Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Tanny on 22/10/2017 10:59:19
-
Are UFOs real? Are people who report sightings seeing something that is actually there? Or is this whole phenomena just a massive pile of confusion and hype?
I used to be a skeptic, because I've met a lot of spacey hippy types in my time who would believe literally anything, and so I assumed the UFO issue was just more of the same.
But, I'm an avid watcher of documentaries on the video streaming services (amazon, hulu and netflix), so for fun I started checking out the UFO documentaries. It won't surprise you to hear that most of these "documentaries" are just a pile of hyped up crap, which you could only enjoy if you were really stoned and wanted some laughs.
However, in the pile of crap I have found three quality documentaries which have changed my mind on this subject, and I thought I would link to them here to start a discussion.
Out Of The Blue
https://www.amazon.com/UFOTV-Presents-Blue-Definitive-Investigation/dp/B00M5KDGSQ/ref=sr_1_2?s=instant-video&ie=UTF8&qid=1508665260&sr=1-2&keywords=ufo
UFOs and Nukes
https://www.amazon.com/UFOs-Nukes-Secret-Link-Revealed/dp/B06XWPK9RK/ref=sr_1_3?s=instant-video&ie=UTF8&qid=1508665260&sr=1-3&keywords=ufo
UFOs The Secret History
https://www.amazon.com/UFOs-Michael-D-Swords-PhD/dp/B01N2NYFCE/ref=sr_1_13?s=instant-video&ie=UTF8&qid=1508665260&sr=1-13&keywords=ufo
If you are a skeptic like I used to be, I'd urge you to watch these films before demanding evidence and such, because these films are crammed with credible evidence. As example, I just finished UFOs and Nukes, and the entire thing is interviews with military officers with high security clearances, those with access to nuclear weapons. Point being, these are not spacey hippies or hillbillies drinking moonshine in the swamp etc.
What I'm not yet convinced of is that the UFOs are aliens from other planets. It seems far more likely to me that they are future humans who have discovered time travel. Yes, I know, that sounds wacky. But after you watch those three films you too will be looking for some explanation, and all of them will be wacky.
-
Out Of The Blue is on YouTube.
--------------
There are trailers for "UFOs and Nukes" on YouTube, but I don't see the full film. However, there is a 90 minute National Press Club press conference by some of the same people on the same subject.
----------------
UFOs The Secret History is on YouTube
-
The question that arises here is, how do we define credible evidence?
Do I have to see a UFO myself to believe they exist? Or am I willing to accept reports from other people? If the later, what quantity and quality of reports rise to the level of being credible? Who am I willing to believe?
What interested me about the three documentaries listed above is that they contained a substantial number of witnesses which seemed credible. Airline pilots, military pilots, air traffic controllers, the head of Belgium's air defense command, leading French national security officials, the Governor of Arizona, nuclear missile launch officers, nuclear missile repair techs, Russian and American astronauts, security guards at major nuclear weapons bases and so on.
Reports from the general public take on an air of credibility when multiple unrelated people at different locations report the same event at the same time. An example of this is the Phoenix Lights incidents. Hundreds of citizens in various parts of Phoenix Arizona were outside on a clear night with binoculars to see a passing comet. What they saw instead was a huge triangular craft move slowly and noiselessly over the city.
Sometimes credibility arises just by using our BS detectors while watching the faces of those making reports. Three security officers at a U.S. nuclear weapons base in England claimed to have walked up to and touched a small landed UFO. I leaned in to the TV and watched them closely while they reported the event. They just didn't seem like crackpots or liars to me, and it's doubtful they would have had those jobs if they were.
And then, a tiny UFO flew up my nose, took over my brain, and flashed an important message from Elvis, which I can't reveal because it's highly classified!!!
Well, ok, not that last part. Just testing to see if anyone is paying attention. :-)
-
After you watch the videos above you may find yourself asking...
What if the UFO believers are basically right (that something extraordinary is going on) and....
...the science community has turned up it's nose and rolled it's eyes at this subject all along, considering the topic beneath it's dignity to discuss?
What would happen to the cultural authority of scientists if undeniable proof of "aliens" on our planet should emerge? The biggest story in human history, and the scientists missed it, because they refused to look. How would that impact the reputation of science?
