117 replies to this topic

[topsecretresearch]

Hilander, on 06 January 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

Maybe they keep coming back because we are an experiment that they started and had nothing to do with the bomb.  At least not at first.

Since they must be a very advanced race to do what has been reported over the years it might not take them that long to get here even if they live light years away.

Some people report multi-generational alien abductions. Thomas Reed would be an example of this. Bud Hopkins was told about early alien abduction cases that predate WW.I.I. So if you are an abductee who was abducted as a child then your parents could be abductees and any children you have could be abducted. If this is true it means ETs may have been coming here for some time. Human activity during the atomic era may have been a cause for concern if humans serve some purpose to these beings. Ufologist Robert Hastings for example has done a lot of reserch on UFOs and nuclear weapons. UFO incidents that occur around ICBM sites and nuclear power plants. Also humans venturing into outer space may be a cause for concern.

The truth is the Universe could be teaming with life very much like what you see in science fiction. Aliens may have always been aware of Earth and life on this planet but we are considered very primitive.

[psyche101]

Lord Vetinari, on 02 January 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

Are we starting from the assumption that everyone must be divided into sheep or gaots, or Believers and Skeptics?, and that if one is a Skeptic, then one must insist that there's a Rational explanation for all of these? have all these cases been Denunked satisfactorily, in the Skeptical view? You say, for instance, that Betty & Barney Rubble- er, Hill have been Debunked. What is the accepted Debunkation for that? If a Debunk has been offered, then do the the Skeptics must accept that, like religious dogma, and say "that's been put to bed then; Next!"? That's sometimes what it seems like.

It's a bit tricky isn't it. We like to keep open minded, we like to think the possibility of "visitors" is there, and we look for evidence to support that, and very hard, which has led to much disappointment along the way, and people making things up so they do not look like fools. Whilst some cases might be intriguing, the general washout of what DL has posted deems any such thing insignificant in the big picture, and yes, as such something good might be missed along the way, yet I point the finger at those who claim to have "answers" as the very cause. I feel the general consensus is that the Hill's tale is fabricated, I mean really does anyone really believe it actually happened as they say? Things like the teletext machine and their "record books" are just far too blatant for people to be taken in I really hope. I mean seriously, one has to really want to believe to swallow that one.
They will keep pushing ET where he does not exist and is not welcome. Prime example:

topsecretresearch, on 02 January 2013 - 08:22 PM, said:

1908 Tunguska event
1909 Mystery Airships
1940s The Foo Fighters

What we now term UFOs were reported in Europe during the mid 1930s. They had what we term a UFO wave during that time. Also the odd ball CE3 later reported to organizations such as APRO that supposedly predate WWII. Coral Lorenzen had her first UFO sighting during the 1930s.

Now none of these are ET related, Tunguska is indeed from space, and the closest analogy to what is being discussed here, but has been presented as a mystery, and anomaly, a possible ET visit, when it is most definitely not. So why push them in an ET forum?
Foo Fighters were balls of light that passed right through planes, and as for the Mystery Airship, that is laughable as ET, whilst it remains a mystery, no being is crossing the galaxy in this, I do not care what any ET'her has to say:



This justifies DL's cynical OP, and it's quite valid as such I feel. These "UFOlogists" make these beds they sleep in, but how they sleep at night I do not know. Anyone who might suggest the above was ET, just because it was "unexplained" deserves no more. As a species, we are too advanced to keep hiding under the covers telling Ghost stories. Well, we should be.........

In all, I think one can take the kid gloves too far. The UFO field dances on this rim. I think we should just call a spade a spade, be done with it, roll our sleeves up, and sort it all out

[psyche101]

mcrom901, on 06 January 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

to 'support' the hypothesis re the common lore we need to consider that these fellows are omnipresent, they get to see what we're up to through some bio-conscious field / or, something similar and that they do not need to traverse the vastness of space to get here... they just pop-in-n-out, just like that... but then there's the question, if they are aware of our misbehavings (i.e. to say that they are monitoring us constantly) then why do they need to pop in physically to observe whatever it is that they need to observe? it kinda goes against the zoo hypothesis, isn't it?

