It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
UFOS= unidentified flying objects.. with intelligent characteristics
I can´t believe people still arguing over whether these objects are intelligently controlled. Damn, they are!
No, it does not mean they are intelligently controlled. There are God knows how many youtube videos that have fairly much been shown to be a plastic bag caught in the wind that 'appears' to be moving in a controlled way. In a similar way, Venus and other heavenly objects have also been found to be the actual root cause.
I'm sorry, but you don't get to make the definition - it's something in the sky and you don't know what it is.
You are only talking about those weather balloon cases. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that many objects that invade the air space are indeed under intelligent control.
´The UFO experience´ by J.Allen Hynek
´Revelations´ by Jacques F. Vallee.
Credible people have put tons of time, research and effort to come to this conclusion. Its not merely my opinion.
Skepticism doesn't mean you have to label a person that has looked at the evidence and has reached a different conclusion than you have as gullible or they have a lower standard than you have. That's not skepticism, that's blind belief.
As a skeptic, I would never say that there's no evidence for Bigfoot or that anyone that has reached a different conclusion than I have has to be gullible.
Everyone that disagrees with their conclusion is gullible and they have a low standard when gathering evidence.
reply to post by uncommitted
In the book I just finished reading about our robotic/probes successes of our Solar System, scientist now think there are about 130 million habitable worlds in the Milky Way galaxy. That's an awful lot, they didn't speculate how many may have life.edit on 26am28am5091 by data5091 because: (no reason given)
You can say this if you stick your head in the sand and ignore all of the photos, videos, abduction cases, radar cases, ancient writings, U.F.O. sightings described in the Bible, eyewitness accounts from high ranking officials, exoplanets, extremophiles, growing evidence for Panspermia and more. I was just watching a debate and the skeptic said, there's no evidence that extraterrestrial visitation has occurred. You hear this a lot and you have to wonder are they living in an alternative universe where none of the above things have occurred?
There's MOUNTAINS of evidence to support extraterrestrial visitation.
Like I said, that's fine if the skeptic reaches this conclusion but you can't turn around and say there's no evidence to reach an opposite conclusion.
Again, you can stick your head and the sand and say there's no evidence of extraterrestrial visitation but again that's your conclusion. The sad fact is, you're so wrapped up in what you believe, you can't accept that others look at the mountains of evidence that frankly, you sound like you don't read and they come to a different conclusion.
We have evidence of UFOs, but we have no evidence of who or what pilots them.
The problem is, the skeptic doesn't even want to accept the fact that there's evidence to reach a conclusion that's different than theirs. So they have to say there's no evidence.
This is what we do as human beings. But the UFO skeptic says, stop being human and stop weighing the evidence. It's stupid.
The UFO's that we see in pictures and videos are the similar objects described by abduction cases and close encounters. These are the same crafts described in trace evidence cases.
If you don't want to see a connection, that's fine. But I see an obvious connection and I've reached the conclusion that extraterrestrial visitation has occurred based on the available evidence.
The sad thing is, some skeptics can't accept that others use common sense and logic to do what humans do all the time which is weigh the available evidence.
At the end of the day it's just your belief and nothing more and that's fine. Like I keep saying though, some skeptics are so insecure about what they believe they have to try to define what conclusions others may reach.
It's not enough that you've reached a different conclusion, you want to make it seem that nobody can reach a different conclusion than you.