Garry Nolan Interview - Most important interview since Debunked Bob Lazar?

This video is beyond interesting. Garry Nolan has first hand knowledge of the UFO issue personally and professionally.



www.youtube.com...

(no idea how to embed this video)



Mod Note: IMPORTANT New old Standards Are Being Enforced again For New Threads – Please Review This Link.

a reply to: FingerMan

Here you go...

a reply to: Encia22


Thanks. I did take a listen as have found Nolan quite interesting which stems from the Rendlesham case and John Burroughs. I picked up that in Nolan's personal experiences he mentioned hearing something in his head . He's pretty brave considering his position. For me it has the hmmmm factor.

Another crackpot weirdo with no credibility claiming to see little green men in flying saucers. What a geek (sarc)

a reply to: FingerMan

Can you give us a breakdown of what is said in the video?

I just happened to be watching the latest Lazar documentary when I spotted this thread.

I think Lazar is FOS personally...

a reply to: FingerMan

Here's a more in depth 1hr 40min interview with Garry Nolan interviewed by Lex Friedman. This is really really good. They talk a lot about the UAP/UFO phenomenon, why it should be studied, how we should go about studying it etc.

"Nolan confirms he believes..." Funny way to phrase a belief for sensationalized effect I guess. Diehard believers in this phenomenon eat that nonsense up.

So he's not confirming by way of scientific facts through scutinized physical evidence and analysis including serious questioning by his peers etc., but by his BELIEF. An emotional "trust me" feeling this is real and not one actually showing us evidence this is in fact happening. Scientific scrutiny and analysis is the mans job! How is this anymore of giving us scientific evidence? It just more fodder that the believer can point to and use as their "evidence" which is only more of the appeal to authority argument attempted to be used.

This subject is NOT A PLACE for a belief and thinking it's true no matter the man's title, it's a place for physical evidence that it's happening within our physical world, not within the mind of the experiencer. This is again is the use of a label, not factual evidence, to convince us of a BELIEF.

I want to believe we're being visited, seriously. That there is a superior intelligence in the universe. But I refuse to play into this routinue game of a figure of authority coming forward, in which i could rattle off a list, now believes UFO/UAPs are off-world craft of superior intelligence just because he has a strong feeling.
Show Us Evidence.

Bob Lazar is full of BS and has proven this for 35 YEARS. People need to stop catering to and playing fanboy and hold Lazar accountable!
Hold Nolan accountable to show us this overwhelming evidence that would convince his scientific colleagues too. The release of photographs and video so far is no way near extraordinary visual evidence.

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

It is interesting, but I guess not surprising to see new names appear, and an insistence that they must replace all old names. Like many of us I learned not to count your chickens because a name told you to, and hate being the bearer of bad news to people just joining the scene full of hope and trust. We all learn through experience I guess. You only get one chance to get burnt by a UFOologist the first time lol.

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Nolan confirms he believes..." Funny way to phrase a belief for sensationalized effect I guess. Diehard believers in this phenomenon eat that nonsense up.

They sure do. Nolan seemed to start out well some time ago and of course has been involved in the Rendlesham affair with Dr Kit Green , as time has gone on though my alarm bells are going regardless of his very impressive credentials . Still, will be interesting to see what further stuff transpires from him in the future?

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
Show Us Evidence.

I want to know and to have you spell it out in clear, concise language, exactly what evidence you, personally, would accept as proof that UFOs exist.

And then I will show you how your "evidence" can all be forged, faked, or photoshopped and that those reasons would be what any other nonbeliever would use to deny the "proof" of the existence of UFOs. Just admit it. UFO debunkers' minds are closed and their opinion is already made up and is not going to change for any reason. People are getting tired of it. If you've never experienced a UFO, you're in no place to have an opinion whether they exist or not. And if you have seen a UFO, you know they exist.

Your non-response to this request will be very telling and everyone will be able to tell that I was right, if you don't reply.



TCB

Let's have a demonstration to prove my point. Somebody try to prove Abraham Lincoln existed and I will be able to debunk any proof of his existence that anybody would be able to provide - using the same reasoning that UFO debunkers use. Can you understand that this kind of thing is what UFO debunkers do? Their minds are closed to everything, so they will not accept any "proof."

A piece of an alleged spacecraft that has crashed, a biological piece of an alien body like the ones you hear have been kept secret for all these years. A speck of anything related to the interior of a spacecraft or from the clothing of ET, a tiny portion of Bob Lazars element 115, a piece of an alien implant like in Patient 17 that has conviently gone missing, a piece of one if these an ancient alien mummy skulls, physical ground evidence that was left behind. Evidence that has been highly scrutinized and analyzed by an unbiased source that has no connection in this analysis either for or against alien life. An analysis that would be open for free available study and questioned by others in all scientific fields. In other words, any type of physical evidence that would be required of a new discovery for our own animal or insect kingdoms in order to create the existence of a new species.

This is the typical unreasonable requirements argument as if the discovery of an entire new species from another planet shouldn't or wouldn't require diligent study. Or saying skeptics wouldn't be satisfied if ET landed on the White House lawn silliness.

