How much proof do you want ???

originally posted by: chuckmorris

originally posted by: LogicalRazor

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
It would certainly have to be more than a dot in the sky thats for sure.

Or some dude in a Youtube video with sketches saying he's been abducted or talks to an alien telepathically. That is not even close to real/credible proof.

Not sure about the aliens but telepathy is for real. It basically was proven in the 70's. If not - how was it possible to "sell" remote viewing to both the US and the USSR militaries?

Uh uh. If anyone can prove telepathy they can collect a cool million from the James Randi Foundation. No takers yet.

originally posted by: Rob48

originally posted by: chuckmorris

originally posted by: LogicalRazor

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
It would certainly have to be more than a dot in the sky thats for sure.

Or some dude in a Youtube video with sketches saying he's been abducted or talks to an alien telepathically. That is not even close to real/credible proof.

Not sure about the aliens but telepathy is for real. It basically was proven in the 70's. If not - how was it possible to "sell" remote viewing to both the US and the USSR militaries?

Uh uh. If anyone can prove telepathy they can collect a cool million from the James Randi Foundation. No takers yet.

Maybe the authors of the studies haven't applied and maybe Mr Randi haven't searched the scientific databases for proof already there. Maybe he doesn't count remote viewing as telepathy. The effect is weak but significantly better than chance. The test I have in my mind was card reading (or something to that effect) at a distance. For most test subjects, they started off better than chance but declined over time (got boared parhaps). However, people with a reputation as psychics never declined and improved over time. Results were peer reviewed and all that stuff with no obvoius flaws found. They were described, even by die hard sceptics, as "interesting".

originally posted by: Rob48
a reply to: Lompyt

A photo that isn't a lens flare or a reflection of a lightbulb would be a good start.

I believe in alien life — who doesn't? — but I sure as hell don't believe there's any evidence it has visited Earth.

As the quality and quantity of cameras available has increased, the quality and quantity of UFO photos seems to have dropped. There were more convincing fakes back in the 1980s.

There were convincing "fakes" of saucers back in th 1800's too. Double exposure? Maybe those photos set off the entire UFO "craze"? Ok, let's do an experiment. Snap a picture of an airliner a mile away with your cellphone. Then zoom it in an crop the picture. Compare the quality with a typical UFO pic. You see, if you wanna fake a perfect saucer there's nothing stopping you. The computing power of Jurrasic Park (1993) is within reach of everyone now. A computer game renders graphics at 60 frames per second. If you could wait a month for one frame, it'd look damn good. Of course most UFO pics are faked. But the deceivers are no more stupid than that they create the pictures in the quality you could expect.

originally posted by: Miccey

originally posted by: chuckmorris

originally posted by: Miccey
What could be convincing
proof to me, would be
multiple scources of the same
situation. Scources with NO
emediate relations.
Pictures AND video.

One singel YT or pic isnt going
to be valid. EVER.. Face it.
Go back, do it right...

Have you tried pre internet books?

A book, seriously?!?
Im 44 so yea i was young when internet
was a slow dialup...Books, anyone can write
a book, doesnt matter how many you read its
the same all over...

And that answer was not really helpful.
As i stated what would be convinsing to me..

I'm sorry you cannot know anything for sure by digisting books and yt-vids. If you wanna get closer to the truth, you'll have to spend the time and money and follow some of the trails yourself. I really don't see why the topic of extraterrestrial spacecraft is so much "out there". It all comes down to physics and few think Newton or Einstein is the final word. A few months ago we heard of the gravitational waves that "proved" the universe expanded faster than the speed of light at one time (if time existed then..). So the idea of bending spacetime rather than traveling through it ("warp drive") maybe isn't that far fetched after all? The question is rather wether it would require astronomical amounts of energy or not..
No, anyone can't write books with hundreds of footnotes and name names, dates and places. This is the stuff that knowledge is made of. Could anyone just make up and put into print that Gordon Cooper saw a saucer landing in the desert and get away with it? And then fake a yt-vid of him saying it.. Don't think so.

And to all of you: If you havent seen Out Of The Blue (by James Fox) then please do (and don't forget the popcorns). It was on youtube last time i checked.

originally posted by: Rob48
Uh uh. If anyone can prove telepathy they can collect a cool million from the James Randi Foundation. No takers yet.

Randi's requirements for proof almost guarantee that the prize will never be claimed. He's not interested in small statistically significant test results. He wants circus stuff. Of course that is going to be bullcrap.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Randi's requirements for proof almost guarantee that the prize will never be claimed. He's not interested in small statistically significant test results. He wants circus stuff. Of course that is going to be bullcrap.

There is a big difference between small success above average and million, billon or trillion to 1 odds to be successful without telepathy or other forms of mind powers. For me the biggest proof that ESP does not exists is that gambling is successful, for the casino that is...