One also wonders why they sit around on their hands with thousands of tests under our belts by now. Obviously ET never went to France or China either

[skookum]

I think a larger quantity of Foo Fighter sightings were down to drug induced hallucinations (morphine) .  I live in the South of England and near a few retired WW2 air fields.  You can visit them and if you are lucky get to talk to some veterans.

one claim has come up twice at two separate air fields by different people.  The mortality rate was so high that some pilots would suffer near complete mental breakdowns before missions.  We recognize this today as battle fatigue, however it was not recognized back then (remember Patton slapping soldier).  The medics and nurses had no way to combat this and little understanding of it.  They would often administer Morphine to air crew in a bid to calm nerves.  Apparently there would often be a queue out side the medical shed before a bombing mission.  The Americans apparently were the worst for this as they conducted the day light missions which had unbelievable losses.

Having been on Morphine in the past for over a week following a serious accident I can totally believe this as it is a very powerful drug that I experienced various hallucinations on.  Many doctors have been known to get addicted to it for recreational use.

It is just another horrible side of war which people would rather not talk about I guess.

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

Have the Phoenix Lights been properly explained yet? The second event was a clear attempt by the gov't to draw attention away from the first event. They accomplished exactly what they set out to do since the masses think it is the official footage and accepted the explanation. No questions asked, business as usual.

Here's an attempt to explain the first event as planes formation. The video was captured by a retired pilot, seemed awfully young to retired. Maybe he hates flying. Can you imagine Captain Sullenberger retired at the same age? We would never had know him...anyway, just look.



Notice the reason was that since the light moved in relation to each other, so it's must be planes flying in formation. Look at the video below starting at 5:30. Ozma Linderman said she saw the lights in an oval shape and shot straight up. Apparently, the lights can move! The fact that lights can move does not mean planes flying in formation

[psyche101]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:

Have the Phoenix Lights been properly explained yet?

Yes. Some refuse the explanations without valid ground but yes.

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:

The second event was a clear attempt by the gov't to draw attention away from the first event.

How so? Have you seen the gif Boon made of the video? It's quite clearly flares.

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:

They accomplished exactly what they set out to do since the masses think it is the official footage and accepted the explanation. No questions asked, business as usual.

Well, that does not make sense, because the one shouting ET from the rooftops is the Government - Fife Symmington. The person saying this is not ET, it is planes is a civillian. Mitch Stanley. It is actually the opposite of what you are proposing in reality.

If it is a Government cover up, the only thing it could possibly be is a type of secret aircraft, one might speculate a hydrogen aircraft or some such thing. The Government always encourages ET when it is military.

And the Government are the idiots parading around in Alien suits, making a mockery of those trying to actually prove planes. Funnily, many people started trusting the Government and said the this politician was to be believed, yet if the same guy was to say this was not ET, the same people would be saying the same evil Government would be covering it up, so how does a rational explanation get heard at all?

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:

Here's an attempt to explain the first event as planes formation. The video was captured by a retired pilot, seemed awfully young to retired. Maybe he hates flying. Can you imagine Captain Sullenberger retired at the same age? We would never had know him...anyway, just look.

I canot see the vid, and wont bother to view it on my phone, no offence but I have seen more than enough testimony from Phoenix to know the ETH'ers are just a mob of thugs. They shouted down Mitch Stanley when he tried to say planes, and suppressed him.


Now why would a politician do that you might wonder?

