Why still denying it?

reply to post by Dianec


What's more ridiculous is this:

"The next day a man claiming to be from the US National Security Agency threatened him with losing his flying status if he told anyone what happened."

Explains why most would probably keep quiet, that's why reported sightings are a very low estimate even in the thousands.

If you're a professional, you're left with the risk of losing your job, but if you aren't a professional people are less likely to believe you.

Speaking of UFO's they talked about pilot/government encounters with UFO's during the 2013 citizen hearing.

reply to post by Dianec


Yea lol, being told to shoot at an unknown object is like saying hey whats that and shooting at it...lol its exactly like that. Sounds pretty ignorant and fear driven.

reply to post by peashooter


Mhmm the people they see as being more influential are hushed immediately but people that are seen as average or an everyday person, they just leave them alone because of the fact that no one would believe them anyway. As opposed to if someone like astronauts were to say it. In fact astronauts have been threatened before for wanting to release what they seen or experienced.

Originally posted by UnknownKnower
reply to post by Dianec

 

Yea lol, being told to shoot at an unknown object is like saying hey whats that and shooting at it...lol its exactly like that. Sounds pretty ignorant and fear driven.

This reminded me of a South Park episode where as long as you say "quick its coming right for us" your allowed to shoot first lol. The lol is for my SP thought not the fact that humans react through fear easily.

reply to post by peashooter


Great video footage. I wonder what will come of these hearings, and hoping all sightings become public. It's good to at least have them open enough so others can post them for the public to compile the info. Ill need to look on YouTube for more of these.

The way he described it in the end was compelling - 3 pilots see the same UFO in the matter of a few minutes as it was going that fast (planes are a safe distance apart so a few minutes inbetween sitings is telling). That seems to be a common theme. Whatever they are they must be running off of an energy were not familiar with since fuel likely would not be enough to generate the speed they're talking about. "Faster than anything I've ever seen". I've heard this before.

The most visable of alien creatures is depicted as grays, A creature with large eyes and gray skin. That would seem to indicate a very low lighting enviromment. Hence the large eyes, and pigmentation. We could guess that they live some distance form a sun or could be considered water baring creatures. That's a guess but seems very reasonable. Their stature is considered to be small in comparison to humans, which could also indicate gravity. But that's a wild guess.

reply to post by UnknownKnower


I don't deny it, in fact I believe there are many that live right here. They may not be easily detectable because they have blended with us genetically in order to survive on our surface. Many different species exist on our planet. We have a preconceived notion fed to us through mainstream media and "Hollywood" that has shaped how we think aliens are supposed to look.

Maybe they do look the way they have been depicted, but if they are an advanced being then they may have figured out by now that in order for us to accept them, they have to look more like us.

There have been many theories proselytized with the hope of providing proof, but it comes down to one very basic conclusion; everyone has the right to believe what they want to believe.

As to your question about who created who? That is, also, entirely up to each individual to decide.

I will just leave you with this....If they created us, then who created them?

Originally posted by jvarga390
The most visable of alien creatures is depicted as grays, A creature with large eyes and gray skin. That would seem to indicate a very low lighting enviromment. Hence the large eyes, and pigmentation. We could guess that they live some distance form a sun or could be considered water baring creatures. That's a guess but seems very reasonable. Their stature is considered to be small in comparison to humans, which could also indicate gravity. But that's a wild guess.

quoting this as a +1
There was research posted in today's newspaper that 'we humans will turn into the Pokemons'
The title was pretty stupid but still the way it described how we will develop a darker skin to protect from gamma bursts and larger eyes. I guess the way above poster described grays. We are going to turn into the same if we get the chance to evolve.

Originally posted by eriktheawful

Originally posted by UnknownKnower
reply to post by HomerinNC

 

Why deny they are visiting us? When there's so much evidence that says otherwise. Sure the evidence is left up to speculation but every type of evidence is up to speculation until someone deems it a fact... Im wondering when will someone decide to declare it as a fact...

You just answered your own question.

So far the "evidence" is, as you said, speculation. The way the scientific method works is not someone suddenly declares something that was speculation as a fact.

In order to be an actual fact, proof or evidence must be provided, peer reviewed, with others being able to reach the same results over and over.

Even to go from speculation to an actual theory requires supporting evidence.

