Is There any point to posting UFO videos?

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
Now, when I clicked on this thread I thought, "finally, someone gets it, UFO videos without support are not worth debating" How sad I was it was just some kid crying that he didn't get the amount of attention he "deserves"

Not crying. Just pissed that people like you are condescending. You assume everyone around here has been on ATS for 10 years and knows the rules and exactly what to expect. This is just some guy who came here to share what he saw and he gets ridiculed. Not exactly how I'd want to be greeted going into a new forum. And I'm pretty sure, neither would you.

Posting the typical 30 second or so UFO video with NO CORROBORATING back-up evidence to validate anything is a waste of time.

This is not a scientist. Maybe after 20 years of searching, he might be able to bring you charts and graphs and interviews from every passenger. This is the first time it's happened to him - how it is for 99% of the people who see UFOs. They don't know the rules. They don't know the best way to film. I'm much more inclined to beleive someone who's seen a UFO for the first time then someone who has perfect video evidence, 6 corroborating interviews from friends, and who has supposedly seen a UFO eight times before. Yeah because UFOs keep flying over the same people.

Like I have said a million times here, and I'm right about it plain and simple, there has to be more to it than just a video. Think about it.

That's your opinion. Don't blast people and be an a-hole to make your point. People will respect you and take you more seriously.

You posted a typical BUNK UFO video of some kids on a plane with a camera. The obvious acting in the very first part is almost embarrassing to listen to. And there was nothing else to look into, no flight data, no faa records...hell, don't even know what airline it is or who the people are, passenger lists to check if any one of the other hundred or so people saw it and reported it....flight crew interviews.....you know, corroborating evidence. It seems to be going out of style in this quick-fix internet age that has done nothing but breed ignorance and kill common sense. Sorry your a casualty, it's not all your fault.

Now who's crying? Are you sad because someone didn't hand you a PR kit of the sighting? Awww, that's too bad. Read the thread. All those things are explained in there in a very logical way. I mean if you see a UFO out your window, are you going to start screaming "UFO!", wake everybody up, and cause panic on an international flight in the middle of the night?

Look, I'm sorry you want to overlook common sense, reason and logic to believe in something so bad, and are all bent out of shape because this video was near and dear to your beliefs and it failed to blow our skirts up...but that’s life. And now you want to make a posting crying you got the wrong kind of attention you think you obviously deserve? Please.

I think he just didn't want a bunch of a&%holes screaming at him for bringing an interesting video online that I'm sure he wishes - just as we do - was of a little better quality. Approaching someone by saying, "Listen, we get a lot of fakes around here and we really want to believe you - so don't take offense if we ask you some tough questions" is a much better attitude to take than, say, anything you write. "YOU'RE A FAKE AND EVERYONE'S AN ACTOR! RAAAAAAWWWW!!! Seriously, how would you respond to that? Well, maybe that's the way you live your life. I don't know. Anyway, I've told this guy to press the ignore button when it comes to people like you. So hopefully he'll listen.

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch

There are so many things wrong with this kind of thinking I don't even know where to begin. Actually, the real answer to how to approach UFOs is the opposite of your response. Because we're dealing with something potentially out of this world, all the normal ways of thinking should be thrown out. A new "open mind" not bogged down by a more typical scientific approach is what's needed.

Excellent point there CaptnCrunch!
And here's a video of an example of a "scientific" evaluation by engineers on one subject matter we are all familiar with but it should be clear, at least to some members of this forum, that they perhaps are (((DELUSIONAL))) not only in their experimental "set-ups" but also in their conclusions of those results from each experiment. Do you think?



[edit on 19-4-2008 by Palasheea]

Hi there hpsfl. Well, ATS certainly isn't a personality contest, good thing too. You had an interesting sighting and did what you felt you should by posting it on youtube. (pssst......bring it here first next time. ) And by reading the thread, it sounds like you were sought out and invited to join the discussion (?), which you graciously did. I think you held your ground very well. There were quite a few very intruiged posters who were supporting you and your video.

