They Are Coming - Are You Ready For Disclosure?

Well I think this thread has gone WAY off topic..

Now all I see are people argueing about THEORIES...

Theories are just opinions, and just because someone has PHD beside their name does not necasarily make their OPINION any more valid....

Take this wormhole stuff and the power it needs...

Most scientists and even us idiots believe there are many power sources yet to be discovered..
Maybe its the Force as in Star Wars...Who knows....

But to see ATS members argueing so ferociously over OPINIONS is just sad...

Originally posted by up up and away
THE SHEEPLE'S CHAMP!


(peoples champ) get it

not really

define context of "sheeple" please...I sort of fail at humor, so perhaps if you could explain to me why this would be fitting, I might be able to get a chuckle out of it.

Who are "sheeple" to begin with?

reply to post by SaturnFX

Definitions of Sheeple on the Web:

•Sheeple (a portmanteau of "sheep" and "people") is a term of disparagement, in which people are likened to sheep.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheeple

•People who unquestioningly accept as true whatever their political leaders say or who adopt popular opinion as their own without scrutiny
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sheeple

The question is, are these UFO's or Spacecraft of some description under Intelligent Control and NOT from Earth. And I haven't seen any real proof for them being anything but UFO's. They are either Hoax's, Space Junk, Top secret Military Projects or Others, and unable to place them into the correct shoe box means their UFO.

A UFO does not mean Kang and Kono are here for supplies, just they are UnIdentified.








That particular explanation often sounds plausible, but actually explains very little. It explains none of the pre-1957 UFO reports, for example, since there were no satellites or space junk of any kind up there before that time--at least none of ours from earth.

It explains none of the UFOs reported in government documents in the 1940s and 1950s that looked and performed nothing like any known conventional aircraft of that era, that could not even come close to matching their speed, altitude and performance.

As I said before, a lot of the answers are already there in records that are declassifed, but no one can claim to be some kind of UFO "expert" today and offer lots of pat answers without having taken the time and trouble to actually wade through all the records that are available.

reply to post by witness63

That particular explanation often sounds plausible, but actually explains very little. It explains none of the pre-1957 UFO reports, for example, since there were no satellites or space junk of any kind up there before that time--at least none of ours from earth.

All true, but then you can argue that they are timetravellers from our future, or maybe Atlantis is an undersea advanced civilization that remains mostly hidden, occassionally flying around for research...

Who knows, but ET has never been proven as fact..Not yet anyways...

Originally posted by SaturnFX
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher

 

Your entire post made no sense

Thanks. It's always a pleasure knowing my professional opinion holds such high regard amongst ATSers.

have you been drinking?

I don't drink much.

anyhow, what didja learn at the base then? go on...let the cat out of the bag.

I'm posting on ATS, aren't I? Perhaps my presence alone lets people know where I stand on certain issues.

Not your typical ovis aries,
ET

Originally posted by CynicalM
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Definitions of Sheeple on the Web:

•Sheeple (a portmanteau of "sheep" and "people") is a term of disparagement, in which people are likened to sheep.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheeple

•People who unquestioningly accept as true whatever their political leaders say or who adopt popular opinion as their own without scrutiny
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sheeple

oh, I get it...so people whom want a skeptical mind to weigh in are sheeple because they dont simply believe any wild claim, but are too lazy to do the research themselves.

but, doesn't that mean that people whom simply believe unproven things without tons of research behind them are also sheeple

according to this then, theres about 10 people, and everyone else whom relies on other peoples expertise are sheeple...

thats alot of sheeple...

I wonder...I am not completely caught up on tax law...I tend to use an accountant for my business because I am a bit too lazy or busy to go through the endless mind numbing legal aspects that can best benefit me..does that make me a sheeple for using an accountant?

sheeple = people whom do not believe what I believe

thats the true definition of it.

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by CynicalM
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Definitions of Sheeple on the Web:

•Sheeple (a portmanteau of "sheep" and "people") is a term of disparagement, in which people are likened to sheep.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheeple

•People who unquestioningly accept as true whatever their political leaders say or who adopt popular opinion as their own without scrutiny
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sheeple

oh, I get it...so people whom want a skeptical mind to weigh in are sheeple because they dont simply believe any wild claim, but are too lazy to do the research themselves.

but, doesn't that mean that people whom simply believe unproven things without tons of research behind them are also sheeple

according to this then, theres about 10 people, and everyone else whom relies on other peoples expertise are sheeple...

thats alot of sheeple...

