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

Originally posted by IntastellaBurst

... UFO's are just that, ... unidentified flying objects. Who said anything about aliens ?? When someone reports a sighting or puts up a picture they call it a UFO, not an alien spaceship.

We try to keep open minds here, ... you should do the same. ...

[edit on 10-7-2010 by IntastellaBurst]

Along the "open mind" thought... A question occurred to me that some here might be able to answer...

Basically, Why do UFO's seem to commonly have such bright "showy" lighting?

If they don't want to be seen - couldn't they just shut them off, or hide them if they are required for propulsion or some other necessity?

If they do want to be seen, why not just land on Times Square or something and be seen?

Why such an obvious show? If they are so “High Tech” and want to remain hidden, they should be able to be a little more “stealth”.

Just looking for opinions on what I think is a fairly simple question, but has no easy answer…

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by __rich__

 

Has there been a crime committed? I've never heard of anyone being convicted when there is no evidence of a crime, it doesn't matter how many witnesses there are.


[edit on 7/12/2010 by Phage]

If alien abductions are actually to be believed then being taken from your house in the dead of the night, against your will and analy trespassed is somewhat of a crime. That being said, you would need the witnesses to have seen this happen. Travis Walton could maybe qualify.

Originally posted by Phage
Has there been a crime committed? I've never heard of anyone being convicted when there is no evidence of a crime, it doesn't matter how many witnesses there are.


[edit on 7/12/2010 by Phage]

This is almost as bad as Dagger's silly rhetoric. Almost...

And why is this thread growing at this rate? Obviously Dagger is the perfect example of a troll. He even admits he won't define what would constitute proof! Probably for fear his threshold could be dismissed as unreasonable, or someone might just meet it.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by jclmavg]

reply to post by AllIsOne

How about this? Can you find one scientist who claims that the Martian atmosphere is not very tenuous and composed of mostly CO2?

Claiming that Martian meteorites contain fossilized life is a far cry from saying that a few scientists believe they do.

I call shenanigans. Even NASA came out and called it on the Antarctica rock, nice try trying to debunk it though.

reply to post by jclmavg


It's Dragger, not Dagger.
Can I assume that's an example of your reading comprehension skills?
I kid ya cause I love ya!

reply to post by ReeVeeR

Again, where is the evidence that a crime was committed?

What happens when these thousands of "witnesses" are called into court and their stories are all different?
"I saw a flashing light hovering in the sky."
"I saw a huge triangle making impossible maneuvers."
"I saw a huge saucer blast out of the ocean."
"I saw a fleet of orbs."

Usually what happens is the attorneys realize it's hopeless and don't bother.

I have seen unexplained lights in the sky on more occasions than just once. And to top it off I had a van full of kids so many of us saw the same thing. They were amber lights and would flash in sequence in what resembled a triangle, then that area would go dark and the same thing would happen in another area far away, this happened for several minutes.
Two of my children saw a ball of light (off the Corsican beach in the Mediterranean Sea) descend into the water, then a few minutes later come out of the water and disappear into the night sky.
I don't need photos - I believe!

it seems to me debunkers do just that.

debunkers are debunkers, and debunkers focus their energies and skills on debunking, sometimes to the point of addiction. they do not always demonstrate a capacity to discuss any information which has not been debunked or which they cannot debunk.

skeptics are too busy verifying every bit of information presented, but don't always hold any piece of the puzzle in context of the picture the pieces put together form.

I think if either debunkers or skeptics were not focused on arguing with each piece of the puzzle, or arguing that it exists or not, might begin to see that they can't live ling enough to debunk each and every piece of information concerning the ufo phenomenon.

eventually if we do enough of our own research and listen to what all sides are willing to share, or can share, then maybe we can get off the fence and pick a side. they are here. they have never been here.

simple enough choice one would think.
they have been here, and/or are here.
they have not been here, and they are not here.

i think enough has been said for someone to justify why they believe in one way or the other and never fully explain their case within one lifetime anyways.

either we are alone, and you see plenty of evidence to support this.
or we are not alone, and you see plenty of evidence to support this.

i do my best to share what i think may be appropriate and at least worth consideration in my avatar background image.

if one is a believer, then by definition they believe.
if one is a skeptic, then one is skeptical.
if one is a debunker, then one focusses on debunking.
if one has 5 senses they would have to disregard in order to not believe, then they are not believers, skeptical, or debunking.

