I guess Ill have to learn how to "read between the lines".



Im talking about evidence that will convince the mainstrem scientific community, real evidence. Not the kind that has you and other believers convinced, not the "maybe", "what else could it have been kind" stuff. Im talking about real evidence.

I have read through lots of the testimonies, the USAF reports and many many report by UFOlogists and other believers.

UFOs are by definition unidentified and I believe that each sighting has to be examined on its own merits. I do not believe that there is one common explanation for all UFO sightings. I sometimes even wonder if the real "UFO phenomenon" is UFOlogy itself, what people believe about UFOs and why they need so badly to believe it. It doesnt matter if the whole world believe in aliens, if they are not real.


The difference between a scientist and a pseudoscientist is that the scientist easily or more easily accepts that his theory is wrong when data says so. I have changed my mind about many things in the past, and I most likely will again. One characteristic of pseudoscience is that they wont leave a theory even if it is falsified a thousand times. And that is also the situation in the public. People want to be fooled.

Noone gives a rats a** if Buzz Aldrin saw a piece of the SLA, Spacecraft/LM Adapter, one of 4 panels, on the way to the moon. And why would they, when we can have the Apollo 11 flying side by side with an alien spaceship. People love this kind of "what if".

People want to be fooled.

Hazzard put it much more eloquently than I, but I agree completely. And to keep this from becoming just a "me too" post, I'll ask Sky, what were the results of the Brazilian AF investigation?

I don't think so, and it clearly shows in your messages.



I see that you continued to ignore that science has been involved in scientific investigations and there are lots of references to UFOs in scientific journals and literature.

In fact, the scientific study of the Colorrado Study couldn't even explain up to 1/3 of its case files terrestrially.



And:

QUOTE

It was at that symposium where Dr. Carl Sagan requested that the Air Force turn over its surveillance data on UFOs that he knew they had.

You might want to check out:

I can definitely say that the Brazilian Air Force didn't conclude that this incident was caused by a bunch of B-747s, which was also released.

And, there are lot's of data that proves the objects are real and intelligently controlled, and the specifics of the performance charateristics as documented from reliable sources, prove that they are not our aircraft.




And, what Charles Moore had said before the Air Force tapped him on the shoulder.




Since then, it has been determined that no Project Mogul balloon was responsible for the Roswell incident.

Hmm... I wonder, is the space shuttle considered an aircraft? NEvertheless, I suppose this is just arguing semantics.



Performance characteristics have no bearing on the definition of an aircraft.



No, its of wonder why non have evidence.



Nope, not at all, I'm teling you everyone and anyone can have an opinion. These "experts" do not have the necessary information to say that the craft belong to ET, they can only state their opinions.



What about it was not indicative of plasma?



Perhaps... or they saw what looked "like" portholes. We know that plasma can create what looks like an organized structure, and these portholes, we dont know to what degree of accuracy these "evenly spaced portholes" were seen. With all the adrenaline and excitement of seeing such a craft hovering right beside you... Its kind of hard to debate this unless you show articles relating to the particular case. Maybe they did see portholes... but that doesnt prove aliens.

But in any case, assuming its not plasma, you still have yet to prove that its alien craft. Once again, I propose that human time travelers are also a possibility, equal to the ET possibility.



Some of the UFOs, which people saw "portholes" on, took place outside the atmosphere? Do you realise that the thermopshere extends to 690km above the Earth?



What exactly indicated that it is under intelligent control?



No, "unexplained".



You're right... and that's why I havent seen anyone here claim it was plasma. We've been saying it *could be* plasma.

Then that means that it could still be some unexplained terrestrial phenomena responsible for them.

Think again as to why military officials have excluded aircraft as responsible, and the reason was, performance outside the envelopes of ALL aircraft.



Goes to show you just don't do homework. What has been posted many times on this forum as far as evidence and documentation presented by scientst, engineers and astronomers, in additon to many other experts?




