Why don't you believe? (@Non-Believers and Skeptics)

page: 29
27
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
How exactly being anti social has ANYTHING AT ALL to do with ignoring testimony of either delusional, mentally ill or downright liars?




You'd have to be extremely closed minded and anti social, ignoring the testimony of countless people, to think there is no evidence.




posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Who? You are making broad accusation but you are not pointing your finger at anyone in particular. So basically you are blaming potentially everyone in their group for being jealous. Your statement is misleading and dishonest and unfair. If you are going to accuse someone don't be a coward and point out exactly who you think it is or else don't say anything at all.



Just looked at the recent posts on this thread, it really does look like jealousy from non believers now. No wonder extraterrestrials choose to remain hidden from some people.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   
The truth about Dr. Roger Leir ...



So, who is Dr. Roger Leir? Roger Leir graduated from the California School Of Podiatric Medicine At Samuel Merritt College in 1964. That would make him likely around 74 years old in 2012. As a Doctor of Podiatric Medicine (DPM) [we used to refer to them as "dropouts from dental school"], this means he is legally allowed to only treat and/or perform surgeries on the foot and ankle (some states may allow a shin). It would be illegal for him to perform surgery on any other part of the body - which is why you'll always hear Leir make reference to his surgical "team," meaning he brings in another guy to actually do the cutting anywhere else on the body other than the feet/ankles, but he always takes the credit. Though not a surgeon myself, I've been in countless surgeries, with surgeries performed in my Unit on a routine basis. I can guarantee you, the types of surgeries Leir et. al. have performed to remove his so-called "implants" could be done by almost any mother who has had small children that got slivers in their hands or feet. Back in my day, if you got something stuck in your foot/hand/name-your-own-body-part, your mom or dad would gather up the surgical kit (razor blade and tweezers), lay the desired appendage on the table or across their legs, spray a little Bactine® on the site for good measure, and start digging. Once the offending "implant" was removed, another little spray of Bactine®, add a few drops of Mercurochrome™, slap on a Band-Aid®, and go back outside and play. About the only thing Leir and his "team" would use beyond "home surgeries" is a tourniquet for deeper incisions. Now obviously, if one had a shard that's been impaled into a boney structure, this requires a bit more expertise, but I promise you, not much. Well, in 1999, Dr. Roger Leir was sanctioned by California Board of Podiatric Medicine, for a period of three years - April 1999-April 2002. His license was not revoked or suspended, but Dr. Leir was place on official probation by the Board for repeated acts of negligence. The Board will release the fact that infractions exist, but will often not make public the specifics of the case(s). I really don't feel like spending any time or money looking into this, but any of you can contact the Board (at links below) to see if you can get specifics.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by stanislav
 


Can you not just link the thread that came from?

coastgab.com...



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by aivlas
 


Why?



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Clicking on a link is easier than choosing a bit to copy paste in to google.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I disagree. You are making it sound as if I was purposefully hiding it. I provide links to YouTube videos and or links to official websites like Wiki but why would I provide direct link to another message board? Besides some people don't like clicking on another link. And my quote was relevant to our discussion so I think it was only appropriate to copy paste.


Originally posted by aivlas
Clicking on a link is easier than choosing a bit to copy paste in to google.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by stanislav
Exactly! I have yet to see ONE video of a real UFO.

How do you know that (I suppose that by "UFO" you mean "alien spacecraft")?



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaPsorry could you please rephrase your question


Originally posted by stanislav
Exactly! I have yet to see ONE video of a real UFO.

How do you know that (I suppose that by "UFO" you mean "alien spacecraft")?



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Imtor
Don't speak from the name of all skeptics, mister.
Sorry if I gave that impression, it was not my intention.


However, I am talking about those skeptics that are certain that ALL is made up and non-existent, even things they do not know because they are kept away from public - that every single clue is fake - I am not talking about some UFO Researchers and TV shows or the Internet where there's lots of crap... I am talking about the overall idea and how certain some are of the non-existence because the evidence isn't knocking on their door.

By definition, if they are certain of something (specially something for which they do not have real data) they are not real sceptics.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by stanislav
Can someone tell me HOW and WHY OP received 27 stars for his-her original post? Insanity must be rampant around here.

