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.

 

To Qualify for Serious Discussion on UFO Topics, You should Know....

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   
I believe many of us wish we'd had a dime every time we hear statements like "UFO=Unidentified Flying Object/=Space Aliens", "No Solid Evidence Exists...", etc. How do I verify if one has perused thru enough material before I deem his/her conclusion worthy?

Can you provide 3 cases and 3 persons one must be familiar with in order to take his/her UFO opinion seriously?




posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TinkererJim
I believe many of us wish we'd had a dime every time we hear statements like "UFO=Unidentified Flying Object/=Space Aliens", "No Solid Evidence Exists...", etc. How do I verify if one has perused thru enough material before I deem his/her conclusion worthy?

Can you provide 3 cases and 3 persons one must be familiar with in order to take his/her UFO opinion seriously?


Opinion is just that...opinion. Everyone has one.

It is up to the individual person to decide what they chose to take seriously or not.

I really do not understand your question


But make sure we are not making a "member hit list" here....that will get trashed immediately.
edit on March 12th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: edited for clarification



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


hi
i was going to say
david icke
david icke
david icke

sorry bad joke i know



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by TinkererJim
 


Forget Dr. Greer's UFO disclosure project and check out these videos of ex military personnel discussing their UFO incidents while serving in the military. The first video really delves into the issue of UFOs shutting down US nukes, but causing no harm and the nukes eventually went back online. The second video was also shot in Washington DC at the National Press Conference and involves foreign military personnel and their UFO stories. The third video is about South America, their Gov't, and UFO disclosure. Enjoy.

Disclosure Conference, National Press Club, 27 September 2010




Out of the Blue - UFO Press Conference - National Press Club LIVE, Washington D.C




UFOs In South America - Disclosure Has Begun





posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by davesmart
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


hi
i was going to say
david icke
david icke
david icke

sorry bad joke i know


well that is what I was not sure of....if it was meant members or known conspiracy theorists...



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


I am certainly not trying to initiate any meaningless arguments here. I am sure most of the skeptics/believers in this forum are well-informed on this topic, however, in other forums, no so much. I just want to have a way of ascertaining that someone knows what he's talking about before replying/commenting further, or just leave it at that and not waste my time.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by TinkererJim
 

Betty and Barney Hill come to mind. The Aurora Incident is also a famous, and documented case. Here is a link to the Top 10 Unexplained UFO Sightings & Alien Encounters.
If you are familiar with those, you can hold a conversation with ease. These are all fully documented cases of UFO/Alien Encounters.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by TinkererJim
 


Just as GEL said, it comes down to opinion.

The UFO debate tends to rely heavily on the 'experiencer' element. You can believe the experiencer blindly on word alone, or word plus evidence, or hold back based on results from examination of evidence, start from a statistical probability standpoint, or any number of positions.

It really depends on how you, personally wish to pursue investigation/examination/interest in the subject.

I personally have zero experience with UFOs. On the other hand, I've a lifetime of watching the sky, being familiar with the stars, planets, the occasional comet, meteors, plus bolides, satellites, domestic and military aircraft, and all sorts of weather phenomenon, some of which will often be mistaken, sometimes quite often for UFOs.

Venus or Jupiter are prime examples of mistaken identity. People see a bright light in the sky, they never seemed to have noticed before, and for whatever reason are convinced Venus, or Jupiter are a UFO.
Read through the UFO forums under titles about bright lights. You'll be surprised.

What does it take to know about UFOs?
I don't know.
What I do know is quite a few things about things that are NOT UFOs that are often mistaken for them.

It's been postulated that roughly 95% of reported UFO cases are misidentification.
Just posted yesterday was a SOHO video claiming that Mercury was a huge UFO flying close to the sun.
The debate got a little out of hand.

The topic has a passionate following of all sorts of flavors; skeptics, believers, and even some claiming to actually BE aliens.


