Paul Hellyer drops bomb @ hearing on UFO/Aliens in Canada - Deathbed Testimonial

a reply to: boncho

It's not being suppressed by civilian ufologists, but they cannot scrounge up enough evidence they need government disclosure. They know greys are evil, but still need government disclosure. Either we are being visited or not? What does it have to do with government disclosure. Cow mutilation was covered up by the government? yet it was in the news. Crop circles? There might be a simple explanation why there is no evidence of alien visitations, and it has everything with nothing to disclose? What are Ufologists good for anyway?

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Are you saying you don't believe that story of Michalek? His son has said he was up very close and touched that ship, so the angle of holes wouldn't have to be perfectly parallel to his body to burn that pattern on him. His own son sounded very honest in his testimony about his dad stating the details of the incident to him. I can always tell when I am being lied to and that case isn't one of them. My avatar was made from an artists conception of what he saw when he looked inside the door that opened for a few seconds, except for the alien head.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

So advance they don't post any kinda of galactic recognized radiation warning signs. At least OSHA in the united states has us millennia ahead of space aliens in posting job related hazards or mitigating work place hazards?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

So advance they don't post any kinda of galactic recognized radiation warning signs. At least OSHA in the united states has us millennia ahead of space aliens in posting job related hazards or mitigating work place hazards?

They were obviously quite fearful of Michalek to harm him like they did, and there's also the notion that just because someone non human is technically superior by far to humans, doesn't mean they are higher spiritually. In other words, it doesn't mean they would have the same emotions or awareness of things the way humans do. (sometimes) ..lately humans don't seem to advanced in any department anyway.

Their reaction to Michalek is actually quite similar to what some stupid humans might do to someone encroaching upon their property so brazenly like Michalek did. Hurt first and split outta there.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Are you saying you don't believe that story of Michalek? His son has said he was up very close and touched that ship, so the angle of holes wouldn't have to be perfectly parallel to his body to burn that pattern on him. His own son sounded very honest in his testimony about his dad stating the details of the incident to him.

Do I question anything about an industrial mechanic familiar with welding, prospecting for rocks wearing dark welding goggles, heavy welding gloves, that comes out with a UFO story with uniform burns across his stomach, a shirt scorched showing holes with an outline of what looks like a piece of metal, describes the interior of a spaceship stereotypical 60's style with "flashing lights like a computer" and hears sounds from the craft like a fast electric motor and smells something electrical burning, hears human-like voices from inside (I guess before aliens perfected telepathy?), the heavily wooded site where the 40 foot craft claimed to have landed has no burns on the surrounding trees from landing or take off while Michalak claims his gloves were burnt just by touching it, and someone with a history of drunkenness? Yup.

I can always tell when I am being lied to and that case isn't one of them.

No one has the ability to tell if they're being lied to or not by a total stranger. You can't base facts on a feeling.

Correction, YOU don't have the ability to tell when you are being lied to. I have always had this gift since early childhood.

If you don't have the ability, you couldn't know what I'm even talking about, except to just dismiss it.

But anyways, thanks for the reply.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
Correction, YOU don't have the ability to tell when you are being lied to. I have always had this gift since early childhood.

If you don't have the ability, you couldn't know what I'm even talking about, except to just dismiss it.

But anyways, thanks for the reply.

Life must be easy for you, having this ability. With such a strong gift, why are you here on ATS? There are no secrets hidden from you, so why waste time here?

originally posted by: boncho


Courts are used all the time to determine whether events transpired or not. Whether or not something is credible or not. And also whether or not further study, be it regulatory, scientific or whatever form need be done.

I never said courts didn't make findings of fact. I said the purpose of courts was not to decide whether Aliens, Bigfoot, or Chupacabra were real.

If you think courts exist to decide if Aliens are real, by all means, take that case to court. Only if you can claim injury and point to specific responsible parties will you get an opportunity to make your case, and even then, the court will only make findings of fact relevant to its ruling.

For example, a court in New York (or maybe New Jersey) established a precedent that a person could be sued if they failed to disclose that their house was haunted to prospective buyers. This does not prove ghosts are REAL. That requires scientific evidence. The court is only establishing that if you believe something is wrong with your house, you have a duty to inform potential buyers, even if that something wrong is a ghost. Your belief in the suitability of the property is the key.

I imagine the same limitation of finding would exist in your hypothetical alien case.

The guilt of people who were involved in a wide scale conspiracy to hide the truth about UFO/Alien phenomena is one that should be tried in the court of law.

