The Thing about UFOs...

It is possible that electrafixtion believes there is another technological race on the planet who are hidden to most of us. Since it is of terrestrial origin it would not be alien. Equally it would be non-human.

If this interpretation is correct then electrafixtion would not have been lying. He would, however, have been doing something equally unethical. Such an interpretation - a non-human Earth originating technology/civilisation - is so far out in left field it is mandatory that the proposer state clearly what they mean. It should not be left to the reader to guess what they mean.

If this is the explanation then I recommend that electrafixtion be banned for a substantial period - say one month - for deliberate time wasting.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, I would say that.... it certainly seems to me that the earth is floating around the sun, so i think it is safe to assume that flying Saucers could use this same type of force to fly around earth. It also seems likly that aliens from another world would figure out the same thing, so then it is plasuable that aliens mastered this force and have traveled space.

DwayneD.L.Rabon

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What is the Earth floating in?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well it appears to be space.


DwayneD.L.Rabon

 

Space has no mass that I know of. Floating is a process of a lighter object being suspended and supported in a denser fluid. What is the fluid of space? Is it really more dense than the Earth? How do spacecraft penetrate it?

 

The "arrogant titan that is Oli" (who happens to be arrogant due being right far, far more often than he's wrong) stated that F-22 "has NEVER been a black project". Not as a "finished and named project" - but NEVER.
From the moment it was announced that there would be a follow-on to F-15 (for example the link you gave on ATF history) there have been regular (monthly, sometimes weekly) updates in the aviation press.
Balck projects are denied to even exist, let alone have cut-away drawings published practically everytime someone reconfigures the control surfaces.

Its technologies?
Stealth was a proven technique by the time F-22 was on the drawing board.
If it's a "FACT" then provide evidence (by which I mean something other than your own word).

And ever since he said it, it's been a rallying cry for woo woos who wish to substitute imagination for knowledge

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Without knowledge imagination is futile, that's the part the woo woos don't understand.

 

Sounds like opinion to me.

You need a healthy dose of both, and thats the part trolls dont understand. Just because you personally havent seen or are simply unable to perceive something does not exclude it from reality; just YOUR reality.

 

Much as Einstein's comment was, neh?

Ah, you see?
Doesn't my statement imply that?

Now you're being obtuse, forgetful or deliberately silly.
I have stated several times in this sub-forum (and possibly even in this thread) that I have seen a UFO.

 

Ahem. In a science forum, those that advocate pseudoscientific and anti-scientific ideas are the "trolls."

I've seen several UFOs. I'm just not shouting, "woo-woo!" over them since I realize that just because I don't know what I saw I also have no reason to think they were something so significant as to think they were "non-human" (read alien/ET) in origin or that there is some vast conspiracy of anti-gravity tech being perpetrated.

 

Meh. He's not coming back. He had his ass handed to him through logic and reason and refused to acknowledge all attempts to help him with an education. We can only hope, however, that this thread will get noticed by less indoctrinated believers who will read several pages back and see where many attempts were made to help electrafixtion and one or more other woo-woo's formulate logical and reasoned arguments.

Its one thing to argue for non-human explanations for UFOs but its another entirely to do it so badly.

Of course, having read this post, he'll fall right into my trap and post again. Most likely, he'll be so angry and emotional that he'll do it quickly and won't bother re-reading the post he quoted and miss this paragraph altogether.

 

Hey SkinWalker
Keep your hands off my ass, and no, even if you do offer me a silver platter, you ain't havin' yer way with me you masher! I have heard via the SciForums pink triangle activists forum that Oli could use a little attention though, if ya know what I mean?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Well, I see you and your stooges are at it again. Nice (and fitting an example of yer logical skillz) that you waited for me to disappear to do so. (can you see these 3 little fat stubby bald guys running around in lab coats, getting dizzy, running into each other and exclaiming, "but, I have proof you're wrong" ?)

Too bad not one of those examples was a lie there Skinny ol' boy. They don't even demonstrate an "intent to confuse" which in your case could mean a capitol offense. Look up the definition of lie in the dictionary oh great moderator sir. If you need one, I might just have one of those "little scholar" dictionaries left laying around from when my youngest was in the third grade. What a maroon!