Best approach, be well versed in a topic relevant to the subject, like meteorology, aircraft, astronomy, even psychology.

Try to keep an open mind, but, with this topic, it's difficult to do so, and one usually winds up camped on one side or the other of the fence.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
So are you saying i cant join a conversation if i dont know what you deem enough about the subject?Seems a tad elitest dont you think,also isnt the best way to learn about a subject to talk with people who are obviously more knowledgable in that subject?



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by TinkererJim
 


How well versed on a subject a person is is not a meter for how 'worthy' their point is? The whole point of throwing something out there in a forum like this is to discuss it.

Although knowledge of cases may help their arguement, their opinion is valued none the less as they may bring a different way of looking at things to the discussion IMO.

Not counting trolls of course. Trolls are trolls.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by marvinthemartian
So are you saying i cant join a conversation if i dont know what you deem enough about the subject?Seems a tad elitest dont you think,also isnt the best way to learn about a subject to talk with people who are obviously more knowledgable in that subject?


Not at all. All I'm saying is I want to be influenced. We all arrive at various level of opinion on this topic ranging from 0 to 100%, after exposing to various materials and reflection. So before I can officially absorb one's opinion into my value system, I'd like to be sure he/she knows what they are talking about. If someone derives his opinion largely from the Jerusalem video, I surely shouldn't have to consider his view further. Conversely, from gathering the opinions from people who have gone thru enough materials provides good datapoints for us to grasp where the truth lies. After all, most of us are not high level scientists, nor gov't personnel privy to these type of information. Just like opinions on buying stocks, or medical issues, the best we can do is collect information, evaluate the source, then formulate an opinion or decision. Fortunately, there's no action required on this subject for now



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
All believers/free thinkers must have a point in which it keeps them interested, a case most probably. For me JAL 1628 is that case. The Iranian incident also springs to mind



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grifter81
reply to post by TinkererJim
 


How well versed on a subject a person is is not a meter for how 'worthy' their point is? The whole point of throwing something out there in a forum like this is to discuss it.

Although knowledge of cases may help their arguement, their opinion is valued none the less as they may bring a different way of looking at things to the discussion IMO.

Not counting trolls of course. Trolls are trolls.


Yeah, I get what your saying, I feel people are not being helpful by expressing solely the extremes of their opinion. I think even the most vociferous skeptic has certain amount of reservation that the possibility exists, and conversely the absolute believers.
edit on 12-3-2012 by TinkererJim because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I personally think it is best to put up "reportings" or "stories" or "ideas" on ATS so they can be discussed in an orderly fashion.

With so many people, you tend to get so wide ranging responses that-if anything-help you come to a better understanding.

Also, don't sit there and wait for the ones you think are the Spacerts or UFOlogist etc.... you could turn into dust.

Use ATS as a tool for learning and sharing ideas/concept. \

Here is one for you....to ponder.

Do aliens wear clothes? Why? For what purposes? Are there Uniform types they are required to wear? Is it for health reasons? The same reasons we do-(religious speaking) because their God told them they had to when they are from the Forbitten tree? etc etc etc......

I could go on and on.... (footwear?, overcoats? hats? gloves? or just body suits? OR, as some abductees reported about Greys... they are naked, except for the larger ones on the ships? Why?



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by TinkererJim
 

So its all about you then,

fair enough.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by TinkererJim
 




All I'm saying is I want to be influenced.


This says it all right here.

You want to be influenced. So if I know about 20 ufo cases intimately. And another member barely knows one case. You'll take my word more into account than the other member even if I'm wrong? And maybe the other member is right?

That dog won't hunt my friend.

Make up your own mind no matter who says what, and whatever their credentials are. Choose for yourself what to believe after weighing the available evidence.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
This thread has already seemed to die off, but i wanna chime in anyway...

If someone doesnt know who Betty Hill, Mac Brazel or Stanton Friedman, then probably their knowledge is pretty limited on the subject since these names are part of even elementary Ufology.

