100% proof of U.F.O.S in space - You cannot debunk this one

While Im still a new users here and only posted once before I have been reading daily That said this topic caught my attention as I just last night watch a 1hour and 30 minute video that breaks this and other hidden UFO news and no less its on HULU!

if this link does not work login to hulu (its free) and type in

The Secret NASA Transmissions
Paranormal TV

www.hulu.com...

this is pretty damming to anything AGAINST THE FACT that we are alone.

What more amazing is that these sphere's we see in these videos moving around may actually be living breathing organisms or some type!

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
Fran, you are committing logical fallacy after logical fallacy. First you are making a base assertion fallacy; that your premise is true just because you say it is true. Then a negative proof fallacy; that because your premise cannot be proven false then it must be true. You attempt to make an appeal to ridicule by immediately dismissing any explanation other than the one you want.

this really doesn't address the question at all. This is just a tiny smear campaign, imho, concocted by somebody who has nothing really to say but must say it anyways. Most people in a thread such as this are probably aware that there isn't enough resistance in space to stop anything. Haven't we all seen no-grav video?
In order for people to communicate, there must be "givens".

I'm not a big poster on the "alien" threads, but posts like this take away from the actual issue, and instead turn it into a personal attack, thereby leaving the issue hanging, and usually, leaving it for dead. Distract, smear.

The poster would probably be extremely successful running a US political campaign.

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
reply to post by franspeakfree

 

Those are not experts, just people making more assumptions about what they know nothing of. As said before unless you have experienced what happens in space firsthand, No one on this board is qualified to make statements like they are actual fact. We the laymen have no idea what truly happens with physics in space. The believers are constantly asking for people to debunk the NASA footage, well it can't be done because there are no first hand experiencers here and niether can the believers make statements that they have smoking guns because they are just as knowledgeable about space as me, which I have no clue. How can believers and debunkers make claims without first hand knowledge of such things.

I've never seen the curve of the earth, i just rely on experts that it exists.
this seems purposefully obtuse.
Also wasn't there an astronaught that proclaims the validity of ufo's? forget his name, like i said, not much into this, but use the ats search for it and it should be there, as it was fairly recently active i believe.

I don't think anyone can dispute UFO's are real whether in outer space or not. What is disputed is whether the UFO is being operated by some form of intelligent being, human or alien.

The video clip you posted definitely has UFO's in it but most look like tumbling debris or ice. What needs to be pointed out in all those floating dots is one that changes course dramatically to prove it is being driven and not floating aimlessly.

Rhain

This is very solid proof that aliens exist out there but not in here...Yet.But are those hundreds of lights UFOs?Because i saw one near the left just zoooom fast and then disappear.This is why NASA hides everything like UFO sightings and UFO encounters.This is because people all over the world will panic.But some suggest NAZIs made a UFO plane in Germany that uses radioactive gas to power it.And the UFO sightings claim to be half are NAZI.That is why there are no sightings in other parts of the world except of course the USA and Mexico (Where the nazis are believed to be hiding)

Originally posted by heyo
I'm not a big poster on the "alien" threads, but posts like this take away from the actual issue, and instead turn it into a personal attack, thereby leaving the issue hanging, and usually, leaving it for dead. Distract, smear.

It is not a personal attack at all. It is pointing out the fallacies and flaws in her argument. Her argument was full of fallacies; that because no alternative explanation could be found, that her assertion must be correct; that because no one was answering her, it must be true; that there was no explanation because the explanations offered were not personally satisfying, therefore proving her claim, and so forth. There was no smear campaign, no personal attack.

If anything distracts and smears it is the attempt to cast these points as personal attacks. How much time has been wasted now not discussing the issue but non-existent personal attacks?

reply to post by DoomsdayRex



copycat! So basically what you are saying is that no one can ever say anything is true because no one knows everything. I say you're personally attacking and you say no, you are. good one.
It IS personal, what you posted, because it did not give any rebuttals regarding what these things might be, it only said "you can't know for sure! you can't know for sure!...because, um, you can't know for sure!!"
It had nothing to do with the facts he presented, only how he presented them. semantics. smear campagn. call it whatever you want. it's obvious.
well, to me anyways!! maybe it takes on to know one.

Originally posted by heyo
So basically what you are saying is that no one can ever say anything is true because no one knows everything.

