It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Debunk This.

page: 2
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimnuggits
There are far too many witnesses, anecdotes,

Eyewitness accounts may work in a court of law, but when it comes to science, they're the lowest form of evidence. I can claim to see a spaceship, but that does not make it so. Many people do not even have a basic understanding of astronomy, weather or present technology - how can they confidently claim what they saw was ET?

Remember, it was only a month back that a guy reported a distress flare, and it turned out to be Jupiter. Or this past October, when another man mistook the moon for a UFO. :|


Originally posted by jimnuggits
artifacts, physical evidences, proofs

What artifacts have been recovered that show evidence of ET?


Originally posted by jimnuggits
stories, historical texts, ancient architectural anomalies

Ancient Astronaut Theory cherry picks its 'evidence', it does not try to understand the culture where these things came from and is an argument from ignorance. Example:

Claim: People suddenly went from cavemen to building advanced pyramids in a short period of time.
Rebuttal: Look at the mastabas. Then look at the bent, red, and stepped pyramids. Afterwards, take a gander at the hieroglyphs & images made by the Egyptians themselves that show how they were built.


Originally posted by jimnuggits
photographs, videos,

Why are all these photographs & videos taken always in poor quality? If these ETs are everywhere, why has no one, especially the professional UFO investigators, gotten a high quality shot of these things?


Originally posted by jimnuggits
pilot and military witnesses,

This is an appeal to authority - these folks are just as fallible as the rest of this.
edit on 12/4/2011 by SuperKawaiiNibiru because: Fixing grammar.




posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 





That's exactly what a skeptic would say. Let me remind you that eyewitness testimony is admissible in court as evidence. I have seen one, my family members have seen them. That is proof enough for us.



But I'm not you though am I?

Eyewitness testimony may well be admissible in court, but whilst someone may testify in court that they saw "something" and that the same court may well agree that they saw "something"......it doesn't prove that they saw aliens....... to my knowledge "proof of aliens" hasn't had a trial date fixed yet.


That might be what it takes to have a court date on top of a disclosure call . Since the court of popular opinion has been bashing each other over it for years . I'll put in some evidence that I saw for that to happen .
edit on 4-12-2011 by watchdog8110 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimnuggits


I know it is against ATS protocol to shine light in the corners,
Thank for pointing out this protcol by ATS. I was not aware of it



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimnuggits
reply to post by Algernonsmouse
 


Tone is not something that the written word can convey, although I understand your meaning.

I am being intentionally adverserial in an effort to show the frustration I feel when skeptics demand proof and look for none.

There is proof running out our collective ears, yet still the demand is made.

Forgive me, but the numbers of stories, physical implants, eye witness testimony and mysterious artifacts are proof in and of themselves.



Substitute physical implants for physical contact and by that "proof" criteria I can prove Santa Clause exists.
edit on 4-12-2011 by randomtangentsrme because: added a word



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 06:22 PM
link   
How about this? In the over sixty years since Roswell, there is no clear evidence, no actual spaceships, and no press conferences indicating the presence of alien life.

If they are out there, wouldn't we have solid, undeniable proof by now? Sixty years, and no firsthand contact?

What gives?



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 

Thank you NM

edit on 4-12-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimnuggits
reply to post by Algernonsmouse
 




There is proof running out our collective ears, yet still the demand is made.

Forgive me, but the numbers of stories, physical implants, eye witness testimony and mysterious artifacts are proof in and of themselves.
For every piece of possible tangible real "proof" there are, who knows how many, intentional fakes, forgeries, misidentified and dare I say "hoaxed" artifacts, photos and testimonies.
I would venture to say that the intentional hoaxes and unintentional misguided and mistaken stuff is far greater than the real stuff. This does not mean that there is a concerted effort by some dark operators with an agenda. Different types of people have many different reasons for making this stuff up or choosing to believe in the unlikely and far fetched.
That being said, I do not consider myself a "debunker" or a "skeptic", just a person seeking the truth and aware of the human desire to con, cheat, lie and delude others and/or themselves into making the most sensational of events out of what is more than likely an Occum's Razor qualifier.

My thought concerning your posting style:
Choosing to address this subject in a confrontational and bombastic manner is bound to leave many people miffed.
This isn't the most practical way to engage in an open and thought provoking dialog. agreed?



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Druid42
How about this? In the over sixty years since Roswell, there is no clear evidence, no actual spaceships, and no press conferences indicating the presence of alien life.

If they are out there, wouldn't we have solid, undeniable proof by now? Sixty years, and no firsthand contact?

What gives?
Maybe they are scared of your scary Avatar face!
Just Kiddin' I could'nt resist


P.S. you make a good point



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Skeptics do look for proof before running down the street and shouting "Eureka' every time a plane flies overhead at night with blinking lights. Without the skeptics some of the believers would be breaking out the Alien Autopsy video every Friday night and be drooling over the poor dead aliens being cut up by military secret doctor guys.

Neither side is 100% correct but you have your choice to believe in every personal story or in media's viewer driven content for their profits and ratings. And I have the option to sit back and pick it apart or set it aside as a "I don't know" event.

Both sides are needed. The all out believers to keep it on the front burner and keep it hot while the skeptics tries to make ufology not seem like a complete fallacy to those on the outside looking in. Everyone believing in UFO's would be as bad as everyone debunking UFO's because whatever is out there needs to be brought out in the open and examined and discussed.

And who are these people that make the fake video's, pictures, stories, and give these large group seminars to sell their products or autographs their books?

