Honestly, What More Proof Do We Really Need?

Originally posted by lifeform11
if you take each case and look at it, you can deny all aspects of that case as a singular incident very easily, however if you take into consideration ALL cases the evidence is overwhelming, and i don't mean cases that have been proven wrong i just mean cases where there is still doubt or cannot be proved wrong.

This is a logical fallacy.

Quantity of 'study' does not equal quality of study. Just because there are a lot of unexplained instances doesn't mean any single one of them are a space craft or alien. What it means is people's eyes are generally not that accurate. That the cases did not necessarily warrant study. That the media enjoyed misreporting the case.

I'll put it this way ... There are many many poor studies on ESP. Over 130 years of them in fact. None of the results of the positive experiments have been replicated in well controlled laboratories. All positive results were held in poor laboratories. Just because there are a lot of poor experiments doesn't mean the number of these experiments holds anyway weight.

Your mind is letting you assume smoke = fire. That's not really how these things work. You are of course welcome to your opinion, but your opinion is in no way a scientific theory.

Will also comment on documentaries. Documentary comes from the French 'documentaire' and it generally means opinion or essay.

Documentary have no legal requirement to include 'fact'. They are less reliable than the non-fiction section of your library. I'll also point out that James Randi almost had a psychic investigation reality show. He was asked how many cases he investigates would prove to be genuine. He said ... zero. The negotiations for the show immediately fell through when he stated that he had never found a legitimate paranormal person in any of his studies.

The media does not want the truth, they want foolery and that is where amateur UFO investigators fall into a pit. For UFO study use books, eye witnesses, newspaper articles and any other evidence you can find and with *all* of this for a single case of study you might find some truth. 99.9% of the time that truth will be that the media mislead, that a person lied, that the object was likely something mundane, and that life goes on as normal. It's an almost impossible field to make progress in simply because of all the mess.

Documentaries always bleat on about proof, and " Here are some blurry pictures" nonsense, they get 'informed' witnesses on to explain their experiences, but ALWAYS at the end of the documentary say " At the moment we have NO hard proof or evidence" or some other such nonsense, oh, and to all the people that say Aliens and UFO's are demons and agents of Satan, can you explain your reasoning and provide evidence to support this?

Why are Aliens demonised ( pardon the pun) so much , Why is religeon even involved on UFO's? From my reckoning Aliens are another form of life that exists in the vastness of space and they are visiting here sometimes, yes some UFO's are military craft , how can anyone prove otherwise one way or the other?.
Religeon needs to realise we are heading to the future , not always living in the past where not knowing anything always lead to ignorance and guessing.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Vanchatron

 

Good. Reading is good. Much better than watching The "History" Channel.
But please try to look at more than one viewpoint, think about what is said, and use your own critical thinking skills.
A good thing to look for is claims, such as Bentwaters being a nuclear missile base. Why would such a claim be made? Who makes it? "Disinfo" can be a two way street.

edit on 10/3/2010 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Now this is a good one, reading is better than watching the History Channel? Why? Are you saying that books are far more accurate than television, or are you saying that the History Channel no longer cares about History?
Either way, both statements are incorrect as far as I'm concerned. If somebody can grab a bunch of "fluff" together and throw it into a TV show, then somebody can grab a bunch of "fluff" together and throw it into a book.
It is, however, very funny to me how all of this stuff about UFO's (and other paranormal subjects) has been shown on the HISTORY channel for several years now... but whether it's just "fluff" or not, it's still a hell of a lot more interesting than 90% of the other garbage that is on TV these days... perhaps this is also intentional?

Originally posted by DataWraith
Why are Aliens demonised ( pardon the pun) so much , Why is religeon even involved on UFO's? From my reckoning Aliens are another form of life that exists in the vastness of space and they are visiting here sometimes, yes some UFO's are military craft , how can anyone prove otherwise one way or the other?.
Religeon needs to realise we are heading to the future , not always living in the past where not knowing anything always lead to ignorance and guessing.

The way I look at, "demons" AND "angels" are BOTH "aliens". Whether or not they're actual living organisms from another planet or beings from another dimension doesn't really make any difference - the fact is, there are lots and lots of stories about them, across all nations of the Earth, covering thousands of years and every religion (that I'm aware of) So... where exactly do all of these stories come from?

