Great UFO documentary

Easy, dawg. I don't think I'm any kind of hard-core believer, so don't put me in that group, thanks. It's just that all that blackout for a cheapass balloon sensor, surely hugely outdated by now, seems kind of strange. I'm not really sure how it would be bad for us if the Russians - no longer the USSR - or the Chinese found out what we were doing in the 40's. Hell, the Brits and Americans were so badly penetrated like a decade later that one wonders what the point would be. I wonder if it would be worth looking at the blacked-out pages themselves to see if there's any kind of grammatical room for something like that.

I do; but I'm also looking to see if it's so in other sources.

Well, actually that's the competing hypothesis, so it's not that ludicrous. This iss the counter-argument.

Ah-ah-ah: calm down. Put it this way: if FTL travel is so insanely impossible, why is there so much interest in it? It can't work? Bit too early to completely count it out: they laughed at the natives who said they'd seen Columbus pull up in his ships too. Let's have a gander. What's to lose?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Perhaps we're not only talking about balloon sensors. Perhaps we're talking about means for spying on them, or our own people. Or maybe there was some other nefarious shit going down that they'd rather we didn't know about. It's obviously an interesting topic, but it doesn't have anything to do with ET.

Please share if you find anything.

No, this is not the competing hypothesis. It's a conspiracy theory imagined by crackpots and conspiracy junkies chasing a thrill. Nobody with a grain of integrity takes this seriously.

No offense intended, of course. Unless you happen to take this seriously. In which case, offense intended. You should know better.

Non-sequitur, obviously, and the study of FTL travel does not mean it will be ultimately achievable. But of course I'm not saying I know whether or not it's possible. I'm saying there's no reason at all to believe that ET has visited, and the implausibility of FTL travel is just one of many reasons to hold that opinion.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

...for a professional debunker, perhaps
yeah
one who assumes, for some self serving purpose that et, by default, has to originate from the furthest possible point.

to whit....

Gliese 581 d (play /ˈɡliːzə/) or Gl 581 d is an extrasolar planet orbiting the star Gliese 581 approximately 20 light-years away in the constellation of Libra. It is the third planet discovered in the system and the fifth in order from the star.

Because of its mass, at least 5.6 times that of Earth the planet is classified as a super-Earth. Originally believed to be outside the habitable zone, in late April 2009 new observations made by the original discovery team concluded that the planet is on the outskirts of the habitable zone where liquid water may exist. In May 2011 researchers in France released a study of a three-dimensional climate simulation concluding that it is plausible that the planet has a stable atmosphere and liquid water on the surface, concurring that it is the first discovered terrestrial-mass exoplanet in the habitable zone, followed by HD 85512 b several months later.


so ahh...the mother ship was launched from gliese 60 years ago, got here in 30 traveling at speeds close to that of light. they skulk behind shit and send their scout ships to fuck with us and do anal probes

kinky little bastards!

mmm
such fanatical conviction

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

cant stuff be just matter of fact?
why emote about it?

as far as ease/discomfort goes, the physical aspect may be unavoidable but there would be a substantial variance in psychological expression of those two "feelings"

consider infants vs adults and the necessity of certitude
one's next meal perhaps

 

Love how you just gloss over the trouble of an object traveling "close to light speed." Also, love how you simply assume that a planet in a hospitable zone has a spacefaring civilization.

And there's nothing fanatical about saying that UFOs are not ETs. Until you show me some evidence to the contrary, there's no reason to believe they aren't just like every other myth.

 

I'm not sure we have much choice about the matter - we emote about facts, it seems to come automatically.

Sure, but I am interested in the principle behind all this.

Uncertainty comes with a feeling of un-ease; and when we feel unease, we want to ease that. We tend to do that either by seeking certainty, to remove doubt; or by numbing ourselves.

 

Well, to change the topic somewhat—the documentary's first footage of "real, never-seen-before" UFOs was interesting in that the lit-up blobs of light casually crossing the sky, and the whole thing lasting under a minute, was so very much atypical of 1950's sensationalism—that's the sort of thing we're seeing today on YouTube.

 

That's right. I haven't made any specific claims and you are already hostile and forming conclusions based on your own expectations and biases. So after recieving your hostile pm accusing me of lacking a backbone, I decided to take look. I do respond to these threads, I just don't choose to waste all my time arguing with people who are irrationally hostile.

So are you capable of having a rational discussion, or do we just argue about your preconceived conclusions about my position?