Wait, it gets worse. Should this happen, not only will the science community be shown to have ignored this huge phenomena, but there will be new higher ranking experts in town, the "aliens", or future humans, or whatever they are. What would our relationship with scientists be if there was another source of much better information?
I'm not saying this will happen, obviously I don't know. But it seems a very interesting cultural question to wonder what would happen if it did.
-
Hello, and welcome back to the most popular forum thread of all time. Well, I mean, if we count all the aliens who are reading this thread via telepathy. :-)
Seriously, today I wanted to discuss my primary reservation about the UFO aliens hypothesis. Why is it ALWAYS assumed that whoever is piloting the UFOs are alien lifeforms from somewhere across the galaxy???
It's credible to propose that there are alien civilizations which can do interstellar travel, because there could easily be civilizations a billion years older than us. But why would such creatures be interested in us?
Second, those who claim to have seen aliens always describe them as having a humanoid form. What are the chances that an alien species from across the galaxy would have evolved in to a humanoid type form?? As example, of all the millions of species to evolve on Earth, how many of them have a humanoid type form??
If the UFO phenomena is real, isn't it far more likely that we are being visited by future humans? All this theory requires is that we learn time travel at some point in human history. Future humans would be interested in us, and would likely have a humanoid type physical form.
As I watch the documentaries listed above, I find myself increasingly frustrated that this theory is never even mentioned. It makes me question the reasoning powers of everyone involved, and keeps some level of skepticism alive.
-
Now that I can post links I've updated a post above so that you can watch the videos I'm referring to right here in the thread. Of course no one is obligated to do so, but if you don't watch the vids, you just might miss the most important story in human history. Just sayin... :-)
If you don't watch the videos, it might be because the scientific community has not put their stamp of approval on this subject. The reason for that is that the UFO issue is a lose/lose proposition for scientists.
1) If no UFOs or aliens exist, then obviously a scientist would be wasting their time, and suffering a credibility hit as well. The scientist loses.
2) If aliens do exist here on Earth, then a much more powerful source of information about reality may soon be available, which will deflate the cultural authority that scientists enjoy today. The scientist loses here too.
The only way the UFO story is a winner for scientists is if it's a bunch of nothing, and the scientists can say "we told you so". Investigating the issue raises the risk that it might turn out not to be a bunch of nothing, so, no investigation.
Is there conclusive proof that can settle the UFO question once and for all? Obviously not. Is there sufficient evidence available to justify taking the UFO issue more seriously than we typically do? Imho, yes, there is. To see that evidence, watch the videos.
-
Are UFOs real?
Are UFO's real? I do not think anyone says they are not real, however unidentified playing a key role here. We have not really established flying saucers. Are flying saucers real? Unproven.
p.s 90% are ''trolls'' on here, just bored with life and nothing better to do.
-
p.s 90% are ''trolls'' on here, just bored with life and nothing better to do.
Ha, I must be one of the 90% or I wouldn't be wasting so much time here. Ok, all forums are dead or dying, not news really. I just forget every so often. Well, it's time for me to be abducted back up in to the Mother Ship. Have fun all, see ya around...
-
p.s 90% are ''trolls'' on here, just bored with life and nothing better to do.
Ha, I must be one of the 90% or I wouldn't be wasting so much time here. Ok, all forums are dead or dying, not news really. I just forget every so often. Well, it's time for me to be abducted back up in to the Mother Ship. Have fun all, see ya around...
I think you would be in the 10% because quite clearly you do have an interest in science by the effort you put in. Forums are only dying because most of them have strange moderation and can be rather boring places to be involved in.
If forums want more viewers and participants it is not difficult to do. Competitions and sponsored prizes would get an interest.
-
Please address any further correspondence to me at my new location. Thank you.
(https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/B5D7/production/_91915564_ufo.jpg)
-
There's nothing essentially weird about a UFO report. All it means is that someone has seen something in the sky that he didn't expect and can't identify, which I guess is fairly commonplace.
Matters get more interesting when several people see the same thing and nobody can identify or explain it, and my interest is strongly piqued if said UFO (which it now clearly is, by definition) is independently observed by radar, photographed, experienced at close range, or tracked by observers over a significant time or distance. This puts the Bentwaters UFO into the "very interesting" category, alongside a 1998 Heathrow "near miss" UFO that was seen by two pilots but not reported by radar: given the intensity of radar scrutiny around Heathrow, that is decidedly odd.
