Ball lightning encounter

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Congrats. What does this have to do with UFO's?

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Originally posted by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE
every facet of what people report as an ufo i will try to explain !
simple is'nt ?

Actually, you don't always make alot of sense. To begin with...you cannot possibly explain "every facet" of what people report concerning UFO's and to assume you're educated enough is just arrogant and egotistical.

Many UFO's cannot be explained and truthfully, no person in Belgium is going to explain them all away by using his fascination (and sometimes what seems to be an obsession) in aircraft.

[Edited on 5-22-2004 by Preest]

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Originally posted by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE
if you do a little effort to read what is written and if you cut out all the crap of lunatics than for 99,99% all uforeports are flying objects in the aviation branch !

so don't come up with crappy fairey tales or other mindwaves visions of sick minds !

"Don't come with crappy fairey tales or other mindwaves visions of sick minds !" ? What in hell are you babbling? Slow down...think calmly...type slowly...state your theories or beliefs in a calm, intelligent, logical manner. You're squeaking at the wrong person. I'm ATS's SKEPTIC NUMERO UNO. See the funny thing about you is that you try and squeeze conventional aircraft into sightings when the possibility is these aren't conventional aircraft and you're wrong. Now then...

HERE'S YOUR CHALLENGE:

You've stated that 99.99% of all UFO Reports are aviation objects...well, that can't possibly be true unless you've actually READ 99.99% of all the UFO sighting reports out there...we both know that's impossible. You're exaggerating. Now, seeing as how you try to prove to everybody including us skeptics that you're an "expert" on the subject of aviation and UFO sightings...I will expect to see you list in this post 99.99% of all UFO reports and your explanation for them.

You can start with Project Blue Book Sightings and go from there. I'll be expecting to see a list of several thousand sightings and your explanations for each and every one...okay?

[Edited on 5-22-2004 by Preest]

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Originally posted by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE
it helps much if you wonder around places that are involved with objects in aviation ! including air force bases,museums,open door and behind the scenes invitations !
for example:
some ufo reports of sweden could be simply explained if these people had seen what some swedish air force pilots in their spare time had fabricated and had flying in the sky !

i noticed during such visit in sweden a disk shaped object of 50 to 70
centimeters in diameter.
underside with sweidsh airforcelogo,3 golden crowns on blue background and on the uppersurface fixed a small proppellerengine.
they flew that disk just for fun in their sparetime here and there they travelled to in sweden.

i'll bet you'll find some ufopix of this hoax ufo too !

anyway the real big reward for the first one handing real extra terrestial
parts is NOT YET been claimed ! nobody came foreward.

idem ditto for magician RANDI's 1 million USA $ reward for the first who brings proof of REAL telekenetic / ghosts actions !
all he received were people trying to sell him a hoax and he could explain all by just normal manipulations.

just look up since how long airships have been in the air too !

Randi's "rules" regarding his challenge are also in his favor. Everybody knows that. He decides what constitutes a "success" or a "failure". He is the sole judge. He's an impartial judge which makes his challenge unfair, even in a skeptics eye's.

Here's what I think...I think you're obsessed with aviation like some of these kids are obsessed with government conspiracy and reptilians.

I called you out...you claimed that 99.99% of all UFO sightings reports were conventional aircraft...I await your proof of that.

[Edited on 5-23-2004 by Preest]

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Originally posted by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE
...
gliders
balloons (including kids stuff)
vtolplanes
helicopters
passengerplanes
civilian jetsplanes
radio guided toyplanes
weatherballoons (small and bigger type)
parachutists
freefallparachutes new type
bananashapetype chute with engine (chuteglider ??)
ulm (tandem & twinseaters)
kiddies kite flyer (small & bigger types)
firework (legal & ILLEGAL doctored items)
hanggliders
experimental rocketeers
...

and about randi...as a true master in magic he bloody knows best what can be done to manipulate the public (AND the materials involved to do magic !
he's got only 1 rule GENUINE AUTHENTIC.
that till today nobody came up to claim the amount to win..explaines
clearly how much imposters are around but also that NO genuine proof
can be deliverd the scientific way !

