Honest Questions

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkz
You KNOW the answer to this, but I will humor you.

Debunker evidence = proof.

Real Evidence = any amount of collected information that supports a given claim or premise.

That's the difference.

And your basis for this claim is?

I'm also very curious about who you consider serious researchers and who you consider crackpots.

Look guy, trolling is one thing but utter time wasting is another. If you can list me one well known debunker that does not substitute proof for evidence, I will happily consider the need valid to provide you a premise. A bit ridiculous.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkz
1) Is there a present day Bill Cooper?

Bill Cooper isn't exactly squeaky clean. Some hold him in high regard, others (myself included) feel he is at worst a sheister, and at best, a disinfo agent. He's linked with the Aviary group, a group known for a lot of UFOlogy disinfo that often contradicts itself. However, he does have some interesting research...but you have to take it all with a grain of salt.

2) Why the hell do we allow crack pots to ruin this extremely serious concern?

One person's crackpot is another person's guru. There is no governing UFOlogy body that can approve one or another. Besides, how could we prevent it?

3) Could it even be remotely possible that the entirety of the UFO phenomenon is man made?

Possible? Sure. Likely? Not really. If we (or any manmade device) had the capability of performing the maneuvers reported by these objects in the 40's, we'd all be flying around in Jetson's cars by now. The only way I can see it being a "manmade" phenomenon is that if all cases are just things getting blown out of proportion, misidentified, etc. This is likely the case for many UFO events, but if even one is genuine, then we're being visited.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkz
Look guy, trolling is one thing but utter time wasting is another.

Disagreement and questioning is neither trolling nor wasting time. Asking who you consider to be crackpots or serious researchers is a valid question, as you have Bill "Mad Dog" Cooper pegged as the latter. In order to have a conversation, we need to have a common set of definitions.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkz
If you can list me one well known debunker that does not substitute proof for evidence, I will happily consider the need valid to provide you a premise. A bit ridiculous.

As you're the one making claims about skeptic/debunker behavior, the onus is on you to prove it. Show us one "well known debunker" that confuses proof with evidence.

Originally posted by Gazrok
Bill Cooper isn't exactly squeaky clean. Some hold him in high regard, others (myself included) feel he is at worst a sheister, and at best, a disinfo agent. He's linked with the Aviary group, a group known for a lot of UFOlogy disinfo that often contradicts itself. However, he does have some interesting research...but you have to take it all with a grain of salt.

"Disinformation" as in intentional government intelligence agency based disinformation, or just plain ignorance resulting in "bad information" and subsequent confusion? I will start looking into this Aviary asap.

Originally posted by Gazrok One person's crackpot is another person's guru. There is no governing UFOlogy body that can approve one or another. Besides, how could we prevent it?

Are we as individuals not that body? Do we not have an absolute need (like me with Bill Cooper) to insist in and of ourselves that we demand credentials, substantiation, as well as outside scrutiny from those that propose the outlandish? How much time must be wasted? How much confusion and subsequent doubt must be cultivated? As I stated, I am just as guilty as the next person, but just as soon as I am able, when I examine the evidence that members here provided me of Bill's rebuke via Don Ecker (who BTW sounds just a wee bit overtly emotional in his own Paracast summation of Cooper) I will attune myself accordingly, not looking back. This field is not one the agrees well with too much self importance or not being able to admit you're wrong. Don't you agree that we owe it to ourselves to insist on the same from those that carry their paranormal hogwash messages? When someone that presents a public blog states that you have offended them for suggesting reasonable expectancies concerning their claims, should that not send up an immediate red flag?

Originally posted by GazrokPossible? Sure. Likely? Not really. If we (or any manmade device) had the capability of performing the maneuvers reported by these objects in the 40's, we'd all be flying around in Jetson's cars by now. The only way I can see it being a "manmade" phenomenon is that if all cases are just things getting blown out of proportion, misidentified, etc. This is likely the case for many UFO events, but if even one is genuine, then we're being visited.

I too find the "secret space" thing simply too much to swallow. However, immediately, if not within the same sentence, I am plagued with the "what the heck are all these daily sightings of then?" question. I doubt seriously that we are all that interesting a tourist trap for the galactic travel agency.

