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.

 

You want proof of flying saucers? This is it!

page: 10
236
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by TXRabbit

So you're saying that folks like Jim Jones and David Koresh were, in fact, prophets? I mean, the proof was offered by the fact that their followers believed 100% in the bull# they spewed.


No I didn't even mention them.
Nice illogical straw man argument btw.

I am pretty certain you are still misusing the terminology.




posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by mithrawept
If this was a test of some kind of secret human made craft, would you really risk exposure by dropping by a school. Doesn't really make sense.

Either a mass illusion/hysteria or something unworldly I would suggest.



Probably not. But if the Prototype machine that you are testing needs to land, regardless of where you are, you will have to land. That would explain why the military was following them. They were probably following from take off to the final destination. Maybe the craft had to stay within range of the military truck for a signal and that is why it was able to take off again when the other planes and military arrived. The cessnas were probably just escorting/ monitoring the craft.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


i dont know if someone has already replied with this but just in case

skeptoid.com...



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by xxblackoctoberxx
 


I only briefly read it but it seems to ignore the evidence and make assumptions. Did you notice the news reports included in the OP?



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by VoidHawk
reply to post by xxblackoctoberxx
 


I only briefly read it but it seems to ignore the evidence and make assumptions. Did you notice the news reports included in the OP?


It certainly doesnt seem to ignore evidence - in fact, it specifically says the following:
"But if we want to determine the most likely account of what really happened, we go to the original sources. We go to the original documentation of what the witnesses reported 44 years ago, and we take the contradictory revisionings with a large grain of salt."

I would think that this indicates that they promote the examining of the original evidence rather than recounted stories well after the fact.

The fact is that we just dont know what it was. Cant say it was aliens, cant say it was not. Cant say it was an experimental aircraft, cant say it was not. We can only make guesses and assumptions.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neeka
I find stories like this fascinating! The fact that so many witnesses are telling the same story so many years later makes it more credible. I wonder what happened to poor Tanya???????


Throughout my dealings with highly classified projects back then, and my own personal investigation, I would say she was "volunteered" for testing purposes by the government.

When I was working on what at the time I thought to be the most advanced military projects (since then I have pondered the recovered craft theory) we had to literally sign our lives away as far as liability waivers in the event that we encountered any strange medical conditions.

I later came to the realization that components of these craft put off concentrated doses of radiation, among other unknown but harmful fumes, fields, what have you. I also recall discussions back in those days of many of the workers "passing out" and generally were escorted quickly away by their handlers. We were never allowed to speak to other workers, only our handlers. So no one knew what their coworkers were actually doing.

She may have passed away from the radiation, and as part of the coverup was just labeled as "missing"

Coincidentally, I eventually developed two forms of Leukemia.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by AlonzoTyper
 


Wow, that is fascinating information. I would loooooove to know the things you have seen and done. I bet you have many interesting stories to tell. I'm very, very sorry for your illness though. As a healthcare worker myself, I have known many ex or current military workers with illnesses from their occupation. So sad.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by AlonzoTyper

Originally posted by Neeka
I find stories like this fascinating! The fact that so many witnesses are telling the same story so many years later makes it more credible. I wonder what happened to poor Tanya???????


Throughout my dealings with highly classified projects back then, and my own personal investigation, I would say she was "volunteered" for testing purposes by the government.

When I was working on what at the time I thought to be the most advanced military projects (since then I have pondered the recovered craft theory) we had to literally sign our lives away as far as liability waivers in the event that we encountered any strange medical conditions.

I later came to the realization that components of these craft put off concentrated doses of radiation, among other unknown but harmful fumes, fields, what have you. I also recall discussions back in those days of many of the workers "passing out" and generally were escorted quickly away by their handlers. We were never allowed to speak to other workers, only our handlers. So no one knew what their coworkers were actually doing.

She may have passed away from the radiation, and as part of the coverup was just labeled as "missing"

Coincidentally, I eventually developed two forms of Leukemia.


That's called - compartmentalization -.

We started using that system during World War 2.

Only a very few at the top know the - big picture -.

That way in case of a leak or a defection the damage is minimized.


-----------
BTW, high voltage systems can be unhealthy.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyswatter
It certainly doesnt seem to ignore evidence - in fact, it specifically says the following:
"But if we want to determine the most likely account of what really happened, we go to the original sources. We go to the original documentation of what the witnesses reported 44 years ago, and we take the contradictory revisionings with a large grain of salt."