I would really like to know how you got to that twisted conclusion; but as I said earlier, this is a waste of time. Let's discuss the issue and the arguments, not the people making the argument. (By the way, accusing me of personally attacking her is laughable, considering I defended her when someone claimed she was "owned.")

Originally posted by heyo
It IS personal, what you posted, because it did not give any rebuttals regarding what these things might be...

It is not personal to point out flaws in argument and logic. And one need not give an alternative explanation, especially as I was not the one making the claim that it is 100% proof.

Originally posted by heyo
It had nothing to do with the facts he presented, only how he presented them

Because there were no facts presented. Fran posted a video, then proclaimed it was aliens, presenting no argument for why it was aliens outside of what I described above. I disputed the logic of this.

Originally posted by heyo
semantics. smear campagn. call it whatever you want.

First, semantics is not synonymous with "smear-campaign".

Second, demonstrating flaws in logic is not the same as semantics. Semantics concerns the meaning of a word.

And as for whether or not your argument is a distraction from the issue...I rest my case.

[edit on 4-6-2009 by DoomsdayRex]

reply to post by franspeakfree

Rant on…

I wish to express to the OP that this video in no way convinces me that this is 100% proof of anything. Do you think that by sharing this video alone everyone here at ATS is going to simply agree with you? Where is your breakdown of the evidence in this video? Please show me your expertise on the subject. You are the person that says you have “100% proof” (strong statement). Please convince me and everyone here that disagrees with you. That is what this forum is all about, isn’t it? You have the burden of proof for starting this post. Everyone that agrees with your claim needs to quit bashing everyone that disagrees or maybe help you in convincing us all that disagree that this is 100% proof. ATS in my opinion is about making a statement with hard evidence to back it up….not opinions!

The people in this forum that could break this video down and tear down your claim are not at this point participating in this discussion. Probably because it’s not worth their time and energy. Those that believe this is proof, fine. Those that don’t, fine. This is nothing but 7 pages of opinions, not hard evidence for either side proving or disproving. I hope I’m not wrong adding to all the opinions in here with mine.

Rant off.

Peace,

Guz

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


Instead of saying i'm gonna stop this ridiculous argument, and then continue on with it, I"m gonna let it go.

The first two didn't really look like anything to me, but the last one looked more like some kind of space lifeform - not mechanical UFO's. Still, it would be huge if we found evidence of any kind of life in space! Maybe space fish? Whos' to say?

reply to post by heyo


Hey heyo, here's a beer... DON'T LET THIS TOPIC GO!
Good to have you onboard.
Look at this ATS link later for recent discussions over "debunker" tactics.
For example, one shouldn't look at cases or evidence, rather flaws in one's debating skills and language semantics (Link). Yikes!

Again, you want to engage in case-by-case study rather than debating the topic. You both fail to recognize that unexplained does not equate to unexplainable or that a failure of a skeptic to explain a case does not mean your explanation is correct by default. All this spaghetti-against-the-wall tactic serves to do is degenerate this thread into fighting over cases instead of discussing the state of study.

Further, both you, Friedman and certain others participating in both this thread and forum fail to understand mainstream science and skepticism is not responsible for the sorry state of Ufology. It is the UFO research community itself that is to blame.

Many of us understand science from university education, but it needs to be "mainstream science"! So failure to kowtow to mainstream means we are not qualified to participate?
Will someone please define "mainstream science"? Does that mean officially blessed? Where can we get that degree?

reply to post by 1SawSomeThings


hey thanks i was real thirsty. That type of tactic is used in all walks of life, I find. It convolutes everything, and to me it shows fear, intentional or not. It could be a defence mechanism.

Frankly, as good as this video is, and as lacking as the rubuttals are, it is ultimately supplemental. I mean, with all the religions denoting them, and all the eyewitnesses, plus every ufo video just HAVING to be a fake because of whatever recycled reason, I think debunking may be some sort of aspect/product of the mob mentality.

for the record, I'm leaning towards them being demons, cast out of other dimensions. If you talk to some hard-core ufo'ers, they'll tell you that aliens respond to Jesus in some way. Some of them claim it's because he's God in the flesh, and others say it's because they find "faith" fascinating. To me, the alien abductions could be a way for them to kind of steal faith from us, making themselves more and more human until they have the ability to have faith again. Or love? Or higher dimensional access?