 

First you said UFOs were non human, then you say you didn't claim they were ET/alien.

Which is it?
If non human technology doesn't imply aliens, then.

Clearly you meant aliens, but if now you're claiming there exists a secret civilisation, I'm eager to discuss!

 

SkinWalker
OK, lets begin a real discussion if possible. I am all too full aware that you are exceptionally intelligent, and NO that is not placation. Nor is it the blowing of smoke up yer wazoo. It is however to say that there could be an actual benefit to BOTH of us here if we will meet each other's "terms". My only proposed term to you SkinWalker is that you will dismiss peer derived empirical prejudice as that which excludes expert eyewitness testimony as a more than worthy consideration for that which constitutes proof. I am not asking you to just accept this evidence as proof, but rather to CAREFULLY weigh and consider it as proof. I don't really believe you have. Proof that clearly demonstrates that some UFOs, and as I have always contended, not all, are in fact represent of non human technology according to these witnesses. This for me constitutes proof positive. Then we can continue an intelligent discussion. What is your singular most important requirement from me? "Logic" in and of itself is a flawed answer because I have clearly demonstrated absolute logic throughout the process of forwarding my convictions concerning UFOs via this thread. In fact, I consider it more than illogical to contend otherwise.

 

Please define or elaborate on what you mean by "non-human."

 

I already have quite implicitly and you know it. If an expert witness that is highly familiar with earth based space craft, sees an object up close (relatively speaking) in space and states that it is "extraterrestrial in origin", whether that objects is inter dimensional (non-human) or from another specific physical location and/or species (non-human), either way the technology is non-human. What is your point?

I have always contended that the technology that is being observed by many the world over is both man made and non human. I simply believe there is more than sufficient evidence to conclude that some of said observed technology is non human.

 

If I knew it, I wouldn't have asked for the clarification. And I only ask since you've objected to equating "non-human" with "alien," but clearly if we are to accept that "non-human" is the result of extraterrrestrial or "inter dimensional" (whatever that is), then they are "alien" in the nicest and most conservative definitions of the word.

And, since you objected so vociferously the last time I used the word "alien," I wanted to be clear on what you meant by "non-human."

My point is the alleged object is either alien, from Earth, a delusion, a misperception, a lie, or a hoax. Being an "expert" (a subjective and loaded term to begin with) doesn't exclude the individual from the rest of the human race and its fallibility.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and an anecdote as evidence barely rises to mediocre.

You'r contention hasn't been born out nor has it been shown to be valid. You've not demonstrated sufficient evidence. An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. You can speculate all you want, but when it comes time to making the claim, it helps to have good reason. There simply is no good reason to believe that the UFOs people have sighted over the years are alien or "inter-dimensional" particularly when there are perfectly good explanations that require far fewer assumptions.

There are too many instances where "expert witnesses" have been shown to be deluded, lying, or otherwise misperceiving situations, events and phenomena to simply throw up our arms, throw in the towel to scientific method and start shouting the sky is falling and the aliens are here.

If you really want to have an intelligent discussion, address the essay I wrote on memory embellishment, show how "expert witnesses" should automatically be taken at their word prima facie, or find real evidence that is in the "extraordinary" category for your very, very extraordinary claims.

 

vociferously<-----NO FAIR, this word scared me!

Seriously, point taken, but I have explained this many times in this thread. I keep trying to emphasize that my formed opinions and subsequent knowledge of this phenomenon are based on careful consideration and not whims. The same is true of the "non-human" partial attribution to UFOs.

