another old CE3 encounter, amfreville france 1947: humanoid encounters

a reply to: knackers323

i don't think that pun works in french

a reply to: igotID

paul hill? his book is a classic, but he still ignored a lot of interesting high strangeness cases

a reply to: BigDave-AR

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

UFOs like it or not have always been a modernized version of old faerie folklore, ignoring that is denialism at the best, censorship at the worst, its clearly that the same thing that was behind the faeries is disquised as aliens now

Indeed! Does that include the reports that have artifacts, viable evidence, something that can be analyzed and be proven to NOT BE OF EARTH?

If I find such a thing, and disagree with you; is that "denialism?" or perhaps it is censorship...In any case you statement is pure "horse" at least until you have dealt with all the available evidence that points to extraterrestrial origins.

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: knackers323

i don't think that pun works in french

It doesn't work in English either!

a reply to: james1947

ETH partisans, ugh

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947

ETH partisans, ugh

No, actually, ETT...Extraterrestrial THEORY. You have a hypothesis, in that it is only a "notion", a thought that can not be demonstrated as "real" by any means...mostly because you are; 1. misusing the term "dimension", 2. fail to understand the dimensional nature that actually runs through the reality of this universe, and of course, you have no evidence.

And, that is where the two ideas part ways; You have no evidence to support your hypothesis, and I have very good evidence to support my theory (its the evidence that makes ETH a theory (ETT)). You can see some of my core evidence here

No denial, no faerie folk...just science!

a reply to: james1947

i aready had that argument with another ETH partisan and surprise! it leads to nothing!
its impossibe to prove either hypothesys, but i am gonna stick with IDH for now because it explains the phenomena better

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947

i aready had that argument with another ETH partisan and surprise! it leads to nothing!
its impossibe to prove either hypothesys, but i am gonna stick with IDH for now because it explains the phenomena better

You should read the material I linked...it is as close to that "proof" you mention is missing as you will ever find without an actual Extraterrestrial. Of course, it is only an interpretation, and the purported Extraterrestrials may have been from HIP-26737 instead of Zeta(2) Reticuli...both are class "G2V" stars, just like the Sun.

You should understand several things here; 1. a proper understanding of the term "Dimension", that is a well defined physical property, 2. I can show you stars suitable for life like Earth has, I can even show you planets where life like Earth has might evolve, 3. you can not do the same with your "dimensions", you can't even show a hypothetical model of such a "dimension".

It is possible to prove the Extraterrestrial hypothesis and thus elevate it to a theory; as I did. It is not possible to do the same with any sort of Intradimensional hypothesis.

There is however, one possible "way" for your hypothesis to gain some traction. In Western Ceremonial Magick, and some other traditions there is the hypothesis of multiple "planes", 4 to be exact, each plane is a higher construct than the one below it. These planes correspond to the four fundamental elements, but, also contain their own unique flora and fauna. These planes have been well researched over the past few millennia, however, this knowledge has been classed as "Black Magic" and thus somewhat removed from the mainstream.

It should be noted that these entities of higher planes are composed of so-called "subtle energy", and can not manifest on our (physical) plane without special circumstances. And, one of those higher planes has the mental energy of every mind in the Universe...

a reply to: james1947

hah!
you are talking about the betty/barney hill map, right?
the correlation they found isn't perfect and considering how big the universe is, there are a infinite number of stars that can be correlated like that
what you forgot to mention is that betty hill was quite, well strange, she claimed a bunch of other UFO sightings and landings all wich are conveniently left out of mainstream UFO literature, in fact later in her life, she claimed that she had a UFO crash fragment in her possesion, she also claimed that her cat could somehow fly, so yeah.....

a reply to: humanoidlord

One aspect of the IDH...might be the misinterpretation of ETH reality --- When Earthlings are confused by the highly technological aspects of ET to Earthling communication; by the use of advanced laser holographic techniques, as possibly performed by the ET's on Earthlings.

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947

you are talking about the betty/barney hill map, right?
the correlation they found isn't perfect and considering how big the universe is, there are a infinite number of stars that can be correlated like that

A few things where I don't think you are quire getting it.

1. We are not talking about the universe, but rather local space out to say 120 ly or so, and that is not so many stars. Next they NEED to be the right kind (Class) of star...one that might belong on a "trade and exploration map".

2. Mathematical probability dictates that the more star that are involved the less probable it is that we will find a match.

3. Betty's map isn't a "good" match because it is not an exact reproduction of the original, it is a remembered, and drawn on note paper reproduction. So, it is naturally not quite accurate, so it only serves as a template. But, if you read my white paper (site) you would have seen that the probability of a match is very, very, low. In fact it is virtually impossible to match a group of stars with a random drawing...demonstrating that the drawing is not random.

4. Other aspects of the "case" do not affect the probabilities (math) associated, so...what ever you think about Betty; it is irrelevant...

5. The drawing, and associated descriptions, and real world stars, and associated mathematics are what compose this "proof".

So, while you do not have to accept this, please be honest and don't say there is no proof, or evidence of either ETH, or alien existence, visitation, or abductions.

a reply to: Erno86

that still doesn't explains high strangeness sightings, i suggest you take a look at my humanoid encounters threads

a reply to: james1947

nope, its not a match and you are forgetting how many stars there is in the milk way, a match is very possible

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947

nope, its not a match and you are forgetting how many stars there is in the milk way, a match is very possible

Well, considering that I applied AI and advanced computer vision technique; You are going to have to show how it is not a match...especially since it matches all 25 stars, and the invisible one (the POV...also a star).

And, no, I'm not forgetting how many stars there are in the galaxy; I already stated that only stars within 120ly or so were being considered. This distance is used as a means to compensate for ET having just discovered a working FTL...so we intentionally limited the distance. We also don't need any stars beyond 120ly since we have found a match. Also, we can't use all the stars in the galaxy since we don't know how many there are, nor do we have them cataloged. (I only used cataloged stars; Hipparcos)

So...please show me how it is not a match, remember, the match will not be 100%...it can't be due to the nature of the origins of the template.

a reply to: james1947

files.abovetopsecret.com...
not even close

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947

files.abovetopsecret.com...
not even close

lol...

Seriously?!


A wee bit of reality

So...you don't see how my version is an excellent match?
Do you not see the common elements?
You should understand that my version is a new 3D construction of Betty's map using Ms. Fish's interpretation, modern astrometrics, and identification of all 24 stars. There is also a 25th star, that is the Point Of View, I've also identified it as HIP-26737.

a reply to: james1947

the stupid, it burns....
in your own drawing its not matching! no lines or points are in the correct place, and if you do so many changes to adapt to your fantasy "modern" world, you came into something very different from the original starmap, hell the original isn't even 3D!
submit to IDH or else!

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947

the stupid, it burns....
in your own drawing its not matching! no lines or points are in the correct place, and if you do so many changes to adapt to your fantasy "modern" world, you came into something very different from the original starmap, hell the original isn't even 3D!
submit to IDH or else!

Are you saying that the Hipparcos mission is all fantasy?

And, I'll not submit, never I tell you

a reply to: james1947

the mission isn't fantasy, but your interpretetion of it is