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.

 

The most silly skeptic explanations

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 03:04 PM
link   
and the most well known that is used: METEORITE




posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Guess, who I am...? :-)

I like aliens, they are cool. )



posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 11:55 PM
link   
I'm going to have to go with "high flying seed pods" as the most laughable debunker explanation for a UFO incident. Some people will come up with anything to preserve their little bubble of reality...

Though the most insidious....yeah I guess that word'll work....explaintion for UFOs has to be secret military aircraft. There's so many holes in that theory, it becomes easier to beleive in the alien explaination when you think about them...



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flinx
Though the most insidious....yeah I guess that word'll work....explaintion for UFOs has to be secret military aircraft. There's so many holes in that theory, it becomes easier to beleive in the alien explaination when you think about them...


Really? Actually, there have been a number of posts that IMHO have provided plenty of evidence that would support this possibility. Magnetism is something that commercial industry is advancing in more and more each day, and you just know that the military is usually FAR ahead of commercial tech. The VAST majority of sightings began (ironically) around the early 1940s, and have increased almost exponentially over the decades that followed. UFOs themselves seem to have gotten more sophisticated since the large sighting trends began. I could go on and on. Btw, I'd like to hear some of these "holes" in that theory. Feel free to U2U me to preserve the integrity of this thread


As for the worst sceptic explanation... I'd have to agree with the suggestion of outright delusion. When authorities claim that a witness probably saw nothing at all... that always makes me chuckle.



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by veritas93
Really? Actually, there have been a number of posts that IMHO have provided plenty of evidence that would support this possibility. Magnetism is something that commercial industry is advancing in more and more each day, and you just know that the military is usually FAR ahead of commercial tech. The VAST majority of sightings began (ironically) around the early 1940s, and have increased almost exponentially over the decades that followed. UFOs themselves seem to have gotten more sophisticated since the large sighting trends began. I could go on and on. Btw, I'd like to hear some of these "holes" in that theory. Feel free to U2U me to preserve the integrity of this thread



Well just to give a few from the top of my head...

-Why would the military fly their top secret craft over major populaton centers all over the world for 60 years? It goes against procedure for testing prototypes.

-I'd actually say that they the UFOs haven't been getting more sophisticated and use that as another reason.

-You can't easily explain away many the close encounters of the 3rd kind (face to face encounters) as delusions or psychological manfestations.

-The sheer number of craft sighted, even during the same incidents seem FAR beyond our ability to produce.

Anyway, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying some UFO sightings could be of top secret military craft. In fact, those black triangles look like something we would build. But just because we're beginning to understand the technology doesn't mean UFOs are manmade. For all we know they got the technology from "THEM"!



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Flinx,

Thanks for replying. You've made some good points. I'm going to respond through a U2U to keep this thread on topic.



posted on Nov, 7 2004 @ 05:13 PM
link   
aliens rubbing cow blood and intestines on skin as a way of ''eating''



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 02:05 PM
link   
I'll put my two cents in here..

One explaination i have always thought was way off base was that UFO's or the bright lights seen are : The pressure from the earths plates comming together and creating friction, and that inturn creates unexplained lights above areas were this pressure is great.

This explanation has been used a few times. Still does not explain obvious features of the actual ships envolved though.
Parker



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by parker
I'll put my two cents in here..

One explaination i have always thought was way off base was that UFO's or the bright lights seen are : The pressure from the earths plates comming together and creating friction, and that inturn creates unexplained lights above areas were this pressure is great.

This explanation has been used a few times. Still does not explain obvious features of the actual ships envolved though.
Parker


This excuse certainly can't be accurate in all cases where it is applied. However, I have seen some photos of this phenomenon occuring around an active volcano. I think it's plasma or something like that. I'll see if I can't find a link or two.

Edit:

Nevermind, it looks like the only links that I could find claim that the "plasma phenomena" and "ball lightning" are one and the same. I have to admit that saying most sightings are caused by ball lighting sounds as ridiculous as saying that they were cause by swamp gas reflecting off of Venus.

[edit on 8-11-2004 by veritas93]




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join