So you have enough evidence to take this to court? By all means, let us know how that goes.

Otherwise, all this talk of what could or couldn't be proven in court is totally irrelevant.


The claim people are waiting for 'scientific evidence' or that they need solid, reproducible evidence, is intellectually dishonest, ignorant to science and understanding, also a logical fallacy. END... OF... STORY.

The existence of ET must be proven with direct empirical evidence. Preferably, the presence of an actual alien, analyzed by biologists and other specialists to prove its extraterrestrial origin.

originally posted by: CoffeeInMyHand

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
Correction, YOU don't have the ability to tell when you are being lied to. I have always had this gift since early childhood.

If you don't have the ability, you couldn't know what I'm even talking about, except to just dismiss it.

But anyways, thanks for the reply.

Life must be easy for you, having this ability. With such a strong gift, why are you here on ATS? There are no secrets hidden from you, so why waste time here?

Cognitive dissonance on your part.
Being able to tell between lies and truth is one thing, but knowing all the news before it even happens is quite another. And since no one can do that, they may just come here to read about things going on. Is that easier for you to understand now?
Bon

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

You must make a living as a human lie detector or a debunker? Seems you are more interested in the truth you want to hear, not reality. Sorry to repeat the question, what are Ufologists good for and why do they need government disclosure?

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: boncho
I think you are correct since the courts in Salem Massachusetts proved that there were witches. Thank god they burned them all.

What if the witches were actually aliens? Thank god we have courts around to decide these things.

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8

originally posted by: boncho

originally posted by: Aliensarehere
The truth is more likely a deity than aliens. At least that's what I'd be more inclined to believe

That's fine too if it were. Though I'd question why a deity needed a silver metallic vehicle that spits out radiation to get around. This is documented by numerous encounters, radiation burns in the Michalek Falcon Lake Incident.

Yeah, from a man that has a symmetrical set of burns squarely across his stomach with exhaust ports from a "spaceship" that has the ports drawn at an angle:

He would have to be leaning up at an angle and inches away from the exhaust to create a square uniform pattern burn like that. When Falcon visited the hospital, the radiologist found no evidence of radiation trauma either.

Also, his shirt suspiciously has an outline burn that looks like a piece of rectangular metal with holes was placed down and flash burned with a torch. Oh yeah.... he happened to be a mechanic obviously familiar with a welding torch, wearing welding goggles and heavy welding gloves while prospecting.

Some suggested he had fallen on a BBQ pit grate.

His description was stereotypically futuristic for 1967. A 40 foot saucer with a 3 foot dome on the top with openings around it. A hatch that opens and inside a maze of lights on a panel with a cluster of lights flashing in a random sequence like a computer.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but falling onto a BBQ pit would burn his skin in the opposite pattern than is shown in your pic, right? I mean, metal gets hot and burns human skin pretty easily. Why would just the squares burn his shirt and his skin? I understand that the shirt might be protected (it's a possibility) by the metal, but the skin certainly wouldn't be. At least it wouldn't be if he had laid down on it for some time to allow the flames to not only scorch his shirt, but burn his skin. I don't think that is the most logical answer, I think it's the easy way out.

a reply to: superman2012

Correct me if I'm wrong, but falling onto a BBQ pit would burn his skin in the opposite pattern than is shown in your pic, right? I mean, metal gets hot and burns human skin pretty easily. Why would just the squares burn his shirt and his skin? I understand that the shirt might be protected (it's a possibility) by the metal, but the skin certainly wouldn't be. At least it wouldn't be if he had laid down on it for some time to allow the flames to not only scorch his shirt, but burn his skin. I don't think that is the most logical answer, I think it's the easy way out.

BBQ pits come in all shapes and sizes and vary in temperature. We are also very limited with actual evidence for anything. Here is the police report which seems to be the only valid piece of evidence

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
Correction, YOU don't have the ability to tell when you are being lied to. I have always had this gift since early childhood.

If you don't have the ability, you couldn't know what I'm even talking about, except to just dismiss it.

But anyways, thanks for the reply.

Yeah, it's pretty easy to dismiss the delusional nonsense of someone who claims they have the power to tell a lie from the truth with total strangers.

I no longer have the need to ask why you believe the story of several large UFOs "putting out landing gear" and landing at the end of busy airport runways of LAX and Tuscon during the day that go unnoticed or reported by the thousands of people arriving, departing, and waiting to depart on planes, the working ground crews, visitors and employees inside the terminals, or people surrounding the airport roads or businesses. It was told to you by an ATC supervisor that, with your super lie detector spidey senses, you could tell wasn't lying so common sense and logic is tossed out the window.

