198 replies to this topic

[Hawkin]

psyche101, on 10 October 2012 - 03:41 AM, said:

Because they expect to see a certain thing. Is it a saucer  a cigar or other? One person shouting out will make it so. Here is one of the most famous and most detailed events that I know of - Our Lady Fatima. Thousands saw Jesus and Mary. They expected to see religious figures, as predicted, and hey presto, they did.

If it is just mass hallucinations then it should be taken serious and investigated. What could be causing it?
Fumes from volcanic eruptions, radio or microwave signals passing through our bodies, the preservatives
in the foods we eat? Somethings going on.

[psyche101]

Ryegrog, on 10 October 2012 - 03:58 AM, said:

If it is just mass hallucinations then it should be taken serious and investigated. What could be causing it?
Fumes from volcanic eruptions, radio or microwave signals passing through our bodies, the preservatives
in the foods we eat? Somethings going on.

I am pretty sure that Psychopathology is heavily involved in these studies. I would bet a quick search on Google Scholar might help a few articles surface. Not my field, but Psychopathology is primarily the field of mental illness, however, I believe the behaviours are the focus in this instance.
Something is going on I agree. The brain as a very complex place. I know there is some theory on the brain not being able to distinguish between self generated and external sources of information, TV is under scrutiny.


LINK - Reality Check.

How do you know what’s real? A new study suggests that people’s ability to distinguish between what really happened and what was imagined may be determined by the presence of a fold at the front of the brain that develops late in pregnancy, and is missing entirely in 27% of people.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

TheMacGuffin, on 29 September 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

The UFOs were always making incursions at nuclear facilities going back to World War II, and they 'invaded' missile bases and weapons storage areas a number of times, as well as Oak Ridge, Los Alamos and Sandia National Labs.  There are all kinds of investigations and documents to prove this, and indeed it's one of the easiest things we can prove about UFOs.  It's all in the record.

They interfered with missiles a number of times in the 1960s and 1970s, and I was even shown a case where they shot one down over the Pacific.  They followed around our nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers, too, so regardless of what anyone might say on here, they have been a major national security concern going back to the 1940s.  Anyone who says otherwise has simply never looked at the record or just wants to pretend that it doesn't exist.

I know the government wants us to pretend the threat does not exist,  that's for sure

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

TheMacGuffin, on 03 October 2012 - 07:41 PM, said:

I have posted it before, and it was not a regulation but a law passed by Congress in 1969, which could be interpreted very broadly.  It's a law that gives NASA the power to quarantine those who had ET contacts, and it concluded:

"Whoever willfully violates, attempts to violate, or conspires to violate any provision of this part or any regulation or order issued under this part or who enters or departs from the limits of a quarantine station in disregard of the quarantine rules or regulations or without permission of the NASA quarantine officer shall be fined not more that $5,000 or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both."


http://www.google.co...EBQ1c4VHOegltaw

MacGuffin, if that is the case, then just *what* can be made out of the several testimonies by former astronauts recently speaking about their close encounters? I mean, all in a small time frame. weird.

does that not make them in violation of some law - if not the one you outline?

I have said in here before, I am very suspicious of those testimonies all coming out now, and others like the woman who worked at Roswell and now says she did see tiny bodies. She says she did sign a non-disclosure form but at her age, "what are they going to do to me, throw me in jail?"

actualy, it would be prison, but who's counting :--)

[TheMacGuffin]

Earl.Of.Trumps, on 11 October 2012 - 12:45 AM, said:

MacGuffin, if that is the case, then just *what* can be made out of the several testimonies by former astronauts recently speaking about their close encounters? I mean, all in a small time frame. weird.

does that not make them in violation of some law - if not the one you outline?

I have said in here before, I am very suspicious of those testimonies all coming out now, and others like the woman who worked at Roswell and now says she did see tiny bodies. She says she did sign a non-disclosure form but at her age, "what are they going to do to me, throw me in jail?"

actualy, it would be prison, but who's counting :--)

That's a good question, although NASA has never acknowledged that ETs really existed or that any of the UFOs were ET.  In fact, the official policy of the US government is NOT to acknowledge this to the public.

We even have that in writing, so therefor the official story will always be that there are no aliens and that all UFOs are swamp gas or whatever.  Those are exactly the same things that all "skeptics" say on here 100% of the time.  You can set your watch by that.

So that means the astronauts always saw nothing but swamp gas, at least for public purposes.

As for people working on the REAL investigation--the classified one--the truth obviously can't be so easily denied and dismissed there so other policies must be in effect.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

psyche101, on 10 October 2012 - 03:29 AM, said:

Alright, I owe you an apology, I thought I was on that pompous list and felt that was not necessary as we left it as each to their own I thought. I felt we had a decent repoire` and was surprised to think it might have been otherwise. I do not agree with your conclusion  but I did appreciate that you showed why you came to that conclusion. I honestly did not think anyone was lying, I really thought they did their best to display how they also reached their conclusions. I think it is great when everyone lays everything out on the table. It's the only way to debate a subject sensibly.

you're right,, we did/do have a good rapore.

It is great to lay everything out on the table, but i am not fond of being screwed with. and that is what they did - as a GANG.

I was trying to make one simple point about "vanishing point". Since everyone was Soooooo negative to me on my every post, I had to at least get some common ground with them. Something to work with. an inch, that's all, an inch

So I started: "Can you see a fly in the sky from 100 miles?"

First came BoonY - his repsonse was "That question is retarded"
He absolutely refused to give me one inch of ground to stand on, not ONE. Instead of agreeing with me that you canot see a fly in the sky from 100 miles, he simply refused to answer and called the question "retarded"..

