I'll Make You A Believer

reply to post by Pimander


Then we can agree on that.
Semi mythical and based on reality or history.
I do not prescribe to history as history has a way of getting erased or rewritten every so often.
I am sure Arthur was a conglomeration of real kings/ warlords or whatever you might have.
But the grand scale christian story I hardly believe.
Someday I'm sure some will say that Obama the first black president personally invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and many other Middle East / African countries to free his people and single handedly killed all terrorists, gave all Americans free health care out of his own pocket, stopped the banks and won the second American revolution.
Oh, and he chopped down a tree or something.
Even the crap in our history books is loosely based on history, they call that full and complete.

Originally posted by ArMaPMany people think that they are able to tell when someone is lying, but how can they (you) be sure? If it's just the way they feel, then there's nothing really supporting their opinion, even if they are right.

There are many ways to tell if a person is lying, but you have to be in their presence. Body language, in the eyes... detectives around the world are trained to do this. In a printed story it is more difficult, but not impossible to tell if someone is spinning a yarn, or truly believes what he/she is saying. Take John Lear for example... only takes a little practice to know when he is in information mode or story telling mode

You my friend tend to be over analytical and do not use all your senses to explore a problem.

How can we know? There's no way of seeing things through the eyes of someone, and even if they had experience in that field that doesn't mean that they weren't mistaken.

Can not a good author describe a rose, a rainbow or a sunset to a blind person so that the blind person can 'see' what the author sees?

The problem with witnesses is that we cannot really see and feel what they saw and felt, so we are limited to their description, and even their description may not exactly correspond to what happened, either because there was some thing they forgot to mention or because they interpreted in a way that was not correct or by many other reasons.

Ah.. so if some astronauts fly to the moon, and tell us what it was like up there we can not be sure they actually went, or might have forgotten to tell us about the atmosphere and the heavier gravity? As you say, its a matter of interpretation? Mind you they did bring back pictures, but heck, those we all know can be photoshopped right?

That's why one witness' testimony has always less "weight" than a consistent group of testimonies from several witnesses.

Don't you find it odd then that the testimony of one witness in a murder trial can get you sent to the gas chamber?

I was only talking about the witnesses, to me they are the weakest link in any case.

Ant THAT is precisely the problem with many skeptics. They focus on ONE issue, instead of looking at all the bits of evidence to see the whole picture. ONE witness's testimony might be week, but when thousands of individuals have made the same statements over decades, when there is radar, photographic, video and other evidence all around... at what point do you say.. "Hmmm maybe I need to look at this from a new perspective..." ?

I believe that extraterrestrial life is possible, but believing that some of those extraterrestrial beings have the capability, the possibility and the will to come to Earth is a different thing.

In an infinite Universe, the possibility that one or more races has the capability is not a far stretch... but you are mixing the belief that they are here with the possibility that they might be

Originally posted by Pimander
The Arthur thing is obviously semi-mythical, I'll agree. That does not mean it has no basis in reality.

Arthur, based on a man... became an idea... that has survived to this day as an ideal, The Most Nobel Order of the Blue Garter and Knighthood in general strive for this ideal even today

Jesus was a man... became an idea... that has survived to this day as a main stream religion and is in fact accepted by both Christianity and Islam

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one" - Albert Einstein

"For truly, I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you. " - Jesus of Nazareth

We create our own reality by what we believe... Quantum physics is beginning to show us that thought CAN indeed influence matter...

The fact that a man like Jesus can influence so many for thousands of years and create that reality is proof
The fact that Arthur can be the basis of Knighthood throughout history is proof
The fact that men like Mao, Hitler, Stalin... can create their own reality is proof

Fortunately constructive ideals have more staying power than destructive ideals (by their very nature evil and chaos are self destructive)

OK Coral and Custer's Last Stand... didn't happen the way we were told it did... yet the Earps and General Custer were real enough.

It is human nature to take a story of a man... and over time make the story more interesting, make it a rally point for ideals.

OH and BTW, Excalibur hangs on my wall... if I were ever to let you hold it, you too would fell the energy

Originally posted by zorgon
There are many ways to tell if a person is lying, but you have to be in their presence. Body language, in the eyes... detectives around the world are trained to do this.

Yes, but even trained people are fallible.

You my friend tend to be over analytical and do not use all your senses to explore a problem.

What senses can I use to explore a problem that is presented just as some text?

Can not a good author describe a rose, a rainbow or a sunset to a blind person so that the blind person can 'see' what the author sees?

Probably, but I think that you agree that not all witnesses are good authors, right?

Ah.. so if some astronauts fly to the moon, and tell us what it was like up there we can not be sure they actually went, or might have forgotten to tell us about the atmosphere and the heavier gravity?

Why do you say that we cannot be sure that they actually went? That has nothing to do with what I was saying.
And no, we cannot be sure that their description (and our perception of their description) correspond exactly to the truth, and I don't think that they would forget about something that would make the whole experience different from what they were expecting, like an atmosphere or stronger gravity.

