CHAOS Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 I really can't see why my other alien thread was closed so prematurely, any who, here is the analysis documention on the implants: http://www.alienscalpel.com/analysis.htm Just for the heck of it I will include the other videos: Alien Implant - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ8wTq3HcDk&feature=related 62 children - You can purchase Dr. Roger Leir's books here: http://www.amazon.com/Aliens-Scalpel-Scientific-Extraterrestrial-Millennium/dp/1893183017 and here http://www.ufocongressstore.com/servlet/the-77/Dr.-Roger-Leir-Presents/Detail
Kyrisch Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 (edited) The "Alien Implant" video makes some vague claims. "The tests showed that it was manufactured, and not naturally-occurring." From what kind of test can you conclude something like that? In fact, after some research, the sources (wikipedia, included) claim that Dr. Leir's work was never independently verified. The second video is even less convincing. Tens of thousands of people saw the sun spiral towards the earth in Fátima, Portugal in 1917. Eyewitness is notoriously unreliable. Edited January 18, 2009 by Kyrisch
mrburns2012 Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 Here's better evidence on aliens: image: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3800210944/tt0119654 video: http://www.imdb.com/rg/video/video-browser-slate/video/screenplay/vi1643381529 I'd recommend buying those great DVDs. They make great gifts too
CHAOS Posted January 18, 2009 Author Posted January 18, 2009 The Miracle of the Sun is an alleged miraculous event witnessed by as many as 100,000 people on 13 October 1917 in the Cova da Iria fields near Fátima, Portugal. An alleged event? Even it did happen, i'm sure the 100,000 people did see some kind of atmospheric phenomena. As for the wikipedia thing, i'm not 100% sure, I will do some more research, but Dr. Leir did send the samples to several independent metallergic testing facilities and they were shown to contain traces of isotopes not from this earth, the results are included in his books.
mooeypoo Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 An alleged event? Even it did happen, i'm sure the 100,000 people did see some kind of atmospheric phenomena. As for the wikipedia thing, i'm not 100% sure, I will do some more research, but Dr. Leir did send the samples to several independent metallergic testing facilities and they were shown to contain traces of isotopes not from this earth. 1. Where's the proof that there actually were 100,000 people who actually saw this? 2. If such an event happened, it would be much more than 100,000 people who'd notice it. It would've been a worldwide event. One that is impossible to hide, not matter how strong government conspiracy is. 3. Can you direct us to where the test results of those independent facilities are posted/exist? If they're independent, and they're corroborated, then I would love to read these and see what method they've used and what exactly they've found. And.. uhh.. what/who are you quoting?
CHAOS Posted January 18, 2009 Author Posted January 18, 2009 Sorry, that post was off wikipedia, and I was trying to discredit it. With the implant, tests were conducted by the National Institute of Discovery of Science (NIDS), New Mexico Tech, Los Alamos National Lab and university of California in San Diego. Here are all the metallergic results I could find: http://www.alienscalpel.com/data.htm http://www.alienscalpel.com/analysis.htm http://www.alienscalpel.com/nonmetal.pdf http://www.virtuallystrange.net/aic/pa2.htm http://www.nidsci.org/articles/metal/metal.php
Mr Skeptic Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 From the first link you gave above, Summary Sample T1,2 can be described as needle or lamellar in shape, with a predominantly iron core and a non-conducting, dark gray-black coating. This coating or surface layer material has Fe, Ca, P, Cl and very possibly some lighter elements (i.e. C, O) as its constituents. The phase analysis via x-ray diffraction was not absolutely conclusive due to the extremely small sample size, however the best fit to the obtained pattern suggests Anapaite, Ca_2Fe(PO_4_)2H_2O, Goethite, FeO(OH), iron phosphide, FeP_4, and phosphorus oxide, P_2O_5, as likely phases. The microstructure of the core (polished and etched) as observed under an optical microscope resembles an iron rich alloy with large amounts of carbon, probably in the form of iron carbide. The iron is likely to be alpha-Fe with a body-centered-cubic packing (bcc structure) since the samples are magnetized. The hardness of this core material is very high, in the neighborhood of high carbon tool steels. Sample