This is for all the `ufo skeptics` must read

Originally posted by argonfritz
reply to post by Anonymous ATS

 

Brilliant, could NOT have said it better myself.


To anyone with an ounce of sense, there has not been a SINGLE piece of evidence that could bring one to conclude that aliens exist, let alone visit earth. NOT ONE SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE.

Some lights? Whoodeedoo.

Again in the same sense you have no more evidence that Uranus inst luminous pink and populated by intelligent monkeys, and yet you dont have any trouble believing it.

In my opinion the conclusion I have always come to is fear of the unknown and this applies largely to the topic of the very real chance of aliens being living breathing things. That along with accepting that we truly arent alone and the fact that we are being visited daily by 'them' is enough to make people fear it.

Their minds will not entertain the possibility because of the radical changes that one would have to go through when mentally adjusting.

More reason for this is the actual meaning of skeptic:

One of the seven attitudes. Its positive pole is investigation; its negative pole is suspicion. Skeptics view the world with doubt.

The very nature of a Skeptic according to definition is to not have the ability to reach a logical conclusion with only doubt ruling their mind.

Think of the situation this way in these examples of popular mindsets:

UFOs have to be fake because the government holds so many secrets and there is every chance that they are secret craft. If we were visited it would be on a global level and no one has seen a 50 mile diametre ship do just that, show itself.

OR

Aliens do exist, they are living breathing beings that are visiting everyday and monitoring the situation of Earth. They are as real as the nose on your face and their craft come from regions outside of space that the governments of the world will not reveal....mass coverup.

Which one is easier to accept..... anyone would go for the first one because it does not require such drastic change and adjustments..... in summary people fear the unknown and sometimes its easier to accept fiction than fact


[edit on 24-10-2008 by Drakiir]

Originally posted by silver6ix
Once again. You are the one constantly criticising others for a lack of "proof" when the "proof" you require isnt proof at all, its someone elses words.

That is not the case at all. You presented NASA as an example, and all I said was NASA telling us aliens were among us would be a form of incontrovertible evidence. At no point did I ever say it was the only standard of evidence.

Originally posted by silver6ix
If someone was disclosing secrets, how on Earth could your "proof" be possible? Do you really think any official person would come out and admit it, because thats the "proof" you keep going on about.

I've never said that was the proof I require. In fact, I and Riggs both defined the proof we are looking for.

Originally posted by silver6ix
Again, you dont have any proof all you have is someones word, its all you have ever had and you CHOOSE to believe it. Its not undeniable, its not soltid and its not the holy grail of proof. Your proof can be disputed, and is disupted so you do not need to be asking anyone for proof you cannot provide for yourself. YOU dont have proof all you have is the testimony of some very sketchy and questionable witnesses.

Are you talking about yourself here? You call me a hypocrite, yet you project the behavior and standards of a closed-minded believer on me. That is your standard of proof, that is your behavior. Not mine. I have defined what we are looking for.

To reiterate, I defined what I and other skeptics are looking for, undeniable, incontrovertible, and not open to interpretation. At no point did I or any other skeptic say all we were looking for was the word of someone we find credible. Despite the fact we have explicitly told you what we are looking for, you ignore this. You exhibit the worst behaviors of the worst sort of closed-minded believer.

And you never answered the question I asked of you. Why is it you, NoRichardRun, and WeNeedtoKnow are less interested in proving the existence of extraterrestrials on Earth, and more interested in attacking me and other skeptics?

Originally posted by silver6ix
Again in the same sense you have no more evidence that Uranus inst luminous pink and populated by intelligent monkeys, and yet you dont have any trouble believing it.

On the contrary, there is no comparison between the evidence for UFOs and the existence of Uranus. While none of us may have ever personally been to Uranus, we have the math, the calculations, the charts, the physics to show that it exists. We have photos of it that undeniably show a blue planet. All of this together is incontrovertible, undeniable proof that Uranus exists. The evidence is not open to interpretation regarding the existence of the planet.

This is not the case with UFOs. The evidence is neither undeniable nor incontrovertible.

Im a skeptic, but i do belive in other life on all of those uncountable other planets out there, after all we are one of them with loads of life.

You need to realise also, that when you say "you dont belive in UFOs" that your meaning a spacecraft from another planet, since a UFO can be anything flying in the sky thats not identifiable.

e.g a pair of boxers shorts with a LED on them tied to a helium baloon.
Oh my god look how it moves, look how it changes shape.