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:

Notice the reason was that since the light moved in relation to each other, so it's must be planes flying in formation. Look at the video below starting at 5:30. Ozma Linderman said she saw the lights in an oval shape and shot straight up. Apparently, the lights can move! The fact that lights can move does not mean planes flying in formation

Many individuals have been cherry picked. Each time a believer testimony is placed up, a skeptical view from another witness is placed against it. This sort of cherry picking can go on forever and never see a resolve. It is pointless to hope that some civillian has the answer, and lets face it, a dead end. All we can really rely on is hard data, and hard data insists planes that were noticed by more people than usual because more people than usual were outside looking up at Comet Hale-Bop. People got excited at a new sight, some idiot reporter read the wrong visitors logs at the base, and the Phoenix Lights became suspected aliens.


Do you honestly believe for a second that if a giant ET craft really did hover over a major city for that long, that the proof would be so minimal people would argue it for decades? Not meant as anything but a genuine question. Sometimes it is hard to see the obvious when the UFO buffs throw chaff and garbage in your path.

[psyche101]

skookum, on 07 January 2013 - 09:53 AM, said:

I think a larger quantity of Foo Fighter sightings were down to drug induced hallucinations (morphine) .  I live in the South of England and near a few retired WW2 air fields.  You can visit them and if you are lucky get to talk to some veterans.

one claim has come up twice at two separate air fields by different people.  The mortality rate was so high that some pilots would suffer near complete mental breakdowns before missions.  We recognize this today as battle fatigue, however it was not recognized back then (remember Patton slapping soldier).  The medics and nurses had no way to combat this and little understanding of it.  They would often administer Morphine to air crew in a bid to calm nerves.  Apparently there would often be a queue out side the medical shed before a bombing mission.  The Americans apparently were the worst for this as they conducted the day light missions which had unbelievable losses.

Having been on Morphine in the past for over a week following a serious accident I can totally believe this as it is a very powerful drug that I experienced various hallucinations on.  Many doctors have been known to get addicted to it for recreational use.

It is just another horrible side of war which people would rather not talk about I guess.

That is a very interesting and quite plausible hypothesis.

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

Psy, the gif by Boon is of the second event, 10 o'clock. Yes, those are flares, an attempt to draw attention away from the first.

Fife made a mockery of the whole situation because he was the governor at the time. he later admit to seeing it himself. his attempt to find out what it was was in vain. Yes, he is government, but not the same government we're talking about.

It's just that the number of individuals claiming to see an actual object over their head is too much to dismiss. When these people say that the explanations by experts or gov't are bs, how can we accept those explanations? Like I said, most of those explanation or of the second event, the gif by Boon above. It's not the same as the first at 8 o'clock.

btw, where boon? haven't heard from him lately.

[psyche101]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 02:38 AM, said:

Psy, the gif by Boon is of the second event, 10 o'clock. Yes, those are flares, an attempt to draw attention away from the first.

There was also a video posted of the first event. Can I ask you to find it, I do not Youtube if I can help it. Terry Proctor shot it.

It seals the deal. Not one big object, not aliens.

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 02:38 AM, said:

Fife made a mockery of the whole situation because he was the governor at the time. he later admit to seeing it himself. his attempt to find out what it was was in vain. Yes, he is government, but not the same government we're talking about.

Ohh man.

Now your doing it! The Government cannot be trusted unless they change their story down the track and come out with ET?

And there is more than one Government, and this one we happen to know works for the "Good Government"?

Fair go mate.

Mate, that does not make sense. Seriously, read it back to yourself and then try to tell me you do not sound hysterical and paranoid. Take the Aliens out of the story and look at it again. This is what I mean about "Shoehorning" ET in where he does not belong.

As I said, when the U2 was spotted by civillians, and they said ET, the Government knew what was sighted was the U2 but just shrugged and went "Aliens, sure, why not"?

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 02:38 AM, said:

It's just that the number of individuals claiming to see an actual object over their head is too much to dismiss. When these people say that the explanations by experts or gov't are bs, how can we accept those explanations? Like I said, most of those explanation or of the second event, the gif by Boon above. It's not the same as the first at 8 o'clock.