"Something" is missing here. And all the debunking pseudo skeptics that repetitively proclaim all at once, "but we don't have enough hard evidence to consider this a real phenomenon" do not make that "something" go away or nonexistent.

I myself find it far a more palatable hypothesis that an alternate intelligence, be it human or not, does in fact reside right here. The question is where and most importantly, what is "here".

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


I do presently consider Cooper to be a serious researcher. He presented a GREAT deal of evidence to support that fact. I also consider Stanton Friedman to be an extremely important researcher, as well as Richard Hall and many others.

With respect to debunker evidence vs, real evidence. In short, look up the term evidence in the dictionary. that's the REAL definition and it seems to be the REAL operative definition of the term for just about every consideration outside the debunker. It's an extremely simple comparative equation actually. One that is best illustrated via false premise and foregone conclusions made by the debunker prior to any consideration of the matter at all. I think the following link does an excellent job of defining clearly the false pretense of most debunking efforts as related to the exceedingly real UFO phenomenon.

www.ufoevidence.org...

reply to post by MasterOfSparkz


Reply to #2 , why do we allow crack pots to ruin the field.

Some may be real crack pots while some are paid by our
government to conduct a disinfo campaign.

It is easy to make a group look insane if you simply have
someone "perform an act" to marginalize the group.

It is a similar tactic to the Agent provocateur.

en.wikipedia.org...

By doing something that appears insane or in fact is insane
and associating yourself with a group of ppl, that may want
nothing to do with you, the damage is done to the group and
they lose credibility.

They don't have to lock up the group members or threaten them,
they just have to prop up a few clowns and make anyone
remotely in their area of study look like the lunatic fringe.

Some things have come out like NBC's Confirmation show
that show that something is going on, but even it is not enough
proof for some ppl.

Google Video Link

The majority of ppl in the US believe something is going on
as polls have indicated.

As for the crack pots simply leave them to their selves and band
together with those who seem sane.

As Sun Tze said warfare is deception, and there is a war on for your mind.

When the large credible group reaches critical mass then it will
start making headway like some groups already have done.

There will be attempted infiltrations of these groups to try to
discredit them.

As a wise man once said the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

There are elements that seek to subvert the truth to serve
their ends in all things.

Orwell also speaks clearly to this effect...

In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act

[edit on 15-8-2010 by Ex_MislTech]

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkz
I am very SINCERELY interested in the UFO phenomenon. Have been for many years and have done a considerable amount of reading and speculating. Lately however, I have found such deep diversity within Ufology that the whole UFO perspective seems to be teetering on sheer confusion.

I'm with ya brother,
The more I read the farther I become from what I like to know.

What I do know is I have never experienced a Alien UFO, or a ghost or anything supernatural.
2nd I know black projects do exist and these could be mistaken for Alien Craft.
3rd I see no logic for Aliens to come to earth then hide.
4th I see no logic for Aliens period to come, They would send sophisticated probs to collect and communicate with earth.
which then makes me think UFO's are too primitive for alien craft.
A flying saucer is primitive, sorry it just is. Light anomalies are more what I would expect.
5th Government cover up UFO conspiracy theory to me is ridiculous. The government is not in charge of covering up UFO's!! it would be the Aliens.
If it's not the Aliens, then all they have to do is tour NY city for 20 minutes but they never have! Why?
So if UFO's and Aliens are here why are they hiding?

Abductions - don't believe it. Sorry,
If Aliens have the science to come here they have the science to take one human cell from you and get all the information they need even when you would die of natural causes unless medicine intervened. That one cell holds your dna so they could just clone you. So why strap you down and probe you and what not.

We just created the synthetic cell. From this, in the future, we can make anything biological. and I'm sure some nut job will say we got the synthetic cell from reverse engineering. Absolutely not!

bottom line is my mind is open because anything is possible,
but is frustrating for me, because all I want is one absolute truth with proof.

That's what we all want and so far it has not happened and may never happen because it doesn't exist or is too far away to exist for us.

reply to post by Ex_MislTech


I apologize for the late response as I really wanted to let you know that I appreciate your insightful and inspiring response. We need more intelligent and discreet encouragement in this field of interest. That's for certain.

As you stated so well, there are simply more than enough crack pots, intentional or not, that have more or less colored this area of immense intrigue a bright shade of wacko.

