4705 replies to this topic

[Hazzard]

zoser, on 05 October 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

Stop messing about Haz.  What did you think of the Winchester clip?

I have stopped watching your videos a long time ago. The reason is simple, the ones I did click on was among the silliest I have ever seen, and I have seen A LOT. Im thinking of the guy in the UK with the sheeps and the likes,...

In the matter of the ETH, people flapping their lips isnt what Im looking for. Sorry.

[Sakari]

zoser, on 06 October 2012 - 06:56 AM, said:

Which is doomed to failure.  The reports of sightings and close encounters have a marked consistency to them.  The skeptics answers all vary usually in ridiculous ways that don't fit the facts.  Then if all else fails, the witnesses are deemed liars.

Zoser, I don't have the time now, but I would love to take say, 100 sightings , and chart them..There is no consistency to them. Some are shaped like cigars, some triangles, some balls, some saucers, some squares......Some wobble, some go slow, some go fast, some disappear.....

Now, most end up identified as hoax's, planes, bugs, rc craft, balloons, Army skydivers, etc...Some have a ton of evidence to support a answer with over whelming evidence ( man made or natural ). And some can not be answered 100%, but would fall into a natural or man made thing, depending whom you talk to.There are numerous videos you had posted that have clearly been debunked.

My point is, there is nothing consistent at all when all put together.

I would think if other species were coming here, they would be more consistent, and same for secret air craft. This is a strong piece of evidence that these " sightings " are not one certain thing, but are " wishful thinking ".

Don't get me wrong, I think it would be great if a ship came here and did away with us, or " fixed " us. I used to be just like you when it comes to this. After opening my mind to answers, and not just faith, I do not think anyone is coming to this place. There is nothing to make me think that way at all, none of the " evidence " adds up at all.

Funny, last night I laughed pretty hard, a old ancient aliens was on about crop circles. It had " scientists " and " experts " explaining how a vortex from space was causing this, and how they could not be made by man. I would love to see these people today answer the circle makers in a interview. I used to believe that crap myself, until I studied and researched more on it. It really made me laugh, and laugh that I actually thought the same thing.

Anyone can be fooled Zoser...And, anyone can learn not to be fooled also.

Edited by Sakari, 06 October 2012 - 04:12 PM.

[TheMacGuffin]

Hazzard, on 06 October 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

I have stopped watching your videos a long time ago. The reason is simple, the ones I did click on was among the silliest I have ever seen, and I have seen A LOT. Im thinking of the guy in the UK with the sheeps and the likes,...

In the matter of the ETH, people flapping their lips isnt what Im looking for. Sorry.

He also said he stopped reading everything I posted a long time ago, so I just stopped conversing with him.

Frankly, there's just no there, there.

[zoser]

Hazzard, on 06 October 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

I have stopped watching your videos a long time ago. The reason is simple, the ones I did click on was among the silliest I have ever seen, and I have seen A LOT. Im thinking of the guy in the UK with the sheeps and the likes,...

In the matter of the ETH, people flapping their lips isnt what Im looking for. Sorry.

[bmk1245]

TheMacGuffin, on 04 October 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

According to the "skeptics", every time there is a radar report of UFOs the equipment is malfunctioning and every time there is a radar visual report, like Stephenville, the witnesses are all lying or mistaken.  

They always have this standard list of "explanations" that they trot out for every single UFO report, although their real purpose is not to explain anything at all, but just muddy up the waters.

Quit whining and check data by yourself. Ever heard of CFAR (Constant False Alarm Rate)?

[zoser]

Sakari, on 06 October 2012 - 04:10 PM, said:

Zoser, I don't have the time now, but I would love to take say, 100 sightings , and chart them..There is no consistency to them. Some are shaped like cigars, some triangles, some balls, some saucers, some squares......Some wobble, some go slow, some go fast, some disappear.....

Now, most end up identified as hoax's, planes, bugs, rc craft, balloons, Army skydivers, etc...Some have a ton of evidence to support a answer with over whelming evidence ( man made or natural ). And some can not be answered 100%, but would fall into a natural or man made thing, depending whom you talk to.There are numerous videos you had posted that have clearly been debunked.

My point is, there is nothing consistent at all when all put together.

I would think if other species were coming here, they would be more consistent, and same for secret air craft. This is a strong piece of evidence that these " sightings " are not one certain thing, but are " wishful thinking ".

Don't get me wrong, I think it would be great if a ship came here and did away with us, or " fixed " us. I used to be just like you when it comes to this. After opening my mind to answers, and not just faith, I do not think anyone is coming to this place. There is nothing to make me think that way at all, none of the " evidence " adds up at all.

Funny, last night I laughed pretty hard, a old ancient aliens was on about crop circles. It had " scientists " and " experts " explaining how a vortex from space was causing this, and how they could not be made by man. I would love to see these people today answer the circle makers in a interview. I used to believe that crap myself, until I studied and researched more on it. It really made me laugh, and laugh that I actually thought the same thing.

Anyone can be fooled Zoser...And, anyone can learn not to be fooled also.

How were the couple from Winchester fooled when an alien came out from a cigar shaped craft and put his arm on the car?  Doesn't make sense.  

Just like your comment about the Tindade incident.  A group of geologists turned UFO hoaxers.  Really?  Yes hoaxing is possible we all realise that but I really don't think that you are seriously looking at each case on it's own merits.  