Taking your logic into consideation, it is an opinion that the Sun exist.



You will find that scientist and engineers were documenting observations and trackings of flying saucers in their reports outside the atmosphere in addition to those within our atmosphere.




[Once again, an armchair expert with no experience, telling experts with many years experience that they don't know what they are talking about].

If you had done your homework, you would have found why natural phenomena was not responsible and why the Colorado Study team found none, hence why 1/3 of its case files remain unexplained terrestrial speaking, to this very day.

What's your point?


Do you have a link to that full quote?

That they weren't weather balloons nor B-747s.




C. B. Moore was interviewed by William Moore and Charles Berlitz for their book "The Roswell Incident" in which he was asked if the debris could have been that of a Mogul balloon. To which he replied, "Based on the descriptions, I can definitely rule this out. There wasn't a balloon in 1947 or today that could account for this incident."

And since then, it has been determined that no Project Mogul balloon was involved after all, which also confirms Congressman Steven Schiff's statement that no balloon was responsible for the Roswell incident.

Washington Post, January 14, 1994

Archive of 2008

Speakers/Panelists/Documentarists

Collectively, the X-Conference speakers hold enough knowledge of government involvement with extraterrestrial phenomena and the truth embargo to end the cover-up tomorrow. All it would take is for the political leaders and the political media to pay attention. And yes, they have been invited, too.



Paul Hellyer - Keynote (short) (Canada)

In early September 2005, Hellyer made international headlines by publicly announcing that he believed some UFOs were of extraterrestrial origin. On 25 September 2005, he was an invited speaker at an exopolitics conference in Toronto, where he told the audience that he had seen a UFO one night with his late wife and some friends. He said that though he discounted the experience at the time, he had kept an open mind to it. He said that he started taking the issue much more seriously after watching ABC News' "Peter Jennings Reports UFOs: Seeing is Believing" special in February 2005.

In 2007, the Ottawa Citizen reported that Hellyer is demanding that world governments disclose alien technology that could be used to solve the problem of climate change. "I would like to see what (alien) technology there might be that could eliminate the burning of fossil fuels within a generation ... that could be a way to save our planet," Hellyer told the paper. He also said that "We need to persuade governments to come clean on what they know. Some of us suspect they know quite a lot, and it might be enough to save our planet if applied quickly enough,"






On September 25, 2005, Hon Paul Hellyer, the former Canadian Minister for National Defense gave a speech in Toronto at an event titled: "Exopolitics Toronto: A Symposium on UFO Disclosure and Planetary Direction"

www.exopoliticstoronto.com




__________________________________________________________________________


Canadian Transport Department, Senior Radio Engineer, Wilbur Smith

MEMORANDUM TO THE CONTROLLER OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS:

I made discreet enquiries through the Canadian Embassy staff in Washington who were able to obtain for me the following information:

a. The matter is the most highly classified subject in the United States Government, rating higher even than the H-bomb.

b. Flying saucers exist.

c. Their modus operandi is unknown but concentrated effort is being made by a small group headed by Doctor Vannevar Bush.

d. The entire matter is considered by the United States authorities to be of tremendous significance

Neither do I.....there's a thread here...where someone's saying they're going to send a balloon thing up
to see what response there is. This balloon will be a UFO to a lot of people.
But, as Skyeagle has gone to trouble of showing.....some/many UFOs seem to have a non-terrestrial
character.




I don't see why anyone would 'need so badly' to believe it. I, personally, have for many years have
entertained the strong possibilty of ET involvement in ancient human history. I've had a few dreams
involving ETs and ET craft.....although I haven't actually seen anything in 'reality'.....that I could say...
whooooa THAT was an unexplained UFO.

