Alien giants land in russia - fantastic ufo/et evidence

reply to post by Phage


You know I am kind of on your side of the fence on this one Phage, I have high doubts about the authenticity, but it hasn't been proven a hoax yet.

if this is a hoax .. it would be a CITY hoax .... that would be #ED UP ... some one would talk .... it is impossible to make all the people in a city to #ing lie ...

i look forward to the day when the emergency broadcast system comes acorss my screen and tells me contact has been made.

beyond that its all speculation.

Originally posted by Faiol
if this is a hoax .. it would be a CITY hoax .... that would be #ED UP ... some one would talk .... it is impossible to make all the people in a city to #ing lie ...

What I think Faiol is trying to say in a less intelligent way is that if the entire town was in on the hoax eventually it would be leaked by someone. We as humans are not capable of containing a lie it eventually comes out in one way or another. This is what actually creates conspiracy theory's, because when one tries to continually lie or mislead it becomes tiring and eventually you make a mistake when trying to keep track of all the lies upon lies or distorted facts. Once someone sees you stumble then it puts up a red flag and people start to see through your "fairy tale"
However that does not seem to be the case here as Faiol is trying to say .. I think

reply to post by Eye of Horus


Google "UMMO" and look at the pics.
There's even a photo of a saucer like the kid's drawing with the symbol on the bottom.
That's why I wondered about it.
Did the kid see that?
Was it added to the drawing later?

Originally posted by Jezus
It is irrational to make assumptions and speculation without any reason because you think something is not probable or unlikely.

Irrational to make logical assumptions and speculations based on the evidence, or lack there of, of this case? That does not make much sense. So, what, it's more logical to take it at face value, regardless of how outlandish it is, and just ASSUME it's true because a few people and their doodles say so? That's not good science, that's being gullible.

This is why no evidence will ever be good enough.

Anything could be faked or a lie.

True, but certain things have a much higher likelihood of fakery. I.E. The chance of a single persons sighting/photo/story being fake or lie is much higher than say, 2 dozen eye-witnesses, half of them taking pictures and video from different times and locations. It could still be a fake in the later case, but then the lie is with the perpetrator and not the individual observers

The idea that these kids could all keep up such an elaborate story and collaborate it with an adult teacher and police officer, and even make up the images ahead of time so their pictures would all look similar COULD be true, but what is the evidence to back up this theory?

And where are the teacher, the police officer? Are you speaking of the video, done long after the event, or the highly dubious tabloid reporting of TASS? The later is invalid the former is highly suspect. So a western news crew comes to your little town and starts interviewing people about the supposed incident...how much you want to bet there are more than enough people who were willing step up to be on camera and give a good story?

I hate to break it to you, but people lie. People lie ALL the time for numerous reasons and goals. And ATS is more than evidence enough of people who love to make up fantastical stories...print out the topic headlines and throw a dart. Hoaxes, con artists, you name it. Remember the oogie boogie day care center scandal back in the 80s? The recent BigFoot scandal? Blossom Goodchilde and her nonsense? And what do people TEND to do? They tend to maintain the facade. They get so deep into the lie that they are scared of being exposed and humiliated. All you have to do is look at human nature.

It seems just as far fetched as giant aliens.

If you think that interstellar giant aliens landing and walking around town is as far fetched as the possibility of lie/hoax/prank gone to far based on the available evidence of this case...well...do not really have anything to say to that. That statement speaks for itself.

Originally posted by ArMaP

Not really, good technicians can completely change a photo (a "real" chemical photo, not the digital version) and nobody would see anything in a copy of the altered original.

I'll have to agree and disagree with you there ArMaP. The key phrase you mentioned is "good technicians" I.E. People with skill at old school photo manipulation...I should know, I live with one. But even then, detailed analysis with modern techniques make it nearly impossible to stand up to serious scrutiny. Getting lighting, angles right, fudging details etc. is extremely hard to get away these days. Not impossible, but might as well be for the average person. But of course, today any kid with half a wit of talent and some practice can make a convincing digital photo. Not only do we have to deal with that kind of nonsense but tech to make convincing physical hoaxes is so cheap we're starting to see that kind of thing now...not to mention that a good ole sky lantern is enough to fool most people.


Evidence makes the case, and this case simply does not have it. Do I say out right that nothing happened? No. The possibility remains but the evidence to date does not meet the burden of proof and remains unconvincing.

