Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 30 votes

The best evidence for aliens on Earth


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
12978 replies to this topic

#6976    Vampwitchenstein

Vampwitchenstein

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,894 posts
  • Joined:30 Jul 2008

Posted 27 October 2008 - 08:59 AM

universal legend on Oct 27 2008, 02:47 AM, said:

please read this alien file
Date:5 november 1975
Name:Travis Walton , Logger
Location:arizona,United States
Claim:he said that he saw a flying saucer hovering above the road as suddenly a laser beam belived to be errupted from the UFO shot him on the chest and he got deflected to the roadside

note:there are many otheralein files

source:THE ALIEN FILES by PAUL MCENVOY

Link?
Those are always nice.

Edit:
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id...=result#PPP1,M1

The title is:
    The alien files / Paul McEvoy.
It's about:
    Presents facts about UFO's.
    Unidentified flying objects - Juvenile literature.
    Life on other planets - Juvenile literature.
Is this the one???

Edited by BlondiGeist, 27 October 2008 - 09:06 AM.

FACEBOOK!
"I can only conclude it's something mental." ~Dr. Jack Seward/Bram Stokers Dracula

#6977    Evangium

Evangium

    Heretic

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,109 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2008

Posted 27 October 2008 - 09:12 AM

skyeagle409 on Oct 27 2008, 06:30 PM, said:

I read it and noticed that it didn't pertain to any of the questions I posed to you earlier.



Zen . . . And the Art of Debunkery
HOW TO DEBUNK JUST ABOUT ANYTHING

Part 1: General Debunkery

<> If examining the evidence becomes unavoidable, report back that "there is nothing new here!" If confronted by a watertight body of evidence that has survived the most rigorous tests, simply dismiss it as being "too pat."


http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html

You have to get pass first base before you can make it to home plate, and you have yet to do so because you haven't answered those questions on the first set of case files I have posted and taking a shortcut across the pitcher's mound just ain't gonna get it!


<> Put on the right face. Cultivate a condescending air that suggests that your personal opinions are backed by the full faith and credit of God. Employ vague, subjective, dismissive terms such as "ridiculous" or "trivial" in a manner that suggests they have the full force of scientific authority

<> Keep your arguments as abstract and theoretical as possible. This will "send the message" that accepted theory overrides any actual evidence that might challenge it--and that therefore no such evidence is worth examining.

<> Reinforce the popular misconception that certain subjects are inherently unscientific. In other words, deliberately confuse the *process* of science with the *content* of science. (Someone may, of course, object that since science is a universal approach to truth-seeking it must be neutral to subject matter; hence, only the investigative *process* can be scientifically responsible or irresponsible. If that happens, dismiss such objections using a method employed successfully by generations of politicians: simply reassure everyone that "there is no contradiction here!")

<> Downplay the fact that free inquiry and legitimate disagreement are a normal part of science.

<> Since the public tends to be unclear about the distinction between evidence and proof, do your best to help maintain this murkiness. If absolute proof is lacking, state categorically that "there is no evidence!"

<> Use "smoke and mirrors," i.e., obfuscation and illusion. Never forget that a slippery mixture of fact, opinion, innuendo, out-of-context information and outright lies will fool most of the people most of the time. As little as one part fact to ten parts B.S. will usually do the trick. (Some veteran debunkers use homeopathic dilutions of fact with remarkable success!) Cultivate the art of slipping back and forth between fact and fiction so undetectably that the flimsiest foundation of truth will always appear to firmly support your entire edifice of opinion.

<> Employ "TCP": Technically Correct Pseudo-refutation. Example: if someone remarks that all great truths began as blasphemies, respond immediately that not all blasphemies have become great truths. Because your response was technically correct, no one will notice that it did not really refute the original remark.


and last but not least (I could cherrypick all night long with regard to how your argument conforms to that tongue-in-cheek essay)

<> Always refer to unorthodox statements as "claims," which are "touted," and to your own assertions as "facts," which are "stated."

