Why do you think that the origin of UFOs is Extra-terrestrial?

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
To me a UFO is an unidentified flying object. That doesn't mean alien to me.

I don't know what they truly are but I do believe in ET's. Are they visiting? I can't say 100%. Do I think it's possible?Yes. I have seen a couple UFOs and I have no idea what it was I saw or what was flying it but let me tell you it made the hair on my neck stand up and I didnt go to sleep til the sun came up.

I think they became associated with aliens after Roswell, since that seems to be when the term became more popular and associated with ETs or that is at least how I understand it.

I also believe in interdimensional beings since I believe in multiple dimensions. There are many things we can't see with our eye but it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.




posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
There’s a lot of speculation, information, disinformation, and misinformation out there in the world about the presence here on earth of extraterrestrials.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 


Explanation: S&F!

My one and only answer to all 7 questions is "YES!, BECAUSE NASA LIES!"

Personal Disclosure: As for proof ...

Apollo1 : ... Nasa's version : They died instantly .... Reality: They took over 1min to die in burning agony.

Challanger: ... Nasa's version: The all died instantly .... Reality: They didn't die immediately and were conscious for the 2.5min horrific ride down to the ocean before being all killed in the 320kph impact.

If they willing to lie when it comes to deaths then they are clearly untrustworthy.

I believe out of SPITE!


edit on 2-11-2012 by OmegaLogos because: Edited to change 'die' into 'lie' ... fruedian slip :shk:



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Shrike
Let me qualify myself first: I do not believe UFOs are real, I know UFOs are real from first-hand experience after having 5 or 6 solid sightings and I do not think that they are extra-terrestrial..

Where are UFOs from? I have no idea. But since no evidence has been produced I cannot support such an opinion. And if I don't have evidence I don't make nor support claims, regardless.

Now, let me ask you simple questions:
1. Do you think UFOs are crafts?
2. If you do, why are there such a variety of shapes?
3. Do you think that if UFOs are craft, do they contain beings which would pilot the alleged craft?
4. Would you consider UFOs as remotely operated vehicles and if you do, where would their
controlers be located?
5. Why do you think UFOs are extra-terrestrial and what do you base it on?
6. Can you provide any evidence for your opinions?
7. If you do not have any evidence, then you must be employing a belief system so what led you to
your beliefs?

There is an "escape clause" and that is that UFOs have been filmed and videotaped hauling over the moon so that you can say "See, I told you UFOs are extra-terrestrial". But that doesn't satisfy me because the term E-t is used to denote other planets, other galaxies, i.o.w., vast distances, not the nearness of the moon. And I'm aware that images resembling UFOs have been recorded over Mars but they're rare and not as numerous as over earth.

So for this discussion, E-t is not near but far (think Zeta Reticuli and beyond).


1. Some yes, others no.
2. Same reason all cars or airplanes are not all the same size and shape. Why would we assume they should be all the same? Different designers, different functions, different preferences? who knows.
3. Some yes, some no. The yes because my daughter has seen a craft with visible beings silhouetted in the lighted areas, I guess you could call them windows.
4 & 5. Honestly not sure. They could be from this earth but not this dimension which would make them extra dimensional, they could be from another area of the planet we are not active in... hard to say but I do know that beings that are not human do pilot some, so to that end I would consider them ET. I base this on personal experiences of people throughout history and people close to me. I have stated before that my mother in law who passed away recently saw the bodies from Roswell. She worked for the Pentagon at the time also known as the war department in those days and she shared a bit of what she saw with me. They were NOT HUMAN.
6. If I did I would most likely be dead, so no. I have no desire to prove anything to anyone. I share what I know and people can take it or leave it, believe or not, I really don't care either way. I do what I can and no more.
7. Opinions are called opinion for a reason.. if they had proof they would be facts and not opinions. You can call it belief if you like, but I know what I know, and lack of ability to prove it to you or anyone else does not in any way diminish it for me, and that is what matters.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 





I stick with facts not unsupported beliefs.