Here is where we part company with respect to the value and reliability of what is expert testimony. Expert testimony is not based solely upon a person's scientific or experience gathered perspective alone. It's based on his credibility as a witness in specific conditions that attribute a far greater than average quality to said individual's testimony. In fact that individuals testimony must be referenced as being contextually located within the most pristine nature of flawless aptitude. In the case of Gordon Cooper we have an astronaut that has been proved to be in prime physical and mental condition at the time of his witnessed sighting in space. He literally wore equipment monitoring his vitals that would impulsively relay the most minute out of parameter breaches that were considered a hindrance to his accurate perception and performance capabilities. Astronauts and high level military pilots do not become what and who they are classified as being by choice alone. They must withstand exceedingly rigorous testing that insures their reliability in the most stressful and demanding of conditions. Such people do in fact represent testimony that is extraordinary and irrefutable to say the least. Their proved contextual coherency as expert witnesses makes this so.

I apologize as I am out of time at work. I will do my level best to respond when I have a chance later this weekend. Thanks for your consideration.

 

Hardly my fault I'm attractive to everyone.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

But you've also demonstrated admirably that you don't have sufficient knowledge to form such judgements.

 

To Skin and Oli,

Long time no talk.

After doing a lot of research on the Stephenville MUFON report I came to the following conclusions. I worked with several individuals on another site that could help with the radar data. This is what I posted there.

___________________________

So far in summary for me. There is a perpetual machine at work here that will never arrive at the truth. Great information from both of you brought up questions that I could not arrive at without your help and the help of others. The right questions get to the truth, answers without the right questions do not amount to much.

So if MUFON gets the data from the USAF nothing will change because if nothing improves the picture they will just say the USAF confirms their report and if something conflicts with it they will marginalize it.

But they are not going to get the data. So they can play the kid who doesn't want to fight but acts like he does while a friend holds him back. Then they continue to make themselves relevant.

The release of USAF data is an issue in itself due to national security issues, it would inform our enemies of our detection capabilities and our flight maneuvers.

The witness testimony whether true or not doesn't matter because we have no craft to observe.

The report is flawed but the FAA data is not. The FAA data does not actually reveal anything that mysterious with the possible exception of the change in speed while traveling SE towards Crawford, that however is also not useable because there are unknown factors per Mr Schulze that make it impossible to know if that change of speed ever occured. The other 2 radar hits to the north and then back to the south are a pure leap and therefore discounted as well because they can not be confirmed with the data they have.

As noted above we are not going to get anymore data.

The two F16s that were reported to chase the UFO is still an issue that is unresolved. Mainly because either they were not there or if they were they did not come back on radar. So it would be back to the witness testimony.

The leap to an ET craft is right out !

The witnesses say they saw something extrodinary but since the ET craft is not here so that we can see it again and know it exists in a tangible state, we can't make the leap that the object they stated they saw was an ET craft.

It is no real concern to me that the military initially botched the handling of the press. Everyone makes mistakes, they came back with the information and revealed there were planes in the area 2 weeks later. Excuse me 2 weeks and 1 day.

The UFO (non-transponder craft) continued within 10 miles of Crawford without interception, but since we can't prove what it was, we can't prove what it was not. Also, it should be noted that Crawford is still there.

One valuable piece of information on that issue would be to know how many craft without transponders and what percentage of those craft have been intercepted in the area. However, it would be difficult to get an accurate number because the military or any other institution is not likely to want to admit mistakes and again it would be information that could prove valuable to our enemies.

If the witnesses truly saw something out of this world then I am jealous and I feel a little sorry for them. The possiblity of 17+ people all seeing something astonishing and at the same time can not prove it or that it isn't even true, is just bizarre. I am not sure how that could happen but we already discussed that many things are possible.

The one big thing I came away with here is the issue surrounding the FOIA Freedom of Info Act. At what point do we stop as the public from intruding on what we do not want revealed and at the same time allow information to be released ? The FOIA does not work because the above question has not been resolved by our government.

Thanks for all the help, I am looking at these issues with a different lens one that is going to apply scrutiny a little more liberally and not to reach for the fantastic even though it's tempting. So tempting.

Take care
JA

The bottom line is without more data to be able to validate the possible change of speeds on the FAA radar data there is nothing. We are not going to get the data so the report is essentially useless other than the fact that they picked up a UFO (non-trans craft) flying an average of 50 mph and was not intercepted. As for what the witnesses saw ? fill in the blank.

 

Jpappl, you may be the most balanced intellectual skeptic I have ever seen.