Have you ever noticed?...

Admittedly there is scientific evidence that is irrefutable that U.F.O's (Unidentified Flying Objects) indeed exist, if they are Prototype aircraft that aren't publically acknowledged due to Patent's Pending.

Otherwise they should really be termed U.A.P's. (Unidentified Ariel Phenomena)

As many posters will post in this thread (... and have subsequently done so in previous threads on the subject):
UFO was an old term, what a person see's while unidentified doesn't have to be flying or an object, it is just something they perceive as Ariel and is a Phenomena.

UFO's != (is Not Equal to) Extraterrestrial Aliens.
If anything you should use UFO's are <= (Less than Equal) Extraterrestrial Aliens,

Which means the chances are so astronomically remote that its hardly worth the energy consumed by the neurons in your brain to even consider the remotest possibility of Aliens existing, let alone visiting this planet on Day-tripping excursions.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes! Stryder, this is EXACTLY my point (partly). When Phlog brings science books into an intelligent consideration for the unknown, yet undeniable, isn't that like stating, here, please read this Betty Crocker cook book, it will help you to better understand your curiosities concerning undeniable uncertainties.

But Stryder, sadly the second part of your post is completely based on speculation and manifested projection. That's NOT realistic. Because we cannot currently determine something as an absolute, does in no way mean that the chances are less that we won't ever. Nor does it mean that what is responsible for the phenomenon is less than what is purposed is. If we always defined the unknown yet undeniable on that basis, we would almost never determine anything yet unknown and undeniable. Speculations are the building blocks of future definitions.

UFOs are REAL people, get that through the THICK noodles you are presently attempting to stir with the ever finite logic stick of "science" with. *This* is PSEUDOSCIENCE which is to state that it's a serious consideration, rather than an absolute definition, based on current scientific understanding for that which is unknown, yet undeniable.

Phlog, do you HONESTLY believe that you could sit down and win a legitimate debate with Stanton Friedman concerning the reality of UFOs? I certainly don't.

Your considerations on the matter are FAR too prejudiced to be of any real value in this consideration. You're more interested in attempting to defend "this or that" when in reality, "this or that" are never being challenged to begin with.

All of science points to one single progressive actuation: Change.

Change is proof that proof as understanding is a fallible concept.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Depends what he means by UFOs. I accept there are secret military aircraft being developed and tested. I accept people see mundane things, and mis-identify them. But if he was hiding behind the term 'UFO', and meaning we are being visited by Alien life forms, well, yes, I could win that debate. It's already won by the skeptics, as there is NO proof for alien visitation. He'd have to come up with something rather extraordinary as proof, and like I said, if there was proof, there would be no debate.

You keep using the term UFO btw, and you should stop. UFO is too vague. When you mean extraterrestrial visitation, you should state that.

Go learn some physics and get back to me. I learned physics, and I respect the views of other physicists. So far, c is the speed limit. If it were safely attainable, we would still not be in a good position to explore the Universe. If you propose a method to circumvent this, by saying there will be new developments in science, well, scientists will solve that, and so far, it does not look hopeful. Simply, there are no space bending events taking place near us, we would detect them. There are no decellerations from ultra high velocity happening in space near us either, again, we would detect them. We have telescopes surveying the whole sky every night, and satellites looking down, and we just do not see Alien Craft.

I believe in the possibility of intelligent life on other planets. The Universe is just too big for us to be unique. But therein lies the problem, the shee size, and the distances those life forms would have to travel. We haven't detected any radio signals from them yet, and don't you think SETI would detect a signal, before a craft arrived?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't believe for a second that you could win the debate with him making the claim that UFOs are in fact a result of aliens that came here and crashed back in the 40s. Not one second. Why? Because you won't read the man's efforts in which he presents the abundant EVIDENCE that they have.

I have made abundantly CLEAR that what I am referring to as UFOs can be either man made or extraterrestrial. There is positively no need to make clearer distinctions because, you, myself, or anyone else can offer more significant information as to indicate one or the other.

A modern understanding of base physics would give about as much insight into the realm of UFOs as would any other base (burdened by yesterday) science. Your point is moot because it disregards the fact that this same base physics CANNOT explain the undeniable REALITY of presently or past observed UFOs.

