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.
Originally posted by The Shrike
Let's cut to the chase: if you can provide evidence that your alien really exists and I accept your evidence then I'll change from a skeptic about the reality of aliens to one of acceptance.
Originally posted by bhornbuckle75
reply to post by The Shrike
Another idea worthy of noting in your history of how 'Grey Aliens' were created is the theory that The Outer Limits TV show influenced Betty and Barney Hills depiction of Aliens.
On the "10th of February 1964; 12 days prior to the Hill's undergoing hypnosis, the science fiction series The Outer Limits ran an episode entitled "The Bellero Shield", which featured a hairless, noseless alien with a bulbous head and 'wrap-around eyes'." source
That they had seen the episode is disputed by Betty though....I thought it was worth mentioning nonetheless.
Also other Episodes of The Outer Limits that played just before the Hill's hypnosis have been suggested as having just as much of an influence, or even more than 'The Bellero Shield', An interesting discussion of this can be found in this article www.jasoncolavito.com...
Originally posted by taccj9903
Originally posted by The Shrike
Originally posted by taccj9903
Dominant in what? Politics, science, military, business?
Yes, in everything for we skeptics and atheists are superior to believers. We don't carry mental baggage that is not beneficial.
So if I understand you correctly you are saying someone who is an atheist or skeptic is superior to someone who believes in aliens. And that atheists and skeptics mental baggage is more beneficial somehow to the mental baggage of say anyone who believes in aliens.
I'm not even sure why I bothered to reply to this most after realizing what you are saying. I'll take my mental baggage over yours anyday.
this actually the way you SHOULD think. Afterall this is just text.
Originally posted by Catacomb
Originally posted by The Shrike
Let's cut to the chase: if you can provide evidence that your alien really exists and I accept your evidence then I'll change from a skeptic about the reality of aliens to one of acceptance.
Quickly, prove to me that you exist, and that you are who you say you are...otherwise, I won't believe that you are real, and that you are actually a computer spitting out pre-programmed conversation.
Originally posted by stiver
Originally posted by The Shrike
Can you imagine the wonders that humankind would have accomplished if skeptics and atheists had been dominant instead of believers who have stunted humankind's growth? Oh, to dream.
This was already tried in the former Soviet Union, which was the first country to attempt elimination of religion and making atheism the official doctrine of the ruling communist party, considering religion nonscientific. Think Lenin and Stalin - not exactly your dream leaders that brought peace and prosperity to the world.
A little morality and tolerance to people's beliefs may work better. And education.
Speaking as a skeptic and atheist myself.
edit on 17-10-2012 by stiver because: (no reason given)edit on 17-10-2012 by stiver because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by The Shrike
It is highly unlikely that aliens would ever abduct anyone. with techonogly that advanced they would only need a single dna sample. Also over billions of years of techonogical advancement the only thing that remains would likely be synthetic.
Social interations and the progress of civilizations arent nearly as unpredictable as some believe..
Originally posted by K-PAX-PROT
I will say this again can the OP provide evidence that proves beyond all doubt that there is no possibility of there being advanced ET intelligences having the teck to visit us and that not ONE high strangeness UFO case can be possibly afforded to a ET source.Off course the OP cannot ,cannot prove that there is no possibility and for that REALITY and the cold hard fact is that the OP fails in trying to yet again attack the ET possibility of being a source for just ONE UFO case,that in its self suggests an agenda of not just ones opinion ,(biased), which is really based on no real scientific rebuffs or evidence but an agenda of the burden of proof mentality that in reality is an attempt to dismantle any real evidence already in out there that is not the "nuts and bolts" or "UFO landing on the Whitehouse lawn" demands.
I often ask myself that when people start threads attacking the lack of real evidence for ET visitations or even rejecting any of the evidence outside the "Whitehouse lawn" demands from credible sources like Dr James E MacDonald what POSITION of credibility ,be it scientific or military do they have to justify their rejections of lets say Dr MaDonalds investigation's , in what way do they hold sway over such sources.The arrogance and lack of justifications of credibility so often transparent in these kind of threads is DAMAGING to the conclusions and scientific investigative proceeduars carried out by sources like MacDonald and the conclusions he reached by them.
We could be POSSIBLY dealing with highly advanced intelligences not only in the technological capabilities but also in the spiritual or inter dimensional capabilities too.Who is to say otherwise that there is NO possibility in either of these realities , it may serve a purpose and seem mighty clever to deliberately list known hoaxes or money making individuals to attack the possibility of the ET origins but what about those cases that stand up on their own, that remain unsolved due to the high levels of strangeness they contain and that applies to abduction or contact cases too.
The often lop sided or biased content that is transparent in these kind of "attack and demand evidence" threads more often than not NEVER mention or include those cases that are hard to dismiss or debunk, that for me is the red flag , they ignore or reject them not out of a justifiable and credible scientific stand point but because these cases serve as a credible reminder that to dismiss ALL possibilities of ET origins is both unprofessional,un scientific and unjustified.That there are other formats of evidence out side the "Whitehouse lawn" demands is a reality that cannot be overlooked or dismissed by those who unjustifiably reject such data because it serves no purpose to their attacks.
Sources like Dr James E , MacDonald and his conclusions after his investigation's,(including the hundreds of credible witnesses he also interviewed), have to be included in any debate or rejection of the possible ET origins for some UFO cases,that is no flight of fancy or even an unjustifiable demand but one that needs welcoming and i for one choose to make the foundation of my perception that some UFOs could very well have a ET origin on the evidence put forward by such sources as MacDonald,he is the kind of source that i listen too,why because its a scientific and credible way to approach this UFO./ET enigma.edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
reply to post by K-PAX-PROT
can anyone prove I'm not a 50 foot kick-ass super ninja from space? of course not silly.
