SamBridge Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 (edited) I ask again, a little more directly, what would it take to confirm such a thing? It would take actual aliens, or a large craft that was confirmed by every developed government to not be of their origin, which would require access to their records. Why simply wave away the problem of inexplicable UFO sightings? I'm not, I'm saying based on all of our data, it is more likely they are not alien crafts. I am not of the opinion it was an alien space craft either. Then you have no reason to be debating with me if you do not think any UFO has a high chance of being an alien space craft. Been there done that, I must have 100 rolls of undeveloped film, i most photographed nature, i tamed a wasps nest once just so i could take close ups of the mean little bastards but again i digress, but you will have to show that "most photographers" is sufficient to show there are no alien space craft visiting the earth... it is not... it is in fact not evidence of anything positive or negative... If the UFOs were really that large and common, don't you think at least one professional photographer would get at least 1 really good shot? I would have to imagine at least one UFO hunter knows how to use a cannon camera. Yet it's always a cloud, or weather balloon, or something kind of blurry from the distance, or some account with no photographs, which reminds me of the lochness monster. How is it that in the 1980s, that in the pine wood incident that no one had picture or video when there was supposedly multiple helicopters chasing after the craft? Even cop cars have dashboard cameras. If the incident was so large that the military was involved, surely there would also be police reports too, and all the commotion would attract people, especially if it was only 35 miles from an air port which would definitely be concerned about UFOs in the airways. I am straw manning? You don't see the problem with asserting one unknown as an explanation for yet another unknown even in some cases to be a bit dishonest? Except I did not assert that the craft in the pine-wood incident was ball lightning and I did not state any inexplicable UFO incident as confirmed to be any particular thing, I merely said it is highly unlikely that it is aliens. Edited February 24, 2013 by SamBridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 24, 2013 Author Share Posted February 24, 2013 It would take actual aliens, or a large craft that was confirmed by every developed government to not be of their origin, which would require access to their records. So deductive reasoning is useless? You require an actual alien space craft to land and say hey guys we're here? I'm not, I'm saying based on all of our data, it is more likely they are not alien crafts. Most are more likely not alien space craft, some have limited degrees of freedom to be anything else... Then you have no reason to be debating with me if you do not think any UFO has a high chance of being an alien space craft. I meant that one case and you know that was what I was saying... If the UFOs were really that large and common, don't you think at least one professional photographer would get at least 1 really good shot? That is a straw man, no one says all UFOs are alien space craft... I readily admit the vast majority are not alien space craft but that leaves literally hundreds of unexplained UFO cases that cannot be explained by any known phenomena... I would have to imagine at least one UFO hunter knows how to use a cannon camera. Yet it's always a cloud, or weather balloon, or something kind of blurry from the distance, or some account with no photographs, which reminds me of the lochness monster. How is it that in the 1980s, that in the pine wood incident that no one had picture or video when there was supposedly multiple helicopters chasing after the craft? It was at night, in an isolated area, and I do not concede that was an alien space craft... Even cop cars have dashboard cameras. If the incident was so large that the military was involved, surely there would also be police reports too, and all the commotion would attract people, especially if it was only 35 miles from an air port which would definitely be concerned about UFOs in the airways. Cop cars do now, they didn't always have them... and such sightings that involve many people have been reported... Except I did not assert that the craft in the pine-wood incident was ball lightning and I did not state any inexplicable UFO incident as confirmed to be any particular thing, I merely said it is highly unlikely that it is aliens. Yet you scoff at the very concept in spite of evidence of a caliber that would convict you of high crimes if it was directed toward you... this at least should indicate that investigation is warranted instead of ridicule and negative assumptions... I happen to agree it's unlikely but unlikely things become a sure bet if enough time passes... Of course if intelligent life always self destructs or we are unique in our desire to explore new territory, of if complex life is outrageously rare then you win but we have only one data point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamBridge Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 