I was hoping you would write your message the way you did, and I will remember your post the next time a skeptic ask me for physical evidence on UFOs.

Who said anything about just documents? Besides, those are OFFICIAL government documents backed by data there were also released. Goes to show you are still out of the loop on what is being presented.



Apparently, the radar data has already been authenticated by the govenment and look what you posted.

The more you post, the more it becomes evident you have no idea what is being discussed.

Also there is mountains of data evidence showing that black holes do indeed exist. And through indirect means (Watching their effects on nearby stars and distortion of objects behind black holes) they can be seen.

That is the crux of the matter.

Cheers,
Badeskov

lol Matter. get it?

Proof? What the issue is.

Apparently, you are not up to speed on reality, but I tell you what, can you prove this data depicts a conventional aircraft? Show eveyone how much you know, or for that matter, how much you DON'T know about data. The radar is in STT- mode, so what does that mean? Deceipher the following data.

Also there is mountains of data evidence showing that black holes do indeed exist.

No, I don't want data, I want direct physical evidence.

We have just as much data on UFO reality and then some, than we have on Black Holes. We also have radar data on UFOs that we don't have on Black Holes, so what I want, is physical evidence, not data on Black Holes.

Can you deliver?

Whipty do. You know something about radar locks! Proof, not evidence. That is only evidence.

sure, your concept of what proof means.

Since I am the one who understands what the data depicts, and you don't, then you've hit the nail right on the head!

LOL I'm pretty damn sure it ain't the smoking gun of evidence. And sure as heck ain't proof.

How would you know since it is clearly obvious you have no idea what the data depicts???

I could tell you the data depicts a tire rolling on a highway and you wouldn't know the difference.

exactly my point. It isn't proof.

How would you know what it depicts since you cannot tell me a thing about the data? In other words, you wouldn't know whether the data is that proof or not by that very fact.

That is typical of skeptics who are just in it for the fun of debunking without any direct knownledge on the issues at hand.

How would you know what it depicts since you cannot tell me a thing about the data? In other words, you wouldn't know whether the data is that proof or not by that very fact.

In order to prove something in science, you must demonstrate your claim, backed up with either observational or experimental data. Then others must be able to reproduce the experiment or observation independently. If they cannot reproduce the results using the same methods, the experiment is not considered scientifically valid.

And that is in essence the requirement any data must meet in order to have a place in science.

Also there is mountains of data evidence showing that black holes do indeed exist. And through indirect means (Watching their effects on nearby stars and distortion of objects behind black holes) they can be seen.

Nope, they cant be seen, in theory not even the light can escape the gravity of black holes, so all you have is indirect proof, some disturbance in nearby galaxies or stars.

But only this is not proof enough to validate their existence, how can you be so sure that these anomalies are not caused by giant plasma balls like the ones people sometimes think are ufos?

Are all these credible high ranking fine people with top secret clearance crazy or lying!?

I dont know.

So? Maybe, maybe not.

Have you ever seen one jot of proof that any of whats been sighted, reported, filmed, or photographed has ever, in any way, been shown to be alien. I do not deny that some things might be alien. Im all for that. What I do deny is that there has been any proof of it.

You see, I do not deal in belief. I deal in knowledge. There is a vast difference between the two. You may believe all you want to. But knowledge requires a higher standard than that which propels belief.

There is no reason to get upset about it. What needs to be understood is the burden of proof that science and its method requires.

As believers begin to build the case about UFO = Aliens, the foundation of this is built on hear say, speculations, theories, guess work, assumptions, beliefs and emotions.

But there are no real scientific evidence or Facts.Until we can prove 100% that these are not earth based ships - we are guessing. So, what it all comes down to is EVIDENCE..!!!

Were is it!?

No BS, I want the undisputed hard scientific proof that there is other life in the universe...!!

****Skyeagle.....Dont post any of the old stuff, please!!!

You believe in science but not willing to accept the almost statistical probability of another intelligent species in the universe?

If you accept Darwins theory then you have to accept that Earth is not the only planet that harbors life. We are proof that intelligent life can evolve in the universe and if we exist there have to be more.

Now coming to Earth is a whole other ball game.

Actually it is proof enough to validate that there are indeed entities with the characteristics of black holes as we know them.