Maybe you've missed it, but your question has been answered.  Obviously not the answer you want, but that's the way the cat jumps, if you want free inquiry and legitimate disagreement to be part of the process.

And reading through other member's posts, I'm inclined to believe that people on both sides want to cover some new ground.  You on the other hand have yet to find the city the ballpark is in... cool.gif


上人は菩薩と見たる桜哉
to saintly eyes
they are bodhisattvas...
cherry blossoms

Should RADAR really be held up as absolute proof of visitation by an extraterrestrial intelligence?  Click here to find out


#6978    Evangium

Evangium

    Heretic

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,109 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2008

Posted 27 October 2008 - 10:13 AM

Now that it's quiet I'll repost that story.  The individual telling it is a man with 20 years experience in UFO investigation.  The way he presents it, the phenomena is real to him, and to a lessor extent his family and friends.  
Whether we believe him or not is our own choice.  He won't force the issue with us, as we all have opinions, and I think he learned long ago the folly of trying to force your own opinion onto someone else.

At this stage, I'm not going to post his name or links, since I'm more interested in people's opinions on the story, rather than what personal opinions of the man himself are.  
I will say that there's a good chance that those of you who have been following my links have seen the story and know who is telling it.

The story itself is intriguing, as it presents many familiar elements of not only abduction stories but also mass sightings, not unlike the rendleshem witnesses' descriptions of the strangeness of the event.  
Perhaps this opens the possibility of Vallee and Hynek's ETI, or the other dimensional traveller theories.   Suffice to say, stories like this one cast a shadow of doubt on the saucer reality theorists' version of the ETH.

Quote

My experiences after the realization of what was going on with me personally, seemed to "ramp up" or become much more "in my face". No longer was it a matter of thinking I saw something, it became undeniable. Initially I surmised I was just devoting too much time to it, and becoming entirely too sensitive. Don't ever assume you can't fool yourself, because no one is immune to that mistake.

However, in response to that notion, the enigma became gutsy enough to present more significant experiences to me, but also much more often in the presence of others (wife, friends, etc). Flashes of light, small ball shaped lights, floating geometric shapes, and apparition types have all been seen by family and friends over the years at one time or another. (David Biedny, on a visit not long ago, saw what he thought was a black cat walk down towards our hallway. We have no cat).

My wife has actually seen what she deems to be a transparent veil drift through the room on some occasions, mostly when I am writing or conversing, or investigating the UFO/alien subject rather intensely. Both of us back many years ago noticed a feeling around the house just before I would have a significant experience: we called it "Doom". Almost as if you were being intensely watched, by something or someone not particularly happy with you. It's a seriously heady and heavy feeling, that others have noticed as well.

To skip to the point, when I dropped away from the pursuit of answers in this field around 10 years ago, the phenomena gradually ceased. There have been spotty events and sightings both seen by myself and family/friends, but there was a dramatic decrease in overall strangeness. I still studied the phenomena, but less intensity, and dare I say, obsession.

Not long before I walked away and secluded myself somewhat from this subject, I had an significant experience as I got ready for bed one night. I got up off the couch, got a final drink of water for the day and headed down the hallway to the bedroom.

It was 1 AM.

I'd had an uneasy feeling earlier, but it wasn't too pronounced until I looked down the hallway, and there between me and the bedroom was an odd light, almost reddish. There was no obvious light source, only the light hitting the floor. This light, much like ones I'd seen before in childhood, visually canceled out everything past it. The door to the bedroom was no longer visible to me.

In that light, stood a being, very obviously not human. It was shorter then me (as near as I could tell) spindly, and moving as if it was underwater. I could not run, scream or look it in the face. My eyes dropped to the floor like a scolded child as the adrenalin slapped me in the chest and ankles. The cold numbing fear rose up my legs from my feet within seconds. There were smaller, shorter beings around this one. But they were not as solid or clear to my vision, but I could hear them moving on the carpet. Everything was completely silent aside from the scuffling.



The only thought in my mind was how to get to the bedroom and my wife. I remember thinking
"How the hell am I going to get past this?"