Some new posters come in, get overwhelmed by the accusations and personal jabs, and leave after the first few posts. You hung in there...good for you! It's the ones that are invited in and don't accept that you have to wonder what their intentions are. I could tell by your posts that your intentions were not deceiftul.

With that said, unless one is familiar with this ATS they may not realize what they are getting themselves into when they join a discussion. I have to agree with an earlier poster that objectivity is crucial here. ATS would be laughed right off the internet if there was none. However, we need objectivity, not personal stabs and accusations. But those kind of posts will always be present, you have to expect it. I've got two posters debating something in one of my threads that is totally off topic, but that's ok, if everyone agreed on everything that is presented to us, well, it would be a very boring site.

Look, disclosure is not going to come in the form of a single video no matter how good it is, sometimes an honest, well-meaning witness with no photos or videos is just as credible.

Don't stop posting, but when you do...don't get discouraged, you've already proven that you can hold your ground. You know what you saw, you don't need validation from us. Stick around for awhile, you may actually enjoy yourself, this is a great site with a lot of great people, believers and skeptics alike.

oops!

wrong thread!

I am sorry

[edit on 19-4-2008 by spacebot]

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
There are so many things wrong with this kind of thinking I don't even know where to begin. Actually, the real answer to how to approach UFOs is the opposite of your response. Because we're dealing with something potentially out of this world, all the normal ways of thinking should be thrown out. A new "open mind" not bogged down by a more typical scientific approach is what's needed.

Oh yes, because we don't know what it is then we should get rid of every piece of logical knowledge, right? In case you don't know it, that's exactly why science exists, to test and explain things we initially don't know. Everything apart that is dogma and faith, which by definition is the act of leaving logic behind. And with no logic, you get nothing because you can't arrive to real conclusions. I'm not pulling this from nowhere, it's the hard truth: if you take out the science and the logic from the UFO field, all you get is person A saying UFOs are green and aliens are big and violet; person B telling UFOs are orange and aliens are from other dimension; and person C telling UFOs are actually flying buildings and that aliens are time travelers.

So, to put it simple:
science and logic ----> real conclusions
everything else ----> chaos and useless information

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
I mean seriously. How dare you tell me or anyone else what they "can't think".

Learn to read. I didn't said anywhere you can't think, I said you can't know for sure that what you're seeing is this or that. You can think it's one thing or the other but you can't know for sure unless you can first rule out earthly and common explanations.

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
Just because I don't "know something" for sure, doesn't mean I can't theorize that it might be that thing.

Of course you can make up theories, that's where the real fun is. But theories per se are completely useless if they are based in something that's not right.

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
As far as you believing that there's no official proof of alien craft and therefore I'm not allowed to think that this may be one - well in my opinion, from a few of the cases I've read about/seen - there is proof. And therefore I CAN believe that this is a UFO.

You, my friend, can do whatever you feel like, believe me I won't be up at nights wondering what you're up to. If you want to believe in alien life that's great by me (I do believe it too, BTW). But you have to understand that one thing is what YOU believe and another one is what the world accepts. I can believe in flying pigs but if there's no evidence for it my theories would be useless. And it's not like I don't think there's "official proof", what I'm saying, and this is nothing new, is that there's not enough evidence to proof alien life. I'm not saying that there's not enough evidence to proof alien life *to you*, I'm saying it's not enough to make it officially a fact and be able to study it.

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
Are you saying that when people theorized that the world was round instead of a flat, they were all wrong because it hadn't been proven yet?? Huh??

It's different, people believed the earth was flat because their religion was telling it was. Religion is managed by dogma and faith, and as I already say, those factor won't lead you to real conclusions. Now, many centuries later, we have science. Science has methods which are logical and irrefutable, no matter how much you kick and scream.

It's very simple: you take a picture showing something odd that you didn't saw before. People analyze it and discover it's actually lens flare or whatever, and they make an experiment which proves them right. That's science. It's your choice not to believe them, but if you do you can: (a) be guided by dogma and faith; or (b) be guided by science and make another experiment or present other kind of proof which destroys the previous theory. If you choose b, then you may have real proof in your hands. If you choose a, you've got nothing.