1. We can't see them, thus they are black.
2. We can measure the velocity of orbiting suns, thus get an estimate of the mass of the black hole.
3. We can measure the intense radiation emitted by matter about to fall into a black hole.

All data confirms our current theories about black holes and until a better and more accurate theory is devised, this is proof of the current version. Giant plasma balls would have different characteristics and observation would thus not match theory.

Cheers,
Badeskov

The radar, if it is even a ufo is not proof, but only evidence, and weak evidence at that. Since it could be a many different things.

Has nothing whatsoever to do with what the data depicts.

It is not reproducible, and that closes that matter in a scientific sense. To quote some folks at Yahoo answers:

And that is in essence the requirement any data must meet in order to have a place in science. And that leads directly into why we don't need a piece of a black hole to prove it's existence, whereas we do with the UFO phenomenon.

Repeatability and independent verification being the key concepts that must be understood before one a even begin to think about putting this in a scientific context.

You're sold that they are here, and I'm sold that people jumping to that conclusion are inately weak minded.

skyeagle you are way oversold on the radar as difinitive proof. But I'm sure you're going to reply with a link to some radar thing again or some 3rd hand information.

You're sold that they are here,...

Trace evidence is a joke also, at this time at least.

No need for insults.

You believe in science but not willing to accept the almost statistical probability of another intelligent species in the universe?

If you accept Darwins theory then you have to accept that Earth is not the only planet that harbors life. We are proof that intelligent life can evolve in the universe and if we exist there have to be more.

Now coming to Earth is a whole other ball game.

I absolutely believe that there are life on other planets in the universe, intelligent and other. I just dont se the evidence that they are or have ever been here on Earth.

Sorry, but newspaper clips, Skyeagles cut and paste, pictures of UFOs, eye-witness testimony from the President, the King of Sweden and his grandmother, wont do. Not even stories about cows mutilated butts or abductions will impress me.

I still await the compelling Exhibit A.

Of course I am! After all, I saw one for myself, and my compatriots were stationed at RAF Bentwaters, the general area of the Rendlesham UFO incidents of 1980. In fact, here is an official U. S. Air Force document on one of the Rendlesham incidents from the website of the Department of Defense.

http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/ufo/dep_ba1.pdf

Skyeagle,

I found this communication the other day on the Rendlesham incident. How does this fit in with the story from your compatriots? I'm quite curious because I found it very compelling.

http://www.rendlesham-incident.co.uk/67th-arrs-ufo-hoax.php

Skyeagle,

I found this communication the other day on the Rendlesham incident. How does this fit in with the story from your compatriots? I'm quite curious because I found it very compelling.

http://www.rendlesham-incident.co.uk/67th-arrs-ufo-hoax.php

It cant fit his perameters of discussion because it contains way too much logic of reality of what really happened and not enough humdrum. Good article btw.

skyeagle you are way oversold on the radar as difinitive proof. But I'm sure you're going to reply with a link to some radar thing again or some 3rd hand information. Don't bother, because its like listening to a broken record and I'm tired of argueing the same points with you constantly. You're sold that they are here, and I'm sold that people jumping to that conclusion are inately weak minded. Trace evidence is a joke also, at this time at least. All you have really is a few radar locks, some from space entering earth's atmosphere, which can easily be meteors, space junk or small comets material. Oh and those infamous blurry pictures which show no detail, or are clear hoaxes. But I can expect you to say that Im just being a skeptic without reason, my only standard is proof which at this time, not just you, but all the hysterical people out there within the ufo community, has not one shread of.

Excellent point AtheistGod. But why would coming to Earth be a whole other ball game? Because we can't go there? Thats rather anthropomorphic thinking , isn't it? But I know what you mean, thats another big leap because of our current beliefs about the univers's structure.

However , if they were coming here and are more intelligent than we are and don't want to be studied by us, then science becomes rather useless. They don't have to sit still long enough, like black holes, to give us any time to have professionals study them. I personally believe that this is why there is so much circumstantial evidence and no direct proof.

I could not agree more. The "evidence" for aliens on this planet is enough for skyeagle and other believers.

We all know this. Dont bother posting the old stuff,its a no sale for us looking for REAL proof.

Like hazzard named the thread,THE BEST EVIDENCE FOR ALIENS ON EARTH, were is it?

After all these years,are skyeagles radar thing or some 3rd hand information and old documents it!!?.