So deductive reasoning is useless? No one can possibly use deductive reason to deduce the result must be an alien as there are other possibilities even if they seem unlikely, they are certainly less strange than the incomprehensibly small chance of life forming on another planet, then evolving to form complex life, then discovering space technology, then finding Earth. Most are more likely not alien space craft, some have limited degrees of freedom to be anything else... Experimental military technology. I meant that one case Then you'll have to be more specific next time. no one says all UFOs are alien space craft Including me, in fact I think I can find myself stating that. It was at night, in an isolated area, and I do not concede that was an alien space craft... If even you do not think it was an alien space craft having experience being a UFO fanatic or hunter or w/e, then why use it as a point to support the likelihood of aliens? Otherwise why bring it up at all? Cop cars do now, they didn't always have them... and such sightings that involve many people have been reported... You mean like the "stealth blimp" that was shown to be a military experiment? How could no one else have any recorded visual data on it when helicopters were supposedly chasing it? There was at least radio recordings of that pilot who's plane became disabled after transmitting he saw a large UFO above him. Yet you scoff at the very concept in spite of evidence of a caliber that would convict you of high crimes if it was directed toward you... this at least should indicate that investigation is warranted instead of ridicule and negative assumptions... Any ridicule is extrapolations you made or that you brought. Within the limit of the boundaries of our observable universe, we have observed there is a very small chance life can form. The conditions for life to form are obviously slim since we have no data of the conditions for life to spontaneously form after it had already happened once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 24, 2013 Author Share Posted February 24, 2013 No one can possibly use deductive reason to deduce the result must be an alien as there are other possibilities even if they seem unlikely, they are certainly less strange than the incomprehensibly small chance of life forming on another planet, then evolving to form complex life, then discovering space technology, then finding Earth. When the impossible is eliminated what remains is the truth... Experimental military technology. Sometimes yes but not always... Then you'll have to be more specific next time. I will be very specific from now on... Including me, in fact I think I can find myself stating that. I think you have gone out of your way to say that they all have to be something else. If even you do not think it was an alien space craft having experience being a UFO fanatic or hunter or w/e, then why use it as a point to support the likelihood of aliens? Otherwise why bring it up at all? I was using it as an example of how UFO fanatics think that anything difficult to explain must be aliens... You mean like the "stealth blimp" that was shown to be a military experiment? citation needed How could no one else have any recorded visual data on it when helicopters were supposedly chasing it? There was at least radio recordings of that pilot who's plane became disabled after transmitting he saw a large UFO above him. Again it was in a remote location, the helicopters were not chasing it and others did indeed see this but from a much greater distance... Any ridicule is extrapolations you made or that you brought. Within the limit of the boundaries of our observable universe, we have observed there is a very small chance life can form. The conditions for life to form are obviously slim since we have no data of the conditions for life to spontaneously form after it had already happened once. Please back up the assertion that life is rare or stop stating it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamBridge Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 When the impossible is eliminated what remains is the truth... We have had more cases where we eliminated aliens than confirmed aliens. Sometimes yes but not always... When it's "not always", then it's usually another natural or man-made phenomena, or the said government is withholding information, such as with the stealth blimp. They didn't release that information right away. I think you have gone out of your way to say that they all have to be something else. I have gone out of my way to show it is ridiculous to think that there is any high or moderate likelihood of aliens visiting Earth. citation needed I can't believe I've done all this and you haven't actually been reading my posts, I cited it at least two times, how about you actually go and read my posts. Again it was in a remote location, the helicopters were not chasing it and others did indeed see this but from a much greater distance... It said in the link you posted that helicopters attempted to encircle the UFO, there were also witnesses who reported not seeing it. Please back up the assertion that life is rare or stop stating