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind
 ...prove Abraham Lincoln existed

Do we have to prove the existence of human beings? Can we use scientific physical evidence to biologically show that a human being exists? Can we then prove that this being was the residing president of the United States over millions of people through physical evidence?
We have PHYSICAL evidence to show all of this, meanwhile there's not a speck of physical evidence to prove the existence of ET.
We live in a physical world governed by physical laws, not one within our minds.

First off, thank you for replying. That shows true character and I can respect that.

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
A piece of an alleged spacecraft that has crashed, a biological piece of an alien body like the ones you hear have been kept secret for all these years. A speck of anything related to the interior of a spacecraft or from the clothing of ET, a tiny portion of Bob Lazars element 115, a piece of an alien implant like in Patient 17 that has conviently gone missing, a piece of one if these an ancient alien mummy skulls, physical ground evidence that was left behind. Evidence that has been highly scrutinized and analyzed by an unbiased source that has no connection in this analysis either for or against alien life. An analysis that would be open for free available study and questioned by others in all scientific fields. In other words, any type of physical evidence that would be required of a new discovery for our own animal or insect kingdoms in order to create the existence of a new species.

Has any of those things been done? What were the results? Can you provide links to all the times it was done and the results? If not, then how would you know if your request hasn't already been answered? Your absence of knowledge is not knowledge of absence.

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
This is the typical unreasonable requirements argument as if the discovery of an entire new species from another planet shouldn't or wouldn't require diligent study. Or saying skeptics wouldn't be satisfied if ET landed on the White House lawn silliness.

I say this is the typical deflection kind of rebuttal that debunkers always resort to. What "silliness" are you referring to? Are you talking about skeptics that see the UFO landing on the White House lawn and who are standing just outside the gates, or are watching it live on television? Because I've seen lots of things on live television that were not real. Such as lines and down numbers on the field during a football game. And I've seen videos of filled stadiums, full of people, that saw a dragon flying above their heads. There were in the actual stadium and witnessed it, however, it wasn't real. It was a 3-D projection of some kind. Technology has really come that far.

Can't you see that no matter what kind of proof there might be, there will always be somebody that will come along and attempt to debunk it? Why is this? If UFOs are not real, why go to all the trouble of trying to debunk it in every thread or newspaper article? Why do people waste some much time trying to debunk something that, according to them, isn't real? I guess it boils down to the old saying, "Seeing is Believing." But, if you haven't seen something, that doesn't put you in a position to say that somebody else hasn't seen something. That's just an uniformed opinion that has no basis with reality.

I would ask two questions.

1. Have you ever seen a UFO?

2. If you haven't ever seen a UFO, are you saying that every single person who has claimed to see a UFO is lying?

I think the odds are impossible that every single person is lying. However.... doesn't that also imply that some people aren't lying and really did see a UFO?

Thanks again for responding, I appreciate it.



TCB

a reply to: FingerMan

Early in the interview Nolan states that no one knows what these " things " are,

Later on he says The US Government have been back engineering crashed UFO's.

A contradiction of statements.

Great video, thanks for sharing. To have someone with his credentials and respect share this is really something, even the presenters reaction says it all.

Interesting to see if anything comes of this, but maybe just another slow drip feed before the big reveal?

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8


This subject is NOT A PLACE for a belief and thinking it's true no matter the man's title, it's a place for physical evidence that it's happening within our physical world, not within the mind of the experiencer.

Let me explain why this is an unreasonable position to take.
We do not yet fully understand our 'physical' world.
We cannot yet detect all elements of our 'physical' world.
But we do know that we have been detecting traces of elements of our physical world which we are not yet able to understand (look up the double slit experiment).

This is the evidence that it is better to remain open on the possibilities that this subject suggests!

What does he say about Lazar?

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: FingerMan

Early in the interview Nolan states that no one knows what these " things " are,

Later on he says The US Government have been back engineering crashed UFO's.

A contradiction of statements.

No its doesn't?

Early in the interview Nolan states that no one knows what these " things " are, - NOT HUMAN

Later on he says The US Government have been back engineering crashed UFO's. - A NOT HUMAN TECHNOLOGY

originally posted by: TritonTaranis

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: FingerMan

Early in the interview Nolan states that no one knows what these " things " are,

Later on he says The US Government have been back engineering crashed UFO's.

A contradiction of statements.

No its doesn't?

Early in the interview Nolan states that no one knows what these " things " are, - NOT HUMAN

Later on he says The US Government have been back engineering crashed UFO's. - A NOT HUMAN TECHNOLOGY

You appear to be confused here

Do you know what " back engineering " is ? Let me help

Reverse engineering, sometimes called back engineering, is a process in which software, machines, aircraft, architectural structures and other products are deconstructed to extract design information from them. Often, reverse engineering involves deconstructing individual components of larger products. The reverse engineering process enables you to determine how a part was designed so that you can recreate it. Companies often use this approach when purchasing a replacement part from an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) is not an option

astromachineworks.com...

If The US HAS been back engineering UFO's then they do know what they are. Nolan states earlier in the interview The US Government don't know what they are. A contradiction.

What he probably actually meant, was if they are not human manufactured then " They don't know where they come from "

Nolan comes across as a fantasist i am afraid. Claims he saw a UFO as a child but can't remember when it was. Something that important would stick in your brain.

a reply to: alldaylong

Claims he saw a UFO as a child but can't remember when it was. Something that important would stick in your brain.

It should. Yet his credentials are so fantastic...? My alarm bells are going though.