Are they the believer's or the skeptics?

I don't think its all the evil governments trying for dis-info. Maybe some believers are trying to sway public opinion, maybe some debunkers are trying to discredit the believers, maybe some people are out just to make a buck.

So no. To my satisfaction, no valid or set in concrete point was made by the OP's statements and I'll continue to examine what I read and watch with a questioning eye.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Algernonsmouse

... Proving to me that this stuff is real would not "ruin my day." Quite the opposite, it would be an amazing thing to find out. Being skeptical means wanting proof over blind faith, it is not about being opposed to you.



You make the OP's point for him. You seem to say that either there is "proof" -- as in a scientific, 3-sigma level of certainty, which any reasonable person admits there is not -- or else any belief is based on blind faith. As if there can be nothing in between?!?! That's simply not a rational position. That's not "skepticism." That's denial.

The OP is (correctly) telling some of the more hard-line skeptics that it's time for a gut-check, because too many on here improperly apply that label to themselves when what they actually are is a debunker or a denier.

Any person reading this who calls himself a "skeptic," yet cannot admit that there are several highly strange, very intriguing UFO cases -- cases highly *suggestive* of ET visitation, even though falling short of proof -- is not a true skeptic. That person is actually either ignorant of that most compelling UFO evidence, or is living in some kind of denial-laden fantasy land, one every bit as deserving of ridicule as that which is occupied by, for example, the saucer-callers and ET taxonomists.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


A small, focused group within a resource rich organizational power structure could conceivably keep a crashed disk out of the CNN radar, don't you think?

Hell, when is the last time you saw a story about Fukushima? That was a mere nine months ago, and is completely out of the loop.

What purpose would it serve to tell everyone, even those who don't care?

It would cause pandemonium, a complete breakdown of social mores and traditions, not to mention economic and political anarchy. So, even though it is a reality, don't expect to see Skinny Bob on the Real World any time soon.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by TeaAndStrumpets
 


However, there are also those ET hypothesis supporters who claim to be open minded, but as soon as a case of high strangeness comes along they are more than willing to toss it out because it doesn't fit their worldview of UFOs=ETs. I strongly believe that the worst thing that has ever happened to ufology is the ET hypothesis. It has turned a once burgeoning field with aspirations of scientific legitimacy into a cult. We need to stop with these preconceived notions and actually look at the facts. Instead of trying to figure out how the Shag Harbour incident is proof of visitors from Zeta Reticuli we need to simply look at the Shag Harbour incident.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


I agree. Let us weigh the facts on their own merit and allow the supposition to stop.

If indeed we have friends from Zeta Reticuli, let us find the evidence of that in the facts, not the what ifs.

Another problem we have is that our science is only as good as the tools by which it measures.

We are using sticks, figuratively speaking. Yet, even with our rudimentary tools, we have many confirmations that something is happening.

Something we cannot explain and are not responsible for.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:19 PM
link   


Eyewitness accounts may work in a court of law, but when it comes to science, they're the lowest form of evidence.
reply to post by SuperKawaiiNibiru
 


do you know what a lower form of evidence is than that? listening to people who have seen nothing or witnessed nothing.

i mean if a u.f.o. incident occured who would you listen to first? the guy who saw it and witnessed the event or the guy who saw nothing at all and guesses about what it could of been, ironically using the witness statement to match it to the nearest thing they can think of and then telling the guy he did not see what he saw?



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I hope you really are or have been in the ARMED FORCES....because if not....I would....suggest....to change your avatar. This is not a demand....nor do I have the right nor anyone else to tell you what you can or cannot do in this matter.

I would consider it a personal favor and a noble act to either confirm that you are or have been in the ARMED FORCES....or are HONORING THEM IN SOME WAY....by this avatar....or remove it.

Sincerely.......Split Infinity



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   
This is an absurd thread that will accomplish nothing. Man, this board really needs to pick itself back up. The fact that you guys are even responding to OP astonishes me.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeform11
 


Actually the testimony of the expert witness tends to bear more weight than the eyewitness. I'm not saying anyone here could be considered an expert witness on this topic, I am just pointing out another reason why people should stop upholding ufology to the standards of the judicial system and instead start upholding it to the standards of the scientific method.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Acknowledged.

Got it.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   
When I say testimony is considered evidence in a court of law, I did not necessarily mean testimony of witnessing a UFO sighting. I meant in general. Also keep in mind that physical evidence can be called into question and disallowed in a court of law as well.

Thousands of photographs exist of something that resemble craft that people have witnessed and testified to (not necessarily in court). So basically skeptics maintain that every single one of those photographs must be hoaxed, witness testimony be damned?

Not very open-minded.



posted on Dec, 4 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by lifeform11

do you know what a lower form of evidence is than that? listening to people who have seen nothing or witnessed nothing.


Except that (most) of these people who give explanations other then "I don't know, therefore aliens!" have seen things. I expect an astronomer to know more about things seen in the sky than your average citizen who's science education stopped at high school.

When people see things they don't understand, they get excited, and come up with exciting conclusions. "Alien Spacecraft" is much more exciting than "Chinese Lantern"/"Ball Lighting"/"The Moon"/"Military Craft"/"Satellite" and so on.


Originally posted by lifeform11
i mean if a u.f.o. incident occured who would you listen to first?

I would listen to both to understand where everyone's coming from. In each case I've looked at so far, the experts explanation was reasonable. I've yet to see a UFO case where their explanation seemed fishy.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join