maTTo is right, Human nature is to take all the facts on a situation, disregard them, and then believe in what you want to believe! Dave, you may have seen a saucer fly over you, one hundred feet above your head, but then comes the assumption. Human nature kicks in, you don`t know what you have seen so the UFO doctrine imbedded in your mind lets you decide it must be from another planet. My view on this subject is simple. There are so many people claiming to be abducted that if they were all telling the truth then, you couldn`t walk out of your front door without bumping in aliens. Secondly, I get the impression that vast majority of abduction claims all appear to be American, why is this? Aren`t these alien interested in the remaining 5.250 billion people on the planet, and if you wanted to conduct medical experiments on people? Wouldn`t it be easier to do it on people say in Africa or South America where it`s easier to keep it secret. I guess someone now is gonna say they already do! Just another unprovable conspiracy! Another question, Do these abducties go to the Police? If someone kidnapped me I call the police before I called a hypnotherapyst, as seems to be the standard in most cases. TV programmes report on this subject on regular basis, but remember this! A television broadcaster may produce a programme, which may undoubtably proves in anyones mind the existence of aliens, but remember this. These people exist to make money, programmes are tailored for viewing audiences, ratings come before all. People generally want to believe in this UFO alien thing, and they want to watch programmes on telly that prove it`s real. I don`t believe it`s real. Modern day ghosts. [This message has been edited by Mike (edited July 11, 1999).]
Mike, I see where your coming from except for one thing. I didn't know about UFO's in the 70's when I was 14 years old. I wasn't aware there was a large interest either. I simply stated what I saw and "I saw a circular shaped object.. yada yada yada...." At no time did I say it came from another planet either. Keep the story straight. There was no UFO doctrine instilled in me at that time and therefore no preconceived conclusions for me to make. OK?? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! . Regards, Dave.
okay the exception, but in most cases if you want to see something then chances are you will. Your case may be different, but the general rule of thumb that I can best make out, is that these days anything that`s spotted in the air which isn`t immediatly identifiable, is marked up as an alien ship. Until I personally meet an extraterrestial, for now I`m putting it all down to hocus pocus.
Dave thank you . I'm curiou as to what exactly scared you? Being 14 i would think that you would be more intrested then scared of the object.
God....frey, Good call. I don't know why but I was REALLY scared! Basically, I was sh@#ing myself. And - when I ran home I couldn't wait to get to the safety of my house. Weird response, really! You've got me thinking now....... Regards, Dave.
Dave, in psychology we call this the "flight or fight" instinct. It is a natural response to outside, visual stimuli of which character is unknown and strange. That is to say that what you saw stimulated your parasympathetic nerves system resulting in fear and, therefore "flight" from the source of fear. Most people are afraid of the dark, for example, and this for no other reason that such an environment causes us to lose our self identity which is closely linked to the five senses. Having lost this contact with a "secure self" causes the brain to send signals to the nervous system which in turn creates chemicals stimulating the parasympathetic system which imposes a response or reaction from the person. This response is instinctive. Fear is an emotion. This emotion, though a natural instinct, can be exaggerated through learning. It can, therefore be unlearned. The sighting of a UFO flying overhead i had last year did not at all stimulate fear within me. It was as clear as day yet i cannot provide any conclusions as to what it really was. It looked like two inverted saucers with a dome on top and it didn't make any noise. But i have no idea what it could have been. Nevertheless, i can assure you that it was no ball of light and that what i saw seemed very metallic and was extraordinary and awe-inspiring. I believe sooner or later definitive answers as to the identity of these UFOs will emerge. ------------------ dumaurier
My little rant: Hmm.. Instinct.....Instinct..That is the thing we civilized advanced human beings have lost in the search for ourselves and who we are. Instead we disregard instinct as primitive, and so we use common sence (living in a box)and logic to translate an experience. Doctors question us telling us we are crazy to have seen such a thing ( the same people that performed lobotomi on people not too long ago) *Whoops* I know what i saw, I trust my gut feeling and instinct fully. .No yada yada doctor or anyone cant explain anything of which they havent seen. How can they perceive an experience when they havent seen it themselves, and from there try to create a different picture in ones mind.. Now that is crazy if you ask me. Indoctrination. FUD, brainwashing.. Hmm..i wonder which party is crazy... ----------------------------- "All i say is keep looking".
Dave Seems like you are remembering a dream. is this possible? Now , don't be offended , just a question am truly interested about. I can remember a reoccurring dream I had many years ago. I won't bore you with the details , but there was a small volcano with a door & a rhino. It was a terrifying experience and I don't know why . it seems as real as any other experience but obviously volcanos don't have doors and there are no rhinos in my neighborhood.
God...frey, Not a chance in the world of it being a dream, I'm afraid! I am able to differentiate between reality and dreams and have never confused the two. Remember, the last time I saw something odd in the sky was only three months ago, with my brother standing along side me! We have recalled the account a few times since then. So, that one's off the cards. ...errrr....I'm trying to say that I know it wasn't any dream....even though that could be offered as an alternative answer to the occurence by some. Regards, Dave.
Mike No offence intended but I have to disagree with your earlier posting on many points. You say Dave is assuming that it was a alien spacecraft because of the ‘UFO doctrine’ embedded in his mind. What I want to know is why you cannot accept that these things are real. Whatever they may be I find it completely unbelievable that some people continue to suggest that saucers do not exist. Personally I have to say that I think that all of you saucer sceptics are all completely barmy for disregarding so much eye witness testimony. Whatever they may be, saucer shaped flying objects exist. Regarding your point on alien abductions. Yes, actually alien abductions appear to be a world wide phenomena. You suggest that the aliens want to keep it a secret. Now who is making the assumptions? How do we know that if aliens are here they really care if we know about them or not. Your suggestion that abductees should go the police is just totally proposterous. I suppose you would do that if it happened to you. Like hell you would..... You also make the assumption that we all want to believe in this alien thing. The fact is that I have been interested in UFOs for many years but some aspects of the subject concern me. Personally, I would be quite happy if the mystery did not exist. One final point! You say that aliens are simply modern day ghosts. I realise that ghosts are probably best discussed in the Paranormal forum and they hopefully will be. However, there are similarities here. From my point of view ghosts, like saucers, are 100% real. Believe me, I know! This is one area of the paranormal that I have had first hand experience of over many years now and on many occasions. What they are not, in my opinion, are the spirits of dead people. There is a scientific explanation for ghosts that we may one day understand. The point being this. Certain people simply will not believe in the possible existence of such things and arrogantly dismiss accounts from thousands and thousands of eyewitnesses to such events. Huge numbers of these eyewitnesses come from professional backgrounds and in a court of law they would be looked upon as excellent witnesses. These people have nothing to gain and everything to lose by reporting such things. Why then do their numbers continue to grow day by day? How can you completely disregard what these people say? [This message has been edited by Spadge (edited July 15, 1999).]
Spadge, Eyewitnes accounts just won't do in this case I'm afraid. That is just the point, our senses can decive us and if they don't our brain will. Do you know how many people saw the virgin Mary in the cave in Lourdes - France ? I believe their numbers are increasing as well, do you know how many people saw Jezus walk on water ? Or multiply fish and bread ? You just can't go about and believe everything that people say. You say that eventually one will find a scientific explanation for all these things like ghosts and ufos but that is not how it works. You see these things lie outside the logical construct of science with a reason, they are the aspects of the eternal mystery that fascinates us since the first man wondered where all the lights in the sky came from. You don't really think the stories will end when man is able to reach for the stars himself ? They will just change form but they will be there, may be it won't be flying sausers any more but interdimensional visitors popping in and out our universe for a brief visit... ------------------ we are midgets standing on the backs of giants, Plato
Spadge, Sorry for not spotting your post sooner, in response read my post on electrical hypersensitivity.
Plato I admit that I was talking from a purely personal standpoint in my above post. I know that to prove the existence of these things conclusively we need to use scientific methods. However, science can deny the existence of saucer shaped craft for as long as it wants to but personally I am willing to believe the testimony of the vast numbers of my fellow men on what they saw. I guess this is the main point on which we differ. Obviously you are quite right in saying that it is easy to be deceived by what you see but the fact that huge numbers of sightings have occurred in broad daylight at close range by professional people is proof enough for me that these things are out there. You must admit that this situation is different to the Lourdes issue. Regarding ghosts, I do maybe think that in the future we might be able to prove that ghosts exist. Although it would not be until after our next big leap fowards in our understanding of the universe. We've already got many tried and trusted scientific methods to prove the existence of UFOs at our fingertips. Unfortunately, for a number of reasons which we've disccussed elsewhere, the research is not being done. Or not enough of it anyway. Anyway, for all we know the existence of these things is already accepted by certain governments. I'm not so sure that we will ever be able to go beyond proving their existence. The truth behind may for ever be hid from us. Remember the Monkey and the Coke can analogy? [This message has been edited by Spadge (edited August 07, 1999).]
