Oh, I was quite aware that some of them have stated that this is their opinion. I could hardly start discussing the case until you provided a source to discuss... otherwise you would have just said that I'm not "keeping up with the thread" and dont even know which "case/article/whatever" is being discussed.

No you weren't!! After all, you DID post this in post ##2196



And, I will remember what you have just said when I visit an airport and express my opinion that the flyling objects at the airport are airplanes and remember that ii is only an opinion that airplanes fly out of airports..

Sky, please post a source to your McLaughlin report. I googled commander robert mclaughlin statement + flying saucer, and found this.


(Bolding mine)

Gosh, you think it could've come from Mars? Since we now know that's not the case, it kind of puts his whole statement at risk, IMO.

What skyeagles argument smacks of in my personal opinion, is an asumption based argumant. In his recent post he put a doctor or someone said, they were convinced it was a ufo. Convinced means no substantial proof, which leads me to the conclusion that skyeagles argument is poor, very poor, and is based on assumptions, not facts, not figures and eyewitness accounts.


Thanks, GUNNARYSEARGENTHARTMAN

Lot's of people thought they were coming from Mars since the obects were observed in space, but that is not the point since the scientist and exgineers documented their observations.

Just goes to show that some skeptics will try all they can to throw reality out the door. So are you now implying that the scientist and engineers are wackos?

If so, I have some very good examples of real wackos I will poste later tonite should you decide to make such a claim.

My argument also smacked the opinions of skeptics who had claimed that a weather balloon was responsible for the Roswell incident and you know by now, how that argument ended in 1994.

No, my point is simply that there are people who cling to their ideas regardless of new information. It's clear that what Commander McLaughlin saw did not come from Mars, yet you cling to his report as if it's gospel. If he was wrong in his belief on the alleged object's origin, could he possibly be wrong in other ways?

To be fair, perhaps he did change his mind about the Martian origin later, and if he did, that'd be to his credit. I wonder if Sky could do the same thing?

You're damn right I did. Do you want to know why? Because you kept saying that they called them alien spacecraft and posted memos and reports in which the writers did nothing of the sort!



Nope! We're implying that they can have opinions and beliefs just as the rest of the people in the world. Simply because they're scientists and engineers doesnt make their beliefs fact, they ALSO have to present evidence!

You keep saying that, and if that is true, they were wrong...But that still doesnt make you right. What ever it was that crashed, what ever the cover up, its not, in anyway, hard evidence of aliens on this planet.

Came across this today......it's a speech from Paul Hellyer, the former Canadian Minister of Defence,

demanding that the US government ends secrecy surrounding UFOs and back-engineered craft.

Made April 19th 2008. It's 9.23 minutes long.


This is the link......PAUL HELLYER SPEECH

Never, poor skyeagle has to much "invested" in this belief. He is far from alone. Ufology has become a staple of the TV pseudo documentary and the chat show. UFO conferences attract large crowds, so long as their organisers take care not to invite skeptical or unbiased speakers.

Of course, there are some ufologists who carry out serious research and investigations, but even some of those seem to be a bit flaky at the edges. For most, though, ufology is simply for entertainment, socialising, or a form of role playing fantasy gaming.

The interdisciplinary nature of UFO studies means that it is unlikely that any coherent and scientific approach to the subject can be successful.

Bee, the link does come up blank - can you post the URL?

I've fixed it......! I'd got it wrong the first time....thanks for the encouragement....it made me
go back and take a closer look.......

So here it is.........Paul Hellyer....


http://www.disclose.tv/viewvideo/4197/X_Co

Very interesting, thanx for the new link...I do think, however, the USA will keep on holding back disclosure until its last breath.

Something or someone is going to have to force the USA and UK to come clean. Even if all the other countries in the world disclosed their secret files, recovered debris etc I doubt it would be enough. I doubt we will see full disclosure in our lifetime

See a UFO being summoned (above)





Well maybe we'll just have to do what the guy in the top link does....and just CALL EM IN.....
(no...seriously....it may come to that!!!)

Or failing that....do what you said about shining a torch beam into the sky in a triangle shape......

I may have to perform a U-turn on this...