Instantly I heard a scratchy voice right between my eyes: "Just...walk."


The next instant, I am aware of getting into bed with my heart pounding so hard I could feel it in the top of my head. I lay down and hear the clock in the living room chime: 4 AM. It was absolutely seamless, and three hours were gone. I woke my wife and told her what happened. We both commented the hallway and house smelled like musty paper, and the air was bristly feeling... hard to describe. Cold.


edit:typo

Edited by Evangium, 27 October 2008 - 10:38 AM.

上人は菩薩と見たる桜哉
to saintly eyes
they are bodhisattvas...
cherry blossoms

Should RADAR really be held up as absolute proof of visitation by an extraterrestrial intelligence?  Click here to find out


#6979    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,287 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006

Posted 27 October 2008 - 10:16 AM

Evangium on Oct 27 2008, 02:12 AM, said:

And reading through other member's posts, I'm inclined to believe that people on both sides want to cover some new ground.  You on the other hand have yet to find the city the ballpark is in... cool.gif


laugh.gif Let alone planet...

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#6980    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,287 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006

Posted 27 October 2008 - 10:50 AM

Evangium on Oct 27 2008, 01:58 AM, said:

bolding mine

You're welcome Badeskov (and welcome back to the 'debate').


Thanks. Unfortunately we have a serious crunch at work these days and it was rather reluctantly I got sucked into it, but so it happened and it took all my time suddenly. And it still takes a lot of my time, so it will be another 14 days before I can really start engaging myself seriously again. That is unfortunately the price of high intensity research once in a while wink2.gif

jaylemurph on Aug 27 2008, 04:22 PM, said:

It was indeed an interesting stroll down memory lane.  I'd almost forgotten that the same method of proof that we, allegedly, ignore, proves that Noah's ark is real and in good condition on a mountain somewhere.  So why do we of the more skeptical bent get told time and time again that when we do it, it's a case of comparing apples to oranges?  geek.gif


A stroll down memory lane is always fun, albeit in this case it shows some rather sad things at times. And we are not skeptically bent, we are evil debunkers hellbent on going against all that science (allegedly) already knows as fact (*cough*). This could be a lot more constructive if there was a willingness to really accept the scientific argumentation for what it is. However, the odds of that happening are probably rather slim and if it indeed happened, I would like to quote Jaylemurph from the Conspiracy threads:

jaylemurph on Aug 27 2008, 04:22 PM, said:

Hmmm. A CT thread with people learning things and respectfully addressing each other. I suggest we have this stuffed and mounted. wink2.gif

--Jaylemurph


Quote

Now onto that bolding, and I'm putting this out to all, it seems pretty clear that the statement says that plasma doesn't account for all UFO sightings; so why is everyone posting in rebuttals that effectively boil down to "Plasma couldn't account for this particular case".


It is truly baffling. But I think the point of showing plasmas is lost on some people. Terrestrial plasmas certainly don't count for all of the sightings, we don't even know if it counts for any, although I would be very surprised if it didn't. However, the fact that such phenomena exists, exhibit some of the same behaviors as UFOs and that we really only learned the finer details about them during the last 20 years just illustrates that:

1) We constantly learn about our atmosphere and the Earth we live one
2) The last Earthly phenomenon hasn't been discovered yet
3) We have not, in any UFO case, proven that it is ET by the elimination of all other possibilities  

..oh, and that

4) 40 year old reports on mirages and temperature inversions are obsolete and utterly irrelevant as pertains to this discussion.

Quote

After all Safe Skys' 'Fastwalker' DVD starts out by quoting that, since the late 1940's 150 million people have witnessed UFOs, and that there have been 20,000 confirmed landings (words to that effect).  I'm no bookie, but I'd say that it's pretty good odds that those six or so cases can be accounted for as "such events are obviously not the explanation."  Old UFOlogy jedi mind trick, that wink2.gif


Indeed. That is another one I cannot really understand, the space rocks and other debris accidentally flitting by a camera and immediately it can be (mis)construed as ET on a leisure trip to planet Earth (we must be their equivalent of either the Grand Canyon or a major theme/amusement park).