Until someone can provide a crashed or captured UFO, in which examination of shows it to be not of Earthly origin, or an actual alien biological that can be studied by various scientific groups, UFOs being aliens visiting us will always be just pure speculation.

That's why the word Unidentified is used in UFOs. We don't know what they are (but people can speculate all they like).

The "evidence" is speculation, sounds like religion doesn't it and there's a bunch of clowns who believe in that tripe

Originally posted by HomerinNC
reply to post by UnknownKnower

 

I dont think most people deny the existence of life out there; I think its hard to believe theyre visiting us.

Don't you think nuclear blasts can be noticed from space? I think they'd visit if this was the case

Peeps are right, there isn't enough clear cut evidence just yet but there's everything else but that.

someone mentioned certain people trade money and power for denying.. if anything i think it's the opposite.. by that i mean somehow infiltrating the average joe public and manipulating them into flooding the internet and mass media with all a perpetual flood of bogus sitings, video, pictures.. etc..

i bet the farm they have specialty drones specifically designed like saucer shaped crafts that they randomly fly over all the ma and pa farms with just enough time to get that out of focus 1 minute video clip that always finds it's way to youtube or that grainy photo that ends up on the local news..

that's my opinion and is why my belief wavers.

i ask this though.. in all our years of government conspiracy, cover-ups, espionage.. etc.. when have any of us heard of a "secret" not sold to the highest bidder in any nation let alone all the greedy rats here in the us?

so how could any of us ask them to release "the truth" about anything let alone something of this importance?

one last point.. if this is being kept secret from us for this many years.. i'm not sure we want to know the truth because it's not gonna look good for us, think about it.

reply to post by Zcustosmorum


Well to be fair, a lot of people "believe" in something when they pursue it scientifically to either support a theory or prove something as fact.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

For example a lot of people believe that Mars once held life, even before we started sending probes there. Now, after serious research, we find that Mars used to have a significant amount of running water on it. That's supporting evidence to help that belief.

If Curiosity is able to find fossilized remains of actual life that had been there, that belief will become fact.

Of course it was all do to serious research, and I think that is what Ufology lacks right now. It's also a field that people use to garner personal game and scam others with. That is something that I wish would stop as it does nothing but hurt this area.

Originally posted by UnknownKnower
In fact astronauts have been threatened before for wanting to release what they seen or experienced.

It's widespread pseudo-facts like these that make many otherwise-sympathetic observers recoil from such imagination-based arguments.

I believe in ufos.....

But as far as alien life....no no i dont believe in other life forms anywhere besides earth...

Life our life is a fluke

reply to post by UnknownKnower


We do not have "evidence". We have suggestion, conjecture, and eye witness reports, which add up to precisely nothing. We have no physical, or examinable evidence available to us to study and come to conclusions on what so ever. For claims such as these, only the most stringent evidence will suffice to prove to those who question these things, and so that is the only evidence upon which we must rely.

On this planet, there are hundreds of different religions and political systems, and all, bar a very small number, have one thing in common, that is that all of them have thier scientists. If one wishes to prove something to the world, one has to speak in terms of science, and science is not in the habit of saying something is so, without having some reason to think it is the case, based on independant and verifiable testing and experimentation. So, the only way we are ever going to prove that alien life exists, is by finding a piece of it, studying it, and by having the entire weight of the global science community observe the process at every stage, so that the findings cannot or are not refuted. This would take, as do many things where such concentrated global effort is required, many years of testing and re-testing to manage, leave alone the fact that no such evidence has ever existed (or at least, no evidence which remains outside of the hands of military intelligence and thier R&D divisions).

This physical evidence would have to be contextualised also, for instance, be linked to a massive sighting, or a mass contact situation, with several different recordings of the same event from different angles, on different equipment by different people, not to mention constant monitoring by at least one airforce. The people who believe implicitly that there have been visitations will not be swayed by a lack of evidence, the people who would not believe in visitation even if it happened to them are blind to the possibility, which only leaves one rational group in the whole mess.

Those would be the group who are prepared to entertain the possibility, but arent willing to decide for themselves what they think about it, until such time as some proper evidence comes along, and is tested independant of government meddling of any kind. Being in this increasingly small group, does not mean that one is sitting on the fence, quite the oppposite. All it means is, that rather than froth mouthed outrage of one sort or another, we can get on with the job of looking at things rationally, and objectively. It might not be as intellectually dull, or therefore, quite as popular as goggle eyed madness of one or another flavour, but it certainly prevents one from becoming too stuck down either the path of fantasy, or the path of no imagination.