Next came BoonY's idol, Big Jim-whatever-it-is. He pontificated for 5 thousand words about how,,, YES! you can see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away.

Back came BoonY who basically implied "you could not see it" with his refusal to give a direct answer, and now he is spieling a 10 thousand word oration as to how you CAN see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away, agreeing with JIm

Two more posters in that thread chimed in with the same opinion. You can see the fly.

And you an't see any lying there??

Amazing, Psyche!

they have the intellectual integrity of an adder in the low weeds.

[TheMacGuffin]

Again, if you ask why it's a big secret, I can only wonder if that story that Dotothy Kilgallen and others heard was true, that some of these ETs are very nasty pieces of work.

[booNyzarC]

Earl.Of.Trumps, on 11 October 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

you're right,, we did/do have a good rapore.

It is great to lay everything out on the table, but i am not fond of being screwed with. and that is what they did - as a GANG.

I was trying to make one simple point about "vanishing point". Since everyone was Soooooo negative to me on my every post, I had to at least get some common ground with them. Something to work with. an inch, that's all, an inch

So I started: "Can you see a fly in the sky from 100 miles?"

First came BoonY - his repsonse was "That question is retarded"
He absolutely refused to give me one inch of ground to stand on, not ONE. Instead of agreeing with me that you canot see a fly in the sky from 100 miles, he simply refused to answer and called the question "retarded"..

Next came BoonY's idol, Big Jim-whatever-it-is. He pontificated for 5 thousand words about how,,, YES! you can see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away.

Back came BoonY who basically implied "you could not see it" with his refusal to give a direct answer, and now he is spieling a 10 thousand word oration as to how you CAN see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away, agreeing with JIm

Two more posters in that thread chimed in with the same opinion. You can see the fly.

And you an't see any lying there??

Amazing, Psyche!

they have the intellectual integrity of an adder in the low weeds.

What a complete mis-characterization of the events that took place.  If you want to revisit that discussion, by all means bring it up again in the original thread.

[psyche101]

Earl.Of.Trumps, on 11 October 2012 - 12:28 AM, said:

I know the government wants us to pretend the threat does not exist,  that's for sure

But how is that even possible in a global situation?

Edited by psyche101, 11 October 2012 - 05:48 AM.

[psyche101]

Earl.Of.Trumps, on 11 October 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

you're right,, we did/do have a good rapore.

I hope we still do. I do not know too many believer/skeptic debates that are resolved with an apology after one line of explanation. I find that positive. But it is not the first time my post has been where grievances toward others is aired. That is the cause of the confusion. I assume that if my post is answered, that comments are directed at me personally.

Earl.Of.Trumps, on 11 October 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

It is great to lay everything out on the table, but i am not fond of being screwed with. and that is what they did - as a GANG.

I was trying to make one simple point about "vanishing point". Since everyone was Soooooo negative to me on my every post, I had to at least get some common ground with them. Something to work with. an inch, that's all, an inch

So I started: "Can you see a fly in the sky from 100 miles?"

First came BoonY - his repsonse was "That question is retarded"
He absolutely refused to give me one inch of ground to stand on, not ONE. Instead of agreeing with me that you canot see a fly in the sky from 100 miles, he simply refused to answer and called the question "retarded"..

Next came BoonY's idol, Big Jim-whatever-it-is. He pontificated for 5 thousand words about how,,, YES! you can see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away.

Back came BoonY who basically implied "you could not see it" with his refusal to give a direct answer, and now he is spieling a 10 thousand word oration as to how you CAN see a fly in the sky from 100 miles away, agreeing with JIm

Two more posters in that thread chimed in with the same opinion. You can see the fly.

And you an't see any lying there??

Amazing, Psyche!

they have the intellectual integrity of an adder in the low weeds.

It seems Boon would disagree with your assessment. I find Boon a really great guy, I have little doubt that you can resolve any issues there the same way we have.
Surely nobody said you could see a fly unaided? Even aided I would think it to be quite a magnificent feat.

Edited by psyche101, 11 October 2012 - 05:49 AM.

[synchronomy]

I found a video clip where Peter Hill-Norton , Admiral of the Fleet, http://en.wikipedia....ron_Hill-Norton during the Rendlesham Forest incident comments that whether the events took place as witnesses claim, or they were hallucinating, both explanations are of extreme defence interest.

Edited by synchronomy, 11 October 2012 - 01:08 PM.

[Hawkin]

Here's a link about a UFO sighting over my home state of Illinois, USA in 2000 by several
police officers from different towns. It was on the Discovery Channel.

[booNyzarC]

psyche101, on 11 October 2012 - 05:47 AM, said:

It seems Boon would disagree with your assessment. I find Boon a really great guy, I have little doubt that you can resolve any issues there the same way we have.
Surely nobody said you could see a fly unaided? Even aided I would think it to be quite a magnificent feat.

Thank you for that psyche, and yes I would Indeed disagree.  He's referring to this, which took place quite deep into the discussion.  I'm confident that almost anyone who takes the time to go through the entire thread will see how untenable Earl's position is.

[Vigilanis]

Fascinating lecture it seems. This is the kind of publicity the UFO community needs, people with some gravity on the subject. Seems to me that there are far too many amateurs who seem to hold the spotlight nowadays, and they offer very little credibility most of the time too.

May there be many more serious debates like this one.

[-M7]

He's not the only military service member to claim a US UFO coverup...and will probably end up getting discharged (or possible killed in a "accident") like the ones before him.