QUOTE
Essentially it's the argument version of a double negative, to respond with "Plasma can't account for this case".  If you want to try and defeat the plasma argument, you're better off finding tha Caelistia link I posted earlier and working from there... happy.gif


Yes, most certainly so.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#6981    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,287 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006

Posted 27 October 2008 - 10:54 AM

universal legend on Oct 27 2008, 12:47 AM, said:

please read this alien file
Date:5 november 1975
Name:Travis Walton , Logger
Location:arizona,United States
Claim:he said that he saw a flying saucer hovering above the road as suddenly a laser beam belived to be errupted from the UFO shot him on the chest and he got deflected to the roadside

note:there are many otheralein files

source:THE ALIEN FILES by PAUL MCENVOY


As others have asked, a link would be nice. Otherwise it is not viable information. Oh, and a laser beam powerful enough to "deflect" him to the road side would have burned right through his chest and we wouldn't have this story in the first place.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#6982    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 6,601 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008

Posted 27 October 2008 - 11:00 AM

badeskov on Oct 27 2008, 03:54 AM, said:

As others have asked, a link would be nice. Otherwise it is not viable information. Oh, and a laser beam powerful enough to "deflect" him to the road side would have burned right through his chest and we wouldn't have this story in the first place.

Cheers,
Badeskov


True badeskov, I would imagine that any impact force from even a large laser would be negligible considering it is only a concentrated beam of light. Although I could be wrong. thumbsup.gif

"You want to discuss plausibility then you have to accept reality." -Mattshark

"Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." -Obviousman

You know... the plural of ``anecdote'' is not ``data''. Similarly, the plural of ``random fact'' is not ``mystical symbolism''. -sepulchrave


#6983    Evangium

Evangium

    Heretic

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,109 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2008

Posted 27 October 2008 - 11:01 AM

LOL... Ahhh, Badeskov.  Where do I send the bill for cleaning the coffee, I spilled, off my computer?  
You really should be careful where you point that wit of yours wink2.gif

Earth, an Alien Wonderland laugh.gif  I Wonder if they are guilty of overselling seats as well, since their evolution parallels our own (apparently)...

edit:typo

Edited by Evangium, 27 October 2008 - 11:59 AM.

上人は菩薩と見たる桜哉
to saintly eyes
they are bodhisattvas...
cherry blossoms

Should RADAR really be held up as absolute proof of visitation by an extraterrestrial intelligence?  Click here to find out


#6984    The Sky Scanner

The Sky Scanner

    Observer

  • Member
  • 5,612 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2008

Posted 27 October 2008 - 11:02 AM

Evangium on Oct 27 2008, 08:58 AM, said:

bolding mine

You're welcome Badeskov (and welcome back to the 'debate').
It was indeed an interesting stroll down memory lane.  I'd almost forgotten that the same method of proof that we, allegedly, ignore, proves that Noah's ark is real and in good condition on a mountain somewhere.  
So why do we of the more skeptical bent get told time and time again that when we do it, it's a case of comparing apples to oranges?  geek.gif

Now onto that bolding, and I'm putting this out to all, it seems pretty clear that the statement says that plasma doesn't account for all UFO sightings; so why is everyone posting in rebuttals that effectively boil down to "Plasma couldn't account for this particular case".
After all Safe Skys' 'Fastwalker' DVD starts out by quoting that, since the late 1940's 150 million people have witnessed UFOs, and that there have been 20,000 confirmed landings (words to that effect).  I'm no bookie, but I'd say that it's pretty good odds that those six or so cases can be accounted for as "such events are obviously not the explanation."  Old UFOlogy jedi mind trick, that wink2.gif
Essentially it's the argument version of a double negative, to respond with "Plasma can't account for this case".  If you want to try and defeat the plasma argument, you're better off finding tha Caelistia link I posted earlier and working from there... happy.gif


~Bolding mine~

The post I was originally responding to is:


Quote

Here I have to disagree. There has been a lot of reports, however, in my personal opinion more and more speaks towards natural phenomena rather than explanations of extraterrestrial origin.


