There's no evidence that extraterrestrial visitation has occurred

draknoir2

EnPassant


Aliens:

Now, if we can establish, by such arguments that I'm giving here, that these people are not deluded, they are all seeing more or less the same thing, and they are reporting the essential details correctly then we can extend that reasoning to the descriptions of the aliens because the aliens are reported in the context of the ufo experience. We are hardly going to argue that they are not mistaken about the ufo and then say they must be mistaken about the appearance of the aliens, just because it is stretching beyond our world view.

People report seeing "alien craft" all the time without having any way of knowing the nature, origin, or contents of what they saw. They assume it to be "Alien" because they equate that with U.F.O.'s. So how would a thousand such false assumptions be of any more value than a single one? What is the "critical mass" that would render it true?

And you have arbitrarily declared that "they are all seeing more or less the same thing". The fact is sightings are incredibly diverse.

edit on 7-3-2014 by draknoir2 because: (no reason given)

It seems that these witnesses are, by and large, reporting what is there. The accusations that they are mistaken are pure speculative and academic. There is no evidence that they are mistaken in any serious way. So, given all the supporting evidence, such as radar, we can take as true the general picture that is emerging with regard to sightings; they are real and reported as experienced.

Likewise, given that we give credibility to the witnesses we have no reason to believe that they are wrong when they describe the ufonauts.

This is where it gets interesting; these ufonauts seem to be spirits or extra dimensional beings. But they also seem to be biological creatures. Strieber says he asked to smell them. Many other cases suggest they are biological creatures. And yet the seem to be spirits.

The evidence suggests that, like human beings, they are spirits and some of them at least have physical bodies. If they are physical creatures then this is evidence that they are ET. They don't seem to come from earth - not in terms of their physicality.

Yes, there are many differences in sightings but there are similarities too. This is why I keep referring to the themes that emerge (stalling car engines etc.)

EnPassant


It seems that these witnesses are, by and large, reporting what is there.

The accusations that they are mistaken are pure speculative and academic. There is no evidence that they are mistaken in any serious way. So, given all the supporting evidence, such as radar, we can take as true the general picture that is emerging with regard to sightings; they are real and reported as experienced.

Likewise, given that we give credibility to the witnesses we have no reason to believe that they are wrong when they describe the ufonauts.

This is where it gets interesting; these ufonauts seem to be spirits or extra dimensional beings. But they also seem to be biological creatures. Strieber says he asked to smell them. Many other cases suggest they are biological creatures. And yet the seem to be spirits.

The evidence suggests that, like human beings, they are spirits and some of them at least have physical bodies. If they are physical creatures then this is evidence that they are ET. They don't seem to come from earth - not in terms of their physicality.

Yes, there are many differences in sightings but there are similarities too. This is why I keep referring to the themes that emerge (stalling car engines etc.)

Speaking of pure speculation, it SEEMS that's exactly what you are engaged in... and rather heavily at that.

ZetaRediculianSo in order to demonstrate that people easily misperceive what is right in front of them, I will be pulling together a list of misperceptions that have occurred in this thread.

I would think very carefully about this. An intellectual misconception, such as those in this thread, cannot be compared with a perceptual error. They are not on the same level as one has to do with cognition and the other, sensory input. Cognitive misunderstandings are common between people in conversation because of the lack of precision in language, among other things. It is very different from perceptual errors.

reply to post by EnPassant


Essentially you are saying that anyone who thinks or believes that there are other ways to explain an unknown phenomenon is just plain wrong. You are saying that due to the overwhelming evidence that aliens are here that anyone who disagrees is essentially delusional. This would include a wide range of people including pilots and policeman. Everyone must be mistaken if there is no other explanation. And calling someone mistaken is just a polite way of calling them delusional retards.

I am saying it is perfectly fine to have different beliefs regarding the origin of an unknown object and you are saying its not.

why are you discussing this?

reply to post by EnPassant

I would think very carefully about this. An intellectual misconception, such as those in this thread, cannot be compared with a perceptual error. They are not on the same level as one has to do with cognition and the other, sensory input. Cognitive misunderstandings are common between people in conversation because of the lack of precision in language, among other things. It is very different from perceptual errors.

I can tell you that what you said is incorrect. reading words requires perception of letters and words. Seeing a blip on a screen requires the perception also. Both are symbolically interpreted. Everything we see is perception which ultimately gets processed cognitively. Illusory contours, pareiodelia,Apophenia, reading something that is not there are all related.

interpreting "g-loc is not an explanation for any case"
as "g-loc is a explanation for (some, any or all) cases" is more than a misunderstanding particularly if is a pattern of misunderstanding that is repeated consistently to a the degree where it becomes predictable.

What I am proposing is that is that this pattern happens so frequently that it can be shown to be an actual psychological phenomenon which will be called the "Rediculan" which will have its own wiki page and which will be overused more often than pareiodelia

reply to post by ZetaRediculian


It was a great post pal, deserved the star!

Also, like you wasn't claiming it's the reason for pilot sightings, I in turn wouldn't rule it out either...
Obviously if radar is added it's different...
But if it is just pilot testimony as with many sightings it is probably very likely that a percentage hallucinated craft, or odd shaped phenomena!