it... I'm pretty sure I've backed it up more than once. Life forming on a given planet obviously isn't that common if after .8 billion years, no new life has spontaneously formed, and on top of that we have tested numerous chemical reactions of EVERY naturally occurring element in the entire universe with the exception of technetium which only exists in stars or short times in labs, and no life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 24, 2013 Author Share Posted February 24, 2013 We have had more cases where we eliminated aliens than confirmed aliens. meaningless assertion, the odds do not falsify the possibility When it's "not always", then it's usually another natural or man-made phenomena, or the said government is withholding information, such as with the stealth blimp. They didn't release that information right away. Do you read what you type? I have gone out of my way to show it is ridiculous to think that there is any high or moderate likelihood of aliens visiting Earth. I'm not sure ridiculous is the best way to describe it but I am not asserting any likelihood, only that it deserves to be investigated and that ridicule and negative assumptions are meaningless... I can't believe I've done all this and you haven't actually been reading my posts, I cited it at least two times, how about you actually go and read my posts. Claiming something to be true is not evidence... It said in the link you posted that helicopters attempted to encircle the UFO, there were also witnesses who reported not seeing it. Of course there were people who did not see it, ever drive in the mountains on the old two lane roads? I'm pretty sure I've backed it up more than once. Life forming on a given planet obviously isn't that common if after .8 billion years, no new life has spontaneously formed, and on top of that we have tested numerous chemical reactions of EVERY naturally occurring element in the entire universe with the exception of technetium which only exists in stars or short times in labs, and no life. No you have made that claim many times and it is indefensible... and lab work not finding new life is not evidence it is a rare event... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamBridge Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 (edited) meaningless assertion, the odds do not falsify the possibility I specifically stated the possibility cannot be ruled out. Do you want me to go through every single time where I said that? Or will you accept that my assertion has meaning because it is labeling aliens as being unlikely, and not impossible? Do you read what you type? Yep, there's tons of pictures of lenticular clouds saying that look like UFOs, yet there's very few UFO pictures that are actually inexplicable with our current public knowledge. I'm not sure ridiculous is the best way to describe it but I am not asserting any likelihood, only that it deserves to be investigated and that ridicule and negative assumptions are meaningless... If you want to try an investigate it you'll have to hack into military data-bases. Otherwise, we have no reason to suggest it is even worth investigating in terms of the explanation being aliens. The only thing I would think is the US government should have reconciled the family in the pinewood incident if it was an experimental craft, but then again they did not reconcile for every innocent killed by a drone, or even my lai. Of course there were people who did not see it, ever drive in the mountains on the old two lane roads? You avoided my point that you contradict your own link. No you have made that claim many times and it is indefensible... and lab work not finding new life is not evidence it is a rare event... If life isn't rare, then go create some or find historic records of life with more than four base pairs of DNA. Even if life can form, the 3.8 billion years of time that has passed on our planet would still suggest that it can be killed off very easily in it's early stages. Edited February 24, 2013 by SamBridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 24, 2013 Author Share Posted February 24, 2013 I specifically stated the possibility cannot be ruled out. Do you want me to go through every single time where I said that? Or will you accept that my assertion has meaning because it is labeling aliens as being unlikely, and not impossible? So we've traveled from so unlikely as to be meaningless to just unlikely but not such long odds it's not worth considering, wow i made progress... Yep, there's tons of pictures of lenticular clouds saying that look like UFOs, yet there's very few UFO pictures that are actually inexplicable with our current public knowledge. Again, this is not evidence of anything, i didn't want to say this but if only one sighting is really an alien space craft then that one is the most important event in recent human history, the fact that the rest are false is meaningless... If you want to try an investigate it you'll have to hack into military data-bases. Otherwise, we have no reason to suggest it is even worth investigating in terms of the explanation being aliens. The only thing I would think is the US government should have reconciled the family in the pinewood incident