I linked to the thread where you simply ignore the facts. If you are incapable of understanding the problem with your position on even this simple matter, then it isn't worth wasting my time trying to talk with you. I provided not only a link to a famous "encounter" in Africa, I also pointed out that there are many thousands of hits for African UFO reports. Your assumption is that these don't exist. That is simply irrational. You can say they're all crap, but the reports still exist, which was the point.

Are you denying the reports exist, or not?

 

By "irrationally hostile," you mean "someone who makes me back up my bluster?" Because that's all I've done. You talk a lot of facts--who has them, who is ignoring them--but you never get specific. I'm simply asking you to get specific.

Again, what "facts" did I ignore in that thread? This is what I'm asking you. To review, someone posed a question (the entire topic title was halved, so the question was not fully realized) essentially why we see certain urban myths in some parts of the world but not others. He cited as an example, which I do not hold to be accurate, that we "see more ghosts and evil spirits in Africa than Europeans and Americans."

I replied that it was because these things (specifically UFOs) are a cultural phenomenon, not unlike the Chupacabra of South America, or Bigfoot of the US.

What facts am I ignoring here? Are you contending that UFOs aren't a cultural phenomenon?

As for the Ruwa "incident," it reeks of hoax. All one has to do is look at the children's drawings to know that they're just drawing what they think UFOs are supposed to look like--there's no continuity to them, no similarities that would make you think that they represented a shared experience. You had traditional saucers, bubble-top saucers, upside down bowls, roundish things with jagged legs, etc.. It's a hoax.

I would like to see some independent confirmation of these reports before I agree to anything (considering that, from what I can tell, they all seem to come third-hand from crackpot UFO blogs or shows like "Sightings," which you linked to in another thread.

But if you're asking if I think it's possible for UFO sightings to occur in Africa? Sure I do. There are lights in the sky, and people on the ground (in certain areas) who have seen movies and TV shows depicting aliens and their spaceships. I would not be surprised if people "saw" things like they do here.

 

Indeed. Imagine the Earth, if there had been no extinction of dinosaurs. Intelligent life may still develop, but it might take a lot longer, and require a minor, local extinction, or challenge for resources, so it can prosper. Imagine again, the Earth, and it was Neanderthals that prevailed. Imagine again, the Earth, and the Black Death mutating into a more pernicious disease. All things that can change or set back progress. Of course, even a planet that developed intelligent life early on, and had no major set backs, would have trouble with near light speed travel, their evolution might differ, but relativity still applies.

I hate the term UFO. Too often the pro-ET camp hide behind it, playing some probability game, that if all items cannot be identified, a % could be extra-terrestrial. It's a 'god of gaps' argument applied to ETs.

 

Exactly.

Again, exactly. Also, I think the term UFO is used too loosely. Just because some local yokel doesn't know what the lights are over his house doesn't mean the object is unidentified. It might very well be a blimp, or a helicopter, or a jet, or a balloon, or something else entirely accounted for.

 

So you're assuming everything is accountable?

 

phlog and jdawg wander the cosmos begging for scraps with their half empty tin cans

/smirk

 

phlog refutes himself...

* There is a gap in understanding of some aspect of the natural world.
* Therefore the cause must be supernatural.

...with "could be"

what a yokel

/snort

red herring

sputnik and the space race had cultural ramifications
arpanet revolutionized culture

are you contending the military is not a cultural phenomenon and thus a figment of yokel imagination?

/suitably dumbed down

 

Ultimately? Yes. Be it a weather phenomenon like ball lightning, a super-secret spyplane, or just a low-flying passenger jet, everything you see in the sky can be accountable.

Now, that isn't to say that everything will be. But everything can be.

 

You're not following. I'm not saying the lights in the sky aren't real, I'm saying that they're not aliens, and that the assumption that they are is a cultural phenomenon.

 

that should read.....are you contending the military is a cultural phenomenon and thus a figment of yokel imagination

assigning the "attributes: of a cultural phenomenon to ufos necessarily preclude an et origin

that is what you pull out of your ass
case in point....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

..the evidence against an et origin of some ufos

 

I understood what you meant. That was one of the few times you've actually managed to string together a complete sentence, so it stood out.

See, I got excited for a moment, because your posts were at least somewhat intelligible prior to this. Now I'm lost. What exactly are you trying to say here?

 

hmm..........*&I&%*&%#^%^%#%*)(

hows that?

 

That's about what I'd expect, yeah.