I've attributed my sightings of these orbs to be my mind playing tricks - as all of them occured after reading, watching, and listening to stuff about them. But my main sighting was when my girlfriend and I where out in the back garden talking about them...and they just appeared, my eyes kinda 'knew' where to look. I had a weird feeling of being watched too, but then, you get all sorts of weird feelings when you see something you can't explain.

There's still so much stuff we don't know about our own brains so it might very well be that we could inadvertantly send some sort of signal.

Maybe I'm not U-turning, but the thought of sending a subconscious signal is interesting. It kinda still doesn't prove anything however.

Did it look like a balloon to anyone eles?

Why the controllers are not allowed to speak about? They are afraid of what? Acting like this seems the FAA is hiding something.

Swamp gas was new information to explain away UFOs and look what has happened since? If an aircrew reports a metallic saucer-shaped flying vehicle with portholes and rotating lights, how is new information going to change the fact that it is anything but an artificial vehicle?

That is like new information changing a Ford truck into plasma.



Why not, after all, it was generally thought that Mars could have forms of life back in those days and I might add, that scientist and engineers also came to that same conclusion that the flying saucers they were observing, were extraterrestrial as well.

You know the old saying" if you can't attack the data, attack the author, or source, or whatever. The skeptics are good at doing just that without doing their homework and when the facts come rolling in, then they look for other things to try and pull together their failed debunking routine.

So what we are talking about is whether those flying saucers were ours, or theirs since it has already been determined that is exactly what they were.

Why is it so difficult for skeptics to connect the dots?



You seem to be missing the point accidently on purpose. You seemed to miss the fact that it were the scientist and engineers who observed and documented their findings, which indicated that the flying saucers they were observing were extraterrestrial .

That is why they almost threw Capt. Ruppelt out of the building when he suggested that they were obseving balloons, which brings me to the conclusion that some skeptics here were in the same boat as Capt. Ruppelt, vs. the scientist and engineers and of course, Commander McLaughlin.

So you see, is it any wonder as to why the skeptics continue to find themselves on the wrong side of the fence?

Then, I rest my case, since I have now acquired your admission!!!

Of course it is true! After all, the skeptics were claiming that a weather balloon was responsible for the Roswell incident that is no secret!



Of course it does, because I was the person who was telling them all along they no weather balloon was involved and they didn't believe me, but they did when the Air Force finally revealed that no weather balloon was involved after all, and guess who the source was for the skeptics in regards to their weather balloon claim?




Questions for you.

* Why did the Air Force claim that it recovered a flying saucer?

* Why were military and civilian personnel at Wright-Patterson AFB, confirming that what was recovered, was an extraterrestrial object?

* How did they arrive at that conclusion?

It goes beyond just a belief.

Next time I visit an airport, I will make it my belief that the objects parked at the gates, taking off and landing, are aircraft.

Taking your logic into consideration, it is my belief that airplanes are parked at airports.



You got that right! Let's look at some of the other believers.

* Commercial and military pilots who have encountered flying saucers in flight

* There are believers in the cosmonaut and astronaut camps

* Senior military and intelligence officials

* Astronomers, and even scome scientist and engineers who know much more than the average skeptic.

* Police officials who have encountered the objects

* Radar controllers

* Meteorologist

* Military officers and enlisted personnel who have encountered the objects

* And, millions of others around the globe and through the centuries.


Now, in the skeptic's camp, they claimed what I have already noted many times before about the two balloon explanations, both that have since burst an crashed.

The skeptics then claimed the following to explain away UFOs:

* Test dummies and accident victims of the 1950's to explain away an incident in 1947. (Lack of common sense in that case).

* An DC-6 propeller-driven airliner to explain away a UFO that flew circles around a jet bomber that was far above the velocity and alitude capabilities of the DC-6

* The planets, Jupiter and Mars, to explain away UFOs that trailed and maneuvered around an JAL B-747. When the skeptics found that the planets were not responsible and in the wrong part of the sky, in addition that the UFOs were also tracked on radar, then they changed their story to that of ice clouds, which failed as well when weather conditions were checked. They didn't do their homework!

