[Evangium]

Lcvec, on 07 November 2009 - 11:26 PM, said:

From what I've seen (I admit I don't know much about the subject), some of the people who do believe on UFO sightings and other "evidences" just seem to assume that aliens come or came to earth, but just because no one has found a clear explanation yet, it doesn't really mean that a light dot moving on the sky at night is an alien spaceship for example.

Most raw UFO reports tend to read exactly that way, an unexplained something (fom the witness' point of view). It's only when they make it to the web 'Casebooks', books, or 'documentries' that 'spaceship' is implied. Personal bias by the investigator onward plays a big role in making the leap from UFO to ET spacecraft.

Quote

If one day someone finds an advanced alien object here on Earth and it gets studied by scientists (and proven not to be made by humans), there would still be people saying it's fake and nonsense, just as if some mysterious event was explained by scientists in a normal way, there would still be ET believers who would say it's a conspiracy of some sort, where governments hide the truth from civilians. I think the only good way for it to be proven without leaving a doubt would be if the aliens themselves showed up everywhere in the world and started living among us...

Very true. Cynicism exists in all camps.

Quote

Also I think Extraterrestrial Life isn't treated seriously enough because it's common on sci-fi films and stories, as well as the countless fakers who only want some attention and manage to turn the subject into some ridiculous nonsense discussion.

Pop culture (sci-fi especially) has played a big role in shaping our preconceptions of what extra-terrestrial life is. Anything human shaped is presumed to be intelligent and technologically advanced (usually significantly more than H. sapiens). Depending on the political climate of the day, humanoid aliens are either the threat or the saviours of humanity. All well and good for TV, since humanoids have human charateristics that an audience can connect to, as well as ease of manufacture for the costume department (though CGI does render the need for physical human actors some what null), but what of the other possibilities for extra terrestial life. Microorganisms for example. I can only think of a handful of sci-fi stories where microbes of some description featured. And all of them ended up with some form of dire consequences for the humans who came into contact with them.
Or the concept of truly alien intelligence that has no similarties with our own. These are things that do require a bit of serious thought, since they are likely possibilities that we could encounter some time in the future.

[747400]

Evangium, on 07 November 2009 - 02:20 PM, said:

Microorganisms for example. I can only think of a handful of sci-fi stories where microbes of some description featured. And all of them ended up with some form of dire consequences for the humans who came into contact with them.

Or vice versa; as in War of the Worlds.

Quote

Or the concept of truly alien intelligence that has no similarties with our own. These are things that do require a bit of serious thought, since they are likely possibilities that we could encounter some time in the future.

Well, I think the Trek has gone relatively boldly in that direction, in its more recent incarnations at any rate, perhaps.

[Evangium]

Hazzard, on 08 November 2009 - 12:13 AM, said:

Exactly.

And frankly... Im a little surprised that the other believers here at UM arent more qurious about this aleged proof (DSP) that the skeptics are asking Skyeagle for...(he also claims to have inside ifo and stuff we never seen before) and most important of all, why he never, ever, posts said evidence.

That would make me go, hmmmm...?

Well given that would mean questioning all that they've been programmed to believe is trustworthy and credible...

Personally, I think the whole leaked DSP 'report' never existed. At least not in the form we're led to believe that it did. More than likely, it may have been little more than a few careless words mentioned somewhere, with the blanks filled in to create a story of ET coverup. It's a no-brainer that NORAD reports would have security classifications attached to them, so if such a report was ever leaked, then its security classification had nothing to do with alienz. Another interesting and overlooked fact to do with security classification and 'leaks' is that a leaked report, memo, etc..., doesn't automatically become declassified. It retains its classification. Browse through MUFON's archieves and you'll find a few cases where this very situation has arisen.
So telling folks to FOI search is rather pointless, and illuminates the fact that the person saying so also has no clue what the real report looks like..

[Evangium]

747400, on 08 November 2009 - 12:31 AM, said:

Or vice versa; as in War of the Worlds.

Ah yes, my humancentric perspective got in the way of that

Quote

Well, I think the Trek has gone relatively boldly in that direction, in its more recent incarnations at any rate, perhaps.

Along with unintentionally promoting the notion that human genetalia can be plugged into any willing alien
Actually shows like Star Trek, Babylon 5 and movie series such as Star Wars have done a great service in moving Sci-fi away from the Red Menace disguised as 'monsters from outer space' narrative and into the notion that we humans can take our place in the intergalatic UN (despite the probability that this is perhaps more of a whimsical commentary on how we should be living with our own kind).

[badeskov]

Hazzard, on 07 November 2009 - 06:13 AM, said:

...
And frankly... Im a little surprised that the other believers here at UM arent more qurious about this aleged proof (DSP) that the skeptics are asking Skyeagle for...(he also claims to have inside ifo and stuff we never seen before) and most important of all, why he never, ever, posts said evidence.

That would make me go, hmmmm...?