Herein lies the extremely narrow view that civilizations millions of years in advance of our own, would some how, by some astronomically unlikely possibility, still be limited to the same technological understanding the we human beings presently possess. The notion that all other "life" in the universe "should", or worse yet, "is", less advanced than us mighty titans of wisdom and understanding, is literally no better than 50/50 at best. Given our own projected and speculated understanding of what the actual age of our universe is, and the earth itself, the odds are virtually impossible.

 

He can't have evidence, or there would be no debate. What don't you grasp about that? He has bucket load of allegory, but that is not _evidence_.

Yes, you must differentiate between the two. The term UFO is too vague. Secret military aircraft existing have absolutely nothing to do with extra-terrestrial visitation.

You are clutching at straws, and hiding behind terms. Really, go read some real physics. Extra-terrestrial visitation is not real. It's an array of things, from lies, hypnagogic dreams, mental illness etc. But it's not real. I'm sure it feels real to the people involved, and is sometimes scary, but Aliens are not travelling vast distances across space to serially abduct fat Americans.

I don't think anybody is saying that. I think we are saying that the Universe is big, current models don't allow for easy interstellar travel, and there is really little hope of solving that. Not none, just very, very little. Also, we have detected no signs of other intelligent life, nor their vehicles. I think we are also saying that should aliens arrive, it's doubtful to be in the numbers reported, and for them to be involved in the activities alleged against them (abductions, cattle mutilation, crop circles), and that they would most likely, observe without interfering, or make contact directly.

It all boils down to one thing. There is no proof.

 

Phlog
A debate has nothing to do with proof. It's about whichever side of the debate proposes the most convincing arguments for whatever is being debated. Such arguments based on well researched documentation IS EVIDENCE. Expert testimony IS EVIDENCE. Just because you yourself will not accept legitimate, integral hard work, by exceptionally and uniquely qualified people as evidence, doesn't mean that all of a sudden the definition for evidence has changed. "Something" is not open to debate when it's post absolute proof. Otherwise, why debate the issue in the first place?

I have always done my best to make clear that we/I don't know either, and the bottom line remains, we don't know either for certain. But I suspect as I have stated many times prior, the greatest percentage are in fact man made. But these are NOT craft that employ the physics you are referring to. Honestly, all bullshit aside. I think you KNOW this already.

This is sheer prejudice Phlog. You DON'T KNOW, so how can you pronounce something as being dead without knowing it's alive. We know that alien abductees are NOT suffering from mental illness. We know they are NOT partially dreaming. We do know that 98% of their abductions from individual to individual are nearly identicle in basic routine make up. That's NOT characteristic of ANY sleep/dream disorder from individual person to person that is known. What you are stating here is not true and DR. John Mack determined this at great scientific length. The problem here Phlog is that you are projecting human qualities onto non human beings. You are right. They do not come from way far away to abduct fat Americans. They most likely come from a MUCH closer and accessible location and abduct human beings quite deliberately from every back ground and every nationality around the globe.

In short: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It's pretty hard to look for signatures that we don't know how to recognize, let alone understand to begin with. That may in fact be hundreds of years away from being a reality. Doesn't mean they are not there to begin with.

Cattle mutilations are not understood. We do know this, the best surgeons in the world cannot explain the precise nature of the phenomenon or how some of these procedures could possibly be crudely executed. That's strange stuff and I don't claim for a second to really understand it. I suspect again, in the case for CM, that this is a form of highly advance military field operations.

But I ask you this: WTF is this "military"? It sure as heck aren't those bozo's we see interviewed on TV concerning Iraq.

Most thoroughly researched and scrutinized abductions of the Gray variety are extremely real. This is NOT a case for little gray beings scooting up in their "interplanetary spacecraft" and taking people for a joy ride around the galaxy. These are beings, possibly artificial intelligence, that execute exacting operations on an intersecting multidimensional level. They take people right though their walls and windows (when they are shut). People report entering craft that are relatively small in size and yet are enormous inside. This is the exact same process and experience that people that were abducted 300 years ago had only because of their lack of present orientation (imagine us lacking as much in 300 years as they did then compared to us now) 300 years ago, they claimed to be "taken" by elves, gnomes, demons, etc. to large dark cavernous areas where they were subjected to all manner of folly and torture before being returned relatively unharmed. My own best guess is that they were temporarily occupants of a different and very real dimension that their abductors could exercise full control over. We know these dimensions are there. We can prove it on paper. Who's to say whether that same esoteric military I eluded to previously has not had a working understanding of that same proof on paper for the last 30 years? It would explain a lot, wouldn't it?