As for aliens it needs to be physical evidence...we have stalled for the past 6000 years on only eye witness reports, pure speculations of drawings, fuzzy pictures and stories. As this continues without any more proof than the same old repeat, the advancement of technology is finally killing this dead horse once and for all.

At some point in all this we will actually need something alien...don't you all think?

a reply to: Lompyt

I've filmed some things I can't explain. Even the best quality footage, shot with cinema cameras & lenses- can't be distinguished from airplanes. The only reason I even keep that footage, is for the time stamp.

The 3D footage however, makes people react like I did when I first saw them. Folks start asking questions, instead of trying to pick out CGI compositing errors.

Therein lies the problem: until north American television goes 4K (all 4K TVs are 3D capable), every "Jay Sherman" out there will have to see them with their own 2 eyes.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Randi's requirements for proof almost guarantee that the prize will never be claimed. He's not interested in small statistically significant test results. He wants circus stuff. Of course that is going to be bullcrap.

There is a big difference between small success above average and million, billon or trillion to 1 odds to be successful without telepathy or other forms of mind powers. For me the biggest proof that ESP does not exists is that gambling is successful, for the casino that is...

As for aliens it needs to be physical evidence...we have stalled for the past 6000 years on only eye witness reports, pure speculations of drawings, fuzzy pictures and stories. As this continues without any more proof than the same old repeat, the advancement of technology is finally killing this dead horse once and for all.

At some point in all this we will actually need something alien...don't you all think?

People in general are not that psychic and rational players focus on the mathematics rather than RV/telepathy. If you wanna go ESP you'd have to let go of all "analytical overlay" (thought, imagination etc) and just see pictures in your head and rely on them. You'd have to be really psychic to do that. I doubt that there is enough time to do that at a gambling table (on the other hand, it seems like a "reading" could be done into the future as well as in the present, the underlying physics do not care). I'm pretty sure it has been done by some gambler at some time. There has been succsesful players, right? But in black jack, card counting would be more effective. In poker, well it's body language and facial expressions. To what extent ESP plays a role in that situation is unknown.

There needs to be physical evidence for what? For you to be convinced? Who should care? Why would a saucer leave permanent evidence behind? (I can't prove I saw an Antonov this morning) Who should keep the evidence? Why would you and I know about it? Wouldn't it hold potentially ground breaking military technlology and thus be subject to secrecy, ridicule and denial? Can you tell your friends without telling your enemies?

What technology is killing what dead horse? Internet technology exposes the UFO enigma because the secrecy around it was not designed for a searchable world. "Exotic propulsion" programmes at for example NASA proves that at least some funded physicists take interstellar travel seriously. Once it's clear that we could do it given enough financial input, maybe some sceptics will re-evaluate UFO anecdotes? (It already is clear that a long lived species could do it with nuclear fusion propulsion)

YT is full of aliens.. Who would notice if one was real? Disinfo agents are doing a good job there. Bottom line, we cannot know. According to ufology, the undertaker in Roswell (who sold some small coffins to the military) happened to know a nurse at the hospital. She did not honor the oath.. She told him that there were dead aliens and they smelled like s-t!

originally posted by: chuckmorris
People in general are not that psychic and rational players focus on the mathematics rather than RV/telepathy.

This is a problem for me...

The problem is that people suggest that ESP is real, but basically untestable due to the how diminutive the results are. This just seems like a copout to me.

There needs to be physical evidence for what? For you to be convinced? Who should care? Why would a saucer leave permanent evidence behind? (I can't prove I saw an Antonov this morning) Who should keep the evidence? Why would you and I know about it? Wouldn't it hold potentially ground breaking military technlology and thus be subject to secrecy, ridicule and denial? Can you tell your friends without telling your enemies?

I saw an Antonov a couple of weeks ago... We do know there are planes in the world, we do know there are many different types, lots of physical evidence...so there is logic here that an Antonov exists even without actually physically seeing one.

You also think too much in the present...Why would a UFO be secret 100 or 200 years ago? This like ESP relies on conspiracies to explain why there is no physical evidence. Everything is kept secret...another copout. BTW I have been to a number of bases considered secret including area 51, Johnson atoll, Michael Army air field, a few others and nothing there alien, but then people will say it is all underground etc...

If I suggest that there are 1000 pound purple flying hypos in the world I have as much proof as UFOs. My point is this all needs to advance to the next stage of evidence, or as time goes by and the world get smaller the whole UFO phenomena becomes more and more nothing more than a socially created event.