You need to think how likely is it that a team of scientists would do that.  To what end? Why risk their scientific careers?  This is what you are not doing and this is why your attempts at debunking are not succeeding.

[bmk1245]

zoser, on 06 October 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

In case you don't know what overly open-mindedness is...



Anyway, I agree with Hazz's no willingness to watch YT "masterpieces": how many times I watched bogus videos, and then smacked myself for being idiot for falling (once again) on that bs clap trap.

[zoser]

bmk1245, on 06 October 2012 - 05:21 PM, said:

In case you don't know what overly open-mindedness is...



Anyway, I agree with Hazz's no willingness to watch YT "masterpieces": how many times I watched bogus videos, and then smacked myself for being idiot for falling (once again) on that bs clap trap.

They can't all be telling lies Mr B.  You know it, I know it and everyone knows it.

[TheMacGuffin]

bmk1245, on 06 October 2012 - 05:21 PM, said:

In case you don't know what overly open-mindedness is...

Anyway, I agree with Hazz's no willingness to watch YT "masterpieces": how many times I watched bogus videos, and then smacked myself for being idiot for falling (once again) on that bs clap trap.

Hazz is not really a participant since he posts nothing but one-liners, but with no real evidence of his own or even any serious commentary on those who post evidence.  He's not quite on the level of DONTEATUS, but pretty close.

Edited by TheMacGuffin, 06 October 2012 - 05:48 PM.

[TheMacGuffin]

bmk1245, on 06 October 2012 - 05:10 PM, said:

Quit whining and check data by yourself. Ever heard of CFAR (Constant False Alarm Rate)?

Once again, I don't believe the Septic Skeptics when they always dismiss all radar UFO reports as ghosts, echoes and temperature inversions.  The radar operators knew the difference back in the 1940s and 1950s just as they do now.

One of the biggest lies that was ever told in history was when the Washington DC UFOs of 1952 were dismissed in this way, although it was not just a lie but a deliberate cover up, pure and simple.  That was also the case with the Bentwaters UFO case in 1956 and the Milton Torres case in 1957--lies and cover ups.

That's why I never believe any of this fake explanations about how radar isn't detecting real UFOs because I know the history and have read many of the original cases.

[zoser]

TheMacGuffin, on 06 October 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

Hazz is not really a participant since he posts nothing but one-liners anyone, but with no real evidence of his own or even any serious commentary on those who post evidence.  He's not quite on the level of DONTEATUS, but pretty close.

I think your right MacG.  The fierce denial is starting to crumble in the face of all of this testimony and the skeptics are rapidly running out of room.  It's not just this thread but all the others too where inescapable evidence is being put forward.

That is the nature of the truth; it is inescapable.  It happened to the Luddites in Britain, it happened to the Catholics at the time of Galileo and it happened to the flat earth society.

Listen to this:

Lance Corporal John Waygandt describes a UFO crash and retrieval in Peru.  Utterly amazing testimony.  Let the skeptics listen to this and maintain their attitude of denial.   Is this a challenge?  yes.

[Sakari]

zoser, on 06 October 2012 - 05:12 PM, said:

How were the couple from Winchester fooled when an alien came out from a cigar shaped craft and put his arm on the car?  Doesn't make sense.  

Just like your comment about the Tindade incident.  A group of geologists turned UFO hoaxers.  Really?  Yes hoaxing is possible we all realise that but I really don't think that you are seriously looking at each case on it's own merits.  

You need to think how likely is it that a team of scientists would do that.  To what end? Why risk their scientific careers?  This is what you are not doing and this is why your attempts at debunking are not succeeding.

I am not trying to debunk anything, you do not have the answers to debunk.

I do the same as you, I look for answers, we just go about it in different ways.

I all ready explained why people Hoax.

[zoser]

Sakari, on 06 October 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

I am not trying to debunk anything, you do not have the answers to debunk.

I do the same as you, I look for answers, we just go about it in different ways.

I all ready explained why people Hoax.

So can I challenge you on this?  What's your verdict on the Winchester case?

[bmk1245]

zoser, on 06 October 2012 - 05:29 PM, said:

They can't all be telling lies Mr B.  You know it, I know it and everyone knows it.

Lies? Not exactly: human beings are susceptible to what they see, and visual perception often fails. Want examples?

[bmk1245]

TheMacGuffin, on 06 October 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

Hazz is not really a participant since he posts nothing but one-liners, but with no real evidence of his own or even any serious commentary on those who post evidence.  He's not quite on the level of DONTEATUS, but pretty close.

Quality of theirs overcomes quantity of yours. Simple.

TheMacGuffin, on 06 October 2012 - 05:38 PM, said:

Once again, I don't believe the Septic Skeptics when they always dismiss all radar UFO reports as ghosts, echoes and temperature inversions.  The radar operators knew the difference back in the 1940s and 1950s just as they do now.

One of the biggest lies that was ever told in history was when the Washington DC UFOs of 1952 were dismissed in this way, although it was not just a lie but a deliberate cover up, pure and simple.  That was also the case with the Bentwaters UFO case in 1956 and the Milton Torres case in 1957--lies and cover ups.

That's why I never believe any of this fake explanations about how radar isn't detecting real UFOs because I know the history and have read many of the original cases.

Check data by yourself, once again (for **** sake).