As you say, its a matter of interpretation? Mind you they did bring back pictures, but heck, those we all know can be photoshopped right?

Yes, it's a matter of interpretation, that's why some people soul collectors where other people see photo faults or something else on the photos, if it wasn't a matter of interpretation we would all have the same opinion.

Don't you find it odd then that the testimony of one witness in a murder trial can get you sent to the gas chamber?

No, I find it sad that someone can be killed with so little to back it up

Ant THAT is precisely the problem with many skeptics. They focus on ONE issue, instead of looking at all the bits of evidence to see the whole picture. ONE witness's testimony might be week, but when thousands of individuals have made the same statements over decades, when there is radar, photographic, video and other evidence all around... at what point do you say.. "Hmmm maybe I need to look at this from a new perspective..." ?

Have all those thousands of witnesses present at the same event? If they were, as I said, that makes their testimony stronger (if they say the same thing), but if the cases were at a different time and/or place why should we consider it as if it was the same?

And, once more, why are you mixing radar photos and videos with witnesses testimony? I was only talking about witnesses, not other type of evidence.

But, answering your question, I look at any problem from a different perspective all the time, but if there isn't any new data is not that likely that I would change my mind, although that has happened.

In an infinite Universe, the possibility that one or more races has the capability is not a far stretch... but you are mixing the belief that they are here with the possibility that they might be

I was talking about what I believe, not about the possibilities, if they exist it's obviously possible that they are here.

reply to post by ArMaP

Don't forget that without witnesses almost the entire scientific, historical and archaeological literature would not exist. A scientist is a witness to their observations. Instruments, cameras and verification by others assist in the process but the verifying researcher is another witness.

Lets look at UFOlogy as that is what the believer question is partly about. We have witnesses. We have multiple witnesses. We have confirmation in the form of many cases. They could be lying as could a scientist. We have video and photographs that can be faked (most of the denial on ATS is based on this idea) as they can in science. Basically the standards of proof required in UFOlogy and parapsychology are far higher than in any scientific discipline.

I know that is an oversimplification (reproducibility is not normally possible with UFOlogy) but I think I have a point and most parapsychologists agree with me on this.

Originally posted by ArMaP
What senses can I use to explore a problem that is presented just as some text?

CIA Psyops use remote viewing skills that can be learned by anyone... as one example

Probably, but I think that you agree that not all witnesses are good authors, right?

Agreed...this is why you need to examine a testimony closely. People have also lied in court. But there are ways to tell which report is worth looking at closer and which are not good enough to go further. The best way is to follow up a testimony with questions.

I don't think that they would forget about something that would make the whole experience different from what they were expecting, like an atmosphere or stronger gravity.

funny thing about that... when asked what it felt like to be on the moon, they didn't have an answer.. but we will leave that for now

Yes, it's a matter of interpretation, that's why some people soul collectors where other people see photo faults or something else on the photos, if it wasn't a matter of interpretation we would all have the same opinion

Well we can see clearly at ATS that for ever 100 ideas there are 90 different interpretations (figure totally random approximations ) So while some clearly see the moon base, others see only blurry rocks. Perhaps we are all living separate realities... in mine the Moon base is there clear to see, while in others they only have rocks. It is also possible that some are simply not meant to see it yet.. “The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, “‘though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.’ - Jesus

All my years of study has shown me that this later version is correct. But one thing is certain. We will NEVER have proof of anything, nor agree on anything... in a forum

Don't you find it odd then that the testimony of one witness in a murder trial can get you sent to the gas chamber?

No, I find it sad that someone can be killed with so little to back it up

Have all those thousands of witnesses present at the same event? If they were, as I said, that makes their testimony stronger (if they say the same thing), but if the cases were at a different time and/or place why should we consider it as if it was the same?

There are several cases where 100,s of witnesses reported the same sighting, one good one is the dimming of Aristarchus Crater when Clementine flew over by astronomers on Earth... but if individual reports over many years give the same testimony, then yes we SHOULD consider them as if it was the same, even if we haven't caught that Loch Ness critter yet

The alternative is to look at nothing... toss it all out as lies and BS as many on here so readily do. And if we do that, then we might as well shut down the forum and go outside and live a real life

And, once more, why are you mixing radar photos and videos with witnesses testimony? I was only talking about witnesses, not other type of evidence.

Because only looking at one type of evidence and ignoring the rest is in my opinion false. That would be like the prosecutor only looking at the witness that says you shot your wife and not looking at the fingerprints of your neighbor on the gun that shot her.

reply to post by piles


What makes you think you are safe posting your knowledge on a public forum? What if I am from the ones you do not want to see... ?

reply to post by Pimander


That may be true, but it doesn't change the fact that someone's observations, without any other confirmation, is the weakest kind of evidence, and that was what I was saying.