The plasma theory was given as one example.

If more and more leads to natural phenomena then it seems reasonable to see how the plasma theory stands up to individual cases. For curiosity if nothing else.

If your going to make vague references to my posts then at least have the decency to take them in context to the post I was enquiring about.


"Equipped with his five senses, man explores the universe around him and calls the adventure Science". ~ Edwin Powell Hubble

#6985    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,287 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006

Posted 27 October 2008 - 11:37 AM

Captain Zim on Oct 26 2008, 05:09 PM, said:

What are you talking about, "terrestrial plasmas?" Are you referring to fire? And atmospheric plasmas? Commonly known as lightning bolts? Can you cite studies where these plasmas have been observed, manufactured and maintained outside Tesla-class magnetic fields?


Terrestrial plasmas are the broader term for plasmas here on Earth. But lets just call them atmospheric plasmas to narrow it down. But lets get down to the more interesting parts of a plasma. You do not need a magnetic field to create and maintain a plasma, you need energy. And such energy can be created in many ways. You can make one in your microwave oven if you are so inclined. Also, when you rub a plastic stick wit a dry cloth to create static electricity, you build up charges and when discharged, you get a tiny lightening strike, which is a plasma. Same can happen in the atmosphere. When you have layer of air moving at different velocities, you can get friction that in turn can create differences in potentials. But the fact is that such exists and we still don't know why and how they are created and maintained. we just know that they are.

I have quoted the Hessdalen studies some times, but I don't mind doing it again. Here we have plasmas that exhibit such behaviors as UFOs exhibit. Again, they don't know why and how, and especially why it is happening just there. They can just observe that it is. From one of my earlier posts
  

Quote

Indeed, sometimes we hear quite some amusing stories on what it could be. I really don't want to hijack Haz's thread, but please allow me to quote a few paragraphs from one of the http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/a..._teodorani.pdf:

pp. 1.

Quote

The balls of light which appear in the Hessdalen valley in Norway are exemplary of anomalous atmospheric luminous phenomena that occur frequently at some locations on Earth.


pp. 2

Quote

In general they consist of light balls of many forms and colors, characterized by pulsations, often erratic movements, occasional long duration, and intense emission of energy. Their dimensions range from decimeters up to 30 m.


Sounds familiar?

pp. 3

Quote

During that campaign, it was also demonstrated that these lights often produce a strong radar signature with a peculiar behavior. Once a bright light was radar-tracked moving at 8500 m/s (the radar was working at 3 cm).


Again, sounds familiar?

pp. 3.
QUOTE
Several attempts were made to get a reaction. The lights ''responded'' almost always by changing their flashing sequence from a regular flashing mode to a regular double-flashing mode and returning to a regular flashing mode after the laser beam was moved away (Strand, 1985, 2000).


Here we have something that is intensely luminous, provides a strong radar signature, can move fast and highly erratically (seeming intelligently), reacting to outside stimuli (in this case a laser beam). This is why I can simply not take a report from 1968 as being relevant, as it reflects what they knew at the time about atmospheric events, and recent science very obviously contradicts what was stated then.

This is why we need the irrefutable evidence, as otherwise we simply do not know. We can speculate, but that is all we can currently do.


My point not being that we can say that our UFO sightings indeed are plasmas. But my point being that until the point where we can eliminate all earthly explanations, the sightings remain unknown. We simply do not know what they are. Period.

QUOTE
Your line of thinking seems to be "since we have these upper atmospheric ionic instabilities, blue sprites, etc., then they may somehow explain what we see in the troposphere and close to the Earth," but I'm sure you of all people know that this is a completely different atmospheric environment and in no way does explain the emissive power, coherency and extreme mobility of UFOs, nor will it explain the regular solid objects.


