You want proof of flying saucers? This is it!

page: 26
212
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by nobodysavedme
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


Where is the high definition video and photos?

no one of the deluded had a mobile phone camera?

or thought of it?

seriously.

more likely they were smoking magic mushrooms.


High definition video and photos in 1966?



Pictures were taken but the government confiscated the camera.




posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


So there's no proof that it was a misidentified object then? See, that's where this becomes speculation and assumption...rather than actual proof of an alien craft sighting.

People make stuff up. If you don't think so, look how many people participated in the "Dr. Reed" alien and UFO hoax. Literally, lied. Many people involved. All lying.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unidentified_Objective
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


So there's no proof that it was a misidentified object then? See, that's where this becomes speculation and assumption...rather than actual proof of an alien craft sighting.

People make stuff up. If you don't think so, look how many people participated in the "Dr. Reed" alien and UFO hoax. Literally, lied. Many people involved. All lying.



Back in 1966 only advanced alien races had the technology to land 2 flying saucers

near a school. There are too many witnesses to dismiss this sighting.

Also, this is not the only UFO sighting. Commercial airline pilots see them all the

time. They just keep quiet so they don't get fired.

-----------
BTW, there were too many witnesses at the Roswell, NM crash in July 1947.

Civilians were involved and threatened.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by nobodysavedme
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


Where is the high definition video and photos?

no one of the deluded had a mobile phone camera?

or thought of it?

seriously.

more likely they were smoking magic mushrooms.


I can see why people are unwilling to accept the evidence when their research is as poor as your own!
From the OP

Westall, a suburb of Melbourne, Australia.
On the morning of April 6 1966



Originally posted by nobodysavedme
more likely they were smoking magic mushrooms.
Most people on ATS are aware of why people speak such drivel.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 07:56 PM
link   
I've got proof!





posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by nobodysavedme
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


Where is the high definition video and photos?

no one of the deluded had a mobile phone camera?

or thought of it?

seriously.

more likely they were smoking magic mushrooms.
\
You guys should watch the video. It is pretty good, even for debunkers.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 01:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Brighter

"Also as yeti said earlier, to scientifically prove the existence of a new species you need more than anecdotal evidence."

Yet, as has been abundantly clear from my posts, I have been explaining how there are different kinds of proof. It is superficial and uninformed to think that the only kind of proof is scientific proof. Scientific proof is only one kind. Other tiers of proof can be supported by, for instance, anecdotal evidence. This is especially the case when all you are trying to prove is the existence of a class of objects with some broadly defined properties. UFOs are such a class of


I am actually a bit embarrased now because I totally misunderstood what you were saying, I was too busy trying to find faults
I have become cynical and jaded from investing too much time on junk and hoaxes I think. Thanks for putting up with my nonsense



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 05:46 AM
link   
The willful denial and ignorance on this site amazes me. Half the damn school saw this thing. Pictures and multiple eyewitness accounts make this case much more solid. The skeptics who say its a government craft give me a break. Why on earth would you test a top secret vehicle over a friggin school of all places??? That's a ridiculous argument.

Honestly it wouldn't matter how many people saw this UFO. Skeptics refuse to believe anything involving UFOs. No matter the evidence.

Great job op. A truly fascinating case that I would definitely classify as proof of UFOs. S&F.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 06:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheIrishJihad
The willful denial and ignorance on this site amazes me. Half the damn school saw this thing. Pictures and multiple eyewitness accounts make this case much more solid. The skeptics who say its a government craft give me a break. Why on earth would you test a top secret vehicle over a friggin school of all places??? That's a ridiculous argument.

Honestly it wouldn't matter how many people saw this UFO. Skeptics refuse to believe anything involving UFOs. No matter the evidence.

Great job op. A truly fascinating case that I would definitely classify as proof of UFOs. S&F.


So, i guess that means.........They're Here !

They fly around in spacecraft very similar to the spacecraft in my Avatar.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by Brighter

"Also as yeti said earlier, to scientifically prove the existence of a new species you need more than anecdotal evidence."

Yet, as has been abundantly clear from my posts, I have been explaining how there are different kinds of proof. It is superficial and uninformed to think that the only kind of proof is scientific proof. Scientific proof is only one kind. Other tiers of proof can be supported by, for instance, anecdotal evidence. This is especially the case when all you are trying to prove is the existence of a class of objects with some broadly defined properties. UFOs are such a class of


I am actually a bit embarrased now because I totally misunderstood what you were saying, I was too busy trying to find faults
I have become cynical and jaded from investing too much time on junk and hoaxes I think. Thanks for putting up with my nonsense


Hey it's not a problem. I actually do sympathize to some extent with those who are hesitant to believe in the existence of these things, as there exists a very powerful disinformation campaign that is effective in convincing the person taking a casual, glancing look at the subject that there is nothing here to see.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister
I have become cynical and jaded from investing too much time on junk and hoaxes I think.