There are many individuals. Yet out of all these people, hardly anyone actually took pictures or video. Honestly, what would you do if a Ginat triangle craft was hovering over you? No News teams out there, nothing. Because it was two short lived events that became the object of severe confusion mainly due to the fact that many people tried to interpret something unusual to them.

What, the expert testimony of housewives, plumbers and store assistants? That is more convincing than a young man with a telescope offering a view 43 times better than every one else in town who spends much time using a telescope to look at the sky and was also corroborated by others? I happen to own the same type of scope - a Dobsonian. Mate, his descriptions are on the level, and his story has remained consistant, and nobody can claim a better view.

Like I say for every person who says it was Alienz, there is one who says no it was not. Fife is an ex pilot? Well here is a current one:

I was on my way from Flagstaff to Laughin Thursday when I saw the light formation reported on the radio the other night. I'm a pilot and was in the u.s. air force 4 years. Being in the mountains on highway 40, the night was clear and still. As the formation came towards me I stopped my car and got out with my binocs to check out what this was. As it came towards me, I saw 5 aircraft with there running lights (red and green) and the landing lights (white) on. They were also flying fairly slow and in the delta formation. As they went over me I could see stars going between the aircraft so it could not have been one large ship. The flying was like that of the Blue Angels or the thunderbirds demo team. Also as they went buy their jets were not very loud because of the low throttle setting for flying slow but I did hear the jets as they went away towards the south. (Contry)

Additionally, we discover there were more witnesses to aircraft in formation that night:

...At 8:30 p.m. the cockpit crew of an American West 757 airliner at 17,000 feet near Lake Pleasant, Ariz., noticed the lights off to their right and just above them.
"There's a UFO!" co-pilot John Middleton said kiddingly to pilot Larry Campbell. They queried the regional air-traffic-control center in Albuquerque, N.M. A controller radioed back that it was a formation of CT-144s flying at 19,000 feet.
Overhearing the exchange, someone claiming to be a pilot in the formation radioed Middleton. "We're Canadian Snowbirds flying Tutors," a man said...
But Capt. Michael Perry, squadron logistics officer for the Snowbirds, denied that any planes were in Arizona that month. "We don't travel ina V-shaped formation, and we don't cruise with landing lights on," he told Readers Digest. (Fitzgerald)

LINK




One question that I have asked many times that nobody can answer is:

Big Object right? When did it leave or even enter from space? Amateur radio telescopes, visual telescopes, private satellites all would have picked it up, and even given clear pictures. Just like the last 2 Jupiter strikes. If it is Alien it had to come from space right? When and where? It's not stealth, hell, it hovered over a major city, possibly twice in one night in full view.

If it came from space, an awful lot of us would know about it I promise you.

Whats the bet some numpty tries to sell dimensional craft next to keep the tale alive?? LOL

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 02:38 AM, said:

btw, where boon? haven't heard from him lately.

No idea, I hope he is having an awesome break for the holiday. He better not be visiting down under without a howdy do, or I will chase the bugger down.

[DONTEATUS]

I hope he didnt burn out like a candle in the wind ,or was that flare ?
Get Happy boony !

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

Psy, I believe Terry Proctor is in the first  video I posted. He also said it was silent, he could be too far to hear the sound if it's planes.

Fife Only spoke of it after leaving government. So I don't think he speak for the government. He's no different than any retired/former government workers that decided to tell us what they know. I don't think he is even that, since he's just a state governor that have no official capacity with any military/secret project. In this case, he's just a witness that happened to hold government job. If you work for one department in goverment, I don't think you can claim to know what's going on in another department. Not even Jimmy Carter is immune.

So this just come down to who we choose to believe? skeptics like the testimony of those saying planes formation. Believers like those saying "out of this world". We have guy with telescope saying planes formation, we have people seen it overhead saying not planes. We have retired pilot saying planes and another retired pilot saying not planes! So the debate continue, nothing settled.