But I don't 'need so badly' to believe in ET related UFOs in the here and now. But I have stumbled upon
information about it all recently that has made me sit up and pay attention. And I have found the
information convincing enough to make a judgement on the matter....and conclude that....much to my
amazement ETs are almost certainly real ( I've gone to around a 95% belief....leaving a 5% doubt
because I haven't had first-hand physical experience)

I've gone half a century without any 'need' to believe......so I think your point about this general bad need
to believe is broadly incorrect. A small % of young people might get into the BUZZ of it all and get a bit carried
away SOMETIMES....but that's all.

More likely...it's the other way round....one's world view has to change and shift when confronted with
extraordinary information......as presented by the Disclosure Project....and related stuff.
Perhaps some people badly need to hold onto the view that they have of the world....and literally
cannot accept something that shatters that world view.




No-one WANTS to be fooled......and many of us are pretty cheesed off with having been fooled by
the ET cover-up......for all these years.....

I'm sure they weren't life size mannequins of Mickey Mouse either. That means nothing.

Look what you wrote. Based on the descriptions.... it wasn't a balloon. That doesn't mean it wasn't actually a balloon, does it? Just that the descriptions rule it out. But suppose the descriptions aren't accurate.

So again, you take something out of context.

Ssssssssssssss goes the air outta my head until its burst! with so many skeptics in here good thing we have sky and a few others posting to the sky`s the limit post record. IMO we are all alein and yes we are traveling through space and time on this great ship we call earth,lets remember who we are Star stuff ,travelers on a grand mission of descovery. Unlimited in our imagination and limits.We are the Future of man lets dont mess it up with fears of the unknown. Just DONTEATUS LoL

Agreed.......on balance, I don't think the ETs are 'baddies' so we could benifit from their more
developed wisdom.....maybe......if we can just open ourselves up to the wonderful potential
of a universe filled with other life-forms. Some possibly very like ourselves.

The bigger picture is what is missed by those who absorb unsubstantiated UFO/Alien material and deny science as their method of investigation.

The real history of our world, our planet, and our universe is a continuing study, a great deal of which has already been scientifically documented.

As to no one changing my mind, or anyone else who adheres generally to the scientific method, that is an erroneous assumption.

Science is self correcting.

If someone proves that ETs are, or have been here, then they will have my support.

To this day, no one has done so. Sure, weird things goes on all the time, in the sea, on land and in the sky...Events yes, but never, EVER, has evidence been used to prove beyond all other possible explanations that there are alien spaceships on Earth. When it comes to extraterrestrial visitors in the 21st century, the evidence is still anecdotal, ambiguous, or, in some cases, artifice.

It is not impossible that we could be visited. It doesnt violate physics to travel between the stars. We are doing it right now, voyager 1 and 2. Slowly compared to any possible hight tec aliens out there, yes, but we are doing it.

But really, if youre going to claim, that extraterrestrials are buzzing our cities, or occasionally assaulting the neighbors with an aggression inappropriate for a first date, then I urge you to find evidence that leaves little doubt among the professionally skeptical community known as the world of science. The "It cant have been invented here" speculation by eyewitnesses is not hard evidence. Far from it.

UFO studies will continue until all the old cases have either been explained or admitted to being unexplainable, and unexplainable, as most of us knows, no matter how impressive the sighting is to the eyewitnesses or how graphic the stories, its still not evidence of extraterrestrials on Earth.

Without the so called "smoking gun" type of evidence the ETH,extraterrestrial hypothesis, will remain only a speculative hypothesis. The ETH could very well be correct...we just need some solid evidence, something beyond radar hits and anecdotes, before we can say for sure that some UFOs are ET space craft.

Well, that post was just damned Hazzard-Like!



Says it all, pretty much in a nutshell.

wouldnt it great if et landed out front of hazzards house ,he looks out and zip off it goes into the nite? then he could show us exhibit-A. wonder what he would say? any words hazzard?

I think he's go from hypothesis to theory and try his best to retrieve the evidence..
Probably fail but will have a greater understanding of the situation and might gain more respect for SkyEagle's posts.

