Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

My name is Tom Carey, and I have spent the past 22 years researching the Roswell incident. Ask me an

page: 27
289
<< 24  25  26   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 27 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   

My assumption is that there is enough evidence that such experiments went on but I don't know enough about it to comment.


Really? There is enough evidence? I see the same evidence as the one for ufoS, I.E just speculation and assumptions and ofc - faked documents. There is nothing that shows such ever happened, all is the same conspiracy BS and yet you assume?? There is your credibility.

And it all can be narrowed down to one's belief system, which yours seems to be in such thing, rather than religion and aliens.

Not even gonna comment on the rest of your 'almost sentences' - it only shows you have nothing useful to respond and the questions like - where is the evidence of the 'Alien was used as a coverup' propaganda only make you 'Hmm errr. ... I ... don't ugh... know...
edit on 27-9-2013 by ImpactoR because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 27 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   

ZetaRediculian
reply to post by Ectoplasm8
 


Yes, I've gone through the mind warp with this one. See "logical trickery". What I find is its the absence of information or the all cap 'SECRET' that sends people into the abyss of illusury possibility. This is what sets apart the good poker players from the bad. It's the guess what's behind the curtain game. The magic trick. Psych 101. It's the word "possibility" that is really misunderstood around here. Mathematically, something is possible or it's not. On or off. Is it possible that Spider-Man is real and we don't see him because he's too fast? It's silly, right? But it's the same argument.


It's a phenomena that's conveniently wrapped up in hidden documents, conspiracies, second and third hand stories, deathbed confessionals, etc. Nothing of any real evidentiary value. These are events that have been going on for decades with thousands of witnesses!! How is it possible that we have nothing? *Oh wait, I know... The government swoops in and takes all the physical evidence away and threatens it's citizens with death that witnessed anything. Of course this happens worldwide with every single government out there. AND, even though in the U.S., roughly 70% of land is privately owned, physical evidence found by John Q Public would never happen! Not to mention in any other country worldwide! *denote sarcasm

I'll gladly hand this off to you, ZetaRediculian...



posted on Sep, 27 2013 @ 07:40 PM
link   

ImpactoR

My assumption is that there is enough evidence that such experiments went on but I don't know enough about it to comment.


Really? There is enough evidence? I see the same evidence as the one for ufoS, I.E just speculation and assumptions and ofc - faked documents. There is nothing that shows such ever happened, all is the same conspiracy BS and yet you assume?? There is your credibility.
yes, you can make assumptions going into a topic. I don't really know a whole lot about it as I said so I really don't have much to offer. In the other thread, there was a discussion about Remote viewing experiments by the government with tax payers money mentioned kind of matter of factly. So yes, there is my credibility on a topic I know virtually nothing about. You got me there.



And it all can be narrowed down to one's belief system, which yours seems to be in such thing, rather than religion and aliens.

What such thing? That some obscure experiments were conducted?


Not even gonna comment on the rest of your 'almost sentences' - it only shows you have nothing useful to respond and the questions like - where is the evidence of the 'Alien was used as a coverup' propaganda only make you 'Hmm errr. ... I ... don't ugh... know...

Yes....don't ....respond to useful almost ...sentences that don't make sense. So in order to show that something is useful, experts even say that there is things that happen. Got it.

But what about all the complete sentences that make total sense? You know the ones where I don't say I don't know about the subject I'm talking about.
edit on 27-9-2013 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2013 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Ectoplasm8
 



I'll gladly hand this off to you, ZetaRediculian...

Gee thanks. But I have a feeling I will wear him down.



posted on Sep, 27 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   

ZetaRediculian
reply to post by Ectoplasm8
 



I'll gladly hand this off to you, ZetaRediculian...

Gee thanks. But I have a feeling I will wear him down.


Not when anything is possible, anywhere, with anyone, at anytime with no need for anything concrete or verifiable to back it up! You're stuck in a perpetual cloud of anything goes... Round and round.