[edit on 19-4-2008 by Radiobuzz]

Originally posted by hsur2112
Hi there hpsfl. Well, ATS certainly isn't a personality contest, good thing too. You had an interesting sighting and did what you felt you should by posting it on youtube. (pssst......bring it here first next time.

) And by reading the thread, it sounds like you were sought out and invited to join the discussion (?), which you graciously did. I think you held your ground very well. There were quite a few very intruiged posters who were supporting you and your video.

Some new posters come in, get overwhelmed by the accusations and personal jabs, and leave after the first few posts. You hung in there...good for you! It's the ones that are invited in and don't accept that you have to wonder what their intentions are. I could tell by your posts that your intentions were not deceiftul.

With that said, unless one is familiar with this ATS they may not realize what they are getting themselves into when they join a discussion. I have to agree with an earlier poster that objectivity is crucial here. ATS would be laughed right off the internet if there was none. However, we need objectivity, not personal stabs and accusations. But those kind of posts will always be present, you have to expect it. I've got two posters debating something in one of my threads that is totally off topic, but that's ok, if everyone agreed on everything that is presented to us, well, it would be a very boring site.

Look, disclosure is not going to come in the form of a single video no matter how good it is, sometimes an honest, well-meaning witness with no photos or videos is just as credible.

Don't stop posting, but when you do...don't get discouraged, you've already proven that you can hold your ground. You know what you saw, you don't need validation from us. Stick around for awhile, you may actually enjoy yourself, this is a great site with a lot of great people, believers and skeptics alike.

Hi hsur2112!

Are you new to the Aliens/UFO forum? I've been here for almost 2 years now and I've never seen you post in this forum before until today but welcome!

Good message to the OP too, btw!

reply to post by Palasheea


Hi Palasheea and thanks. No, not new, but thanks for the welcome anyways. I'm actually in this forum 90% of the time, we've probably just been missing each other. Oh, and I changed my avatar last week so that may be why. I'm trying to motivate myself to get my Alaska tripped planned.

Ok, sorry, back on topic. M & M's for the mods.

It's different, people believed the earth was flat because their religion was telling it was. Religion is managed by dogma and faith, and as I already say, those factor won't lead you to real conclusions. Now, many centuries later, we have science. Science has methods which are logical and irrefutable, no matter how much you kick and scream.

It's very simple: you take a picture showing something odd that you didn't saw before. People analyze it and discover it's actually lens flare or whatever, and they make an experiment which proves them right. That's science. It's your choice not to believe them, but if you do you can: (a) be guided by dogma and faith; or (b) be guided by science and make another experiment or present other kind of proof which destroys the previous theory. If you choose b, then you may have real proof in your hands. If you choose a, you've got nothing.

[edit on 19-4-2008 by Radiobuzz]

Okay, hold up. There was science back when people thought the earth was flat. Let's not start making things up here. It may have been stated in religious texts first that the world was flat, but that doesn't mean that the scientists of the day didn't believe it as well. It took one scientist, however, who thought outside of the box, to prove all the other scientists wrong. It's no different that there are a million scientists today who think there are no aliens - and one day someone will come along and prove them wrong. Everything requires at least some leap of faith. If I asked you to prove to me that, let's say, whales existed. Could you prove to me that whales existed? Sure you could point online to pictures of whales and send me books about whales and point me to the "W" page of the encyclopedia - but just because someone writes about something, does that make it true? Just because someone's taken a picture of something, does that make it true? Just because you've personally saw a whale yourself, does that mean I have to believe you? Have you and I ever stood in front of a whale together where you pointed and said, "that's a whale"? No. Therefore there's always going to be a leap of faith involved, whether it's a big leap or a tiny leap.

That's why I think science is important - but not the end all be all - espically when talking about UFOs, since they may not act under the laws of science as we know them (they may act under the laws of science that we know in, say, 100 years). But just because we haven't made it to the point where our science catches up with theirs, doesn't mean we can't make a good case (nothing is definite either way - like I said, a leap of faith is always required) that this could be a UFO.