Spadge, I`d like to hear about your tried and trusted techniques of proving the existence of UFO`s with ET origins. As far as I am aware there are none, only the apparent witness accounts of human beings from this planet. The main point I have to say is that human beings, to a certain extent, are notorious liars at the best of time. With the onset of TV, even honest people will over dramatise events just to get thier fifteen minutes of fame. I`m not saying," everbody is a liar", and I`m not saying," every abductie or UFO sighting witness is over dramatising what they saw or what they claim happened to them." But, popular culture, in the west, is hungry for the UFO, alien grey phenomena, and there are to many people willing and wanting to feed the beast. Too many TV corporations exploiting the human eagerness to believe. I personally will not be herded like a human sheep, I will not be absolved by mass belief. Until an alien knocks on my front door and says hello, as far as I`m concerned they do not exist. Like I said before, read my post on electrical hypersensivity. This I believe explains all. [This message has been edited by Mike (edited August 10, 1999).]
About through investigation in the ufo syndrome, you must admit that this would cost huge amounts of money. This is the problem, in order to make people spend this money they must first be convinced it is a worthwhile investment and as long as there is no good evidence for these things, that is very hard. So we have the old vicieus circel again... Spadge, about the Lourdes analogy, I don't know if we can just pretend that the professionals that you are talking about and the religious people in the South of France are two totally different groups. First of all, what are they professional in ? Some kind of technical job ? So what is the difference between the perception of a shoe mender and a rocket scientist ? Their brain is subject to the same impulses and misdirections but their interpretation of these impulses might differ in as one saw just another spacecraft and the other saw a messenger of God... ------------------ we are midgets standing on the backs of giants, Plato
As a trained skeptic and scientist, I have to put my two cents-worth into this debate. First, regarding proving the existence of aliens scientifically, I refer you to my August 14th post, "get a clue train...all aboard". To sum-up that post, science cannot prove anything, but only disprove things. Therefore, there is and will never be any scientific 'proof' that aliens exist. At best, there will be data 'supporting the hypothesis that aliens exist'; I kid you not, this is science jargon. As a scientist, I am also an empiricist. Now I bow to Plato's questions of reality and perception; this philosophical debate has been hot since the time of his namesake. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that empirical experience is not only possible, but trustworthy. The difference between believers and skeptics (in my opinion) then comes from the ANALYSIS of a given empirical experience. This is were the grey matter truly is. When one observes something that experience gives no rational explanation, one must then use logical extensions of their experience to identify and/or explain the event. In other words, your previous experiences dictate the analysis of current/future experiences. Let me give some examples... 1) Mermaids, griffins, unicorns, etc. were all accepted to exist in Western History; many learned peoples documented sightings of these critters. 2) There are probably over 100 recognized religions (and franchises thereof) currently practiced in the world today. All of which have practicioners that swear there way is the 'one-way'. 3) In almost all cases, the idea that something SHOULD exist precedes its discovery. This also holds true for science. There are even some philosophical debates that suggest (quite well) that observed reality is preceded by the idea that such reality should be. In the end, it comes to this. Two (200, 2000, 2-million) may see the same event that does not fit into their previous empirical experience; the explanations of that event will probably vary with the number of witnesses. Believers by their nature will accept their personal explanations as truth, while skeptics will question that truth. This is all fine and good when the believers and skeptics agree to compare notes, but as usually is the case with humans, emotions get involved. In summary, skeptics should question the issues and respect the individual, and believers should behave the same way. Under this context, a true dialectic is possible. For the record, I view skepticism as not disbelief, but doubt. I doubt any evidence of the existance of aliens, while at the same time question whether it can be possible that we are alone in the universe. I guess, I am an permanent post-sitter. -Bitsy ------------------ Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. -Mark Twain
Plato, you list in your interests philosophy However, you have not only misquoted in your signature but you have the completely the wrong person too. It was Isaac Newton who said "If I have seen further, it was by standing on the shoulders of giants". Unless Plato you are referring to yourself, Plato the software engineer ofcourse??? ------------------ You know it to be so
My dear Matt, It was indeed Isaac Newton whose quote I'm using in my signature, I'm glad you figured that out ! That is only to show my high estime for the great 17th century physisist and I simply liked the quote. I don't see why my Plato-alias should have anything to do with this. Does everything has to be the same way as you see things ? Then I'm happy to have messed up your esthetical view on how a good posting should look like. Yes, by 'Plato' in the signature I don't mean the Philosopher but my humble self, having made the post, not the quote, besides the quote is not exactly the same as Newton's so technically it is not from him, besides I didn't put it between 'quotes'. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ------------------ we are midgets standing on the backs of giants, Plato [This message has been edited by Plato (edited August 16, 1999).]
Pookums, You are very true in saying that emotions sometimes (all the time?) come in the way in debates between believers and non-believers. As a scientist you should now that even in the scientific community these 'primitive hormonic extravagances' show up from time to time, it is only human I'm afraid. Still dialoge is needed to keep the focus on reality, a priori disregarding each observation is as foolish as believing each crazy story that comes along. ------------------ we are midgets standing on the backs of giants, Plato