if it was an experimental craft, but then again they did not reconcile for every innocent killed by a drone, or even my lai. That is why i generally concentrate on early sightings from a time when it was more difficult to cover up. You avoided my point that you contradict your own link. I've went over this closely, you are going to have to rub my nose it it i guess... If life isn't rare, then go create some or find historic records of life with more than four base pairs of DNA. Even if life can form, the 3.8 billion years of time that has passed on our planet would still suggest that it can be killed off very easily in it's early stages. More meaningless horse feathers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semjase Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Explain these sighting as anything other than UFO's, I guess these are all fake as well? Here's some other interesting pictures from Plejaren craft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 24, 2013 Author Share Posted February 24, 2013 Semjase, Billy Meier was shown to be a hoaxer when i was a young man, i am now an old man and his photos are still hoaxes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamBridge Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 (edited) So we've traveled from so unlikely as to be meaningless to just unlikely but not such long odds it's not worth considering, wow i made progress... Nope, it's still very unlikely. Let's run through a scenario A kid says "I am very interested in investigating biology and want to become a doctor, but I am equally interested in becoming a UFO hunter because I like exploring for aliens, what should I do?". Would you tell him to dedicate his professional career to becoming a doctor? Or would you tell him to dedicate his professional career to being a UFO hunter or paranormal investigator? Again, this is not evidence of anything, i didn't want to say this but if only one sighting is really an alien space craft then that one is the most important event in recent human history, the fact that the rest are false is meaningless... Again, it is evidence that we have no confirmation that aliens were ever involved. That is why i generally concentrate on early sightings from a time when it was more difficult to cover up. Oh sure, just like the lochness monster. There's no possible way someone could throw a metallic disk in the air while I take a photograph. More meaningless horse feathers... Or, more valid points that alien life is so rare it shouldn't be considered in much the same way that ball lightning is so rare I shouldn't use it to explain every UFO phenomena. Explain these sighting as anything other than UFO's, I guess these are all fake as well? Here's some other interesting pictures from Plejaren craft. That really makes it look bad because some of them are very vague and actually do look like they could be air planes, and some of them are so modestly detailed they looked like they were photoshoped. I bet I could do something like some of those myself. http://mashable.com/2010/06/22/best-ufo-videos/ Some UFOs are currently explainable to a degree that people can't agree on, but I'm not going to assume it was aliens. Edited February 25, 2013 by SamBridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semjase Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Nope, it's still very unlikely. Let's run through a scenario A kid says "I am very interested in investigating biology and want to become a doctor, but I am equally interested in becoming a UFO hunter because I like exploring for aliens, what should I do?". Would you tell him to dedicate his professional career to becoming a doctor? Or would you tell him to dedicate his professional career to being a UFO hunter or paranormal investigator? Again, it is evidence that we have no confirmation that aliens were ever involved. Oh sure, just like the lochness monster. There's no possible way someone could throw a metallic disk in the air while I take a photograph. Or, more valid points that alien life is so rare it shouldn't be considered in much the same way that ball lightning is so rare I shouldn't use it to explain every UFO phenomena. That really makes it look bad because some of them are very vague, and some of them are so modestly detailed they looked like they were photoshoped. I bet I could do something like some of those myself. http://mashable.com/2010/06/22/best-ufo-videos/ Some UFOs are currently explainable to a degree that people can't agree on, but I'm not going to assume it was aliens. There's only one problem with your assessment these photo's have been around since the 1970's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 25, 2013 Author Share Posted February 25, 2013 Nope, it's still very unlikely. Let's run through a scenario A kid says "I am very interested in investigating biology and want to become a doctor, but I am equally interested in becoming a UFO hunter because I like exploring for aliens, what should I do?". Would you tell him to dedicate his professional career to becoming a doctor? Or would you tell him to dedicate his professional career to being a UFO hunter or paranormal investigator? Depends on many things, the