UFO Testimonies By Cosmonauts and Astronauts and U.S. Presidents

reply to post by K-PAX-PROT


I disagree.

K-PAX-PROT

my point here is that out with the " UFO landing on the Whitehouse lawn" scenario kind of evidence there is in those cases enough circumstantial evidence of clear genuine unknowns that by their flight characteristics and signs of intelligent control alone is ample enough data for a serious consideration of the ET hypotheses having a credible foundation at least to support the POSSIBILITY that we are indeed in the past or know experiencing observational stimuli from unknowns that very well could originate from other dimensions,(occult), or ET intelligence's.....

Since only machine and animal intelligence are KNOWN to exist I would think that Alien intelligence would be pretty low on the list, considering the fact that Aliens, intelligent or otherwise, are NOT
KNOWN to exist.

Your "hypothesis" is built upon, at best, an unsupported premise.

reply to post by draknoir2


It is possible that aliens are a combination of animal and machine and plant with high strange abilities to enter into stealth mode.

What is not possible is prove that it's not possible therefore leaving this as a possibility.

Let's say you have a deck of playing cards and we throw it in the garbage because we dont undetstand basic math. This leaves us with the possibility that it was a deck of alien playing cards.

Now since we don't get basic math, or basic logic or even the basic meanings of words, we can now argue to our hearts content that aliens are possibly here in stealth mode and camouflage our ignorance by dropping names of what someone said 45 years ago, placing the word "data" at the end of "high strange" to make it seem like a Ligit word and insisting that someone have "credentials" in order to even have an opinion.

So what are your credentials to speak against dr McDonald and not considering high strange data and What evidence do you have that the ETH is not possible high strange data considering radar high strange data it tis laughable high strange data periods are not even required when making one long high strange data post...

reply to post by HiddenSecrets


Have to get to work but LOVE this topic, one of my most favorite of all. Have not read your thread yet, but promise to asap.

Keep discussing!

ZetaRediculian
reply to post by draknoir2

 

It is possible that aliens are a combination of animal and machine and plant with high strange abilities to enter into stealth mode.

What is not possible is prove that it's not possible therefore leaving this as a possibility.

Let's say you have a deck of playing cards and we throw it in the garbage because we dont undetstand basic math. This leaves us with the possibility that it was a deck of alien playing cards.

Now since we don't get basic math, or basic logic or even the basic meanings of words, we can now argue to our hearts content that aliens are possibly here in stealth mode and camouflage our ignorance by dropping names of what someone said 45 years ago, placing the word "data" at the end of "high strange" to make it seem like a Ligit word and insisting that someone have "credentials" in order to even have an opinion.

So what are your credentials to speak against dr McDonald and not considering high strange data and What evidence do you have that the ETH is not possible high strange data considering radar high strange data it tis laughable high strange data periods are not even required when making one long high strange data post...

That was a highly strange post.




Oh yeah... and data.

reply to post by K-PAX-PROT

Outwith evidence in the format of a UFO landing on the Whitehouse lawn and a Alien emerging from it and then shake the hands with the president in front of a world audience we have evidence that genuine unknowns have manifested in countries air spaces , picked up by multiple military and civilian radars , have multiple independent witnesses, have performed flight characteristics out with any known capabilities in the form of cases like this one below .... also no known "transponder" signals have emanated from these objects or recognized,(by FAA law), identification signals that are picked up by radar, military or FFA ...

I think some of the difficulty I have with this type of information is that it lacks data. Saying "multiple radars" and "multiple witnesses" doesn't make it a fact. Neither does saying something "performed flight characteristics" or is "intelligently controlled". Using these words tells a story that is spun and time after time when I look at the actual facts of actual cases, they fall short of their sensational story. the focus on transponders is interesting and misleading also. Who is claiming that anything is a commercial plane?

The JAL flight over Alaska is a classic spun story of multiple witnesses with multiple radar hits. UFOs seen by the entire crew! It is also well documented and I took the time to read all the interviews. The story doesn't hold up. The "entire crew" consisted of a captain and two copilots. no other passengers. There were radar hits consistent with clouds but the captain insisted there was traffic and gave a detailed description of what he saw. the other two guys said "yeah we saw some lights" . The lights happen to be in the direction of an airport and happen to match the pattern and color of runway lights. Then there is the giant mother ship that only the captain saw. There happens to be a satellite image of a giant cloud at the time and exact location of the "mother ship". its a classic confabulation between radar operators and ONE person.

