Originally posted by Gazrok
Well, lets look at the evidence...
Many credible sightings near defense and research installations
Just to provide some counter point:
First, I don't think there's any evidence of specific 'craft'. Sightings that I'm aware, consist of a light in the sky and possibly a radar
trace. I believe there's one or two where the lights seemed to be in formation, but nothing about a solid object with a distinct shape.
Unfortunately, we haven't been allowed to see any convincing gun camera footage.
Attempts to evade rather than contact any aircraft sent to intercept
Where we might term something an 'evasion', the same results might be seen with very distant lights perceived as being near, or reflections on
clouds or bodies of water where the light will always appear to be 'fleeing'.
Chase planes sent up and finding nothing, even with changes in radar traces don't really tell us anything. So it might be premature to conclude that
anything is evading us.
Note we have similar sightings of 'ghost lights' on the ground. Is the origin of both the same? Since not all UFO researchers believe in 'ghosts',
most of them would consider those earthly 'ghost' lights illusions or reflections. Why the disparity?
An apparent desire for secrecy based on such evasion
Begs the question.
Abductees allegedly taken against their will and treated like lab animals
I'd suggest, enticing as it is, it's a big jump between anything sighted flying through the sky and stories of people being picked up and
experimented upon. Though there's some strong circumstantial evidence, we still haven't seemed to pin anything down.
No known contact with world leaders
Suffice to say, assuming we are being visited by aliens, it doesn't seem they want to be friendly. The only good news is that at least we haven't
been attacked, etc., so it doesn't appear they are expressly hostile either... Based solely on the evidence of testimony, etc., it appears the
visitors see us more like animals than fellow sentients....which is probably a good thing, for as we've seen with our own species...technologically
advanced beings eventually conquer less advanced ones (and often violently)...so probably good they don't perhaps see us as a threat....
Or, maybe it's not too hard to get a craft here, but mounting an invasion would have more logistical problems... Who knows?
Part of the problem is that we're seeing a lot of phenomena, and trying to categorize them within a framework of a single explanation. I.e.,
extraterrestrial influence or action.
But within the data resides a subset which includes prosaic explanation, and there's really no way to exclude those. So we have a lot of confusing
and confounding information. Much of it is what Vallee termed 'jealous phenomena'; it can't be photographed reliably and it can't be
Finally, we have people's perception of things. Even during normal events, the perception is often at odds with the actual events. Time distorts,
point of view differs. Some people have what they call 'fantasy prone' personalities.
If I were going to make a guess, it would be that any outside observers would be wise to make their visits 'virtually', and any presence would be
unlikely to be in large numbers, making it problematic to 'invade'.
As far as the original question, just going by human motives and examples, territoriality and conquest seem to go hand-in-hand with behavior that ends
up being hostile to the invaded party. In fact, there are only a very small set of behaviors that one might expect from a 'visitor' that would be
deemed 'non-hostile'. The mere act of observation would probably be deemed harmful in some way. (radiation, unintentional effects of examination)
[edit on 21-2-2008 by Badge01]