Also 99% of things will be normal human # like satalites planes helicpters and shooting stars, comments etc

Just like to add that ive seen some amazing shooting stars too, unreal colours... anyways

The thing, as you said there is alot of fakes out there, basicaly they have totaly spoilt it for other people who proabblys do have a real genuine video.

To be honest im not arsed about what videos are real or not, the day i will be happy is when weve made contact , and its all over the news and we really get to mett see them.

Even if there videos were real, there still no use to anyone if there not goona come and contact us.

Hope that helps on your topic.

Mark


[edit on 24-10-2008 by MarktheSkepticUK]

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by silver6ix
Again in the same sense you have no more evidence that Uranus inst luminous pink and populated by intelligent monkeys, and yet you dont have any trouble believing it.

On the contrary, there is no comparison between the evidence for UFOs and the existence of Uranus. While none of us may have ever personally been to Uranus, we have the math, the calculations, the charts, the physics to show that it exists. We have photos of it that undeniably show a blue planet. All of this together is incontrovertible, undeniable proof that Uranus exists. The evidence is not open to interpretation regarding the existence of the planet.

This is not the case with UFOs. The evidence is neither undeniable nor incontrovertible.

You have images that could be made in photoshop, reports that could be made to fit what you are wanted to believe and you have someones word to support it.

So yes, its open to interpretation. YOU choose to accept those are evidence, that doesnt mean others who question the credibility of the source should. A liar should not be trusted to present truth. Governments lie, military people lie, this is known to be true in anyones mind so maybe some people take what liars tell them with a large pinch of salt?

You might believe what George Bush tells you is true, most sane people automatically assume its a lie of some kind or other

However there are plenty of armchair astronomers out there that can do the same things. Anyone with a decent telescope and some mathematical knowledge could do what SC is saying. Not to mention that it's probably required of people taking courses in Astronomy to be able to do what he's proposing. So, I find it hard to believe every Astronomy professor as well as almost every person that takes an interest in Astronomy are all just government plants to perpetuate a cover-up that has no purpose.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
However there are plenty of armchair astronomers out there that can do the same things. Anyone with a decent telescope and some mathematical knowledge could do what SC is saying. Not to mention that it's probably required of people taking courses in Astronomy to be able to do what he's proposing. So, I find it hard to believe every Astronomy professor as well as almost every person that takes an interest in Astronomy are all just government plants to perpetuate a cover-up that has no purpose.

Thats not true. I have a friend who is an "amateur astronomer" you can see tiny dots of most planets, basing the information on what you have been told about their orbits. Sure you could say they are there, what you couldnt say is anything about them.

They could all be inhabited by tribes of semi naked amazon women and you would have no clue. The makeup and atmospherics, surface condtions of the planets are not something any amateur astronomer can see. My friend has a very good, very large long range telescope and even then you cant see a great deal of anything bar the moon.

Unless you have access to a serious telescope you cant see much at all. The theories on the conditions of these planets is based on what someone told you and by that fact it very easy to say they might not have told you something.

reply to post by Drakiir


If you had read our replies to the believers, it is not about fear of the unknown. All we want is positive proof to back up such claims, we want to believe as much as the next guy. The same could be said for the believers, they fear knowing the possible truth. That there is nothing here.


[edit on 24-10-2008 by riggs2099]

reply to post by silver6ix

"Famous amateur astronomers
George Alcock, discoverer of comets and novae.

John Dobson perfected the Dobsonian telescope that revolutionised the building of large-aperture Newtonian reflector telescopes for faint-object observing.

Will Hay, the famous comedian and actor, who discovered a white spot on Saturn.

David H. Levy discovered or co-discovered 22 comets including Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9, the most for any individual.

Leslie Peltier was a prolific discoverer of comets and well-known observer of variable stars.

Russell W. Porter founded Stellafane and has been referred to as the "founder of amateur telescope making

Isaac Roberts was the first to apply photography to astronomy.

Amateur Thomas Bopp shared the discovery of Comet Hale-Bopp in 1997 with unemployed PhD physicist Alan Hale.

Sir Patrick Moore, presenter of the BBC's long-running The Sky at Night and author of many books on astronomy.