T3-A is a very complex mixture of materials. While the inner core is presumed to be similar to T1,2, the outer portion is comprised of a combination of many different elements and phases, depending upon the location. A majority of the cladding is the same as T1,2. However, a flake-like substance deposited on a portion of the sample is made up of Fe, Si, P, Mo, Na, and Ca. This may be some complex silicate mineral. The "neck" region of this sample may actually give a representation of the core metallic constituents: Fe, Cu, Ni, Al, & Sn. This alloy may have been oxidized for lack of protective phosphide coating. Sample T3-B was apparently a "chunk" of the amorphous/mineral cladding material with no metallic core, as evidenced by the very low density and lack of magnetization. Nothing suggesting it is in any way alien, nor suggesting it is anything more than a mineral. Also, all your websites are intricately linked, not independent of each other. 1
CHAOS Posted January 20, 2009 Author Posted January 20, 2009 (edited) Um, the first 3 are the same website. The last two are independent of the rest and each other, and do contain information on the isotope analysis. Why would you look at the first few and make such hasty conclusions? I would like to drop that particular case as it seems the sources are not 100% reliable and it is just another skeptical loop hole. So on with the evidence! I recently heard of the Gary Mckinnon case. He spoke of the "Disclosure Project". I did a bit of research on this. It turns out to be the most solid evidence of aliens I have ever seen. It contains over 400 testimonies. These people range from Air Force Pilots, Aeronuatic Engineers, Master Sergeants, CIA Operatives, Astronuats and countless other Government officials including people in charge of nucear devices. They have blown the whistle. They can no longer handle the deception and lies. Basically, they say that the Government, or secret compartments of it (that may or may not have any connection with the legitimate Government) have been aware of alien life visiting the Earth since as early as the 1940's and keep the public from knowing by ANY means possible. They also claim that the Government has captured alien space crafts and has attained incredible technology such as anti-gravity and free-energy generation. They want to see all secret documentation and technology released to the public. What are peoples thoughts on this one? It seems very hard to believe, or have we been made to automatically react with a response like "what stupid garbage". The cognitive system is calm and stable through avoiding any disturbing new truth. Edited January 20, 2009 by CHAOS
mooeypoo Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 CHAOS, when we say "independent" we mean that the tests themselves were independent and conducted by valid, objective, certified scientific facility, and gone through peer review. Having results from "somewhere" (who made these? what's the name of the facility? who else conducted the same experiments without knowing the other results, independently? what's the name of the second facility? where are its findings published?) posted in three different websites are *not* what anyone in the scientific community regards as "independent sources". I would say they're not what anyone considers independent sources. They're just reiterations of the same source.
Mr Skeptic Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 And also, I've seen no evidence in any of them that the "implants" were any sort of technology. The closest to that that I've seen is one of the people saying how the tests damaged the fragile device, conveniently making it impossible to verify that it is anything but some natural minerals that not only exist on earth, but have also been studied and named.
CHAOS Posted January 20, 2009 Author Posted January 20, 2009 As I said, I would like to move on. The evidence is just not reliable, I am in acceptance of this.
Mr Skeptic Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 I'm not saying that the evidence is unreliable, I'm saying it is not there. Perhaps I missed it in my reading -- I didn't read it very thoroughly. If you would like to quote some of this evidence you found, then we can talk about its reliability or lack thereof. I saw a bunch of data, but nothing to suggest anything alien or technological.
mooeypoo Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 As I said, I would like to move on. The evidence is just not reliable, I am in acceptance of this. Move on to what? So far there's still not even the slightest shred of proof that aliens are visiting this earth in the manner you speak of. Unless you have any more evidence to put forth, for us to analyze?