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch

Okay, hold up. There was science back when people thought the earth was flat. Let's not start making things up here. It may have been stated in religious texts first that the world was flat, but that doesn't mean that the scientists of the day didn't believe it as well. It took one scientist, however, who thought outside of the box, to prove all the other scientists wrong.

Ok, fine. It took a guy to prove them wrong, and how did he do it? Crying in forums? No, he followed a scientific approach: "they think the earth is flat, I don't, so I will go sailing and see if I fall or not". He had an hypotesis and he proved it right by making an experiment.

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
It's no different that there are a million scientists today who think there are no aliens - and one day someone will come along and prove them wrong.

I don't really think there are millions of scientists who don't believe in aliens, in fact it's probable that they do believe it to a certain degree at least (considering the drake ecuation and all). But they know they can't do anything with just believing, they also have to prove it to be taken as a scientific fact of life. And until now there's no video or picture to prove it because even if you manage to capture an unidentified flying object in great detail you will only have a proof for that: an unidentified flying object. But you don't know who build it, who's operating it and where do they come from. So filming a craft (or worse, a dot) it not objectively a proof of alien life.

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
Everything requires at least some leap of faith. If I asked you to prove to me that, let's say, whales existed. Could you prove to me that whales existed? Sure you could point online to pictures of whales and send me books about whales and point me to the "W" page of the encyclopedia - but just because someone writes about something, does that make it true? Just because someone's taken a picture of something, does that make it true? Just because you've personally saw a whale yourself, does that mean I have to believe you? Have you and I ever stood in front of a whale together where you pointed and said, "that's a whale"? No. Therefore there's always going to be a leap of faith involved, whether it's a big leap or a tiny leap.

We know whales exist because everyone in the world can see them whenever they like (assuming they could travel), and thus science could study them and make conclusions which you can test for yourself if you'd want to. You can choose to not believe in something evident but that's paranoia. Aliens are not a scientific fact because only some people claim to have seen them, and only a few of them captured the event on a camera. But as I explained before, it's not evidence. And I know it's not fair, but that's simply the way it is.

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
That's why I think science is important - but not the end all be all - espically when talking about UFOs, since they may not act under the laws of science as we know them (they may act under the laws of science that we know in, say, 100 years). But just because we haven't made it to the point where our science catches up with theirs, doesn't mean we can't make a good case (nothing is definite either way - like I said, a leap of faith is always required) that this could be a UFO.

You're way off with this. What we were discussing was the fact that when a users post a video, people tend to debunk it. It has nothing to do with alien technology, if someone films something that they think it's a UFO but it turned out to be anything else, and if that can be proved by a solid theory, then that's that, it has nothing to do with external factors. Supposedly if you arrive to a logical conclusion using the scientific method then the result should be irrefutable.

Meaning, I say "I believe my table is hard, so I will punch it to see if I'm right". I punch it, my hand hurts, I see that I was right. The same applies to this field: if you take a picture of a thing, then a user comes and say "I believe this is actually a reflection so I will apply these filters and take similar pictures". If they are right, then that's it, you can't really argue about it unless you also can offer a new logical theory which can be backed up with more experimentation.

Originally posted by hsur2112
reply to post by Palasheea

 

Hi Palasheea and thanks. No, not new, but thanks for the welcome anyways.

I'm actually in this forum 90% of the time, we've probably just been missing each other. Oh, and I changed my avatar last week so that may be why. I'm trying to motivate myself to get my Alaska tripped planned.

Ok, sorry, back on topic. M & M's for the mods.

I know you're not new here now (in this sub-forum) and I'm sure it's the avatar change on your part was part of the confusion.
-- checked out your profile and I recognize and recall your contributions here. Your moniker (name here) is one of those hard ones to remember too so that and your new avatar change threw me off! I'm more apt apt to remember avatar's anyway as I'm more visually oriented in that regard.
Jeesh, hard to keep track on who's who here sometimes but now that I know who you are just want to say that I've always enjoyed reading your posts!

