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

reply to post by OldDragger


If more people would do some research into formerly "Top Secret" military projects, they would be amazed at how many vehicles the Air Force has worked on and then shelved because they ultimately didn't serve the needs they were being developed for. I've seen pics in Popular Science magazine from the 1950s through the 2000s of prototypes that didn't "make it", and considering that these were Black Projects, it's understandable that people were frightened/excited by seeing these strange vehicles being tested--including disk-shaped ones and the classic "cigar-shaped" appearance attributed to many UFOs when viewed from the side and below.

Originally posted by jeanne75018
I didn't take time to read the thread but Caponi's photographs are very startling:
You'll find them here

With all due respect, I believe that is a frisbee.

[edit on 1-9-2010 by Royzer]

I think this is one of the more compelling photos that you might consider.

reply to post by type0civ


It looks fake to me.
But aside from that, what does it show that is proof of alien visitation?
Exactly what should I consider?

reply to post by OldDragger


For myself , I consider that the photo was taken in 1952 in Peru......The object is definitely out of place for that time frame and location.... and it's leaving a smoke trail.....we send probes to other planets, could this be a probe...with no one on board.

Please tell me about it's fake attributes

reply to post by type0civ


Could be?
That's not proof.
To me it "could be" a retouched photo.
Why would you conclude that it's a real picture of an alien spacecraft?

reply to post by OldDragger


I find it highly unlikely to be 1950's Peruvian technology. The smoke trail indicates to me that it's not a frisbee wrapped in aluminum foil. If we can send out probes to check out other planets, why would you not think it's possible for others to do the same? And where's your proof of photo manipulation? It really bothers you to think someone saw this bizarre sight, and snapped a picture of it.

reply to post by type0civ


I'm not proving anything, I don't have too do I/
YOU are making the claim?
What is 1950's Peruvian technology?
Do you think photos weren't retouched in the 50's?
The picture doesn't "bother" me at all?
Why would it?
So.....how does the picture prove anything?
I'm not going to quibble with you all day!
Your picture is not PROOF of anything!

Ha! I just read your comments on the first page....you seem angry....consider counseling....and stay off your mom's computer.

reply to post by type0civ


Well thanks for your intelligent contributions!
I'd say your posts speak for themselves.
Another "believer" bites the dust.

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by primetime2123

 

NOPE! SUPER LAME ANSWER!
Why , this and other internet sites are full of folks that play tennis with aliens on a regular basis! That spend more time with aliens then their Grandma! CONSTANT pronouncements here that aliens are a fact!
ooooooo! the big bad GOVERNMENT does nothing but flit around the globe hiding evidence1 That's just silly. laughable in fact.
Got to do better than that my friends, ! That's a laughable response!
And, don't accuse me of trolling just because I can ask questions you can't answer!

[edit on 10-7-2010 by OldDragger]

Now that's an intelligent contribution! There's something wrong with you....I saw another thread you started on the same subject, for some reason you can't let it go, and you have not answered others request to define proof as you see it.

Originally posted by type0civ
Please tell me about it's fake attributes

What does it run on, steam?

Even we don't fly jets that inefficient and dirty anymore. It's a crappy photo, and you can even see where it's been manipulated by somebody dodging the clouds behind the "smoke" trail. Who knows what the original photo might show? Maybe wings and tail?

Probably an excellent photo for 1950's Peruvian technology slick. I'm not an expert at photo editing, so could you please explain what "cloud dodging" is....And i'm gonna go out on a limb here, but trailing smoke, even with today's aircraft, is almost always indicative of a malfunction.

reply to post by type0civ


Probably an excellent photo for 1950's Peruvian technology
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I asked you once and you evaded.
What is "1950's Peruvian technology"?
What do you mean by that?

The object in the photo to me does not look like something I would expect to see in the skies over Peru in 1952 also with reference to the photo itself being "crappy" it's probably not unusual for a photograph taken with equipment available in Peru in 1952. So your frame of reference here is Peru 1952.

Would you care to enlighten all who have posted in your thread as to what you consider "proof"?

reply to post by type0civ


What do you know about what photographic equiptment was available in Peru in 1952?
Why assume that it was different from anywhere else?
READ THE THREAD!
If there were proof, we wouldn't be having this pointless conversation, would we?
Again, WHAT DOES THAT PHOTO PROVE?
How does it prove aliens are visiting?
Last chance!

I searched the thread for your definition of "proof", I cannot find it. (And why do you have multiple threads on this subject).LINK Proof can come from the process of elimination. So again, your definition of "proof".

reply to post by type0civ


Uh, I have two threads. Two different subjects.
Proof would be something that ends the controversy, that would take aliens fro speculation to fact.
That hasn't happened.
My last reply to you, you avoid questions, offer nothing at all but your opinions.

80 pages and still nothing?




I try to check back every 20 pages or so, only to be disappointed each time.

major let down.

If I posted the exact location of a real, touchable and not-of-this-world aircraft here on the Forum, out of 1000 people likely to read the post...

...700 would ignore it because they dont really believe in the possibility.

That leaves 300 people. Of those 300 people

250 would be too lazy to pursue it.

That leaves 50 people. Of those 50 people

40 would give up after not finding any evidence of it on the Internet.

That leaves 10 people.

Of those 10 people 9 would give up after travelling and finding that the location is difficult to access .

That leaves 1. I am that one.