UFO enthusiasts admit the truth may not be out there after all

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:54 AM
link   
Doesn't everyone know? The only people that see UFOs are the folks that aren't looking for them.

It's just the rule, like a watched pot never boils, or you can't meet bigfoot unless you have beef jerky.




posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Outrageo
So-so article (*yawn*).

Perhaps a more accurate, fitting thread title might have been something like,

"An exceedingly tiny percentage of former UFO-enthusiasts abandon the hunt..."




Indeed, that is a better way of putting it, especially given the hacking scandal where a UK citizen more or less found proof. Anyone who has just sifted through the unknowns that have been filed by pilots, radar personel, credible witnesses in the US government (not to mention around the world) will reach the conclusion that we are being observed by intelligent life forms who have a high degree of technology.

My God, even the RAF hero responsible for the Battle of Britain defense openly admitted it!
edit on 19-12-2012 by seen2much because: ?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:21 AM
link   
There is more evidence than ever.
A recent you tube search pulls up
TONS of unexplained aerial objects.
Not all are CGI conspiracies. Most are people saying
"what the hell is that?" and grabbing their phone.

I don't understand these types of articles.
If you or an orginazation think people who record
videos of UFO's are whacko's , why comment ?

If there is no phenomena, why bring it up?
This is what is so strange to me, if there is truly nothing,
debunkers shouldn't need to lift a finger, right?
It should take care of itself.

For example; The Military,through the History Channel
lift many fingers, & go to great lengths to explain away
something that does not exist according to them.
UFO's are alive and well.
edit on 19-12-2012 by sealing because: More
edit on 19-12-2012 by sealing because: even more



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   
I am certain there are many in the business of "journalism" like this Night Editor for the Telegraph, who know this article will entice readers into accepting the headline as the gospel truth.

I propose that those it dissuades from pursuing the study are best left outside the matter anyway. These kinds of articles are crafted to be fodder .. despite the fact that the 'author' is neither acquainted with the subject nor has any interests in it....

Note his most recent columns....


  • Birds suffer 'worst ever' year for breeding after poor weather
  • Bald cats are friendliest, but moggies are grumpiest
  • Snoopy Sloop: the unmanned toy boat attempting Atlantic crossing
  • Britain's dogs twice as likely to have a woman owner than a male one
  • The trench talk that is now entrenched in language
  • The mystery of the vanishing beetles
  • Thomas Hardy and George Eliot fall out of fashion
  • British and American power boats vie to be fastest around the world
  • British have invaded nine out of ten countries
  • Kate's accent 'is traditional RP'
  • Scouts want to curb use of nicknames
  • Revealed: best and worst Bond themes


This is a "fluff" reporter - filling his quota of words.......

edit on 19-12-2012 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 09:22 AM
link   
All the UFO idea was killed off by the pop culture. Sadly.
All those tv series (with the X-files at the front which saddens me as I liked that show) and all the interest it brought up was the eve of destruction for the movement. TV audiences got bored and the UFO idea was put to bed for a slumber. For now, there's little chance (barring the full-on landing in the spotlights) that it could be treated with some more seriousness it deserves.
It was eaten, digested and excreted by the entertainment industry.

But still... I suffer the Mulder syndrome: I want to believe....



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Osiris1953
Doesn't everyone know? The only people that see UFOs are the folks that aren't looking for them.

It's just the rule, like a watched pot never boils, or you can't meet bigfoot unless you have beef jerky.


Bloody amazing, you formulate a post idea and someone beats you to it!


Yeah exactly, like in Russia, you no find UFO, UFO find you.
Like in 1989, when I looked up into the day lit sky, at an intersection at a red light with my friend at the time.

This one, or at least that is the UFO I saw, therefore I believe this pic is probably legit.

So, a UFO may appear when you are not looking for one, it's may happen, it may not, however I am really fortunate to have seen something like this, whatever it was.
It was not moving, then it could not be found moments later.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
The entertainment industry has accomplished its goal of training humankind to perceive the UFO phenomenon as extraterrestrial in nature, which could not be farther from the truth.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   
No, they don't actually. And whoever participated in that article is bought off sell out to humanity.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Toadmund
 


The only time I've seen one was while in the car as well. It was mid afternoon and I as traveling on the US1 to my right (east) there was a fairly large cow pasture with the tree line in the distance, probably about three hundred yards maybe more. I drive past this field every day, yet on the day in question I noticed something metallic around the tree line at about the average tree height. It was oblong, silver in color, and highly reflective. I had to focus on driving, and struggled to get a good look at it. However, it was too low to be a plane, or a cell/radio tower, and didn't look at all like a helicopter, but still at the time I dismissed it, figuring had to be a tower I hadn't noticed before with one of those shiny circular looking antennae at the top.

So I decided that if it was still there when I travelled the same route later on that day that it had to be explainable, but when I returned it was gone. So by definition it was a UFO, but I have no idea what it actually could have been.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Osiris1953
Doesn't everyone know? The only people that see UFOs are the folks that aren't looking for them.

It's just the rule, like a watched pot never boils, or you can't meet bigfoot unless you have beef jerky.



You're right, I've had two up close sightings since September. I wasn't looking for UFOs the first time and I wasn't expecting to see anything again. I'm reading the Dorothy Izatt story, that's helping me to understand a bit more. I don't care what the Telegraph people think, what do they know?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by LEL01
 


People can spend their entire lives looking for UFOs and not find a single one, but some random person sitting in their garden on a Sunday afternoon will get an eye full, that's just the way it works for whatever reason.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Osiris1953
 


It's like what Toadmund said, you don't find them they find you. I'm sure my second sighting was them letting me know I wasn't mistaken the first time. I did have reason to doubt myself the first time because of local events at the time but deep down I knew it was a real sighting.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Osiris1953
reply to post by LEL01
 


People can spend their entire lives looking for UFOs and not find a single one, but some random person sitting in their garden on a Sunday afternoon will get an eye full, that's just the way it works for whatever reason.