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Ectoplasm8
 

reply to post by ZetaRediculian
 



All that you are saying how not a single time someone smuggled some actual video clip of a landing ship for 60 years makes sense and I am asking the same. And yet, I gave examples how things that you probably didn't know to exist like Area 51 - it was decades until it started existing for the public, so if there is one such case, what makes it impossible to have other cases not being shown for decades but in the end to actually exist?

That is what I find wrong with this logic. Other than that, if it goes like that I am sure in another 60 years there will be nothing new around the topic, and it is a crappy topic I fully agree.

But if for you when it has happened once or even more times, I am just listing one example - things kept in secret and considered non-existent to later start existing, if for you this is so absurd, then you are BAD, your methods are not scientific and you are doing nothing but scoffing.

I have never claimed any of this evidence as sufficient and you are attacking me for considering a possiblitiy based on the so good example of Area51, like there can never be other cases like this one? Wow, you are neither scientists, nor nothing, and your approach is awful, perhaps I shouldn't give you any more attention.

We all agree that the topic is full of nonsense and lies but when you can't even accept something could be possible based on cases of cover-up that have already happened, why am I wasting my time with such?
edit on 28-9-2013 by ImpactoR because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 02:09 AM
link   
....
edit on 28-9-2013 by ImpactoR because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 07:38 AM
link   

ImpactoR
reply to post by Ectoplasm8
 

reply to post by ZetaRediculian
 



All that you are saying how not a single time someone smuggled some actual video clip of a landing ship for 60 years makes sense and I am asking the same. And yet, I gave examples how things that you probably didn't know to exist like Area 51 - it was decades until it started existing for the public, so if there is one such case, what makes it impossible to have other cases not being shown for decades but in the end to actually exist?

That is what I find wrong with this logic. Other than that, if it goes like that I am sure in another 60 years there will be nothing new around the topic, and it is a crappy topic I fully agree.

But if for you when it has happened once or even more times, I am just listing one example - things kept in secret and considered non-existent to later start existing, if for you this is so absurd, then you are BAD, your methods are not scientific and you are doing nothing but scoffing.

I have never claimed any of this evidence as sufficient and you are attacking me for considering a possiblitiy based on the so good example of Area51, like there can never be other cases like this one? Wow, you are neither scientists, nor nothing, and your approach is awful, perhaps I shouldn't give you any more attention.

We all agree that the topic is full of nonsense and lies but when you can't even accept something could be possible based on cases of cover-up that have already happened, why am I wasting my time with such?
edit on 28-9-2013 by ImpactoR because: (no reason given)


OK. Now this is a good post. It is actually argumentation that I use. Area 51 is a good example of a secret base. Now if you are looking for aliens, you need to find the one case where aliens are known to exist. We don't have that yet. But are there other ways to account for aliens without them actually existing? I would say yes.



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Yet they not only exist, in this corporal universe, but also access this from on High in corporal form. And you only have to ask within your heart, and look up, for you to also know this. But its a classroom, exams going on, you need to do the extra work to go beyond the simple choices of: do you steal, do you enslave, do you chose kindness or judgments? Do you allow ritual sacrifice and your children to be chewed up by the machine? Can you see beyond the words on the exam, beyond the programming? The world doesn't make sense, do you see beyond it.

There is NO explanation beyond ET and Spirit. Even those peering into atoms saw the plasmic screen....

In a universe where there are infinite stars and planets, apply Drakes formula and some logic please. If you reduced drake's formula to a fraction 1/100th of its projection, you would still have civilzations out there, that achieved unity without war, or survived wars and destruction, and made it to the Higher Level of energy usage, and science. Those civilzations would be, thousands, millions and billions of years ahead of us in technology. I'm not even sure they would be strictly corporal any longer, nor transhuman AI, but interdimensional and ethereal, at least for some. Billions of years, for those outside the screen, kazillions.

Are you a seed or child from them entering a movie, or coloring book? This isn't a childish question, its one that you need to think deeply on, and in my opinion this is the reality.