Pondering Soul: Excellent point to an extent, I too await that day with great anxiousness.

Dwest: I understand what you are saying about the city wide hoax not being likely. But Ufologist can't spend much time on something like this that is unprovable other than witness accounts. Cases like Roswell, Kecksburg, Height 611, Kalahari, etc have much more promise for some type of solid proof, ie; in the form of documents, more reliable and credible witnesses, and possible physical evidence. So in my humble opinion those should get the majority of attention, as well any new cases with promising evidence.

reply to post by Saganite

Evidence makes the case, and this case simply does not have it. Do I say out right that nothing happened? No. The possibility remains but the evidence to date does not meet the burden of proof and remains unconvincing.

That's exactly what I feel about this case, there just isn't any solid evidence, well solid enough to be called proof. I am one of the most liberal believers out there, but I do not and can not blindly trust such extraordinary claims.

reply to post by jkrog08


I agree! I also think that once such an incident occurs it does continue to be investigated but not by the mainstream people and certainly not by the media so the on going investigations are most likely being done by military or other government bureaus and defiantly in secret. So even if anything was proven I dont think we would hear about it until some type of disclosure or a real solid leak in the top brass!

reply to post by Dwest


IMO they have already found out what really happened, WE however will likely never know, so we must concentrate on the more well known and more documentable cases.

reply to post by elijahspirit


You ever stop to wonder why nobody took photographs? It's not like the camera didn't exist in 1989. I just find it very strange - sort of like John Scheer, CEO of Video Professor coming on television hawking his wares to improve computer literacy and yet has a handful of handwritten testimonial letters rather than a stack of email.
Just sayin....

Cool post, thx

I think it is relevant for comparison to other reports of sightings. Remember half of what we "see" is from memory as our mind seeks to fill in the gaps from our eyes. The more sources the better our understanding of what to look for.

Can anybody tell me why the OP was banned? Was it from actions in this thread or another? Just wondering...

reply to post by jkrog08


He's been banned many times, in many incarnations. He is not hard to spot when he reincarnates.

reply to post by jkrog08


Not, sure. Between the time I made my initial post and the half hour it took me to get home he had responded and been banned. I suspect, due to the ahh....quality of his other responses it was a serious case of TOS violating butthurt. From some of the other comments it seems he may do this quite a bit.

hi

i recall haring about this some time back,,,,this was a strange case...

Im sure there is many interesting cases behind the iron curtain as well,,,,

thanks for reminding me of this case ...

I see, thanks Saganite and Phage! I was wondering what happened. This must be a newer member then, because I have been a member since December of 07 and haven't heard of him. But then again like Phage said, he has many incarnations. Such a shame that someone can't stay civil when trying to prove such a critical topic (The UFO phenomina) , it gives more discredit to the rest of us .......Oh well.

Let's say these children witnessed a murder instead of these giant aliens. Ok, now, all these children drew a picture of the culprit and his car instead of a picture of the craft and the alien. (and all the pictures matched with 100% accuracy)

They catch the supposed murderer and it goes to court, do you think these kid's testimony and pictures would put that murderer away?

I'm betting that it would. Because IT'S HAPPENED many times.

So why is it so hard to believe when the tables are turned towards something we don't see everyday? Where are the skeptics during the murder trial? To me, that is more fascinating than the alien event itself, the total and utter disbelief by people.

Here are numerous people telling you they saw something not of this world, DRAWING MATCHING PICTURES and yet, the skeptics are picking apart every little thing they can to make them lose credibility? sad.



[edit on 6-5-2009 by sniggitydiggity]

Originally posted by sniggitydiggity
Let's say these children witnessed a murder instead of these giant aliens. me, that is more fascinating than the alien event itself, the total and utter disbelief by people.

...

Here are numerous people telling you they saw something not of this world, DRAWING MATCHING PICTURES and yet, the skeptics are picking apart every little thing they can to make them lose credibility? sad.

Strawman argument. Like comparing apples to steak.

reply to post by sniggitydiggity


One problem. Where's the body? The point is, your analogy is no good. Can you find a case where only eyewitness reports led to a conviction? No body, no other evidence? And then there is the matter of convictions based on eyewitness evidence which have ended up being shown to be false. Nope, doesn't work.

And the kids' drawings are not really very similar, much less exactly the same.

[edit on 5/6/2009 by Phage]