You have not addressed 99.99% of all UFO sighting reports. You are dodging your own exaggeration.

By the way...Randi is not a "master in magic", he is an illusionist. His challenge for proof of the paranormal is to be judged by one person...Randi. Now then...me being a skeptic myself, I can easily spot Randi as a biased judge. This would mean no matter what came past him, he would deny it's legitimacy. THAT is not impartial and there isn't truly a fair challenge. Randi has turned down several people concerning his challenge as well so not every person that has accepted Randi's challenge has been proven an "imposter". You, sir, are incorrect.

[Edited on 5-23-2004 by Preest]

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Stick to the topic and stop concerning yourself with the moderators duties. One of the biggest tenets on this board is to back up your claims or theories and as of yet YOU have not. You still have not attempted to adequately explain 99.99% of the UFO sightings reports. Do you plan to start today?

Randi is not right because he puts up his own money...Randi is right because he'll never admit to anything paranormal nor will he accept a winner's "proof" because he is biased. He will never award anybody anything and you'll never hear about the "real" paranormal winner from Randi because he will not allow a winner. That, even to skeptics, is what we call...unfair. I'm well aware of the "magic tricks" out there for children...thanks for pointing those out.

You're missing the point of critical thinking and being a true skeptic. A true skeptic does not make up their mind until all the data has been laid out on the table, so to speak. Until then they make no unfounded claims. Randi is biased and does a great diservice to skeptics.

Amen on the Randi comment.
He annoys me, he's not a skeptic, he's a cynic.

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Ball lightning?

That sounds painful... try to steer away from metal codpieces in the future, I guess.

About the Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge, they rules for what is evidence are created by both parties before the test (source):

Applicants must state clearly what they claim as their special ability, and test procedures must be agreed upon by both parties before any testing will take place. All tests must be designed in such a way that the results are self-evident, and no judging process is required. We do not design the protocol independently of the applicant, who must provide clear guidelines so that the test may be properly set. All applicants must clearly identify themselves properly before any discussion takes place.

I don't know, Ball Lightning is a bit controversial. It has not been recreated in any laboratory as far as I know and its properties seem to differ between observations (source).

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Originally posted by amantine
About the Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge, they rules for what is evidence are created by both parties before the test (source):

Applicants must state clearly what they claim as their special ability, and test procedures must be agreed upon by both parties before any testing will take place. All tests must be designed in such a way that the results are self-evident, and no judging process is required. We do not design the protocol independently of the applicant, who must provide clear guidelines so that the test may be properly set. All applicants must clearly identify themselves properly before any discussion takes place.

If you read these guidelines carefully you'll notice it says "test procedures must be agreed upon by BOTH parties" meaning Randi is the one to create the procedures and if the other party does not feel the procedures are fair, the challenge will not happen. If Randi does not agree with the procedures brought up by the other party, the challenge is over. This challenge HINGES ON RANDI...period. Scientific data is soemtimes hit or miss with hundreds of test conducted in controlled environments...Randi knows this...his challenge in essence says,"After I agree with the other parties procedures or the other party agrees with mine I won't need to judge because the first and only test will prove conclusively that the paranormal exists. If it is not proven on the first try, it does not exist."

There's nothing fair about that. There's no sugarcoating that...the guidelines sound fair but when you really read them you'll notice the wording COMPLETELY FAVORS Randi.

The biggest question is...who decides if the results are successful? Randi, who stands to lose a million dollars and his reputation as a balls out "skeptic" or the other party? I think we all know who ultimately decides whether the results were a success...it's obvious.

I'm a huge skeptic as many people on this board can attest...I'm arrogant, abrasive, confrontational and persistant...but I'm not unfair, Randi is.

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

What do you propose then? That the procedures are created by only Randi or only those claiming to have paranormal powers? That would make the test entirely unfair. You seem to have a grudge against Randi. Nothing indicates that is unfair in making the procedures.

The agreement never says that you can try only once. It says there will be one preliminairy meeting and I think you can try a few times there. That's only reasonable. An applicant can also try again if he or she wishes:

There is no limit on the number of times an applicant may re-apply.

[Edited on 24-5-2004 by amantine]