Please...

Whoops, just saw this.

Originally posted by Gazrok

I suppose you think an official US Army press release, and the local paper's front page, numerous documents and the Ramey memo, referring to a crashed disc don't count as "well documented"?

[edit on 22-9-2004 by Gazrok]

The Ramey memo is sketchy at best. the rest, while very tempting, is hardly conclusive. I've learned the hard way of taking everything at face value.

MKULTRA- that's an excellent photo of a blurry orange object.

Esoterica-

Thank you, exactly the response that I was hoping to receive.

Since you are approaching this photo with a skeptical eye, could you please explain what type of photographic evidence you must observe in order to believe that you are seeing a picture of an actual extraterrestrial?

If photographic evidence of any type would not satisfy your criteria, what would you need to see in order to accept the hypothesis that the Earth has been visited by extraterrestrials? What conclusive proof would you need?

I will answer the question myself, so as to not be accused of "baiting" or "avoiding the question". I would personally need to physically & socially interact with an extraterrestrial (as well as "their" technology) in order to believe that ETs have visited Earth.

MK
EDIT: Added the word "conclusive".

[edit on 22-9-2004 by MKULTRA]

Originally posted by MKULTRA
Esoterica-

Thank you, exactly the response that I was hoping to receive.

Since you are approaching this photo with a skeptical eye,

If by skeptical, you mean not reacting with "OMFG ITS TEH ALEINZZZZ", then you are correct

could you please explain what type of photographic evidence you must observe in order to believe that you are seeing a picture of an actual extraterrestrial?

None, really. Photos can be faked. Show me broad daylight video footage of an alien moving in such a way that modern animatronics cannot duplicate, and I'll probably raise an eyebrow. But a blurry orange glob in a piece of film in no way makes me think it's an alien.

I

f photographic evidence of any type would not satisfy your criteria, what would you need to see in order to accept the hypothesis that the Earth has been visited by extraterrestrials? What conclusive proof would you need?

Well, any sort of unearthly artifacts. Even a piece of alloy that was unbuildable when it was discovered. Maybe organic samples that are identified as non-terrestrial. I know things of this nature have been claimed, but I've never seen proof those claims were genuine.

I will answer the question myself, so as to not be accused of "baiting" or "avoiding the question". I would personally need to physically & socially interact with an extraterrestrial (as well as "their" technology) in order to believe that ETs have visited Earth.

MK
EDIT: Added the word "conclusive".

[edit on 22-9-2004 by MKULTRA]

I'm not a skeptic. I am very open to the possibility that EBE's are visiting Earth. I am also very open to the possiblilty they are not. I have not seen enough to make up my mind either way. But an orange blob is not going to sway me

I suppose you think an official US Army press release, and the local paper's front page, numerous documents and the Ramey memo, referring to a crashed disc don't count as "well documented"?

I thought you couldn't trust a word the military said as they just spin cover-stories for the cover-up. Yet the initial press release came from the military.

The Air Force and CIA were created, etc.

It's not so much why the CIA was created, but by whom was the CIA created?
Me thinks that the only Aliens the US were harboring and recruiting in 1947 were war criminals, scientists and dodgy shrinks. Luckily everybody else on civvy street were to busy looking up at the sky for the Alien space brothers, to bother with sinister Earthly concerns. Hey you know how it works, people are more inclined to believe the lie, and bigger the lie the better.