Maybe at last i've found my niche on here lol.

i had not seen this mentioned in this growing thread, though perhaps i missed something...

the issue, for myself at least, is not debunking or validating this latest curious light in the sky, but that Yahoo is willing to show this footage and promote it as "NASA's secret UFO footage?"

you see... NASA & UFO in the same sentence. it is a subliminal offering.

these words enter into the subconcious of us lay-folk who stare at our screens, digesting what they (whoever THEY might be...) want us too.

and they wanted us to cojoin these two acronyms: NASA. UFO.

whether we believe in Disclosure or not, why are they teasing the issue?

and of course this community is aware that this is not a unique phenomenon. more and more mainstraim media is covering the topic of UFO's in a news fashion (CNN has been doing their fair share. even FOX dabbles).

so what's up?

are UFO's the latest fad? good for advertising dollars?

or are we being eased into Disclosure?

or is there some other reason THEY want us to ponder the thought that NASA may have UFO images.


the devil's not always in the details. sometimes it's the bold faced tag-line right before your eyes.

hmm...

Originally posted by 1SawSomeThings
Look at this ATS link later for recent discussions over "debunker" tactics.
For example, one shouldn't look at cases or evidence, rather flaws in one's debating skills and language semantics (Link). Yikes!

Many of us understand science from university education, but it needs to be "mainstream science"! So failure to kowtow to mainstream means we are not qualified to participate?
Will someone please define "mainstream science"? Does that mean officially blessed? Where can we get that degree?

I will stand by everything I said in that thread. However, what you posted above has nothing to do with the topic we are discussing now. Both you and Heyo are no longer discussing this case or these videos, but attempting to make it about the people who are disagree these videos are of alien craft. Discuss the issue, not the people who are discussing it. Get back on topic.

Originally posted by mythos
you see... NASA & UFO in the same sentence. it is a subliminal offering.

these words enter into the subconcious of us lay-folk who stare at our screens, digesting what they (whoever THEY might be...) want us too.

I don't think it is a conspiracy of any sort. The association between the two terms is nothing new. UFOs and NASA have always been associated one way or another on some level because in the popular imagination they involve the same arena, outer space.

We cannot say this is Aliens for sure! this could easily be something from the US, Russia, or China - unless i see an Alien waving out the window im not convinced. Those NASA videos could be us documenting our own UFO flights. I Too at once thought, yes, this is proof, but no, there is no way of saying its an alien craft for sure!!

deleted and done.

[edit on 5-6-2009 by heyo]

Originally posted by h3akalee
If a mosquito can survive in space then shureley it make's sense something else can too.

Take care.

Regards
Lee

Care to clarify that statement, please?

OK the argument is getting distracting. It was NOT a personal attack(such as you're a liar, and a racist!!!), it was simply pointing out the argument's flaws(such as pointing out discrepancies) and NOT the POSTER"S flaws, so get over it and both should drop it. If you can't handle having your work critiqued, DO NOT POST!
(Caps for emphasis, not yelling, don't get the wrong idea )

the video: Definitely NOT absolute proof. I mean, just about every video I've ever seen like this one (a camera view on a shuttle or something of the sorts) has these flying "UFO's" in the video. I seriously doubt that every time we put something into orbit these critters are like "OMG what is that! I dk lets ALL go check it out!" It seems to be the same scenario each and every time. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to put the pieces together here.

OK so I'm no expert. But IMO it just takes a little logic to have an idea of what's going on and what's NOT going on. Most logically, it's debris or projections form our equipment. I watched twice, and it just looks like most of the stuff flies in one direction, albeit not all in the SAME direction. It may look like they are moving perpendicular to the camera's point of view, but that doesn't mean it trully is. How can you say it's ABSOLUTELY not moving slightly away from the camera?

Would you disagree that we have really polluted our near-Earth space? That being said, perhaps not all of the objects came from this particular equipment, and I certainly cannot prove any of what I have said, so don't try to bash my argument asking for proof, because it's obviously not possible for someone like me with nothing but my laptop to prove what's going on miles into space.

I do believe we are not alone, and that we have been visited. I have a friend that used to work at area 51. I've known him since he was five. And he will NOT, I repeat NOT even say one peep to me about ANYTHING that went on there. That in itself is enough to tell me there has to be some truth to this place.

But this video, no where close to UFO's. If the government is reading this thread, they are laughing really hard right now.

Peace.


[edit on 4-6-2009 by Karrotz]