Fact = All witnesses that were involved in the Travis Walton case passed a lie detector test. If the shoe was on the other foot and they didn't pass, skeptics would be yelling that it proves these men were lying.

Fact= Testimony is more credible with multiple witnesses, especially when all of them have undergone physical & mental stress, these cases are just that.

Fact= The U.S. government's own disinformation and "UFO debunking" investigator J. Allen Hynek, changed from skeptic to believer after examining and analyzing chemical residues left by these vehicles after years of investigations.


J. Allen Hynek, a trained astronomer who served as a scientific advisor for Project Bluebook, was initially skeptical of UFO reports, but eventually came to the conclusion that many of them could not be satisfactorily explained and was highly critical of what he described as "the cavalier disregard by Project Blue Book of the principles of scientific investigation."


Lets not even get into the ongoing and extensive laboratory analysis of the Star Child skull.

I've done a lot of research on this subject for the past 20 years. I was also a skeptic, but the more you research and compare case studies, and analyze the type of witnesses that have nothing to gain but ridicule, you have to come to the conclusion that there is an extreme probability that this earth has been or is currently being visited by extraterrestrial or biological entities. To view this through the eyes of humans who presently have only scraped the surface of new and possible future technologies, is really ignoring the fact that we are not as highly evolved beings as we may believe.

We still settle our differences using primitive and uncivilized methods, such as war. We still can't get beyond using fossil fuels for energy, unable to recycle our waste and improve our way of living and hardships.



edit on 2-11-2012 by WeRpeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeRpeons
reply to post by The Shrike
 





I stick with facts not unsupported beliefs.


Fact = All witnesses that were involved in the Travis Walton case passed a lie detector test. If the shoe was on the other foot and they didn't pass, skeptics would be yelling that it proves these men were lying.

Fact= Testimony is more credible with multiple witnesses, especially when all of them have undergone physical & mental stress, these cases are just that.





There is a difference between what a group of people actually see and what they think they see. If they think they saw a UFO, then the lie detector will qualify that as "not lying." They passed a test that proved they all thought they saw a UFO.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by alumnathe
 


How are you so sure, that what they saw and experienced wasn't true. You want facts, but you're just making generalizations. Five people witnessing the same thing, the probability of all of them hallucinating - probability is "0". Not to mention one experiencing a physical encounter while the others looked on.

It's one thing to be skeptic, but to ignore mathematical probabilities is like closing your eyes and wishing it would all go away.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeRpeons
reply to post by alumnathe
 


How are you so sure, that what they saw and experienced wasn't true. You want facts, but you're just making generalizations. Five people witnessing the same thing, the probability of all of them hallucinating - probability is "0". Not to mention one experiencing a physical encounter while the others looked on.

It's one thing to be skeptic, but to ignore mathematical probabilities is like closing your eyes and wishing it would all go away.


Or, one said "hey look there, a UFO" and then everybody agreed. I do think something extraordinary happened to those men, and the way they explained it sounds plausible. When I look at the description I gave MUFON for my sighting many years ago, I can hardly believe it happened to me. I'm just not convinced it's the result of extraterrestrial intervention. It's a conclusion that is too frequently jumped to. I'm not going there yet. That doesn't make me right or wrong, just patient.



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 01:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by ScientificUAPer
snip
I'm intrigued. Was there a pattern to your sightings? Could you briefly give us an example or two? Did you conclude anything for yourself, e.g. that they were military?


I appreciate all comments and I'm sorry that I can't reply to all. I tried doing that and got tired of typing. Hopefully, others will add their 2 cents to yours and we will all be enriched.