Personally speaking I think that mathematically the chances of our being alone in the universe are minimal, if only because of the scale of the universe, and the number of planets and stars that are in it. But that in and of itself is probabilistic, not realistic, and until it becomes such, I will have to accept that while the mathematics may support other life, personal expirience and historical record, no matter how full of stories, do not, as of yet.

People are herd animals and most tend to go with the group think of the era.

People tend to 'believe' what they are told when very young even if it's ridiculous but after that are quite resistant to new thoughts or ideas, both because they're incurious and because the majority really don't take in that much new information after a point.

The government and the media are now the same entities; they control the flow of information. Since historically going against a herd mentality was akin to certain death (by stoning, burning at the stake or simple banishment from the group, in any event you were probably dead), the default thought process is 'what everyone else is thinking'; since we take our cues from the media, and the media mostly says there's no such thing except couched as 'bedtime stories' to be made light of, then the default reaction to it is ridicule.

The vast majority read very little and not reading is pretty much the same thing as being unable to read. In other words, most people, in the US, anyways are illiterate for all intents and purposes.

The US government has strategically hidden the physical evidence and threatened the lives of anyone who talked about what they had seen. Other governments have been more open about sightings and the belief in ETs is higher in those countries. The US media doesn't cover this reality and for the above reasons, most Americans don't know this.

Cognitive dissonance - the reaction to something so shattering to their world view is fear and it's easier to revert back to childish behavior - ridicule - than it is to actually do the mental and emotional work involved to consider it as reality.

If someone does decide they want to research the evidence, there's plenty out there to read about and consider but few of us have had a spaceship or a guar-an-teed alien to examine in person.

My question is, why do people believe in a god and 'jesus died for your sins' but not intelligent beings from another planet advanced enough to have conquered space travel? Which is less likely?

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by UnknownKnower
In fact astronauts have been threatened before for wanting to release what they seen or experienced.

It's widespread pseudo-facts like these that make many otherwise-sympathetic observers recoil from such imagination-based arguments.

Really Jim? How do you explain Philip Corso's book, 'The Day After Roswell'? The man was high level military for decades. Or Richard Dolan's very meticulously researched and footnoted 'UFOs and the National Security State'? Or Donald Keyhoe's wonderful books from the late 50s and early 60s wherein he had access to information which later went on to be classified, available here:

www.nicap.org...

There's two kinds of skeptics: those who are willing to look at the information and those who already know everything. One only has to look at that press conference after Apollo 11 returned to see that something was very, very wrong... here you should have had three triumphant heroes eager to smile and relate stories of their expedition into both space and history, but instead you had three people looking incredibly uncomfortable and unhappy; as if they had been warned to watch every word they uttered. Talk about cognitive dissonance...

reply to post by signalfire


You mention that people are prepared to have a religious faith, based on no firm evidence, but cannot do the same for the potential existence of aliens.

Do you know why that is? It is because, specifically, faith requires no proof. If you require proof to gain faith, then you never end up with faith anyway, just knowledge. Those who seek the truth honestly, regarding the alien question, do not want a faith they have to rely on thier inner child for, but a quantifiable, substantive answer, which has visible and immediate effects on the world around it.

Simply put, religion and the alien question ought to have as little to do with each other as is possible, and that is because without clear degrees of seperation nothing of any worth will be learned in the event that our species ever contacts another.

Originally posted by signalfire
.... One only has to look at that press conference after Apollo 11 returned to see that something was very, very wrong... here you should have had three triumphant heroes eager to smile and relate stories of their expedition into both space and history, but instead you had three people looking incredibly uncomfortable and unhappy; as if they had been warned to watch every word they uttered. Talk about cognitive dissonance...

Wasn't there some old retired rocket scientist who once sniped, "It's widespread pseudo-facts like these that make many otherwise-sympathetic observers recoil from such imagination-based arguments. " Sounds on target to me.

reply to post by JimOberg


Way to go to not answer the question. Explain Philip Corso's revelations and Richard Dolan's research away as 'pseudo-scientific'.

reply to post by TrueBrit


Substitute the word 'faith' with its ring of piety and unassailability lest you anger god with the word 'imagination'.