Final conclusions on UFOs and Aliens.

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by 0pass
In case of Billy Meier read the following articles that shed more light on what he was and what he said before skeptics started chasing him to Haoxdom.

Billy Meier Hoax Exposed

You don't need Michael Horn to be a credible source for Billy Meier as they're both frauds. Check out this link HERE to see exactly what items Billy Meier used to construct his fake UFO.

It doesn't matter what Billy Meier was before he created his hoax, and it doesn't matter what he was after he created his hoax. Once someone creates a hoax, they are always going to be known as a hoaxer, and nothing they say for the rest of their lives can be taken seriously.




posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Klassified
 


She isn't ignorant of the field. She has done her homework.

Ah, correction: As much as I love and respect Druscilla's view on things, she has NOT done her homework on anything to do with UFOlogy. Nothing.

Ask her. She herself said she has not read any book on UFOlogy and will not read any book on UFOlogy.

How can you trust the views of someone on any topic that they have either no first hand experience or background knowledge to entertain? The psychology of UFO abductees is one thing but one's interpretation and analysis based on personal research and experience lends more credence than the former, IMO.

Maybe Druscilla can respectfully provide some simple and cogent analysis of The West Lothian Question incident.



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by 0pass
 


1. The Wandjina Aboriginal Elders in the Kimberley Region of Western Australia.........they have ongoing encounters and a massive history pertaining to this phenomena.

2. Courtlandt Dixon Barnes Bryan.



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by 0pass
 


Did you even bother to watch the video i linked to? Art experts know exactly what the objects in the skys are in those paintings and you can watch the progression of them throughout the years. People who are not experts in art history just blindly look at them and claim 'hey day must be aliens' because they dont know any better.

edit on 22-8-2013 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Druscilla
reply to post by 0pass
 


Citing Whitley Streiber and/or Billy Meier as sources to base a conclusion on the UFO phenomenon is like using The Ren and Stimpy cartoon, and Southpark as basis for conclusion on real world global politics.

Neither of them actually have anything to do with the UFO phenomenon except in using the phenomenon as means to exploit others willingness to believe in something for their own personal profit.




With due respect to your observations, did you go through both these video's?

The Billy Meier documentary was very well done even though one does not have to accept the evidence presented there. In fact it is one of the better documentaries that I have seen on this subject matter.

The creators of this documentary do not accept any conclusions nor do I accept it as a fact.

The Whitley Strieber interview on coast to coast has another guy Craig Spector who is on most accounts skeptical about the entire phenomenon and is just a horror novel writer who writes for Hollywood and has movies such as " A Nightmare on Elm Street" to his credit as a writer.

And I found that this was a very balanced interview and highlighted incidents about some creepy creatures that looked more human than Alien and who killed homeless people and Whitley asked Craig to write this fictional novel called the "Nye Incidents".

I very well understand this is a promo for the novel as Whitley is a dear friend of Geroge Noory who is the top honcho currently on C2C and would do anything to promote his artwork.

I went through this interview wearing my skeptical hat and in no way I believe in everything they said in that. For me Whitley is a good novelist not a historian.

But I think most people who read my OP have misunderstand why i referred to these two videos. I have not concluded anything about what is in these two videos to be true or representing facts.

But these two videos triggered my conclusions with the background of all that I have researched on the subject matter in the past 25 years.

One observation that caught my fancy from the Billy Meier video is the shape of the UFO. Having gone through various cases besides the Billy Meier case and research on what would be right shape for technology that involves anti-gravity or electromagnetic propulsion (not just on what is said in the video by some scientists but also from other sources) the saucer shape or the circular shape would be the best shape for interstellar or hyperspace travel.

From the Whitley interview what caught my fancy was his remarks when he was asked if thinks the Aliens who abducted him are benevolent creatures. To this he said, he was raped by these aliens who inserted in his rectum something similar to what farmers do to induce in cattle.

When someone says something this personal in a public interview I do not think it is to sell a few books.

That made me conclude that most of the so called abductees have a very horrible reality. Who could do such things? Aliens from 500 light years away who have achieved technology that is so superior that they could simply wipe us all out or our skunk work genetic researchers who have no qualms on what is right and wrong in what they do.

Because they know after all the people will think this is the handy work of some evil Aliens.

Thus these two cases affirmed my belief that anything and everything that is sinister about UFO and Alien cases has nothing to do with people from light years away.



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by 0pass
 


billy meir's picture used to be the avatar for the hoax forum here
he is the biggest hoaxer in ufo history
just because you watched a video on the internet, doesn't make it true
whiteley strieber is an author of fiction, which is exactly what his tales are.
i suggest you check out the hoax forum here




So it is time to introspect and understand the truth


the truth? first off you have to find it,
you won't listening/reading to what those 2 people have to say



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by 0pass
In case of Billy Meier read the following articles that shed more light on what he was and what he said before skeptics started chasing him to Haoxdom.

Billy Meier Hoax Exposed

You don't need Michael Horn to be a credible source for Billy Meier as they're both frauds. Check out this link HERE to see exactly what items Billy Meier used to construct his fake UFO.

