UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?
- Thread starter Magical Realist
- Start date
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
I didn't start this thread. James R did. He too likes to attack the strawman of "aliens" because it's just so much damn easier to disprove aliens than ufos.
Last edited:
Nooooo
The sun existed
The god part didn't
Those who worshipped the sun as god couldn't see the difference
Again nooooo
Everybody knows UFOs exist
They are called Unidentified Flying Objects
They are not called FAS Flying Alien Spacecraft
You don't have to prove all sighted objects are ufos.
Nobody does anything like that
Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
What's so important about hillbillies seeing shit?
You don't know what "compelling accounts" would look like, if they're there at all they're hidden behind your masses of confabulations.
So what's the deal with Hillbillies ?
To your last statement , what evidence do you have that these 700 unsolved cases are in fact " masses of confabulations " ?
Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
Sorry, but 700 "sightings" is chump change. But if you want to insist that they're Unidentified Flying Ostriches, that's fine. You have to right to look like a fool if you so chose.
Chump change ? Compared to what ?
Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
Really?
Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
Okay, so you know next to nothing about the topic. That's fine.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Hillbillies? Who said just hillbillies see ufos? Do you have a prejudice against poor country people?
Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
I was born in rural Missouri, Chuckles. Hordes of dumbasses whose only reason for existing is to get probed by aliens.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
I was born in rural Missouri, Chuckles. Hordes of dumbasses whose only reason for existing is to get probed by aliens.
So how many hillbillies did you know who saw ufos?
Why do you presume this ?
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Tyson is just parroting the standard gripe of every other ufo denialist---no proof the ufo is of alien origin, therefore the ufo doesn't exist. How can a man of science obviously curious about the wonders of the universe take the position of not studying these things we have thousands of accounts of and video of and photos of? He says we SHOULD be studying these things, and then acts indifferent about what they are. They are just unknown OBJECTS he claims, variables without definition. Problem is the ufo has to be a real knowable thing. It's on video. The pilot said one of them looked like a 40 ft tic tac! That's not just anything. It's a specific something that has typical characteristics seen thousands of times over the past 70 years and which has tremendous implications for our species. Go back to studying outer space Neil, at least until you've cracked a book or two on the very earthbound and hugely evidenced ufo phenomenon.
Last edited:
Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
Not going to bother with your questions.
MR ;
Perhaps Neil is cracking the egg on the information on UFO's . Perhaps Neil is doing what Carl Sagan did many yrs. ago .
Sometimes , sometimes ... some people give a hint to the truth on this matter , and have to do so because .....of life .
Clearly you didn't listen to what he said. He specifically said there was something there, it is unidentified, and he is glad the military investigated it. Since they closed down the program in 2012, clearly there was no identified threat.
Tyson also clearly says that there is no evidence that the object in the video is an alien spacecraft, which is, of course, correct.
He also takes some time in the video to urge people like you, Magical Realist, to grab your video cameras and to colllect some truly "compelling" footage of aliens, rather than this fuzzy unidentifiable crap you keep offering up.
He explains why in the video clip. Weren't you listening? Didn't you bother watching it? Is it all just cut and paste for you, then you think you're done?
He reaches the sensible conclusion that the evidence is insufficient to conclude that this has anything to do with aliens.
That "U" in UFO means unidentified. Once you've identified it as an alien spaceship, or a drone, or a fly on the windshield, then it's a real, known thing. Not before.
Something's on the video. We don't know what it is. That doesn't, by the way, mean the Pentagon doesn't know what it was. They decided it was not a threat. Why? You don't know.
We can all see what it looks like on the video. We don't need the second-hand account. We have access to the same information as the pilot, in terms of visuals.
You mean that lots of people have reported vague cigar-shaped things in the sky over the years, along with saucer-shaped things, triangle-shaped things, ill-defined-shaped things, disc-shaped things, donut-shaped things, etc. etc.
What makes you imagine that this has any important implications for "our species"? Maybe it has implications in study of psychology, or perceptions, of certain members of our species, but beyond that there's nothing much to say.
Go back to wasting your time trawling youtube for fuzzy videos, until you're ready to switch on your brain to learn how to think critically about UFO phenomena.
The best evidence of UFO's is always the older photo's . From the early 60's late 50's . Because none of this photo manipulation was possible , if done extremely difficult and rare .
Books on the topic , the same . Much , much less redaction .
Neil is a conservative at heart which most scientists are . No surprise here . And quite frankly has to be , his job and reputation are on the line .
But the " SHOULD " in post #396 could be a hint , a slight turn in the straight road of mainstream science on the UFO topic .
Books on the topic , the same . Much , much less redaction .
Neil is a conservative at heart which most scientists are . No surprise here . And quite frankly has to be , his job and reputation are on the line .
But the " SHOULD " in post #396 could be a hint , a slight turn in the straight road of mainstream science on the UFO topic .
Last edited: