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.


* * * * * 1 votes

Father Gill's UnDebunkable Case?


  • Please log in to reply
271 replies to this topic

#16    Norbert Dentressangle

Norbert Dentressangle

    misanthropic nihilist

  • Member
  • 26,181 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tanybwlch

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 23 January 2013 - 10:22 AM

Our old friend, the Secret Military Project has of course been put forward for this, something like a hovering platform might be very useful for use in jungles, and while there might be some grounds for suggesting that if there was just one person on it, wearing a flying suit & helmet and what you'd expect, I think the number of peopel, the reports of what they looked like, and the fact that they seemed fairly friendly might count against it. Plus, if they were trying something like this out in 1959, why didn't they make use of it in 'Nam just a few years later, when it would have been just the job and a lot more discreet than all those noisy Choppers?

Not to mention this "When it finally departed at 9.30, Fr. Gill says it made a slight wavering movement, and then suddenly shot off at immense speed, changing colour to red and blue-green, and disappeared across the bay in the direction of Giwa in a fraction of a second.", so they'd have to be able to cope with some pretty significant G forces, so you'd expect them to be strapped into fight-style seats, mightn't you?

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#17    1963

1963

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • Joined:02 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:BEDLAM

  • When the day is through,and the nightsky shades the blue,and the swallows cease to sing as they fly!.......

Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:50 PM

View Postbison, on 23 January 2013 - 03:16 AM, said:

Thanks 1963. I've read about the Fr. Gill case for years, but never heard or seen the Good Father telling of his experience in his own way.
I have to doubt that this was an instance of time travelers from our own future. It seems an overly-complicated explanation. First we have to assume that time travel from the future is possible, which is not at all clear. We must also assume that the paradoxes built into such time travel, which are as basic as logic, and cause and effect, can be ignored or overridden. Seems quite a lot to ask.  All this in service of what? To explain an approximately human appearance, and the rudimentary knowledge needed to respond to a wave? Extraterrestrials might easily have learned enough about us from our television broadcasts to do *that*! It doesn't seem too extraordinary that a roughly human shape might occur on some other planet, with conditions not too dissimilar to our own. We see examples of convergent evolution in very different types of creatures right here on Earth. Why not throughout space?  Perhaps such extraterrestrials are uniquely interested in us, because of what we have in common with them.
I don't think the comparisons to false memory syndrome or witch hysteria are likely to be very helpful in understanding this incident, either. Father Gill and his flock seem to have been remarkably relaxed about what was happening before them. There is no hint of hysteria or obsession. They even went along to evensong in the middle of their sighting!  Is there anything here comparable to the coercion, prompting and hypnotic manipulation that has produced those regrettable cases of false memories? it seems not.

Hi Bison, and yes it is a extraordinary case that has held my attention for years too!.. :tu:
I came across the short video of Father Gill by accident when I was trying to find an alternative copy of this longer lecture-type film that has terrible audio quality throughout....[i'll post it anyway, in case you can do something with it]....



I have to say that I am in agreement with your negative position on the "time-travellers" hypothesis also!...I have seen the possibilities of time travel as very dubious since I was a schoolboy. Partly because of the obvious reasons of if it were ever no matter how far into the future, a viable possibility to travel backwards in time...then where are all of 'our descendants' that would undoubtedly be prepared to interfere with the natural course of history?...Preventing the rise of Hitler, Stalin etc...or evacuating the people of Indonesia at around Christmastime 2004, or preventing the nuclear disaster's at Chernobyl or Fukushima  etc...you know the type of thing that I mean!
I know that some supporters of the time travel hypothesis argue that there would be a policy of 'zero-interference' implemented to avoid the foreseeable disastrous Temporal Paradox. Quite sensible too, but then if we were to invent 'time machines' in the future, then surely the scale of mankind's future would be so vast that somewhere in that vastness of existence there would be some miscreant 'crackpot', 'despot' or other catastrophically 'bent-minded' individual or government  that would be prepared to 'risk all' for personal gain!
And also, [just as a side note because I have no confidence in my own scientific reasoning's lol] ...since mulling over the possibilities of travelling back in time when I was just a boy, I have had this major stumbling block to the possibility of physically moving backward in time....and that is that in my reckoning there would be an impassable blocker in the way!...And that is the lack of time itself!.. or more precisely the point at where time stops! oh I am finding it hard to convey something that has seemed obvious in my mind from the beginning,,,imagine that the time machine, [though remaining still]   is benignly moving forward in time [as it, and all the other objects in the cosmos are!] then is switched on by it's pilot, and put into 'reverse-time gear'...then when would it start to go back in time??...I mean, ...if it were to move [backwards] then what time will it reach the point where time itself stops and starts to run back?...if it has to stop travelling forward in time , then when it stops it is no longer in any 'time frame' so to speak . And so for that time machine [along with the pilot] is stuck in no man's land for ever...with no time or time-reference to move, and will be lost in a timeless void infinitely!
I probably should be able to explain my thoughts exponentially better than this, but I hope that you get my drift anyway buddy!...And please feel free to ameliorate or point out the glaring flaws in my childhood brainstorm. :wacko:  :w00t:


As for the point being made about Father Gill's referring to the crew of the flying saucer as... "men came out of the object"?...well. how did anyone expect a man that confesses to being a life-long  sceptic of extraterrestrial beings to describe four figures that obviously resembled 'human figures' appearing from a strange 'flying-platform' kind of object that he stated thought was American technology?...of course it would be more suspicious to the continuing-validity of events if the man had noted that "four slimy aliens that had the basic shape of men" had emerged from the"flying saucer"!...But no sensationalism was involved, the man just reported events as they happened and as he witnessed them.!...And later in the report, the good Reverend said..." Beings Of Some Sort"!
And he also made it abundantly clear that the witnesses could not possibly know that the 'Men/Figures' were in fact either 'men' or 'human' in this part of his statement...."everyone beckoned  to invite the beings down but no audible responses...no expressions discernible on the face of the men-rather like players on a football field at night."

Also the 'rail' point could be moot, as the reverend only said that he assumed that there was a rail!
His words..."one of the men seemed to lean over as though over a rail and look down on us. I waved one hand overhead and the figure did the same as though a skipper on a boat waving to someone on a wharf. Couldn't see the rail, but he seemed to lean over something with arms over it...could see him from just below waist up".



....http://www.ufocasebook.com/gillinterview.html


And for the waving back to the natives doubt?...that particular aspect of the ETH is by no means unique to the Papua case, here is a sample....

http://nawewtech.ang...om/gesture.html

and no!...I do not think that the people on top of the flying saucer would have been too wary of our savage natures to wave back to a group of the relatively primitive natives of the planet, from the safety of their lofty position!...Rather like myself always staring and growling at the lions at the zoo. lol.
...And finally,..who among us is qualified to state for a fact that no matter how the craft was described by Father Gill, it is impossible for the occupants to navigate the galaxy in it?...or indeed that the obvious answer to the difficulties of space travel is that the myriad of craft seen by millions of witnesses on Earth are no more than shuttles from the orbiting motherships!...or maybe large ships are not even required if some kind of  'star-trek type wormholes' are a reality to technically advanced civilisations ?
And there is always the intriguing possibility that the 'Visitors' do not have to travel from as far as we think?....

http://www.waterufo.net/

...imo , as for the where's and why's of these undoubted visitations ,the possibilities and speculations are endless!...but I fail to see how any sceptic/debunker can claim to be impressed by the lack of  an alternative explanation to the ETH in a case as solid as this one! ...and still claim to be objectively open  to all possibilities, but then suggest an even more outlandish scenario rather than just say ...maybe?

so just what do you think that Father Gill and all of those witnesses observed then Bison...ET?.. or something else?


Cheers buddy.

When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
...I found the Smoking Gun at last!!!!!!!!.....https://www.youtube....h?v=fGKOcuANNQo

#18    Norbert Dentressangle

Norbert Dentressangle

    misanthropic nihilist

  • Member
  • 26,181 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tanybwlch

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:56 PM

View Post1963, on 23 January 2013 - 04:50 PM, said:


...And finally,..who among us is qualified to state for a fact that no matter how the craft was described by Father Gill, it is impossible for the occupants to navigate the galaxy in it?...or indeed that the obvious answer to the difficulties of space travel is that the myriad of craft seen by millions of witnesses on Earth are no more than shuttles from the orbiting motherships!...or maybe large ships are not even required if some kind of  'star-trek type wormholes' are a reality to technically advanced civilisations ?
And there is always the intriguing possibility that the 'Visitors' do not have to travel from as far as we think?....



Cheers buddy.
Indeed, I think anyone risking a ship capable of interstellar flight in the atmosphere of a strange Planet (or even relatively close orbit, i.e. nearer than the Moon, say) would be pretty foolish, really.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#19    bison

bison

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,639 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2011

Posted 23 January 2013 - 05:31 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 23 January 2013 - 05:16 AM, said:

But folding or warping space is no problems at all?
And 35 foot wide craft are more than sufficient to traverse solar systems? With several occupants?

I am not saying this IS time travel, I am saying the instance seem to fit that expectation better than an ET expectation, as we envisage such. I find the viewing platform, friendly gesture's and pure observation fot that which we expect form time travel. I just thought black ops might be stretching it here, and am looking at the actual aspects of the recollection. If time travelling to PNG for an American resident, perhaps paradoxes can be overridden. Do we even know if a Grandfather Paradox, of a rolling film paradox is more likely than each other, or even have an effect on our current timeline?



Culture, is what you are broad brushing, and misunderstandings have led to war.

Not only that, but what about the ship sugests it is made for space? The saucer description? What about the railing? That is like putting fly screens on a submarine.



Codswallop. As with the above example, if you watch a Gorilla and then go mirror it, you will get ripped to pieces. The shape and features are so identical that it is considered "one of us". That is conceivable I admit, but is it plausible that first contact is going to be a species that looks just like, and acts like us? No difference noticeable?

If commonality was of interest, why did they not land when invited than?

Is it because you are making up excuses as you go along? I am trying to make up nothing, time travel was a suggestion based on the fact that the occupants look like us, know our ways, and the craft seems built for observation, and it is too small to cross space. And it never went into space, So why is it a spaceship?



No, I agree, but it does make for some interesting precedents. Particularly, the 1896 Airship. It to was an out of place technological wonder, that did not exist, that humans were seen talking from. How do you explain that? I think the 1896 Airship is quite comparable to Father Gills claim.