-
What's turning me around and making me more open to the UFO topic is the sheer volume of reports from credible sources. The videos above are filled with them, and after awhile it becomes increasingly difficult to dismiss them all.
There are different levels of the story to consider.
I'm now pretty much convinced that there are objects flying around which no one can identify. I see enough evidence to justify leaning hard in that direction.
But the question of who or what is directing these craft seems entirely open, and I'm still quite suspicious of theories like "it must be aliens from another planet". I prefer a future humans theory, but there's nothing substantial to support that either. There's a lot of interesting speculation about who the pilots are, but so far it seems that's all it is.
The next level is the issue of abductions. I'm holding off on any opinion here, other than whatever the explanation for these reports is it seems to qualify as interesting. You know, even if it's just hallucinations it's a lot of hallucinations, so that seems interesting to me. As best I can tell, many or most of the people making these reports are very sincere, and they at least believe it happened, whether it did or not. There are Parts 2 and 3 of UFOs The Secret History which go in to this subject in a lot more detail.
-
It is easy to get carried away by the conspiracy noise that overwhelms rational thought.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendlesham_Forest_incident
-
If you want to search for information on science then the web is a good place to try first. You can fairly easily find something reliable. Trying the same to find ufo evidence is a total waste of time. That is the problem with conspiracy nuts. They polute the sources of reliable information. So if there is actually something unexplained and of interest it is buried in the haystack of nonsense.
-
What's turning me around and making me more open to the UFO topic is the sheer volume of reports from credible sources. The videos above are filled with them, and after awhile it becomes increasingly difficult to dismiss them all.
There are different levels of the story to consider.
I'm now pretty much convinced that there are objects flying around which no one can identify. I see enough evidence to justify leaning hard in that direction.
But the question of who or what is directing these craft seems entirely open, and I'm still quite suspicious of theories like "it must be aliens from another planet". I prefer a future humans theory, but there's nothing substantial to support that either. There's a lot of interesting speculation about who the pilots are, but so far it seems that's all it is.
The next level is the issue of abductions. I'm holding off on any opinion here, other than whatever the explanation for these reports is it seems to qualify as interesting. You know, even if it's just hallucinations it's a lot of hallucinations, so that seems interesting to me. As best I can tell, many or most of the people making these reports are very sincere, and they at least believe it happened, whether it did or not. There are Parts 2 and 3 of UFOs The Secret History which go in to this subject in a lot more detail.
It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself as opposed to view these videos critically.
-
It is easy to get carried away by the conspiracy noise that overwhelms rational thought. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendlesham_Forest_incident
One of the videos above (Out Of The Blue I think...) shows interviews with the primary witnesses, who claim to have walked around and touched a landed UFO for about 15 minutes. These witnesses were security personnel for a major nuclear weapons base, it was their job to investigate any possible threat to the base.
After watching the video, only two conclusions are possible. They saw the UFO as claimed, or they have been deliberately lying all along since the beginning. Their reports are too specific and in too much detail to be explained as a case of mis-identification, confusion, light house in the distance etc.
They either saw and touched a landed UFO, or they decided to risk years in prison to perpetrate a hoax upon their military superiors. It's one or the other.
As example, Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is probably soon going to get a long prison sentence, maybe life, for walking away from his unit in Afghanistan. The consequences for a military security officer on a nuclear weapons base perpetrating a UFO hoax while in uniform would likely be severe.
After watching the interviews with the primary witnesses I concluded they were telling the truth. I have no proof of course, all I have is 65 years of practice at smelling out BS on people's faces. Didn't see it in this case.
-
If you want to search for information on science then the web is a good place to try first. You can fairly easily find something reliable. Trying the same to find ufo evidence is a total waste of time. That is the problem with conspiracy nuts. They polute the sources of reliable information. So if there is actually something unexplained and of interest it is buried in the haystack of nonsense.
Well, the point of posting the videos above is to help readers focus on sources that seem credible. I agree there is a TON of BS hype in the UFO field, I really do, and have already said so above. But the BS is allowed to continue because the scientific community is apparently too chicken to do a serious investigation which could sweep much of the BS aside. The general public is now leading the investigation simply because the science community has abandoned their post, on this issue.
Point being, it's not a waste of time to look for credible UFO information, you apparently just haven't bothered to do the homework, even when handed to you on silver platter in this thread.
-
It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself as opposed to view these videos critically.
