Elizabeth Klarer & Aliens from the Proxima Centauri System (Our Neighbors!)

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: AboveBoard

It was a planet orbiting the Sun that was likely pushed by Venus into Earth.

She quite clearly states the Moon is foreign. It's not. The Earth and Moon formed when 2 planets orbiting the sun collided. They both are the result of that collision.

She is quite clearly wrong. You appear to WANT her to be right ... which is what her and her kind prey upon.

This is nothing more than a theory, and as Aboveboard stated, the most likely, but that is all... a theory. There is no definitive proof that the moon was created by a collision. It may be that science really has no idea and this theory is the best they can come up with, cuz of course, they have to come up with something. I'm just saying. You try to speak as if you are 100% correct and you are not.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

That isn't the only theory on Venus. New research shows that it could have had habitable atmosphere before turning into the boiling roiling mass we now know and love.

This was linked earlier - here in Part II of the OP: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here is the resource again... Simulations suggest Venus may have once been able to support life

Venus is, by all accounts, an extremely hostile planet—at least from the perspective of humans. It is extraordinarily hot, volcanically active and has an atmosphere that is mostly carbon dioxide. But the simulations created by the research team suggest it may not have always been that way. They started with the idea that Venus and Earth were probably similar billions of years ago—a time when Earth's atmosphere was also mostly carbon dioxide. From there, they created four possible scenarios for the future of Venus based on climate models developed for studying the history of Earth's climate. The models differed only slightly, with variances in energy received from the sun, or the length of days. They also considered conditions with shallow oceans. They let the models run, creating simulations of the planet as it evolved for approximately two billion years.

This is only ONE possibility for Venus, and isn't a sure bet - but I found it interesting.

Look, if there had been nothing at all to support what she was saying, I would be the first to agree! I'm not an apologist for her, though I would love to find some evidence of a story like this being real, but I'm not adverse to it being false, either. The story is on shaky ground, but there is a little bit of ground that hasn't crumbled. That interests me. Especially since the Venus article was from August 9, 2016, so this is brand new information. There are holes in her story for sure, and it may all simply collapse in on itself.

I'm not saying that you are wrong, in other words, I'm simply saying that in my opinion, as unlikely as her story may be, there are a few things that make me scratch my head and, frankly, are keeping me interested in what would otherwise be simply an historical footnote of the "1950's UFO abductee wave."

I appreciate you bringing your sources and opinions, OccamsRazor04! It would be ridiculous to look at a story like this without knocking around the science aspects to see what shakes out and what doesn't!!

a reply to: Rezlooper

Nice of you to ignore the evidence, such as isotopic analysis.

Science does have an idea. They then showed the evidence supports the idea that was the most likely from modeling.

Maybe you want to try to say something about the evidence and sources I posted?

originally posted by: AboveBoard

That isn't the only theory on Venus. New research shows that it could have had habitable atmosphere before turning into the boiling roiling mass we now know and love.

Nice of you to ignore this ...

several simulations of conditions on Venus billions of years ago using

BILLIONS of years ago.

At its current rotation period of 243 days, Venus's climate could have remained habitable until at least 715 million years ago if it hosted a shallow primordial ocean.

IF it did, with no evidence supporting it did. Life does not = lush forests, and 700 million years ago is not 70 million like this lady said.

You just posted a source that proves this lady is a fraud, you do realize that right?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Rezlooper

Nice of you to ignore the evidence, such as isotopic analysis.

Science does have an idea. They then showed the evidence supports the idea that was the most likely from modeling.

Maybe you want to try to say something about the evidence and sources I posted?

Scientific theories are always changing.

originally posted by: Rezlooper

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Rezlooper

Nice of you to ignore the evidence, such as isotopic analysis.

Science does have an idea. They then showed the evidence supports the idea that was the most likely from modeling.

Maybe you want to try to say something about the evidence and sources I posted?

Scientific theories are always changing.

Awesome job at ignoring EVIDENCE again, not theories. I did not post a theory, I posted EVIDENCE, it's not changing. It's clear you WANT this to be true. She's a proven fraud.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I'm attempting to have a friendly discussion with you, so please consider that.



I wasn't ignoring anything. I said 1) that there was one simulation that showed the potential for life - I imagine there were many other simulations where life was not at all successful, 2) In the OP Part II I fully acknowledge the 750 million years issue, and the discrepancy with what she said. (Link ETA - In this simulation, the planet would have been fully habitable for 2 billion years - I'm not sure that, unless it was a highly oxygenated environment, that intelligent life could have evolved during that period of time. Oxygen rich environments are needed by complex creatures. Our evolutionary path was so slow, in part, because oxygen levels in our atmosphere developed so slowly...) Link

It took life on Earth about 3 billion years to develop from primitive to complex. We have no idea if this is “typical,” but it seems reasonable to assume that if “intelligent” life develops at all, this process should take a few billion years, given the rather slow pace of Darwinian-like evolution. This means that we might expect “intelligent” (more cautiously, “complex”) life forms to have emerged in abundance in the universe some 5 to 6 billion years ago. If true, then there could be quite a few civilizations out there that are more advanced than ours by a few billions of years. How is that for a humbling thought?

