Anyone who thinks UFOs don't exist read this!!!

Well... a vast proportion (the majority, perhaps) of the world´s population believes in a religion/god(s)/deity.

We walk this Earth since millions of years as a species (or more than 100.000 years as Homo Sapiens Sapiens).
Yet, after so much centuries/milennia we still don´t have proof (scientific, irrefutable) of the existence of those gods/deities.

About the UFO/Aliens stuff.
We don´t have proof of their existence (or of their inexistence).
Yet, we are still confronted with a phenomenon that has been going for decades (centuries, millennia perhaps) that happens on the air, ground or seas (or underwater), with good/bad weather, day/night or inside/outside buildings.

We have lots of credible witnesses and cases (one can argue their credibility and the validity of the sightings/events), and governments (and the intelligence community) had/has an interest on this phenomenon (even studies/studied it).

We have cases relating UFO (as craft) and beings and we also have cases of beings/entities (seemingly without craft) that behave like some paranormal beings of our past/folklore tales.

Maybe we are dealing with different types of phenomenon.
I genuinely think that we need to adopt a multiple perspective (ETH/IDH/time travellers/others) regarding the UFO/Alien issue (in the "small percentage of those high strangeness cases").

Most of our advanced knowledge is theoretical.
Take the Higgins Boson´s for example, it was predicted decades ago but only now it was confirmed.
Today´s bounderies of our knowledge can become anedoctes for future scientists.
A hundred years ago (1913) supersonic aircraft were a impossible dream. Yet the Concord and the SR-71 came and are now museum displays.
Our cell phones or tablets would have been seen as witchcraft just... 200/300 years ago.

I believe (yes that is the term, believe) that our reality suffers the interference (visit?) of some extremely advanced intelligence (perhaps more than one type/species) for wich purpose we can only imagine.

meaningless333
Well... a vast proportion (the majority, perhaps) of the world´s population believes in a religion/god(s)/deity.

We walk this Earth since millions of years as a species (or more than 100.000 years as Homo Sapiens Sapiens).
Yet, after so much centuries/milennia we still don´t have proof (scientific, irrefutable) of the existence of those gods/deities.

About the UFO/Aliens stuff.
We don´t have proof of their existence (or of their inexistence).
Yet, we are still confronted with a phenomenon that has been going for decades (centuries, millennia perhaps) that happens on the air, ground or seas (or underwater), with good/bad weather, day/night or inside/outside buildings.

We have lots of credible witnesses and cases (one can argue their credibility and the validity of the sightings/events), and governments (and the intelligence community) had/has an interest on this phenomenon (even studies/studied it).

We have cases relating UFO (as craft) and beings and we also have cases of beings/entities (seemingly without craft) that behave like some paranormal beings of our past/folklore tales.

Maybe we are dealing with different types of phenomenon.
I genuinely think that we need to adopt a multiple perspective (ETH/IDH/time travellers/others) regarding the UFO/Alien issue (in the "small percentage of those high strangeness cases").

Most of our advanced knowledge is theoretical.
Take the Higgins Boson´s for example, it was predicted decades ago but only now it was confirmed.
Today´s bounderies of our knowledge can become anedoctes for future scientists.
A hundred years ago (1913) supersonic aircraft were a impossible dream. Yet the Concord and the SR-71 came and are now museum displays.
Our cell phones or tablets would have been seen as witchcraft just... 200/300 years ago.

I believe (yes that is the term, believe) that our reality suffers the interference (visit?) of some extremely advanced intelligence (perhaps more than one type/species) for wich purpose we can only imagine.

An interesting thing to all this is we must realize that a big capability of our brain is to think in the abstract. We do it so well we spend most of our time there where the rest of life on earth deals with what they can see, touch and feel.

We can't even make breakfast without first creating it in our head first. Look around and EVERYTHING you see what we call manmade started abstractly.

Saying that, a byproduct of all this is we have invented beings that are not a part of the see, touch, feel part of reality.

In the past we had 100 gods, 1000s of demons etc to explain everything we could not explain, today we have basically one god that does the same, and we have in the past 70 years slowly interjected aliens too as a entities that basically live within our brain no matter how hard we try to connect reality with them.