But seriously, you have to know with a claim like that your credibility wanes. ? . ?

originally posted by: superman2012

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8

originally posted by: boncho

originally posted by: Aliensarehere
The truth is more likely a deity than aliens. At least that's what I'd be more inclined to believe

That's fine too if it were. Though I'd question why a deity needed a silver metallic vehicle that spits out radiation to get around. This is documented by numerous encounters, radiation burns in the Michalek Falcon Lake Incident.

Yeah, from a man that has a symmetrical set of burns squarely across his stomach with exhaust ports from a "spaceship" that has the ports drawn at an angle:

He would have to be leaning up at an angle and inches away from the exhaust to create a square uniform pattern burn like that. When Falcon visited the hospital, the radiologist found no evidence of radiation trauma either.

Also, his shirt suspiciously has an outline burn that looks like a piece of rectangular metal with holes was placed down and flash burned with a torch. Oh yeah.... he happened to be a mechanic obviously familiar with a welding torch, wearing welding goggles and heavy welding gloves while prospecting.

Some suggested he had fallen on a BBQ pit grate.

His description was stereotypically futuristic for 1967. A 40 foot saucer with a 3 foot dome on the top with openings around it. A hatch that opens and inside a maze of lights on a panel with a cluster of lights flashing in a random sequence like a computer.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but falling onto a BBQ pit would burn his skin in the opposite pattern than is shown in your pic, right? I mean, metal gets hot and burns human skin pretty easily. Why would just the squares burn his shirt and his skin? I understand that the shirt might be protected (it's a possibility) by the metal, but the skin certainly wouldn't be. At least it wouldn't be if he had laid down on it for some time to allow the flames to not only scorch his shirt, but burn his skin. I don't think that is the most logical answer, I think it's the easy way out.

I should have italicized "Some." I separated the sentence from the other paragraphs because it's not necessarily what I believe. As I said above, it looks like a piece of rectangular metal with holes was placed on the shirt and flashed with a torch which made the burn marks of the holes and outline of the metal. Michalak was an industrial mechanic whose responsibilities included metalwork and working with a welding torch. Combine it with what was said on the police report ZetaRediculian posted and the refusal to allow the officer to examine his shirt, it seems logical that the scorch marks could have been created after-the-fact:

I wanted to examine his shirt, however, he would not let me, and kept backing away every time I got close to him.
At no time during my conversations with Michalak would he allow me close enough to him to definitely see whether or not he was injured.

a reply to: ZetaRediculian
Hmmm, that is interesting and doesn't seem to corroborate his story, especially with the ash on his chest. That is cool too as my uncle lives on Lindsay St in Winnipeg on the same block!

Was he in shock when he talked with the RCMP or did he make it up? I still have troubles with the burn patterns where the square is burnt into his chest and not the perimeter of the square. That says to me that a high heat was pushed through something. Why it burnt just those squares is anyones guess as it only makes sense to me (because of the small spaces between the burns) that he must have been within inches of the "exhaust port", if it was a spacecraft. I can watch this whole thing from the fence because I can believe either way.

What do you mean by radiation. Infrared, gamma, beta, x-rays, microwaves, alpha, radio waves? Electromagnetic waves could produce those burns like a tanning bed? A burn from a nuclear reaction causing that much radiation probably would have cause great sickness.

I truly believe the main reason the government denies UFOs and refuses to disclose this information is because they are more involved in it way more than we could imagine and mostly for the purpose of technology. The military has technology far beyond our comprehension and mainly for the purpose of weaponry. Anything that can be used as a weapon will be so in the the hands of our military. I believe that their main concern is to make sure that these "weapons" do not get into the wrong hands because obviously it would not be good for any of us. To acknowledge that we have these technologies could start a world war. For the government to admit that UFOs exist would arise so many questions that would eventually lead to: why dont we attempt to gain their technology for use of our own? Which in turn would lead to WWIII and that would be it. I also believe that this very WWIII is inevitable and that is why they have NASA researching life on Mars being the planet in our galaxy most like Earth, believed to have once sustained life. I watch a lot of UFO shows lol and never understood exactly why the government covers it up, but I have recently come to the conclusion that is it actually for the safety of our planet and it's inhabitants, well the human race anyway. I understood the chaos and panic it would cause but ultimately I believe it is to protect themselves from others who are desperate for the technology as well.

