ATS UFO FORUM - Where's the serious UFO Phenomena researcher / enthusiast ?

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 05:29 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Embedded for you.



I wish I had knowledge to understand what the video seems to be showing. You should probably post this video in its own thread. Wow if this is legit...



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Morg234



UFO = ETH/EDH/Spirits? Saying that UFO equals anything other than unknown phenomenon is intellectually sloppy and irresponsible.
reply to post by Druscilla
 


What is sloppy is to group "spirits" along with legitimate terms for hypotheses proposed by legitimate researchers.



legitimate researcher of UFO phenomena know that occultism and spiritism are a must have knowledge if one is to research UFOLOGY. If one research only the physical aspect of UFO phenomena and discarding the massive amount of data regarding non-physical manifestations then that research is not valid.

Only the modern US Ufologist are focused on physical explanation of UFO Phenomena and attributing everything to material scientific method. They are abandoning the other half of non-physical (psychical) research of UFOLOGY.

disregarding the data on non physical manifestation of UFO Phenomena are not only 'sloppy' but also incompetent and unscientific.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by spiritualarchitect
reply to post by milomilo
 


"- Serious UFO phenomena researchers do not believe in Extra terrestrial hypothesis, they believe in other form of existence (extra dimensional / spirits / etc)"



Since when? This sounds like a cop out. Let's cut thru the star trek time travel dimensional crap.


About 40 years ago. That's around the time when Jacques Vallee and John Keel dumped the "ET hypothesis" for similar reasons.

Vallee gives detailed reasons for rejecting the "ET hypothesis" and replacing it with the "inter-dimensional hypothesis" in his 1969 book "Passport to Magonia". Not sure exactly when Keel rejected the ET hypothesis in favor of the inter-dimensional one, but by the time he wrote "The Mothman Prophecies", in 1975, he had fully made the switch.

Your reading into UFO literature must be extremely sight if you've never heard of "Passport to Magonia" and its significance to UFO research.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Moresby
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


About 40 years ago. That's around the time when Jacques Vallee and John Keel dumped the "ET hypothesis" for similar reasons.

Vallee gives detailed reasons for rejecting the "ET hypothesis" and replacing it with the "inter-dimensional hypothesis" in his 1969 book "Passport to Magonia". Not sure exactly when Keel rejected the ET hypothesis in favor of the inter-dimensional one, but by the time he wrote "The Mothman Prophecies", in 1975, he had fully made the switch.

Your reading into UFO literature must be extremely sight if you've never heard of "Passport to Magonia" and its significance to UFO research.


I think you've possibly misinterpreted, or overstated, Vallee's stance on the ETH. He's written several more books since 'Magonia' and offered detailed thoughts and examples why the ETH doesn't go all the way to explaining UFO and related reports. He's never rejected it and has actually said so in as many words, in audio interviews, as recently as 2009 (iirc).

His 5 Arguments against the ETH (pdf) is regularly cited as his dismissal of the ETH. According to him, it was published to highlight the shortcomings of the ETH and invite debate. He's frequently stated that he believes there's a physical, technological component to UFO reports and that there isn't the data to be certain about the origins.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by Moresby
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


About 40 years ago. That's around the time when Jacques Vallee and John Keel dumped the "ET hypothesis" for similar reasons.

Vallee gives detailed reasons for rejecting the "ET hypothesis" and replacing it with the "inter-dimensional hypothesis" in his 1969 book "Passport to Magonia". Not sure exactly when Keel rejected the ET hypothesis in favor of the inter-dimensional one, but by the time he wrote "The Mothman Prophecies", in 1975, he had fully made the switch.

Your reading into UFO literature must be extremely sight if you've never heard of "Passport to Magonia" and its significance to UFO research.


I think you've possibly misinterpreted, or overstated, Vallee's stance on the ETH. He's written several more books since 'Magonia' and offered detailed thoughts and examples why the ETH doesn't go all the way to explaining UFO and related reports. He's never rejected it and has actually said so in as many words, in audio interviews, as recently as 2009 (iirc).

