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!!!

What about trace cases?

Good post, Hazzard!



So do I, but I also want to win the lottery

Cheers,
Badeskov

I don't know what it is but I cannot resist these threads in ALL CAPS.

ALL CAPS, a form of alien mind control perhaps?

Seriously though, there exists some very tantalizing evidence that UFOs are certainly *something* corporeal, not just something people imagine. However, the definitive/rock solid evidence needed to say that UFOs are indeed alien space craft (at the exclusion of any and all other possibilities) hasn't been forthcoming. Some say the government has such evidence (it's being covered up), others say this is because such evidence simply doesn't exist. Right now, I'm not willing to conclude much of anything really. As someone said recently (in another thread), "a piece of a flying saucer would be great right about now".

absence of evidence isn't absence of truth....

Hello there is plenty of hard evidence that ufos exist starting by the BIBLE to ancient artifacts even pictures them in Egyptian art - many ancient cultures and religions testify of them also Christ told us it would be like in the days of Noah in the end times - in the days of Noah they were coming down already at that time to mate with human women which produced giants as offspring -today it is well known that they are abducting and using humans to create hybrids also millions around the world can testify that this is really happening and that they are real and they are here

Given that we are talking “a standard of proof “ different from the traditional criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt, it is interesting to compare the differences between the two standards.
With proof of existence (E.G UFO, big foot and so on) the standard requiring a ‘high degree of probability’ compared with the orthodox criminal standard of “beyond reasonable doubt”. There fore if the evidence of proof of UFO’s contains fakes then the evidence in whole is held with a lower degree of probability and they’re for unable to compare to the standard. Even if a UFO is held and shown to the public it will only prove that one flying saucer is real and not that there are more so still can not be used as proof. This is where human logic must be used.

Sure, UFOs exist, no question about it. But that doesn't mean that they are of ET origin. And a 2000 year old piece of fiction can hardly be called hard evidence.



Eh, say again? You are joking, right? Otherwise lay off the sauce, it is affecting your mind in a detrimental way

Cheers,
Badeskov

What do you accept as UFO? Any sighting of lights on the sky or unidentified controlled objects in the sky? Because if they are objects capable of maneuvering like nothing build in this planet what other explanations you have besides et?

Hazzard, as usual, you're confusing evidence with proof. I don't think many people on this board profess that proof of the existence of aliens dwells within their hands or has been shown to the public. There is mounds upon mounds of evidence however.

Anything flitting around that I cannot recognize is to me, by definition, Unidentified Flying Object. I just don't think we can leap to the conclusion that it is ET hiding inside whatever it is I still hold on to that it could be naturally, but rarely occurring atmospheric phenomena that is the culprit. I am not saying that it is for sure, just that we can't rule out the possibility. Just as we can't rule ET out as a possibility.

Cheers,
Badeskov

No, they are not lying, and one of the reasons is, there are lots reliable electronic data that backs their accounts. Secondly, it is not likely that commercial and military pilots are going to lie about their encounters, and in fact, most encounters are not even reported. In some cases, whole aircrews and passengers were part of those aerial UFO encounters, which was confirmed by radar and ground observers. (Bariloche, 1995).

And once again, some encounters took place to within a space of less than a few hundred meters in broad daylight where visual identifications of the objects were made. At such close proximity, there is no way a 'saucer' is going to be confused as some natural weather phenomenon or any conventional aircraft for that matter.




What about physical trace evidence from UFO landing sites where lab technicians were unable to duplicate the findings in the field in their own labs? Why are such cases found to have no earthly explanation and listed as unknown?

You know there is no proof of ets in our planet because when their spaceships crash on earth there is a device which is set to disintegrate the ship and all occupants so we cant copy the technology. Thats what happened in Roswell when the aliens ship collided with a meteorological balloon and crashed on earth, when the military arrived to the place all they found was the balloon.



But if you want new hard evidence that some ufos may possible be made not by monkeys from earth...


In may of 86 21 ufos were sighted int the sky of brazil, the objects were visible from people on the ground and tracked by radars, the brazilian air force sent jets to pursue the ufos and during the chase the ufos interacted with the jets, sometimes avoiding the planes others chasing them.