In my honest opinion I think the reason is that the vast majority of believers here at UM actually have a very nuanced and skeptical approach to this whole conundrum. They just hold the probability of the ETH being the cause of some UFOs higher than other posters (like myself). Fair enough, I can only respect that. But I think very few have the need to keep propping up their belief by hanging onto ET visitation being factual and a necessity to pin ET on every unexplained case out there. Frankly, I think most believers agree that we simply do not have the evidence to support ET visitation as factual. And while I disagree with the believers about the probability of ET visitation, they command great respect for their ability to differentiate between what they believe and what we know as being factual. If I had to tally the believers that I have seen stating ET visitation as a proven fact, I find that number very small compared to the number of posters actually discussing the subject.

And that is part of what I appreciate about this forum, the diversity of opinions and the ability to discuss said opinions in civilty and maybe in the end part ways agreeing to politely disagree. Unfortunately, with such diversity we also see the outer fringes on each side and a rule seems to be that the further out on the fringe, the more vocal the opinion. And that is what is polluting the whole subject for both sides, because I think both sides have a lot to offer, yet focus is elsewhere. But I think that is one of the prices we pay for diversity of opinion and it is one I personally am more than willing to pay for all the benefits I feel I otherwise reap.

Just my two cents on the matter, Hazz

Cheers,
Badeskov

Edited for typos (pesky buggers).

This post has been edited by badeskov: 07 November 2009 - 02:45 PM

[badeskov]

Evangium, on 07 November 2009 - 06:33 AM, said:

Personally, I think the whole leaked DSP 'report' never existed. At least not in the form we're led to believe that it did. More than likely, it may have been little more than a few careless words mentioned somewhere, with the blanks filled in to create a story of ET coverup. It's a no-brainer that NORAD reports would have security classifications attached to them, so if such a report was ever leaked, then its security classification had nothing to do with alienz. Another interesting and overlooked fact to do with security classification and 'leaks' is that a leaked report, memo, etc..., doesn't automatically become declassified. It retains its classification. Browse through MUFON's archieves and you'll find a few cases where this very situation has arisen.
So telling folks to FOI search is rather pointless, and illuminates the fact that the person saying so also has no clue what the real report looks like..

Hi E.,

I have a slightly different opinion on this if I may

I think indeed a report existed because something passed closely by the DSP bird. However, I also think the military pretty quickly determined that it was something inconsequential (and most certainly not ET). And while the report might not be released, data will be released to civilian organizations because of the collaborative efforts in tracking orbital objects. And in the process I have a suspicion that some UFO buff incapable of deciphering what was actually going on obtained the data and spun a story. And here we are.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[Evangium]

badeskov, on 08 November 2009 - 01:04 AM, said:

Hi E.,

I have a slightly different opinion on this if I may

I think indeed a report existed because something passed closely by the DSP bird. However, I also think the military pretty quickly determined that it was something inconsequential (and most certainly not ET). And while the report might not be released, data will be released to civilian organizations because of the collaborative efforts in tracking orbital objects. And in the process I have a suspicion that some UFO buff incapable of deciphering what was actually going on obtained the data and spun a story. And here we are.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Fire away, B

That scenario fits quite nicely along the lines of what I was thinking regarding the military aspect, which appears to be the crux of the 'spaceship' argument.
From everything I've read on the 'Fastwalker' incident, it strikes me as being another case of an old favourite of ufology - something seen or overheard by a friend of a friend's third cousin(twice removed) mother's sister's aunt's father-in-law's neighbour (who moved years ago). Just imply 'military complicity' and there's no need to verify the first hand source

[Hazzard]

badeskov, on 07 November 2009 - 02:42 PM, said:

In my honest opinion I think the reason is that the vast majority of believers here at UM actually have a very nuanced and skeptical approach to this whole conundrum. They just hold the probability of the ETH being the cause of some UFOs higher than other posters (like myself). Fair enough, I can only respect that. But I think very few have the need to keep propping up their belief by hanging onto ET visitation being factual and a necessity to pin ET on every unexplained case out there. Frankly, I think most believers agree that we simply do not have the evidence to support ET visitation as factual. And while I disagree with the believers about the probability of ET visitation, they command great respect for their ability to differentiate between what they believe and what we know as being factual. If I had to tally the believers that I have seen stating ET visitation as a proven fact, I find that number very small compared to the number of posters actually discussing the subject.

And that is part of what I appreciate about this forum, the diversity of opinions and the ability to discuss said opinions in civilty and maybe in the end part ways agreeing to politely disagree. Unfortunately, with such diversity we also see the outer fringes on each side and a rule seems to be that the further out on the fringe, the more vocal the opinion. And that is what is polluting the whole subject for both sides, because I think both sides have a lot to offer, yet focus is elsewhere. But I think that is one of the prices we pay for diversity of opinion and it is one I personally am more than willing to pay for all the benefits I feel I otherwise reap.

Just my two cents on the matter, Hazz

Good post Badeskov.