There is life out there no question about it, but that statement is a long long way from aliens are among us too. This is why empirical data is so important because we have a tendency to connect dots where there are no connections, we also have a tendency to take assumptions and conjectures and repeat them enough that they magically become fact with zero correct empirical data backing it all up.

Eye witness reports no matter how responsible the person is are the worst form of evidence, sorry to day. The reason is as I said in the above paragraph and that our senses are very imperfect. A million articles and books on the subject also do not turn assumptions, conjectures, options in to fact either.

reply to post by Xtrozero


You may be right and I think you're close to the truth, but then again, you may be wrong. You might be committing the same error you're condemning others for committing. You say that because everything in our reality has to somewhat exist in our mind and because we're abstract thinking beings then the et ufo's, absent of other evidence, are actually a byproduct of the way our mind works. Seems reasonable, but what if the et ufo's are real anyway? Then you'd be committing the same error by believing it's all in people's heads.

I agree that without strong supporting evidence we cannot say ufo's are et in origin, but then again, I also can't say it's all in peoples heads. I don't think we can come to a conclusion.

It's easy to say it's all in people's heads, but it's a lot harder if you have to tell that to their face. And what if there're pictures and radar reports and even trace evidence? Does that qualify as supporting evidence? And what if there're dozens or hundreds of witnesses as well? When you put all that evidence together, isn't it made more robust? And assuming our military is covering up some cases, wouldn't that make hte supporting evidence lacking in many instances? Of course, where's hte evidence our military covers up cases?

My ultimate opinion is that a great majority of ufo reports are the result of misidentification and also the result of people wanting to believe in a higher power, such as aliens. So I think you're in the right for pointing that out, but I'm not 100% with you.

And what does it matter anyway? If I was making business decisions based on my opinion about the possibility of et ufo's or making political or policy decisions that impact other lives then it might matter. As it's, it's just an isolated opinion.

jonnywhite
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

You may be right and I think you're close to the truth, but then again, you may be wrong. You might be committing the same error you're condemning others for committing. You say that because everything in our reality has to somewhat exist in our mind and because we're abstract thinking beings then the et ufo's, absent of other evidence, are actually a byproduct of the way our mind works. Seems reasonable, but what if the et ufo's are real anyway? Then you'd be committing the same error by believing it's all in peoples heads.

I agree that without strong supporting evidence we cannot say ufo's are et in origin, but then again, I also can't say it's all in peoples heads. I don't think we can come to a conclusion.

I'm not saying that they are not here other than to suggest that looking back at 6000 years of modern history all our evidence is still in the assumption, conjecture and opinion stage, and that is where it sits with me.

We are still "what if-ing" this to death and one would think for people to make the bold statements that they do about this subject we would have something empirically to back up those statements, but we don't. At least the religious people suggest they have "faith" since empirical data does not exist for God, but faith is not apart in the belief of aliens even though it is basically the same situation.

jonnywhite

It's easy to say it's all in people's heads, but it's a lot harder if you have to tell that to their face. And what if there're pictures and radar reports and even trace evidence? Does that qualify as supporting evidence?

Supporting evidence for what? that is my point. If we want to use UFO in the traditional sense (Unidentified Flying Object), then yes, but how do we go from UFO to aliens....hehe


We see this with the idea of life in the universe too.

We say there is life in the universe and that could mean mold or other simple life forms that can exist in a wider life envelope than more advance life can, but somehow just saying that there is life in the universe we suggest it is space faring life that has found us in our corner of the galaxy too.

Jumping from mold to space faring life is as big of a jump as UFO to aliens...

reply to post by Xtrozero


Point taken. We can't say they're et ufo's.

However, we can argue at least some ufo's don't just exist in people's minds. It might be an inversion or it might be a geological or atmospheric phenomena or a blimp or an experimental (weather?) balloon or an et probe. The supporting evidence can work to support this argument by supplementing the witness reports.

I could also use what you say and argue some people want to believe there're no other higher powers because of egocentrism or anthropocentrism and so they choose to believe there're no et ufo's. In fact, I recall a survey and it found that those who supported the idea of et life tended to be less human-centric. Perhaps I am recalling it wrong or maybe it was a junk survey, but I wanted to throw it out there and expose it.