Of course the applicable cases that go along with each name would suffice n the case stufdy question.

And since Brazel and Friedman could be referenced in the same case I will add the June 1947 Washington state case, being the first time ever 'flying saucer' was used.

Pretty elementary I know, but without this elementary knowledge, how can anyone really have said to have studied the field...unless they have first hand experience, there is no substitute for that.



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Too bad this thread died off. I was waiting to see what type of responses you rec'd etc.

BUMP.

Which brings me to the next thing to ponder....

Today, NASA released info about the effects of Space/Radiation has on the Human Eyes, using the astronauts as their study group (sperm & eggs previously--ber with me).

If true, any type of long range space travel will be hazardous to your body and to the reproductive items needed.

So, unless you find some way to protect the reproductivity of humans/animals/plants etc. there is no hope for us to get to far away from Earth. As I see it.

Now, you take the Aliens. If they exist and they really do come & go as they please-what happened to them? The big eyes of the Greys? The need to get eggs from females? etc etc.... Maybe they only have a "limited" answer to the Space/Radiation issue.

Which, if you REALLY think about it... If the Aliens DO have problems related to Space/Radiation etc, then most likely there "range of travel" is limited to some degree, ergo close?

OR if you are really in the mood......

Maybe Earth is a "refueling" station. Aliens stop here and water up. cow parts up, take out a few nukes for Sh--s & Giggles, and maybe have their way with a few of the locals....before heading onto the next waypoint-deeper into the universe.

Well, then, that just might explain the "indifference" to the human pain and suffering they cause when they do their "proceedures"..... Or, in the few known Human Multilations, discecting them alive.....

Well, gotta run....



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by TinkererJim
 

Betty and Barney Hill come to mind. The Aurora Incident is also a famous, and documented case. Here is a link to the Top 10 Unexplained UFO Sightings & Alien Encounters.
If you are familiar with those, you can hold a conversation with ease. These are all fully documented cases of UFO/Alien Encounters.


No they're not! They're full of holes as no evidence exists for any of them. The Hill's doctor didn't accept their account as having happened and when you do proper research you find that it was all made up from whole cloth.

Aurora is just a poor man's Roswell and, again, devoid of irrefutable evidence. If you are going to continue thinking that you are helping, try to offer logical info, not fantasy.

1. Gulf Breeze has been explained satisfactorily. A UFO event complete with photos and tons of witnesses.
2. 2004 Mexican UFO Incident - fishing vessels
3. Kelly-Hopkinsville Encounter - a report is all that exists
4. Dyatlov Pass Incident - strange event, no sign of aliens or UFOs and the witnesses' testimony unreliable.
5. Travis Walton - biggest hoaxer in history, makes Adamski look like a piker.
6. Belgian UFO Wave - I don't know about "wave" but one good UFO sighting
7. Cash-Landrum Incident - a stupid military effort
8. Rendlesham Forest Incident - he said, she said, he said - nobody knows what really happened. Boooring!
9. The Phoenix Lights - The Phoenix FLARES
10. Space Encounters - Now we're talking! But "Encounters" is not correct.
edit on 13-3-2012 by The Shrike because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 01:22 AM
link   
A prerequisite should be having read all of Jaques Vallee's work. He's the only scientist that has approached the phenomenon in a scientific way, plotting graphs, correlations, etc and looking for an answer. He has no answer, and he admits it.

He is beyond the silliness of "space brothers" from another star or planet and joins the data with reasonable conjecture to formulate thoughts on the phenomenon. He takes data from eye witness accounts, to hoaxes and trace landings and filters each properly. Beyond hynek (who drew many of the same conclusions as Jaques after originally considering the subject nothing more than mass delusion), Vallee should be standard reading for anyone who genuinely wants to understand what it is people are seeing in regards to the UFO phenomenon.

Another pre-req should be not having posted a "UFO FLIES BY THE SUN" or "PROOF OF PLANET X" youtube video on ATS.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join