By the way, the royal zeta reticuli, ie. Betty and Barney hill, and from the information I was given on Roswell, this is the race that crashed, or was shot down. Their star is akin to ours, but billions of years older than ours. Interesting thoughts that leads to, eh?

Now, if you have even a handful, in the infinite universe, (Horton Hears a Who! Infinity within and without all things), so no matter what this universe really is, even if its an atom, smaller than a grain of sand, it is still infinite.

If you have a handful of civilizations billions of years ahead of ours, then they would be terraforming everything and genetically creating Life on other worlds.

Earth would be a project...



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 



In a universe where there are infinite stars and planets, apply Drakes formula and some logic please.

I just get stuck on the planet full of Spider-Man type superheroes when I do that.


Now, if you have even a handful, in the infinite universe, (Horton Hears a Who! Infinity within and without all things), so no matter what this universe really is, even if its an atom, smaller than a grain of sand, it is still infinite.

Infinite sets are interesting. For instance, in the infinite set of even numbers, odd numbers do not exist.

edit on 28-9-2013 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   

anomalie
You can forget about debating with certain people here on the notion some UFO's may be piloted by aliens its like banging your head against a wall they will not entertain the idea or consider it a possibilty.

These are the same people who ignore the vast amount of data already out there credible reports (such as multiple witnesses, police, pilot, and military reports) and trace evidence all of which is worthless in their minds.

They accuse believers making leaps of logic, unaware that theyre doing it themselves and will at times resort to thinly veiled insults.

Funny really..it wouldnt bother me so much but these people have the nerve to call themselves skeptics when what theyre really are pseudo skeptics, debunkers and at worse trolls.

I would say save your breath these people have already made their minds up.


"These people" seem to come on here, only when certain topics are brought up, then they slam anyone who thinks that aliens exist.

Seems to me that IF any government folks were lurking about, that would be how they might act.

Just sayin'.




posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Unity_99
In a universe where there are infinite stars and planets, apply Drakes formula and some logic please. If you reduced drake's formula to a fraction 1/100th of its projection, you would still have civilzations out there, that achieved unity without war, or survived wars and destruction, and made it to the Higher Level of energy usage, and science. Those civilzations would be, thousands, millions and billions of years ahead of us in technology. I'm not even sure they would be strictly corporal any longer, nor transhuman AI, but interdimensional and ethereal, at least for some. Billions of years, for those outside the screen, kazillions.


Not to be unkind, but you don't know what you're talking about and this is typical of UFO believers. Drakes -Equation- is just a summary of terms which would estimate the number of COMMUNICATING civilizations in the MILKY WAY GALAXY. It has NOTHING to do with the UNIVERSE.

If there's one civ. per Galaxy, then even multiplying by the number of Galaxies in the Universe, it's still EXTREMELY RARE. Estimates done after the Hubble Deep Field survey, which is not ideal since you'd need infra-red also, range from 176 Billion to about 1,000 Billion. But the problem of dealing with very big numbers is that you get tricked into thinking the total is significant. It's not the total, it's the density.

Let's say there is 1 sentient civilization per Galaxy, and 1 space traveling civ per 100 galaxies. That's a total of 176 billion sentients or 1.7 billion space travelers. Now figure in the time synch. That's 1.7 billion space travelers found somewhere within a span of 14 billion years, in a volume of space (about 10e33 cubic light years), making the possibility of meeting or encountering any space travelers beyond remote, beyond rare.

Look at the density of space. About 1e-22 or about 1 hydrogen atom per 16 cubic centimeters. For all practical purposes, given the huge size, the huge distances, the Universe is a big empty container and any sentient beings who are actively engaging in space travel even inside their galaxies RIGHT NOW is effectively close to zero.



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Maverick7
 


Heh... you think you understand the universe.

Credentials?



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   

applesthateatpeople
reply to post by Maverick7
 


Heh... you think you understand the universe.

Credentials?