Bottom line, as I stated in my first reply, we don't know and can't conclude anything yet. We can't conclude et's have been here and we can't conclude it's all in the mind. We can say many reports might be rooted in the mind, but we can't say all of them are.

EDIT: This may or may not be what I was thinking of:
archive.seti.org - How Our View of Ourselves Affects Our Beliefs About E.T....

..........
Drawing on the responses to our Internet survey, and analyzing these data with some basic statistics, we learn that there is in fact a significant correlation, or pattern, between these two attitudes. Specifically, the more anthropocentric a person is, the less likely they are to believe that life exists beyond Earth.

We can interpret this finding in a very straightforward manner. If people think that humankind possesses a privileged position on Earth, they are less likely to think that other beings exist on other planets. The impact of discovering life beyond Earth has often been characterized as another Copernican revolution. Copernicuss theory, you might recall, removed the Earth from its privileged place at the center of the solar system. Discovering life beyond Earth -- particularly life capable of sending radio signals -- might give humans a comparable sense of being "off center," as we get used to the knowledge that we are not the only intelligence in the universe.
............

reply to post by CaptainBeno


I don't know what you've been smoking but I want some
Just teasing!
Seriously though what area of the outback are you talking about? I've been camping in the outback many times and the only thing that I've seen that comes close to being a UFO was a pink fireball with a tail that went in a straight line gradually descending that I identified as space debris therefore making it not a UFO

As I have said on another thread you must decenter from US reality.

A vast portion of human population are polytheist (take the Hindus, for instance, just remember that India population is more than 1 200 000 000, mostly hindu).
Thousands all over the world although they “officially” have only one religion they still believe in ancient gods/spiritual forces. Take South America for instance, were the native populations were forcefully converted catholic missionaries but they secretly managed to pay cult to their ancestors deities.

But there are more modern examples of this. During the soviet times, russians were not allowed to have a religion since atheism was a state dogma. Nevertheless people “praticed” their religion in secrecy (at the cost of life imprisionment or death penalty).

So that assertion of yours that we have been simplifying religion to one god/deity is wrong. It may be valid to some western communities but that is not the picture you get looking closely at the world.


Regarding the UFO/Aliens subjects.

Just to clarify when I use the term UFO in this thread I am using it as a “craft” of unknown type/origin.
In this subject we are not limited to witnesse´s reliabilty and credibilty.
We also have radar, flight instrumentation and other sensor data.
Take the Theeran case (1976), the Milton Torres case (1957), the 1990 belgian UFO wave (quite documented) or the Washington´s “Light Parade over the Capitol” footage (1952).

An alarm bell is the interest that both military and intelligence community take on this subject. We can figure why and it is quite understandable taking the implications on national security. Take the Aviary actions (well documented here in ATS).
What triggers me is that their interest began in a time before the UFO and Aliens folly of the 1950´s or the 1960´s.

Jacques Vallée became an UFO investigator because he had a sighting (1955) and suspected the behaviour of some of his colleagues regarding the UFO subject.
Also Gordon Cooper warned us about a “cosmic Watergate” and we have too much examples that politicians, military and the scientific community are not trustworthy.

About the politicians there innumerable examples that they are not reliable (ex.: Waterate, Irak WMD´s in 2003). I just wont bother exposing them.

The military, well they are a bit of a Catch 22 for the UFO community. If they provide some “inside information” we have to take it with scepticism. But if we take it as true, well, we should also take their word when they say its all swamp gas, chinese balloons and Venus.

About the scientific community, we all know that these fellows need money to their job and prosecute their careers. As Vallée noticed in the 1960´s that it was a no-no to a scientist career to pay attention to or to talk about UFO´s.
Funding is a big issue to scientists and universities (and this gets worst in a time of economic crisis). And who has the bucks has the ability to suit the findings to his ends.
Take the aspartame issue or the lung cancer-tobacco industry issue.
Scientist and even governmental authorities manipulated scientific data and conclusions to suit the corporations interests.
Did they care about the millions of people that got sick and died? No.

I find plausible that governments (along with the top of the military, intelligence and scientific communities) are hiding something about the UFO/Aliens subject.
Remember that those are the same people that allowed and performed tests of biological and chemical weapons, injected plutonium, '___' and others drugs on Third World populations or on the fringes of their own population (prisioners, patients on mental institutions or homeless people).
And have hidden this for decades.