I also highly appreciate you bringing it up...
As with the old saying, we learn something new everyday...
Apart from some info on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)...
G-Loc is something else for me to add to today's education list!

Peace Z!

reply to post by EnPassant

I don't know that amphetamines cause distortion in perception. I believe they sharpen the senses, if anything, which is probably why they give them to soldiers.

If you consider killing your own people by mistake as being due to having a clean, undistorted, sharp sense of perception, then I am at a loss. let me google that for you

But again I am addressing your argument

Are the airforce employing mentally unbalanced pilots who have clear sightings of UFOs

The airforce doesn't give a poop. They encourage the use of amphetamines during missions. Again, I have no idea if they cause UFO sightings but they certainly do distort perceptions. They also enhance performance. So its a trade off.

So to answer your straw man question, yes , the airforce encourages and even force their pilots to take drugs which has the side effect of "mental unbalance".

Now again addressing your straw man, seeing something unknown and believing it is due to aliens is not being "mentally unbalanced"

Do you consider the pilots that said they have seen alien space ships "mentally unbalanced" when what they saw turns out to be something else entirely? apparently you do.

Case Studies In Pilot Misperceptions Of "UFOs"

reply to post by CharlieSpeirs

Well, I am glad you find it interesting. Here is the article I recommend The Trigger of Extreme Gravity: Dr. James Winnery's NDE Research

Again, I make no claim that any of this sounds anything like or explains any case of "high strangeness" or is related in any way shape or form to UFO sightings by pilots. its cool all on its own

1. G-LOC Characteristics in Common With NDEs

1. Tunnel vision / Bright light
2. Floating
3. Automatic movement
4. Autoscopy
5. Out-of-body experience
6. Not wanting to be disturbed
7. Paralysis
8. Vivid dreamlets / Beautiful places
a. Euphoria
b. Dissociation
9. Pleasurable
10. Psychologic state alteration
11. Friends / Family inclusion
12. Prior memories / Thoughts inclusion
13. Very memorable (when remembered)
14. Confabulation
15. Strong urge to understand

ZetaRediculian
reply to post by EnPassant

 

Essentially you are saying that anyone who thinks or believes that there are other ways to explain an unknown phenomenon is just plain wrong. You are saying that due to the overwhelming evidence that aliens are here that anyone who disagrees is essentially delusional. This would include a wide range of people including pilots and policeman. Everyone must be mistaken if there is no other explanation. And calling someone mistaken is just a polite way of calling them delusional retards.

I am saying it is perfectly fine to have different beliefs regarding the origin of an unknown object and you are saying its not.

why are you discussing this?

Not at all. There is no evidence that people who see ufos are seeing incorrectly. It is speculation. The evidence goes the other way. These people are normal. If you say they are not seeing correctly you need to back that up. The default is that they are seeing correctly unless shown otherwise. It is ok the speculate but I am answering these speculations and they don't hold up. G-loc does not always apply. Many of these missions were scrambled from bases in a non combat capacity. It is not as if pilots are continually blitzed up on amphetamines during peacetime in case something happens. Also, what these pilots see is backed up by commercial pilots sightings. Also, commercial pilots don't experience g-loc. I also read an account of a pilot who experienced both oxygen deprivation and an nde. He said they were different experiences.

You have every right to argue your point but you should also try to argue against you own points and you will see that they don't hold up to analysis.

The argument that witnesses are not seeing things properly does not originate in evidence concerning the witness it originates in the debunking campaign that started in the 50s with swamp gas etc. psychological assessment of witnesses shows they are normal.

ZetaRediculian
reply to post by EnPassant

 

I would think very carefully about this. An intellectual misconception, such as those in this thread, cannot be compared with a perceptual error. They are not on the same level as one has to do with cognition and the other, sensory input. Cognitive misunderstandings are common between people in conversation because of the lack of precision in language, among other things. It is very different from perceptual errors.

I can tell you that what you said is incorrect. reading words requires perception of letters and words. Seeing a blip on a screen requires the perception also. Both are symbolically interpreted. Everything we see is perception which ultimately gets processed cognitively. Illusory contours, pareiodelia,Apophenia, reading something that is not there are

Cognitive errors don't normally result from misreading words and sentences. These errors are concerned with the meaning deduced from what is being said, not seeing a H where there is an N. There are perceptual errors.

reply to post by ZetaRediculian


"Dr Winnery noted that the experiences of individuals who reported NDE's after cardiac arrest had a strong correlation with the experiences of his own fighter pilots who has Out Of Body Experiences.

Dr Winnery says that, "as a traditional scientist, these experiments add tremendous credibility to the NDE phenomenon." He says that individual's accounts of NDE's should be listened to very closely, because their stories are very accurate, as demonstrated by his experiments on pilots."

www.freechristianteaching.org...

EnPassant
There is no evidence that people who see ufos are seeing incorrectly.

sure there is but you choose to ignore it.
Case Studies In Pilot Misperceptions Of "UFOs"

you consider these people delusional.

These people are normal.