What technology is killing what dead horse? Internet technology exposes the UFO enigma because the secrecy around it was not designed for a searchable world. "Exotic propulsion" programmes at for example NASA proves that at least some funded physicists take interstellar travel seriously. Once it's clear that we could do it given enough financial input, maybe some sceptics will re-evaluate UFO anecdotes? (It already is clear that a long lived species could do it with nuclear fusion propulsion)

Maybe... but this doesn't mean we have ever been visited. So far there has been nothing that has not followed a normal path of pure human creation, or I guess people do not give humans much credit to do things on their own.

Bottom line, we cannot know. According to ufology, the undertaker in Roswell (who sold some small coffins to the military) happened to know a nurse at the hospital. She did not honor the oath.. She told him that there were dead aliens and they smelled like s-t!

The bottom line is we are down to "the undertaker and nurse" at Roswell as proof....

As for me, I wouldn't be convinced at all even if there's a mass sighting with clear video and a craft would land 1m from me. As there would still be no evidence, that this craft isn't man made.

What would convince me, is when they would communicate verifiable scientific knowledge or present a device, that is really that far advanced, that I would neglect the possibility that it was man made.
Or if their body would really be that far off, from a human body, that a tie, even with genetic modifications or by an illness can be excluded. E.g. if they would really be very small but still completely conscious beings (e.g. like a fairy).

Edit1:
I personally do think that 99.999% of the sightings and even abductions are human people. I still think that there could be other beings, but then not in the kind, like people usually assume, but then rather the Jacques Vallee types.



Edit2:
I strongly got the impression that any public discoid aircraft development has always strongly been counteracted.
If this is the case, then it would be obvious why: As long as people think these strange crafts are extreterrestrials, the secretops people can do as they want. But as soon, as everytime anyone sees such a craft people would think it is man made, it would make a huge difference, as then people really would want to know who flew when where...and why they did this or that...

I've never experienced anything myself, but it's hard not to believe there is other life out there.

originally posted by: jusputitonmytab
I've never experienced anything myself, but it's hard not to believe there is other life out there.

True, but I see this argument as two very different questions:

1. Is there other intelligent life in the universe?
2. Are intelligent aliens visiting Earth ?

Personally, I'm with you in saying that it would be hard not to believe in other life out there. The sheer size of the universe (even our whole galaxy is nothing but a tiny speck of near nothingness compared to the known universe) and knowing what we know about the veracity of extremomophile life on Earth, I think other life -- even intelligent life -- almost surely exists elsewhere in the universe.

However, when I consider the evidence for the alien visitation of earth, I am not yet convinced that aliens are visiting Earth.

It is good that some folks do not believe aliens are real...They will be able to sleep much better then the folks that have seem aliens.

Just let them sleep in peace...

a reply to: Xtrozero

The problem is that people suggest that ESP is real, but basically untestable due to the how diminutive the results are. This just seems like a copout to me.

It's not untestable. The probabilities associated with a deck of cards are known. It has been done and the results were far beyond the usual thresholds for statistical significance.

We do know there are planes in the world, we do know there are many different types, lots of physical evidence...so there is logic here that an Antonov exists even without actually physically seeing one.

My point was that a typical sighting of any craft does note leave permanent traces. So that's not really an argument against the ET hypothesis, since they're thought to have their bases at locations inaccessable to us.

You also think too much in the present...Why would a UFO be secret 100 or 200 years ago? This like ESP relies on conspiracies to explain why there is no physical evidence. Everything is kept secret...another copout. BTW I have been to a number of bases considered secret including area 51, Johnson atoll, Michael Army air field, a few others and nothing there alien, but then people will say it is all underground etc...

1897 Aurora, Texas crash..please see news article to the right
-Not very secret in 1897.
Back in the 70's, Mufon interviewed a lady who was about 10 yo at the time. She stuck to the story.
Not all ESP research is secret (hence I know of it).
I've done military service and no one showed me a UFO either. But then I'm not american of course.

If I suggest that there are 1000 pound purple flying hypos in the world I have as much proof as UFOs. My point is this all needs to advance to the next stage of evidence, or as time goes by and the world get smaller the whole UFO phenomena becomes more and more nothing more than a socially created event.

Yes, if you dismiss all witnesses testimonials. Personally I'd not count purple flying hypos out, if two or more credible witnesses told of it independently. But they don't.

Maybe... but this doesn't mean we have ever been visited. So far there has been nothing that has not followed a normal path of pure human creation, or I guess people do not give humans much credit to do things on their own.

No and I haven't said that. It was the late colonel Philip Corso who said it in the book The Day After Roswell.

The bottom line is we are down to "the undertaker and nurse" at Roswell as proof....

One of a myriad well researched anecdotes.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
For me the biggest proof that ESP does not exists is that gambling is successful, for the casino that is...

