Video proof that aliens are NOT flying around Earth!!

Originally posted by TimeCrisis
Good God what a moronic thread...

I have to agree with you, This guy isn't very bright.

Nice time lapse and I have never seen these observatories but I have to agree with others pointing out the false logic. I immediately knew that you were wrong when saying that you had photographic proof that something didn't exist. Like others, I saw no bicycles, busses, buildings, humans et.al. yet i KNOW those things exist.
sorry pal

reply to post by ProphecyPhD


Stop using such titles.

Originally posted by worldriot
reply to post by ProphecyPhD

 

I don't see tacos in this video, so I suppose they don't exist either. Sucks, I liked tacos too.

What? no tacos?? lol.

There is no way that these 2 vids are proof that Aliens do not exist. There is more proof that they do exist than proof that they dont.
Wow this thread actually got 2 flags? CRAZY!

I think the threadstarter was trolling us, to get us to watch the video and consider that in the vastness, there's life everywhere.

Proof is a strong word. As someone else mentioned.

I heard once, that even scientists don't "prove" things, they just make them more likely to be true. There isn't a way to prove that something didn't happen somewhere while nobody was watching (in most circumstances, anyway). Do we videotape the earth from space? If not, maybe that would be a good idea(:

reply to post by ProphecyPhD


I agree with you. I think the aliens and ufos most report seeing are from our planet or other dimensions.
But I do believe that there is life on other planets I just don't think they are visiting us.

To boil down what the OP was saying in a less sensationalist way: Millions of people watch/film/photograph the skies. Only a small percentage of those claim to see UFOs(an even smaller percentage do so without a book to sell). We can conclude that the body of evidence against UFOs is much much larger than the body of evidence supporting UFOs.

reply to post by ProphecyPhD


Somebody needs to show this to all of the air traffic controllers who've picked up a lot of unexplained stuff on radar.

These videos, in all their grandeur, are filming less than one percent of the night sky.

So, by the same measure, if a scuba diver were to film a beautiful underwater coral reef, but the film did not display every single creature in the ocean, would that mean those creatures don't exist?

Logic Fail.

Originally posted by FEDec
To boil down what the OP was saying in a less sensationalist way: Millions of people watch/film/photograph the skies. Only a small percentage of those claim to see UFOs(an even smaller percentage do so without a book to sell). We can conclude that the body of evidence against UFOs is much much larger than the body of evidence supporting UFOs.

Considering that the given example lacks proper means of detection of true UFOs, no valid conclusion can be inferred from mere absence of detection. In short, the OP did not offer any evidence of absence and the argument is thus a classic fallacy.

Your boiled down version suffers from another flaw, it would only work if it is presumed that ET UFOs - if they exist - would show up in ludicrous amounts. That presupposition is doubtful therefore your version fails as well.

Why are people this stupid? And why is the OP putting "PHD" in his/her name when it is obvious he/she does not nearly have the necessary mental faculties for obtaining a doctorate?

You picked the wrong site man.

Originally posted by TheLogicalist
You picked the wrong site man.

Don't blame the site for his silly views.

Seeing is believing, until you actually get to witness one for yourself you will never know. Oh and did you know that you're staring into the screen of Alien Technology. You have Alien language "text" embedded into your PC right now. You and everyone else.
Language such as this:

AeâÆ“˜
@
eäØ’˙
EkëΣ›*Qwû≈Ï;cä≤⁄*R
[£ÃıGpô√Ï@jîæÈ>iîøÍ A l ò ƒ !!H!u!°!OE!°"'"U"Ç"Ø"›#
#8#f#î#¬#$$M$|$´$⁄% %8%h%ó%«%˜&'&W&á&Σ&Ë''I'z'´'‹(
(?(q(¢(‘))8)k)ù)–**5*h*õ*oe++6+i+ù+—,,9,n,¢,◊-
-A-v-´-·..L.Ç.Σ.Ó/$/Z/ë/«/˛050l0§0€11J1Ç1∫1Ú2*2c2õ2‘3
3F33Π3Ò4+4e4û4ÿ55M5á5¬5˝676r6Æ6È7$7`7ú7◊88P8å8»99B99º9˘:6:t:≤:Ô;-;k;™;Ë

Originally posted by jimnuggits
These videos, in all their grandeur, are filming less than one percent of the night sky.

So, by the same measure, if a scuba diver were to film a beautiful underwater coral reef, but the film did not display every single creature in the ocean, would that mean those creatures don't exist?

Take that further: We have only explored about 1 percent of the world's deep oceans. So using the logic in the OP, we have no reason to explore other 99 percent. At first, scientists didn't believe life existed in deep oceans after initial explorations not finding anything but lifeless underwater deserts. Had they assumed the OP's logic, we'd still believe that.

Beautiful images, though. They only strengthen my belief that we're not alone in this vast universe.

Anyone else see the big fricken laser beam coming out of that telescope at 2:42?

i dont see any aircraft in the videos..i guess man never flew if this is proof ufos dont exist..wish they would stop useing the word proof when there is none

The title of post and claims within are far from absolute. Is there a chance that we're alone in the Universe? Yes, albeit miniscule. Is there a chance we have no never, nor are being visited by extra-terrestrial/dimensional beings? Yes, but once again, id say the chance of that, too, is low.

So, for a couple beautiful videos of the cosmos around us to serve as 'proof' that 'aliens' don't exist...that's just silly.

That's like saying, "I walked through the woods for 10 minutes and didn't see any bears, so bears must not exist." Proof of nothing

Originally posted by worldriot
When we were done laughing he said

"Thats not how science works though, science job is to prove things, not disprove them"

He's so brilliant

I'm so proud

You might have been better off correcting him. It's actually almost the exact opposite. Science disproves theories all the time, but can only provide evidence in support of theories that can never be 100% proved.