The UN did not appoint an Ambassador to aliens HOAX!!!

The whole thing is fake. Both the UN and the person named are reporting the story is completly false.
What a surprise.

Fox News

I simply selected Fox because it came up early on Google.
Stop citing this hoax as some breakthrough kids!

I knew this 2 days ago. No need to pop a membrane.

This person is an idiot, how does he know what Aliens which are potentially thousands, millions of years ahead of us would use to communicate? Think we'll still be using radio signals in 1000 years if we're still here? I would hope not.
Secondly, how the hell does he know life hasn't evolved more than a microbe on another world.
Maybe he missed the discovery of a potentially habitable l planet which means, there is a lot more of them out there..they are COMMON. Sorry to burst the bubble, life is out there in all the diversity we have here..from
microbes to full sentient beings.

Just deal with it.


"However, he thinks humanity's first encounter with any intelligent aliens is more likely to be via radio or light signals from a distant planet than by beings arriving on Earth. And, he suggests, even if we do encounter aliens in the flesh, they are more likely to be microbes than anything intelligent"

reply to post by ATSZOMBIE



What are you talking about?
Am I the "idiot' you are speaking about?
Watch ou1 I can be "ill mammered" when provoked !

reply to post by OldDragger


OldDragger.....

The whole thing is fake.

Perhaps this will encourage people to be a little more careful when they review such material.

Perhaps not.....

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by OldDragger


if you hate all the talk about aliens & ufos so much then why don't you stop talking about them?

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Awww that takes all the fun out of it!

I'm confused as to how stating something as a fact because it's mentioned in a news story on a web page can be used to say that people are gullible for believing in "facts" from a different news story on a different web page.

Particularly when both Fox News(who are reporting the hoax) and The Times (who originally ran the Alien story) are both owned by the same person

Not that I actually believe that the UN is appointing an alien ambassador but still...

Laughing at people saying, haha you believed something just because you read it on the internet.. and then saying Heres the real truth....... from the internet. Seems to be a bit logically inconsistent

reply to post by Haydn_17


People are citing this fake story as part of the Great Disclosure that is happening.
It ain't, it's fake.
Thanks for the "popping a membrane" remark! Very thoughtful of you.

reply to post by davespanners


I'm not laughing. Who is? Google the story. See if 90% of the sites running it are UFO sites.
And who cares who owns what, a tabloid is a tabloid. we have brains, we should have working BS detectors as well. It's about rushing to judgement, inventing connection where there are none to support your own preconcieved dogma.
The vast majority of alien related stories turn out to be fakes, over and over again. Yet, the believer tells me that doesn't matter! That I'm not open minded.
Why? Because I can actually learn from experience?

I also believe the truth was exagerated, but lets just consider this:

The MSM tells us the UN appointed the malasyan astrophysicist to coordinate responses in case we are eventually contacted by extra terrestrials.

Then the MSM tells us that ain't true and we treat the first information we got from MSM as a hoax.

So, suppose another scenario. People here are claiming for disclosure. Suppose disclosure happens tomorrow. Who is going to tell us about it? The MSM. If the day after tomorrow they caim it ain't true, are we also gonna just believe it and call it a hoax?

My point is, do you believe in the MSM or not? Do you choose WHEN to believe in them? How many people treat the MSM as liars but are always believing in everything they report?

Just some food for thought.

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by davespanners

 

I'm not laughing. Who is? Google the story. See if 90% of the sites running it are UFO sites.
And who cares who owns what, a tabloid is a tabloid. we have brains, we should have working BS detectors as well. It's about rushing to judgement, inventing connection where there are none to support your own preconcieved dogma.
The vast majority of alien related stories turn out to be fakes, over and over again. Yet, the believer tells me that doesn't matter! That I'm not open minded.
Why? Because I can actually learn from experience?

Obviously a lot of UFO sites have picked up on the story as it supports their views, but the original story was in "The Times" a news source thats usually considered a lot more trust worthy then Fox News
The Times isn't considered a tabloid in the derisory sense of the word as papers like "The Sun" are it's one of Britains most respected news sources
The vast majority of Alien related stories are not reported in one of Britains most respected news papers, it's not the national enquirer and so people tend to believe what they report as they have a good reputation

What experience does anyone here have of the appointment of UN ambassadors or space law? and how have you learned from it?
If someone had told me before this story that there actually was a UN department called "United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs" I would have been incredulous to say the least
The original story didn't say "Aliens ate my hamster" it was just about the UN doing something rather bizarre, which is hardly beyond the realms of possibility is it?

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by davespanners

 

I'm not laughing. Who is? Google the story. See if 90% of the sites running it are UFO sites.
And who cares who owns what, a tabloid is a tabloid. we have brains, we should have working BS detectors as well. It's about rushing to judgement, inventing connection where there are none to support your own preconcieved dogma.
The vast majority of alien related stories turn out to be fakes, over and over again. Yet, the believer tells me that doesn't matter! That I'm not open minded.
Why? Because I can actually learn from experience?

I find you to be a bit hypocritical. You tell us not to believe this story as a breakthrough because it's a hoax, yet you qoute the hoax story from the same place that posted that it was real in the first place. Maybe you should take your own advice , or should it only be taken as literal when it supports your way of thinking?

Argumentative aren't you?
Facts are, The UN denies the story. i tend to believe them.
whatever. Believe what you want.

Originally posted by henriquefd
I also believe the truth was exagerated, but lets just consider this:

The MSM tells us the UN appointed the malasyan astrophysicist to coordinate responses in case we are eventually contacted by extra terrestrials.

Then the MSM tells us that ain't true and we treat the first information we got from MSM as a hoax.

So, suppose another scenario. People here are claiming for disclosure. Suppose disclosure happens tomorrow. Who is going to tell us about it? The MSM. If the day after tomorrow they caim it ain't true, are we also gonna just believe it and call it a hoax?

My point is, do you believe in the MSM or not? Do you choose WHEN to believe in them? How many people treat the MSM as liars but are always believing in everything they report?

Just some food for thought.

LOL MY same thoughts!! Just like when they said the ufo crashed in Rosewell, and then the next day retracted!! Oh please, MAYBE since they are the MEDIA they should start checking their sources before they post, print, or report....because there is starting to be a pattern here, and I think its all for the disinformation campaigne to confuse us!

Originally posted by OldDragger
Argumentative aren't you?
Facts are, The UN denies the story. i tend to believe them.
whatever. Believe what you want.

edit on 30-9-2010 by OldDragger because: (no reason given)

Of course they would deny the story! The topic is so taboo, and made fun of that the UN doesnt want to be open about it, because they are a respected organization but Id bet anything that its true, just like for all those years the US government denied the existance of a base in the dessert and then BOOM in 1999 the pictures from the satalites came out proving there was indeed a base in the middle of the desert! Hmmmmmm Im seeing a pattern of offical LYING goin on around here....

reply to post by StarrGazer25



Gettin' a little convuluted maybe?
Reaching?
Nawwww.
OK It's a sinister cosmic plot.

reply to post by henriquefd

You don't "believe" the MSM. You think for yourself and look carefully at "extraordinary claims". You note that all of the articles carried almost exactly the same verbage and can thus be considered a single source. You note that none of the direct quotes said anything about a "primary contact". You note that none of the direct quotes said anything about an ambassador. You note that none of the direct quotes said anything about an appointment.

You use critical thinking skills.

More food for thought.

Please contribute to one of the ongoing threads on this topic.

Closed.