Could this be the same type of thing with other "multiple" radar and "multiple" witness cases? I don't know because I only see the spun story. Saying it over and over with the word "credible' and "High strange" doesn't help.

Taking into account the above and below text that adequately rules out any human mental hallucinations or misconceptions regarding cases that have had objects of this nature and the amount of credible independent radar and witness in them then "WHY" if the secret military ops explanation is acceptable WITHOUT no admittance from the military, then "WHY" is the ET hypotheses also not acceptable too....??

First of all its impossible to rule out misidentification even with radar and witnesses. The JAL case is a good example. saying stuff like "human mental hallucinations or misconceptions" is just exemplifying your ignorance of the subject and really doesn't help your case.

We have genuine unknowns invading or materializing in various nations air spaces, performing flight characteristics that indicate an advanced form of technology ,easily out pacing ect military jets , these unknowns have no standard or recognizable aviation signals coming from them, those entrusted with the defense of a nations air space ,trained and in much more qualified positions make a professionally trained and qualified military decision based not on human hallucinations or misconceptions but from in some cases multiple independent sources such as military based radar and ground observations, civilian aviation radars ect to send up fighter jets to investigate or engage these unknowns and we are expected to take the non credible , non qualified and non witness "SPECULATIONS" that there is nothing to see here , move along there is no chance of any of these cases being credible for the ET hypotheses even when the stark bare data in these kind of cases is manifesting the total and credible opposite, that its manifesting the evidence that these "unknowns" ,(not through any considerable amount of lack of data), but through the witnesses testimonies, pilot and radar evidence and flight characteristics ect something real is manifesting without recognizable lawful aviation identification in restricted airspace's of various nations....

first off, can you use paragraphs and maybe even a period here and there? Its really difficult to take you seriously. Organize your thoughts and you might have something. But the gist of what you are trying to say is that sometimes the military acts on information? Most people do. Im not sure what else you are saying.

are we really expected to not only accept but perceive that those that are NOT in any way qualified or in any scientific credible position are justified to make the claim that these "unknowns" outwith the "UFO landing on the Whitehouse lawn" scenario have not enough data in them to provide the kind of hard " UFO landing on the Whitehouse lawn" scenario kind of evidence to substantiate a ET hypothesis or origin engaging in a highly sophisticated stealth like observational agenda...

don't believe me, believe others who are qualified. there are several. The data thus far, is very inadequate for a leap to the ETH. Why not the Ancient Wizard Hypothesis? or the Psychic Pokémon Theory?

my point here is that out with the " UFO landing on the Whitehouse lawn" scenario kind of evidence there is in those cases enough circumstantial evidence of clear genuine unknowns that by their flight characteristics and signs of intelligent control alone is ample enough data for a serious consideration of the ET hypotheses having a credible foundation at least to support the POSSIBILITY that we are indeed in the past or know experiencing observational stimuli from unknowns that very well could originate from other dimensions,(occult), or ET intelligence's.....

intelligent control is impossible to prove unless you give it some kind of test. something "seeming" like its evading does not make it so. Every time I wanted to ride my bike this summer, it rained. Does that mean aliens didn't want me to ride my bike? I guess it's POSSIBLE.

POSSIBILITY being almost meaningless here. the ET hypotheses is no more credible than anything else anyone can dream up. Why not Magical Elves? Explain why Magical Elves isn't a viable explanation and you have your answer why the ETH isn't either.

Again were is the undisputed evidence that rules out any possibility of ET intelligence's out there having the means to orchestrate a sophisticated stealth observational agenda .....

Where is the undisputed evidence that rules out the possibility of ET existing? WOW! You have to know that this some of the most backward logic around. don't you? First, who is saying that there is no possibility of ET visiting earth? The Magical Elves are keeping this "undisputed evidence" from us. Where is your undisputed evidence that Magical Elves are not keeping this information? Where is your undisputed evidence that Magical Elves are not responsible for all credible high strange data?

reply to post by VeniVidi


I don't remember the site actually.

Heres Mcdivitt saying he saw a ufo at the 9:00

originally posted by: IMSAM
Heres Mcdivitt saying he saw a ufo at the 9:00

I didn't hear him say he "saw a UFO", is there something wrong with my ears?