That's easy to understand, as the garbage surrounding this topic outweighs the gold by about ten-to-one. The Internet has been a double-edged sword when it comes to UFOs; It's much easier to locate quality information if you know what you're looking for, but if you don't you're absolutely deluged with crap and distractions with very little chance of finding your way.

I've been looking into the subject for about five years now, and I consider myself lucky to have somehow gotten onto the right path almost from the start. I was practically a blank slate in 2007, never having really considered whether or not UFOs were "real". I had seen Close Encounters of the Third Kind as a kid, maybe a couple episodes of Unsolved Mysteries, but that was about the extent of it. To me it was entertainment, nothing more. Then when I was about 28 years old, my brother got me to watch a couple videos on YouTube in which people - who seemed credible and genuine to me (at the time) - were giving interviews and claiming to have knowledge of the reality of UFOs. It was rather shocking to me because, as I said, I had never really given the idea much more than a passing thought.

In the following weeks, I started looking into the subject guided by one question - Has anybody who is reputable and intelligent ever given this subject any serious attention? Almost immediately I discovered that intelligent, reputable people had looked into it, and I was rather surprised by what they were saying. Long story short, five years later the subject has become a minor obsession, and I'm convinced that something out of the ordinary is going on. Even more interesting to me is that the vast majority of people have absolutely no idea!

To any open-minded skeptic I would recommend taking a look at the following books:

The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry by J. Allen Hynek
The UFO Controversy in America by David Jacobs
Anatomy of a Phenomenon by Jacques Vallee

These were the first three books I read on the topic, and I haven't looked back.

Educate yourself.
edit on 20-7-2012 by Orkojoker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Also pertinent to this discussion is an article from a 1966 issue of the NICAP UFO Investigator that features this lead:



For those who aren't aware, Dr. J. Allen Hynek was the man responsible for the infamous "swamp gas" debunking of the 1966 Michigan sightings - a move which led to a public outcry which in turn precipitated the first Congressional hearings on UFOs and subsequently the Condon Report and the closing of the Air Force's 22-year UFO project..

Thanks to karl12 for adding this article to his great thread entitled Dr. Hynek and the UFO Lawyer

The article can be read in its entirety here.
edit on 20-7-2012 by Orkojoker because: (no reason given)
edit on 20-7-2012 by Orkojoker because: (no reason given)
edit on 20-7-2012 by Orkojoker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Orkojoker
 


all the material your posting is really old. Its been gone over by several specially convened committees which included scientists like carl sagan & hynek. Sagan himself spoke to hynek quite a bit on ufos and even invited him and other ufo proponents to debate the issue.

Hynek & vallee didn't believe ufos were nuts and bolts craft of ET origin so its interesting you would put them along side someone who believes abductions are taking place. I think there's more to be gained in the psychological area of science above anything else with regards to the ufo phenomenon.

still it would be good if one ufo case was proven to be something new to science. But i'm skeptical that will ever happen.
edit on 21-7-2012 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by VoidHawk

Originally posted by Druscilla
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


The infamous witch trials of Salem and other places consisted primarily of witness testimony.
This is why we require more concrete evidence in real criminal cases that just witness testimony.



I agree, but this isn't a witch hunt, its a lot of sensible educated people who say they saw two flying saucers. It's also backed up by adults who had nothing to do with the school.

If people in your town started telling you they saw a flying saucer, how many would it take before you were willing to believe it was true?


So true. For my two cents, the simple amount of people around the world for years telling so many of the same stories ,whether it be seeing something, or being abducted, to me makes people who say "there's no proof" look like obstinate idiots.



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by thebtheb
 


It's sad that what you said is so true, yet everyone is so corrupt and brainwashed that no matter how many people tell them otherwise, they will deny the existence of any extra-terrestrial.. That is until they actually see one.. Which I hope will be soon!



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by VoidHawk

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
reply to post by lordaqua
 


It usually takes a lot more than just witness testimony alone to convict someone. In a courtroom it is a unique situation where a decision HAS to be reached. In court a 'decision' can be made on witness testimony but that does not make the testimony 'proof' which was the original claim made by the OP.

I might be able to provide 50 people that say that Elvis had lunch at my house yesterday but that doesnt prove he did. You might want to make a decision based on what they say but thats no proof.

Witnesses (circumstantial evidence) does not = proof.

So while the OP may have made a decision based on witness testimony there is no actual proof like he was claiming. Which is a shame, id love to see real proof of flying saucers.

edit on 10-7-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)


I'm going to agree with you, but only because NOTHING is proof. We have to weigh up the odds that we're right or wrong. For me hundreds of school children, the school staff, and others in the neighbourhood all saying they saw flying saucers IS proof because the odds are that it really happened.

Personaly I believe these people saw something manufactured on earth that defies gravity. Why they were allowed to see it I dont know.



I agree with many of the people (on the first few pages that I have so far read) that your assertion of nigh-on 'watertight' proof was a bit of an exaggeration. But, everybody has their own threshold as to what eliminates reasonable doubt, and you explained your position adequately.

