Questions regarding "Disinformation"

Okay. Before I begin, I should say I ponder some weird ass things sometimes when I'm in bed trying to sleep. This is one of those times. I thought of a scenario, and here goes.

WHAT IF - Somebody, somewhere was abducted by Aliens or had an extremely close encounter where they had the chance to take high definition (read: NON blurrycam) photos or video of the Alien creatures, their craft or some of their technology?

WOULD IT - Really mean that we finally had some tangible, wave-in-your-face evidence that we could show to our friends and NOT look like raving weirdos?

I DON'T THINK SO.

Thanks to Hollywood, modern-day Technology (on this planet anyhow, ha!) and the liberal use of both good and bad CGI in nearly every single Movie and TV Show made in the past 20 years, people viewing the video or photos would instantly assume that it was fake.

And these wouldn't be baseless, ignorant assumptions either. They would be subject to the utmost scrutiny, but I believe that any HD photo or video would be doubted regardless of evidence (EXIF Data, etc) that said "HEY! THIS WAS TAKEN ON PLUTO" or something.

So ponder this, friends. I'd love to grab your opinions.

Anyway, I must sleep... I'm too tempted to keep reading this darn board!!

reply to post by cocotutch


I enjoy your honesty...but this is quite a depressing read-because you are most definitely correct. T_T

This also reminds me of why I really dislike hoaxers.

reply to post by cocotutch


Certainly, any video posted on YouTube without additional evidence is automatically suspect. Photographs alone have never been proof of anything; some of the first photographs ever made involved "trick" photography. Any UFO report depends on the number and credibility of the witnesses.

reply to post by DJW001


I tend to believe people who share similar experiences, then they could be considered more reliable. Kind of like people sharing the same dream or something. However, if it is a popular story already, then it could be debunked because someone could have easily just based their story/video/image on that one.

reply to post by cocotutch


In the 1950's a photograph was the best evidence that anyone could really hope to get as it was extremely rare for anyone to have anything else to hand. These days we all have smart phones with hd pictures and video, many have very high quality digital cameras.

About 5 years ago i said that if there really was any visiting aliens we would be overrun by high quality video and pictures by now. It just hasn't happened.

For anyone in the 21st century to believe you are going to have to produce 21st century evidence, not 20th century evidence.

reply to post by Lunette

I tend to believe people who share similar experiences,

There are many people who think they have witnessed the work of whatever god they believe in , many of these experiences are shared. But this doesn't make me think there is a god. It just the way people project their belief systems onto things they cant explain.

Many children have the shared thought that there are monsters under the bed or in the closet..doesn't make it real.

reply to post by cocotutch


Would a slightly blurry picture of the inside of a flying saucer do?

reply to post by EnPassant


If that photo was real it was taken from a point about 15ft in the air at an angle for 40 degrees. Its clearly a bad picture of a miniature hand made set. It looks like its right out of a dolls house.

EnPassant
reply to post by cocotutch

 

Would a slightly blurry picture of the inside of a flying saucer do?

edit on 17-11-2013 by EnPassant because: typo

On that site the picture caption reads that picture was taken in 1958 in Italy.

Explains the "round" radar screen.

cocotutch
I believe that any HD photo or video would be doubted regardless of evidence (EXIF Data, etc) that said "HEY! THIS WAS TAKEN ON PLUTO" or something.

A large enough data set can be verified to a very high level of certainty.

A single of photo of Pluto up close, even with accurate survey data would be contestable ... but say, for example, a large amount of data which correlates with other data, it would be verified. Data being from land surveying, astronomy, time and weather conditions, revealing knowledge without prior knowledge etc ...

Some people will always doubt, but there aren't that many ground breaking cases which have a large number of these things coming together at once along with an image that's meaningful.

reply to post by cocotutch

WHAT IF - Somebody, somewhere was abducted by Aliens or had an extremely close encounter where they had the chance to take high definition (read: NON blurry cam) photos or video of the Alien creatures, their craft or some of their technology?