I would respectfully disagree, although I cannot claim to have an advanced degree in psychology or the like, thus it is my own uneducated opinion on Hazzard's state of mind if such an event should happen to occur to him

I think Hazzard knows enough about what constitutes scientific evidence, so I seriously doubt he would walk out on a limb and start posting outdated and irrelevant reports in an effort to convince others. Rather, I think Hazzard would be honest enough to state up front that he has no evidence whatsoever for what he saw, but still describe in detail what he saw.

I don't see him as a person with an inner urge to try and convince others by all means necessary, rather, I think he would be sifting through as much scientific material that he possibly could to correlate what he saw (and in the same breath send his morning coffee and breakfast to detailed analysis for possible hallucinogen contamination ).

Cheers,
Badeskov

Mmmmm. Interesting subject here... Anyone here seen "YouTube" subject: UFO's - The Secret Government?

Your views on this lecture please....

I think he may just pop off and end the misery he would now be in .IMO

And what misery would that be?! I think the trouble of convincing others is by far outweighed by the actual sighting and the implications it would have (ET exists, ET is visiting, FTL is most likely possible and so on).

Cheers,
Badeskov

It means that they weren't aircraft nor balloons



Well, let's do a recap and see what was described from classified documents.

Science has been given a chance and there were some scientist who became involved anyway, but look what has been said about mainstream science.




That pretty much sums it up as far as where the mindset of mainstream science has been all of these years, but that is currently changing with announcements that more scientist have decided to jump in on UFO investigations and for whom are those scientist going to rely on?

The same folks who have been saying all along that the UFOs they have encountered were those of ET.

Why not ask the scientist, astronomers, and engineers who have been saying for years that ET vistitation is a reality based on their own sightings and observations.

[quote]

The Limits of Science
in UFO Research

by Richard M. Dolan

The Condon Committee Report, for instance. This was supposed to be the ultimate scientific analysis of UFOs. It was supposed to be detached, objective, academic – in short, the approach of the Condon Committee epitomized then, and continues to epitomize today, a peer reviewed, academic, scientific approach to understanding UFOs. And just how well did it do its job? Well, if you read through the report, you find a very spotty document. There are some good individual analyses, quite a few conclusions that don’t match the data, a lot of good cases that should have been analyzed and weren’t; many cases that were poor bets to begin with, as far as obtaining useful scientific data, and of course you find a director of the project who knew nothing about the topic, didn’t want to know anything about it, could never take it seriously, and who was bent from the beginning on a negative conclusion.

And yet, the Condon Committee Report was reviewed by the American Academy of Sciences and approved. Rather hastily. The entire process of generating this report, along with its conclusion, was deeply, deeply flawed. But it went through all the formal channels necessary to give the sanction of official science.

"At this time, the reports of incidents convince us that there is something going on that must have immediate attention.... Sightings of unexplained objects at great altitudes and traveling at high speeds in the vicinity of major U.S. defense installations are of such nature that they are not attributable to natural phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles."

http://keyholepublishing.com/limitsofscience.html

QUOTE

Statement Made By Howard E. Goldfluss,
Acting Justice, Supreme Court, State of New York,

Source: OMNI June 1987

I was as skeptical as the next fellow about unidentified flying objects. My legal training required evidence to prove the existence of UFOs. None was forthcoming, except for the typical tabloid headlines (I was sexually assaulted by a Martian) found at supermarket checkout counters. But what was laughable has now become serious.

Solid evidence does exist to erase the skepticism. Before this evidence emerged, I believed the Air Force, the Central Intelligence Agency, and every other government agency that insisted UFOs were a myth. I would have continued to accept this government pronouncement forever had it not been for the passage of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Congress enacted this law because it felt that the government as keeping too many facts from public inspection. This concern was certainly justified.

Thanks to the FOIA, we now know that Uncle Sam has been sitting on evidence that UFOs do exist and that very substantial people have seen them. The most revealing information is found in Air Intelligence Division Study (A.I.D.S.) 203.