It works like that because they are not subjective hallucinations but actual events. The above observation actually gives sightings more credence.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
I am certain there are many in the business of "journalism" like this Night Editor for the Telegraph, who know this article will entice readers into accepting the headline as the gospel truth.

I propose that those it dissuades from pursuing the study are best left outside the matter anyway. These kinds of articles are crafted to be fodder .. despite the fact that the 'author' is neither acquainted with the subject nor has any interests in it....

Note his most recent columns....


  • Birds suffer 'worst ever' year for breeding after poor weather
  • Bald cats are friendliest, but moggies are grumpiest
  • Snoopy Sloop: the unmanned toy boat attempting Atlantic crossing
  • Britain's dogs twice as likely to have a woman owner than a male one
  • The trench talk that is now entrenched in language
  • The mystery of the vanishing beetles
  • Thomas Hardy and George Eliot fall out of fashion
  • British and American power boats vie to be fastest around the world
  • British have invaded nine out of ten countries
  • Kate's accent 'is traditional RP'
  • Scouts want to curb use of nicknames
  • Revealed: best and worst Bond themes


This is a "fluff" reporter - filling his quota of words.......

edit on 19-12-2012 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)



Bravo for this post, well done. Either a reputable scientist or a clown reporter are usually employed, the king's knight or jester.

I am afraid it will take a landing on a Super Bowl or World Cup field to convince the world, sadly.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
I was reading here through and want to share my opinion about UFOs.
My intention is not to discredit UFO researchers or disbelievers.

The first argument for the existence of UFOs is our historical evidence written (literally) in stone, cave paintings and the like. In this respect, a counterargument would prove ignorance. However, not witnessing UFOs all the time - per se a "busy sky" - is perhaps due to other reasons, such as the effectiveness of actual space ships traveling back and forth. In cave paintings we can see beings wearing space suits, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they use flying dishes. They might use space suits because of different atmospheric needs and they may well have established a moon base to travel to. But they might not necessarily use flying dishes all the time to go from A to B.

When I discussed the subject with a friend of mine, we came to the conclusion, that, UFOs found in contemporary media seems inadequate for efficient travel across the galaxy. Moreover, we concluded travel by alternative means without spacecrafts (in the common sense) but instead utilizing something similar to what was portrait in the movie Star Gate, could be preferable. But this method would require for each outpost to fly physically at least one time there and to place such a device, in order to make use of it. So we dashed that idea.

A different approach could be of interest, if comprehended by all means. That would require the ability to synchronize our entire biology in accordance with space and time. Using bio-portals would make sense. They would be created by thought and accessed on a "as needed" basis. The major advantage is also, using thought-travel, that thought is incomprehensibly fast. So much so, that the speed of light would appear slower as a snail, and every destination is reached instantaneously.

However, as said, not having foolproof photos of UFOs doesn't mean we can rule out the existence of extraterrestrial life.

Perhaps people will become wiser or not. But everything seems to point towards the theory that aliens use alternative methods for space travel and perhaps advanced alternatives to travel between Earth and Saturn for example. Not to mention the possible dangers that are out there in deep space when flying with a cruiser (meteorites, comets, other objects etc, etc).

We need to start going away from movie science fiction of the past decades. It is not going to help us to keep our focus on flying dishes and the like. It's easy to believe the world is flat or until you want to shoot a guy who can demonstrate that the Earth is a spherical object. Likewise with UFO flying dishes.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   
what if we are looking in the wrong places? what if these ufos are not extraterrestrial but interdimensional?

what if they are not ships at all but some kind of critters that arent visible to the naked eye?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Im afraid its true to extent the best cases was years ago before digital photography the subject has become more mainstream theres hundreds of sites including Youtube the subject has become a bit cultish with members not caring less about real sightings and evidence but more concerned with fulfiling social and emotional needs rather than looking for the truth.

However this does not mean theres no real sightings, videos and photos or other evidence out there its just harder to find.

The argument that we have tichy HD mobile phones and camcorders is bit lame my crappy camcorder from 1997 does better job than these new consumer high tech..problem its not very portable and as someone has already mentioned no UFO is going to appear just because we want it to.

Over 25 years and not a single significant sighting and yet i carry on looking for the elusive UFO.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sublimecraft
reply to post by jahlv
 


Now that's a textbook PSYOP disinformation article if ever I read one. The mountain of testimony and evidence proving the validity of the phenomena makes this article a joke.

edit on 19-12-2012 by Sublimecraft because: (no reason given)


A large % of people still believe in angels, fairies, bigfoot & vampires...despite zero tangible evidence. Just because lots of people believe and claim to witness something...does not reliable/actual evidence make. There is nothing in the way of actual proof. Human beings are liars, idiots and superstitious. Testimony is not proof.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Toadmund
This one, or at least that is the UFO I saw, therefore I believe this pic is probably legit.



Unwillingly, you just prove the OP's point. (Not that I agree with this report, by the way).
However, that UFO photo is really, really and I mean REALLY bad. One quick look already shows that the focus/sharpness of the "UFO" does not match with the rest of stuff, trees etc., it should be much less in focus if it were halfway "UFO sized" and in some distance.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   
As for the "British UFO enthusiasts"...I don't want to read the article since I think its a re-post of the same article I read several weeks ago.

But what's astonishing is that especially the UK there is one of most respected UFO researchers, Nick Pope, one of the few researchers who tackles the subject seriously.

And...no serious researcher "scans" the sky for "alien activity" or automatically assumes the extraterrestrial hypothesis. Therefore I assume the article is just BS.





new topics
top topics
 
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join