I'm reporting where I am at the moment on this issue, and have provided the information that brought me to my current perspective on the issue so that readers can examine it for themselves.
If readers actually watch the videos and still remain cynics, ok, that's their call, no problem. I'm not claiming the videos represent the absolute truth, only that they are worth watching. If readers don't bother to watch the videos and still want to act like they are critical thinkers who have examined the evidence, expect me to comment upon that.
What I am viewing critically in both of my threads (see the thread about Knowledge Explosion) is the scientific community. I have no personal beef with scientists, as they seem smart people of good intentions doing the job we hired them to do, and doing it well. However, it's quite possible they are totally dropping the ball on two of the biggest stories of our time, and that possibility seems worth examining.
-
doing the job we hired them to do, and doing it well.
So who are we? You claim that yourself is in involvement in the hiring of scientists, I assume you must be a politician?
-
They saw the UFO as claimed, or they have been deliberately lying all along since the beginning.
The problem you are ignoring is the very fact that if something is identified, it is no longer a UFO. So to claim to have touched a UFO is a lie.
-
So who are we? You claim that yourself is in involvement in the hiring of scientists, I assume you must be a politician?
We are the public, of whom I am a part.
-
The problem you are ignoring is the very fact that if something is identified, it is no longer a UFO. So to claim to have touched a UFO is a lie.
1) Have you watched the videos?
2) The UFOs in the story were (according to claims) touched, not identified.
-
The problem you are ignoring is the very fact that if something is identified, it is no longer a UFO. So to claim to have touched a UFO is a lie.
1) Have you watched the videos?
2) The UFOs in the story were (according to claims) touched, not identified.
I have watched possibly 100's of videos on UFO's in my time . Once you have seen one you have more or less seen them all.
I do not let videos corrupt my own mind and my own thoughts. If a person is touching something and I presume they can see, they can identify that something , so no longer is it a UFO. They can describe what they touched and give it meaningful context, i.e I touched what looked like a spaceship
Most videos of UFO's show unidentified somethings, the ones that get my interest is the ones that can change velocity. These are the ones that are of importance. Normal matter, e'g rocks , can not change velocity without Newtons laws applying, so if a UFO stops in flight, then there is something really suspicious about this and these could be controlled things.
-
So where are the Naked Scientists? Do they participate on their own forum? Hey, I'm not fussy, I'll even take scientists with their clothes on. How do we raise the game here? Isn't this a perfect environment for everyone including scientists to engage this issue? Everyone can participate anonymously so nobody needs to worry about their reputation and career etc, right?
I've done the homework of watching dozens of UFO videos and dismissing the junk so reader's time won't be wasted and we can focus on a few quality videos. One of those videos, UFOs The Secret History, was put together by an astro-physicist. A couple of astronauts share their belief in UFOs in both that video and Out Of The Blue. There's no good reason to dismiss these intelligent, educated, experienced people out of hand.
Anybody here know the Naked Scientists who own this site? As a place to start, how do we get them involved in this discussion? Why shouldn't this web site and the Naked Scientists be the leaders in engaging the scientific community in what could be the biggest story of all time? Somebody has to get that ball rolling, why not us?
Let's rescue this place from being just another little forum almost nobody pays any attention to.
-
I have watched possibly 100's of videos on UFO's in my time . Once you have seen one you have more or less seen them all.
Ok, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about so I'm gonna have to let you go. Sorry, no personal offense intended, but we either have to raise the game here or I need to be gone before I get bored and grumpy.
-
I have watched possibly 100's of videos on UFO's in my time . Once you have seen one you have more or less seen them all.
Ok, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about so I'm gonna have to let you go. Sorry, no personal offense intended, but we either have to raise the game here or I need to be gone before I get bored and grumpy.
Really? I am really the wrong person on this forum to try and pit wits against. Your threats to leave because you are bored is not a worry to anybody on this forum. Why do you think you are so special?
A few videos do not make facts. Facts make facts and axioms provide facts.
I think what you really mean is that if we speak science and involve Newton's laws etc, you won't get it. However if we turn this into a science fiction debate, then you being a trecky and all, you would understand it.
I know more about aliens than you could ever dream up and could provide far superior proof than you can.