point I am making is that UFOs are not taken seriously due to government disinformation, before that even the government was convinced they were interplanetary space craft... Again, it is evidence that we have no confirmation that aliens were ever involved. Again your idea of conformation is unreasonable and would not be applied to any other phenomena with as much evidence... Oh sure, just like the lochness monster. There's no possible way someone could throw a metallic disk in the air while I take a photograph. Ummm actually that can be detected in a photograph... Or, more valid points that alien life is so rare it shouldn't be considered in much the same way that ball lightning is so rare I shouldn't use it to explain every UFO phenomena. Planets are so common that even if one in a billion stars have life bearing planets there are thousands of them in our galaxy alone... That really makes it look bad because some of them are very vague, and some of them are so modestly detailed they looked like they were photoshoped. I bet I could do something like some of those myself. http://mashable.com/2010/06/22/best-ufo-videos/ Some UFOs are currently explainable to a degree that people can't agree on, but I'm not going to assume it was aliens. just don't assume it's not and we can at least agree on that... but you should know those photos in Semjase's post were well before photoshop but still investigated and found to be hoaxes, if i remember correctly the models he used were found in his home as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semjase Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Here's credible evidence to backup these UFO photo's and and sound recordings. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfz56iX5Zhs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamBridge Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 (edited) Depends on many things, the point I am making is that UFOs are not taken seriously due to government disinformation, before that even the government was convinced they were interplanetary space craft... That's weird, I would argue that the only reason alien UFOs gained any traction after 1947 is because of mass media, perhaps the government doesn't support the notion of alien UFOs because some of those "UFOs" are the military experiments. Again your idea of conformation is unreasonable and would not be applied to any other phenomena with as much evidence... That's because what I was saying isn't that UFOs are a particular thing, it's that they aren't a particular thing, that thing being aliens. Ummm actually that can be detected in a photograph... Citation? A picture doesn't show speed, we don't know if it's moving or in which direction, someone could have made a fancy weather balloon for some of the UFO cases. In a few of them, that's what it was. Planets are so common that even if one in a billion stars have life bearing planets there are thousands of them in our galaxy alone... Yet astronomers haven't found a good radio source. They can tell if something is a pulsar or a quasar or a star if you just look at radio maps of telescopes. There's astronomers right now looking for intelligent life using radio signals, so far nothing, it's like the reverse of the movie contact. A planet capable of supporting life doesn't necessarily mean it has life either, to keep in mind, we really don't know what processes are necessary to form life, but we can rule out the many we have done in our various experiments of chemicals. but you should know those photos in Semjase's post were well before photoshop but still investigated and found to be hoaxes, if i remember correctly the models he used were found in his home as well... Well I am not saying they are impossible, there has to be life somewhere else if the universe is infinitely large, but we will have to agree to disagree. Jase, don't ruin this. Edited February 25, 2013 by SamBridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 25, 2013 Author Share Posted February 25, 2013 (edited) That's weird, I would argue that the only reason alien UFOs gained any traction after 1947 is because of mass media, perhaps the government doesn't support the notion of alien UFOs because some of those "UFOs" are the military experiments. No, actually project SIGN concluded in their "Estimate of the Situation" that UFOs were extraterrestrial space craft... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Sign By late 1947, Air Force files included 109 UFO reports, nine of which remain listed as unsolved.[/size][7] There were four categories for UFOs: flying disks; cigar/torpedo shaped objects; balloon/spherical objects; and "balls of light". Preliminary investigation revealed that about a fifth of Sign's UFO cases were explained prosaically, with the expectation that a substantial portion of the remaining cases could be similarly explained.[/size][4] The earliest hypothesis, even before Sign was formally established, was that UFOs were Soviet aircraft.[13] Sign was based at Wright Field partly because it was the headquarters for American analysis of German aeronautical data. There was concern in U.S. military intelligence circles that the Soviet Union could make aeronautical advances on the work of Nazi scientists, especially the Horten brothers, "a pair of brilliant aeronautical engineers far in advance of their U.S. counterparts."