by Unidentified_Objective


Only someone who completely miss's the point of that statement would call it a joke.

I took this on Wednesday while trying to capture a sea gull flying while on the manly ferry. Taken on the Sydney harbour. Actually I have posted the pics on my page don't know how to upload it to here

reply to post by aussieserenity

So stupid I can't upload the pics

Ok took this while trying to capture a see gull flying