-
UFO's are such a broad spectrum of objects, in a sense UFO's are real, just not in the way most people think. For example, someone seeing a silhouette of a helium balloon could interpret that as a UFO in nature, purely because they cannot fully make out what they are seeing, so in essence we know it is a helium balloon because we can see it in the light but a person viewing the aforementioned balloon from a mile away wouldn't know what it is if they saw it as a silhouette. So person A, who knows it is nothing more than a helium balloon can state that as a fact, but person B who is a mile away would believe it is an unidentified flying object and that would also be a fact. The two people who can see the same object but from a mile apart are both right if one only looks at it logically. Therefore the existence of UFO's is a reality but the jury is out if they are Alien in nature.
-
UFO's are such a broad spectrum of objects, in a sense UFO's are real, just not in the way most people think. For example, someone seeing a silhouette of a helium balloon could interpret that as a UFO in nature, purely because they cannot fully make out what they are seeing, so in essence we know it is a helium balloon because we can see it in the light but a person viewing the aforementioned balloon from a mile away wouldn't know what it is if they saw it as a silhouette. So person A, who knows it is nothing more than a helium balloon can state that as a fact, but person B who is a mile away would believe it is an unidentified flying object and that would also be a fact. The two people who can see the same object but from a mile apart are both right if one only looks at it logically. Therefore the existence of UFO's is a reality but the jury is out if they are Alien in nature.
Good answer atb, like I have being trying to explain to the opp.
However, I can show alien existence for real without the aid of you-tube videos. I have astounding axiom facts of logic. P=1
-
UFO's are such a broad spectrum of objects, in a sense UFO's are real, just not in the way most people think. For example, someone seeing a silhouette of a helium balloon could interpret that as a UFO in nature, purely because they cannot fully make out what they are seeing, so in essence we know it is a helium balloon because we can see it in the light but a person viewing the aforementioned balloon from a mile away wouldn't know what it is if they saw it as a silhouette. So person A, who knows it is nothing more than a helium balloon can state that as a fact, but person B who is a mile away would believe it is an unidentified flying object and that would also be a fact. The two people who can see the same object but from a mile apart are both right if one only looks at it logically. Therefore the existence of UFO's is a reality but the jury is out if they are Alien in nature.
Good answer atb, like I, have been trying to explain to the opp.
However, I can show alien existence for real without the aid of you-tube videos. I have astounding axiom facts of logic. P=1
Thanks! I have a good mind for this sort of thing. Please, could you tell me some of these axiom facts? I'm very intrigued.
-
UFO's are such a broad spectrum of objects, in a sense UFO's are real, just not in the way most people think. For example, someone seeing a silhouette of a helium balloon could interpret that as a UFO in nature, purely because they cannot fully make out what they are seeing, so in essence we know it is a helium balloon because we can see it in the light but a person viewing the aforementioned balloon from a mile away wouldn't know what it is if they saw it as a silhouette. So person A, who knows it is nothing more than a helium balloon can state that as a fact, but person B who is a mile away would believe it is an unidentified flying object and that would also be a fact. The two people who can see the same object but from a mile apart are both right if one only looks at it logically. Therefore the existence of UFO's is a reality but the jury is out if they are Alien in nature.
Good answer atb, like I, have been trying to explain to the opp.
However, I can show alien existence for real without the aid of you-tube videos. I have astounding axiom facts of logic. P=1
Thanks! I have a good mind for this sort of thing. Please, could you tell me some of these axiom facts? I'm very intrigued.
see other thread I started, it is an easy one to prove, quite brainless really doesn't take much thinking
-
Therefore the existence of UFO's is a reality but the jury is out if they are Alien in nature.
It seems there are two basic questions.
1) Are there non-human objects flying around the sky under intelligent control of some kind? This is typically what people mean by "UFO".
2) If the answer to #1 is yes, then what is the nature of the intelligent control? Aliens? Future humans? Beings from another dimension? Something else?
To me, just one vote, the videos listed above do a pretty compelling job of making the case for #1. But when it comes to #2 I see little beyond interesting speculation.
Imho, even if the entire phenomena can be explained as a case of mistaken identity, the scale of the mistake still merits serious investigation. Thus, I'm quite suspicious of any cultural consensus which suggests this is just a big bunch of nothing which isn't worth our time.
Finally, the logic math here is quite challenging. In order for skeptics to be right every single one of the thousands of UFO reports have to be wrong. In order for the UFO believers to be right, only one case needs to be a real UFO.