What about you Bison? I know you do not particularly like me after pointing out that Mr Kimbler was not kosher, and heck, he has gone rather quiet hasn't he, but you talk to me when it suits you. Hey, we cannot all be believers you know. What other than the ship itself do you see here as extraordinary? Do you see no point in isolating that which is anomalous from the recollection and trying to understand if the everyday can lead us in a direction?
  If I had to choose between which was the more likely, a spacewarp or time travel, I'd have to say the former. NASA scientists are testing the physical basis of a space warp, and thinking seriously about the possibilities of its use for stellar space travel. Is any recognized scientist doing the same for time travel?
In any case, no extraordinary new physics discovery is actually necessary to travel to the stars. At a tenth the speed of light, it would still have been possible for elder civilizations in this galaxy to have filled it, long ago. The fact that this is not obvious to us could merely mean that extraterrestrials, like ourselves, do not populate and develop every corner of the territory that have reached.
Is a 35 foot ship too small to travel in deep space? I  couldn't say, really; there are too many unknowns. The vehicle in the Gill case could have been a short range excursion craft launched from a larger one.
The ship is described as appearing about 2 &1//2 degrees across. Judging by the drawings made by the witnesses, the beings would have appeared proportionately quite small. It is not clear that details of their appearance, which would have classed them as humanoid, rather than human could have been perceived. Father Gill referred to them as 'men'. That term covers quite a lot of territory, really, even among humans. All adult males, from a two foot 'dwarf' to a seven foot Tutsi are called 'men'. The same term seems flexible enough to apply to basically humanoid beings, not of this Earth.

It doesn't seem too extraordinary that intelligent extraterrestrials could have learned enough about us to engage correctly in simple interactions with us. Dian Fossey and Jane Goodall managed to do this with gorillas and chimpanzees, using only very modest technology.
The 1896-97 'airship' cases seem to be a mixed bag. Some reports of a long, elliptical, lighted craft traveling through the air;  some journalistic hoaxes, with details based on the expectations and preoccupations of the era.


#20    SwampgasBalloonBoy

SwampgasBalloonBoy

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Joined:02 Jul 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:1 Star State

Posted 23 January 2013 - 08:57 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 23 January 2013 - 04:44 AM, said:

That is a mighty big assumption, and much faith in Alien species. I think it is ludicrous that one can be smart enough to guard against the unknown. And I would consider an alien planet the unknown.

Why would they be aware of human culture? TV? That is not enough. We have enough trouble just communicating across seas, you think space would be a snap? What these "men" that Father Gill saw did was reciprocate a gesture with an expected reply, That indicates experience. I see that as another plus for being normal humans. What you are doing is assuming that some species has deciphered all out cultures, and acts appropriately in any given one. Personally, I think that is a big ask.

Why wouldn't they be smart enough to guard against the unknown? You assumed they just stumbled upon the earth and it was their maiden voyage. Aren't there reports of UFOs even before this event? I don't think it's ludicrous to assume they could be from the same place. For example, before Neil Armstrong step foot on the Moon, don't you think NASA would take every precautions based on what they know about the Moon and space travel at that point? If us human can do so, why wouldn't a more technological advance race?

It would be a darn good start to be able to learn from another culture through "TV". That's a lot more than the many explorers who risked life and limbs to venture into the unknown of places such as the Amazon. Can you imagine an unknown tribe putting arrows into your body? I am sure they would love to get to know what to expect through "TV".


View Postpsyche101, on 23 January 2013 - 04:44 AM, said:

What? Because you believe some other report's you feel they support this report?

Does not work like that. If you go up to a Gorilla and he glares at you, and you glare back, it's not going to go well. That is essentially what these men did, Father Gill waved, they waved back, knowing it was a friendly gesture. Why do you think that basic behaviours can be observed, and simply then put into practise?

here's another of your assumption. you assumes they wouldn't know whether a gesture is friendly or not? If human scientists can learn to tell when an animal is about to attack or when they're relax through observations, you don't think a highly advanced race can? I can learn enough about Gorilla through reading and TV to know I would be a fool to get close to them so they can glare at me. And it's perfectly sensible to think previous report of UFOs are possible connection, it possible they're from the same place.
Don't you think Neil Armstrong would tell the crew of later Moon mission of what to be prepare for?



View Postpsyche101, on 23 January 2013 - 04:44 AM, said:

OK, fair enough, you are entitled to your own thoughts. As am I. But are you also saying that a spacecraft would have balconies or railings as described by Father Gill, with a viewing deck, or that such a design would be sensible for crossing space?

I reckon you could do with listening to some Jacques Vallee. He could blow your mind with this sort of stuff. Parallel universe, time travel dimensional alternative, he is more on top of the subject than anyone I could think of. You want to bend space time to travel the Universe  but you cannot travel through part of the same medium? Interesting to say the least. I think you are contradicting yourself a bit there. Space is big. You need something special to get across it in a lifespan.

What evidence is the for exotic space travel? Such as would be required to get a tiny 35 foot craft to traverse space with occupants? The size suggest local travel, not interstellar.

What reports of astronomical events could possibly account for this craft leaving or entering the atmosphere  When did it leave our solar system when did it enter it? You cannot tell me we do not know, hundreds of thousands of people from Government agencies and private satellites to someone who just bought a telescope are looking up all day every day. How did they miss this? To say they all did is logical? How? Spacecraft are supposed to go into space! Not one UFO ever has been tracked entering, or leaving the atmosphere, let alone the solar system!

I wouldn't know what it take to travel long distance in space or how such spaceships should look like. Father Gill did mention some sort of "mother ship". could they have traveled in it? and the smaller ships are use for close observation? maybe that's why they were designed with some sort of rail. Another earthly example, if someone goes on a safari, would they be some sort of modified vehicle with open top for better observation?

Not seeing whether it leave or enter the atmosphere is no indication that nothing had.


View Postpsyche101, on 23 January 2013 - 04:44 AM, said:

I have to say that same about you. Like the other believers already thinking "ohhh we got the skeptics this time!!" I see no more in your post other than a protest. What I want to know, is what is the actual Alien connection? Because from what I can see, it is assumption. The craft is out of place, I admit that, I cannot place a craft that can do what Father Gill described, but everything else about the story is very much an everyday event. So what I have done is break it down, the craft and the occupants, the occupants do not warrant ET do they? The craft is an anomaly, does that warrant ET does it? Using that logic, everything unidentified in the sky is from another planet, isn't it?

Do you understand time dilation? How would you describe that?

Instead of insisting I am wrong, can you tell me why ET is right? I understand why people would scream ET, the craft. I am pointing out that the craft is the only extraordinary aspect, such as the 1896 Airship Exhibited. How do we explain that event? That cannot be ET. What about the Witch claims I gave you? Eyewitnesses! We have a precedent, but what does it mean?

If the craft is extraordinary, you said it yourself, then why shouldn't the occupants be extraordinary also? As far as we know, the human race is the most advance on earth. But has human proven they can build such extraordinary craft? if not human, then what other advance earth specie could have done it? I really don't know if the 1896 airship or witch claims are connect.


#21    Norbert Dentressangle

Norbert Dentressangle

    misanthropic nihilist

  • Member
  • 26,181 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tanybwlch

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 23 January 2013 - 09:19 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 23 January 2013 - 04:44 AM, said:



That is a mighty big assumption, and much faith in Alien species. I think it is ludicrous that one can be smart enough to guard against the unknown. And I would consider an alien planet the unknown.


Why would they be aware of human culture? TV? That is not enough. We have enough trouble just communicating across seas, you think space would be a snap? What these "men" that Father Gill saw did was reciprocate a gesture with an expected reply, That indicates experience. I see that as another plus for being normal humans. What you are doing is assuming that some species has deciphered all out cultures, and acts appropriately in any given one. Personally, I think that is a big ask.
Sorry, psyche, me again; this is what I always say, that if we were to discover a Planet that we could reach and which might potentially host Life, it would surely be sensible to study it carefully first and get to know the culture and how, as best you could, not to cause offence before taking the step of making official Contact, would it not? Rather than sending a message saying "here we are"?
And people also often say, in relation to, say, certain incidents in New Mexico for example, that ETs, if they were able toc ross the immeasurable distances of Space, would not possibly be foolish enough to make an error or have a technical hitch and crash. But as you say above, anything could happen if you're stepping into the Unknown, couldn't it.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#22    SwampgasBalloonBoy

SwampgasBalloonBoy

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Joined:02 Jul 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:1 Star State

Posted 23 January 2013 - 09:22 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 23 January 2013 - 04:44 AM, said:

Too specific with words? What else do we have to work with pray tell? From what I can see, conclusions are drawn from imagination. I am only trying to step that up a notch, and work with what we have, not what we imagine this case to be.

It is not attack, that is the believer mentality in you. It is evaluation. Did he say those words? Did he repeat them often? What does that mean if not a striking similarity identical to humans? Can other species exist that look just like humans? Of course! What makes you say that this is another species that looks like humans from another planet?

Please answer that. I am interested in your reply.

What about Father Gills words? What did he say that is completely different to my perplexing conundrum?



He notes this as extraordinary too.

I take note of his words, and agree with him. It is an extraordinary aspect. Do you feel we should gloss over the terminology, and come to a conclusion without it?



The craft was lit up, it was a bright white, which diminished to a yellow (Daylight colour to soft white, our everyday lighting works in these spectrums). So it was not "in the dark" If the mannequins had lights all around them, you would then see them, such as was the case here.



He could have used the words you just did. Appeared human. Also, humanoid, human like or even "look like us" would have been more of an indicator. This was not "like a human" he defined the sexes. Men. Yes, we use she or it, when familiar, as a general term with species we are specific with. We do not say, that is a male gorilla, as you say, we go "look at him" but Father Gill did use the word "men".

Psyche, I think this could solve the conundrum regarding the observation of "human", "men". I have to admit, Father Gill and the other did say they saw "men". The most important question is, "ARE THOSE REALLY HUMAN?". Wouldn't it be possible for the beings to want to get close to the villagers for better observation without frightening them? Could they be in some sort of human costume?

Look at what Hollywood costume maker are able to do. They can create realistic looking alien suit. Imagine if they put a man in a Predator costume(great action movie), and send him back to the villagers. Would the villagers have described seeing a "monster" and would ran for their life? Hell I would. If human are able to create very realistic looking costume, I would expect even better from a more advanced race. Yes, human had been known to create animal costumes to get close to them without frighten them. Why wouldn't a more advanced race thought of it?

Again, what is more plausible? ETs can get here or time travelling human?
           What is more plausible? ETs can make themselves "appeared human" or time travelling human?
           What is proven? Human can create realistic costume or time travelling human?

Didn't the skeptics always said, "the simplest explanation is the best"? Well, time travelling is too complex for me, costumes seemed much, much simpler. i can go to a store and buy an alien costume. If I have much more money, I could hire Hollywood artists to create much better one. Even if I am the richest man in the world, there's no way I could get a time machine.


#23    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,638 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 January 2013 - 10:24 PM

View PostSky Scanner, on 23 January 2013 - 09:56 AM, said:

Oh I wasn't implying you was making a conclusion either way - I was just saying that I see nothing in this case to limit where it's origin might be from. My point was more along the lines that from the little amount of detail we have, all of it lays in line with humans, but if that explanation is lacking and there needs to be a more extreme explanation then I don't see the reasons given for favouring one scenario over another as being particularly convincing - time travel or ET both needs leaps of understanding to bridge the gaps and make this case fit. If we are exploring other possibilities then making assumptions about what is possible with an ET craft, or why it would be designed a certain way seems to be jumping the gun.

OK, Thank's.
I just find the fact that we have one qualifiable component significant and for the purposes of evaluation, I feel it is a good idea to at least begin by separating the components we can recognise and focusing on what might be solvable. I see nobody has put forth any other ideal than alien, but as you say above, no conclusions can be drawn, yet only one possibility is being entertained. It seems a bit of a narrow investigation to only consider one avenue. As you can see, even suggesting an alternative makes one a heretic.

View PostSky Scanner, on 23 January 2013 - 09:56 AM, said:

We have nothing to go in knowing how a craft would look like or behave (a craft capable of carrying intelligent life across the voids of space I mean)...if we can't do it, how can we use that lack of knowledge to rule in or out how something else might achieve it?

Well you say above it is jumping the gun, but is not assuming ET also? The general consensus so for would suggest not. I do not feel we have a total lack of knowledge. We understand physics, we know Aliens have to obey the laws of physics just as we do, so why can we not apply simple assessments of what is suggested to be a flying craft? If ET, and some exotic propulsion system that re-writes aerodynamics, then nobody has a chance at even guessing at what the process might be, but with what we do know, we can at least look at basics, such as fly screens on a submarine, which one would thinks even an Alien might understand as mirth. I feel applying our parameters, and seeming as this is in our airspace, that does not seem unreasonable, to make a start. I am not sure that the subject is even worth discussing if the purpose is to ohh and ahh over a description.
Personally, I think that some just did not expect such "Gold" to be challenged so soon. I might have nothing, I understand that, but I feel at least I am trying to make a start on dissecting the case as opposed to leaving it behind glass.

I do not think Jacques Vallee would receive this from Hynek, whom these very same people revere. Well, I guess Vallee is considered a Heretic of UFOlogy.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#24    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,638 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 January 2013 - 10:28 PM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 23 January 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

Our old friend, the Secret Military Project has of course been put forward for this, something like a hovering platform might be very useful for use in jungles, and while there might be some grounds for suggesting that if there was just one person on it, wearing a flying suit & helmet and what you'd expect, I think the number of peopel, the reports of what they looked like, and the fact that they seemed fairly friendly might count against it. Plus, if they were trying something like this out in 1959, why didn't they make use of it in 'Nam just a few years later, when it would have been just the job and a lot more discreet than all those noisy Choppers?

Well I have to agree, and that is why I suggested time travel as one possible alternative, I believe black ops covers a great deal of sightings, but I cannot see it fitting in with the Fathers description no matter how I look at it.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 23 January 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

Not to mention this "When it finally departed at 9.30, Fr. Gill says it made a slight wavering movement, and then suddenly shot off at immense speed, changing colour to red and blue-green, and disappeared across the bay in the direction of Giwa in a fraction of a second.", so they'd have to be able to cope with some pretty significant G forces, so you'd expect them to be strapped into fight-style seats, mightn't you?

Exactly, but this is another conundrum that I feel should be separated and analysed for it's own merits. We have some quantifiable aspects, and some extremely bizarre ones. Just like the 1896 Airship. But heck, that never has been solved either.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#25    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,638 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 January 2013 - 10:30 PM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 23 January 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

Indeed, I think anyone risking a ship capable of interstellar flight in the atmosphere of a strange Planet (or even relatively close orbit, i.e. nearer than the Moon, say) would be pretty foolish, really.

But that's the rub. You are suggesting that a mother ship or similar is nearby are you not? That is based on the craft itself, but where is the mother ship? I just do not believe that if some behemoth was in space near us that we would miss it.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#26    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,638 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 January 2013 - 11:37 PM

View PostSwampgasBalloonBoy, on 23 January 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

Why wouldn't they be smart enough to guard against the unknown? You assumed they just stumbled upon the earth and it was their maiden voyage. Aren't there reports of UFOs even before this event? I don't think it's ludicrous to assume they could be from the same place. For example, before Neil Armstrong step foot on the Moon, don't you think NASA would take every precautions based on what they know about the Moon and space travel at that point? If us human can do so, why wouldn't a more technological advance race?

Are there reports that match this one? Ones that you could say are close enough in description to say, it would appear this craft has been seen in X location, so we might surmise this is an ongoing thing, or are you relying on "reports in general" to back that ideal?

Yes NASA did take every precaution, yet Apollo 13 still happened didn't it? Quarantine has always been something that bothered me about UFO reports. It just does not happen, yet it has the potential to wipe out entire planets. All you are doing is assuming this is an advanced race, with advanced knowledge, because the craft is described as foreign in design and performance. That is what I feel should be isolated, and the only chance one has of understanding the event at all. What do you feel we should do? Just pretend this is definitely ET and be happy with that, and consider it proof? I do not think that would be conclusive, and it would also make the ETH look even more credulous. Like any conclusion, it has to be qualified, or it is not a conclusion. At best, it can be regarded a hypothesis. The exotic nature of the performance craft (hovering, high speed exit) is why ET is suggested, not the occupants, not the design of the craft. not the contact. All of this is happily glossed over to expedite ET to the finish line.

View PostSwampgasBalloonBoy, on 23 January 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

It would be a darn good start to be able to learn from another culture through "TV". That's a lot more than the many explorers who risked life and limbs to venture into the unknown of places such as the Amazon. Can you imagine an unknown tribe putting arrows into your body? I am sure they would love to get to know what to expect through "TV".

It would be a start, no more.

Again, you are making assumptions, if those explorers were watching tribes in the Amazon, they would see  tribes hunting, celebrating, and living normal lives. They would not see what happens when a totally new type of species makes contact with them. It might be helpful, it might not. Regardless, the possibility exists, and I do not feel brushing it away os conducive to any real conclusion. I know we have much trouble with communication, heck, I do not post to "The L" because I just cannot understand him. How is another species to overcome this? Another species might communicate through gesture,or even light patterns. These did not, they waved back. That just seems awful familiar to me for an Alien, and I think bias allows you, and others,  to simply "brush this off" again, based entirely on the craft. Yet you refuse to isolate the craft for the process of elimination. To me, that reeks of a preconceived conclusion. I expect that of some others who have posted in this thread for sure, but I see nothing wrong with analysing this as a "sighting" and not "ET contact".

View PostSwampgasBalloonBoy, on 23 January 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

here's another of your assumption. you assumes they wouldn't know whether a gesture is friendly or not? If human scientists can learn to tell when an animal is about to attack or when they're relax through observations, you don't think a highly advanced race can? I can learn enough about Gorilla through reading and TV to know I would be a fool to get close to them so they can glare at me. And it's perfectly sensible to think previous report of UFOs are possible connection, it possible they're from the same place.
Don't you think Neil Armstrong would tell the crew of later Moon mission of what to be prepare for?

I am assuming it for what it is, a one of with a bizarre description. You are assuming a highly advanced species has been spying on us for decades, knows everything about us, and although they keep stealth from the world to a point where no actual proof exists.
Please note, as nobody seems to be picking this up, I do not say that time travel is the answer. I suggested it as one possible alternative to ET based on the description from Father Gill and the fact that he too finds the human being components significant. He was the actual person and he says he thinks these were humans, yet UFO buff's are all saying, "well, he does not believe in ET, of course he is wrong!" but then in the same breath taking each and every aspect as gospel.
Do you see nothing wrong with that?

Yes I think Neil would relay his experience. How would that even help an Astronaut today going to the dark side of the moon?

You are watching a Gorilla on a TV as you say, narrated. I am not entirely sure you might come to the same conclusions from watching a trail cam.

View PostSwampgasBalloonBoy, on 23 January 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

I wouldn't know what it take to travel long distance in space or how such spaceships should look like. Father Gill did mention some sort of "mother ship". could they have traveled in it? and the smaller ships are use for close observation? maybe that's why they were designed with some sort of rail. Another earthly example, if someone goes on a safari, would they be some sort of modified vehicle with open top for better observation?

And there is the ET shoehorn.

There is absolutely nothing to suggest a Mothership every existed, but that imagined assumption does make this instance easier to qualify as ET. The seeming anomalies that I have mentioned about the craft can only be explained by a Mothership right? So the logic is that a Mothership probably exists?
That is a straw-man if ever I heard one. You are making things up to make ET sound like the best option. Heck, some have even suggested it is not reasonable to suggest that a viewing deck on a spaceship is illogical!!! Based on what? But a mothership is just assumed to exist when the anomalies in design are pointed out to qualify them?
That some imagined species that does things we cannot understand might posses such technology and they might be visiting is?

And yet after all of that, time travel is outrageous? Even though traveling at, or a percentage of c is a form of time travel?
I am an amateur astronomer, and I simply do not believe that a giant mothership can be in our solar system, and remain undetected. Show me the mothership, and I would consider ET a viable option, until then viewing decks on a spaceship are like fly screens on a submarine.

Another precedent I can think of, but am unable to fid the link to, is a case Vallee discussed. He was convinced he had the read deal, and though he was going to garner some solid proof from a story about a farmer who saw a UFO land on a roadway, nearby him. It was circular, large, lights all round, landing platform, and I think Vallee even described landing mark's. I do not remember anything about an occupant.
Yet the description included the propulsions system in this case. That was what really had Vallee scratching his head. This farmer insisted the thing made quite a roar as it took off, as it was powered by a series of propellors around the rim of the craft. At which point Vallee became rather confused, as we all know, propellors are not a great deal of help in space. Like the Airship of 1896, seemingly advanced technology, but is just does not fit into our historical record.

View PostSwampgasBalloonBoy, on 23 January 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

Not seeing whether it leave or enter the atmosphere is no indication that nothing had.

I beg to differ. If it is a space ship it went  into space. If it went into space, someone saw it.

From all these reports you call on as a precedent that indicate to you that we have been visited for some time now, not one instance has been recorded going into, or leaving the solar system. Not a single one. How are they a precedent for ET when not a single one every has been proven to enter space?

View PostSwampgasBalloonBoy, on 23 January 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

If the craft is extraordinary, you said it yourself, then why shouldn't the occupants be extraordinary also? As far as we know, the human race is the most advance on earth. But has human proven they can build such extraordinary craft? if not human, then what other advance earth specie could have done it? I really don't know if the 1896 airship or witch claims are connect.

Well, I really do not know what Skunkworks have achieved, but I am running with that this is beyond technology available to us today. I do not want to go the black ops path, as I cannot recall a project that comes close to fitting this bill. Some hover platforms were devised, but I do not know of any that worked, certainly not of this size or description. Nor in this part of the world. I do not see how black ops can be qualified, and personally, see it as weak as an ET answer. I just want to push that boundary is all, and see if anything falls out when I rock the boat. Vallee put my inspiration on this case best when I quoted him the page before:

Quote

To me that's why puzzles like UFOs are interesting. I don't have a personal theory to "explain" them, but I see them as an opportunity to pose new questions. If it's true that information resides in the questions we ask, coming up with novel problems may be more important than having answers, at this stage of our very limited understanding of the universe.

I do not say "Yes this is time travel" but I am not comfortable with "This is proof of ET " either. Has anyone ever considered options for this as more than hallucination or ET? I do not think so. I wonder to myself, why not? Are we happy to say "yes this is ET" based on our own conclusions? It would seem so for many. Not I. I think there is more to this case, and that this good description deserves more than a smug this is ET conclusion, beat that skeptics. It is not because as far as I can see it is a conundrum. Questions remain, no matter how you look at the recollection including the ET angle, and as I said, this is not the first time we have recorded such strange happenings, and they cannot possible all be attributed to ET. As such, it seems reasonable to assume "Something" else might be going on. Vallee has been treading this path for a while, and like the saucer with propellors, or the 1896 airship, or for that sake the witch hunts and the Fatima event, all suggest that ET is to narrow a parameter to consider for every such anomalous event. As such, this is not at all proof of ET, it is proof that we cannot explain everything we see.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#27    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,638 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 January 2013 - 11:51 PM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 23 January 2013 - 09:19 PM, said:

Sorry, psyche, me again;

Hi LV

Do not be sorry, I am sorry for being cranky, you pose good questions. If I might add, particularly so over the last 6 months or so.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 23 January 2013 - 09:19 PM, said:

this is what I always say, that if we were to discover a Planet that we could reach and which might potentially host Life, it would surely be sensible to study it carefully first and get to know the culture and how, as best you could, not to cause offence before taking the step of making official Contact, would it not? Rather than sending a message saying "here we are"?

I think we are at an impasse here. I feel that "spying" would be more likely to be seen as offensive, and end first contact before it happens. It is just not how we do tings, We just blunder on in and make ourselves welcome. To much so in Cook's case at Hawaii.

I respect you feel this way, but I feel you have not convinced ne that spying is the best option. I feel honesty is the best policy in all situations.

I feel what you propose is too big a risk. Remember even the prime directive that is referred to from telly is only for pre warp civilisations. Assuming warp is actually possible, and untraceable by us. And it was broken by Janeway every other week anyway. In fact, it gets broken all the time on Star Trek.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 23 January 2013 - 09:19 PM, said:

And people also often say, in relation to, say, certain incidents in New Mexico for example, that ETs, if they were able toc ross the immeasurable distances of Space, would not possibly be foolish enough to make an error or have a technical hitch and crash. But as you say above, anything could happen if you're stepping into the Unknown, couldn't it.

Yes, anything could happen, but not due to the reasons we have been given like a Thunderstorm, or a Death ray. I mean really, some people actually entertain that we shot something down with a freaking death ray. To get to our planet, you will not be able to not help but notice the other ones. Jupiter's storms make out worst cyclones look like a mild day in the park. A claim has to make some sort of sense. Almost every planet Kepler has found has been a Gas giant. They are abundant in the Universe, and each and every one of them are covered in storm's thousands of times more powerful than what you see here. To consider our mild "winds" by comparison to what one must go right past t get here, it strikes me as ludicrous to suggest local weather as a crash factor. If a crash, then why the crash, not "just a crash, believe me" when other options do indeed exist.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#28    ReaperS_ParadoX

ReaperS_ParadoX

    “What’s wrong with accepting madness?

  • Member
  • 2,521 posts
  • Joined:29 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:A really cold region devoid of stars

  • The boundaries which divide Life from Death are at best shadowy and vague. Who shall say where the one ends, and where the other begins?

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:14 AM

Could they be interdimensional I mean that would possibly take care  of the whole space travel question, although im not sure about the ins and outs of them manifesting themselves to be seen

COME WITH ME. OVERWHELMING POWER AND MADNESS AWAIT

THAT IS NOT DEAD WHICH CAN ETERNAL LIE AND WITH STRANGE AEONS EVEN DEATH MAY DIE

#29    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,638 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:34 AM

View Postbison, on 23 January 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

If I had to choose between which was the more likely, a spacewarp or time travel, I'd have to say the former. NASA scientists are testing the physical basis of a space warp, and thinking seriously about the possibilities of its use for stellar space travel. Is any recognized scientist doing the same for time travel?

Exactly! You are choosing. I am not. I am trying to scrape up as many options as I can. The first page, I came up with one, I may come up with more with a bit of luck.

NASA has this to say on time Travel


Quote



Posted Image

The Question

(Submitted March 26, 1997)

Can humans go back or forward in time ( in the future )? If yes then how?