Since the objects were witnessed by people from various states the FAB went to public to give an explanation, pilots, radar operators and the ministry of aeronautics brigadier moreira lima talked to journalists and given interviews recorded on video and some in tape.

In the interviews one of the pilots said when one ufo was behind him, he try to make a loop to leave the ufo pass but the object followed his evolution.
Other pilot was warned by radars that 13 objects were following his plane, they came down to his position and locked at the same velocity, then there was 7 objects on one side of the plane and 6 on other..
Other pilot said the object he persecute was the size of a 747 and when he tried to get close the object accelerate over 1000km/h.

Source
Video 1
Video 2


@badeskov One month later the FAB come to public to say the lights were some kind of magnetic anomaly in the sky.

I think the original poster is saying that, while there are reports of UFO's, nothing has ever proven them to be ALIEN in origin. I mean they could very well be from our own future for all we know, or secret military projects.

I agree there are countless anecdotal evidences that help to support a case, but nothing so compelling as to be considered proof.

But, what proof could we possibly ever see that would be considered real? Video is obviously easily fake, personal accounts are subject to misidentification, practical jokers, and downright liars. I suppose I won't really believe it until NASA confirms it....

Actually, the specifics of an UFOs maneuvering capabilities is all that is needed to prove they are not ours.



Not likely to be future travelers, nor secret military projects, and I am very familiar with the way we do business with our secret assets and none of the UFO case files in question involved secret projects.



Not likely to happen anytime soon, especially after NASA received a chilling report from the Brookings Institute in 1960 on the serious consenquences should ET be revealed to the world.

________________________________________________________

SPACE-LIFE REPORT COULD BE SHOCK, UFOI,
Vol. I, No. II (Dec 1960 - Jan 1961 issue)

The discovery of intelligent space beings could have a severe effect on the public, according to a research report released by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The report warned that America should prepare to meet the psychological impact of such a revelation.

The 190-page report was the result of a $96,000 one-year study conducted by the Brookings Institution for NASA's long-range study committee.

Public realization that intelligent beings live on other planets could bring about profound changes, or even the collapse of our civilization, the research report stated.




http://www.nicap.org/images/nasa_spacelife.jpg

Understandable, I would like the same. For me, there is enough circumstantial evidence to prove something is going on.

As far as direct proof of what the phenomenon is , no one here can provide that sort of information, because there is none. Unless the governement or some private group is holding something extraordinary that would indeed be proof, there is no real proof.

So this post is more of an emotional response of frustration rather than an actual desire for someone here to prove to you with "EVIDENCE", because you know thats quite impossible.

And now, Peru.

____________________________________________________________________

PERU AIR FORCE SETS UP UFO OFFICE:

The Miami Herald US newspaper reported that the Peruvian Air Forces have now set up a nationwide system to track alleged UFOs, whose flashing lights seem to be distracting pilots and radar operators from doing their jobs.

"The Air Force is concerned about the disturbances in our air space," said Air Force Commander Julio Chamorro, who sees unidentified flying objects as a threat to national security.
____________________________________________________________________


The ball toward full disclosure as been set in motion as more and more countries reveal to the public, their own secret UFO encounters, so it is just a matter of time and we have already heard from Chile.

___________________________________________________________________

Chile announces UFOs are for real:

On 2nd April 1997, Chilean newspaper "La Cuarta" has the following headline: "UFO Sighting of Arica is Confirmed by La Direccion General de Aeronautic Civil." Chile did start to join the small number of countries who officially stated that the nature of UFOs is of intelligent driven flying machines.

http://ufologie.net/htm/offichili.htm

________________________________________________________________

Eventually, all people will know why those UFOs are not ours.

The Brookings Institute report is fascinating. So are those Fast Walkers you had referred to in a previous post. But I think what Hazzard wants is completely unattainable on these boards.

It seems that this is the opinion of one small, scared group of people. We've just intentionally broadcast music into space, and the warnings are coming out that ET could interpret this as a 'warcry', and come down here to kick our a**es.
Which reminds me of the same paranoid voices that were saying back in the 80's, how much noise we're making in our corner of the universe (and guess what ET might do...).
Given that modern sci-fi serials, such as Star Trek, have proliferated a cultural ideal of exploration and interaction with intelligent ET beings, why would the Brookings report still be considered relevant?
If history has taught us anything, human belief is exceptionally resiliant and adaptive when confronted with worldview changing events.