Just imagine to what lengths of effort they are willing to go just to avert disclosure.
Just think of the religious, economical, financial and cultural effects on our societies if disclosure happened.
Their authority would questioned and dismissed!
TPTB would loose their grip on Mankind!

About sightings and strange events.
It is reasonable to assume that the vast majority of sightings/events have more down-to-earth explanations. They could range from misinterpretations, light, optical and meteorological phenomena, satellites, aircraft, astronomical bodies (planets, meteors, asteroids), hallucinations, mental illness, alcoholism, etc.

But I am interested in “those high strangeness cases” that represent a very small percentage of the sightings/events.

Here I beg you to “de-focus” from American reality.
This phenomenon happens worldwide and from quite some time.
In vast areas of the world (South America, Africa or Asia) people barely have food and potable water. So a cell phone or a camera are unlikely goods there.
Even in Europe, things are not uniform. Not all live the American way of life and go running for their cell phones to “tweet” that light in the sky to a friend.

In my country, there are still lots of people (and I mean a lot) with low–level education or uneducated people.
Yet, independently from their degree of education (or the lack of it) I find people saying that they saw something or presented something strange.
Focusing on “those high strangeness cases” I realize that people try to”debrief” those experiences and accommodate into their minds and reality the best way they can.
They try to describe those experiences with the references they have.

An example: In the late 1990´s while travelling by train, I accidently heard two old people (a men and a woman) talking about a sighting they had a few days earlier over their village. Politely, I jumped into conversation with both and got to know that almost all the villagers saw it and those two people (uneducated and in their late sixties´s early seventies) described the object they have seen floating above the center of the village on a afternoon as “God´s car”. They were probably catholic (as most older people in my country) and to them the concept of a car was the best they had to describe the UFO (a hovering metallic object with windows all around).

The point of this example is for me to say that I don’t subscribe the Carl Jung theory (and alikes).
I just don’t think that the vast majority of people (educated or non-educated) and not contaminated by UFO folklore, all of a sudden hallucinate and “see” objects (or whatever) for wich they don’t have previous references/knowledge.
Those old people were simple and very down-to-earth. To them there are no aliens up there, just God (and the catholic pantheon).

In my opinion, “in those high strangeness cases”, the stimulus can be physical, chemical or visual but is located outside the observer (not in the observers mind). The source is on the outside.

It is possible that what we see during a sighting/CE is just a fragment of it, or what they want us to see. And our brain filling in the blanks and trying to make sense of it.
But there is something exogenous to the observer, that stimulates our brains and senses and generates a “visual and/or physical” manifestation.

A lot of people “dream” of finding a bag with a million dollars or a voluptuous blonde woman but they don’t see it anywhere or everywhere. They don’t generate on the reality/outside their most sought dreams/ambitions.
My point is that our deepest aspirations/dreams just don’t materialize in front of us by thinking about them (even if we spend all your life wishing and thinking about it).
Why would UFOs/Aliens do?

Remember that I am talking about situations for wich we find earthly explanations insufficient or as not the best explanation.

jonnywhite

Point taken. We can't say they're et ufo's.

However, we can argue at least some ufo's don't just exist in people's minds. It might be an inversion or it might be a geological or atmospheric phenomena or a blimp or an experimental (weather?) balloon or an et probe. The supporting evidence can work to support this argument by supplementing the witness reports.

I don't suggest UFOs exist in people minds, just aliens...

Bottom line, as I stated in my first reply, we don't know and can't conclude anything yet. We can't conclude et's have been here and we can't conclude it's all in the mind. We can say many reports might be rooted in the mind, but we can't say all of them are.

I agree 100%, we just do not know, but so is the evidence, or lack of, that suggests aliens are not the answer.

We can interpret this finding in a very straightforward manner. If people think that humankind possesses a privileged position on Earth, they are less likely to think that other beings exist on other planets. The impact of discovering life beyond Earth has often been characterized as another Copernican revolution. Copernicuss theory, you might recall, removed the Earth from its privileged place at the center of the solar system. Discovering life beyond Earth -- particularly life capable of sending radio signals -- might give humans a comparable sense of being "off center," as we get used to the knowledge that we are not the only intelligence in the universe.

I disagree...