-
Are there non-human objects flying around the sky under intelligent control of some kind? This is typically what people mean by "UFO".
If I've read this right you mean non-human as in not human in nature? Or not manufactured by humans? If your answer is the former then I should think you can include drones, planes or just about anything in the sky we control, we are all an intelligent species. ( Some of us anyway)
My original statement still stands in this case;
So person A, who knows it is nothing more than a helium balloon can state that as a fact, but person B who is a mile away would believe it is an unidentified flying object and that would also be a fact. The two people who can see the same object but from a mile apart are both right if one only looks at it logically.
As for; In order for skeptics to be right every single one of the thousands of UFO reports have to be wrong. In order for the UFO believers to be right, only one case needs to be a real UFO.
How many of these reported UFO sightings were seen on a night, from far away or from someone looking up at a high altitude object? There is a simple answer to nearly all these cases, these are as follows;
- Night sightings - Most things that are ordinary in nature take on a darker hue on a night, people may think a simple object is a UFO, as much as that is right to you, someone may know what it is and thus they don't make the assumption that it is a UFO.
- Objects from far away & high altitude objects. - Fairly few people have eyesight that good. If they did then my statement still stands.
Again two people can state differing facts, ultimately they are right by means of what they see.
-
Well, ok, same question to you as to everyone else. Have you watched any of the videos listed above?
I ask because you don't yet seem to grasp the credibility of some of those making reports. Of course anyone, however credible, can make a mistake. But as the number of incidents and credible reporters begins to pile up it gets harder to dismiss them all.
I would agree that many or most cases are almost certainly to be mis-identification as you suggest. No problem there. But that doesn't solve anything.
The relevant question is, are _ALL_ of the cases mis-identifications, hoaxes or other false information? That's what skeptics have to claim. Every single case, wrong.
-
Are UFOs real? Are people who report sightings seeing something that is actually there? Or is this whole phenomena just a massive pile of confusion and hype?
If you're asking whether people have seen objects which are flying which they and nobody else could identify then yes, they exist. I know of at least one case I can count on - My own. However the UFO was so far in the distance in utter darkness on a very long straight highway in New Mexico I couldn't tell if it was flying or on the ground. We were driving along the highway and we never got close to it even though we sped up to 100mph for a while and slowed down to 30 mph for a while it never got further away.
Other than that Jimmy Carter, former president of the USA, also saw a UFO. I even recall one of NASA
's astronauts from the Apollo program seeing one. Then there's the case from Bentwaters AFB in England. The base commander himself reported seeing one along with fellow AFB men. On two consecutive nights if I recall correctly. What I regret about that instance is I was in the USAF at the time. I was originally assigned to that base and had I not had it changed to a base in the USA I could have been there when it happened. Then again I might have missed it altogether and have missed the one we saw on the highway that night. Careful for what you wish for. :)
Are they aliens? Who knows? I haven't seen any solid evidence of that. Are the humans in advanced spaceships sent back in time from the year 9743? Ya got me. But I find it awfully hard to accept that everyone who reports seeing something a liar or crackpot. There are just too many of them for that.
-
Finally, the logic math here is quite challenging. In order for skeptics to be right every single one of the thousands of UFO reports have to be wrong. In order for the UFO believers to be right, only one case needs to be a real UFO.
That doesn't mean that believers are more likely to be right than doubters: "In order for skeptics to be right, every single one of the thousands of free energy machine patents have to not work. In order for free energy believers to be right, only one needs to work."
-
Are they aliens? Who knows? I haven't seen any solid evidence of that.
Agreed. The alien theory is one of my primary complaints. Everyone seems to take it for granted that it's aliens from other worlds. I haven't seen any evidence that is the case other than people seem at a loss to come up with other explanations and so they've settled on this one. Even in the abduction stories, I can't recall anyone quoting the aliens as saying they were from planet XYZ.
But I find it awfully hard to accept that everyone who reports seeing something a liar or crackpot. There are just too many of them for that.
Agree again. It's the volume of reports from credible witnesses that seems the most compelling. We can dismiss this or that report, or even most of them, but dismissing them all reveals an unobjective bias, imho.
-
Have you watched any of the videos listed above?
I can't say I have, I commented exactly how I see it, I don't need to watch a video to know what it means.
you don't yet seem to grasp the credibility of some of those making reports
I understand that someone credible could well see a UFO, but a problem with credibility is a person who sees's one thing and then a person who sees's another is still correct. Credibility isn't really a factor if you think about it.