Originally posted by piles
still can I ask, whats the point in investigating a UFO sighting?
what do you aim to achieve from that said sighting??

I will let Dr Robert Wood answer that for you...

UFO Conversations - Dr. Robert Wood

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by Pimander

 

That may be true, but it doesn't change the fact that someone's observations, without any other confirmation, is the weakest kind of evidence, and that was what I was saying.

And I am saying that observation is all we really have - especially as nearly all other evidence can be faked.

Originally posted by zorgon
CIA Psyops use remote viewing skills that can be learned by anyone... as one example

On all my experiments I was only good at transmitting my thoughts to other people (and it only worked with some people, not all), so I don't think I would be good at that.

Because only looking at one type of evidence and ignoring the rest is in my opinion false. That would be like the prosecutor only looking at the witness that says you shot your wife and not looking at the fingerprints of your neighbor on the gun that shot her.

But who is talking about ignoring the rest?

Don't forget that this whole witnesses discussion started because I commented about this sentence:

The witness knew exactly what they were seeing and it was beyond earthling capability.

That's why I was only talking about witnesses, not about other corroborating evidence.

But if you can find any clear evidence of the presence of extraterrestrial intelligent beings on Earth, I will gladly look at it.

reply to post by Pimander


So, observations is (almost) all we have, but observations are limited by the observer's senses and their interpretation, right?

What can we do about it?

Originally posted by piles
america computers with top secret info is offline, you would need to get access to a computer by walking through the front door. To walk through the front door you would need clearence, to have clearence you would have taken a legally binding oath, whereby if you shared the infomation to anyone you would be killed, to leave the building you would need a miracle to get you out.

Well not quite true... it is online... you just need a DoD CaC card and need to access it from a .mil address

Up until recently the front door was here... nic.mil

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by piles
still can I ask, whats the point in investigating a UFO sighting?
what do you aim to achieve from that said sighting??

I will let Dr Robert Wood answer that for you...

UFO Conversations - Dr. Robert Wood

Hmmmm...........

Very Very Interesting Old man.

Originally posted by Pimander
reply to post by Springer

 

Admittedly, I've never had a proper look at this particular footage. I can't find any footage of a similar effect on a missile at low res. I don't suppose you have any?

Does anyone have footage of a missile that looks like the NM crash? Surely there must be some if Springers's explanation is correct....

Originally posted by Pimander

Originally posted by Pimander
reply to post by Springer

 

Admittedly, I've never had a proper look at this particular footage. I can't find any footage of a similar effect on a missile at low res. I don't suppose you have any?

Does anyone have footage of a missile that looks like the NM crash? Surely there must be some if Springers's explanation is correct....

I think we need to find this Fact or Fiction video so we can see what they're talking about. Lemme see if I can find it.

Originally posted by zorgon
Arthur, based on a man... became an idea... that has survived to this day as an ideal, The Most Nobel Order of the Blue Garter and Knighthood in general strive for this ideal even today.

Absolutely. The fight for truth is surely part of that striving - one with which we are both familiar.

Originally posted by zorgon
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one" - Albert Einstein

But we know that the experience of that "illusion" is real. Surely the illusion is merely what we perceive the experience to be.

Originally posted by zorgon
Fortunately constructive ideals have more staying power than destructive ideals (by their very nature evil and chaos are self destructive)

You just reminded me of a line I read once.

"Evil left unopposed always turns upon itself." ~ Dion Fortune (I think but can't find it right now.)

Originally posted by zorgon
OH and BTW, Excalibur hangs on my wall... if I were ever to let you hold it, you too would fell the energy

That's a grand claim. Interesting....

reply to post by Pimander

Originally posted by rigel4

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by piles
still can I ask, whats the point in investigating a UFO sighting?
what do you aim to achieve from that said sighting??

I will let Dr Robert Wood answer that for you...

UFO Conversations - Dr. Robert Wood

Hmmmm...........

Very Very Interesting Old man.

the only reason to keep alien visitation a secret would be because you gain more from keeping it a secret... if america gained more from telling everybody about it, then america would have told everybody..

so what does America gain from keeping it a secret?

the theory that all aliens that have visited america and not one other nation is illogical IMO.. unless one alien species arrived in america who was allies of other aliens and that first species introduced those aliens to america... but with aliens they would want something from this planet, if the first species of aliens introduced itself other aliens it may later then have to compete for what it wanted from this planet...

i've seen proof of greys and i have had sources tell me that the nordics, are more likely 'the creators species' if anything else, and the same sources have told me that they don't suspect that we have been visited by more than one species... however with the nords they communicate telepathically, and you simply hear a voice in your head that sounds very human..

By the way, who thinks the first video shows baloons?


It's covered here, and most people seemed baffled:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Who would design a mechanism that could eject baloons horizontally at hundreds? of miles an hour. And the spheres do appear to move intelligently.