237 replies to this topic

[zoser]

cenobite, on 20 June 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

and if nothing is easier to prove, then put your money where your mouth is and prove it

If you don't agree that the authorities want the phenomena covered up then watch this:

[TheMcGuffin]

quillius, on 20 June 2012 - 12:28 PM, said:

I feel this is plausible, however another possibility is that they were actually illuminating the area behind the mountains.......(or ofcourse that they were just disposing of them )

Hey, maybe they were just trying to light up the areas where UFOs were being reported.  It's possible.  Or maybe it was all a big diversion, just blow a few whistles and show the masses a bright, shiny object and say "look over here, look this way.  Good boy".

Edited by TheMcGuffin, 20 June 2012 - 03:57 PM.

[TheMcGuffin]

cenobite, on 20 June 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

and if nothing is easier to prove, then put your money where your mouth is and prove it

I can only bow to your superior experience in these matters and say no more, except to offer my humble apologies.

[cenobite]

TheMcGuffin, on 20 June 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

I can only bow to your superior experience in these matters and say no more, except to offer my humble apologies.

sarcasm is the lowest form of wit
you cannot come out with statements like 'nothing is easier to prove' and then not provide proof

[TheMcGuffin]

cenobite, on 20 June 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

sarcasm is the lowest form of wit
you cannot come out with statements like 'nothing is easier to prove' and then not provide proof

No, I'm being perfectly sincere. I apologize for bothering you.

[quillius]

Hazzard, on 20 June 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

The hard-core believers usually take refuge in in this explanation, its their "get out of jail free card".

The material that would be convincing proof has been collected and secreted away by the US government. While endlessly appealing, this is an argument from ignorance (tantamount to saying "we cant show you good evidence because we havent got it"), and perforce implies that every government in the world has efficiently squirreled away all alien artifacts. Unless, of course, the extraterrestrials only visit the US, where retrieval of material that falls to Earth is supposedly a perfected art form.

I suppose what constitutes convincing proof is debatable, dont you think?

[Space_Jockey]

TheMcGuffin, on 20 June 2012 - 03:53 PM, said:

Hey, maybe they were just trying to light up the areas where UFOs were being reported.  It's possible.  Or maybe it was all a big diversion, just blow a few whistles and show the masses a bright, shiny object and say "look over here, look this way.  Good boy".

Where does it end?

Maybe the sky itself was fake and they projected a hologram that night to 'cover' over the 'real' UFO and then someone accidentally clicked the "flares in formation to fool the gullible people" button on the projector?

[TheMcGuffin]

Space_Jockey, on 20 June 2012 - 04:04 PM, said:

Where does it end?

That's actually a very good question, and I wish I had an equally good answer for you, but I don't.

[quillius]

cenobite, on 20 June 2012 - 03:48 PM, said:

absolute rubbish, if they are so good at keeping secrets explain incidents like abu ghraib that was well kept wasn't it? to quote Dave Mustaine 'military intelligence two words combined that cant make sense' the fact is large numbers of people cannot and will not keep secrets for long its human nature

possible he doesnt wishh to prove to someone that has such a biased position to begin with....opening with 'absolute rubbish' wasnt the way to progress the conversation. IMO

Although I am curious about a couple of things, do you think 'abu gharib' proves that other secrets have not and are not kept? if so I believe logical fallacy comes into play.
secondly, in regards to chosen quote by Dave Mustain,  do you really  think the military is not intelligent?

Edited by quillius, 20 June 2012 - 04:16 PM.

[quillius]

Space_Jockey, on 20 June 2012 - 04:04 PM, said:

Where does it end?

Maybe the sky itself was fake and they projected a hologram that night to 'cover' over the 'real' UFO and then someone accidentally clicked the "flares in formation to fool the gullible people" button on the projector?

dont think this works as I am sure they would have stuck with clicking the 'swamp gas' or 'venus' button instead as they are proven to work even when it is ludicrous to suggest the either or.

[cenobite]

zoser, on 20 June 2012 - 03:52 PM, said:

If you don't agree that the authorities want the phenomena covered up then watch this:

again another youtube clip - this IS NOT EVIDENCE, alledged photo's that convieniently disappeared and the source of the story? a radio reporter, well it must be true reporters never make anything up do they! and this the same wytheville that since 1985 has a hot air balloon festival! coincedence surely not must be aliens eh. If tonight i phoned in to a local radio show and said i had seen a ufo over my area, i am certain that other people would soon be phoning in claiming to have seen the same, if i sent in a grainy photo of a light in the sky to my local paper the same thing would happen, again if i posted a video on youtube of lights in the sky, bang, the same would happen and people like you would be posting on forums like this swearing it was aliens. The point im trying to make is a youtube clip proves nothing

[Hazzard]

quillius, on 20 June 2012 - 04:02 PM, said:

I suppose what constitutes convincing proof is debatable, dont you think?

That goes without sayin, my friend. As we keep seeing here some people need nothing more than a fantastic story from eye witnesses. To me that is not even close to credible evidence.

I need more. A lot more.

[quillius]

Hazzard, on 20 June 2012 - 04:16 PM, said:

That goes without sayin, my friend. As we keep seeing here some people need nothing more than a fantastic story from eye witnesses. To me that is not even close to credible evidence.

I need more. A lot more.

Credible evidence does not need to be in existance for 'convincing proof' to have been seen, enough so that not too much if anything need be kept under lock and key, plus many people need not be involved...possibly.

[Hazzard]

cenobite, on 20 June 2012 - 03:48 PM, said:

absolute rubbish, if they are so good at keeping secrets explain incidents like abu ghraib that was well kept wasn't it? to quote Dave Mustaine 'military intelligence two words combined that cant make sense' the fact is large numbers of people cannot and will not keep secrets for long its human nature

I agree. The government couldnt even keep a semen-stained blue dress a secret, how in the hell can anyone truly believe they have kept this from the world for over 60 years?!

Edited by Hazzard, 20 June 2012 - 04:22 PM.

[cenobite]

quillius, on 20 June 2012 - 04:09 PM, said:

possible he doesnt wishh to prove to someone that has such a biased position to begin with....opening with 'absolute rubbish' wasnt the way to progress the conversation.

Although I am curious about a couple of things, do you think 'abu gharib' proves that other secrets have not and are not kept? if so I believe logical fallacy comes into play.
secondly, in regards to chosen quote by Dave Mustain,  do you really  think the military is not intelligent?

again absolute rubbish,and i'll start a post any way i choose thanks, abu ghraib shows that secrets do not remain secrets due to the nature of humans, of course secrets are kept, but not forever and such a huge secret like the existence of aliens would in my opinion be impossible to keep, for a start why do people assume that aliens would contact the governments?
and your quote 'possible he doesnt wishh to prove to someone that has such a biased opinion to begin with (sic)' that is just typical of the believers in the fantastic, you cant prove it so you provide a pithy comeback.
and in answer to your question no i do not believe the military is intelligent, neither is government or any other huge orgainization