Whether this case is "solved" or not, it's in the eyes of the beholder. But the debate can be danm ugly sometime.

To answer one of your many question, Psy, Ozma Lindderman did said, "(it) shot straight up".

[psyche101]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 05:42 AM, said:

Psy, I believe Terry Proctor is in the first  video I posted. He also said it was silent, he could be too far to hear the sound if it's planes.

Sorry, I would not know, I cannot see YT here either. I have to go to great lengths to view YT. I hate it to be frank.

After 43 seconds of tape, the Proctor video shows individual lights. If we must have a video, can I suggest this format. LINK - Discovery.

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 05:42 AM, said:

Fife Only spoke of it after leaving government. So I don't think he speak for the government. He's no different than any retired/former government workers that decided to tell us what they know. I don't think he is even that, since he's just a state governor that have no official capacity with any military/secret project. In this case, he's just a witness that happened to hold government job. If you work for one department in goverment, I don't think you can claim to know what's going on in another department. Not even Jimmy Carter is immune.

You think? I suggest you look up his brother Who just happens to be a UFO buff!

Do you know why he was not Govenor any longer? This is not the first time he has been accused of fraud, last time he lost the case in court:

Quote

U.S. Department of Justice news release
June 13, 1996
Governor of Arizona Indicted on Federal Fraud and Extortion Charges
United States Attorney for the Central District of California Nora Manella and Phoenix FBI Special Agent in Charge Bruce Gebhardt announced that John Fife Symington III, the Governor of the Stat of Arizona, was indicted today by a grand jury in the District of Arizona in a 23-count indictment charging him with making false statements to federally insured financial institutions, wire fraud, attempted extortion, and bankruptcy fraud.
Prior to being elected Governor in February 1991, Symington was a commercial real estate developer. The indictment charges Symington with providing false personal financial statements for his real estate projects; with attempting to extort six Arizona labor union pension funds into releasing him from a personal guarantee of a $10 million loan made by the pension funds in connectin with Symington's Phoenix Mercado project; and with making false statements under oath during a debtor's examination in his pending bankruptcy case.

LINK

So an Ex-Government man, who's brother holds a decent position, and is a UFO buff, who has ripped of the community, has been charged with making False Statements in the past, is such is an honest down to earth bloke that should be believed over 19 year Old Mitch Stanley with a telescope who is corroborated by others and shouted down by UFO buffs? A civillian kid is less believable than someone older who has been charged and convicted with making false statements in the past??

This bloke is trustworthy???????

The retired people who come forth with claims are not always on the level. Bushman is not, Ed Mitchell knows nothing, but the media says he does, it does not matter who comes forth, not one can provide any more than a claim. And pretty shaky ones at that. Proof is in the pudding, and the bowl is empty. The claims exist, but you need to look closely at them. We need to remember the media relies on flashy headlines to put food on the table. The Hynek UFO Report (p.271 of the paperback edition) states that “commercial and military pilots appear to make relatively poor witnesses”. Hynek was more cluey than any reporter ever will be on this subject. And I am sure we agree on that much.

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 05:42 AM, said:

So this just come down to who we choose to believe? skeptics like the testimony of those saying planes formation. Believers like those saying "out of this world". We have guy with telescope saying planes formation, we have people seen it overhead saying not planes. We have retired pilot saying planes and another retired pilot saying not planes! So the debate continue, nothing settled.

That is what I am saying, people are taking this option, when it is not the way to run. We need to see what actually exists. And what actually exists indicates a military exercise. Things like log books. Every single video and photo indicate flares and planes. Nothing at all has ever corroborated a giant triangle or even one single craft. Yet how many people live in Phoenix? Not one could manage to capture the giant wedge on tape? Not a single TV station? Does that not strike you as strange??

Again, the plural of anecdote is not data. One piece of empirical evidence outweighs a million testimonies.