The relevant question is, are _ALL_ of the cases mis-identifications, hoaxes or other false information? That's what skeptics have to claim. Every single case, wrong.
It's half a dozen of one a dozen of the other, miss identification being 50% and then the real thing is another 50%, as I have already explained two people viewing the same object but under differing conditions are still right. It's still a credible fact, remember I mention person B earlier in the thread? Now, person B saw the balloon as a silhouette and made the assumption that it was a UFO cause they couldn't explain what it really was. Therefore that is correct, and because person A saw it as a balloon and didn't need to make the assumption that it was UFO, they are also correct. Therefore in most instances, the people who see these objects are right and stating facts as I said before.
Even in the abduction stories
A possible explanation for this would be someone who inadvertently fell asleep/ collapsed while out walking and they had an out of body experience, having had one of these myself ( Thankfully in the comfort of my bed) I can say this as a fact in my own way. Reason being when you have an out of body experience you can sometimes see figures standing near you or distant from you and these figures as anonymous as they are, rarely have identifiable features. Meaning a person who has an out of body experience for the first time could well assume that it was an abduction by aliens based on the characteristics of the experience they had.
-
Even in the abduction stories
A possible explanation for this would be someone who inadvertently fell asleep/ collapsed while out walking and they had an out of body experience, having had one of these myself ( Thankfully in the comfort of my bed) I can say this as a fact in my own way. Reason being when you have an out of body experience you can sometimes see figures standing near you or distant from you and these figures as anonymous as they are, rarely have identifiable features. Meaning a person who has an out of body experience for the first time could well assume that it was an abduction by aliens based on the characteristics of the experience they had.
Further proof for this may have come from an experiment in 2011, this is summed up as follows;
In a sleep study by the Out-Of-Body Experience Research Center in Los Angeles, 20 volunteers were instructed to perform a series of mental steps upon waking up or becoming lucid during the night that might lead them to have out-of-body experiences culminating in perceived encounters with aliens. According to lead researcher Michael Raduga, more than half the volunteers experienced at least one full or partial out-of-body experience, and seven of them were able to make contact with UFOs or extraterrestrials during these dream-like experiences.
Take from this what you will, but it is highly likely alien abductions may well just be out of body experiences.
-
I can't say I have, I commented exactly how I see it, I don't need to watch a video to know what it means.
Should you decide to watch the videos and wish to discuss it further after doing so, happy to join you there.
-
I can't say I have, I commented exactly how I see it, I don't need to watch a video to know what it means.
Should you decide to watch the videos and wish to discuss it further after doing so, happy to join you there.
As I have already stated I don't really need to watch a video to tell me what I already know, although I am still willing to discuss this with you without the need to watch said videos.
-
As I have already stated I don't really need to watch a video to tell me what I already know, although I am still willing to discuss this with you without the need to watch said videos.
I don't need to read your posts to tell me what I already know.
-
The UFOs in the story were (according to claims) touched, not identified.
This says otherwise, your account of this from watching the videos is quite honestly wrong, if someone touches something it is considered identified, just as @Thebox said. Whether this identification is by sight or by touch, it is still identified regardless. Therefore it wouldn't be considered a UFO anymore, to give it another name it would be an IFO ( Identified Flying Object) Or maybe a SIFO ( Self Identified Flying Object). In any circumstance, it is identified and would no longer be a UFO. So that is why I wouldn't watch the videos, moreover, I prefer videos with actual fact and not just some stories.
-
I apologize, this is all my fault. When I started the thread I didn't realize that my honorable fellow members already know everything there is to know about UFOs, and so obviously, it logically follows there would be no point in them watching videos on the topic. My bad, sorry!
-
I apologize, this is all my fault. When I started the thread I didn't realize that my honorable fellow members already know everything there is to know about UFOs, and so obviously, it logically follows there would be no point in them watching videos on the topic. My bad, sorry!
No person on earth knows everything, the points I have stated are explanations for the events, they are true to my knowledge. Therefore someone else could offer another explanation and call it the truth. Being as there is no real true explanation anyone can explain it and it would be true to that person. There isn't any reason to apologise. It's not necessary.