Originally posted by Radiobuzz

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
That's why I think science is important - but not the end all be all - espically when talking about UFOs, since they may not act under the laws of science as we know them (they may act under the laws of science that we know in, say, 100 years). But just because we haven't made it to the point where our science catches up with theirs, doesn't mean we can't make a good case (nothing is definite either way - like I said, a leap of faith is always required) that this could be a UFO.

You're way off with this. What we were discussing was the fact that when a users post a video, people tend to debunk it. It has nothing to do with alien technology, if someone films something that they think it's a UFO but it turned out to be anything else, and if that can be proved by a solid theory, then that's that, it has nothing to do with external factors. Supposedly if you arrive to a logical conclusion using the scientific method then the result should be irrefutable.

Meaning, I say "I believe my table is hard, so I will punch it to see if I'm right". I punch it, my hand hurts, I see that I was right. The same applies to this field: if you take a picture of a thing, then a user comes and say "I believe this is actually a reflection so I will apply these filters and take similar pictures". If they are right, then that's it, you can't really argue about it unless you also can offer a new logical theory which can be backed up with more experimentation.

Actually, you’re quite way off yourself. You’re applying a method of science to a world/culture/technology that we don’t understand. It’s almost ridiculous that you would argue this is a good idea. They don’t operate under the same rules as us, so why are we allowed to judge them by our rules? Science supposedly “proved” 20 years ago that there was no water on Mars. So I grew up thinking it was impossible for water to exist on Mars. Imagine my surprise when science backtracked. So why should I believe that scientific analysis is the best course of action again? It sure has been wrong a hell of a lot. This is the very reason I don’t trust the method. Not only is science extremely fallible, but it has the nerve to actually “prove” something about a planet it’s never been to. So pardon me if I don’t jump on the “let’s all adhere to scientific analysis” bandwagon when looking at UFO videos.

Now if we REALLY want to go back to what my response was about. It was about the fact that people attack these posters in a rude and aggressive manner without any respect for their video or picture in question, usually ripe with snarky sarcastic remarks and assumptions that the person is a liar. I’m saying, why can’t we give them the benefit of the doubt? And if we can’t, why can’t we at least be polite about it? That’s all. I know. Amazing concept, right?

The conversation evolved into a discussion about how to approach video analysis. You thought we should only try to disprove a video, adhering to the scientific method, whereas I say, why not approach it from the other side? Why not assume the person is telling the truth and look for clues as to how this might be real? Does it fit into the neat little box of what your college professors taught you was the only way to approach an unknown entity? No. But I’m saying, that really hasn’t gotten us anywhere in this arena in the past. So it may be time to change.




[edit on 19-4-2008 by CaptnCrunch]

[edit on 19-4-2008 by CaptnCrunch]

Most ufo clips just look like blobs moving about. Blobs that have been uploaded by someone you dont know from Adam. Considering this its more peculiar that a lot of people just believe them unconditionally.

The main problem is that no one yet has posted a picture or a video that shows anything????? I have taken photos of Jet aircraft.. birds,,, kites... and when I put them on the screen.. you can actually tell thats its a bird or a plane ... or even a kite... but with u.f.o.s.. you might just as well.. . take a hike..

reply to post by philjwolf


Unfortunately if they look too real then everyone thinks their fake or cgi! I did have a chat with a pilot once who reckons ufo sightings are genuine, and not uncommon in the airline industry. He told me about orbs following a plane over Canada at night.

Which would be exactly the kind of video which would look like nothing on the internet.

Wow I seem to have created quite the stoem of controversy.

On a sort of off topic matter:

Internos:

It won't let me send U2U until i have 20 posts, or upload anything until I have 15. Maybe I could email it to you?

Wow I seem to have created quite the stoem of controversy.

On a sort of off topic matter:

Internos:

It won't let me send U2U until i have 20 posts, or upload anything until I have 15. Maybe I could email it to you?

Originally posted by hpsfl

Internos:

It won't let me send U2U until i have 20 posts, or upload anything until I have 15. Maybe I could email it to you?

Of course you can: the address is the one i've sent you via U2U.
Thanks in advance

I think there are certain things or criteria a video should implement before it's really worth to get posted.

- High res or at least medium quality.