I agree this is a very interesting and significant case, as with the Harare, Zimbabwe one in the 90's, which is almost a carbon copy (except for testimony proclaiming visual contact with that craft's occupants).

I also agree with your viewpoint now that you have stated you believe what they saw was of man-made origin. Reading Nick Cook's 'The Hunt For Zero Point' put any question marks regarding the antigravity endeavours of us mere Earth men completely to bed for me. A fantastic piece of investigative journalism, that was not 100% proof, but do I believe his findings and conclusions? You can bet you ass I do!

I think that these exotic antigravity craft might be used in cases like these two school encounters to help perpetuate the myth of ET visitation that helps mask what 'they' are up to behind the scenes. Either that or they happened to have two malfunctions during test flights that happened to come down near packed school houses.

Thankyou for bringing my attention to this case, I look forward to watching the video.
edit on 22-7-2012 by JamesMc82 because: silliness, stupidity, the list goes on and on!



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by JamesMc82
 


Hi JamesMc82

You said

I agree with many of the people (on the first few pages that I have so far read) that your assertion of nigh-on 'watertight' proof was a bit of an exaggeration.


Actualy Brighter spoke on this and explained it much better than I ever could have done.

If you take a rational, unbiased person, and present them with this case (and they study it carefully), it alone should be sufficient to prove the existence of UFOs. And if there is any uncertainty, simply research the untold other reports of multiple-witness sightings, and, if that is not sufficient to convince you, then I would strongly suspect some sort of cognitive or (belief-based) emotional defect, or an ulterior motive.

I recommend you check out his posts and the replies he recieved on This page.


I have changed my view on what actualy happened on that day. I've leant so much on the subject of ufo's since I started this thread. I am now 99.999% convinced these craft were alien.
Again I highly recommend reading the replies starting on this page.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by Orkojoker
 


all the material your posting is really old. Its been gone over by several specially convened committees which included scientists like carl sagan & hynek.


I've posted quite a bit of material. Which are you referring to? The books I recommended came out in 1972, 1965 and 1975 respectively. The article is from 1966, and the Congressional hearings were in 1968. I'm not sure if any of these in particular were gone over by several committees. Maybe you're referring to some other material? In general, I've found that a good portion of the most intelligent, most thoughtful and least sensational material available on UFOs was published prior to 1980.



Sagan himself spoke to hynek quite a bit on ufos and even invited him and other ufo proponents to debate the issue.


Yep. That "debate" occurred in 1969. Specifically,



A symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects [sic], sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, was held in Boston, Massachusetts, on December 27 and 27, 1969."
- UFOs: A Scientific Debate, edited by Carl Sagan and Thornton Page, p. ix


Another excellent book on the topic, it features papers from the symposium written by, among others, Frank Drake, William Hartman, J. Allen Hynek, James McDonald, Donald Menzel, Carl Sagan and Walter Sullivan. A must for anyone interested in the subject, a hardback copy can be purchased on Amazon for as little as ONE CENT plus shipping!


Hynek & vallee didn't believe ufos were nuts and bolts craft of ET origin so its interesting you would put them along side someone who believes abductions are taking place.


It's not all that remarkable if you are familiar with Jacobs' first book on the topic, The UFO Controversy in America, which is an expansion of his doctoral thesis on the history of UFO reports in the U.S. and the government's reaction to them. It's one of the most sober and factual accounts of the subject you're likely to find - in contrast to some of his later work which became quite speculative. Why do you find it interesting that I placed those titles on the same list? Is it because the authors of those books ultimately reached different conclusions on the nature of the phenomenon?


I think there's more to be gained in the psychological area of science above anything else with regards to the ufo phenomenon.


You may be right, although I disagree. Either way it should be studied in a serious manner by competent professionals.


still it would be good if one ufo case was proven to be something new to science. But i'm skeptical that will ever happen.


You're right. That would be good, although as Jacques Vallee has noted, "One particular case doesn't really prove anything. You have to look at an accumulation of cases and look for patterns, and that's how the phenomenon reveals itself". I think the evidence accumulated to date, however, strongly suggests that something is going on with the UFO phenomenon that has not yet been recognized by science.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Orkojoker
 



Either way it should be studied in a serious manner by competent professionals.


it has been. many experiments & investigations have been done. Its just they didn't find anything.

e.g in the early 1980s a group of scientists tried to address anomalous radar returns which were claimed to be ufos. They had a plane on standby and every time they got a blip on the radar they scrambled the plane. In each instance when they reached the location they found weather phenomenon like turbulence which was causing the blips.

not one experiment in trying to find "ufos" has yielded any results apart from natural phenomenon. That's the main reason nobody is interested these days.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 04:21 AM
link   
This what makes the government being more untrusted, they know what is going on but they don't want people to know the truth and let people live and die from their lies.





top topics
 
212
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join