No, that is not my line of thinking and I hope the above clarified that. If not, I would be more than happy to explain it in more detail. I am certainly not thinking of sprites, elves and higher atmospheric emissions and discharges. Although those are extremely interesting in and of themselves, they do not relate to the present discussion.  

QUOTE
This is known as priming, but it does not lead to gross misidentification. Pilots are also trained to look for celestial markers, beacon lights and bad weather. Also, if this were the case, it can be argued that pilots would see things they except to see, such as wings and engine nacelles, instead of circular metallic craft.


Yes and no. Pilots are trained to look for many things, all of them known. But a pilot seeing something that is so rare that it is not taught and very few pilots ever hear about it and let alone see it, something that exhibits the same characteristics as an artificial craft would, that tends to make it a craft. It is instinct and it is hard to get past that. I am not saying that it is a misidentification - I am just saying that it is extremely hard to eliminate the option.  

And then we are back at the problems of eye witness reports. We can argue back and forth about such, but I think that might be a waste of time wink2.gif

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#6986    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,287 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006

Posted 27 October 2008 - 11:40 AM

Slave2Fate on Oct 27 2008, 03:00 AM, said:

True badeskov, I would imagine that any impact force from even a large laser would be negligible considering it is only a concentrated beam of light. Although I could be wrong. thumbsup.gif


Indeed. Any coherent light with the energy to push you around would leave you significantly lighter as it would have vaporized your chest in the process wink2.gif

Cheers,
badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#6987    Evangium

Evangium

    Heretic

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,109 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2008

Posted 27 October 2008 - 11:55 AM

Sky Scanner on Oct 27 2008, 09:02 PM, said:

~Bolding mine~

The post I was originally responding to is:




The plasma theory was given as one example.

If more and more leads to natural phenomena then it seems reasonable to see how the plasma theory stands up to individual cases. For curiosity if nothing else.

If your going to make vague references to my posts then at least have the decency to take them in context to the post I was enquiring about.

Word twisting is something I try to leave to one particular expert in this field.  Despite how he may try and insinuate it, I, and (hopefully) the other 'skeptics', on this board won't resort to subterfuge if we have an issue with a particular point you make.   In that case, we will reply directly to you.

Regarding my statement, I wasn't specifically referring to your post, as several members  have posted to the effect that plasma can't account for certain, individual cases (as I read it).  

My point I was trying to make, was that since Badeskov has acknowledged that plasma can't account for all UFOs, logically the only way to 'attack' the argument is to highlight the problems with the plasma/earthlight theory to the exclusion of all other theories.  That includes the contrasting of why plasma can't account for particular UFO cases.



On to your response, personally I have no problems with the fact that you seem to be stating that the plasma theory needs more verification before it can be an acceptable explanation in light of other explanations.  

But I've seen the plasma argument on 3 other occassions now and, each time, the most vocally presented arguments against it were-

1) Plasma can't account for this or that case;
2) Sounds like Klass' theory from the 70's which he abandoned; and,
3) Plasma is the new swamp gas.

To me this is hardly an adequate critique of the terrestrial plasma hypothesis.  Hence my reference to Caelistia's critcism of the argument put forward by earthlight proponents.  Of course, I understand that there are quite a few similarities between that critique and the one for saucer reality.

Hopefully this clears up the confusion original.gif

I don't hold much hope that this round will present anything I haven't already seen before, though.  
Hence, I've presentied a new 'case' for consideration.

edit:typo

Edited by Evangium, 27 October 2008 - 12:01 PM.

上人は菩薩と見たる桜哉
to saintly eyes
they are bodhisattvas...
cherry blossoms

Should RADAR really be held up as absolute proof of visitation by an extraterrestrial intelligence?  Click here to find out


#6988    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,287 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006

Posted 27 October 2008 - 12:00 PM

Sky Scanner on Oct 26 2008, 03:47 PM, said:

I understand your point but when you compare that to descriptions of ufo reports it doesn't hold water. If plasma was the cause then that doesn't explain the 'objects' avoidance of the plane, even when the object is directly in front the plane.