I think it was MID who said....

The matter of alien visitation will be decided by the evidence, not by the intensity of opinion.

Truer words were never spoken.

[badeskov]

Evangium, on 07 November 2009 - 07:33 AM, said:

Fire away, B

That scenario fits quite nicely along the lines of what I was thinking regarding the military aspect, which appears to be the crux of the 'spaceship' argument.
From everything I've read on the 'Fastwalker' incident, it strikes me as being another case of an old favourite of ufology - something seen or overheard by a friend of a friend's third cousin(twice removed) mother's sister's aunt's father-in-law's neighbour (who moved years ago). Just imply 'military complicity' and there's no need to verify the first hand source

Indeed. Although in the chain you forgot walking-the-next street-overs-dog I think that is the crux of the matter. Somebody overhearing a story *mumble* removed and not knowing how to decipher scientific data in the first place. It is a recipe for disaster.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[badeskov]

Hazzard, on 07 November 2009 - 07:52 AM, said:

Good post Badeskov.

Thanks Hazz

Quote

I think it was MID who said....

The matter of alien visitation will be decided by the evidence, not by the intensity of opinion.

Truer words were never spoken.

I think you are right and I can only agree wholeheartedly - truer words were never spoken. And in that spirit, the humble opinion commands a lot more respect

Cheers,
Badeskov

[Ra_Sun-God]

skyeagle409, on 07 November 2009 - 12:53 AM, said:

Well, when Capt. Ed Ruppelt suggested that the scientist saw and tracked mundane Earth objects, they practically threw him out of the building, and he made it known in his book on what happened.

But, look what you posted, that didn't reflect that reality. I even posted their comments that the objects they observed were extraterrestrial and yet, look what you posted.

How Scientist Tracked a Flying Saucer

These impressions I settled on as accurate:

1. The Saucer, at the time it was first sighted, had been going at an extremely slow speed, perhaps 1 mile per second.

2. Despite the relative slowness, I could not determine its shape, although I judged it was similar in size to Saucer No. 1 because it was visible at an altitude above 25 miles.

3. It accelerated to a speed far in excess of anything obtainable with present day rocket motors.

4. The object passed within 5 degrees of the sun and was still visible to the naked eye. This would hardly have been true if the the object had been a meteor.

5. Again, there was no evidence of a propulsion system.

I am convinced that it was a flying saucer and, further, that these disks are space ships from another planet, operated by animate, intelligent beings.

http://www.nicap.org/true-mc.htm

Well put. This is a very good example of a extremely fast moving "Craft" and menueverbility (including turns in space), impossible for being made in Planet Earth, and very good drawing of the "Craft". And when this planet is not advanced enough to create such "Crafts" then there is very good chance that it is made of "Not of this Earth"...

[DONTEATUS]

Dont forget if they come to eatus Use Salt water It Kills everythiung!
And Then at least they will only need to bring some pepper to the table.

This post has been edited by DONTEATUS: 07 November 2009 - 06:33 PM

[Czero 101]

Ra_Sun-God, on 07 November 2009 - 10:27 AM, said:

Well put. This is a very good example of a extremely fast moving "Craft" and menueverbility (including turns in space), impossible for being made in Planet Earth, and very good drawing of the "Craft". And when this planet is not advanced enough to create such "Crafts" then there is very good chance that it is made of "Not of this Earth"...

So far no conclusive, verifiable evidence has been produced to support the "alien craft" theory. The main "facts" about this event seem to come from Joe Stefula who claims that an anonymous source who allegedly worked for the Air Force at the time "leaked" the information to him. Joe Stefula himself even admits that he has no idea as to the authenticity of the information.

Information has been presented here and many other places that shows that the event does not represent evidence of an "alien spacecraft" but is rather the result of orbital mechanics, optics and thermal sensor sensitivity.

Skyeagle claims that there have been reports of this incident issued by both NORAD and Aerojet.

To date, despite MANY repeated requests to produce such evidence, Skyeagle has, in typical fashion, danced around the subject, shifted goal posts and basically done everything to avoid taking responsibility for his clams.

You seem to also believe that this event is proof of an "alien spacecraft". Please produce the irrefutable evidence that you think proves this case.



Cz

[badeskov]

Ra_Sun-God, on 07 November 2009 - 10:27 AM, said:

Well put. This is a very good example of a extremely fast moving "Craft" and menueverbility (including turns in space), impossible for being made in Planet Earth, and very good drawing of the "Craft". And when this planet is not advanced enough to create such "Crafts" then there is very good chance that it is made of "Not of this Earth"...

Are you really willing to trust someone that is deliberately using decepetion and manufacturing evidence to bolster his claims?

Cheers,
Badeskov

[DONTEATUS]

It wont matter one Little bit If E.T lands or parks overhead,we will just all go GaGa!
And most likely Shoot at them!
We are far from advanced enough to get there visits!
Just Look at how we act on Earth to our own Kind?