Thanks again for the response.

Originally posted by mysteryskeptic
I'm with ya brother,
The more I read the farther I become from what I like to know.

What I do know is I have never experienced a Alien UFO, or a ghost or anything supernatural.

Thanks for the response. Honestly, we are not even close to being on the same page. Although, I assuredly do appreciate your input and will reflect on it a bit now:

Firstly, I have seen a UFO, quite a lengthy encounter actually. I was with another witness and numerous others in the area where I live also reported witnessing something in the same time period. Do I think it was aliens? The truth is that I don't have a clue.

Originally posted by mysteryskeptic
2nd I know black projects do exist and these could be mistaken for Alien Craft.

Unquestionably.

Originally posted by mysteryskeptic
3rd I see no logic for Aliens to come to earth then hide.
4th I see no logic for Aliens period to come, They would send sophisticated probs to collect and communicate with earth.
which then makes me think UFO's are too primitive for alien craft.
A flying saucer is primitive, sorry it just is. Light anomalies are more what I would expect.

In a Larry Niven science fiction novel, perhaps. However, what you are doing here is speculating based on what makes sense to you as a human being. You are personifying the uncertain, and anytime we do that with respect for a given phenomenon, we are in reality doing little more than throwing mud at a canvas in hopes of it revealing something to us. We do this because of the most basic of human instincts. We do this in an effort to "size things up" that may present a threat to us directly or environmentally. This process is inherent to our survival as a species and is deeply ingrained within our cognitive recognition processes. The problem of course is the fact that we are dealing with complete uncertainty at this point in time.

5th Government cover up UFO conspiracy theory to me is ridiculous. The government is not in charge of covering up UFO's!! it would be the Aliens. If it's not the Aliens, then all they have to do is tour NY city for 20 minutes but they never have! Why? So if UFO's and Aliens are here why are they hiding?

Perhaps they are not hiding at all. Perhaps we only "see" them as a result of a progressively natural evolutionary quantum leap in our own development as a species. Everything is a "perhaps", but that is exactly the point isn't it?

Think about this angle for just a moment: Drop all the entertainment for just a second. All the recovered flying saucers, all the area 51 test drives, all the secret alien/human conspiracies. Now tell me, what can the government do? What exactly can that tiny, I mean relatively microscopic portion of itself, do? It could come fourth and state for the record:

"yep, we know they's out there, but we'll be guldernd if what know what in tarnation they is, but yep, they're out there all right."

In short: There is a HUGE difference between a willingness to officially admit that: "we, your government, realize all too well that something is really happening in UFOville, but frankly we can't even catch up to them long enough to say hi, let alone share technologies" and the government keeping this monstrous sized, galactic interplanetary secret to end all conspiracies.

continued:









[edit on 18-8-2010 by MasterOfSparkz]

reply to post by mysteryskeptic

Abductions - don't believe it. Sorry, If Aliens have the science to come here they have the science to take one human cell from you and get all the information they need even when you would die of natural causes unless medicine intervened. That one cell holds your dna so they could just clone you. So why strap you down and probe you and what not.

Somethings happening, that's for certain. We KNOW that because of all the more than legitimate research that's been done on the issue. Trouble is, we don't have a clue what the "Abduction" experience really constitutes or represents. All we have is the abductees and yes, that unquestionably is more personification. The question is, what the hell is really happening to these people and who (most likely, but not absolutely, it's us) is behind the phenomenon?

We just created the synthetic cell. From this, in the future, we can make anything biological. and I'm sure some nut job will say we got the synthetic cell from reverse engineering. Absolutely not!

Personally, I am far more fascinated with the membrane than I am the cell itself. The interface to the environmental variable.

bottom line is my mind is open because anything is possible, but is frustrating for me, because all I want is one absolute truth with proof.

That's what we all want and so far it has not happened and may never happen because it doesn't exist or is too far away to exist for us.

What we want is the truth on our terms. It's always been that way and this again is an instinctual and learned intellectual response in expectancy.

Remember that "box" that discovery revolves around, oft far be it from a centric orbit, until the two finally in turn do in fact intersect? Inside that box exists the "truth on our terms". The problem is that this same "truth" most often resides where it's first discovered in the remotest of locations, well outside the confines of that box. Only when truth's new residence has been safely affirmed and accepted within the box is this same truth made to be available "on our terms".