If somebody uses ESP to win at gambling, they might not know it and just consider themselves "lucky," or they might -- if they're smart -- purposely conceal it to avoid the associated negative consequences of people finding out you have an edge. Win just enough to make life easier, but not attract attention. They would also want to stay away from Randi, since getting a one-time million dollar prize and becoming famous in the process wouldn't be worth ruining their chances to make much more than that in the long run.

ESP doesn't exist because people would use it to win the lottery? Well, how do you know they don't?

originally posted by: Lompyt
I often read the threads here on ats with the pics saying "final proof of aliens!!!, bla bla bla. Some of them are good and some are realy bad, but even with the good ones they still end up being slated as fake because maybe we just cant comprehend the thought that there realy real.

So what im saying is what would it take for all you non beleivers out there to turn around and say dam,,, they are real. If i took a pic of a real alien up close in hd, maybe even stood next to it in a cheesy pose it would still get shot down as fake because its too unbeleivable.

Please explain to me what rules a good honest pic or vid for that matter of a real alien being, what would be your perfect alien picture.

The problem is: Pics and Vids can't compete with the possibilities, one has today to fake something. Everything that seems to good to be true will therefor be looked at as fake from the majority of people. Which is ok for me because blind believe in something doesn't get us anywhere.

Personally i believe in the UFO phenomena but after like a decade of reading books, listening to broadcasts and watching videos i'm still uncertain of what the whole subject is really about.

"Open Minded" doesn't mean to believe every crap you come along the internet. For me it means to prevent you from taking a prejudiced view over a certain topic. Nothing more, nothing less.

Also it means to use your own brain. Especially on topics, that are controversial and heavily discussed.

If you think logical there can't be any proof yet. A real "proof" would turn out to get along the media and all the people of the world would recognize it.

originally posted by: chuckmorris
It's not untestable. The probabilities associated with a deck of cards are known. It has been done and the results were far beyond the usual thresholds for statistical significance.

I agree but if one thinks about ESP in the sense that the odds of getting something right over and over becomes astronomical then we have something out side of "thresholds for statistical significance". That is the key..

If I had 20 cards and had 7 billion people guess their order we would have many exceed the thresholds for statistical significance, but what if I gave you a list of the cards over and over. It would be easy for you to have extremely good results that would be almost statically impossible. This is what I would view real ESP to be like and we do not have a case of this, ever. If we did it would be one of the most astonishing events in the world, wouldn't you think?

My point was that a typical sighting of any craft does note leave permanent traces. So that's not really an argument against the ET hypothesis, since they're thought to have their bases at locations inaccessable to us.

I guess my point here is why would it be ET at all? We have basically pulled ET out of thin air and somehow we are saying it is factual. I'm not saying events do not happen just that our conclusion is totally speculation at best.

1897 Aurora, Texas crash..please see news article to the right
-Not very secret in 1897.

So what does this provide us as evidence other than speculation, once again. Doesn't it bother you at all that at the beginning of the UFO phenomena flying saucers were extremely crud, aliens were humanoid etc and as this phenomena grew so did the complexity of ships and aliens? Do you really think aliens in less than 100 years went from flying disks to complex space crafts, so did our commutative imagination evolve this over the years?

I did a post a while back that was pictures of UFOs from late 1800s up to today and it is very interesting how they evolved in a linear fashion with our beliefs in each era of UFOs.

Really makes one wonder....

Yes, if you dismiss all witnesses testimonials. Personally I'd not count purple flying hypos out, if two or more credible witnesses told of it independently. But they don't.

Witnesses testimonials are the weakest form of evidence since it is so easily manipulated. All I'm saying is after 6000 years that is still basically all we have, and it has not changed at all even as we advance ten fold.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
ESP doesn't exist because people would use it to win the lottery? Well, how do you know they don't?

Mainly because odds allow for a winner...

Once again we are back to...either people have it but do not know it, people keep it a secret, the Government gathers them all up, it is so random that one can not reproduce it consistently in an experiment, etc etc... None of this suggests anything out side of pure chance, does it?

We either have proof or we have excuses...all I ever see is excuses...

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Randi's requirements for proof almost guarantee that the prize will never be claimed. He's not interested in small statistically significant test results. He wants circus stuff. Of course that is going to be bullcrap.

There is a big difference between small success above average and million, billon or trillion to 1 odds to be successful without telepathy or other forms of mind powers. For me the biggest proof that ESP does not exists is that gambling is successful, for the casino that is...

Not quite. It proves that ESP of a strong nature is not widely distributed in the population, which I think is an unassailably true fact. Otherwise, casinos have no problem kicking out people for card counting or "card counting". After all, "ESP" looks just like a conspiracy between dealer and customer. They have rights to get rid of any unprofitable customer no matter the reason.