However, you are the second person who has requested that I post details of my 5 sightings so here goes:
My 1st sighting occurred in the early 1980s while living in the San Fernando Valley (L. A.) and visiting friends in Fullerton, California. I was in their backyard using my 7-15 zoom binoculars to admire the nearby hills. I saw a silver/aluminum domed "craft" edge on hovering at a low height. It seemed to be riding invisible waves, bobbing gently. Wanting to see it at 15X I moved towards a low wooden fence so that I could rest my arms and get better, solid support because when I saw the "craft" at 7X I started to tremble slightly and my arms could not hold the binoculars steady. But after I rested my arms on the fence I couldn't find the object. I don't think an illusion could cause me to tremble at the realization of finally seeing what others reported. I rushed inside excitedly and told my wife and friends.

My 2nd sighting occurred a short while later at night in our apartment building. I went down to the darkened pool area and laid down on one of the recliners facing West. Using the binoculars at 7X I started scanning the sky. I saw 3 widely-spaced stars in a vertical row and I stopped and stared at them. Rows of stars are not unusual but this row grabbed my attention. As I started to look away the 1st or top star suddenly shot away at an extremely high speed towards the south. I froze and saw the middle star also shoot away in the same direction, followed a moment later by the bottom star. In the early '90s when Internet UFO forums propagated I read of similar experiences.

Jump to 2004 for my 3rd sighting. On June 20, I took a walk with my wife, Linda. We walked towards Central Park, a half block from our apartment building. As I've trained myself to do whenever I step outside, I started scanning the sky. It was partially cloudy. Between clouds I saw a high-altitude white orb-like object hauling. I pointed it out to a person that was walking towards me and we looked at it for the short while it was visible between clouds. I realized, too late, that I had my digital camcorder with me! We entered Central Park and headed towards Fifth Avenue. At the Great Lawn we decided to separate as I wanted to go to Belvedere Castle, a weather station on a rocky area overlooking the Great Lawn. I went up and found myself on the stone stairs that overlook the Delacorte Theatre and the Great Lawn. When I saw a plane appearing above the distant buildings I zoomed in on the space into which the airplane would eventually fly. As I zoomed in I lost my balance on the stairs and started to fall forward but regained my balance or I would have landed in Turtle Pond possibly dead! Later, when I played back the videotape on the TV I saw that I had recorded a stationary white dot which was definitely a UFO in the same frame as the ascending airplane. Looking at the tape frame-by-frame the UFO appears to have moved.

A week or so after the above sighting I was waiting at a bus stop. I looked up and saw a small, wispy cloud in an otherwise clear blue sky. Sitting in the center and obviously behind the cloud, as if "hiding" I saw a white object. I tried to videotape it but had a problem with my digital camcorder. The night before I had used the night MagicVue feature and forgot to put the camcorder back to normal for daylight videotaping. When I tried to videotape the UFO behind the cloud, all I could see in the viewfinder was a message about the infrared filter. It took only a few seconds to put the camcorder back to normal but for the few seconds that I looked away the UFO was gone!

About a month after the above I took a walk but left the slightly heavy camcorder at home 'cause I didn't feel like toting it. As I arrived at an intersection I looked up and saw a dark, round object hovering in the sky at a low altitude so its round shape was clear. At first I thought it was a balloon but I stopped and stared at it. A passerby saw me craning my neck and inquired as to what I was looking. I pointed out the object to him. After a while of comparing notes, he agreed that it had to be a UFO to be just hovering there with a slight rotating movement visible, and sometimes gently tilting . A balloon would have drifted away or if it was being held by one hell of a long string it would have oscillated and, really, whatever it was couldn't be tethered at that height. And it was not a kite. After about 5 minutes the object seemed to be rising ever so slowly and



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 04:21 AM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 


It seems your question is directed at those who embrace ignorance or what they want to believe over what is most likely. Of all of the documented sightings I have seen evidence of I have found nothing to indicate the UFOs were extraterrestrial. In fact, the idea of observing the craft to me makes it more likely that it is terrestrial. I say this because if we visited another planet with the intent to conceal ourselves, which we have to assume they are doing since no contact has been made, then we would not be seen hovering areas with flashing lights. We would drop another ship or drone that could cloak into the atmosphere.