There are many instances of UFO experiences where people get bogus information - there is a trickster element to the phenomenon. I also know that theories are evolving constantly. And frankly, I'm interested in looking at her story - and that is my right to do, and to take my time to see what things may be "abjectly and objectively untrue" and what things may fit into "high strangeness" and could reveal "truths," or at least statements/events that could be corroborated.

There are parts of her story I just can't believe, for sure! Something about Russians trying to kidnap her with technology that we are only currently developing (a landing vertical rocket complete with escape back to a space station!! Riiiiiiight....)

It interests me to see if there is any wheat in the chaff... *shrug*

a reply to: AboveBoard

Hi above board. ☺

Ill be posting tomorrow my thoughts on the technology aspect of the story as i have thecday off and some time..

Like i said some of it has some merit

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: Nochzwei
a reply to: AboveBoard

hey that flying saucer hill is true. in few of my oobe i boarded a flying saucer or ufo there. it was rather large and also spoke with akon. there were akon like people on board.

Have you put up a thread in the "Grey Area" forum about it yet? If so, please link, if not, you might consider it...

Thanks so much for joining in!

- AB

I had forgotten about it so I didnt make any thread, but your photo in the op about the grassy hill i remembered of my experiences. It was in the mid 90's and my memory is fuzzy. I was gliding over that grassy hill, then was translated
into a rather large spacecraft with akon like beings and also had something very pleasant to eat. whether i travelled to any distant world i dont remember nor do i remember anything about the propulsion system or what i spoke with those beings. but was sad to return back to my body. Lol do you think i should make a thread now that i remember it?

I've read that any plant life that might be found in the day/night band of this tidally locked planet, would almost certainly be black in colour, because of the dimmer light of it's host star, where evolution would favor a color that would have the highest possible rate of absorption. That would be freaky in and of itself.

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

That would be freaky in and of itself.

And really makes no practical sense. The coloration of photosynthetic life would depend upon the absorption spectrum of the planet's atmosphere. As on Earth, it would maximize utilization of the dominant wavelengths.

a reply to: Kimo12fr

S aucers V4N4 1957

They list as source for complete story sievers and FSR and always only 3 photos - has someone seen the 4 missing ones?

originally posted by: Kimo12fr
a reply to: Kimo12fr

S aucers V4N4 1957

They list as source for complete story sievers and FSR and always only 3 photos - has someone seen the 4 missing ones?

I think the other 4 were too blurry to be worth anything. That's the reason they are not used.

Thanks for joining the thread!!

Valiant Thor, research the story...

I find it hard to believe that life evolved on Venus. Period. Several hundred million years ago, it surely could have been "seeded" or colonized.

Then again, the Homo Sapiens genome was manipulated in the last 100,000, so in as much as I respect brilliance like Richard Dawkins, current held truths are convenient falsehoods.

originally posted by: Gothmog
So , an alien uses up a near infinite amount of resources to travel to Earth . To communicate with only one Earth woman. Telepathically . Then impregnate her and leave.
Yeah , I believe.

I raise my hand to testify that at least one member of Earth would do this. No remorse.

originally posted by: Illumimasontruth

originally posted by: Gothmog
So , an alien uses up a near infinite amount of resources to travel to Earth . To communicate with only one Earth woman. Telepathically . Then impregnate her and leave.
Yeah , I believe.

I raise my hand to testify that at least one member of Earth would do this. No remorse.

she came forward with her story, but there surely are others and these aliens can collect sperm from even oobes or seemingly so
read this www.abovetopsecret.com...

just finished reading ' beyond the light barrier '. some inconsistencies are there, like a russian contraption landing to capture her.
And why didn't she bring back from the other planet, something we can touch, measure and analyze?

the picture looks like fake to me because the UFO object is too detailed for the photo quality

a reply to: play4keeps

Richard Dawkins was probably hugged too much and made to believe that he was the centre of a world that in itself is a fluke of an existence.... The reason he is so revered....is because sadly there are plenty of people out there that think that way, hey and maybe they are right...but you wont be able to tell me so in the next life whereas i will, you may not be there to hear me though.

Just finished reading the book of Elizabeth Klarer.
Amazing.

Although some things don't make sense.
1. She claims aliens she met originate from Venus. Then they came to Earth because Venus became uninhabitable.
And they left some Aliens on Earth before moving to Alpha Centauri. Then they mated with local Earth humans.
WHAT THE... ? HOW COME? Earth humans and Venus humans must have had completely different genes.
2. How come they evolved on Venus physically so similar to Earth humans?
3. Why don't they help Earth humans to achieve harmonic civilisation?