Robert Owen Evans is a minister of the Uniting Church in Australia and an amateur astronomer who holds the all-time record for visual discoveries of supernovae."
en.wikipedia.org...

Apparently these guys weren't just seeing little dots in the sky...all amatuer astronomers, not government funded at the time discoveries were made. So amatuer astronomer can can view planets and are able to tell if life exists. And some have had an opportunity to view though observatory telescopes.
www.insidetoronto.com...

and are offered chances to do so

query.nytimes.com...



[edit on 24-10-2008 by riggs2099]

Originally posted by lifeform

why do people do this? why do people judge wether or not it would be possible to travel across space based on HUMAN technology and HUMAN knowledge and HUMAN understanding.

what so just because we are incapable at the moment, that must mean any other inteligent life out there must be unable to aswell?

[edit on 20-10-2008 by lifeform]

Even though we are Humans, some of our observations are seem to be universal. Einstein's theory of Relativity has been tested over and over and it appears to be valid. There are physical phenomenom that can best be explained by using his theory.

One of the tenets is that if you have a mass greater than zero, you cannot exceed the speed of light in a vaccuum.

IF we are receiving visitors from other planets, then they are are travelling at sublight speeds. Which is extremely time-consuming.

Now, I am not saying super-luminal speeds are not possible, but we need a theory to explain this that does not contradict the known laws of physics. Some theorists have speculated ways this can be done, but usually the processes entail using a wormhole, which is still a theorhetical object. Now if they were doing this, the wormhole would itself make itself known in such a way that we would be able to observe if it was near the Earth. I would think a wormhole within a light year or two would be detectable. Nothing like that has ever been observed to date.

Originally posted by NoRunRichard

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
The "evidence" is inconclusive. Until an actual craft or body is recovered, or they touch down and say "Take me to your leader" then there is no evidence anything has visited us. Not to say something doesn't exist out there. I believe something does, but nothing has visited us yet.

That's the biggest baloney I've ever heard. There were spaceships and bodies recovered but they're all covered up by the Government. People were told to say nothing about them. Threats were given out. What can you say about Roswell, Kecksberg, Rendlesham, etc.? Now you may say that this is an old conspiracy theory but that is the truth. And these informations came from no other than the eyewitnesses themselves.

No, it's not Baloney. Do you have the physical evidence? You are assuming that there are spaceships and bodies because so many people claim to have seen things. Yet you have no physical proof. All those sightings have equally reasonable alternate explanations that do not need extraterrestials.

Kecksburg ma in fact actually have been a Cosmos satellite, Eyewitness desriptions closely match that of Cosmos satellite that had been launched a few weeks before.

Rendelsham could have been a test of a top secret craft, whether UK or USA we can't say. But the fact it occurred at an airbase and at night help support that theory.

As for Roswell, much of the so called evidence and eyewitness reports came years later.

Eyewitness testimoy has often been shown to be unreliable. And eyewitness testimony given years after te fact cannot be morereliable than eyewitness testimony taken right after.

We are not saying, or at least I am not saying, all these people are hallucinating. What I am saying is that they are mistaken in interpreting what they have seen.

Originally posted by NoRunRichard

Originally posted by riggs2099

You have no solid evidence. Your UFO's are here is based purely on speculation and faith. Show us something that says outright alien and cannot have another logical alternative. Eyewtiness's can be mistaken, ufo's can be misidentified terrestrial craft or maybe celestial occurances or they can be alien, and as for alien life taking people, there are only the stories that can be attributed to sleep paralysis or other things. See what we are talking about...there are too many alternatives to just the alien hypothesis. There is no evidence out there that points at aliens being the one and only answer.

That is your opinion and an opinion only. Could millions of people be hallucinating at the same time? Let's say a thousand. Or still a hundred. There is still credible proof out there outweighing any other speculations. "No evidence out there that points at aliens being the one and only answer" huh. This is a sweeping generalization. Riggs, my friends, is an example of a typical nonbeliever. Go back to the thread titled "The Questions UFO Skeptics Can't Answer" and peruse everything they have posted in there and you'll see what I mean.

[edit on 23-10-2008 by NoRunRichard]

No, he is stating a fact. No solid evidence that has ever been offered has been shown to be of non-terrestial origin. What is the credible proof? The opening posting to this thread is credible? It isnt. That entire trread is speculation and opinion.