I know. Theres a physicist whom I can't remember the name of, I saw a lecture he gave and he said the same thing. "Hey, next time you're abducted, grab something off the shelf or counter like an ash tray or something so we can have some physical evidence."

I'm a bit older and can tell you there is footage of UFO's I saw when I was a kid that I have not been able to find anywhere on the web. Thats why I came here, hoping I would find a link to it or others like it… to no avail.

There are "very good" examples of older stuff on film before the internet. But like Phoenix, I am frustrated by the lack of new information or evidence.

The only thing I can attribute that to is really active censorship. Only the crap is allowed thru.

intrptr

EnPassant
reply to post by cocotutch

 

Would a slightly blurry picture of the inside of a flying saucer do?

edit on 17-11-2013 by EnPassant because: typo

On that site the picture caption reads that picture was taken in 1958 in Italy.

Explains the "round" radar screen.

And that's just it.

All of the hoaxes tell us far more about ourselves and how limited our own imaginations about aliens are at any given point in time than it does about the alleged space aliens.

I study hoaxes like this for that reason.

When we actually DO make first contact, having a good idea what human nature is regarding views of what most likely will at first be a mystery are crucial.

reply to post by JadeStar

When we actually DO make first contact, having a good idea what human nature is regarding views of what most likely will at first be a mystery are crucial.

I was with friends and others we didn't know who all saw the same thing one night back in the late 70's. I could say "I know what I saw" and "it wasn't earth technology" but I don't have pics, video and I am not a celebrity so nobody really cares one way or the other.

Its a programmed response on our part. If you have something to show for it, it is debunked; if its only a tale then its contrived or mistaken.

I'd say the censors and the aliens are doing a good job keeping themselves invisible.

reply to post by cocotutch


That's about it, people are too ignorant to even take possibilities. I will say, when I see more and more documents - declassified or smuggeled by researchers that talk about something not of human nature or crashes if ET - for me this is not enough to be certain but hell, it's freaking deserving attention to ask yourself especially when there is no proof of 'We wrote 1000 documents to keep up the UFO myth' - no - communication between high officials, memos of high rank people, presidents show they discuss it and frankly it's absurd to think they make whole communication about such things, then classify it and all this to lie to the public which by the way may not get their hands on such documents ... Sounds unrealistic and not logical.

Therefore, it is absolutely ignorant to say 'oh these? they are nothing' - they are not proof of a fact but they are material that you cannot pass without considering possibilities.

JadeStar

intrptr

EnPassant
reply to post by cocotutch

 

Would a slightly blurry picture of the inside of a flying saucer do?

edit on 17-11-2013 by EnPassant because: typo

On that site the picture caption reads that picture was taken in 1958 in Italy.

Explains the "round" radar screen.

And that's just it.

All of the hoaxes tell us far more about ourselves and how limited our own imaginations about aliens are at any given point in time than it does about the alleged space aliens.

I study hoaxes like this for that reason.

When we actually DO make first contact, having a good idea what human nature is regarding views of what most likely will at first be a mystery are crucial.

But is it a radar screen? It is just a round thing. There's a square thing as well! Is that a round waste paper basket on the left?!

I think at this point and time no video or photo would ever be enough to be considered actual "proof". For the reasons you mentioned the level of video and photo production nowadays is at a level that anything could be made to look real. I think the only proof that could come along at this point would be a huge shared event involving thousands of people. Even then it could possibly be staged by whatever black projects they have up their sleeves.

When you have such technology for producing real or imagined imagery the act of disinformation becomes all too easy.

I would be a lot more likely to accept a photo (or any image) as "proof" if it was:
* Part of multiple images taken of the same thing by different people, none of them anonymous
* Backed up by some kind of physical evidence directly linked to the thing in the images
* Verified as "alien" by multiple independent labs
* Confirmed by multiple authorities, including the President and the Pope
* Available to me to look at with my own eyes or even touch.

That's not too much to ask for, is it?