It doesn't matter what Billy Meier was before he created his hoax, and it doesn't matter what he was after he created his hoax. Once someone creates a hoax, they are always going to be known as a hoaxer, and nothing they say for the rest of their lives can be taken seriously.



Yes. I am not referring to Michael Horn as anywhere credible. I visited his TheyFly.com site and saw nothing interesting there.

I am referring to this specific video which was created by one Wendelle Stevens in 1978. You can check his background here. And for all accounts he seems credible to me.
edit on 22-8-2013 by 0pass because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Strewth
reply to post by 0pass
 


1. The Wandjina Aboriginal Elders in the Kimberley Region of Western Australia.........they have ongoing encounters and a massive history pertaining to this phenomena.

2. Courtlandt Dixon Barnes Bryan.


Are you serious? This Dixon has just written one book on UFOs and you are referring to some tribals in australia as the gurus on Ufology?



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Strewth
reply to post by Druscilla
 


YAWN



I would advise putting some effort into learning
the following:

INSANITY: Repeating the same thing over and over and over and over again, and somehow expecting a different result.

Your psycho-babble is so predictable.........and laughable.

Yes, we get it, you have a quadruple Doctorate in Psychology and an IQ of 260 (ish)





That was awesome, Strewth. Finally - a few standing up to... oops! I'm about to get slapped!



Oh -and on-topic - OP - the "evidences" you site are not really "evidences" whatsoever. Just MHO. Nothing more.

But keep looking up!



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by 0pass
 


To be fair, the aborigines have one of the oldest continuing cultures on the planet. Their oral history stretches back thousands of years.



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:48 PM
link   
We are all aliens. We came here for a weekend trip. To get away from everyday alien life. Thats why no disclosure.



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Jaellma
 

I see where you're coming from. And I don't completely disagree.



Ah, correction: As much as I love and respect Druscilla's view on things, she has NOT done her homework on anything to do with UFOlogy. Nothing.

Ask her. She herself said she has not read any book on UFOlogy and will not read any book on UFOlogy.

Even though I am a voracious reader, I haven't read any books on ufology either. But I've read and seen enough over many years to come to some conclusions overrall. And to talk about it with some degree of comfort. Though I'm always open to more information on the topic. Kandinsky's old threads have been helpful there.



How can you trust the views of someone on any topic that they have either no first hand experience or background knowledge to entertain? The psychology of UFO abductees is one thing but one's interpretation and analysis based on personal research and experience lends more credence than the former, IMO.

I trust NO ONES views. Not even my own per se. What I do is take other perspectives into account, and try to reach an objective conclusion without confirming my own bias of the subject matter at hand. Critical thinking is something I've worked hard at teaching myself. Part of that includes objectively listening to perspectives and opinions I may not like or agree with.

I guess what I'm saying bottom line is, it's obvious she has done enough research to have a somewhat educated opinion on the topic as a whole. She, like myself, most likely hasn't studied each individual case, but we aren't ignorant either. I call that homework. Though not as much homework as you and others have done, I'm sure.



edit on 8/22/2013 by Klassified because: grammar



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by 0pass

Originally posted by Strewth
reply to post by 0pass
 


1. The Wandjina Aboriginal Elders in the Kimberley Region of Western Australia.........they have ongoing encounters and a massive history pertaining to this phenomena.

2. Courtlandt Dixon Barnes Bryan.


Are you serious? This Dixon has just written one book on UFOs and you are referring to some tribals in australia as the gurus on Ufology?




some tribals in Australia would be a more believable source for ufo lore than billy meir any day.
are you serious?

and it doesn't matter how many books one's written, bull# is just that



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 01:26 PM
link   
You lost me at Billy Meier. It's not the people responding on this thread who are newbies; it's you. There have been countless threads about Billy Meier and Strieber. some with over 1000 replies. We are quite familiar with these folks and have been familiar with them since you were still in diapers. This has been researches and studied ad nauseum by many people. Here's just one small synopsis. Use the search tool and look up some of these old threads. This is not new stuff.

So you are faced with a video or two, become enthralled, and expect to "teach" us your new found knowledge. What you really ought to do is study the issue for more than a few days, look at both sides, and realize a whole lot of people have done a lot more research than you have. Attacking them for pointing this out does nothing for your cause. You are primed to be a neophyte cult member, but you are by no means an authority.

The bottom line is that your conclusions are faulty and you have no credibility.



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


I was going to post almost the same before reading your post..

ah yes the Pleiadian Laser Gun.
all together now...
I want to believe
I want to believe
I want to believe



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler
You lost me at Billy Meier. It's not the people responding on this thread who are newbies; it's you. There have been countless threads about Billy Meier and Strieber. some with over 1000 replies. We are quite familiar with these folks and have been familiar with them since you were still in diapers. This has been researches and studied ad nauseum by many people. Here's just one small synopsis. Use the search tool and look up some of these old threads. This is not new stuff.