I think it is that "privileged position" ideal that supports religion, AND aliens.

I think humans are a life form on earth...period...no aliens or God involved in the process. We are not any more special than mold. In fact if earth has another "snowball earth" stage only mold will survive, so maybe mold is the special one.

I do think we are special because of the abilities of our brain power, but I'm not convenience if this is a good or bad evolutionary trait that will lead to us into extinction, or not, because of it.

When we think about life we must keep it simple until proven otherwise. Why would life evolve on another planet even close to what life on earth is like?

For us, having Opposable thumbs and the brain power to use it has been a rather rare even on earth...like one species in 4 billion years...So I will not hold my breath for that "particularly life capable of sending radio signals".

One thing to remember is life started rather early on earth, around 4 billion years ago, or 500 million after it's formation. This says a lot, it says that life happens when conditions are right. It says that life, most likely, can not be stopped when conditions are right.

With that said, life is hard to kill and earth has tried a number of times and life just springs back in full force, but when we talk about species that is a different story.

Species come and go all the time, with a few million years at best for each one. Billon of species have come and gone on earth, but life continues, humans are a species...get my point?

As crazy as it sounds...and crazy it do.
Not everything is black and white and not everything is explainable.... hence the term UFO.

I have no doubt that things are going on, but by whom??

There are no doubts that UFOs exists. Thousands of reports are submitted to various organizations a year. For the most part, however, many are misidentified objects such: man-made objects, natural phenomena, hoaxes, etc. Most of the cases we solved fell into those categories. A few we investigated, however, were closed as unidentified. We stress, however, that unidentified means unidentified and we never attempted to make the assumption a particular unidentified UFO was extraterrestrial unless there was proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I am a believer ... but my mission is not to believe or judge. My mission is to find proof, beyond a reasonable doubt.

Since I know - for a fact - they exist - it lets me off the hook for having to read any of this.
I saw one at tree top level - at about 1mph - and then did not turn but rather went in another direction.
50' in diameter - 3 to 4 ft thick in the middle, with a small bubble looking obstacle on the top and probably less than a foot thick at the end w/ lights flashing round about.

I saw another UFO which may or may not be following a pattern. I'm starting to slowly be drawn into the Chemtrail conspiracy theory sphere.
It was a cloudy evening a few days ago and I was out sky watching and noticed a jet leaving a chemtrail as it flew west over SE Pa. It had the setting sun reflecting off it and looked bright silver. You know its cool to look at cloud formations and see them white in full sun even though the sun has set below the horizon for the most part.
Anyway, just behind it I saw anoher flash of silver a reflective object moving much faster, almost at metoer speed. It didn't leave a chemtrail and was moving too fast to be a jet. I thought it was a meteor except it looked reflective not like a flash of light. Just as I saw the fast moving object, the first jet began to bank to the northwest changing its path. That's odd in jet flight paths, usually they follow a straight path once theu're this far out of Philly or Jersey or New York.
I noticed the last few days that jets are leaving chemtrails again, maybe its the cooling weather. But Saturday and Sunday Morning I saw a cris cross pattern of trails. Saturday night a caller on Coast to coast AM talked about chemtrails and rain saying when he noticed a pattern like a checkerboard of crossing trails it meant rain in 36 hours.
This morning we got a surprise rain storm. Oh, well we needed the rain.
Saturday night I also saw a large low flying jet pass overhead. I checked Flight radar 24 and there was no flight on its register so I assume it was military.

JimTSpock
reply to post by uncommitted

 

I said considering this the idea doesn't seem so strange. Not 'de facto conclusion' or whatever concept of your own you wish to project to support your own view. That is a part of my view not it's entirety. And that is what you fail to comprehend.

You've stated your de facto conclusion in just about every post in this thread - that in your mind ET visitation is a fact and anyone who dares to think differently is wrong.

BTW, the Washington DC flyover... the only pictures for this I have seen (which aren't clear mock ups) show lights being reflected into the sky - and show that very clearly. I'd be interested in more contemporary reports about this, or is it more like the 'battle of LA' where the myth started some decades later?

