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.

 

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

page: 25
85
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by eennoo
Thousands of years ago people thought meteorites (shooting stars) were angels falling from heaven.
.

Have you eliminated the possibility that they have wild imaginations?

Have you eliminated the possibility that it was space junk they saw?

Have you eliminated the possibility that they were wrong?

No, you haven't.

Show us proof. Not stories!


I did....several of us have...

Look at the links I gave, which of course you haven't...

BTW, because people were supesticious in the past it doesn't mean they were not describing what they saw WHEN WE HAVE EVIDENCE OF WHAT THEY SAW...

BTW, first of all "space junk" is a new term describing the left overs of satellites, and probes, and last I checked satellites and probes haven't been around for thousands of years. obviously you didn't think this long enough...


And sorry but EVERY single culture describing the EXACT SAME THINGS is not "wild imaginations"....


Let me show you yet another example....

The following is a painting from 1350 titled "Cruxificion" and this particualr painting hangs above the altar at the Visoki Decani Monestary in Kosovo, Yugoslavia.



Now, let's take a closer look at two things which were painted there...





The following is a depiction of a sighting which was made in Germany on November 4th 1697.





This picture shows a UFO sighting over Hamburg, Germany
The objects were described as 'two glowing wheels' -
November 4, 1697 - Wheels - Spoked Wheels.


www.crystalinks.com...

Do yourself a favor and watch the links I gave on my first post which show where some of these paintings can be found.

And btw...you are going to claim that military personel "have been imagining things" because of the things we have seen?...


Obviously you are running out of excuses....

[edit on 11-7-2010 by ElectricUniverse]




posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Oh my, when I read another thread I couldn't help but think of this, and researched the link, though the OP quotes something about the way pseudo skeptics act, ignoring evidence and testimony, which is evidence, they simply are not open minded and seekers in any way.

But I found other quotes from the site that including very well known and respected figures, Sagan and Einstein for example.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
SCEPCOP ~ Debunking pseudo-sceptics

Good read, but also, from the link there is more:





www.debunkingskeptics.com...


And according to Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, a skeptic is:

"One who is yet undecided as to what is true; one who is looking or inquiring for what is true; an inquirer after facts or reasons."

But rather than inquiring, or asking questions to try to understand something, they seek to debunk, discredit and ridicule anything that doesn't fit into their belief system.  And rather than suspending judgment, they make accusations of fraud and delusion of all paranormal claimants.  Hence, we call them pseudoskeptics (a term coined by the late Marcello Truzzi) for their actions and behaviors are the complete antithesis of what skepticism truly means.

….



In truth and by their actions, these pseudoskeptics are defenders of the status quo and materialism.  They are fanatics and dogmatists who have no regard for facts, evidence or truth, but have an a priori faith-based belief that paranormal phenomena is impossible and therefore set out to debunk it, not investigate it. And they will distort, dismiss and obfuscate to get their way.  Thus, they generally have no objectivity toward evidence, but bigotry and emotional fanaticism.

And in fact, despite their worship of science, they do not even follow the Scientific Method, because they do not update their hypotheses to fit the data, but instead reject data that doesn't fit into their hypothesis, which is a direct violation of the Scientific Method of course.  There are plenty of examples of this....



"I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud." - Carl Gustav Jung

"Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of the empirical world. All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it." - Albert Einstein

"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new lands but seeing with new eyes." - Marcel Proust, French novelist


Unfortunately, pseudo-skeptic groups have not heeded the warnings and advice of one of their own heros, the late Carl Sagan:

"...The chief deficiency I see in the skeptical movement is its polarization: Us vs. Them -- the sense that we have a monopoly on the truth; that those other people who believe in all these stupid doctrines are morons; that if you're sensible, you'll listen to us; and if not, to hell with you. This is nonconstructive. It does not get our message across. It condemns us to permanent minority status." - Carl Sagan

"People are not stupid. They believe things for reasons. The last way for skeptics to get the attention of bright, curious, intelligent people is to belittle or condescend or to show arrogance toward their beliefs." - Carl Sagan

"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or in politics, but it is not the path to knowledge, and there's no place for it in the endeavor of science." - Carl Sagan



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Another_Nut

even if all that is true it still doesnt mean ET. doesnt anyone get this? u have to "prove" that these "beings" are ET. which, like ive said many times, CANT BE PROVEN WITHOUT A TRIP TO THEIR PLANET! that is the ONLY WAY to be sure they are ETs!