[11] The Horten brothers's "flying wing" designs were strikingly similar to some early UFO reports, such as Arnold's crescent-shaped objects. However, due to a lack of evidence supporting the Soviet hypothesis, a faction within the U.S. Military began contemplating an extraterrestrial explanation -- not because any specific evidence supported it, but mainly because all other interpretations for the data were exhausted.[14] Bold is done by me... A turning point for Sign came with the Chiles-Whitted UFO Encounter over Montgomery, Alabama on 24 July 1948.[16] In this case, two experienced airline pilots, both veterans of combat flying during WWII, reported that a rocket-shaped UFO, 100 feet long and emitting reddish exhaust, approached them on a near-collision course. Chiles and Whitted also reported the object appeared to show a double row of ports or windows emitting an intense bluish-white light. The reports of "windows" also suggested the object was possibly occupied.[17][18] Additional corroboration came from four sources: a passenger on the plane who saw the object's exhaust trail as it sped from view; from an experienced military ground witness in Alabama; from a military pilot who reported an unusual light in the vicinity of Montgomery at roughly the time of the encounter; and from a sighting of a very similar object near The Hague, Netherlands on July 20.[3]Moreover, the Chiles-Whitted object also faintly echoed the mysterious Scandinavian "ghost rockets" of 1946, reports of which had intrigued American military officials.[9] Loedding and others interviewed Chiles and Whitted two days after the incident, and were deeply impressed by their testimony. Ruppelt[2] would later write,"According to the old timers at ATIC, this report shook them worse than the Mantell Incident. This was the first time two reliable sources had been really close enough to anything resembling a UFO to get a good look and live to tell about it." The Chiles-Whitted case became the centerpiece of Project Sign's investigation for the next several months. According to Swords, "The flying fuselage encounter [i.e., Chiles-Whitted] intrigued them."[11] Such a torpedo-like design was in fact flightworthy according to the theories of German engineer Ludwig Prandtl, but would require power far in excess of conventional fuels in 1947, possibly nuclear power. Given that no American technology could account for the flying saucer sightings, and that there was no definitive evidence of the German/Russian hypothesis, Sign's personnel began to take the interplanetary hypothesis more seriously.[2][3] Swords argues that this consideration of non-earthly origin was "not as incredible in [military] intelligence circles as one might think." Because many in the military were "pilots, engineers and technical people" they had a "'can do' attitude" and tended to regard unavailable technologies not as impossibilities, but as challenges to be overcome. Rather than dismissing UFO reports out of hand, they considered how such objects might plausibly function. This perspective, argues Swords, "contrasted markedly with many scientists' characterizations of such concepts as impossible, unthinkable or absurd."[11] Remember this was in 1947, if such craft had been built by the US or the soviets by now everyone would be riding in them and riding to Earth orbit on top of fireworks would never have happened.... Gen. George Schulgen, Garrett's superior at the Pentagon, ordered a more thorough review of flying saucer data. In response, Lt. Gen. Nathan F. Twining, then-head of Air Material Command's intelligence and engineering divisions at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (then Wright Field), compiled and analyzed the data. Twining's memorandum to Schulgen, dated 23 September 1947, stated, in part:[8] The phenomenon reported is something real and not visionary or fictitious. There are objects probably approximately the shape of a disc, of such appreciable size as to appear to be as large as a man-made aircraft. There is the possibility that some of the incidents may be caused by natural phenomena, such as meteors. The reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and action which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly aircraft and radar, lend belief to the possibility that some of the objects are controlled either manually, automatically or remotely. It is possible within the present U.S. knowledge... to construct a piloted aircraft which has the general description ... Any development in this country along the lines indicated would be extremely expensive... Due consideration must be given to the following: The possibility that these objects are of domestic origin - the product of some high security project not known to AC/AS-2 or this command. The lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash recovered exhibits which would undeniably prove the existence of these objects. The possibility that some foreign nation has a form of propulsion, possibly nuclear, which is outside of our domestic