It's called "different opinions".



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by stanislav
 


How do you know that you "have yet to see ONE video of a real UFO"? You may have seen one and not being able to identify it as such.

PS: I suppose that by "UFO" you mean "alien spacecraft".

PPS: is this better?



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   


How do you know that you "have yet to see ONE video of a real UFO"? You may have seen one and not being able to identify it as such.


By the same token, how can one see a video of a UFO and proclaim it alien? What is the logic that leads to such a conclusion based on so little data?



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
...Et who is way over our heads, has the remote on time, processes everyone on earth over and over, giving missing time (on the dvd player, they have the remote and can push pause, forward and backwards at will), can interfere with all devices, along with our paramilitary that have even been rumored to kill, when the topic of ufology is above top secret, why would anyone presume that anyone would ever have proof, even though some have some amounts of it, such as the implants removed, the dna on the hairs found, and other things. Also family regressions and studies. You'd have to be extremely closed minded and anti social, ignoring the testimony of countless people, to think there is no evidence.

However, back on the evidence. Those who are more credentialed and have higher security clearance than most of the presidents of the US, don't have proof either, just their word.


With all due respect (and I mean that sincerely), none of the things you mentioned are tangible, empirical, physical, palpable items or experiences that can be examined, observed, or repeated in a controlled environment. Please understand that we do not mean to suggest that such things did not and do not occur or exist.

It is often asked in the hallowed environs of ATS, usually in a bemoaning, exasperated tone, "...why, oh why, will the scholars, academia, university researchers of the world NOT pick up this earth-shaking topic and finally give our voice some legitimacy!?!?!?"

The answer is elementary: There is nothing to study.

Analyzing grainy spots of light on a questionable video? Nope - done that. Not enough, not empirical.

Interviewing witnesses, abductees, and other experiencers using techniques such as regression hypnosis and lie-detection tests -by the multitude? Nebulous at best. Little to document. Here-say/3rd person. Not acceptable as (peer-reviewed) proof.

Alien autopsy? Nah. A debunked film clip is not the body itself. Bring the body (or invite independent medical examiners) to participate - then you might have something. Until then... *sigh*

UFO(IFO) landing/crash/capture/encounter? Can we have a piece of it to look at? Run a few tests of our own perhaps? NO? Nothing solid whatsoever? Sorry - no validation can then be forthcoming - nothing to validate!

How about a good, hi-resolution, close-up photo at least? Of any ship! No? How about the inside of a ship? You know, the instrument panels, propulsion devices -anything?!? Don't have any of those either? *sigh*

Do you see the problem? We WANT to believe - just like many of you! TRULY!

But thus far all we have been given (officially) is a few blinking lights at night, some fantastic witness accounts of what THEY saw (or think they saw), some heart-wrenching stories from good folks that are clearly distressed by 'close encounters' - and many more of the same.

Again - there is nothing to study, nothing to examine, nothing to test, nothing for researchers to collaborate on and discuss. Is this by design of some PTB whose motives are to keep the populace in the dark? Perhaps - and if so, they have been largely successful (and man-oh-man that must be exorbitantly expensive)!

Yet - and the reiteration is significant - we do not necessarily disbelieve the believer (or the experiencer). I may be enthralled, utterly fascinated, by your belief, your account of what happened to you or to someone else. And I often am!

But it hasn't happened to me. And nobody seems able to produce ANYTHING that can be held up to even the slightest scrutiny to any body of educated men and women on this planet for them all to say, emphatically, and in unison, "IT IS SO!"

Cough up just one tiny morsel of ANY kind of ALIEN, ANY kind of CRAFT or ARTIFACT that we can touch, smell, hold, taste, and we'll jump into your believer's boat in an instant!

Can you do it?

Do it!

p.s. This ain't it:




posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slave2Fate
By the same token, how can one see a video of a UFO and proclaim it alien?

They cannot know but they can proclaim it.



What is the logic that leads to such a conclusion based on so little data?

A failed one.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Outrageo
Again - there is nothing to study, nothing to examine, nothing to test, nothing for researchers to collaborate on and discuss. Is this by design of some PTB whose motives are to keep the populace in the dark? Perhaps - and if so, they have been largely successful (and man-oh-man that must be exorbitantly expensive)!