So you are faced with a video or two, become enthralled, and expect to "teach" us your new found knowledge. What you really ought to do is study the issue for more than a few days, look at both sides, and realize a whole lot of people have done a lot more research than you have. Attacking them for pointing this out does nothing for your cause. You are primed to be a neophyte cult member, but you are by no means an authority.

The bottom line is that your conclusions are faulty and you have no credibility.


Yes. I have noticed that now that many of the frequent ATS members have a bias against Billy Meier and Whitley Streiber.

I have read some of the posts and the vitriol spawned on these two individuals.

So there is not much that I can expect on these two individuals here that I should waste my time reading the posts.

I take my opinion on these two individuals from a far more credible source that is Wikipedia. And you could also possibly read the accounts of these two individuals on Wikipedia to get a balanced judgement than the rambling on ATS.

Wikipedia on Billy Meier

Wikipedia on Whitley Strieber

Therefore I consider your opinion on these two individuals as also very biased and thus your comments on my conclusions not much different.
edit on 22-8-2013 by 0pass because: (no reason given)





It's not the people responding on this thread who are newbies; it's you.


Regarding your note above, I see you have registered on ATS in 2007 and to let you know I have been on ATS since 2003 but with a different ID that I lost trace off. But does it matter if one is a newbie on ATS to have a better understanding of the UFO phenomenon.

I definitely do not think so.
edit on 22-8-2013 by 0pass because: corrections



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 01:57 PM
link   
My final conclusion is that it would be extremely small minded to think that we are the only beings in this universe

But it would also be extremely small minded to think that they would want to visit us & be interested in us...



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by 0pass
 


Quality, not quantity, is the key to this subject.

I challenge you to dispute their claims.

Start with the Aboriginal Elders.....I've met, talked to and stayed with them many times to learn their stories, which they take EXTREMELY seriously. But it will require FIELD RESEARCH because your computer screen and google will pull up very little about them regarding this.

That means going to the Kimberleys in Western Australia, gaining their trust and then documenting their stories - no easy task if you rely on "online" information to draw your conclusions as is clearly the case with some individuals.
edit on 22/8/13 by Strewth because:




posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 03:09 PM
link   
OP, star and flag. I don't agree with everything you wrote, but I do agree that the UFO and alien visitation phenomena are very real.

Billy Meier is an interesting case. His name is mud on here, but some of his prophesies were amazing. I like Whitley Strieber, and don't t get criticism of him.



posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jaellma
reply to post by Klassified
 


She isn't ignorant of the field. She has done her homework.

Ah, correction: As much as I love and respect Druscilla's view on things, she has NOT done her homework on anything to do with UFOlogy. Nothing.

Ask her. She herself said she has not read any book on UFOlogy and will not read any book on UFOlogy.

How can you trust the views of someone on any topic that they have either no first hand experience or background knowledge to entertain? The psychology of UFO abductees is one thing but one's interpretation and analysis based on personal research and experience lends more credence than the former, IMO.

Maybe Druscilla can respectfully provide some simple and cogent analysis of The West Lothian Question incident.



While true I have not read any UFO Books, as would seem common ad hominem in ignoring the points of anything said in favor of paying more attention to a personality than the actual meat of the matter under discussion, those so overly eager to wave this little flag around would seem to be willfully ignorant of information proliferation in the 21st century.
Data on most any topic is readily available online, for instance. As is applies to the UFO Phenomenon, there's a veritable wealth of sourced and cross referenced data, as well as a wonderful depth of discussion regarding many UFO Phenomenon cases here on ATS alone.

As far as "research" is concerned, it's a common mistake repeated by the uneducated to consider review of data and the opinions of investigators opining on said data as RESEARCH.
Such, in reality, is merely reading a story, familiarizing oneself with it, and making a personal value judgement on the results opined by those given to opine on the data.

Research, actual research, on the other hand is a process of reviewing the data of any given subject, ignoring all previous findings or indications, and arriving at an INDEPENDENT conclusion, whether supporting, or detracting, through sourcing personal or other references of expertise of relevant applicable informations.
It's how the peer review process works.

If conclusions can be independently arrived at supporting previous interrogation of a subject, then, there might very well be something to it. If conclusions are inconsistent, and can be reliably shown to be inconsistent, then, whatever hypothesis is being tested needs amendment.

Gravity, for instance, can be independently verified. If anyone can cast doubt on that paradigm and do so with open demonstration of replicable test procedure and data, then Gravitational Theory can be brought into question.

As far as The West Lothian Question is concerned, I'm not familiar with the case, and thus have no opinion on the matter.
I am not, however, afraid to say "I don't know". Thus, if at some time I do happen to familiarize myself with the data, and interrogate the data to arrive at an independent conclusion, even if that conclusion is "I don't know", a finding commonly lauded by adherents to the UFO phenomenon as validation, "I don't know" is just that, and nothing more. "I don't know", or a finding of "unknown" is not carte blanch to claim ALIENS or anything other than unknown.

Critical thinking and distinction between distinct separate classifications of subject matter in this forum is very important.
Too often the distinctions are blurred and UFOs becomes Aliens, vice versa, and many other things altogether.





new topics




 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join