The Answer

An interesting question....can humans travel back and forward in time. I presume that you are asking about travel in time like you see on television or in the movies. But let me take a more scientific (if simplified) approach.
The laws of science do not distinguish between the forward and backward directions of time -- yet they do distinguish the past from the future (time increases as disorder increases). There are some solutions to the equations of General Relativity which would allow for travel back and forth in time....(1) would require that you move faster than the speed of light, but we know that this cannot be done; (2) would require space-time to be very warped and a sort of "tunnel" between two space-time points to be present (called a "wormhole"). Such tunnels would not last long enough on their own for anyone to travel through them (unless the traveler discovered some way or built some machine which would keep the tunnel open). There are all sorts of other conditions which would have to be imposed on space-time in order for human beings to travel into the past. All of these conditions tend to conspire against time travel being more than a theoretical possibility. But, as of 1997, our understanding of physics causes the possibility of time travel to remain an open question. NOTE: What I have said here is related to big objects like humans...and my comments do not necessarily apply to very small (subatomic) objects.
Hope this helps,
Laura Whitlock




LINK

They say you use wormholes for time travel. Considerng the current state of both hypotheses, I do not see anything wrong wot at least brining both options to the table?

View Postbison, on 23 January 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

In any case, no extraordinary new physics discovery is actually necessary to travel to the stars. At a tenth the speed of light, it would still have been possible for elder civilizations in this galaxy to have filled it, long ago. The fact that this is not obvious to us could merely mean that extraterrestrials, like ourselves, do not populate and develop every corner of the territory that have reached.

A tenthof the speed of light is not an advanced craft. We can do that. What we are talking about is a craft that whisked away at high speed in a changing light display. If a time ship were possible I imagine this would be the sort of effect it might generate. What we are seeing is not an ambling spaceship such as we have designed. The description of the craft is extraordinary.

View Postbison, on 23 January 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

Is a 35 foot ship too small to travel in deep space? I  couldn't say, really; there are too many unknowns. The vehicle in the Gill case could have been a short range excursion craft launched from a larger one.
The ship is described as appearing about 2 &1//2 degrees across. Judging by the drawings made by the witnesses, the beings would have appeared proportionately quite small.

As far as we know, yes it is, and Aliens have to obey physics just as we do.

If we go as far as our imagination can take us, then time travel is most perfectly viable as an answer. Just as much so as ET. See what I am illustrating here, not that this is time travel but that it does not have to be ET. As previously mentioned, if Jacques Vallee considers this option in general, why is it not viable?

And as shown above, the mothership is made up to support a made up conclusion. That just does not work. I cannot entertain a mothership unless you can qualify it somehow, or at least prove this craft actually went into space.

View Postbison, on 23 January 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

It is not clear that details of their appearance, which would have classed them as humanoid, rather than human could have been perceived. Father Gill referred to them as 'men'. That term covers quite a lot of territory, really, even among humans. All adult males, from a two foot 'dwarf' to a seven foot Tutsi are called 'men'. The same term seems flexible enough to apply to basically humanoid beings, not of this Earth.

Yet Father Gill saw this aspect as significant. Should that not be a focus of his words as well? Why do you think the Father thought that the fact he thought he saw "what appeared to be Human beings" - his words, on the ship?



Quote


A: Well, of course, the whole thing was most extraordinary; the fact that we saw what appeared to be humans beings on it, I think, is the important thing.




Like I keep saying, I think this is important too, but whilst taking his recollection into account, no person who is Pro ET consideres this significant? Why is that? I cannot fathom why some feel they may interpret parts of the recollection, yet insist others are accurate. The only answer I get is "we have no craft like that so he must be seeing aliens that look like us" why not have a look at the angle, where might we get something that could fit this description?
Why jump to the ET conclusion based on ignorance of the performance described? That is just attributing the unknown to a higher power is it not?

View Postbison, on 23 January 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

It doesn't seem too extraordinary that intelligent extraterrestrials could have learned enough about us to engage correctly in simple interactions with us. Dian Fossey and Jane Goodall managed to do this with gorillas and chimpanzees, using only very modest technology.

And they spent years living in the middle of them. That assumption has to be made for this ideal to work, yet this particular craft has been described once only. It is a series of leaps that leads to ET, not any solid information.

View Postbison, on 23 January 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

The 1896-97 'airship' cases seem to be a mixed bag. Some reports of a long, elliptical, lighted craft traveling through the air;  some journalistic hoaxes, with details based on the expectations and preoccupations of the era.

It is an anomaly where what looks like humans are on board a craft that is advanced for it's time. As mentioned, it is not the only one. It seems shortsighted to dismiss Vallee's work in this instance. As far as I know, he is the only one out there looking at this most strange aspect.

Another note, I have not even said this is NOT ET, I have asked, why is it ET. Because I feel more than one option exists i the current circumstance. I do not believe I have received a satisfactory answer to qualify ET as a candidate, just the old "Must be an advanced species because we do not have craft like that in our closet" which I feel is merely invoking a higher power. If we canot put what we do know against this instance to qualify it, such as questioning viewing decks on a spaceship, what is the point in gaining knowledge in the first instance? Posing the question just might prompt someone to qualify the answer, or it might be a nail in the coffin. Either way, it is progress is it not? Is that not the objective of the discussion?

Edited by psyche101, 24 January 2013 - 12:39 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#30    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,638 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:38 AM

View PostR4z3rsPar4d0x, on 24 January 2013 - 12:14 AM, said:

Could they be interdimensional I mean that would possibly take care  of the whole space travel question, although im not sure about the ins and outs of them manifesting themselves to be seen

I honestly do not see why such is any more exotic than Aliens to be frank. More options. Good to see more thinking about the problem, and not simply accepting a conclusion. It may not even be inter-dimensional beings, but a ship that can travel inter-dimensionally to overcome the problems associate with folding space. Who knows! But that I think is the problem. I think maybe we should break this undebunakable case down into it's smallest components and analyse them. We have some recognisable statements, I think we should focus on those and see if we can make sense of them.


Posted Image



Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users