Even if the stories originate from a bunch of prehistoric cavemen sitting around eating different psychedelic plants, the fact remains that lots and lots of people had very similar experiences... so yes, for me there is definately something else out there - what exactly it is, who knows - you tell me.

reply to post by Phage


OMG im not agreeing with the infamous phage so I must be wrong because the sheeps will soon say so.

I agree that alot of these "documentries" are rubbish and one sided but to say they categorically offer no proof is streching the truth in the other direction! There is ample evidence presented that would suggest somthing else is going on (photos, infrared, video's, radar, miliatry reports & eye witness accounts by people from all walks of life including trainted airforce personel) - not to say it is ET's - but something unusual.. and its very nature could be why hard proof is so hard to capture.

I respect your opinion and your contributions to ATS in general but in this case feel you may need to deny ignorance a little more mate. Your mind is already made up?

PS: Sorry for spelling it's late and i am lazy - aka human.

The Day Before Disclosure - FULL documentary

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Well here is a good one.

Simply too many well documented cases to deny.

It's gets to a point where attempting to rationalize this all away as hallucinations or liars is denial.

The logical conclusion is non-human origin.

Ignore the obvious.
That's what the believer does.
People lie all the time about UFO's. People lie in general, constantly, about almost everything.
But the "believer" almost always just takes at face value what another believer says.
Please, there is no proof.

Originally posted by OldDragger


Ignore the obvious.
That's what the believer does.
People lie all the time about UFO's. People lie in general, constantly, about almost everything.
But the "believer" almost always just takes at face value what another believer says.

Please, there is no proof.

edit on 5-10-2010 by OldDragger because: (no reason given)

Yes, but to some people, all ufo witnesess are either liers,bad witnesess, or hoaxers. You might moan at believers, but skeptic/de-bunkers can be just as bad. As much as some people love to mention the word "belief" when it comes to ufo believers, they don't realise they are running on there own belief system.

Originally posted by OldDragger
Please, there is no proof.

You must not be looking very hard.

These cases aren't just based on eye witness testimony.

But regardless, the idea that all these people are liars is unrealistic and an unfounded assumption based on speculation and preconceived notions.

The problem is you are viewing the evidence with a conclusion in mind.

reply to post by Vanchatron


You're right man. Although, I'm not sure that watching videos like "ancient aliens" or "out of the blue" = the smoking gun. The smoking gun is in my signature. The smoking gun is the Peruvian pilot who said he shot at a UFO in 1980. The smoking gun is the ICBM incidents. The smoking gun is JAL Flight 1628.

The reason people can accept an invisible atom and not an invisible alien is simple. The invisible atom has no implications to the average person other than "hmm interesting." The invisible alien has huge implications which people aren't prepared to deal with at the present time.

It is very frustrating I admit, but please don't think of the military or government as "one evil entity which refuses to disclose information." Always think logically and clearly. These organizations are made up of human individuals. Many of these individuals are not prepared to deal with alien implications either (just as the general population). Just because they work for the federal gov't, NASA, USAF, etc doesn't mean they have all the answers to the universe. Keep that in mind.

Originally posted by sum1one
Now this is a good one, reading is better than watching the History Channel? Why? Are you saying that books are far more accurate than television, or are you saying that the History Channel no longer cares about History?

Either way, both statements are incorrect as far as I'm concerned. If somebody can grab a bunch of "fluff" together and throw it into a TV show, then somebody can grab a bunch of "fluff" together and throw it into a book.

It depends ... Are you reading the 'My First Penguin Book of UFOs'?

If you attempted to learn a discipline from TV, and I attempted to learn it from books ... I would get there faster and more accurately than you.

When was the last time you finished watching a show on the history channel and went through their references? When you hit the rewind button to find a particular document? When the narrator stopped to tell you where a certain formula or statistic came from?

If a book is fluff I'll usually work it out quicker and easier than if I'm watching TV.

reply to post by Jezus


Oh sure. that's it.
Speaking of looking, look at this. Go ahead scroll through.