* They claimed that a lighthouse was responsible for the Rendlesham case, not knowing that the lighthouse can't be seen from the location in quesiton. To sum that up, a lighthouse supported became a former lighthouse supported when he took it upon himself to visit the site. Never mind the lighthouse can't fly and also has a light-blocking backshield between the lighting unit and the base.

* They then claimed that Jupiter was responsible, not knowing that there were objects in the sky, which were maneuvering.

* When that explanation failed, the claimed that a police care was responsible, not knowing that there were also maneuvering objects in the sky and unaware that the guy the skeptics claimed was responsible, had later admitted that he wasn't responsible after all.

* In an effort to discredit a Roswell incident witness, the skeptics then claimed that the Air Force's C-54 couldn't operate from Kirtland AFB, not knowing that the C-54 was one of the aircraft used to fly components of he first atomic bombs out of where??? Kirtland AFB.

* The skeptics backed Phil Klass explanation that a UFO, which flew near a DSP satellite that was over 20,000 miles above Earth, as an air-breathing SR-71.

* The skeptics claimed plasma could have been responsible for the Belgian UFO incidents, never mind that thousands of witnesses were describing an artificial vehicle; not anything to do with natural phenomena.

* The skeptics then claimed that temperature inversion was responsible for the 1952 Washington D.C. UFO incidents, not knowing that temperture inversion was found to not have been responsible and in fact, impossible according to the 1969 Air Force study.

* The skeptics clamed that an F-117 stealth fighter was responsible for the Belgian UFO incidents, not knowning that the F-117 is a stealth aircraft and the triangular objects presented a strong radar signature and the F-117 cannot hover nor is it maneuverable. (Missed clues)

I can go on and on, but I think you got the point, and I have others as well.



Can't be a fantasy since the Air Force has already knowledged they are real. The fantasy lies in the skeptics camp as evident of what I posted above.

The govennment does things like that when it comes down to UFOs.

Dude where exactly in the american goverment do you work? and why do they let you post this nonsence

Nonsense!

Much of the information I gathered is available under the FOIA, which involved declassified government UFO files. Some I gathered from the Air Force, since I spent much of my time in the Air Force. so I knew where to go.

In fact, that is where I got the scoop on Project Mogul.

Where did you serve, in what squadron, what was your call sign and again where in the goverment do you work and why do they allow you to post

I worked for the Air Force since the 1960's. One of my base of assignement, was Hill AFB, which was involved in the investigations of the Minuteman missile shutdowns caused by flying saucer and Hill AFB had maintenance reponsibilities for the Minuteman missiles in the field.

I was also stationed in Vietnam, where I saw a disk-shaped object fly over the base from the sea, and I missed another opportunity in 1969 at Pleiku, Vietnam by a few months when another object overflew the area.

Some of my Compatriots were stationed at RAF Bentwaters, when UFOs were spotted there, so I knew beforehand, what was talking place over there and know what is fiction in regards to what has been posted on the internet about those incidents and what is factual.

The information I have been posting is available to anyone and no longer classified.

http://roswellproof.homestead.com/files/MCLAUGH1.jpg


http://roswellproof.homestead.com/files/MCLAUGH2.jpg

The information is very vague, also its interesting that you served at the bases where all of this activity took place all of which are well known.
Heres a simple question how old are you and name the commanding officer of Hill AFB when you were there

Ok, lets say that its true. What Im saying is, IF its true that no weather baloon crashed, how does that make what crashed an ET ship? The military said so(!?) There has been so much info and des-info about Roswell its hard to keep track, unless you "read between the lines", like you always do. Cherry picking the "good stuff" and ignoring the rest.

If people only listen to the stuff that supported their claims, there would be no science fiction left. It would all be real, anything would be possible.

Despite UFOs not being things you can necessarily touch, they must still be things that can be measured. In other words, some objective measurement must be able to be taken of them.

You are not being asked to provide anything that anyone with as extraordinary a claim would not be asked to provide. If you think you are, then you need to learn a little bit more about what makes up credible evidence. Your Pluto example would be a good start.

For me, Roswell offers no answer. Sure the government lies and covers up stuff. However, this alone does not serve to support any argument for the existence of alien visitation.

The whole question revolves around as to why the Air Force reported the capture of a flying saucer in the first place. It is known that flying saucers were observed and reported over the area before, and after the incident by civilians, and observed and documented by scientist and engineers over the area as well.

The Air Force would never have reported such an extraordinary story to the whole world for no other reason, and we already know that what crashed, had nothing to do with any classified project of the military, since the military was unaware of any crash until notified later. Had it truly been a classified project that had crashed, the military isn't going to wait days for a civilian to let them know about it and that is just another very important clue.

More than 60 years after the fact, the military is still hiding the facts surrounding the events of the Roswell incident and it was eventually revealed by the GAO, that certain military documents that could have shed some light on what happened, have been destroyed without authorization. And once again, debris was flown to Wright-Patterson AFB for examinations where even the folks there, indicated the debris was not ours.

The military sought to contiinue the cover-up with a 1994 report with a of Poject Mogul balloon flight #4 that never was, and its 1997 report that stated that test dummy and accident victims of the 1950s were responsible for an incident in 1947 and it is amazing that there were those who swallowed those explanations by the Air Force when all of the clues proved the Air Force was lying, and it didn't even take a rocket scientist to figure that out either, but the skeptics took the bait and ran away with it anyway.

Just a few days after the Roswell incident, flying saucers were reported by the Air Force over Muroc AFB in California.

The tenacity in the way the Air Force has been covering up the Roswell incident after all of these years, and to this very day, clearly indicates that something extraordinary had crashed near Roswell in July 1947.

To sum that up, before and after the Roswell incident, civilians, scientist and engineers were reporting flying saucers over the area and Wright-Patterson AFB personnel indicated the debris sent to their base was no ours. In fact, the flying saucer report made by Mr. Wilmot, made it to the newspaper before that of the Air Force that it captured a flying saucer. He reported observing a flying saucer over the area the night before Mac Brazel discovered debris on the Foster ranch the next morning.

Always remember what I have said about reading between the lines.

Do you really believe that test dummies and accident victims of the 1950s were responsible for an incident in 1947?




And, why flying saucers are real. We have highly credible witness reports from those whose encounters were supported by airborne and ground-based radar systems, ELINT and optical systems.

Also remember, flying saucers are not science fiction, as they have been reported around the world for centuries.



People have never seen the so-called "Aurora" but it exist, and in fact, many people have never seen nor touched nor even knew about many of the secret arcraft before they were revealed years later, but they existed despite the fact the general public having never seen nor touched them.

On another note, there have been physical evidence noted in many UFO reports, especially at UFO landing sites and the Air Force had already said they were real back in the late 1940s.



I use the Pluto argument for a very good reason, and that is, to point out that you don't need physical evidence in your hand to prove something. I did so because the skeptics kept demanding physical evidence that I didn't have in my garage and I knew they didn't have a piece of Pluto in theirs so where did leave us?

If they cited data to prove the existence of Pluto, I would do lilkewise to prove the existence of flying saucers.

So why are we still waiting on official disclosure? In fact, from the information you post, it sounds like the gov't has already admitted it, so why are we wasting time arguing about it?

The flying saucers have landed!

But wait, where are they? Why doesn't the world look like the shows "Alien Nation", "V", or even "They Live"?

And that is were you are wrong.

How can this be, you ask, well first of all we know were Pluto is, even though its REALLY far away, and we also know were Pluto is going to be in space at a given time....

So NASA sent the New Horizon probe to check it out? New Horizons is still too far from Pluto for LORRI, Long-Range Reconnaissance Imager, to resolve any details on Plutos surface, that wont happen until summer 2014.


Can you say the same about alien spaceships?

Nope, I am correct and radar and other data tapes have proven that fact and folks such as these, concur.

* Commercial and military pilots who have encountered flying saucers in flight

* Cosmonauts and astronauts

* Senior military and intelligence officials

* Astronomers, and even scome scientist and engineers

* Police officials who have encountered the objects

* Radar controllers

* Meteorologist

* Military officers and enlisted personnel who have encountered the objects

* And, millions of others around the globe




I don't know if you knew this or not, but there has been a battle between astronomers as to whether Pluto is even a planet. It is no longer considered a full-fledged planet.



I can do much more than that, since UFOs have been tracked via numerous space and atmospheric surveillance systems and as a result, data collected on them that we don't have for Pluto.