  
Yes and no. Again, I am not sure which UFO reports you are specifically talking about, so I can't really say why in that context. However, plasmas can do different things that seems to be a deliberate effort to avoid/follow a plane:

1) it can slipstream, i.e. be caught in the plane's slip stream and follow it. But it should be gone when the energy to maintain it is removed.
2) It can react to radar waves, i.e. if a planes radar locks onto a plasma, it'll create an influx of energy on one side that can increase the degree of ionization on one side and thus effectively create thrust.
3) The atmosphere can experience magnetic ducting, where plasmas can be held in such. However, a plane is metallic and thus a huge magnetic disturbance that will incur perturbations in the magnetic field guiding the plasma.  

In the end, we simply don't enough enough about the phenomenon yet to truly understand the chaotic physics behind it. We can just observe that they exist.

Quote

If plasma was the cause then surely some cases would have arisen were these objects are reported and then the plane makes contact with the plasma, either with no adverse effect or with catastrophic effects. On the cases were the unkown object and aircraft are seen to merge on radar the plane often disappears.

I'll look around tomorrow to check if there's any cases where the two objects merge and aircraft wreckage is later found, if so, it should have some description of the plane wreckage and cause. I'm pretty sure those cases don't exist (from memory) but i'll check tomorrow.


It is a good point if there has ever been collisions. But in the case of a collision it should not cause a crash, or rather, it would me very unlikely to do so. Aircraft are struck by lightening and typically nothing happens (as there shouldn't). A plasma has the mass as air and is not a solid object.  

Quote

Needless to say, I find the plasma theory extremely unlikely.


I respect that and that is certainly how it should be, i.e. you form your own opinion on the matter. I am just explaining why I feel that plasmas can account for some of the sightings and why we cannot exclude atmospheric phenomena we have no yet discovered.

Quote

I don't believe that's true at all. Pilots with flight times in the region of 10,000+ flying hours (and the man in question I mentioned in my post was also a former fighter pilot) would have seen and been trained to indentify all manner of phenomena, from weather and atmospherics to objects and potential hazzards. I find the idea that they are programmed through their intense training to only recognise unknown ariel objects as craft to be a little 'out there', excuse the pun.


Fair enough. The problem is that, relatively speaking, very few will ever see such events when flying and they are not trained to identify them. And when they see something that has geometrical shapes and moves in ways weather phenomena doesn't, training tells them we are talking crafts and not some natural phenomena.  

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#6989    The Sky Scanner

The Sky Scanner

    Observer

  • Member
  • 5,612 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2008

Posted 27 October 2008 - 12:02 PM

Evangium on Oct 27 2008, 11:55 AM, said:

Hopefully this clears up the confusion original.gif


Yes it does and thank you for clarifying  thumbsup.gif

I refuse to get into this singling out of Skyeagle, I think he makes valid points and won't be commenting further on alleged tactics, only the reports he posts, which whilst I've often read before I think actaully add to the thread.

I'll now go and look at the new 'case' you posted.


"Equipped with his five senses, man explores the universe around him and calls the adventure Science". ~ Edwin Powell Hubble

#6990    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,287 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006

Posted 27 October 2008 - 12:08 PM

F-16 Falcon on Oct 26 2008, 03:27 PM, said:

Yes, but you see... that doesn't explain what people have seen at night time. During the day, yes - the Sun may render you as viewing a luminous object which is not really there... but it doesn't account for what people have seen at night, especially in desolate areas. Nor does it account for what airforce pilots have both confirmed at night via optical confirmation and radar.


Yes, it does. But we need to discuss a specific case in order to look at the sighting itself. However, plasmas can most certainly be highly reflective. It will basically act as a metallic object with respect to RF signals (e.g, radar waves). Please reply to others. original.gif

Quote

Airforce officials are trained to identify a variety of objects in the sky, not just "aircraft". Get your facts straight.


Of course they are, sorry for not being clear enough on that. But not unknown atmospheric events as they are, per definition, unknown. wink2.gif  

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.