And tell us "another nut" what else could have been flying these things for thousands of years?...


We have descriptions, and paintings of every culture which have described these aircraft, and they also mention that these things have "pilots", and at first these pilots were not human but were "gods" and "Godesses".

Arthur C. Clark defined this phenomenon very well when he said. "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." this is why ancient people called the occupants of these crafts as "Gods" and "Goddesses" because they didn't know anything about technology.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by itchy_tartan_blanket
 


Of course I got pictures of it flying!

See!

April, 1, 2001: Witnesses report seeing a hovering container. "It just seemed to be dangling there in the sky for a few minutes. Like it has anti-gravity!"

Image of the sighting:



Here is more proof!

www.clipartof.com...

There is aliens in that container I tell ya!



[edit on 11-7-2010 by eennoo]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by itchy_tartan_blanket
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


You're the one making the claim so I put it to you to prove it.


i am not the one that made the claim.

i am not the one disregarding those who have been in a position or professional status and based upon their experiences have made the claim. this is evidence to me, this is proof entered into testimony by individuals who were already famous, and did not need nor require, nor want an additional 15 minutes of fame.

i am not the one making the claims.

the claim i'm making is you have yet to discredit the claims made by people far more qualified than you with far more credentials and skills in specific proffessions, from multiple disciplines.

you discredit all the experts in all the languages. then we will discuss what qualifies as "evidence" & "proof".

because right now skeptics and debunkers are not focussed on what it means, but rather how much of this can we disprove as evidence and deny as potential proof.

what do you want or expect?

the cliff note version of 6,000+ years worth of reports throughout written history in one nicely packaged thread here on ATS concerning all the evidence? evidence you have already demonstrated the capacity to ignore anyways?

would this pacify your "trust none of it" addictions?

how many people am i to acknowledge and recognize as liars in order to entertain the "debate" that no evidence and no proof exists?


trillions upon quadrillions of peices of a puzzle you want someone else to put together for you?

what a spoiled little brats some people must be.

sure, they will travel light years to make one trip in order to pacify your skepticism.

and once they get here to show you, you won't owe them anything for them having made the trip especially just for you.



yada yada yada & blah blah blah & stuff + thingies,
ET

[edit on 11-7-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Noone is even wanting to debate this with me... makes me sad. I am willing to argue any point with logic and reason. I just would like a nice debate cause half this place is arguing over who is the coolest and I already know the answer.... ME!



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


A UFO is not an alien ship. But I'll tell you something, the artist must have had some level of sight seeing as he could depict whomever was inside these "spaceships". While I want to believe, I just can't. A wheel in the sky is not an alien ship. It is perception about the inexplicable for the times. Comet, meteor/ites gaseous phenomenom could be an explanation for these depictions, not only alien visitors. And yet again I have to say that this just provides evidence not proof. Just admit that your opinion is just an assumption based on nothing. If photos, videos and testimonies aren't proof then what makes you think a "cartoon" is?

I know that God has been painted but that doesn't mean he exists.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matrix Rising


First off you have to weigh the available evidence for each case. Only a pseudoskeptic will try to lump these things together. So the evidence that has been listed throughout this thread pertains to Ufology. If you want to discuss the lochness monster I suggest you go to appropriate folder and start a thread.


hmmm, now you say you need to weigh available evidence, but I thought you suggested that witnesses, being direct evidence, is enough. I'm still waiting on evidence to be presented outside of observation of some kind, so is observation all that is needed for proof positive?