originally posted by: SarahAnn
I truly believe the main reason the government denies UFOs and refuses to disclose this information is because they are more involved in it way more than we could imagine and mostly for the purpose of technology. The military has technology far beyond our comprehension and mainly for the purpose of weaponry. Anything that can be used as a weapon will be so in the the hands of our military. I believe that their main concern is to make sure that these "weapons" do not get into the wrong hands because obviously it would not be good for any of us. To acknowledge that we have these technologies could start a world war. For the government to admit that UFOs exist would arise so many questions that would eventually lead to: why dont we attempt to gain their technology for use of our own? Which in turn would lead to WWIII and that would be it. I also believe that this very WWIII is inevitable and that is why they have NASA researching life on Mars being the planet in our galaxy most like Earth, believed to have once sustained life. I watch a lot of UFO shows lol and never understood exactly why the government covers it up, but I have recently come to the conclusion that is it actually for the safety of our planet and it's inhabitants, well the human race anyway. I understood the chaos and panic it would cause but ultimately I believe it is to protect themselves from others who are desperate for the technology as well.

In my opinion, governments don't want to acknowledge the UFO phenomenon because they don't understand it. It confuses them beyond belief. I am sure they have some very secret and impressive tech, but I don't think this is the real reason they stay away from the subject. It seems, to me at least, this phenomenon is very perplexing to those in the know. They know something is going on, they know other governments know something is going on, and they know some civilians know something is going on. They just don't know "WHAT" is going on. I think in the early years they believed the phenomenon was basically nuts and bolts, but they eventually learned there is "more" to the subject. Things that go beyond just science and technology. Governments can't control this phenomenon, and they will never let the people know this...unless their hands are forced.

To make it clear, I am in no way trying to say I know what is going on. The more I look into this subject, the less I know. I believe this is what happened to the various governments of the World. They are living on borrowed time, disclosure will happen. Maybe not in our lifetime, but it will happen. They don't want it to happen, but there will come a time that it will be unavoidable.

a reply to: Greggers

I never said courts didn't make findings of fact. I said the purpose of courts was not to decide whether Aliens, Bigfoot, or Chupacabra were real.

Strawman argument since they don't need to. The answer to the question likely lies in the thousands of undisclosed classified reports and artefacts. Now if we have a hearing to release those hidden facts to the public, than the legal doctrine is 100% relevant to the issue, isn't it? It also needs not make a determination on whether or not any of those things are real, doesn't it?

Only if you can claim injury and point to specific responsible parties will you get an opportunity to make your case, and even then, the court will only make findings of fact relevant to its ruling.

Are you unaware of congressional hearings? You should know them, Benghazi for instance, loges hearing in the history of Congress. Tell me, do you think Pearl Harbour, Watergate, JFK, Subprime Crisis, 9/11...any of these deserved as much attention?

Now, you might say "holy snip Boncho, you sure went off on a straw man right after you accused me of it!" but no, since the two are directly correlated. Is the law being used to adequately pursue and protect the peoples interests, and is congress making a damn bit of difference and doing the job they are hired to do? The answer is no. And the answer to the UFO/Alien question likely lies in their hands if they would actually pursue the topic.

So you have enough evidence to take this to court? By all means, let us know how that goes.

Actually YES, and much more would it ever get to court? NO. Are you not aware of Congress "losing" all its files when they investigated the CIA? Are you also not aware of the CIA covering up the JFK assassination?

The existence of ET must be proven with direct empirical evidence. Preferably, the presence of an actual alien, analyzed by biologists and other specialists to prove its extraterrestrial origin.

You realize this is a circular argument if the military industrial complex is holding the empirical evidence hostage right? The only solution to the problem is disclose the files.

Thats it.

NOTHING MORE TO BE SAID.

Disclose, disclose, disclose.

If there is evidence, its in the many the many missing case files there is nothing more to be said PERIOD. Either disclose or don't, but don't talk about scientific protocols or empirical evidence or anything else, when there's clear evidence that's being kept away from you.

If you did a study to assess if black people are violent and only drew from criminal population data, would that be science? No. Would you be telling people, "well, once we have the empirical evidence to suggest they aren't, until then we must declare black people violent criminals."

Do you see the problem with this? You cannot have 'science' with missing datasets. It doesnt work. Politics and ideology destroy science and both of those have been covering up a subject, for many years and there is plenty of evidence to prove this. Official, physical, circumstantial, you name it.