-
I apologize, this is all my fault. When I started the thread I didn't realize that my honorable fellow members already know everything there is to know about UFOs, and so obviously, it logically follows there would be no point in them watching videos on the topic. My bad, sorry!
We were not being ignorant Tanny, there is just no need to watch more UFO videos when we all know what the discussion entails.
Like atb as pointed out, UFO's are different to I.F.O's
Have you noticed nobody as commented on my proving alien existence thread?
They exist alright but in what purpose I am yet unsure, although I ''feel'' the Earth is a very good Universal prison and they may be our wardens.
-
I apologize, this is all my fault. When I started the thread I didn't realize that my honorable fellow members already know everything there is to know about UFOs, and so obviously, it logically follows there would be no point in them watching videos on the topic. My bad, sorry!
They exist alright but in what purpose I am yet unsure, although I ''feel'' the Earth is a very good Universal prison and they may be our wardens.
I'm of the opinion they do exist but in plaintive terms, they may not be human in nature, though stranger things have happened. Thankfully I'm not of the opinion that the world is run by lizards like some people in America do!
-
It seems some of us wish to have a semantic debate. Ok, go for it, I'll leave that to those who find it interesting.
Meanwhile, to cement my reputation as a high ranking UFO expert :-) I will now fulfill the requirement of the job and present a crackpot theory which will generously provide the skeptics with something they can declare ridiculous. :-)
I'm wondering if three different fields of endeavor are all describing the same thing without realizing it. Those three arenas are:
1) Christianity
2) UFO abduction stories
3) DMT users
I'm sure beyond all doubt that my fellow members already know EVERYTHING anyone could possibly know about DMT, and thus have no need whatsoever to inspect any further information, but just in case a less expert person should wander in to the thread, here's a video introduction to the drug DMT.
In this crackpot theory, what unites Christianity, UFO abduction stories, and DMT experiences are:
1) intelligent non-human entities
2) profound experiences of love
What if each of these seemingly completely different areas of investigation are all describing another layer of reality which has yet to be discovered by science? The phrase "another layer of reality" probably sounds wildly speculative, and it might be, but consider that we've already proven the existence of:
1) microscopic realm
2) atomic realm
3 quantum realm
Each of these layers of reality are radically different than human scale reality, and each of them are fully real, and each was discovered only relatively recently in human history. What's so crazy about imagining there might be other layers of reality yet to be discovered?
Perhaps human scale reality and this other level of reality have co-existed side by side all along, with each having only occasional glimpses of the other. Perhaps what we call "aliens" are actually Earth bound creatures who inhabit this other level, and who have realized that our nuclear weapons threaten their level of reality just as they do ours. Thus we see the phenomena described in the UFO and Nukes video (which of course you already understand in every detail).
Consider this. Every known species on Earth in our human scale reality is expert within it's niche, or it wouldn't be there. But at the same time, every known species is also largely blind beyond it's niche, because it has no need of that extra information. Every species on Earth is in this situation. Isn't it reasonable to assume that we are too?
My wife is an avid rehabber and often watches TV with a squirrel in her lap. The squirrel can see the flashing colors on the screen, but has no ability at all to understand the level of abstraction involved. Thus, the squirrel can see the TV physically, but has no grasp at all of what it really is. Point being, every known species has built-in limits of perception. Each species can see a slice of reality, but is blind to the full picture.
We are hairless apes only recently living in caves. Why should we assume that because we can't see something, that therefore it is not there?
And why should we assume that scientists are the only credible source of information on such topics, when 1) they are completely ignoring the UFO issue, possibly the biggest story in human history, and 2) seem to have little to no grasp of the bottom line trajectory of the knowledge explosion (as described in my other thread)?
-
Why should we assume that because we can't see something, that, therefore, it is not there?
That is a really good question, best guess is we always acknowledge things are there but then deny it in our mind, maybe it is psychological in nature but who knows. The existence of aliens, on the one hand, would make absolute sense to most people but to others, they may acknowledge there existence but then deny it in there mind because of fear and or scepticism to what they think is right being met with criticism. But on the other hand, they may not exist at all, and we could openly admit that without fear of reprisal.
UFO's, for instance, don't conform to this logic because we can't deny they exist when in reality they do, there is an explanation for them being real, but whether they are alien in nature is a different story. I'm gonna guess that till we actually see a UFO land and we are able to identify it as an alien craft, then we will never know. This also includes by undoctored photo and or video.