Could we Really Be On The Brink?

reply to post by wrkn4livn


Who need disclosure really?? We know what we know. Either that or millions of abductees are completely nuts which I highly

doubt. Dwight made the deal .

LogicalRazor
You don't need disclosure & you don't need belief. You don't need worthless and unreliable "witness" testimony. You don't need Youtube videos or UFO books and documentaries. You don't need conmen & clowns claiming to channel aliens from zeta reticuli. What you need is actual evidence supporting alien visitations to earth. Evidence that can pass the scientific process and not crumble under scrutiny. That's all you need. Anything less than that, is simply hearsay or stories. Thus far, that proof eludes us. Its conceivable that given the immensity of the universe life on other planets is likely, but an alien presence on earth has never been proven. Ever.

100% This.

This post should probably be stickied atop this forum as a guide for posters over what the ATS threshold for good evidence is and most importantly is NOT.

A number of accredited scientists have gone on the record as supporting the extraterrestrial hypothesis for some UFOs. A scientific conclusion is never proven. It may be the best available explanation, but is always subject to revision or rejection, based on further evidence.

Magantice
reply to post by wrkn4livn

 

Who need disclosure really?? We know what we know. Either that or millions of abductees are completely nuts which I highly

doubt. Dwight made the deal .

Very well said! Thank you!

There are way too many people out there that will never get it.

It's like we give them the information and it goes in one ear
and rots the few brain cells that they can not afford to loose.

disclosure = authoritative validation and confirmation, providing vital information to those who have the right, and the need, to be informed.

realization, actualization. establishment.

FORWARD, MARCH!

VoidHawk

wrkn4livn
With the Canadian Minister coming out (no, not THAT way), could we finally be on the brink of disclosure? Could more officials come out with their knowledge? That would be something for sure. What do you think would really happen? How would we handle this? I know all the Geeks would finally be able to say "I told you so..."

news.nationalpost.com...

I'm unimpressed by that guy. All I've heard him do is repeat what he's read in books! He even admits he got his info from books.
There's a purpose to his "coming out" and its got nothing to do with disclosure.

Yes but does he need to bring an alien in by the ears? I guess my point was, and I see I didn't really make that clear, is that could this be a Catalist for MORE government officials to come out?

Soylent Green Is People

jessme
For me, government disclosure wouldn't do it for me, wouldn't prove much of anything either way, just like them saying aliens don't exist doesn't prove anything to me. For me, what WOULD prove it would be enough scientists and reputable researchers without preconceived notions of what they might find came to a conclusion after years of research and published a scientific paper...

Science and most laypeople with even a moderate education believe that aliens almost certainly "exist". The question is: Are they visiting the earth".

Granted, there is no hard evidence that intelligent aliens exist elsewhere in the universe, but the circumstantial evidence (the size of the universe and what we know about extremophile life on Earth) makes it likely. However, many people (including myself) feel that the evidence for alien visitation of Earth is not as good.

But you you be very hard pressed to find a scientist who thinks that humans are the only intelligent life in the vastness of the universe.

oh yes, that's a given, but I was not talking about disclosure that there is other life in the universe, I have no doubt whatsoever that there is. I'm talking about actual visitations on this planet of those from other planets. And I personally think there is a possibility that has happened too..just that "FULL DISCLOSURE" of that would be for me a peer-reviewed scientific report, not a govt. statement.

A number of scientifically trained persons have considered the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis for certain unidentified flying objects, and openly endorsed it. Among these:
Dr. Herman Oberth, Physiscist, Rocketry Engineer
Eugene Cernan , Aeronautical Engineer
Dr. James E. McDonald, Physiscist
Dr. Maurice Biot, Aeronautical Engineer
James Mc Campbell, Physicist
Dr. Walther Reidel, Rocketry Engineer

Ross 54
A number of scientifically trained persons have considered the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis for certain unidentified flying objects, and openly endorsed it. Among these:
Dr. Herman Oberth, Physiscist, Rocketry Engineer
Eugene Cernan , Aeronautical Engineer
Dr. James E. McDonald, Physiscist
Dr. Maurice Biot, Aeronautical Engineer
James Mc Campbell, Physicist
Dr. Walther Reidel, Rocketry Engineer

Well, that's good for those guys, and they are entitled to their opinion. However, considering that there are scientifically trained individuals who feel that there is NOT enough evidence to support that alien visitation is "fact", then we are back to "square one".

Like I said before, a group of educated individuals who say that they think the evidence shows that alien visitation is happening is not ITSELF additional evidence that alien visitation is happening. Just like the converse -- which is that just because there are educated individuals who feel that there is NOT evidence to support that alien visitation is happening THAT, TOO, is not ITSELF additional evidence that alien visitation is NOT happening.

Both of these examples would be an "argument from authority", which is a logical fallacy. Even when the cited authority truly is an authority, it is still a fallacious argument, because even an authority's opinion may not be correct.

The evidence is the evidence, and we have all seen it. One expert may conclude one thing from that evidence, and another expert may conclude something else from that evidence, but the fact that the people making the conclusions are experts does NOT add to the evidence.

Please notice I didn't say that some educated people think it is "impossible" that aliens could in fact visiting us, because I think that third opinion is definitely a tiny minority. I think most scientifically trained people believe alien visitation is indeed "possible", and the question is "alien visitation may be possible, but is it in fact occurring". Some feel there is evidence to support that alien visitation is indeed occurring as we speak, and others believe the evidence is not good enough to conclude that.

The evidence is the evidence, and we have all seen it. One expert may conclude one thing from that evidence, and another expert may conclude something else from that evidence, but the fact that the people making the conclusions are experts does NOT add to the evidence.

No, but their expertise does make their opinions about the value and meaning of the evidence much more valuable and likely to be correct than ordinary people's interpretations.

Actually, I have not been trying to argue, by evoking the names of scientists who support the ETH , that this hypothesis is the better one. I have merely been trying to show that support for it is not confined to sensationalists. Some comments in these forums have implied that this is the case.
I agree that is it possible for two reputable and conscientious persons to examine the same data and reach very different conclusions about it. This is a well established fact, and should be borne in mind by all of us.