I believe what is laid out is a good case for an alien mythology. I personally believe that humans need mythologies to be human. there does not appear to be any tangible evidence for ET. it than stands that it's a mythology.edit on 17-10-2012 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by badgerprints
Originally posted by The Shrike
The early cases didn't matter, in the long run, because while there are always believers, for some reason humans in the '50s and '60s had a higher standard in believing outrageous claims. Their descendants, today's youth, don't have the higher standards and believe everything, hence beliefs in hostile aliens.
So early cases didn't matter because they had higher standards in illusion?
Today's cases don't matter because today's youth don't have higher standards?
Belief in bad aliens denotes lower standards.
You are offended because the illusions of today aren't warm and fuzzy?
Seems if you don't believe in aliens then you could pretty much end it there.
Being bothered by today's youth having no standards and believing in hostile aliens really seems a bit too involved for someone who knows that everyone who believes in aliens is wrong.
Sounds to me like you are trying to convince yourself of something.
Originally posted by MarrsAttax
Originally posted by The Shrike
Alien life is NOT real, that's just a romantic thought. You are just espousing a belief held by many.
Alien life hasn't been proved but statistically the chances of Earth being the only place life exists are miniscule. Rather than being a romantic thought, I suspect most scientists believe that alien life exists.
If it doesn't then that would be more baffling and certainly harder to explain. Life would then have to be viewed as something so amazingly unlikely as to almost be a miracle.
Assuming that life developed on Earth in accordance with the known physical properties of matter, then it must be assumed that the same thing will occur wherever and wherever the same conditions arise, assuming the same physical laws apply across the universe. In a universe with an incomprehensible amount of stars, the safe money has to be on life having arisen many, many, many times elsewhere.edit on 17/10/2012 by MarrsAttax because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by spinalremain
1. You really believe we are all alone in this universe?
2. The normal skeptic simply dismisses ET visitation due to lack of concrete evidence, and so they should.
You're actually taking a giant leap of faith and proclaiming that aliens aren't real at all.
3. The numbers alone would suggest otherwise to an overwhelming degree.
4. Why are you so convinced there is no alien life?
5. If you cannot see beyond the mountain, do you infer that nothing is there?
6. Im very curious about why you believe what you do.
Originally posted by Catacomb
Originally posted by The Shrike
Let's cut to the chase: if you can provide evidence that your alien really exists and I accept your evidence then I'll change from a skeptic about the reality of aliens to one of acceptance.
Quickly, prove to me that you exist, and that you are who you say you are...otherwise, I won't believe that you are real, and that you are actually a computer spitting out pre-programmed conversation.
Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
this actually the way you SHOULD think. Afterall this is just text.
Originally posted by Catacomb
Originally posted by The Shrike
Let's cut to the chase: if you can provide evidence that your alien really exists and I accept your evidence then I'll change from a skeptic about the reality of aliens to one of acceptance.
Quickly, prove to me that you exist, and that you are who you say you are...otherwise, I won't believe that you are real, and that you are actually a computer spitting out pre-programmed conversation.
Originally posted by BrianVillar
No one here is going to convince you to believe anything. You're going to have to put your own time into it and come to a conclusion for yourself.
The fact is, that anyone can debunk anything. It's very easy to say "Prove to me this" or "Convince me of that" and dismiss every piece of evidence as "They're lying", "That's a plastic bag" "It looks to me like x", "Photoshop!" etc... The list can go on forever. And it's really convenient for skeptics to use any of the above excuses because it requires far less evidence than to prove something is real.
Personally, I love all of these fantastic stories of the world and universe. Sometimes you find duds, but every once in a while you get a case that can't be explained. It's exciting finding those and trying to put together the story of the world and space. To me, it's better than assuming everything came from nothing, cause that sounds so bland to me. Maybe one day you'll find something that convinces you of something greater, but until then, you're probably not gonna find it here.
And don't say that you don't think you're better than believers. Cause your saying that you have less "baggage" than them. You don't know what kind of baggage anyone carries.
Originally posted by The Shrike
I don't believe in anything 'cause I don't have a belief system and never did. So religious myths are personas non grata with me. I understand what makes a believer thanks to being taught hypnosis by a legend and associating with other legends, top hypnotists.
Originally posted by TheFlash
Originally posted by The Shrike
I don't believe in anything 'cause I don't have a belief system and never did. So religious myths are personas non grata with me. I understand what makes a believer thanks to being taught hypnosis by a legend and associating with other legends, top hypnotists.
So you don't believe in anything, eh? When you go to sleep at night you don't believe that you will wake up the next morning? So you never make any plans for the future because you don't believe that you will be alive then? Do you believe that the man you were told was your father is actually your biological father? You don't believe that the human race is a result of Natural Selection and evolution either?
Originally posted by BlackManINC
Originally posted by TheFlash
Originally posted by The Shrike
I don't believe in anything 'cause I don't have a belief system and never did. So religious myths are personas non grata with me. I understand what makes a believer thanks to being taught hypnosis by a legend and associating with other legends, top hypnotists.
So you don't believe in anything, eh? When you go to sleep at night you don't believe that you will wake up the next morning? So you never make any plans for the future because you don't believe that you will be alive then? Do you believe that the man you were told was your father is actually your biological father? You don't believe that the human race is a result of Natural Selection and evolution either?
Big difference between micro-evolution, or 'natural selection' which is the proven process that species gradually change over time at the cellular level to better adapt to their changing environment so that they don't get sick and die out, and macro-evolution, or Darwinism the belief that we magically changed from primate to human. I'm guessing the latter is his religious belief.edit on 18-10-2012 by BlackManINC because: (no reason given)