These speculative answers are easy when you compare what is most likely to what is less. For example, which is most likely:

Other intelligent beings similar to or exceeding our technology exists elsewhere within our dimension and universe. - Most likely

We are the only intelligent species in all of the universe. - Less likely.

We have been visited by an alien intelligent life form. - Less likely.

Other intelligent life forms know we are here. - Less likely.

Other intelligent life forms believe in our existence. - More likely.

If another life form finds us they will attempt to establish communication and contact. - More likely.

We will one day make contact with another intelligent life form. - More likely.

When we make contact we will still be considered the species Sapiens. - Less likely.

We will establish communication before we make contact with another intelligence. - More likely.

This is pretty simple stuff here. If any photographs of UFOs are real (not hoaxed) then they likely recorded a terrestrial object. Nothing is definitive, but I refuse to believe something that is less likely from being true.



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 


the existence of UFOs is simple since it is just something that is unidentified and there are plenty of things we can't identify; but when you get to specific incidents it becomes more complicated and the emphasis is on if they are beyond known technology. Jacques Vallee and several others prefer UAP or Unidentified Arial Phenomenon which makes sense because it allows for things like the Aurora Borealis but some of them are allegedly physical so that won't explain it.

Then there is the simple question of whether they can travel these long distances and commute as many people seem to assume. I think this is a big mistake! The possibility that this is a result of long term exploration, micro technology and automation should be given more consideration. This hypothesis could involve a craft that had a specific mission and artificial intelligence to make decisions in the relatively short term that was sent out to space for a trip that might take hundreds of years. Once it arrived it would be programed to use local resources and communicate back with the home location which could give it new programing but if it is one hundred light years it would take that long for the message to travel each way.

This hypothesis might be in line with the Ancient Astronaut theory but it would have to have a lot of details worked out and the most common versions of this theory have so many blunders it would be better to start from scratch or plan on reviewing all the details.

The bottom line is that it is unidentified and without more information it might be difficult to develop a stronger hypothesis.



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 


My previous post did not all end up in my response??Sorry for the confusion....

1. Do you think UFOs are crafts?

I do believe aprox. 45% (of what is being called U.F.O'S),are indeed actual craft. By craft I mean most are earth originating aircraft, satellites, balloons, rockets,drones, U.A.V'S, and perhaps even probes.

Out of that 45%, perhaps 15% being true unidentified and never fully explained.

The remaining 55% being made up of planets ,meteors/fireballs,missle test, cloud formations, reflections, imaging artifacts, and intentional hoax.

2. If you do, why are there such a variety of shapes?

Three possible reasons:

1. The design may vary according to the type of travel in which they were designed.

2.The age and level of development of the creating species.

3.Just as earthlings have different creative tendencies, what's to say outside visitors would not have the same...?


3. Do you think that if UFOs are craft, do they contain beings which would pilot the alleged craft?

Due to the extreme flight characteristics of SOME of the 15%, I tend to think some are piloted by a kind genetically altered super pilot. Maybe even a living craft which could Unite with the pilot enabling otherwise impossible advanced flight control.

4. Would you consider UFOs as remotely operated vehicles and if you do, where would their
controllers be located?

I consider some UFO'S to be remotely operated and their controllers likely operating from isolated areas on the earth. Perhaps underwater, underground,or from within military installations. A majority being controlled from within the Craft.
A lesser number may well be remotely controlled from within and from afar...
edit on 3-11-2012 by wutz4tom because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by The Shrike
 


The come from The Hollow Earth.

