354 replies to this topic

[sslama]

The Possibility Principle.....letting your mind play with a belief.  It can shift your thinking to become true.  You can give your left brain something to think about so it stops sensoring what is actually possible.  I believe it is possible if your mind is expanded enough to let it in

[mcrom901]

sslama, on 16 January 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

The Possibility Principle.....letting your mind play with a belief.  It can shift your thinking to become true.  You can give your left brain something to think about so it stops sensoring what is actually possible.  I believe it is possible if your mind is expanded enough to let it in

so if one is open minded about certain possibilities about whatever, then said possibility becomes factual?

in other words, as nopeda is trying to suggest, critical thinking should be discarded in order for any belief to take hold?

nopeda, on 15 January 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:

No it doesn't, but it does mean that there's a possibility of xt influence. Accepting that fact is the starting line, though apparently not everyone can get that "far" with this topic.

[TheMacGuffin]

cormac mac airt, on 16 January 2013 - 12:51 AM, said:

Riiiiight, that's probably what I'd say if I were gullible enought to believe in unevidenced ET's visiting earth while the various governments were carrying on with their multi-billion dollar "Black Projects" right under my nose. Gotta love the gullibility of the AA crowd, they make it soooo easy for governments and their military to hide what they do.

cormac

On the other hand, maybe you're the one being played for a sucker.

[cormac mac airt]

TheMacGuffin, on 16 January 2013 - 06:38 AM, said:

On the other hand, maybe you're the one being played for a sucker.

Let's see. On the one hand a minimum of 50 BILLION dollars for Black Projects versus, what was it you had again? Oh yeah, no evidence ET's exist. I know which one's more likely.

cormac

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

Slave2Fate, on 15 January 2013 - 10:08 PM, said:

You realize of course that it depends on how the radar is configured right? Or do you think that enemy jets have their transponders turned on? Configured correctly, radar can get returns on a wide variety of airborne objects, even birds. Transponders were only invented as an assistance to commercial radar and are not required to detect objects.

yes, but th air defense radars are a different kettle of fish to regular civilian air traffic radars, aren't they? You'd expect them to be an order of magnitude better able to detect something that didn't want to be deteted. We're talking air traffic radar here, since there isn't air defense coverage within the USA, as was found out on 9/11. Which is perhaps a case in point.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

cormac mac airt, on 16 January 2013 - 12:51 AM, said:

Riiiiight, that's probably what I'd say if I were gullible enought to believe in unevidenced ET's visiting earth while the various governments were carrying on with their multi-billion dollar "Black Projects" right under my nose. Gotta love the gullibility of the AA crowd, they make it soooo easy for governments and their military to hide what they do.

cormac

Oh no, not (in the words of the vase of petunias) the "Secret Military Black Projects" theory again. So the Military would spend decades and billions of dollars, roubles or dong on developing something in ultra secrecy, and would then trundle about in the skies over inhabited areas, in full view of everyone, trusting that anyone who did see it would assume that it was a UFO? is there any logic to doing that at all?

* Anyway, it's not AAs we're talking about here, that's the other thread, this is just A's.

[quillius]

TheMacGuffin, on 15 January 2013 - 07:09 PM, said:

As for the professional UFO "skeptics", I have never been able to convince a single one of them about anything in my life, regardless of what evidence I had.  I have never seen them budge a single inch on any UFO case or admit there was anything to it, no matter what.

Have you ever seen one of them who would change their views one iota on a single UFO case?  I never have.  It's like trying to argue with religious fundamentalists about the Bible.  Nothing you can say will have even the slightest effect.

Can you think of any exceptions to this?  Ever?  I can't, no matter whether it's at UM or anywhere else.

its about winnning the argument rather than getting to the truth....

look how many pages I argued with Ryleh as to whether Santa is claimed to be seen more than Aliens, these discussions wouldnt happen if its progress we are looking for. Pride has such a big part to play on this forum (probably others too), once we type something out we feel like we must defend it come hell or high water......

I think we are all guilty of this at some point or another, myself included.

I guess its caused by the extremes, skeptics who wont even admit to some UFOs being an unknown and cannot be explained by what we know today, to the other extreme of if its in the air its a UFO (UFO=alien).

keep dropping those hints though I am sure that many of us are following your trail

[Slave2Fate]

quillius, on 16 January 2013 - 09:21 AM, said:

Pride has such a big part to play on this forum (probably others too), once we type something out we feel like we must defend it come hell or high water......

I think we are all guilty of this at some point or another, myself included.

I think you're right about that quill as I have had to swallow my pride and admit error on more than one occasion myself. (I know, I know, I find it a little hard to believe myself! )

It's a little counter intuitive but some people don't want to look stupid by admitting they were wrong but sticking to an erroneous claim is even worse. I've seen it from both sides on occasion.

Edit to add: Not that admitting error makes one look stupid, quite the opposite really. Just wanted to clarify that.

Edited by Slave2Fate, 16 January 2013 - 09:43 AM.

[nopeda]

Slave2Fate, on 15 January 2013 - 10:08 PM, said:

You realize of course that it depends on how the radar is configured right? Or do you think that enemy jets have their transponders turned on? Configured correctly, radar can get returns on a wide variety of airborne objects, even birds. Transponders were only invented as an assistance to commercial radar and are not required to detect objects.