I wonder...I am not completely caught up on tax law...I tend to use an accountant for my business because I am a bit too lazy or busy to go through the endless mind numbing legal aspects that can best benefit me..does that make me a sheeple for using an accountant?

sheeple = people whom do not believe what I believe

thats the true definition of it.

Damn bro you weren't giving yourself enough credit. You don't sort of fail at humor, you unequivocally fail at humor, at an exceedingly high level. Your breakdown kinda reminded me of Data from STNG trying to understand jokes. But you tried and I honestly applaud you for that.

As a species, we do not 'know it all', far from it.

Hence I get irrate when someone states a known fact to our species as the be all and end all of everything.

e.g.

1st ATS Poster : "I believe the US has exotic propulsion that is almost uncomprehendable to us"

2nd ATS Poster : "NO THEY DONT, Here's what they have (links Wiki), case solved, mod move this thread to Hoax"

We only see a tiny fraction of the light spectrum, and yet we still only believe what we see on the whole.

reply to post by Skellon

Funny thing.
Neither one has any proof but generally proof of something can be provided while proof of nothing cannot.

reply to post by SaturnFX

I wonder...I am not completely caught up on tax law...I tend to use an accountant for my business because I am a bit too lazy or busy to go through the endless mind numbing legal aspects that can best benefit me..does that make me a sheeple for using an accountant?

sheeple = people whom do not believe what I believe

No, I use an accountant also, but I check over their work and ALWAYS find mistakes..
No one is perfect...

BTW, I was just answering your question by showing you the definition of sheeple...

Dont shoot the messenger.

reply to post by Phage


True Phage, however, going back to my example, the propulsion technology could well exist, and that in itself makes it something rather than nothing.

Regards Skellon.

reply to post by Skellon

Prove it.

Ah man. I hate that one line rule. The above is perfect, with no need for further pointless comment.

reply to post by Phage


Pointless comment incoming...

And if I, an average guy cannot prove it, it means it does not exist?

I could have speculated that the stealth fighter existed before it was revealed to the public, I could not have proven it at the time, only summised from indications, would that mean it did not exist?

A large amount of money goes to the 'black budget' in the states every year and that is just the states.

Military technology is on average 15-20 years ahead of what is known by the public.

How then can we state catagorically that if there is no data on the net regarding the discussed probable item, that it cannot exist?

reply to post by franspeakfree


Yes, the DoD is involved but there is no war involved. Otherwise, many of your amateur or professional astronomers would have seen something. And guess what? Nothing has been seen or discovered. The main reason for concern is that the DoD/NASA and even further back as the NRO had discovered artifacts on the Moon. Who made them? Where did they come from? Why are they there? Just do a simple search here on ATS and you will find a bunch of them.
But disclosure is not coming. I'm sorry. The PTB cannot let this out unless they want to see world wide anarchy on an epic scale occur. Supposedly, this would satisfy the Georgia Stone's rule to limit a population to a certain level, but for what reason?

Kratos40

Hopefully, a few earthlings are ready for that event. I myself felt like I've been ready for a long time in spite of haven been kept in the dark by this veneer of reality. The conclusion I'm coming to is, whatever alien species that are coming, I don't care if they come with a cookbook, they better be good at cleaning because planet Earth needs a major cleanse. Too many parasites of waste of skin are festering misery on this world. They may have the cure for the cancer that is plaguing this beautiful cosmic body.

They have my full blessing for doing whatever they see fit! Enough with human primitivism.

reply to post by Skellon

If your speculation on the F117 had included characteristics which violated known physical laws of the time your speculation would have not been validated. Everything about the aircraft used "conventional" science of the time.

Technology is application of science. Technology may be secret and ahead of public knowledge but the science behind is not.

Originally posted by Phage

Prove it.

Thats pretty funny coming from you. How many times have we seen you "debunk" something just because you come up with another possibility for the stated event or hypothesis. Yet, since there's another possibility in your eyes, that's your automatic proof that the original idea thought or question is wrong...And then all the little Phagites jump on the "our God has spoken" bandwagon...

I try to listen to everyone's ideas and thoughts, do whatever research I can on my own, and try to learn from everyone. But man, some of the schtick is getting old....

reply to post by Toxicsurf

It was a throw away comment. A joke in the context of the conversation.

Originally posted by PhageTechnology may be secret and ahead of public knowledge but the science behind is not.

Prove it.