Crop Circles are man made, a hoax. 98% of them anyway.

 

Get back to me when you have compelling evidence, and have abandoned the allegory.

Show me a good picture or video.
Show me a reliable witness.
Give me something solid.

Until then, it's just fantasy. Oh, and I've had an alien abduction experience myself. I just know it wasn't real.

 

Check out this evidence. It's the New Jersey UFO sightings.

video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=9022371226156483716
video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=8751090888158148535
video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4754561190713590190

Watch them in order and don't miss the last few seconds of the final video.

 

I've seen it...it's retarded Marty.

 

I really can't take credit for this and I just want to THANK sincerely whoever here turned me on to this incredible site called "The Anomalist". This is so entertaining in a quality way on a daily basis, that whoever you are, I owe you.

Here you go Phlog. Just please remember to chew before you spit.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Great stuff!

http://inexplicata.blogspot.com/2009/04/no-trespassing-ufo-ce-2s.html

 

Evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence found

This changes everything.

 

Thanks for showing us how poor the evidence is:

"none of the photos taken of the Azcapotzalco saucer came out"
"widespread electrical blackouts appear to have been UFO-induced"
"There were reports that even cameras using standard photographic film yielded nothing but overexposed images."
"The hardy souls who braved the road found that their photo equipment was useless and worse yet, their pickup trucks had had their power drained as well."
"two perfectly circular burn marks"

 

Needless any more debate... there is alien civilisation outside our solar system. Many victims had already tell their encounter with the aliens. Science can't find the explanation and simply reject the claim. Contemporary science is still weak given inadequate instruments and technology to detect any paranormal activities and unusual happening. We still haven't create an efficient instrument that can clearly portray the planet in other galaxy and to determine if there is any civilisation in other planet. We just only be able to detect planet base on the wobble of the star that attracted by the orbiting planet's gravity.

 

OK, first article, 'Cattle Mutilations' is pure bullshit.

If you have ever seen dead animals in the wild, you'd know that they are consumed by flies and small predators often, and the soft tissues, the gums, tongue eyes, and nose are eaten first. Entry from fly lavae is through any wound or orifice, and these parts eaten by maggots, often giving the impression organs have been removed surgically, without major incision, when all that has happened is that flies lay eggs, which turn into lavae, which eat the insides of the animal, which them emerge as flies, leaving an empty carcass. No mystery, no surgery, just nature. Maybe you should go outdoors more.

It's this rotting/predation of soft tissues that gave rise to stories of sea monsters, as whales and other sea life would wash up on beaches after being chewed on in the sea, and rot and be eaten by gulls, leaving a a rather twisted, unrecognisable form.

Nothing new here, the same old human misconceptions. I hope the rest of the site gets better, but I doubt it. Again you have demonstrated an utter lack of critical thinking, and linked to some bullshit. You do you credibility no favours.

 

OK, Checked out a few more of the links on that site. It's the usually blurry video, and single photo of nothing special with nothing more than allegory and the observers incredulity that what they are seeing could be a regular aeroplane.

I've wasted enough time there.

Now, to re-iterate the challenge, I want some decent evidence. Not that low quality bullshit.

 

Yes Yes, and people see Leprechauns, and the Virgin Mary too.

 

"Many victims had already tell their encounter with the aliens."

I love this albertchong1999. So people who encounter UFOs are victims.

So you state that the evidence is so poor or nonexistent that there is no evidence. Thanks for agreeing about that.

 

electrafixtion, I'd like a reply please, I mean, if you offer up the same crappy quality 'evidence', and then cut and run, well, it looks a little shifty.

So, some quality evidence please. I keep asking, you keep trying to feed me BS. Show some critical thinking, and link something compelling, please. Claw back some credibility, eh?

 

phloggy,phloggy ,phloggy

 

read the book "aliens from space" by major donald kehoe.
you will find a list of reliable witnesses as long as your arm, some of these witnesses were top military brass and whitehouse officials.