ATS HOAX

More than a couple UFO hoaxes, yet each one was starred and flagged and defended by the believers!
NOW, doesn't that kinda make you wonder?

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by Jezus

 

Oh sure. that's it.
Speaking of looking, look at this. Go ahead scroll through.

ATS HOAX

More than a couple UFO hoaxes, yet each one was starred and flagged and defended by the believers!
NOW, doesn't that kinda make you wonder?

Yes, we all know there are hardcore believers, who will believe every that is thrown at them. But, the same can be said for some skeptics/de-bunkers. They run on there belief system too, they just don't know it.

Are you saying there are no skeptics/de-bunkers who have their mind made up before they investigate a case. Are you saying that some skeptics/de-bunkers don't throw out stupid explanations because there ignorance won't let them have it any other way?

reply to post by Pinke


you might think cases where military jets have chased and in some cases attempted to shoot down u.f.o's means nothing and is unscientific to include, but i believe it has to be counted. the same as u.f.o's being captured on radar, i am not talking about what joe bloggs said, a individual, or just a handful of what can be dismissed as loonies, however you ignore ALL the evidence and decide instead to concentrate on a small portion of evidence (eye witness) that can be easily dismissed. proving my point about what i was saying.

if science means ignoring evidence because it dos'nt fit your belief then i was misled at school.

when it comes to people saying they saw u.f.o's if one person says it, it can be easily dismissed, how many does it take before you start to understand that not ALL these people are lying? 100, 1,000, 1 million? more? 10 million? is it really logical to say "well i don't believe it so they must all be delusional and lying" once you get over a certain figure? i could understand dismissing a few people saying something that is unheard of, and if you look at each case individually then you can dismiss what they say, but when you look at the bigger picture a pattern starts to emerge and you have millions saying it. the same as when you look at one individual case of a u.f.o being chased by the military you can dismiss it, but when you look at all the cases from every country of jets chasing u.f.o's then a pattern starts to emerge.

that was what my point was about, if you look at things individually, they are easy to dismiss, to get a true picture you need to look at the pattern. are you saying the pattern is unimportant and unscientific when exploring something that is not fully known? surely the pattern leads to the answers. eyewitness testimony can be taken as evidence if it were witnessed by more than a few people in different locations and who do not know each other and they all say the same thing, it dos'nt prove what it was but it gives clues. its a fallacy to say that 100 people who all witnessed the same thing were all lying or all have eye problems.

reply to post by Jay-morris


Now who creates hoaxes?
Who deliberatly sets out to lie? To spread false information?
Who creates fake videos, photos, and stories?

Would that be...debunkers?

How many people make money in this field with books, DVD's, lectures etc.
How many of those people are debunkers as opposed to selling to "believers"?
Who has a vested interest in the alien/UFO field?
Let's be honest here!

reply to post by OldDragger


yes both sides, how do you know some hoaxes are not created by debunkers to discredit the subject and make themselves look good when they explain what it really is? i don't and i doubt you do to?

reply to post by lifeform11


Yeah, that's likley.
The convoluted explanation! The twisting of logic!
a "believers" last resort!

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by Jezus

 

Oh sure. that's it.
Speaking of looking, look at this. Go ahead scroll through.

ATS HOAX

More than a couple UFO hoaxes, yet each one was starred and flagged and defended by the believers!
NOW, doesn't that kinda make you wonder?

Are you serious?

So if I make a picture of a fake airplane it means airplanes don't exist?

Pointing out the fakes doesn't disprove the thousands of unexplainable cases.

The Day Before Disclosure - FULL documentary
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You could have a direct personal experience and rationalize it as some kind of unexplainable hallucination.

Sometimes trying to rationalize all the evidence as anything BUT extraterrestrials is simply illogical.

reply to post by OldDragger


no not twisting just not cherry picking, i included both possibilities i did'nt deny believers create hoaxes, your the one denying that it could be possible some from the other side do it also, maybe because it dos'nt fit your already made up opinion of debunkers(intelligent, logical) and believers (liars, loonies, delusional), what i said is very possible if you actually think about it without being biased, but it dos'nt fit your view hence, i must be twisting it.