knowledge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimate_of_the_Situation Aftermath When Sign personnel refused to abandon the interplanetary hypothesis, many were reassigned, and Sign was renamed Project Grudge in 1949. According to Ruppelt, "The Estimate died a quick death. Some months later it was completely declassified and relegated to the incinerator. A few copies, one of which I saw, were kept as mementos of the golden days of the UFOs." In the early 1980s, researcher Kevin D. Randle[14] said he spoke with an unnamed colonel who claimed to have helped write the Estimate when he was a lieutenant. According to the colonel, when Vandenberg was sent a working draft of the report, he allegedly ordered the paragraphs giving physical evidence (metal recovered in New Mexico) removed from the report. After doing so, Vandenberg then rejected the final version as lacking physical evidence. Randle claimed that he realized the significance of this anecdote only a few years later, while investigating the 1947 Roswell, New Mexico crash. According to Randle, the colonel had died by that point, and a follow-up interview was not possible. That's because what I was saying isn't that UFOs are a particular thing, it's that they aren't a particular thing, that thing being aliens. So now we are back to UFOs cannot be alien space craft? Citation? A picture doesn't show speed, we don't know if it's moving or in which direction, someone could have made a fancy weather balloon for some of the UFO cases. In a few of them, that's what it was. While i am not aware of the methods used a great many such pictures were identified as either hoaxes or too little information to make a determination, but the investigators can use various techniques to tell if an object is something small close up or something large far away and various other things like comparing it to the background and such... It was how Billy Meier was exposed... Yet astronomers haven't found a good radio source. They can tell if something is a pulsar or a quasar or a star if you just look at radio maps of telescopes. There's astronomers right now looking for intelligent life using radio signals, so far nothing, it's like the reverse of the movie contact. A planet capable of supporting life doesn't necessarily mean it has life either, to keep in mind, we really don't know what processes are necessary to form life, but we can rule out the many we have done in our various experiments of chemicals. Again, unless aliens are beaming a signal directly at us it's highly unlikely we could detect it even if it was around the nearest star... Edited February 25, 2013 by Moontanman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semjase Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 While i am not aware of the methods used a great many such pictures were identified as either hoaxes or too little information to make a determination, but the investigators can use various techniques to tell if an object is something small close up or something large far away and various other things like comparing it to the background and such... It was how Billy Meier was exposed... Meier's photo's were given the most advanced scrutiny of their day and pasted with flying colors. How can you discredit these 2 videos. Here's credible evidence to backup these UFO photo's and and sound recordings. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfz56iX5Zhs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 25, 2013 Author Share Posted February 25, 2013 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Meier Meier's relationship with his wife Kalliope ended acrimoniously and in 1997 Kalliope stated in an interview that the UFO in the photos looked like models that Meier had made himself with items like trash can lids, carpet tacks and other household objects, and that the stories he told of his adventures with the aliens had been entirely fictitious. She agreed when asked by an interviewer that the infamous "wedding-cake" UFO looked like the lid to a trash barrel. She has also claimed that one of the pictures taken of an "extraterrestrial female" was actually an acquaintance covered in tanning foil. Also, photos claimed to be Asket and Nera was actually two The Golddiggers dancer-Michelle Della Fave and Susan Lund, though Meier claims that these photographs were part of a batch that had been tampered with. Michelle Della Fave alleges[13] that pictures of her were illegally used by Billy Meier to support his claims of having been visited by female extraterrestrials. The very assertion that extraterrestrials would be so human in appearance to be perfectly human is simply silly, it falsifies the assertion immediately. There is simply no way a human could evolve on an other planet independent of the Earth... Just silly... http://forgetomori.com/2009/aliens/asket-and-nera/ More silly from Billy... http://www.iigwest.com/investigations/meier/dinosaur_deconstruction.html Billy did a lot of silly stuff... http://www.iigwest.com/investigations/meier/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semjase Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 (edited) If a high ranking US military officer did a thorough investigation of the photographic