Originally posted by taibunsuu
NASA policy, responsibility and authority to guard the Earth against any harmful contamination or adverse changes in its environment resulting from
personnel, spacecraft and other property returning to the Earth after landing on or coming within the atmospheric envelope of a celestial body; and
security requirements, restrictions and safeguards that are necessary in the interest of national security.
The above is the opening paragraph of the ET exposure law. Considering their may be microbes on Mars of unknown effect to humans, it might be in the
interest of our race to have regulations about the handling and exposure of any foreign bodies.
Common citizens are not venturing into space whereby they would be exposed to alien life. The Extra-Terrestrial Exposure Law applies to citizens on
this planet, not to astronauts. If there were no aliens here, there would be no need for the federally mandated law to stop citizens from having
contact with them.
Secondly, most Ufologists are aware that NASA follows a policy of deception and disinformation toward the general public on the issue of UFO's and
extraterrestrials. In light of this, NASA has no credibility among serious researchers.
For example, there is that well-known account of a US astronaut in orbit referring to an alien spacecraft on his radio transmission. Shortly
thereafter, all NASA radio transmissions were scrambled.
Originally posted by taibunsuu
As far as ET crashing in New Mexico... Don't you think that logic dictates that a spacecraft capable of FTL travel is not going to crash?
Since when does an interstellar spacecraft automatically become indestructible and its occupants infallible? Assuming so is indicative of faulty
logic.
It is also well-known in the Ufologist community that Zetan spacecraft and instrumentation can be disrupted by traditional radar emissions. This could
easily cause them to crash.
Originally posted by taibunsuu
Why would it be here, anyway? A civilization with the benefit of FTL technology would not have to physically introduce themselves to Earth's
environment for any reason but to make contact. FTL travel is a sign of technology so advanced we can only imagine its peripheral applications, but
if we extrapolate from what we already know, it would dictate that ET will never leave unwanted evidence of a visitation on this planet by accident
because they can travel in time.
You are making assumptions on how you would apply interstellar flight technology, not how they would.
Having access to advanced technology doesn't mean having access to wisdom.
The aliens have no intention of publicly announcing their presence, as that would disrupt their agenda of covert subjugation.
Originally posted by taibunsuu
As far as people talking about what they saw without proof, that's the stuff legend is made off. Show me some proof, otherwise don't waste your
breath on fairy tales.
With all the cogent arguments presented as well as the numerous links toward valid research in this area, which you have chosen to ignore, it makes
you appear to be either be a disinformation agent of the government or someone who is too emotionally immature and close-minded to embrace the
truth.
So which is it?
You don�t appear to be stupid so the only logical assumption is that you are either prejudiced or purposely trying to debunk the abundance of
anecdotal evidence and eyewitness testimonies.
Originally posted by taibunsuu
Thomas was a very wise man for insisting he poke his fingers into Christ's wounds before believing he came back from the dead.
Bad example...
Jesus of Nazareth was a prophet, not God or one with The Original Creator; he was married to Mary Magdalene, never died on the cross and never rose
from the dead. After the purported crucifixion, he traveled with Mary to India. They both settled there and eventually died in Kashmir. Jesus' tomb
was traced and found in Khanyar Street, Srinagar. The crucifixion drama is another sham in history that has been thoroughly discussed in a number of
places on ATS. Here is one of them:
Did Jesus die on the cross?