- Different objects (trees, houses, landscapes), not only the ufo, so someone can estimate the size and distance.

- An unusual movement. Otherwise it's just a light (plane, baloon, venus or whatever) in the sky. There's nothing special about stationary objects, no matter what kind of color, or shape. This is what makes alien craft special, their ability of impossible maneuvers compared to our state of technology. That would be some true evidence to me, and makes it worth to investigate further into it.

- Witnesses are also very important.

- It shouldn't stop right in the middle, like the camera got out of battery.

- And at least it should have some unusual look to it, which is for me the last thing that counts. But it should definatly not be some blurry, stationary point of light in the distance. Even if it's a space craft, it wouldn't make sense to post it, because no one could distinquish.

Any other videos regarding alien spacecrafts, which doesn't fit into these criteria, are a waste of time, imo. And i have just seen a few really interesting ones out of a few hundreds, if not thousands.

[edit on 20-4-2008 by hackbart]

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch

Actually, you’re quite way off yourself. You’re applying a method of science to a world/culture/technology that we don’t understand.

Oh my Cat, we've been through this already. You take a picture of a bird, you think it's a UFO and you submit the picture to analysis; if a person comes up with solid proof to backup the fact that the object in question is a bird then it will not matter if aliens uso or not cloaking devices. Alien technology has ****nothing**** to do with the analysis a person can do regarding a picture or a video if the object on the said pictures are not extraterrestrial spaceships. I will not explain this again, so I hope you get it because it's getting tired.

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
Science supposedly “proved” 20 years ago that there was no water on Mars. So I grew up thinking it was impossible for water to exist on Mars. Imagine my surprise when science backtracked. So why should I believe that scientific analysis is the best course of action again? It sure has been wrong a hell of a lot.

Hey, I agree with you here, science has made some mistakes (not as half as the mistakes religion has made, for example). Those mistakes were made because they were based on the data available at the moment. And guess what, to prove it wrong they not only used new data but also a scientific method. So yes, science make mistakes, but science also correct them.

Originally posted by CaptnCrunch
You thought we should only try to disprove a video, adhering to the scientific method, whereas I say, why not approach it from the other side? Why not assume the person is telling the truth and look for clues as to how this might be real? Does it fit into the neat little box of what your college professors taught you was the only way to approach an unknown entity? No. But I’m saying, that really hasn’t gotten us anywhere in this arena in the past. So it may be time to change.

And why won't you talk to pigeons? Because people will start calling you names. You can't just assume "oh, he's saying the truth and this amorphous blur is a spaceship builded by an extraterrestrial civilization". It's really easy to jump on that wagon and make theories about how do spaceships work, but then someone with 1% of his brain working will show up and proove to you and everybody that the blur was nothing more than a bird or whatever. So yeah, why do we just start making theories about blurry pictures and obscure videos? The conclusions we'll arrive will be world changing. Until people start to realise 85% of those pictures and videos weren't showing alien activity at all.

Ok, so when the UFO is hovering over my house I am going to get a photo that my fellow friends at ATS will be proud of...

--Find my camera, where did the kids leave it?
--Get new batteries so the camera doesn't die when I try to get the shot.
--Wait, reference points, ok there's some.
--Witnesses: My 7 yr. old will have to do.
--Filter, I don't know anything about them, but I'll stick this one on.
--Do I need the flash?
--Ok, lens cap is off.
--Tripod, how do I set it up? ATS-er's don't like shaky shots.
--Ok, got it.

Crap, it's gone.


I am not trying to be disrespectful, just trying to prove a point. I am not a photographer, or a scientist. or a mathmatician. But if ever I do get a decent shot I will not hesitate to share it here, not looking for validation, I would just want others to see it. I will never discourage anyone from posting at ATS as long as there doesn't appear to be any deceit and they search to see if it has been posted before. I know there are alot of hoaxes here, but if someone posts something and the poster seems sincere, especially if they are new to ATS, I will never blast them.

I would hate for a great piece of evidence to slip through this site because some members with bad attitudes and crappy comments (I am not referring to anyone in particular ) run off sincere posters.


Rush