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.
"Five Arguments Against the Extraterrestrial Origin of Unidentified Flying Objects", Journal of Scientific Exploration, 1990:
Scientific opinion has generally followed public opinion in the belief that unidentified flying objects either do not exist (the "natural phenomena hypothesis") or, if they do, must represent evidence of a visitation by some advanced race of space travellers (the extraterrestrial hypothesis or "ETH").
It is the view of the author that research on UFOs need not be restricted to these two alternatives. On the contrary, the accumulated data base exhibits several patterns tending to indicate that UFOs are real, represent a previously unrecognized phenomenon, and that the facts do not support the common concept of "space visitors." Five specific arguments articulated here contradict the ETH:
1. unexplained close encounters are far more numerous than required for any physical survey of the earth;
2. the humanoid body structure of the alleged "aliens" is not likely to have originated on another planet and is not biologically adapted to space travel;
3. the reported behavior in thousands of abduction reports contradicts the hypothesis of genetic or scientific experimentation on humans by an advanced race;
4. the extension of the phenomenon throughout recorded human history demonstrates that UFOs are not a contemporary phenomenon; and
5. the apparent ability of UFOs to manipulate space and time suggests radically different and richer alternatives.
www.scientificexploration.org...
Originally posted by The GUT
Good questions. I would say that Dr. Jacques Vallee's "Five Arguments" come to mind.
"Five Arguments Against the Extraterrestrial Origin of Unidentified Flying Objects", Journal of Scientific Exploration, 1990:
Scientific opinion has generally followed public opinion in the belief that unidentified flying objects either do not exist (the "natural phenomena hypothesis") or, if they do, must represent evidence of a visitation by some advanced race of space travellers (the extraterrestrial hypothesis or "ETH").
It is the view of the author that research on UFOs need not be restricted to these two alternatives. On the contrary, the accumulated data base exhibits several patterns tending to indicate that UFOs are real, represent a previously unrecognized phenomenon, and that the facts do not support the common concept of "space visitors." Five specific arguments articulated here contradict the ETH:
1. unexplained close encounters are far more numerous than required for any physical survey of the earth;
2. the humanoid body structure of the alleged "aliens" is not likely to have originated on another planet and is not biologically adapted to space travel;
3. the reported behavior in thousands of abduction reports contradicts the hypothesis of genetic or scientific experimentation on humans by an advanced race;
4. the extension of the phenomenon throughout recorded human history demonstrates that UFOs are not a contemporary phenomenon; and
5. the apparent ability of UFOs to manipulate space and time suggests radically different and richer alternatives.
en.wikipedia.org...ée
If not extraterrestrial hardware, what are the UFOs? Vallee has three suggestions: (1) they are "earth lights" a la P. Devereux; that is, an unappreciated terrestrial phenomenon that impresses mental images on the minds of observers; (2) They are artifacts of a "control system" operated by a nonhuman intelligence or, perhaps, a Gaia like manifestation of supernature (of which we are a tiny part) that is trying to modify our behavior; and (3) They are apparitions caused by entities ma nipulating space and time; viz,. time travellers from our own past and/or future. (Vallee, Jacques F.; "Five Arguments against the Extraterrestrial Origin of Unidentified Flying Objects," Journal of Scientific Exploration, 4:105, 1990.)
Originally posted by TheBloodRed
Most of the time UFOs are basically just a cover for some government project. You can find many released documents admitting to this.
Sure some may be lies or whatever but it makes more sense to use a cover that is mysterious and unexplained. I think Russia(after USSR) might be the biggest open info giving about previous projects. I need more sources but I am sure you can find it out there. xD
Originally posted by Kang69Ok, so there not highly intelligent beings from light years away. What if there on the moon and they have low iq's. What's the difference? What I'm saying is you can't just see a light in the sky and yell alien.
Originally posted by Kang69
Oh and btw forgot to add, wheres the evidence of jets being scrambled against ufo's? I'm going to assume you don't remember right?
Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist
Originally posted by Kang69Ok, so there not highly intelligent beings from light years away. What if there on the moon and they have low iq's. What's the difference? What I'm saying is you can't just see a light in the sky and yell alien.
Typical argument. I will easily concede that 95% of the cases are misidentifications of either natural or man-made phenomenon. However, a remaining 5% of actual physical crafts witnessed by high ranking military and air force personnel, commercial airline pilots, police officers, etc. of absolutely unknown origin. These are not lights in the sky, as many times they have been tracked on radar, showing unequivocally that these are physical airborne crafts.
A lone chemist’s quest to expose the UFO cover-up
...At the time, a lot of emphasis was placed on UFO sightings that were confirmed by radar – as late as 1989 and the Belgian UFO wave, specific emphasis continues to be placed on this “technological confirmation”.
But Davidson pointed out that as early as 1945, mechanical countermeasures against radar had become publicly known – and used. It was known that these could cause blips on the radar screen, resulting in incorrect range, speed, or heading. This was called Electronic Countermeasures and Davidson believed this method of counterintelligence was used to present the myth that “UFOs” existed.
Davidson drew the infamous equation: ECM+CIA=UFO, suggesting that the CIA were creating ECM signals on radars, so that people would believe in the presence of UFOs, as they confirmed eyewitness accounts of anomalous objects in the sky. Furthermore, the anomalous blips were a perfect mechanism to distort the true capabilities of any new aircraft that was being test-flown – occasional sightings of which were passed off as UFOs too...
www.philipcoppens.com...