.

http://www.keyholepublishing.com/The%20Lim...%20Research.htm

Page not found SE...



Never heard of The Condom Committee

"At this time, the reports of incidents convince us that there is something going on that must have immediate attention.... Sightings of unexplained objects at great altitudes and traveling at high speeds in the vicinity of major U.S. defense installations are of such nature that they are not attributable to natural phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles."


So in conclusion, they're basically telling us here they're convinced of their own uncertainties. (?)

Thanks to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), it has now been revealed that a flying saucer had landed and took off at Kirtland AFB, setting off alerts and resulting in radar jamming to military and civilian radar and backup systems.

The objects were classified as UAOs because they were shown to be "aerial machines" and the incidents were hidden away from public view until revealed under the FOIA.

In addition, and thanks to the FOIA, Project Aquarius has now been confirmed.

What is all means is that we are slowly heading down the road to full disclosure on ET reality, and my prediction is 15 years or less.

This should give some insight as to what was taking place.

I ran across this see what you think its kind of distrubing no matter what it is , BIZARE OBJECTS CAUGHT BY ILLINOIS GAME TRAIL CAMERAS http://www.earthfiles.com/news you can also find it on coast to coast am (same story line with the photos)

Questions have been asked many times here why they don't make official contact...







(?)

On reality, if ufos are ets, this picture would show a human in the table. We are the ones being abducted.

Any skeptic who actually see a glowing metallic flying saucer will change his believe system completely. Except probably hazzard and badeskov, they would run for some psychiatric treatment, because aliens are not real. If you can´t touch ets they don´t exist.

That still means nothing. You haven't ruled out every prosaic explanation, have you?

To continue, in post #2312, you posted the following:

To which I replied in post #2315:


But something struck me as familiar about Prof. Moore's quote. You're right, it does seem that he said it (or something similar). I have in front of me as I write this a copy of Kal K. Korff's book "The Roswell UFO Crash--What They Don't Want You to Know" (©1997 Prometheus Books, ISBN 1-57392-127-0, first printing, hardcover edition). I'll quote only two paragraphs from page 157. But they're pretty damaging to your case.


(Italics and brackets in original.)

In post #2326, you posted most of what I'd posted in post #2315, which is above, and added this:

Fine, then you post this as support:

Was that an error on your part? I was talking about CB Moore and his descriptions of Mogul, then you turn it around and make it about Brazil in 1986...(I suspect it wasn't an error, but be that as it may..)

It was very clear as to what was reported, so debunking attempts don't work in that regard.



I am surprised that you mentioned Kal K. Korff considering the issues with him. It simply means that you do not know enough about what is really going on.

You posted:



Of course it couldn't have been a Mogul balloon flight on June 4, 1947 because the record shows it was cancelled and once again, why there are not flight records for that particular flight and Charles Moore would have known that that flight was cancelled.

Continue on what you posted.



Charles Moore knew that a Project Mogul flight was cancelled on June 4, 1947 as recorded in the record book, and that is why there were no flight records for any Project Mogul balloon flight #4 because the Mogul balloon story was made up in the first place just as the weather balloon story and the false explanations in the Air Force's 1997 Roswell report.

It wouldn't have been "dropped right there" and the proof is in the fact that there were no such thing as Project Mogul balloon flight #4 as Charles Moore falsely states and you can find that fact right in the original records of Project Mogul records kept by A. P. Crary. And, there are no flight records of any Project Mogul balloon flight on June 4, 1047 because according to the Project Mogul records, the balloon flight was cancelled on June 4, 1947 because of clouds as was the case on June 3 for the same reason. That in keeping with the stipulation with the CAA that no Mogul balloons be launched on cloudy days due to hazards to air traffic.

In addition, that rawin device in Ramey's officer belongs to a weather balloon and those who posed with the rawin device have stated that it was placed there for the purpose of a cover-up and was not recovered on the Foster ranch.