It's significant that they are used at all and radar isn't enough.

[nopeda]

Nuke_em, on 15 January 2013 - 08:47 PM, said:

This is logic 1on1 ... you have trillions of solar systems that are very very similar to ours.. so saying there is no other life or no proof exists of such thing is pure ignorance...
The problem is in vastness of space for start... You will find building blocks of life on all of those earthlike planets... missing materials from which primitve life started here on earth, is in my theory brought by asteroids and meteorites... so that brings us to how many similar events happened out there..
If drake equation would be at least 1% right we are looking at possible 50 alien civilizations nearby ( by nearby i mean million of light years away ). Even then the real science made calculations of probability ( they took in all that we knew at the time ). I for one don't need any proof of such a obvious thing...
....the question for me is when?
Edit: Sorry nopeda for going abit offtopic..

You brought up a very significant aspect. With all the stars out there it's almost certain there are beings who are traveling to different star systems. The bigger question is whether any have been to this one or not.

[nopeda]

mcrom901, on 16 January 2013 - 04:35 AM, said:

Quote

nopeda, on 15 January 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:
No it doesn't, but it does mean that there's a possibility of xt influence. Accepting that fact is the starting line, though apparently not everyone can get that "far" with this topic.

so if one is open minded about certain possibilities about whatever, then said possibility becomes factual?
in other words, as nopeda is trying to suggest, critical thinking should be discarded in order for any belief to take hold?

I don't consider it critical thinking to put your faith in the one possibility that no xts have ever been to this planet. To me that's as shallow thinking as a person could have. To accept the very real possibility that they have been here is a starting line from my pov, and would be a huge step up for anyone who can't consider it in a realistic way. They may not have ever been here. That's easy and another very real possibility. Since we could never know that they have never been here, putting faith in that possibility being the correct one seems pretty absurd from my pov.

[nopeda]

quillius, on 16 January 2013 - 09:21 AM, said:

its about winnning the argument rather than getting to the truth....
Santa
. . .
I guess its caused by the extremes, skeptics who wont even admit to some UFOs being an unknown and cannot be explained by what we know today, to the other extreme of if its in the air its a UFO (UFO=alien).

Winning over the truth...I guess that must be it. I so often wonder if people are being more dishonest than stupid, or the other way around. I've also pointed out to people that in reality when they lie they lose by forfeit because they've given up on reality, but I guess some people think they still win somehow. Maybe if they just don't give in they feel like they win, regardless of whether what they're saying is true or even whether or not they believe it themselves. The situation Santa is in and the situation xts are in are both very different from each other. We KNOW nobody is going to millions of houses in one night, but we don't KNOW that no beings have ever been here from a different star system. To try pretending they're similar makes me wonder about dishonesty vs stupidity. I don't know of people insisting everything is a UFO, though I feel sure we could find a few who feel that none of the sightings have ever been of true xt vehicles.

[nopeda]

Lord Vetinari, on 16 January 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

* Anyway, it's not AAs we're talking about here, that's the other thread, this is just A's.

Considering that they could ever have been here at all would be a starting line for a lot of people. Though they could have been here in the past but don't come around any more, or they could come around now but were not around a thousand years ago, it seems most people who accept that they could have been here in the past also accept that they could still be coming around. It's all the same from my pov. I still find it amusing that some people who disbelieve the possibility that they've been here already, don't seem to have a problem with the possibility that they could arrive next year, or next month, or in a couple of hours....

[nopeda]

topsecretresearch, on 16 January 2013 - 02:09 AM, said:

A lot of cover-up types come to these forums doing their PR. A troll and debunk routine to marginalize the subject matter. Anti-alien spin doctoring that sort of thing.

Who would want to cover it up and why? I can sort of see why the government might lie to the press if they don't want people to know they really found solid evidence of xts, but who would come to forums like this to do it and why? IF some solid evidence was really found, why would they even want to lie about it unless they'd been contacted by xts and told to take that approach? If an xt vehicle did "crash" and bodies were found I believe it would more likely be deliberate rather than an accident. It seems that would be them giving us something that SHOULD be made public unless they contacted officials in the government and told them otherwise.

[Crikey]

sslama, on 16 January 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

The Possibility Principle.....letting your mind play with a belief. It can shift your thinking to become true...

Good point, Prof. Gertrude Shmeidler did experiments some years ago that showed how closed-minded people seemed to dig themselves into a 'pit of disbelief' which made them score below average in ESP tests. (the 'Sheep-Goat Effect)
Gettit?- they should simply have scored average, yet something was dragging them down to below average!

She concluded- "This was inexplicable by the physical laws we knew, it implied unexplored processes in the universe, an exciting new field for research. From then on, naturally, my primary research interest was parapsychology"
http://www.parapsych...schmeidler.html



Dr. Mario Varvoglis- "The more an individual harbors a reductionistic view of the world, the less chance such phenomena will emerge; the more one is interested in interconnectedness, and open to psi experiences, the more likely the world will "respond" by creating such experiences".

http://archived.para...goat_effect.htm