CHAOS Posted January 20, 2009 Author Posted January 20, 2009 The first theory on the origin of these samples was initiated due to the relatively high hardness value obtained for the iron core of sample T1,2. It is well known that very hard iron alloys can be found naturally in meteorite samples. In fact, several characteristics of the specimens are similar to certain meteorite-type materials. Meteorites can be a complex combination of many different elements (see for example, McSween, 1987). This is the case particularly for sample T3, which contains at the very least 11 elements: Na, Al, Si, P, Cl, Ca, Fe, Ni, Cu, Mo & Sn. Typical of iron and stony-iron meteorites is the classic "Widmanstatten structure", consisting of lamelae (plate or needle-shaped crystals) of kamacite (alpha-iron) and/or taenite (gamma-iron), formed during the slow cooling of meteoroids [McSween, 1987; Budka et al., 1996]. Interspersed with the metal grains are other minerals rich in iron and/or nickel such as troilite, FeS, and schreibersite, (Fe,Ni)_3P. Based on my examination, the samples in question could possibly fit into this framework. Elemental analysis done by X-ray Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) indicated iron and phosphorus as major constituents of the cladding material surrounding the iron core. The (EDS) patterns resemble those recently reported for iron dendrites found in pockets and veins of the Yanshuang H6 meteorite [brooks, et. al., 1995]. In addition, I identified a calcium phosphate mineral as a possible phase within the cladding of both samples. Interestingly, chlorapatite, Ca_5(PO_4)_3Cl is among the more common meteorite minerals [Wasson, 1974]. This would account for the presence of a substantial amount of calcium and smaller amount of chlorine detected. A problem with this theory, however, is that no nickel was detected in T1,2 and only a minute amount in T3. It has been stated that "most meteorites contain between 6 and 10 percent nickel"...and "no iron meteorites contain less than five percent nickel" [McSween, 1987]. Although I could not find information describing the isotopes found, if you know your stuff, it is quiet clear that they didn't come from Earth. So thee are basically two possibilities, they had a small piece of a meteorite hit them, and lodge under their skin or they were abducted. Considering, 90% of the people had memories of being abducted, no scaring and no inflammatory response, I think I know which one I will go with.
mooeypoo Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Although I could not find information describing the isotopes found, if you know your stuff, it is quiet clear that they didn't come from Earth. So thee are basically two possibilities, they had a small piece of a meteorite hit them, and lodge under their skin or they were abducted. Considering, 90% of the people had memories of being abducted, no scaring and no inflammatory response, I think I know which one I will go with. Once more, with feeling: This forum does not tolerate copyright infringement kindly. Please cite your sources. Not only is it unfair and illegal not to, it will also give your fellow debaters a chance to read this article in proper context. For the convinience of everyone, I ran a google search on your article and produced this result: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/aic/pa2.htm if this is not where you took this article from, please supply the source. Please make sure you do that for *every* citation. It is worth noting, btw, CHAOS, that this is again not a peer-reviewed, reliable source. Do you have any actual proper peer-reviewed citations or any actual, peer-reviewed, verified findings we can truly work with?
CHAOS Posted January 20, 2009 Author Posted January 20, 2009 Sorry, I always forget to do that. Yes, you are correct in where I found it, and as I said before, I am going to move on from this topic, I do not have any peer-reviewed, verified sources, and I suspect I wont find any. To answer your question, I am moving onto the disclosure project, I have attached it to my other thread. Sorry, again.
mooeypoo Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 CHAOS, I am just curious on something, and I really don't mean this as anything but a real question out of curiosity - With a conspiracy so big as this, involving more than just one or two countries, and spanning for a VERY long time, how do you explain that there are not even the slightest tiniest *peer-reviewed* proof to this? History shows us that the government failed in holding out much lesser conspiracies than these when it was only a handful of people involved.. with SUCH a large scale conspiracy - it seems highly illogical this would be kept a secret by multiple countries, most of which were (and perhaps still are) enemies.