I am curious what are you calling credible? And how is the statement "No evidence out there that points at aliens being the one and only answer" a sweeping generalization? If you are going to use these terms, it be best to under what they mean.

The problem with the skeptics is that they fail to see the overwhelming amount of evidence that already exists.

If skeptics would take a look at the Cometa Report for example. It is a highly credible and scientific investigation conducted by high ranking French officers and personnel.

They conclude that UFO's are real, and that Flying Saucers are real. And that the most probable scientific conclusion is that they are extraterrestrial.

It is one of the most compelling documents I have ever read,, and you cannot doubt it's credibility either. So, if you just do your research properly, you will find plenty of evidence to support this notion. I could go on, but I'm not one of those long posters If you want more evidence, I suggest you visit the link I provided for the cometa report, as there is much more evidence on that website. Flagged Thread

reply to post by Majorion


Yes Ufo's exist but are they alien in original, nothing says that. Overwhelming evidence?....nothing but stories, heresay and vids/pics that show SOMETHING NOT WHAT. The evidence only leads to speculation..then it is up to the person on what they feel they will believe...basically it is up to the person to place thier faith on something that could be anything.

Originally posted by riggs2099
reply to post by Majorion

 

Yes Ufo's exist but are they alien in original, nothing says that. Overwhelming evidence?....nothing but stories, heresay and vids/pics that show SOMETHING NOT WHAT. The evidence only leads to speculation..then it is up to the person on what they feel they will believe...basically it is up to the person to place thier faith on something that could be anything.

What you call hearsay, I call eye witness testimony.

What you call stories, I call them cases.

And I also believe it is quite obvious that these flying saucers are intelligently controlled by beings other than human. What can you rule out of this equation? time travellers from the future? unlikely, considering the paradox factor. Humans? Impossible considering the physics defying behavior of these craft and the long history behind UFO's.

Interdimensional: high degree of probability.
Extraterrestrial: higher degree of probability.

So do you see now how on a basic level I believe these to be ET?

I hope I clarified enough on this matter. Enjoyed the debate, thank you.

Originally posted by Majorion
The problem with the skeptics is that they fail to see the overwhelming amount of evidence that already exists.

If skeptics would take a look at the Cometa Report for example. It is a highly credible and scientific investigation conducted by high ranking French officers and personnel.

They conclude that UFO's are real, and that Flying Saucers are real. And that the most probable scientific conclusion is that they are extraterrestrial.

It is one of the most compelling documents I have ever read,, and you cannot doubt it's credibility either. So, if you just do your research properly, you will find plenty of evidence to support this notion. I could go on, but I'm not one of those long posters

If you want more evidence, I suggest you visit the link I provided for the cometa report, as there is much more evidence on that website. Flagged Thread

No, we examine the evidence and find it to be lacking. It is not ignored.
I have not seen that report, but I will look at it after I post this. But most skepticks want convincing,evidence. Something that can best explained as being and extra-terrestial artifact.

I have not heard of that document before, butI will look at it. And I will endeavor tokeep an open mind.

reply to post by Clear Thinker


Also, here is Another Link you may find compelling.

This is the best UFO documentary ever made. I implore you to watch all parts of this film, and then you can tell me if you are still not convinced.

I await your reply anxiously. Thank you.

reply to post by Majorion


Until you know for a fact that these are not manned by humans then you may have something. With the possibilty being open to anything then you cannot state that alien are here as fact. The evidence is too open to interpretation to be of any value. As for the ufo's being around for centuries, you must read some of the literature back then and notice that acording to the stories the ufos were only more advanced then what was back then...meaning that people were seeing things with propellors and other low tech things. As for the paintings and cave paintings...they are all open to what you want to see. The problem with that is the people back then were mostly likely mistaking celestial objects as being unworldly. As for the aliens themselves...i have always wonder why they differ so much depending on what country or culture your from. Why are the greys mostly involved with North American influence and in brazil you will have wierd creatures....ie..little hairy dwarfs, blobls...etc...while in eastern cultures you will have caucasion beings emerginf from so-called space craft.

reply to post by Majorion


I have seen this documentery before and it is interesting. As usual though it is all based on theory and not facts. Someone thinking they are alien does not make it fact and the evidence as said before is open to interpretation. The ufo believers belief is based on who you are willing to believe not on facts only on theory.