Admiral Byrd’s Epoch-Making Discovery
The Greatest Geographical Discovery in Human History
"That enchanted Continent in the Sky, Land of Everlasting Mystery! "
"I'd like to see that land beyond the (North) Pole. That area beyond the Pole is the Center of the Great Unknown:"

In January, 1956, Admiral Byrd led another expedition to the Antarctic and there penetrated for 2,300 miles *beyond* the South Pole. The radio announcement at this time (January 13, 1956) said: "On January 13, members of the United States expedition penetrated a land extent of 2,300 miles *beyond* the Pole. The flight was made by Rear Admiral George Dufek of the United States Navy Air Unit."
The word "beyond" is very significant and will be puzzling to those who believe in the old conception of a solid earth. It would then mean the region on the other side of the Antarctic continent and the ocean beyond, and would not be "a vast new territory" (not on any map), nor would his expedition that found this territory be "the most important expedition in the history of the world". The geography of Antarctica is fairly well known, and Admiral Byrd has not added anything significant to our knowledge of the Antarctic continent. If this is the case, then why should he make such apparently wild and unsupported statements - especially in view of his high standing as a rear admiral of the U.S. Navy and his reputation as a great explorer?
This enigma is solved when we understand the new geographical theory of a Hollow Earth, which is the only way we can see sense in Admiral Byrd's statements and not consider him as a visionary who saw mirages in the polar regions or at least imagined he did.

Read this story:

The Hollow Earth The Greatest Geographical Discovery in History Made by Admiral Richard E. Byrd in the Mysterious Land Beyond the Poles - The True Origin of the Flying Saucers

by:

Bernard, B.A., M.A., Ph.D.
1964 FIELDCREST PUBLISHING CO., INC. 210 Fifth Avenue, New York 10, N.Y.
1965



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   
NOTE: WHEN PREVIEWING MY TEXT I NOTICE THAT THE FORMATTING IS SCREWED UP BY THE ATS COMPUTERS SO PLEASE DON'T FAULT ME FOR IT.

When constructing my thread I didn't consider that I should be the first to provide answers to my questions. A little late but better late than never. Herein my possibly simplistic answers.

1. Do you think UFOs are crafts?
This would be the first conclusion to arrive at since the majority of UFO sightings are of aerial devices that are seen to move in ways that human aircraft cannot, with few exceptions. However, not knowing what UFOs are, saying that it's a craft seems to be the de rigueur answer. My honest answer is that I cannot state with certainty that any or all UFOs are craft. The only way to have a definite answer is to have one land and allow humans to enter and be taken for a ride. But then, Jonah was given a ride in a whale!
.
2. If you do, why are there such a variety of shapes?
Since I do not state that UFOs are craft the apparent variety of shapes just adds to the mystery and even though human craft also come in a wide variety of form they all have some things in common such as wings, mechanical motors, tails or fins (excepting blimps and helicopters some of which employ wings and tail fins). We don't know why UFOs employ their various forms.

3. Do you think that if UFOs are craft, do they contain beings which would pilot the alleged craft?
Not having had the experience of seeing anything considered living (or otherwise) emerge from UFOs, there is no way to come to such a conclusion in light of the fact that human craft are both piloted by humans and remotely operated, again by humans.

4. Would you consider UFOs as remotely operated vehicles and if you do, where would their controlers be
located?
Not knowing anything about UFOs to make an educated guess, all we do is wonder. If some or all UFOs are
ROVs, the location of the alleged controllers has to remain unknown and guessing doesn't help.

5. Why do you think UFOs are extra-terrestrial and what do you base it on?
Because we do not have evidence that UFOs are extra-terrestrial, meaning farther away that the Moon and Mars where they have been seen and recorded, I do not consider UFOs extra-terrestrial, meaning farther away than the Moon and Mars. However, it is obvious from space videos that they do have the ability to leave Earth and possibly fly to the Moon and Mars but no one has provided any evidence of seeing them traveling between us and the Moon and Mars.

6. Can you provide any evidence for your opinions?
Yes, my own non-observations and no reports to substantiate the ETH! Again, discounting the Moon and Mars.

7. If you do not have any evidence, then you must be employing a belief system so what led you to your beliefs?
Fortunately, I do not have a belief system so all that I rely on is the lack of evidence. Without evidence no claim can be satisfied.

The bottom line is, for me, that the mystery of UFOs has endured since they were first reported and at no time since then has anyone been in a position to impart any worthwhile knowledge.