those are some of my thoughts.

personally i'm not really focussing on calling so many people liars and hoaxers. enough of the evidence had to be true to offer a foundation for the hoaxers to be motivated to act upon previously described phenomenon known as ufos.

thoughts, things & stuff,
ET

Originally posted by Jay-morris
Ufolgy is not like religon. Religon has no evidence what so ever to back up its claims. But evidence of ufos are overwhelming, we just dont know what they are.

we have many religious books dont we ?
these are about the same level of value as a light in the sky

yes/no ?

ii have read every single post on this 43 page thread. i myself am a believer, not from personal experience or any picture or video i have seen. its just a feeling i have.

now to get to my point. i think the proof the op needs is this.

The United States Government does not acknowledge the existence of / nor does any other government from what i understand

1. Aliens
2. Flying Saucers(ufos)

now if the government any government, but especially the united states government which has unlimited money and resources doesnt want to post there flag up and say hey you know what yup those things in the sky at night that you cant explain there ours.

then by default these ufo's / aliens have to be other worldly.

thats pretty good proof right there if you ask me.

Will someone please lock this thread up and throw away the key, I can't believe is that this has gone on for 43 pages. However, a wise man once said, "Everybody should believe in something; I believe I'll have another drink."

Seriously, end the insanity before I spill my Scotch.

So what is the point in this pointless thread?

You're not interested in anything other than ridiculing those of us believers than feel the need to respond to your insulting title.

I assume you are only intersted in making yourself feel superior. Ha! ...and adding to your thread count

reply to post by OldDragger


Isn't proving an unknown to be 100% true just as difficult as proving an unknown to be 100% false?

A photograph alone will not constitute irrefutable proof of anything--be it UFOs or peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. And as has already been pointed out, there is a limit as to what sort of evidence or proof can be offered for any subject given the medium of an Internet message board.

That said, I personally don't know of any irrefutable proof, that's available to the public-at-large, that would establish alien contact.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by cagliostro]

Originally posted by neformore
reply to post by OldDragger

 

You never replied to this

Am just curious as to your take on it.

OldDragger don't like questions he can't answer.

He came to a discussion forum but never intent any discussion.

He never answered my questions too because they proof he's wrong.

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by debris765nju

 

I'm getting sick of my own thread!

So you now see that all you did was joining in one single thread a lot of evidence, making members and no-members even more aware that we all need to keep the pressure and not given up.

Thank you for the great work you did.

reply to post by OldDragger


When you get new information don't you always consider the source to determine how true this information might actually be?

In one of the first pages of this now epic thread I listed many, many, quotes from at least a dozen NASA Astronauts.

They didn't "think" they saw a UFO that could be explained away by natural means, they claim to know the difference and say they definitely saw one or definitely know they exist.
Sometimes radar tower records substantiate these sightings.

How can you indirectlyaccuse these men, all experts in the field of being at best delusional, at worst liars and frauds?

You can't keep avoiding the question. I will chase you down old man. I'll have to settle for whats left after these wolves get through with you though. So be it.

reply to post by rusethorcain


How can you indirectlyaccuse these men, all experts in the field of being at best delusional, at worst liars and frauds?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Geez, what got into you?
There is the possibility they could be mistaken isn't there?
There are a ton of fake astronaut quotes out there, I didn't check yours. Did you?
Did any of them state anything other than their opinion?
Astronauts also can br staunch catholics, some are fundamentalists.
More opinion. Do I HAVE to believe an astronauts opinions, because they are an astronaut?

Originally posted by pterra

Originally posted by neformore
reply to post by OldDragger

 

You never replied to this

Am just curious as to your take on it.

OldDragger don't like questions he can't answer.

He came to a discussion forum but never intent any discussion.

He never answered my questions too because they proof he's wrong.

I answered that back on page 40.

UFOs don't fly underground, that's physically impossible.

When we try to fly our aircraft underground, it's called a "crash".

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by pterra

Originally posted by neformore
reply to post by OldDragger

 

You never replied to this

Am just curious as to your take on it.

OldDragger don't like questions he can't answer.

He came to a discussion forum but never intent any discussion.

He never answered my questions too because they proof he's wrong.

I answered that back on page 40.

UFOs don't fly underground, that's physically impossible.

When we try to fly our aircraft underground, it's called a "crash".

But it could be metaphysically possible.