Excellent post Outrageo.


One thing though, with the scientific community being a literal world wide organization and the outstanding input from even the likes of the amateur astronomy community I don't see any feasible way of suppressing all verifiable evidence of alien visitation. You can bet your last dollar that any scientist or astronomer worth their salt would not sit on anything so monumental as alien visitation. The cover up conspiracies just don't make much sense in light of such things.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I have to disagree with you here. In my opinion photographic evidence of supposed alien space craft cannot account for real evidence. I say this with a lot of confidence because most YouTube videos of supposed UFOs were debunked to be either elaborate hoaxes (i.e. CGI) or misidentified objects (i.e. balloons).

So for you to ask “HOW DO YOU KNOW” is like me asking an astronomer how could he conclude that UFOs don't exist simply because in all of his 30 years of observation he seen no evidence of such occurrence. So you could supposedly ask him the same question because it's impossible for one astronomer to observe an entire sky 24|7 looking to identify UFOs.

I think it's self explanatory that most if not all YouTube videos pertaining to UFOs are nothing more than hoaxes and misidentified objects in the sky. However if you could provide me with ONE video which could be identified as an alien craft I will personally admit here that I was wrong in my assumption.


Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by stanislav
 


How do you know that you "have yet to see ONE video of a real UFO"? You may have seen one and not being able to identify it as such.

PS: I suppose that by "UFO" you mean "alien spacecraft".

PPS: is this better?
edit on 27-11-2012 by stanislav because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   
Are you recapitulating another science fiction movie?



Lets see, Et who is way over our heads, has the remote on time, processes everyone on earth over and over, giving missing time (on the dvd player, they have the remote and can push pause, forward and backwards at will), can interfere with all devices, along with our paramilitary that have even been rumored to kill,



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by stanislav
In my opinion photographic evidence of supposed alien space craft cannot account for real evidence.

Photos are a representation of what was seen at that time from that point of view, why shouldn't they be considered real evidence, in the same way a witness account may be considered evidence?


I say this with a lot of confidence because most YouTube videos of supposed UFOs were debunked to be either elaborate hoaxes (i.e. CGI) or misidentified objects (i.e. balloons).

Most. The problem is that we cannot really know if any of them is real, can we?


So for you to ask “HOW DO YOU KNOW” is like me asking an astronomer how could he conclude that UFOs don't exist simply because in all of his 30 years of observation he seen no evidence of such occurrence. So you could supposedly ask him the same question because it's impossible for one astronomer to observe an entire sky 24|7 looking to identify UFOs.

That's my point, we cannot really know. If we cannot really know we shouldn't dismiss, because one can be the real thing.


I think it's self explanatory that most if not all YouTube videos pertaining to UFOs are nothing more than hoaxes and misidentified objects in the sky. However if you could provide me with ONE video which could be identified as an alien craft I will personally admit here that I was wrong in my assumption.

I can't provide you with a video that could be identified as an alien craft because I have never seen one, but that doesn't mean it's not possible, just that.

PS: I have posted in many threads my opinion of videos that supposedly show alien craft, you can see in those posts that even if I couldn't really identify what was seen in the video I never assumed that it was an alien craft.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   
But photos of WHAT is a better question. What am I seeing in a photograph? How can we be sure it is an alien craft? We know what plane looks like, we know what a human being looks like but if you are showing me poor quality video or a photograph there is no way we can identify anything, even if it was a space rock. Would there be any distinct difference between space junk and an alien craft? What are we basing our findings upon? I can understand if someone took multiple photographs with high resolution camera inside and out of an alien craft. i have yet to see ONE such photograph. However I have see a lot of photographs inside and outside of an airplane, aircraft, a helicopter but nothing of an alien craft. Not until we can actually see multiple, high resolution, clear as day photographs of a real alien craft can we even begin to conclude that aliens are visiting our planet. Science does not work this way. Cern is still trying to make sure that Higg Boson is a real subatomic particle *field) eventhough they already found it since July of this year.



Photos are a representation of what was seen at that time from that point of view, why shouldn't they be considered real evidence, in the same way a witness account may be considered evidence?





 
27
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join