Are all these credible high ranking fine people with top secret clearance crazy or lying!?

[SkepticalEd: Position has nothing to do with UFOs or "aliens."]

I dont know.

So? Maybe, maybe not.

Have you ever seen one jot of proof that any of whats been sighted, reported, filmed, or photographed has ever, in any way, been shown to be alien. I do not deny that some things might be alien. Im all for that. What I do deny is that there has been any proof of it.

[SE: What's been sighted, reported, filmed, photographed, videotaped IS alien evidence since it is NOT evidence of humanness.]

You see, I do not deal in belief. I deal in knowledge. There is a vast difference between the two. You may believe all you want to. But knowledge requires a higher standard than that which propels belief.

[SE: You are contradicting yourself. You obviously deal in "belief" since you do not understand "belief" and say that knowledge propels belief. Actually, knowledge cancels belief. Knowledge replaces belief. Belief is the product of mental conditioning.]

There is no reason to get upset about it. What needs to be understood is the burden of proof that science and its method requires.

As believers begin to build the case about UFO = Aliens, the foundation of this is built on hear say, speculations, theories, guess work, assumptions, beliefs and emotions.

But there are no real scientific evidence or Facts.Until we can prove 100% that these are not earth based ships - we are guessing. So, what it all comes down to is EVIDENCE..!!!

[SE: Why don't YOU provide evidence that "these" are earth-based ships?]

Were is it!?

[SE: Were is what?]

No BS, I want the undisputed hard scientific proof that there is other life in the universe...!!

[SE: And who are you that undisputed hard evidence has to be supplied to? There is NO evidence that there is other life in the universe. At least not in another planet or location that we know of. The only evidence we have, so far, is that there are objects that are obviously not of human construction being seen, etc.."]

****Skyeagle.....Dont post any of the old stuff, please!!!

[SE: Finally, a comment that makes sense!]

Why don't YOU provide evidence that "these" are earth-based ships?

You are contradicting yourself. You obviously deal in "belief" since you do not understand "belief" and say that knowledge propels belief. Actually, knowledge cancels belief. Knowledge replaces belief. Belief is the product of mental conditioning

Don't forget to mention military services around the globe!

After all, military officials have also stated that based on the data, the UFOs were those of ET. Even the Iranians went on video.

But there are no real scientific evidence or facts Sky. Even you have to wonder, if this is such a no brainer, why is it that the biggest scientific discovery of all times is ignored!!????

physical evidence that were taken from UFO landing sites?

Link to these "military and intelligence officials around the world that now are saying that ET is here"... No old document.

A LINK.

SkepticalEd, that last post, wrapped in my quote, made no sence what so ever.



And as far as me showing you evidence that all UFOs are terrestrial crafts, well, lets just say logical fallacy and leave it at that.



If you are going to quote me then do it right....I said "You may believe all you want to. But knowledge requires a higher standard than that which propels belief".

Skyeagle wrote...

I agree that there are people all over the world that believes in Aliens and that they are here...Still, and the bottom line, the foundation of this is built on hear say, speculations, theories, guess work, assumptions, beliefs and emotions.

But there are no real scientific evidence or facts Sky. If there were, we would have that incredible date of First Contact tought to our kids in schoolbooks all over the world, an I dont see that happening.

Even you have to wonder, if this is such a no brainer, why is it that the biggest scientific discovery of all times is ignored!!????

It's a whole other ball game due to several factors none of which involve travel problems. The universe is so vast and spread out that it would make it difficult to find Earth, species with our level of intelligence or even higher will be quite rare, lots of life out there but how many planets produce intelligent life. If we were found by a super advance species why would they even bother with us at all, we are simply far to primitive.

There is tons of data though that does prove the existence of UFO phenomena, this however is about as far as it goes in regards to something tangible.

While UFO's could be alien there is no evidence to suggest this other then hearsay.

As for abductions there are several logical explanations and I am not convinced that this does and has happened.

Those cases are stamped: "unknown," because there are no earthly explanations, since such formations do not occur in nature anywhere on earth and cannot be duplicated even in the labs.

Our sun is out to get us:

"Stellar nuclear fusion is an alien weapon because there are no earthly explanations for it, since such reactions don't occur in nature anywhere on earth and cannot be duplicated even in labs."