In bold type above "most likely account".
We dont need the most likely account, we know what happend, we have many dozens of witnesses.
Statements like that just add doubt to something we already know is true.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   
sooooo where are the pictures the lady took?

lemme guess


they didnt come out when developed

or the government intercepted them from their local Walgreens of their time



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by tones
sooooo where are the pictures the lady took?

lemme guess


they didnt come out when developed

or the government intercepted them from their local Walgreens of their time


Maybe you simply did not read it thoroughly enough;


Graham Simmonds says he was prepped to tell the students that what they’d seen didn’t exist. He says he was given the job of walking up and down the corridors to keep the students in their rooms. While he was walking the corridors he saw the teacher who’d been taking photographs of the saucers struggling with people in uniform who were demanding she hand over her camera.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   
I'm sure its been mentioned already - but I will repeat for good measure. You (OP) say that this is proof of flying saucers. I'll give you that. There was a UFO which was saucer shaped. Lots of people saw it. I think most people with a little common sense will accept that. Those who don't aren't looking at the evidence (as you stated, OP - if this was a murder trial - the perp would be hung).
The real question is whether this is man-made, from space, or another dimension, whatever. We have proof of something out there. But what is it.......and why??



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   
I didn't read through the entire thread so I don't know if anybody else mentioned this or not.

The only thing I look at for evidence are anything on tape. Eyewitness testimony is unreliable.

However, those are some interesting objects in that picture. If they are real and not some sort of fake, then what they remind me of is the Nazi Bell.

The Nazi Bell was a flying device that was developed by the Vril society.

For those interested, here's the wiki on it:

en.wikipedia.org...

Here is part one of a you tube documentary of it:



There are a total of four parts and you can find them here:

www.youtube.com...



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by therealdemoboy
The real question is whether this is man-made, from space, or another dimension, whatever. We have proof of something out there. But what is it.......and why??


Agreed, that was really the point of this thread. It did happen.

Who are the owners of the craft?

If they were alien then that would be amazing. If they're not alien then who owns the technology that would benefit the whole planet.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   


Ok I am kinda getting tired of the gross ignorance around here.

Proof

1. The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.


Does no one use the dictionary? 'Proof' can be anything, even an argument.
Doesn't mean it's 'conclusive', doesn't mean it's 'compelling', doesn't even mean it's 'accurate'.

Point is, learn English.


Im pretty sure that you are misunderstanding the definition of proof. If what you are saying is true i could put forward drawing as proof that my car has 4 wheels. That might compel you to believe it but it doesn't prove it as a fact.

Proof can be anything (like in your definition) as long as its correct , IE a fact

from the Oxford English dictionary

1 [mass noun] evidence or argument establishing a FACT or the truth of a statement:


So because we dont know for a fact that what the people were seeing really was a flying saucer then they are not providing proof though witness testimony. They are only providing testimonial evidence which is flimsy evidence as to the true nature of what they are describing.



edit on 11-7-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by VoidHawk

Originally posted by therealdemoboy
The real question is whether this is man-made, from space, or another dimension, whatever. We have proof of something out there. But what is it.......and why??


Agreed, that was really the point of this thread. It did happen.

Who are the owners of the craft?

If they were alien then that would be amazing. If they're not alien then who owns the technology that would benefit the whole planet.


It sounds like the Grays to me.

They have small spacecraft. It looks like the Australians had a contingency plan

all ready to go. It worked. They suppressed the truth for decades.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by VoidHawk

Originally posted by flyswatter
It certainly doesnt seem to ignore evidence - in fact, it specifically says the following:
"But if we want to determine the most likely account of what really happened, we go to the original sources. We go to the original documentation of what the witnesses reported 44 years ago, and we take the contradictory revisionings with a large grain of salt."


In bold type above "most likely account".
We dont need the most likely account, we know what happend, we have many dozens of witnesses.
Statements like that just add doubt to something we already know is true.


Well, yes. You're correct, we know what happened - unknown somethingorother was seen. What we'll forever be searching for is the knowledge of what actually caused this event to happen, what the origin of it was. Could be chicken, could be beef, could be tofu.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mobidinc
If they were man made they were not from oz I would think, considering our secret services were still struggling with teenage hackers, a 14yo and a 16yo making their own modems and such, within 20 years of the Westall sightings. The closest Oz has come to anti gravity would be the boomerang, but there heaps smaller and different shape. "sir was that swamp gas?," "NO, your just crazy,all at the same time, temporarily, from all ages and different locations".

Hahaha nice one man. I would think if anyone has the tech for such things it would most certainly be either USA or Russia....after all they got the pick of the bunch of the Nazi scientist at the end of wwii



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Back in the 60s the government was experimenting with early flying saucer crafts that were taken from blueprints of the Nazi bell + Roswell incident.

That dinky ship in that photo doesn't look interstellar but it does look decades ahead of its era.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
This case has always amazed me just as much as the Roswell incident. It has got everything apart from actual aliens. There are many witnesses, adults and children who both describe seeing the object(s). There are many questions this case raises but may never be answered. I would suggest that everyone watches the fantastic documentary that was made about this. Not only does it show the government will always attempt to hide visitations from alien craft but they will also do their best to shut witnesses up. There are various things you can compare with other UFO cases.



new topics

top topics



 
236
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join