His 5 Arguments against the ETH (pdf) is regularly cited as his dismissal of the ETH. According to him, it was published to highlight the shortcomings of the ETH and invite debate. He's frequently stated that he believes there's a physical, technological component to UFO reports and that there isn't the data to be certain about the origins.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


yes i think this pdf should be must read for every ufologist looking for more than just interpreting blurry photo/video..

Vallee's argument against ETH , i have read it long ago and i think i can add a few myself.

There is a reason why vallee never admit his own opinion on UFO phenomena origin. i think because scientifically (based on today's material/physical science) its impossible to explain something that physical and psychical at the same time. As long as 'science' never allow real research (without ridicule) on paranormal/psychic and focused only on material science , UFO phenomena will never be solved..

in my opinion, the term EDH is just a 'technical' term for explaning some of the psychical manifestation of UFO phenomena, without going straight into spirits/mediumistic/paranormal terms and be a laughing stock. Note how some people automatically deride the word 'spirits' in ATS, because their pre-set belief that they dont exist and its not proven by the standard of science of the day..



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by Moresby
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


About 40 years ago. That's around the time when Jacques Vallee and John Keel dumped the "ET hypothesis" for similar reasons.

Vallee gives detailed reasons for rejecting the "ET hypothesis" and replacing it with the "inter-dimensional hypothesis" in his 1969 book "Passport to Magonia". Not sure exactly when Keel rejected the ET hypothesis in favor of the inter-dimensional one, but by the time he wrote "The Mothman Prophecies", in 1975, he had fully made the switch.

Your reading into UFO literature must be extremely sight if you've never heard of "Passport to Magonia" and its significance to UFO research.


I think you've possibly misinterpreted, or overstated, Vallee's stance on the ETH. He's written several more books since 'Magonia' and offered detailed thoughts and examples why the ETH doesn't go all the way to explaining UFO and related reports. He's never rejected it and has actually said so in as many words, in audio interviews, as recently as 2009 (iirc).

His 5 Arguments against the ETH (pdf) is regularly cited as his dismissal of the ETH. According to him, it was published to highlight the shortcomings of the ETH and invite debate. He's frequently stated that he believes there's a physical, technological component to UFO reports and that there isn't the data to be certain about the origins.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


Some of Vallee's "backtracking" also came from a misinterpretation of "Magonia". Some seemed to assume that by connecting the UFO phenomena to folkoric ideas he was suggesting it was no more real than folklore. This wasn't the case. Sometimes when you're misunderstood that dramatically you overstate things in the other direction. And some of Vallee's later statements fall in that category for me.

But suffice it to say no book Vallee wrote after "Magonia" was a flat-footed as those he wrote before it.

And Vallee was clearly the primary starting point for a rejection of the ETH, which was the question I was answering, and he's still sited to this day on this issue. John Keel, who I also mentioned, I don't believe ever returned to the ETH even rhetorically.

But some are even less grounded in one camp or the other. Whitley Strieber, for instance, never seems to fully embrace one hypothesis. He seems to favor the inter-dimensional hypothesis, but elements of the ETH seem to intrigue him more or less from time to time.
edit on 4-3-2013 by Moresby because: (no reason given)


milomilo

posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Moresby

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by Moresby
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


About 40 years ago. That's around the time when Jacques Vallee and John Keel dumped the "ET hypothesis" for similar reasons.

Vallee gives detailed reasons for rejecting the "ET hypothesis" and replacing it with the "inter-dimensional hypothesis" in his 1969 book "Passport to Magonia". Not sure exactly when Keel rejected the ET hypothesis in favor of the inter-dimensional one, but by the time he wrote "The Mothman Prophecies", in 1975, he had fully made the switch.

Your reading into UFO literature must be extremely sight if you've never heard of "Passport to Magonia" and its significance to UFO research.