So you see, debunking attempts don't work here since you were unaware of the rest of the story.

Please post exactly what Kal K. Korff's position was as to what he thought was responsible for the Roswell incident.


BTW, were you aware that Charles Moore filed a UFO report over the area?



What was NOT recovered on the Foster ranch nor eviident in the photos taken inside Ramey's office.

http://www.csicop.org/si/9507/ros_fig.gif

I start with the premise that astronomy has revealed the enormous distances within the Galaxy. No spaceship is going to traverse that and have it's crew survive. Something able to go the distance is not going to be a mere spaceship, a flying saucer or any larger version of that idea. It is like trying to revive the roman gods. I refuse to just accept the idea that whatever we conjure up, and that has some traction with popular acceptance, flies.

Whatever happened at Roswell, N.M., of which I actually know very little, seems to brew a lot of speculation and debate. Of course, access to any relevant records would settle the issue. What if what actually happened would be a slight embarassment to those involved, their families, and the USG. What if it was something of normal activity, in the course of carrying out their duties, that relates to an accident of sorts. An accident involving some level of national security activities.

Perhaps there are a few such events all over the world, which are held close to the chest forever, as long as there are competing elements along international lines. I really don't care what happened that day. But, some would use it to stir the pot.

Again, with all of the build up in popular media throughout the early twentieth century, dealing with science fiction, it's no wonder the government would seize upon some lame excuse, in haste. Then, they decided to retract it, instead of looking like fools.

The story has gotten more spin than a child's toy top.

Here's a link to a good video on the subject. It's in 5 parts and about an hour long, but worth it, as it contains numerous witnesses and testimony:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny_Wfc7sjgk...feature=related

Thanks for that....just watched it....all of it. It was VERY good.

It was interesting to see Clifford Stone and Robert Dean as younger men....as I've recently
watched interviews with them.....on this site.......PROJECT CAMELOT

You can tell that the people in the Roswell link above (top)....are not lying.

We have to educate ourselves and share information about this matter....because, God knows....no-one
is going to do it for us.....and it is of immense importance..........

Anyone on here old enough to remember this?>www.rense.com/ufo/battleofla.htm (Battle of L.A.)

Remember old chinese proverb: "Man with head in the clouds looking for UFO's sees very little" : )

I remember my dad was out there when that happened and told of the papers were describeing it as a Jap invasion on the west coast,like the many paper a radio reports th enext day.Must of been plasma eah? LoL DONTEATUS

So it seems. But skyeagles favorite "evidence", if real, isnt as good as we all would like it to be. He, as most believers are only looking for the "evidence" that supports their claim.

Radar evidence only tells us that there is indeed "something" up there. Radar evidence can not tell us that the UFO is definitively an ET space ship verses some type of other unknown phenomenon.

In the scientific method one must prove not only what something isnt, ie, the UFO isnt terrestrial air craft, one must also definitively/irrefutably demonstrate what the something in question is as well. There has to be direct irrefutable evidence that any UFO seen on radar is indeed alien technology, at the exclusion of any and all other possible explanations.

The laws of physics clearly shows that many UFOs can indeed be explained by naturally occurring phenomena. Having that said, there are the cases left that remain unexplained. But that is in no way evidence that these are ET.

Even with different approaches to the subject of alien life, one is still left with the issue of definitive evidence when it comes the idea of alien visitation to Earth. Just because its possible that advanced aliens are somewhere "out there", and I agree that they very likely are, that alone does not equal the definitive evidence we need to say that alien visitation is indeed a reality.

Basically, just because something is possible doesnt mean it is a reality.

The probabillity for exraterrestrial life, intelligent or not, in the galaxy is strong. This is nothing I would leave to faith however, I need proof.... a bacteria on Mars would do just fine.

But I need skeptical science to show me before believing it.

How can you tell?

Also, perhaps they really do believe what they are saying, but it's a memory that's been influenced in some manner? When it comes to the 'psychology of belief' it's very difficult to know for sure what someone experienced in objective reality.