That is exactly what Im saying. For me it would take an alien body or an alien spaceship, and the world wide scientific community telling me that its the real deal.

Only then would I become a true believer.

hahahhahahahha wooooovvv even when i was a little kid i didnt have quiet and imagination that some of you guys do....
thanks for a good laugh

The Brookings report is relevant because even today, the government still fears the unknown should ET be revealed to the public. According to a senior FAA official, such fear was the reason why the CIA was confiscating data and communication tapes on an UFO encounter involving commercial aircraft.

The revelation of ET will change the world forever and any U. S. President will know that in doing so, the President will be personally responsible for the conseqences afterwards, whether for good or bad, and there can be no turning back the clock.

Are you a believer that the so-called "Aurora" exist? If so, what physical evidence is available right now that proves its existence?

In fact, what physical evidence did we have on the CIA's A-12 Oxcart in 1963? None, yet its existence was a reality and the reason why the public wasn't aware of the existence of that aircraft is because the government wanted to keep it that way.

Apparently the governments have it, as many have come out and said, "Yep, dem be aliens." ((As skyeagle has posted.))

I for one think that if the US actually had that kind of technology it would be expanded into a crapload of projects in order to make more money from their public. And I really don't think they could have this kind of technology for years and years and never actually put it into their commonly-used craft. Radar stealth technology is fairly recent and is a trademark of several craft now. We've got a lot of weird-shaped craft; look at the B2. But unless we dub only the most recent sightings of UFOs to be factual accounts, then they really couldn't be entirely manmade. What kind of useless absorption of funds would that be? Even the US wouldn't do it (or maybe especially them, seeing how they like to show off the shiny toys they make xD).

Shameless tribute:




If we've got it and it works, we flaunt it. Think of how great a small, silent, radar-undetectable craft would be at surveillance for anything. I don't buy the "government made it and flies them over random suburban areas" thing.

United Nations and UFOs


The UN Gets a Warning About UFOs
Flying Saucers and UFOs 1969, Page 64, Vol. 3, 1969

Summary:
Ever since June 30th, 1965, UN Secretary-General U Thant had been in possession of a grave warning concerning the potential threat posed by the phenomena of Unidentified Flying Objects.

This dire warning was issued by Colman VonKeviczky, Director of the Intercontinental UFO Research and Analytic Network. It clearly sounded a call for the United Nations to look to its defenses against an invasion from outer space, or else suffer the consequences of a failure to heed such a warning.

______________________________________________________________________

Dr. J. Allen Hynek
Speaking at the United Nations
Nov. 27th 1978
Mr. Chairman:

I am delighted to have been invited by Sir Eric Gairy and the Grenada Mission to speak to this committee on behalf of many of my scientific colleagues about the subject of Unidentified Flying Objects. Many years ago, in conversation with His Excellency, U. Thant, I was informed by him that protocol demanded that a member nation first bring a subject up in the General Assembly before any action on that subject could be initiated.

Now, many years later, one of the smallest nations on the Earth has courageously introduced the perplexing subject of UFOs to the General Assembly, and thus made possible this meeting today. I commend the initiative his excellency Sir Eric Gairy has taken; he has trod where mightier nations have feared to tread.

______________________________________________________________________

U.N. General Assembly Now Has Resolution To Establish United Nations Decade Of Contact & Diplomatic Relations With E.T.s

For the first time in almost 27 years, the United Nations General Assembly will be debating the issue of establishing diplomatic relations with advanced Extraterrestrial Civilizations that may now be visiting Earth.

On December 16, 2005, a Resolution to establish a United Nations Decade of Contact was formally transmitted to the incoming President of the General Assembly, H.E. Jan Eliasson of Sweden by the Institute for Cooperation in Space (ICIS), a Non-Governmental Organization. President Eliasson was Sweden's Ambassador to the United Nations from 2000 to 2005.