evidence and said the that photos are authentic, who are you going to believe him with evidence or a disgruntled ex-wife.They have scientifically proven that the Golddigger Michelle Della Fave is not the extraterrestrial Asket as you can see in this video. Edited February 25, 2013 by Semjase Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 25, 2013 Author Share Posted February 25, 2013 So semjase, it doesn't bother you that Silly Billy is a confirmed liar? An obvious attention hoe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semjase Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 So semjase, it doesn't bother you that Silly Billy is a confirmed liar? An obvious attention hoe? Regardless, I have to go with the evidence and the evidence speaks for itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 25, 2013 Author Share Posted February 25, 2013 Regardless, I have to go with the evidence and the evidence speaks for itself. Yes I have to agree, the quality of the evidence does speak for it's self... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamBridge Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 (edited) Remember this was in 1947, if such craft had been built by the US or the soviets by now everyone would be riding in them and riding to Earth orbit on top of fireworks would never have happened.... NASA sent people to the moon, that doesn't mean it has to build moon cities. If you're talking about highly maneuverable aircrafts, why would you want to public to have access to it? If any enemy got a hold of it, it could be reverse engineered and used against them once someone else figured out how it worked. So now we are back to UFOs cannot be alien space craft? I didn't say they couldn't be alien crafts, I said any given UFO likely isn't. However, I still think that an experimental air craft of some nation or group is more likely than extra-terrestrial life developing then creating space technology then finding Earth. http://www.thetruthbehindthescenes.org/2010/08/06/the-foo-fighters-of-world-war-two/ There are weird experiments of other nations as well. Ion mercury plasma balls? Who woulda thought. Given that My Lai wasn't even known throughout the military itself until many many years later, I think there's room for secrets. While i am not aware of the methods used a great many such pictures were identified as either hoaxes or too little information to make a determination, but the investigators can use various techniques to tell if an object is something small close up or something large far away and various other things like comparing it to the background and such... It was how Billy Meier was exposed... It doesn't rule out that the objects were man made. I could put a thin solar panel on a weather balloon in the shape of a disk to provide electricity for small measuring equipment on the weather balloon or some type of atmospheric device, and the picture could be taken from someone who I didn't think was watching because I was out in the plains and never bothered to correct it because I don't usually pay attention to UFO news. Again, unless aliens are beaming a signal directly at us it's highly unlikely we could detect it even if it was around the nearest star... http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/1995/30/image/a/ The nearest galaxy is the Andromeda galaxy, since this galaxy is not the Andromeda galaxy, it must be further away. How much further I don't know, but at least twice as far given the size of our galactic cluster. Radio telescopes and devices could definitely pick something up from within our own galaxy. Anyway, after looking at articles like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roswell_UFO_incident Even though the official report states what was uncovered was possibly a weather balloon, or that the corpses were not alien but rather dummies or mutations, I'll say you convinced me it's a little more likely, but I certainly don't expect things to be like Men in Black. Edited February 25, 2013 by SamBridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnaud Antoine ANDRIEU Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Far side of the Moon .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 25, 2013 Author Share Posted February 25, 2013 (edited) It's late and I'll get to the other things but the foo fighter piece caught my eye, a well written piece of information and fiction woven together the key to this is the Were the Germans working on an ion mercury plasma? This is nonsense, technobabble, it is the result of believe it or not, Indian religious writings that describe Vimanas ships or machines driven by gods used in warfare between gods. they were said to be powered by rotating rings of mercury in a copper bowl. They were said to be able to strike an offending army with "all the power of the universe" often alluded to in the ancient alien crowd as evidence of both aliens and nuclear warfare in the ancient world... Mix that with a little science in the form of the first ion engines used mercury and you have horse feathers... Far side of the Moon .. Fell free to elaborate on that... Edited February 25, 2013 by Moontanman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now