I think you've possibly misinterpreted, or overstated, Vallee's stance on the ETH. He's written several more books since 'Magonia' and offered detailed thoughts and examples why the ETH doesn't go all the way to explaining UFO and related reports. He's never rejected it and has actually said so in as many words, in audio interviews, as recently as 2009 (iirc).

His 5 Arguments against the ETH (pdf) is regularly cited as his dismissal of the ETH. According to him, it was published to highlight the shortcomings of the ETH and invite debate. He's frequently stated that he believes there's a physical, technological component to UFO reports and that there isn't the data to be certain about the origins.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


Some of Vallee's "backtracking" also came from a misinterpretation of "Magonia". Some seemed to assume that by connecting the UFO phenomena to folkoric ideas he was suggesting it was no more real than folklore. This wasn't the case. Sometimes when you're misunderstood that dramatically you overstate things in the other direction. And some of Vallee's later statements fall in that category for me.

But some are even less grounded in one camp or the other. Whitley Strieber, for instance, never seems to fully embrace one hypothesis. He seems to favor the inter-dimensional hypothesis, but elements of the ETH seem to intrigue him more or less from time to time.
edit on 4-3-2013 by Moresby because: (no reason given)


i think vallee's latest stance is just what he is trying to explain from the beginning.. he want people to see UFO phenomena as both physical and psychichal at the same time.. he never favor one side or another because evidence from encounter data suggest physical traces and yet its also undeniable that there are psychic effect from ufo encounters. i dont know about vallee (since he never mentioned in his books or interviews) but it seems vallee is one of the real UFO Investigator not influenced by the paranormal effect that usually follow UFO Investigators..

Investigators like John Keel and Jerome Clark know how bad it is personally to get 'targetted' by psychic terror and that influence their conclusion on UFO phenomena. They are also right that if a person want to research UFOLOGY they must learn occultism literature and be protected spiritually because by entering UFO research they are inviting attacks from unknow sources.. I think there are lots of example of UFO researchers turning in their badges (eg Quit) because they cant handle the stress.

Since this 'effects' also happened to me personally when i started researching UFOLOGY, i can vouch personally that yes the unknow / psychic terror are there. For some who dont have spiritual protection it must have been worse..

Vallee continuously criticize people in US UFOLOGY that made up their mind with nuts-n-bolt-ufo-is-physical-stuff because he know they ignore massive amount of evidence indicating phsychic after effects.. he also said that US UFOLOGY was hijacked by fantasist and myth maker that now it lost its focus on real research and go for the sensationalism..


Unity_99

posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 08:00 AM
link   
You found out why no one would share here much eh, though there are some wonderful threads, not so much newer ones though. Aggressive and abusive posters. And it has to be on purpose, allowed, or it would be stopped. So they don't want a ufology forum here.


TheDevilWearsBlueShirts

posted on Mar, 8 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by milomilo

Originally posted by TheDevilWearsBlueShirts


i thought meaningless and one liner post are strictly forbidden ?

what are you trying to say?

Lol yeah, sorry for going off topic. I just thought it was really interesting. I'm new here so forgive me. I will learn from it


Kandinsky

posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by milomilo
 
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.




Vallee continuously criticize people in US UFOLOGY that made up their mind with nuts-n-bolt-ufo-is-physical-stuff because he know they ignore massive amount of evidence indicating phsychic after effects.. he also said that US UFOLOGY was hijacked by fantasist and myth maker that now it lost its focus on real research and go for the sensationalism..


That door swings both ways.

US ufologists noticed that some of Vallee's conclusions overlooked evidence they themselves had published. This was taken as an insult and led to the 'cold war' that began in the late '70s.

As Vallee was interpreted as forcing the alternative 'EDH,' it was felt he was dismissive of US research that identified physical aspects to the phenomena. Once upon a time, Jacques Vallee and Jerome Clark were good friends and they fell out over differences of opinion regarding the credibility of the witnesses cited by Vallee in his trilogy. If you look at the old BBS, there are plenty of ancient e-mails recording the heated disputes between Vallee, Clark and others.