I'm actually lumping evidence type and trying to determined whether like evidence suggests the existences of other phenomena that are also only based on observational evidence.






Now you want to dictate how we can evaluate the evidence? We use direct and circumstantial evidence to send people to their death so we can use it to weigh the available evidence alongside using the scientific method to build a hypothesis to explain the observed phenomena called U.F.O.'s.

Also, you are wrong about the legal system. If a bank teller sees a robber and she's credible they use her testimony along with circumstantial evidence to take the person to court.


I just do not know why people keep coming back to the legal system to prove anything. It is so unrelated it kind of dumfounds me in trying to answer the obvious.

Also in your case we do have a bank that is robbed right? So there is physical evidence of a robbed bank and we do know that robbery is real, so bring this over to UFOs and show me the physical evidence and/or something physical we can relate aliens to help prove they are here. Give us non-observable physical evidence, please. Picture, video, radar, eye ball, witness reports are all third party observational evidence and that is all we got with nothing else supporting it.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by eennoo
 


And then some people ask why some of us respond in kind to these idiots in the forums...

What you showed provides nothing at all.. it doesn't prove your claims which are based on nothing more than ignorance, and your willingness to keep swiming in ignorance...

But hey, this sort of response like yours does show you inability to make an intelligent argument.

So THANK YOU for proving what we already knew of people like you.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
The following is a painting from 1350 titled "Cruxificion" and this particualr painting hangs above the altar at the Visoki Decani Monestary in Kosovo, Yugoslavia.



Now, let's take a closer look at two things which were painted there...





Symbols for the moon and the sun. Nothing more.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


You just don't get it!

You have not shown any proof! AT ALL.

You can talk all you want about ancient civilizations seeing flying things with beings in them, but how does that prove they were alien?. IT DOESN'T.

You fail yet again to show any proof what so ever.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
Oh my, when I read another thread I couldn't help but think of this, and researched the link, though the OP quotes something about the way pseudo skeptics act, ignoring evidence and testimony, which is evidence, they simply are not open minded and seekers in any way.

But I found other quotes from the site that including very well known and respected figures, Sagan and Einstein for example.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
SCEPCOP ~ Debunking pseudo-sceptics

Good read, but also, from the link there is more:





www.debunkingskeptics.com...


And according to Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, a skeptic is:

"One who is yet undecided as to what is true; one who is looking or inquiring for what is true; an inquirer after facts or reasons."

But rather than inquiring, or asking questions to try to understand something, they seek to debunk, discredit and ridicule anything that doesn't fit into their belief system.  And rather than suspending judgment, they make accusations of fraud and delusion of all paranormal claimants.  Hence, we call them pseudoskeptics (a term coined by the late Marcello Truzzi) for their actions and behaviors are the complete antithesis of what skepticism truly means.

….



In truth and by their actions, these pseudoskeptics are defenders of the status quo and materialism.  They are fanatics and dogmatists who have no regard for facts, evidence or truth, but have an a priori faith-based belief that paranormal phenomena is impossible and therefore set out to debunk it, not investigate it. And they will distort, dismiss and obfuscate to get their way.  Thus, they generally have no objectivity toward evidence, but bigotry and emotional fanaticism.

And in fact, despite their worship of science, they do not even follow the Scientific Method, because they do not update their hypotheses to fit the data, but instead reject data that doesn't fit into their hypothesis, which is a direct violation of the Scientific Method of course.  There are plenty of examples of this....