It very well may be. However, not all information is of equal value...and here lies the problem as I see it.

I CAN tell......by using observation, instinct and feeling.

The only thing that could make what they say untrue is if they were conned by props and actors...
but in the general context of the whole thing this would make no sense.
Or if they had been messed about with, regarding 'false memory' or some kind of hypnotism...but
again...in the context of the whole thing this would make no sense.

So...I conclude that, as I judge them to be telling the truth....the chances are EXTREMELY high
that they saw and experienced what they say they did.




This is where personel judgement comes into it. Judging what value the information has.
We all use personel judgement on what information to accept or reject....or put on hold.

edit for spelling

Instinct and gut-feeling works most of the time, but it can be in the way when one has to look at the "evidence" objectivly. I have said this before and Ill say it again, alot of people have claimed to see odd craft in the skies. I think its safe to say that these witnesses have seen something. But just because you dont recognize an aerial phenomenon doesnt mean that its an extraterrestrial visitor. That requires additional evidence.

To be taken serious, you need physical evidence that can be examined at leisure by skeptical scientists.

The problem with just sighting a UFO is that you dont know if the pilot of the mentioned strange looking craft is an alien, or simply a human testing out the latest black operations technology. All one can be sure of is that they saw, what appeared to them to be, some strange looking air craft doing "impossible flying". Thats really all one can logically conclude from just sighting a UFO, no contact with the occupants.

Is it possible to be 'objective' ? (philosophically speaking) People like to think that they are...but
are they really? As we are all human, not robots, can an element of subjectivity ever be taken out of the equation?
Levels of belief and acceptance of the 'unknown' probably come into play, somewhere.

Take for example...the man speaking on the Roswell link posted earlier...the one who told the
story of looking at the bodies of the dead ETs.....now he knows what he saw...but maybe even
his first-hand witnessing has an element of subjectivity....a lesser person might have fainted, or
cracked up...or ran away...refusing to believe what they saw....then gone on medication because
it was all to much?




Well, as I've said before...if the physical evidence is being deliberately with-held...this is going to be
nigh on impossible.

But say....you personally were shown what you were told was part of an ET craft...to touch and hold.
You would have to make a judgement on whether to believe it was what you were told it was.
If you actually saw a UFO crash...went up to it and saw ET occupants come out....you would have
to make a judgement about whether you were hallucinating, or had gone nuts or were dreaming...
or weren't looking at a high-tech hologram etc etc

Taking subjectivity out of the equation is VERY hard....so as we aren't the 'insiders' working on an
ET related project....we just have to do the best we can under the circumstances. Ie...all we can
realistically do is examine the circumstancial evidence and evaluate it. And I do believe that gut
reaction and instinct can aid the process.

I have lot's and lot's of favorite evidence that are backed by evidence and documentation, and the skeptiics can do nothing to debunk successfully, After all, they still remain unexplained terrestrially speaking to this very day.



Hmmmmm! Looking for evidence??? What has been posted for years?



Goes to show how much you DON'T know about radar technology and example is; military and civilian radar experts have already determined that the objects captured on radar were artificial intelligently controlled crafts as noted in their reports and that the specifics of their maneuvering capabilities excluded aircraft.

As you just saw, it doesn't take much to debunk a debunker's claims.



Scientific means have been used to verifty many UFO case files as reported.



The skeptics tend to rewrite the laws of physics to make UFOs what they are not. Ever wondered why those case files did not list any cause by natural phenomena after scientific investigations? They were describing intelligently controlled flying machines. Clue!!!





We heard it before, Hazzard, and as usual, it is the closed-minded skeptic that comes out with the short end of the stick.

Question:

Were these objects that created a serious situation for a B-747, ours or theirs?

http://ufologie.net/htm/japan86.htm

Or this:



"Reading between the lines."

Where have you heard that one berfore, Hazzard???