Aliens and UFO's ? I've seen UFO's. Made official reports on them in US Navy logs and in message traffic. I've seen daylight UFO's and night time UFO's. I've read pretty much every UFO report ever forwarded to the US Government by multiple agencies and all branches of the US, NATO and other military organizations. Based on current Earth technology, everything that UFO's exhibit as far a flight characteristics could be explained or attributed to a highly sophisticated UAV/Drone. Reports/Evidence of Non-terrestrial life forms recorded/observed/recovered by ANY Earth government, have never seen a SINGLE official report from the US or any other government. Not that I don't believe intelligent, advanced alien life forms exist, the mathematical odds alone are enough to "prove" there IS something there, but if they have the technical sophistication that is so often attributed to "advanced civilizations" making visits to Earth, how would I or anyone else know? How do we know the 'aliens' abductees say they have interacted with aren't anything more highly sophisticated robots? I believe the small segment of UFO's we've seen that are described by highly trained and qualified observers are no different than the drones we are using right here on Earth in the present. Until Klatu turns up on the white house lawn with Gort, I guess we'll never know!

reply to post by uncommitted


That's what I think and obviously I think the skeptic view is wrong. I'm not the only one, there are people in high places with similar ideas. But that is just my opinion.

1.The evidence is overwhelming that Planet Earth is being visited by intelligently controlled extraterrestrial spacecraft. In other words, SOME UFOs are alien spacecraft. Most are not.

2.The subject of flying saucers represents a kind of Cosmic Watergate, meaning that some few people in major governments have known since July, 1947, when two crashed saucers and several alien bodies were recovered in New Mexico, that indeed SOME UFOs are ET. As noted in 1950, it’s the most classified U.S. topic.

3.None of the arguments made against conclusions One and Two by a small group of debunkers such as Carl Sagan, my University of Chicago classmate for three years, can stand up to careful scrutiny.

The problem is NOT that there is not enough evidence to justify my conclusions; but that most people, especially the noisy negativists, are unaware of the real, non-tabloid evidence.

Debunkers seem to employ four major rules:
1.What the public doesn’t know, we certainly won’t tell them. The largest official USAF UFO study isn’t even mentioned in twelve anti-UFO books, though every one of those books’ authors was aware of it.

2.Don’t bother me with the facts, my mind is made up.

3.If one can’t attack the data, attack the people. It is easier.

4.Do one’s research by proclamation rather than investigation. It is much easier, and nobody will know the difference anyway.

I prove at every lecture that the NSA and CIA are withholding UFO data. Having worked under security for fourteen years, visited seventeen document archives, and having become aware of the huge black budgets of the NSA, NRO, CIA, DIA, etc., I know how easy it is to keep secrets. My nineteen years of study about crashed saucers, and thirteen years on the Majestic-12 documents have convinced me these are real.

www.stantonfriedman.com...

As for the Washington '52 incident it was a very big deal at the time.

Across America, the story of jets chasing UFOs over the White House knocked the Korean War and the presidential campaign off the front pages of newspapers.

" 'Saucer' Outran Jet, Pilot Reveals," read the banner headline in The Washington Post.

"JETS CHASE D.C. SKY GHOSTS," screamed the New York Daily News.

"AERIAL WHATZITS BUZZ D.C. AGAIN!" shouted the Washington Daily News.

As rumors spread, President Truman demanded to know what was flying over his house.

"They proved in their own study that there wasn't enough temperature inversion to cause this effect," he says. "The Washington sightings cannot be explained as a radar mirage."

After 50 years, the debate over the Washington UFOs goes on and on.

"You have dueling experts and dueling reports," says Kevin D. Randle, author of "Invasion Washington: UFOs Over the Capitol," a new book on the 1952 sightings. "One expert says it was temperature inversion. Another says it wasn't. In that situation, you have to refer back to the air traffic controllers and the pilots who actually saw the objects."

Former controller Howard Cocklin is still convinced that he saw an object over National that night. "I saw it on the screen and out the window," he says. "It was a whitish-blue object. Not a light -- a solid form. An object. A saucer-shaped object."

Now 83 and retired, Cocklin says he never saw anything like that saucer -- not before, not since.

www.ufoevidence.org...

articles.washingtonpost.com...

channel.nationalgeographic.com...

The scare attracted President Truman's personal attention. During the time of the sightings, all intelligence channels into and out of the capital were jammed, leaving the city defenseless if an Earth-bound adversary had chosen to attack.

science.howstuffworks.com...