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 05:42 AM, said:

Whether this case is "solved" or not, it's in the eyes of the beholder. But the debate can be danm ugly sometime.

The debate gets ugly because when people prove this was individual lights, people like Zoser ignore all information and cherry pick testimony and think one anonymous report trumps all logs, mathematical triangulation even according to information from the witnesses themselves. The only honest solution is that this was military according to the facts that do exist, excluding testimony. An argument for ET does not really exist, it's more of a protest that the case was solved.

I do not think that will be the case here, because you seem something of a gentleman, and willing to read. That's a massive head start on the woo woo contingent. Your good manner has earned my respect. I thank you for a civil conversation. Good to see this place being used properly for a change of late.

There is not really a counter argument, there is a giant woo woo factor that some hold onto like a dog with a bone. It is a bit annoying when people try to pull the wool over one's eye with woo woo. All that one can possibly achieve by endlessly citing witness testimony is only attempting to reinforce their own beliefs. If real facts for a giant craft existed, you and I would not be having this conversation I assure you.

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 05:42 AM, said:

To answer one of your many question, Psy, Ozma Lindderman did said, "(it) shot straight up".

Ozama is lying! That was my point!! We have literally thousands of eyes trained up at all times, probably millions because of Hale-Bop and from all over the world, not just Phoenix. We have machines recording. An Amateur from my own country picked up the last 2 Jupiter strikes and reported them to NASA who confirmed him. It is simply not possibly that nobody on earth saw this except Ozama, not only that, but what do the rest of the reports say? That it disappeared over the horizon. I wont even give the benefit of the doubt here, because I am completely sure that Ozama is lying. Do you not find one conflicting testimony of all something of a red flag?

This one really brought the crackpots put of the woodwork. You should read Tim Leys page. He thinks it was one giant craft........ sent from God! And even though he says "one giant craft" his description says:


Tim Ley says "It was astonishing and a little frightening. It was so big and so strange. You couldn't actually see the object. All you could see was the outline, as though something were blocking out the stars The lights looked like gas. There was a distortion on the surface. Also the light did not spill out or shine. I've never seen a light like that."

So it is one giant craft that he could not actually see? This is why we need to rely on data, not anecdotes. I undersand a want to know, I understand a desire to learn, the idea of a new visitor in exceedingly interesting, but information on ET is simply not there. It's just a big mess of assumptions.

I still say ET is not going to fly here. He or she or other I guess is going to make a phone call first. That is the intelligent thing to do IMHO.

Edited by psyche101, 09 January 2013 - 07:31 AM.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 09 January 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:

Have the Phoenix Lights been properly explained yet? The second event was a clear attempt by the gov't to draw attention away from the first event. They accomplished exactly what they set out to do since the masses think it is the official footage and accepted the explanation. No questions asked, business as usual.

It was apparently the Canadian Snowbirds.
If that makes no sense to you, you're not the only one.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

psyche101, on 09 January 2013 - 03:22 AM, said:

I still say ET is not going to fly here. He or she or other I guess is going to make a phone call first. That is the intelligent thing to do IMHO.

That assumes, doesn't it, that he (a) knows that this planet is inhabited, if not perhaps Civilised, and ( knowing that, they'd then decide that they wanted to make Contact? Would it not be equally likely that they'd want to study the planet and everything about it, not just us, in a proper, systematic manner, just like we do in our tentative efforts at planetary exploration so far? Wouldn't making Contact with the dominant species skew the results? wouldn't it be the proper scientific thing to do not to try to interfere- because making Contact would surely interfere - and just observe? For that probes, at least, if not manned craft, would be needed, and if anyone was to ask me I'd say that might be a reasonable explanation for UFO Sightings.

[psyche101]

Lord Vetinari, on 09 January 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

It was apparently the Canadian Snowbirds.
If that makes no sense to you, you're not the only one.

LOL, you should have spoken up earlier, you could have saved me all that typing.