Almost to the day twenty-seven years ago, on December 18, 1978, the United Nations General Assembly voted to approve decision 33/426, inviting U.N. Member States "to take appropriate steps to coordinate on a national level scientific research and investigation into extraterrestrial life, including unidentified flying objects, and to inform the Secretary-General of the observations, research and evaluation of such activities."

http://www.newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v92/...0092-000106.htm

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread279397/pg1


It is just a matter of time!

Ah yes... The material that would be convincing proof has been collected and secreted away by the US government.

While endlessly appealing, this is an argument from ignorance, tantamount to saying -we cant show you good evidence because we havent got it, and perforce implies that every government in the world has efficiently squirreled away all alien artifacts.

Unless, of course, the extraterrestrials only visit the US, where retrieval of material that falls to Earth is supposedly a perfected art form.

Amazingly, the government has been releasing its declassfied UFO case files over the years and now, government workers and former government workers are taking steps further by revealing what they know about UFOs. In addition, their accounts are backed by the same documents the government has been releasing over the years.



Some governments over the years have been revealing data and even physical evidence directly related to their encounters that had no earthly explanation. In 1993, NORAD agreed to lightened up on some of its own files.



Actually, it is a worldwide phenomenon, and retrievals are not limited to the United States.

http://www.nsa.gov/ufo/ufo00018.pdf


It is just a matter of time

You wouldn't be a believer, you would know!

Cheers,
Badeskov

Indeed, sometimes we hear quite some amusing stories on what it could be. I really don't want to hijack Haz's thread, but please allow me to quote a few paragraphs from one of the Hessdalen reports:

pp. 1.



pp. 2


Sounds familiar?

pp. 3


Again, sounds familiar?

pp. 3.


Here we have something that is intensely luminous, provides a strong radar signature, can move fast and highly erratically (seeming intelligently), reacting to outside stimuli (in this case a laser beam). This is why I can simply not take a report from 1968 as being relevant, as it reflects what they knew at the time about atmospheric events, and recent science very obviously contradicts what was stated then.

This is why we need the irrefutable evidence, as otherwise we simply do not know. We can speculate, but that is all we can currently do.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Edited for typos.

Very well said badeskov, it only takes a few possible theories to become a believer.

Very well said badeskov, it only takes a few possible theories to become a believer, After all it's the "crazy" people that don't go by the rules and believe in what they do and achieve goals, if it was for skeptics thinking only logical possibilities could cause this universe's enigmas then we would be as dumb as the people 1000 years ago.. oh well..

But, that has nothing to do with any of the UFO case files in question, such as:



And

http://www.ufocasebook.com/jal1628surfaces.html

Skyeagle that looks like a triangular UFO, and looks pretty nice, Do you think it's real ?

You must be refering to past comments made by skeptics. Here are some examples of past quotes of skeptics.

It underwent a multitude of anaylysis. Similar objects were also reported around the globe.

Indeed, it has nothing to do with the above picture. It just invalidates all radar data as evidence as we know that luminous atmospheric events can do what many UFOs do, thus leading credence to that those UFOs are naturally occurring phenomena rather than ET flitting around.



So, they saw something, we just don't know what it was. To quote from the link:



Yes, they could. You like to quote Hynek before he changed his opinions on the matter. I will take grab some of his data from his "The Hynek UFO Report". Here he basically finds that the best eye witnesses have ~50% hit rate in correct identifying things, whereas pilots only have a little more than 10% hit rate in correct identifying objects. The latter are so highly trained that they invariably will try and put things they see in their frame of reference. Thus, pilots as eye witnesses aren't actually that good.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Edited for typo.

I know!



Actually, it doesn't invalidate any radar data. This is independent of the radar data that was provided by the Air Force.



In regards to the planets, Mars and Jupiter, the planets were not even in the same patch of sky as the UFOs and, the UFOs were also captured on radar, which should have been a very clear indication that the UFOs had nothing to do with planets.

Debunker Phil Klass and CSICOP made the fatal mistake of going public before the results were in, that the UFOs were Mars and Jupiter. When the data came flowing in, Phil Klass and CSICOP changed their explanations from Jupiter and Mars, to ice clouds, but when conditions were examined, it was found that ice clouds were not responsible either.



Data and communications tapes were later flown to Washington D.C. for analysis. Conclusions supported the reports of the JAL aircrew of UFOs maneuvering around their aircraft, and confirmed that one of the UFOs was gigantic.

similar UFO's at the same time ?