Ok guys and girls we need to get on Sky`s side even if we dont belive in et,the point is we need to get sky to give someone his real name and e-mail,address maybe a pic or two so if he turns up missing all the sudden we can look for him . the gov,has ways of makeing these folks vanish. Im with you sky better to be safe than gone! I do have many ex-airline pilot buds that to the letter they all have seen and most would not report due to inner corp,guidlines ect pressures. most were ex-military with thousands of air hrs,all have told stories and accounts of sightings. The key is until the gov,stands up to the plate we may never know. So watch your back Sky e-some one so there may be a trail to follow. DONTEATUS

Waiting for someone to have the guts of the President of Brazil who went public when it was determined that the Tridade flying saucer was a real real craft.




They have on many occasions.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7495041330105572312

So do you discount what then head of the Skunkworks, Ben Rich, said about Aurora? That it was the codename for what became the B2 bomber?

Funny... any official report relating to any research on the subject simply states "unexplained flying object"... its only the opinions of people that they're alien craft.



With this type of reading comprehension, I begin to wonder whether you were actually a pilot... I dont see the airforce accepting people who dont comprehend what they read. I said that you're damn right I did ask you where they said its ET craft, because up until the following post you kept making that claim but posting articles that had nothing to do with it.

But, with such a reading comprehension, I begin to understand why you believe you're case is proven.



The airforce has claimed plenty of things, why do you only pick and chose which ones to believe?

Who knows why the personnel claimed what they did? Maybe what they found was so advanced compared to what they knew, or looked so advanced that they thought it was alien? Maybe it did turn out to be human afterwards... who knows? Where's the evidence that it was ET?



You'll rarely find a person who would say that UFOs arent real... anything can be a UFO as long as its unidentified. The airforce does mention UFOs, you're right! Remember that training manual you posted? They said "UFO", not "Alien spacecraft"!



See? Its more than just me that doubts whether you actually have anything to do with the airforce or not...

[quote]

Finally some sense

Taking your logic into consideration; it is an opinion that autos have wheels.

It is just a matter of connecting dots, since the Air Force's own flying saucer recovery story is etched in stone and the Air Force continues to this very day, to hide the object that crashed more than 60 years ago. Question is: Why?!

You think that Hazzard makes sense, but it was that same logic that skeptics used to claim that a weather balloon was responsible and look what happened in 1994!

Your lucky, I asked him that and I wasn't graced with a response

I think I gave away enough information already.

If the very people who are keeping THE BIG SECRET to themselves....are the ones in possession
of the 'hard evidence'...then hard evidence is going to be....errrr....hard to present.

This is the 'ace' that they have up their sleeve......and provides ammunition for their supporters.

But 'circumstancial' evidence is growing by the day.....it seems.....and with the advent of the
internet.....THE BIG SECRET......is getting harder and harder to keep.

I have a strong belief that someday in the near future (I'd say within the next 40-50 years) evidence will come to light, and the government will not be able to deny it.

(I'm not pouncing on you again.....I promise.... )

But I just want to say that if we have to wait 50 years...that will mean that THE BIG SECRET...
will have been kept from the taxpaying public for over a hundred years!!!!! And that is WAAAAAAY
to long, in my opinion.

I agree, it is way too long. The freedom of information act allows us to see the evidence and yet the government who keep this stuff under lock and key blatantly ignore the rule. Fair, I think not.



Thanks, GUNNARYSEARGENTHARTMAN

Too right....it's not fair....

Never mind....perhaps we'll all have to 'remote view' the hard evidence for ourselves.....

But this would still be 'soft'......circumstancial 'evidence'......

To be fair to Sky (or anyone else), it's my opinion that it's out of bounds to ask someone in a forum for personal identifying information. I've thought of a way to ask Sky for credentials, but frankly, I haven't been able to come up with a way without asking flat out for it, and I refuse to do that.

It'd be different if he did it willingly (for instance, Jim Oberg has posted on this forum before), but I will not ask Sky, or anyone else, for personal information.

That does make it more difficult for him to back up his personal claims, but tough for the rest of us. It simply is a line I will not cross, and so I'm forced to take his word (or other information, such as publicly available documents, etc.) at face value.