It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Beavers
Since joining ATS i've stopped believing in aliens.
I've not seen one single piece of evidence that couldn't be faked or just a light in the sky.
I want to believe, but I just don't!
You're right but look at the kind of people involved.
Originally posted by JimTSpock
Please be fully familiar with the material before attempting any arguments against it!
You should take your own advice.
COMETA was not a "French military report". COMETA was a UFO study group which produced a report in 1999. In it, the group concludes that about 5% of the cases they studied were inexplicable by any other means than extraterrestrial. Not everyone agrees, not even other UFO groups.
You are confusing UFOs with extraterrestrial visitors. There is no doubt that people have reported unidentified objects. There is plenty of doubt about what they are.
edit on 8/21/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)
COMETA was .high-level French UFO study organisation from the late 1990s, composed of high-ranking officers and officials, some having held command posts in the armed forces and aerospace industry. The name "COMETA" in English stands for "Committee for in-depth studies." The study was carried out over several years by an independent group of mostly former "auditors" at the Institute of Advanced Studies for National Defence, or IHEDN, a high-level French military think-tank, and by various other experts.
Originally posted by JimTSpock
reply to post by Phage
Well according to you the link I posted is incorrect then. With all due respect I find the report and it's authors highly credible. I'm just highlighting material I find interesting and compelling. You're not really arguing with me rather the authors of Cometa.
Are you really trying to say you think the report is not credible and should not be taken seriously? I don't think that would be a very persuasive argument.
No. What we are saying is that those 5% of cases which can't be explained, while fascinating and unusual, cannot be concretely explained by the "extra terrestrial hypothesis". It's only one of many theories, and thus the report is really nothing new. Jacques Vallee and J.Allen Hynek concluded the same thing decades before this report, but at least they had the ability to admit that the extra terrestrial hypothesis couldn't adequately explain all of the phenomenon being reported, although both admitted it was a possibility.
Witness testimony does not count for much when it is not backed up with with something else. I could tell any story I wanted to.
I would really, really LOVE to see some incredible evidence. Something that blows my mind. Something that is nigh on impossible to dispute.
I would have to say that from my point of view I have come to this conclusion:
No evidence of ET. (No publicly released photos, no video, no real public sightings)
Plenty of UFO sightings. (More than you can shake a stick at)
so that equals - No ET but there are these things flying around we know nothing about?
We have a myriad of evidence. Credible eye witness accounts from fighter pilots, civilian pilots, radar operators, police officers etc etc etc etc. Photographic evidence from before photoshop was invented. Radar tracks recorded. Video from the likes of NASA etc etc etc. Military and air force reports of failed interceptions etc etc etc.
Phage I refer you to one of my previous posts where I said if 2 people describe the same thing but have never met then it must be true etc etc etc.
It's true eye witness accounts can be unreliable but they can also be very reliable if your talking about people like fighter pilots, radar operators etc who know what the # they're talking about.