In which sense? We have a naturally occurring phenomena that exhibits the same characteristics as many UFOs. Thus, any radar data showing such characteristics cannot in any way be evidence of ET.



Sure, but a wrong explanation doesn't make the sighting any more credible in itself. They saw something, they just don't know what. It is a UFO, no more, no less, and pinning other labels on it is pure speculation. You can say ET and I can say atmospheric something. Either way, we simply do not know.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Just on a side note, I wanted to quote from this article in New Scientist called "And the voice said..." from 1999. It is a funny read.



This is only a story and the journalist went on a quest to figure out whether it was actually true; while most scientists he asked were skeptical, the consensus was that it was possible, albeit hard to do.


Cheers,
Badeskov

UFO's in renissaince paintings says it all for me

Yes, UFOs in Renaissance art do indeed 'say it all', but I suspect the 'all' they are saying isn't what you may think. Take a look here. Most of the discussion is in English, I've had some of the rest of it translated (the portion about the UFO coin). After you read this site your opinion may change.

Old spotlights used for advertising by local businesses basically created similar effects at night as they illuminated the base of clouds.

There are major differences between metallic objects and those of natural phenomena, which is why radar controllers will tell you they can differentiate between the two. Besides, radar have filters because radar operators can't afford to be distracted by natural phenomena clutter on radar scopes when they are controlling a number of air traffic in close proximity of one another in high-density airspace, especially during precision approaches.



According to the pilot, he encountered a "gigantic spaceship." Weeks later another commercial aircraft and an Air Force tanker encountered the same object as well. In fact, the description made by the military aircrew was simillar to that made by the JAL aircrew, which was described as a "gigantic spaceship." Radar data confirmed that particular UFO was in fact, gigantic and maneuvering around and trailing the aircraft.

Check out the news broadcast at the latter half of this video.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=3MQ1LtD_Sxg&feature=related



So in that regard, the UFO was close enough to where the aircrew visually identified the UFO as a "gigantic spaceship."



So, here is where not only the FAA confirms the UFO tagging along with the B-747, but the military confirms radar contact of the UFO as well, so it is clearly obvious that particular UFO was NOT Mars nor Jupiter.

Eventually, Phil Klass and CSICOP found that no planet of any kind were involved either and that natural phenomena played no part as well.



But, it has already been confirmed from atmospheric and scientific analysis, including the nature of the radar contracts and aircrew visual accounts, that natural phenomena played no part in this encounter.

You can say, "atmospheric something," but the facts do not agree, nor does Mr. Reality!

Yes, I agree...I just had this thought of a couple of scientists playing around with their invention with no regard to what other people might think was happening, so I found it rather funny Admittedly, way off topic, but fun nonetheless

Cheers,
Badeskov

By all means of respect, but I beg to differ. Radar controllers cannot differ between the two. If an object has a radar cross section, it will give you a return and the return will not tell what it is. Plasma phenomena will give you a radar return and you cannot differentiate that from an airplane or otherwise. All you see is a radar "blip".



Trainling the aircraft? Could it be a plasma phenomena caught in the slipstream? And again, apparently pilots make rather lousy eye witnesses due to their training, since they tend to put anything they see into a known frame of reference. So I will not put too much credence into their descriptions of what they think they saw.



See above.



I agree, it wasn't Mars or Jupiter.



No, they found that Mars and Jupiter played no role. They obviously couldn't rule out other atmospheric phenomena.



No, it hasn't.



Actually, they do agree pretty darn well. I am not saying that it was, I am just saying that we can't rule it out.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Why would we think that we are here alone in this vast universe?

http://www.paranormalmatrix.tv/ watch the video titled "Disclosure".

Food for thoughts!

I don't think anybody on this baord thinks that we are alone in this vast Universe. I think the question is whether our neighbours are stopping by to visit

Cheers,
Badeskov

Is that the infamous Petit-Rechain photo?

There are some doubts about the authenticity of that particular photo and some criticism regarding SOBEP's method of investigation regarding lack of imagination and knowledge SOBEPS collaborators have in photo faking.

I'm not trying to debunk it, but it is one of those images I'd think carefully about including in the evidence.