How about discussion? Asking for credentials is just saying the topic is over your head. Why else would you need to see credentials? Here is what you do. Pick the points you want to argue and counter it with what YOU think. Not that hard.



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Maverick7
 





the Universe is a big empty container and any sentient beings who are actively engaging in space travel even inside their galaxies RIGHT NOW is effectively close to zero.


That's if you base your opinion on such low starting numbers , given there's an estimated 300 billion stars in the Milky Way alone I find it surprising that you can assume that only one civilisation would appear in this and other Galaxies given the shear number of opportunities that would be available .



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by matadoor
 



"These people" seem to come on here, only when certain topics are brought up, then they slam anyone who thinks that aliens exist.

Seems to me that IF any government folks were lurking about, that would be how they might act.

Just sayin'.

Just because I "might" work for the government doesn't mean I know anything. It would be likely that certain over the top believers are sent here to distract from the "real" stuff. You have to think on several levels in order to really do this site justice.

Just say in'



posted on Sep, 28 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   

ZetaRediculian

applesthateatpeople
reply to post by Maverick7
 


Heh... you think you understand the universe.

Credentials?


How about discussion? Asking for credentials is just saying the topic is over your head. Why else would you need to see credentials? Here is what you do. Pick the points you want to argue and counter it with what YOU think. Not that hard.


Right.

Actually, it's over everyone's head.

...in more ways than one.



posted on Sep, 29 2013 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Unity_99
Yet they not only exist, in this corporal universe, but also access this from on High in corporal form.


for Ectoplasm8

you still will confuse me with believers? Is this what I said in every other post of mine? They exist? I am certain? Now do you see why I also defend 'it is possible' but I would disagree with claims 'they exist'. You know without 'could' 'might' 'may' 'it is possible, probable'.


By the way, the royal zeta reticuli, ie. Betty and Barney hill, and from the information I was given on Roswell, this is the race that crashed, or was shot down. Their star is akin to ours, but billions of years older than ours. Interesting thoughts that leads to, eh?


I would not consider Betty and Barney Hill the most credible case at all, there are fallacies in the explanation of how she got to point out (ζ Ret). In fact, this may very much be DISINFO and the couple to have been approached by GOV to mislead into programming people to think of aliens. I cannot present evidence for this happening but I know other cases of disinformation.

Open mind should go BOTH ways, neither claim as existing nor as non-existing without the sufficient evidence.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   

gortex
reply to post by Maverick7
 





the Universe is a big empty container and any sentient beings who are actively engaging in space travel even inside their galaxies RIGHT NOW is effectively close to zero.


That's if you base your opinion on such low starting numbers , given there's an estimated 300 billion stars in the Milky Way alone I find it surprising that you can assume that only one civilisation would appear in this and other Galaxies given the shear number of opportunities that would be available .


It's the conservative estimate to be sure. Not every star supports a planet that could support gentle evolution, not every area of the MW galaxy is favorable to life (due to high radiation, for example).

Also we're talking about those that exist right now.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Also, bear in mind that it's probably a given that the Galaxy is teeming with life, but the vast majority of it is likely to be microscopic, even single celled life.

And, there's a difference between a planet supporting a sentient civilization and having one right now. Finally there's a vast difference between being sentient and having the ability to travel in space reliably.

So, microscopic life, sentient life, sentient life alive right now and sentient life that can travel in space.

There's another big jump and that's sentient life that travels in space and could locate us, then another leap to sentient life that can space travel, find us and come here.

The last layer is sentient, space travel, find us, come here and do it within our lifetime (or, say the last 50-60 years).

You might have a lot of worlds with all the stuff needed, high intelligence, able to theorize about travel, but perhaps have gravity that's a bit too high to reach escape velocity. Or maybe an all-water world with super intelligent aquatic beings, unable to (and that don't need to) build and use technology.
edit on 2-10-2013 by Maverick7 because: (no reason given)









 
289
<< 24  25  26   >>

log in

join