"I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud." - Carl Gustav Jung

"Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of the empirical world. All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it." - Albert Einstein

"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new lands but seeing with new eyes." - Marcel Proust, French novelist


Unfortunately, pseudo-skeptic groups have not heeded the warnings and advice of one of their own heros, the late Carl Sagan:

"...The chief deficiency I see in the skeptical movement is its polarization: Us vs. Them -- the sense that we have a monopoly on the truth; that those other people who believe in all these stupid doctrines are morons; that if you're sensible, you'll listen to us; and if not, to hell with you. This is nonconstructive. It does not get our message across. It condemns us to permanent minority status." - Carl Sagan

"People are not stupid. They believe things for reasons. The last way for skeptics to get the attention of bright, curious, intelligent people is to belittle or condescend or to show arrogance toward their beliefs." - Carl Sagan

"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or in politics, but it is not the path to knowledge, and there's no place for it in the endeavor of science." - Carl Sagan


Yeah, its funny! Some skeptics/debunkers believe that ufo believers are brainwashed by there beliefs, even though they are brainwashed by there own beliefs.

Why do some de-bunkers come out with the most stupid explantions for some cases? Well, its because its part of there belief system, which makes there judgement flawed. But they hide behind there beliefs by always using the science work, and saying crap like"show me the evidence now" when they know god damn well that is not gonna happen on a forum.

If you are on the fense, like me, then you see things from both sides, the good and the bad.

I mean, we have the skeptics sociaty. Why the hell do we have a group of people caring what other people say? Well, its because they love it, they thrieve on it. Why else would they do it?



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Somewhere we all know the truth, which is:

There is no way to absolutely prove we have been visited.

There is no way to absolutely prove we have not been visited.

It remains a gray area.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


Evidence and proof exist of the Phenomena of UFO's the debate is about what the hell it is.


I think it is almost entirely terrestrial besides some space debris. Man-made craft or unknown natural events. Kinda like the rainbows before earthquakes.

Why would aliens come here with a whimper? Are they scared? Hell no! They traveled from who knows where I am sure they could squash us if they ever arrived.

Almost every major sighting is in a secluded area! WHY!? Fame fetching? Too far to go to a proper school?



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


I just proved that YOU were the ignorant ones. YOU are the ones that see a container and ASSUME there is "extraterrestrials" in them.

You see a light in the sky, and you think "extraterrestrials" are flying that light.

You see a blob in the sky, you believe "extraterrestrials" are flying that blob.

You have NOTHING. I just made a point stronger than any point you will ever make in your life.

YOU HAVE NOTHING TO PROVE EXTRATERRESTRIALS EXIST. This is a cold hard fact and I am watching you fail to understand.


[edit on 11-7-2010 by eennoo]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ladyinwaiting
 


EXACTLY!

But why are people still arguing as if they have proof?

There are several members here who keep posting stupid witnesses, and stupid pictures, and stupid stories about ancient people, and they actually believe this is proof..... WHY?



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


I don't HAVE to show you anything. I saw with 2 other people some kind of craft disappear right before our eyes near a lake at 3 in the morn. So whilst, you have had no such luck; your rant does not phase me in the least...



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by eennoo
 


I don't think the articles and posts are stupid. I think they are interesting for the most part. It's just..............they aren't tangible proof, which is what is being called for here.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
You can't get a proof, because there isn't any.

The best way to be 100% sure is to see it for yourself. And that means, judging by your respones, seeing the UFO landing in front of you, grey or whatever dudes coming out of it, telling you they're from another planet and being absolutely sure you're not high/drunk as hell or anything.

Which is kind of difficult to achieve.

Oh btw, this is my first post here


[edit on 11-7-2010 by Boh22]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 


Oh stop making sense and being factual!
you spoil all the believers fun!
Actually, this brings up a serious and valid point.
The Van Danikan (sic) style of revisionist interpretation of known fact.
A UFO fan takes a quick internet trip through historical artifacts, ie. the paintings illustrated, folklore, Mayan sculpture, Nazca Lines etc, pronounces himself an expert, and completly ignores the real experts that have spent their lives studying these subjects, and ignore the entire historical tradition and context. Then trumpets his 'discovery'.
this is quackery and pseudo science at it's worst, it's dishonest, it's deliberatly misleading, exploitive and most importantly, FALSE!!
Many of you are incapable of getting this. too bad.



new topics

top topics



 
85
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join