Where do I disagree? This is pure fantasy on your part.

If you say they are not seeing correctly you need to back that up.

They see just fine but you apparently haven't seen one thing I have written!

The default is that they are seeing correctly unless shown otherwise.

You are the one saying that they are delusional!

It is ok the speculate but I am answering these speculations and they don't hold up.

you are not answering anything other than what you are making up!

G-loc does not always apply.

apply to what????? g-loc happens. That's my only point!
Here is my quote "G-loc is a really interesting phenomenon that hasn't been linked to UFOs and nor am I attempting to do so."
Do you not see the absolute utterly gross misperception and misinterpretation here? Not once, but TWICE now. I am just pointing this out on this one point but you are doing it consistently with several points if not all. Are you not aware that you are doing this? At least two others have pointed this out now.

Many of these missions were scrambled from bases in a non combat capacity. It is not as if pilots are continually blitzed up on amphetamines during peacetime in case something happens.

AGAIN NOT MY POINT ANYWHERE!

Here is my actual point. AGAIN

[previously posted]
But again I am addressing your argument


Are the airforce employing mentally unbalanced pilots who have clear sightings of UFOs

The airforce doesn't give a poop. They encourage the use of amphetamines during missions. Again, I have no idea if they cause UFO sightings but they certainly do distort perceptions. They also enhance performance. So its a trade off.

So to answer your straw man question, yes , the airforce encourages and even force their pilots to take drugs which has the side effect of "mental unbalance".
[/previously posted]

Do you see it yet? I directly answered your straw man only to be met with another straw man! I clearly stated "I have no idea if they cause UFO sightings" but stated that they do have side effects that result in friendly fire which should answer your question about "unbalanced pilots" being employed by the airforce. I think that giving drugs like amphetamines to your employees constitutes making sure your employees are "unbalanced" and compared to friendly fire, seeing a UFO does not seem like much of a concern. Same point with g-loc. Neither have anything to do with UFOs!

You turned this point into "UFO sightings and radar return cases not being caused by amphetamines". What am I missing? how can we have a conversation or get anywhere like this?

Also, what these pilots see is backed up by commercial pilots sightings. Also, commercial pilots don't experience g-loc. I also read an account of a pilot who experienced both oxygen deprivation and an nde. He said they were different experiences.

commercial pilots don't experience g-loc and neither do bus drivers. I once read an account about someone who lost a dog.

You have every right to argue your point but you should also try to argue against you own points and you will see that they don't hold up to analysis.

really? you should actually argue against a point that was actually made by somebody at some point because not one thing you said has anything to do with anything said by me or anyone else.

The argument that witnesses are not seeing things properly does not originate in evidence concerning the witness it originates in the debunking campaign that started in the 50s with swamp gas etc. psychological assessment of witnesses shows they are normal.

witnesses see just fine its interpretations by people like you that are suspect. you have not read or understood ONE point I made. UNBELIVABLE!

reply to post by EnPassant

Cognitive errors don't normally result from misreading words and sentences.

Apparently you have just displayed this excessively!

These errors are concerned with the meaning deduced from what is being said, not seeing a H where there is an N. There are perceptual errors.

Yes errors in meanings deduced from what was actually being said. you nailed it. repeatedly.

EnPassant
reply to post by ZetaRediculian

 

Dr Winnery says that, "as a traditional scientist, these experiments add tremendous credibility to the NDE phenomenon." He says that individual's accounts of NDE's should be listened to very closely, because their stories are very accurate, as demonstrated by his experiments on pilots."

These people are not delusional or suffering from mental illness but you consistently say that people that experience this are delusional. This is important stuff and yet you ignore it. Why do you think we should ignore it?

reply to post by EnPassant

If you say they are not seeing correctly you need to back that up.

I am not making any claims whatsoever. Do you get that? If you think I am, quote me

ZetaRediculian

Do you not see the absolute utterly gross misperception and misinterpretation here? Not once, but TWICE now. I am just pointing this out on this one point but you are doing it consistently with several points if not all. Are you not aware that you are doing this? At least two others have pointed this out now.

And the default is that we are seeing correctly unless shown otherwise... unless he is saying we are all delusional and mentally unbalanced.

reply to post by EnPassant


You seem like a nice enough guy[?]. You are apparently just logically impaired, for whatever reason. Perhaps its your deeply held beliefs that color what you read by those you perceive to be "pseudoskeptics". The only advice I can offer is that you read each post several times, considering all possible meanings beyond your preconceptions. You have been consistently wrong up to this point, so what have you got to lose?

reply to post by neoholographic


Its funny that on a site with so many bul# stories (ufoevidence) you cant find The Billy Meier Case!! .rofl

WhySoBlinded
reply to post by neoholographic

 

Its funny that on a site with so many bul# stories (ufoevidence) you cant find The Billy Meier Case!! .rofl

Sure you can. It's right there in the Hoax bin. He's even the avatar.

No extraterrestrial evidence has even been mentioned in this thread by the ETH supporters.

Let me know when you post a pic of a UFO with "We're not from this planet" painted across the side - in alien glyphs, of course.

Harte