This thread is quickly becoming a perfect example of just the sort of confusion and disarray within ufology that is mentioned by the OP. This is what really frustrates me... this charade has gone on for so long that everything imaginable has been thrown on the table to explain these UFO's. People are practically dividing into factions:

"Bill Cooper."

"No, not Bill Cooper. David Icke."

"No, no, no. Philip Corso."

Everybody is trying to find a spokesperson that they can idolize as the one and only source of truth on UFO's. But that's just the problem... there is no such person! Sure, some of these famous names might have some truth behind some of the things they say. That doesn't mean EVERYTHING THEY SAY is truth! Just because somebody has some documents that suggest alien bodies were recovered from Roswell doesn't mean he knows where those aliens came from and why they're here! For that matter, just because they might say something which turns out to be false doesn't mean everything they say should be disregarded!

True ufologists need to be able to study the information that has credentials, and leave the rest alone. Unfortunately I fear this problem will only get worse if we don't do something about it soon. And what really bugs me is that whoever is withholding the truth seems to be aware of these pseudo-religious cults that are forming, and still does nothing about it. Apparently they desire nothing short of a total corrosion of what ought to be the people's free access to information and education.

[edit on 18-8-2010 by Magnus47]

Originally posted by Magnus47
This thread is quickly becoming a perfect example of just the sort of confusion and disarray within ufology that is mentioned by the OP.

Everybody is trying to find a spokesperson that they can idolize as the one and only source of truth on UFO's. But that's just the problem... there is no such person!

True ufologists need to be able to study the information that has credentials, and leave the rest alone.

I agree with everything you stated except the last part. True researchers and reporters need to study all the information and then state what is real, what is not real AND how they came to that conclusion. The more we see of this, the more people will be able to develop better critical thinking skills of their own since they will have examples to follow.

But then again, that goes against the grain of what TPTB want us to be doing. Heaven forbid we learn how to question and think for ourselves!

Originally posted by Magnus47
This thread is quickly becoming a perfect example of just the sort of confusion and disarray within ufology that is mentioned by the OP. This is what really frustrates me... this charade has gone on for so long that everything imaginable has been thrown on the table to explain these UFO's. People are practically dividing into factions:

"Bill Cooper."

"No, not Bill Cooper. David Icke."

"No, no, no. Philip Corso."

I have not detected this type of overt bias here. Could you quote specifically where someone is pointing without reservation to ANY specific source of information? I quickly admitted that I could very well be completely wrong with respect to Cooper. I'm honestly still not convinced that I was, but that's just to state that there was in fact a great deal of accurately represented information that came from Cooper and his research. Icke? Who mentioned him? Corso?????

Everybody is trying to find a spokesperson that they can idolize as the one and only source of truth on UFO's. But that's just the problem... there is no such person! Sure, some of these famous names might have some truth behind some of the things they say. That doesn't mean EVERYTHING THEY SAY is truth!

Good grief, I am NOT attempting to idolize anyone! You're preaching to the choir friend. Certainly not stating anything most don't already know. Can you possibly share something pertinent here with respect to actual information? I mean with respect to the first post in this thread and the questions it contains.

Just because somebody has some documents that suggest alien bodies were recovered from Roswell doesn't mean he knows where those aliens came from and why they're here! For that matter, just because they might say something which turns out to be false doesn't mean everything they say should be disregarded!

Documents are often a reflection of hard and legitimate work, sometimes they are forged, and sometimes they represent intentional disinformation. So what? Other than the FACT that I agree with a good deal of what's being stated here, I'm just not certain you are really sharing any knowledge as much as you are attempting to coach the basics.

True ufologists need to be able to study the information that has credentials, and leave the rest alone. Unfortunately I fear this problem will only get worse if we don't do something about it soon. And what really bugs me is that whoever is withholding the truth seems to be aware of these pseudo-religious cults that are forming, and still does nothing about it. Apparently they desire nothing short of a total corrosion of what ought to be the people's free access to information and education.

So you are frustrated. I am too and so are 99% of those that have stopped viewing this phenomenon as entertainment. What I was hoping for via the initial questions that I asked was alternate view points based on reliable up to date information. With respect to those questions, do you have some information you could share?