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeRpeons
snip


Fact: You need to get away from the popular explanations, such as Kevin Randle's, and dig really deep for real answers. You may pooh pooh certain, non-popular sources but so far they are preferred to the popular bs about hoaxer-meister Travis Walton:


Travis Walton Fact Sheet
By Phillip Klass
Date: Aug 16 1993
http://j_kidd.tripod.com/b/218.html

Bad UFOs: Skepticism, UFOs, and The Universe - by Robert Sheaffer
badufos.blogspot.com...

If you can prove that the research mentioned above is faulty please post so but leave your beliefs out of it, stick to the facts.



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by zacherystaylor
snip
The bottom line is that it is unidentified and without more information it might be difficult to develop a stronger hypothesis.


Exactly! Except that it is presently impossible.

BTW, before Vallee, back in the early '60s when I was active in UFOlogy I started using the initials UAO (Unidentified Aerial Object) in my communications but it seemed I was the only one. I preferred Object to Phenomena since most people I spoke with used the more familiar "object" than "phenomena. In Vallee's circle phenomena was more in line with their jargon than with the average Joe on the street of which I was one.



posted on Nov, 3 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by The only 1 who knows the
reply to post by The Shrike
 


The come from The Hollow Earth.

Admiral Byrd’s Epoch-Making Discovery
The Greatest Geographical Discovery in Human History
"That enchanted Continent in the Sky, Land of Everlasting Mystery! "
"I'd like to see that land beyond the (North) Pole. That area beyond the Pole is the Center of the Great Unknown:"

In January, 1956, Admiral Byrd led another expedition to the Antarctic and there penetrated for 2,300 miles *beyond* the South Pole. The radio announcement at this time (January 13, 1956) said: "On January 13, members of the United States expedition penetrated a land extent of 2,300 miles *beyond* the Pole. The flight was made by Rear Admiral George Dufek of the United States Navy Air Unit."
The word "beyond" is very significant and will be puzzling to those who believe in the old conception of a solid earth. It would then mean the region on the other side of the Antarctic continent and the ocean beyond, and would not be "a vast new territory" (not on any map), nor would his expedition that found this territory be "the most important expedition in the history of the world". The geography of Antarctica is fairly well known, and Admiral Byrd has not added anything significant to our knowledge of the Antarctic continent. If this is the case, then why should he make such apparently wild and unsupported statements - especially in view of his high standing as a rear admiral of the U.S. Navy and his reputation as a great explorer?
This enigma is solved when we understand the new geographical theory of a Hollow Earth, which is the only way we can see sense in Admiral Byrd's statements and not consider him as a visionary who saw mirages in the polar regions or at least imagined he did.

Read this story:

The Hollow Earth The Greatest Geographical Discovery in History Made by Admiral Richard E. Byrd in the Mysterious Land Beyond the Poles - The True Origin of the Flying Saucers

by:

Bernard, B.A., M.A., Ph.D.
1964 FIELDCREST PUBLISHING CO., INC. 210 Fifth Avenue, New York 10, N.Y.
1965


Hardy, har har!


The Hollow Earth, Atlantis, Great Flood, Jesus, God, various monsters, equal "made out of whole cloth".

The planet earth has been seen from all angles by satellites, which Admiral Byrd didn't consider. No openings.

BTW, I hold the claim to be the only person to have been physically ejected from a UFO lecture, given by Admiral Byrd's nephew in L.A. in the early '80s.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by WeRpeons

Fact = All witnesses that were involved in the Travis Walton case passed a lie detector test. If the shoe was on the other foot and they didn't pass, skeptics would be yelling that it proves these men were lying.

Fact= Testimony is more credible with multiple witnesses, especially when all of them have undergone physical & mental stress, these cases are just that.


No, having no actual proof of abduction shows skeptics they're probably lying. There was a video posted here a couple of months ago where Travis Walton was asked on a lie detector game show about the abduction. The lie detector said he lied about the story. Do you think that validated skeptics belief that he lied? It didn't for me and I highly doubt it did for any other skeptics. A claim of being abducted by alien beings from another world should take far more than just a story from a few guys. Unfortunately for many people, it doesn't. You also have to remember, Travis Walton made a lot of money off this story through books, movies, countless interviews etc. Money that surely would be shared between all of his "witness" buddies. Money is a great motivator.