CHAOS Posted January 20, 2009 Author Posted January 20, 2009 (edited) That's probably the most obvious question isn't it? It is quiet simple, there is a vast amount of evidence but these organizations, which are not necessarily part of the legitimate Government discredit it in any way possible. The evidence isn't peer-reviewed properly for two reasons: These organizations don't allow it and most refuse to review it in the first place because it sounds like crockery. BTW I attached the .zip file containing the Disclosure Project testimonies because my other thread was removed, it was my third Sorry [[[ATTACHMENT REMOVED BY MOD, DUE TO COPYRIGHT VIOLATION]]] Edited January 20, 2009 by mooeypoo
mooeypoo Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 It was removed for a reason, and you would see it if you read our rules, as you were urged to do for abotu four times already. If content is paid for, then it is NOT LEGAL to post it free of charge. Please refer to the laws: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/ And go read our forum rules.
YT2095 Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Chaos, if you Continue to disregard the rules we will be forced to reconsider your membership here.
CHAOS Posted January 20, 2009 Author Posted January 20, 2009 I just so happened to purchase the product. Does that not make it ok for me to share it with whom ever I like? I own it and there was no copyright present, it is the testimonies of people who want as many people as possibe to hear what they have to say, this website is just trying to make some profit of it. It is my documentation to do what I like with, is it not? Please let me know because this is something I really want to share with the people. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedSo my other thread was closed because it needs proof and logic, it needs to be scientific. Well, I wonder what has more scientific importance than the existance of UFO's and it REALLY baffles me as to how time-travel is any more scientific and provable!!!
mooeypoo Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 No, it does not, I supplied a site for you to read about it. In the case of no clear copyright statement, a copyright is to be assumed. The only way a site/resource is copyright free, is if there is a statement wavering copyright. The general rule with copyright is: when in doubt, it's copyrighted. buying a resource allows you the right to use it yourself, not to give it freely to others, specifically not in a public medium such as a forum. Read the site I've posted, look up copyright and copyright laws and fair use. In any case this resource is moot without the context - hence, the original site this came from. Now that we're done with laws and rules, I suggest we move on to the actual topic at hand. If you have any real, substantiated, peer reviewed, evidence, please present it. Otherwise, I am not sure what else could benefit this thread, in this particular forum, considering our rules.
CHAOS Posted January 20, 2009 Author Posted January 20, 2009 Well, it is actually a donation they require, does that make any difference? I also doubt I will find any better evidence on a race that are experts at keeping the human race unaware of their existance then the testimonies found at the disclosure project. This is the point of the project, to disclose the truth. How about if I give people my username and password? Jokes, but I need to do something so that people can freely view this information without donating $5, and don't get me wrong, it will happen one way or another, whether this website lets me or not.
Mr Skeptic Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Time travel discussion can be about whether the laws of physics allow it or not, or about time travel logical paradoxes. While aliens themselves are great for scientific discussion, talking about them having visited earth is in the realm of crackpots, deluded, and conspiracy theories. We would love to see evidence of alien visits, but most such things are hoaxes or delusions, so don't be surprised that we will be skeptical or even hostile about that.
mooeypoo Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 I am not a lawyer, which is why I posted the website for you. Arguing with me about the rules without reading the rules is really not going to help this discussion. Read the rules, read the laws of copyright, and see for yourself. In any case, posting ANYTHING without proper citation (which was done a few times already by you, and twice with that zip file) is ABSOLUTELY copyright violation. How 'bout you start by telling us where this batch is from, so that even if you *CAN* post it, it's properly attributed and cited, and we could go and check the site for ourselves, perhaps even make that donation, if we so wish, and read it in context. Do not post that zip file until you verify you may do so. I would recommend sending an email to the site authors and asking them. That would be the only way to assure you are following copyright laws. Debate about it won't get us anywhere, and it is also offtopic. You are still in need of proving your statements, and I am very uncertain that this file is doing that regardless of its copyright status. Cite its source, start from there.
Recommended Posts