In reality, I admire Vallee's thinking as much as I admire the research of the US guys. However, he was certainly guilty of focusing on one element and ignoring others. For a good example of this just look at his book references and bibliographies - no US researchers get a mention. James McDonald, Mike Swords, Jan Aldrich, Dick Hall and so forth have made pretty good cases for physical aspects to UFO incidents and none of them are referenced.

The 'culture of ufology' has been dogged by turf wars since NICAP and APRO fell out. The disputes and pissing on lamp-posts continues today.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


milomilo

posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


keyhoe was an ETH proponent and i respect his work and research in NICAP. but i dont know what happen to the serious US ufo researcher nowadays ? the only ones getting spotlight are those who spout the same old gov conspiracy and ufo crashes and promoses of disclosure.. ETH or EDH where are today's field researchers ????


Outrageo

posted on Mar, 24 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by milomilo
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


...but i dont know what happen to the serious US ufo researcher nowadays ? the only ones getting spotlight are those who spout the same old gov conspiracy and ufo crashes and promoses of disclosure.. ETH or EDH where are today's field researchers ????


Where are they? They've retreated back into their libraries and gone underground after being burned by the likes of Greer, et al.

The exception is the occasional no-nonsense 'voice', willing to spend the time, energy, and money, and has skin thick enough to deflect both incessant ridicule and abject rejection (common in the field, as you may know).

One such current researcher is Leslie Kean, with a recent favorite approach to the topic in the manner of Timothy Good, but with an intriguing twist: the author let's the top brass and highly-credible witnesses and officials tell the story themselves.



Check it out: used hardcover is less than $5 on Amazon...

edit on 3/24/2013 by Outrageo because:



HomerinNC

posted on Mar, 24 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
I'm a hardcore researcher into things UFO and alien. As many people on here know, I'm an avid believer in alien life. I'd like to believe they might have been here since ancient times and i believe that man may NOT be from earth.
But that being said, I dont believe EVERY photo, video and alleged evidence is of ALIEN ORIGIN. There is too much faked and hoaxed stuff out there, it makes me sick and really puts a cramp in legit research. I've been told of sightings that i can explain off as flares, conventional aircraft etc. I've had a sighting myself that was debunked as a satellite so, not everything is alien


Hybrid00

posted on Mar, 24 2013 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by milomilo
 


Nuremberg, 1500's tapestry of extraterrestrial 'dog fight' over the city witnessed by hundreds of people. Course ufo's and extraterrestrial beings are real, anybody who says they aren't is arrogant to the truth. You say 'sensationalism' I say realism!


mirageman

posted on Mar, 24 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by milomilo
Dear ATS UFO Forumer

Everytime i checked ATS thread it seems sensationalist threads are the one that garner most attention.. Sure there are gems but there are very rare.. Karl12's thread are consistently focused on serious UFO documentation and never veer single inch toward sensationalism, some also consistently post enlightening historical UFO phenomena research but these kind of threads are exception to the rule in ATS

Is it possible to group serious UFO threads into a sub-forum thread and those that focus on sensationalism and blurry photographs/movies into other sub forum ? its getting hard to filter serious threads from the sensationalism threads.

now i understand that the threads mirrors real world's UFOLOGY , meaning that most people do not really focus on researching UFO phenomena historically and they go for the usual garbage information thats circulating in UFOLOGY especially US. The rise of disinformation and junk information since 1980s gave way to more and more hilarious and impossible 'facts' and yet more people abandon their common sense and start believeing it..

back in the 60-70s there's lack on report/data on crashed saucers, sure there are few but never have major impact on the serious research. Nowadays it grown from crashed saucers and crew recovery to underground bases, goverment conspiracy, alien working together with humans, etc. With bad seed all you get is a badly grown tree, with bad information all you get is a nasty imagination/fantasy replacing facts.