Fact= The U.S. government's own disinformation and "UFO debunking" investigator J. Allen Hynek, changed from skeptic to believer after examining and analyzing chemical residues left by these vehicles after years of investigations.


J Allen Hynek didn't believe UFOs were alien spacecraft. He only believed the phenomenon was real.


Lets not even get into the ongoing and extensive laboratory analysis of the Star Child skull.


So the "star child" skull has been an ongoing investigation for 13 years and they still can't determine if it's "alien" or not?! According to their website, they need $7,000,000 in order to carry-on this "investigation" to the next step!! Nothing odd to you in all of that? Thirteen YEARS and 7 MILLION dollars. They are preying on the gullible.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Why must humans believe they are the center of the universe? first they believed there was only one world, the one humans happen to live on, the. They believed that the sun flew around the earth, now they believe that they are the only things existing in this universe on this one little planet, no where else can have life ...


Or their belief system in their religion can never be wrong so no aliens exist.


The ego is still a big problem in society I see...

we need to grow up...



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Shrike
Let me qualify myself first: I do not believe UFOs are real, I know UFOs are real from first-hand experience after having 5 or 6 solid sightings and I do not think that they are extra-terrestrial..

Where are UFOs from? I have no idea. But since no evidence has been produced I cannot support such an opinion. And if I don't have evidence I don't make nor support claims, regardless.

Now, let me ask you simple questions:
1. Do you think UFOs are crafts?
2. If you do, why are there such a variety of shapes?
3. Do you think that if UFOs are craft, do they contain beings which would pilot the alleged craft?
4. Would you consider UFOs as remotely operated vehicles and if you do, where would their
controlers be located?
5. Why do you think UFOs are extra-terrestrial and what do you base it on?
6. Can you provide any evidence for your opinions?
7. If you do not have any evidence, then you must be employing a belief system so what led you to
your beliefs?

There is an "escape clause" and that is that UFOs have been filmed and videotaped hauling over the moon so that you can say "See, I told you UFOs are extra-terrestrial". But that doesn't satisfy me because the term E-t is used to denote other planets, other galaxies, i.o.w., vast distances, not the nearness of the moon. And I'm aware that images resembling UFOs have been recorded over Mars but they're rare and not as numerous as over earth.

So for this discussion, E-t is not near but far (think Zeta Reticuli and beyond).


Basically, the question you ask boils down to the title of this thread which is:

Why do you think that the origin of UFOs is Extra-terrestrial?


And I say that if most people were really honest with themselves they would come out and admit that its because Hollywood told them so, and nothing more. This is pretty much the sole reason why many equate the term "unidentified flying object" with extraterrestrial. They literally have no evidence to show for it beyond their own preconceived notions that came from Hollywood in the first place. I'm a Christian, but I don't think I've ever seen anything that I can truly call unidentified and I don't trust so called UFO footage either as anything can be faked these days, and there are a lot of con men out there. I do however, know some people that claim to have seen a "UFO", but that's about it. The term 'Unidentified Flying Object' should mean exactly that, something that can't be identified. It doesn't mean "alien", "demon", or anything else.

The abduction reports, however, is another subject entirely and should be treated as such. After many years of looking at this subject, I can say with absolute certainly that nothing at all about the beings people claim to have had an actual encounter with is "E.T" but an absolute demonic manifestation, and for the majority of the people that do have this experiences, had they not been engaging in the occult, they wouldn't have had the encounter in the first place, because when you engage in the occult you are asking to be contacted, and these people have no idea what they are truly dealing with. Magic is not just some push a button and get a candy bar type of universal method. It is a way to invite dangerous beings in your life that would like to control and manipulate you.
edit on 4-11-2012 by BlackManINC because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join