Certainly the Washington '52 episode is a big mystery and no one seems to have any real answers, not in a conventional sense. It's actually pretty scary stuff and I can easily see why people would not want to believe it. OK I'll shut up now. Debunkers and skeptics please tell me it's a temperature inversion or mass hysteria or military black op projects, they all sound good let's go with that.

reply to post by JimTSpock


Please don't quote Stanton Friedman at me as though that is proof of anything other than his desire to sell more books/get more airtime/sell seats. And after your own comments in this thread, accusing 'debunkers' of saying don't argue with me, my mind is made up is somewhat rich isn't it?

Thank you for the links to the Washington event.

ufoevidence by it's nature is a biased site so I'm afraid I can't really take that into account (it even appears to falsify a quote as the Washington post version says the lights looked like falling stars without tails, not what a flying saucer would look like).

Assuming the Washington post piece (written 60 years later) is unbiased then it appears that unidentified/unaccounted for objects were caught on radar not once but twice - is that evidence for ET visitation? Only if you want it to be.......

reply to post by uncommitted


I came across project Palladium which is interesting.
I have no idea what to make of this yet.

What happened in 1952 over Washington, D.C.?

The first incident took place early one morning in July. It was reported extensively in the newspapers that a number of unknown objects appeared on radar screens around Washington. Now, it looks very plausible to me that the Washington incident was a demonstration of a technology from the Defense Department, known as Project Palladium, which allowed the operator to project radar blips onto other radar screens. Later on, the technology became very sophisticated to the point where you could change the shape of the blip and its speed and so forth. We go on in the book at length about the evidence that suggests that the Washington radar incident was a planned operation.

www.usnews.com...

I have been lucky enough to have witnessed 4 different UFO events since November of 2011. I didn't run in the house to get a camcorder, or camera, or to call anyone. I took that time to observe what was put there in front of me and study it and absorb as much as I could. I don't care if anyone believes what I say. I don't expect them to and I'd probably feel the same way if I were in their shoes. I wasn't looking for UFOs when those events took place. But I DID do two key things that everyone should do if you ever want to see one. (A) You have to live with an open mind. You don't have to believe in anything you haven't actually seen, but don't discount anything because you haven't yet seen it either. (B) I was looking UP. You won't see anything considered a FLYING object if you don't take the time to scan the sky. The more you look, the better your odds. History tells you that it doesn't matter if you have video, photos, COA of an alien autopsy or the steering wheel off a flying saucer. 99.999% of everyone won't believe you. And YOU won't truely believe it until you see one for yourself, right? 3 of the 4 things I seen were absolutely not from Earth. The other was probably military. But you won't see those 4 or anything else worth a damn sitting at your computer. It IS real and IS true. Now, go outside and look...

I believe certain UFO sightings display objects which appear to behave in a way which our present scientific and technological capabilities are without doubt not yet capable of. This is the basis of my point of view. Having studied physics and military hardware I believe I have a solid foundation to be able to judge for myself what is possible with our current technology.
Some UFO sightings, if they are true, appear to display the capability to manipulate gravity which I'm certain our civilization is not capable of. Some people say the incidents as reported aren't truthful of reality and that there must be deception or mistake on the part of the viewer. That is a fair thing to say but I don't think that is the case for 100% of the time.
Some say we cannot make any conclusion and label the whole thing unknown. That is also a fair view to take.
But personally I think another step in logic can be taken if these incidents are in fact truthful which I think some of them appear to be. That technological capability far beyond our limits has been displayed which by it's very definition is alien to us.
Of course this may be a view which others disapprove of or it challenges their belief system or view of reality whether they are aware of it or not. And to tell you the truth I have heard and seen nothing on this site which challenges this view in an objective or logical way. About the only argument I've heard really is that we cannot make any conclusion, we don't know which is a fine position I think. I have just taken it a step further. Strictly scientifically speaking we don't know is the correct answer as we have no proof but this is a unique subject unlike other areas in science and personally I think there is an obvious and correct hypothesis.
As Spock said in Star Trek if I drop a ball from my hand on a planet with gravity I do not need to look down and see the ball has hit the ground I know it has. I respect others thoughts and opinions and if we all thought exactly the same thing it would be boring wouldn't it.