For comparison :
- Serious UFO phenomena researchers do not believe in Extra terrestrial hypothesis, they believe in other form of existence (extra dimensional / spirits / etc)
- Serious UFO researcher always noticed the HIGH Strangeness involving UFO encounters, from physical to psychical.
- Serious UFO researcher do field work in interviewing witnesses, in fact its been said that meeting with witnesses are the most effective field research for Ufology
- Modern UFOlogist speaks as if UFO = Aliens from outer space , like its already a FACT.
- Modern UFOlogist speaks of UFO = nuts n bolts spacecraft , like its already a FACT
- Modern UFOlogist hardly (or never) go interview witnesses.
- Modern UFOlogist prefer to disseminate blurry photos and videos and start endless discussion from it

Are there hope for serious UFO Phenomena research ?


I've been thinking about your points again seeing as this thread has kept ticking over.

There is of course JKRog's Revised Chronological UFO Thread Directory which is a good starting point for new members.

However at one time ATS used produce a PDF for offline reading of top threads (I think this was about 5 years ago).

So what if ATS compiled a "ATS - UFO case files" in pdf form from member posts and made it freely available?

The intention being this would be a compilation of the best UFO case write ups on ATS combined into however many volumes it takes (as long as the OPs agree of course)?


milomilo

posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hybrid00
reply to post by milomilo
 


Nuremberg, 1500's tapestry of extraterrestrial 'dog fight' over the city witnessed by hundreds of people. Course ufo's and extraterrestrial beings are real, anybody who says they aren't is arrogant to the truth. You say 'sensationalism' I say realism!


you take my meaning wrongly,. note that i never include the nuremberg case as a sensationalism. something happened there, what it is no one knows for sure, but it must left a deep impression on the people there that they make that drawing. its very interesting to see more of that case if there are interviews with witnesses..

Sensationalism in UFOLOGY is the push toward lunatic fringe of UFOLOGY where everything is so focused on fantasy/myth like roswell, conspiracy, crashed saucers, alien corpse, alien working together with military, dulce/underground bases, reptile/grey alien at war with mankind, etc etc .. you get my meaning ? its whats wrong in modern UFOLOGY today, there are little serious research, field investigation, witness interviews like those done back then. Today its all about roswell and its endless permutations..

How many people new to UFOLOGY know about CORALES UFO Incident that dwarfs roswell incident ?

and on the minor side, there are many people in UFOLOGY that looks for disclosure everywhere and some who sensationalize every blurry photo/video. These people forget that without a case , field investigation and witness testimonies, every UFO photo is meaningless..

regards


milomilo

posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Outrageo

Originally posted by milomilo
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


...but i dont know what happen to the serious US ufo researcher nowadays ? the only ones getting spotlight are those who spout the same old gov conspiracy and ufo crashes and promoses of disclosure.. ETH or EDH where are today's field researchers ????


Where are they? They've retreated back into their libraries and gone underground after being burned by the likes of Greer, et al.

The exception is the occasional no-nonsense 'voice', willing to spend the time, energy, and money, and has skin thick enough to deflect both incessant ridicule and abject rejection (common in the field, as you may know).

One such current researcher is Leslie Kean, with a recent favorite approach to the topic in the manner of Timothy Good, but with an intriguing twist: the author let's the top brass and highly-credible witnesses and officials tell the story themselves.



Check it out: used hardcover is less than $5 on Amazon...

edit on 3/24/2013 by Outrageo because:



yes , they all now back into hiding.. the invisible college that jacques vallee mentions.. funny how the modern lunatic fringe of UFOLOGY single handledly ruined UFOLOGY when loads of debunkers cannot.

sometimes i wonder if these people in the lunatic fringe (lear , cooper, greer, etc) are secretly tasked with making UFOLOGY as stupid/silly as possible so common people will brand real UFO research as the same with these fringe.

and they succeeded





new topics

top topics


active topics

 
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join