My Big Problem with the ET Hypothesis

I liked the Ancient Aliens thing when i was 7 but like most people I grew up.
The part i always had an issue with was that it the whole ET visitation thing makes little to no sense.
They come from light years away to perform aerial stunts, abduct people, have secret meetings with the "NWO/Reptilians" or just watch. But they do not want to make their presence known, so they use vehicles that are brightly colored and perform stunts? They do not wantto be known but they will make art in crops? Please... And i have heard the analogy about us trying to explain math to ants and that is why the aliens do not talk to us it is because we are "to beneath them". Well you know what? If ants had an internet, currency,art,music,spoken language,space vehicles,cars,government, churches, schools and laws I am positive we would find a way to communicate.

reply to post by zaiger


LOL This again why humanity makes me laugh. So you are stating believing in the ancient astronaut thing is childish? I think being naive is childish to think we are the only humanoids in this galaxy. Maybe they are observing us and think also that there is no intelligent life as well.

Originally posted by dragnet53
reply to post by zaiger

 

LOL This again why humanity makes me laugh. So you are stating believing in the ancient astronaut thing is childish? I think being naive is childish to think we are the only humanoids in this galaxy.

Did i say that i did not believe in Aliens oh wise one? I was just bringing up the logical problems with calims of ET visitation.

Maybe they are observing us and think also that there is no intelligent life as well.

Oh i know so deeeeeep. You should wear all black and hang out at starbucks till it closes.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a9283d24b203.png[/atsimg]

So many people on this site cling to that as the only possible explanation and disregard any other theory as being flat out wrong.

No single theory can be applied to all cases. Some are misidentified normal objects or phenomenon, others seem to be unexplained as anything else. The best we can do is take the evidence at hand, analyze it, and draw our conclusions based on this information.

It is my belief that ufology took a major downturn when it became a foregone conclusion that UFOs were ET in origin.

I don't think ANY UFOlogist believes all UFOs are ET in origin, but in some cases, that is the only theory that seems to fit the evidence.

____________________________________

Here's an example. Recently, I've been entertaining an idea about Roswell. Here's the hypothesis I was going to research:

What if it really was Mogul that crashed, but they thought it was a Russian Balloon at first, and were later too embarrassed to let anyone know?

This would explain the steps they took (flying it to foreign tech bases, etc.), and the cover story and coverup. Their embarrassment could even explain the duration of the coverup.

But, then many holes appeared...

Why did so many military officers come forward testifying to the strangeness of the debris materials, etc.? Most never saw a penny from such testimonials.

Why did the Air Force feel the need to coverup the reports of bodies in their report?

Mogul Flight 4's recovery date only fits if you accept Brazel's testimony after being in military custody, as to when he found the debris.

Nobody's ever produced the "flowery tape" that Moore claims is responsible for the accounts of I-Beams with hieroglyphics on them.

Why couldn't witnesses identify simple balsa wood, foil paper, and balloon debris?

I'm a firm believer in trying to find a more plausible explanation before jumping the gun to an ET craft being responsible for a UFO sighting, etc. But, in some cases, it's the only explanation that fits the evidence. Now, with additional evidence, some cases may be able to be more satisfactorily explained, but it's good to be open to at least the possibility.

But, thinking every light in the sky that you can't immediately explain is a UFO, that's just blind belief.

Originally posted by Gazrok
Why couldn't witnesses identify simple balsa wood, foil paper, and balloon debris?

Possibly because they never saw this specific ML307 construction before, and it looked very peculiar. Shredded to pieces, it was difficult to imagine what it was originally. The similarity between Mogul balloon debris and the supposed extraterrestrial debris, including mono-filament string and tape is quite an amazing coincidence...

reply to post by zaiger


haha I hate starbucks.

2nd line was here, but it left ....