QUOTE(Norman @ Sep 3 2004, 03:10 PM)
I am not talking about just a possibility.
Yes you are.
QUOTE
At least not when I mention my
views. To science and archeology, it is a possibility. To me its true information.
Exactly where blind faith comes to play. There is no hard evidence that aliens are here among us now.
QUOTE
FACT: Archeologists have found ancient drawings of flying discs that were known
as the gods from heaven.
Yes, they have, but thats not hard evidence of it being alien in origine. Symbolism was common in the past, and many cultures always claimed that their god arrived "from the sky in a chariot of fire!" That, however, is not hard evidence. That is about as much evidence as any mythological being.
QUOTE
They found remains of UFO crashes in the past,
No, they havent. Roswell doesnt count as "found remains of UFO crashes" and nor does anything like that.
QUOTE
they found millions of documents carved into stone that state that a metallic/
amber colored objects are the Chariots of the Gods.
I havent heard any statement of a metallic coloured object written in stone. Either way, while its intriguing, its not hard evidence.
QUOTE
The pictures resable a
disc flying in mid-air with people pointing at it.
The key word is "resables". Or well, it should be "resembles"

QUOTE
Historical records show that
in ancient Egypt the sons of God taught the Egyptians about architecture,
and decorations, make-up etc...
Correction, historical records show that ancient egyptians SAY they taught it to them. Again, this is not hard evidence neither, because that would mean that anyone who says "God told me to kill my son" should be taken seriously.
QUOTE
The famous flying wheels of Ezekiel in the
Bible is NOT the most convincing proof out there.
Again, you cant take mythology as hard evidence. In this day and age, many things can be interpreted as "UFOs" in the past... but again, its not hard evidence.
QUOTE
SETI, and project Phoenix
have found many alien signals but were kept from informing the public due to
a massive cover-up by our government.
You have no evidence of this neither. You're relying on heresay and just believing it without any hard evidence of it. Do you have anyone working at SETI thats not biased, hasnt been discredited, and who analysed these signals and still claims they're ET in origine? If so, you still dont have "proof" you only have some "evidence" which changes a blind belief into a belief backed up by some evidence.
QUOTE
The government has a clue what will
happen in the future, and the bible prohpecies are true.
Please, you still dont have any evidence what so ever, and people have been making prophecies since the first language was created... and some still happen to have survived hundreds of years because people keep claiming them to be true, but they just "havent happened" yet. Again, its only a belief.
QUOTE
They will be fulfilled!
You dont have any evidence what so ever of that neither.
QUOTE
If the government KNEW that these "aliens" were going to snach up thousands
of people from the face of the earth, it would be reasonable not to tell the public
since it would drive them into panic... maybe even suicide.
This is only a conspiracy theory. You have no evidence for it, and seeing as how a conspiracy is not falsifiable, I'm not even going to argue it. If I could obtain proof that debunks this conspiracy theory, my proof would be classified as part of the conspiracy... see what I mean? Either way, you dont have any evidence here neither.
QUOTE
I remember the
quote from JFK, but I cannot recall it. He said something like:
"A government without a free-flow of information is a government
that is afraid of its own people." Or something like that.
That has nothing to do with any evidence.
QUOTE
No, no. I am sorry. Indeed there is.
No, there isnt. Heresay isnt evidence.
QUOTE
You just don't want to accept it,
or cannot find it.
Please, dont try to tell me that you're right and I'm wrong just cuz I dont want to accept hard evidence. I accept hard evidence, and I dont accept what you have because its not hard evidence. In a court of law, you cant say "Well, my friend here says that she saw the video of the defendent murdering his friend Joe..."
"Wheres the video?"
"I cant find it. The government must have taken it and destroyed all evidence of its existing."
That just isnt evidence. Thats the kind of style your "evidence" has, and using the same style, I can practically claim anything, even something completely different than what you say is happening. You cant change hard evidence. If something you call hard evidence can be used to defend an idea 180o of yours, its (usually at least) not evidence.
QUOTE
One of the reasons I know that you do not want
proof because you're not looking for it. If you were you would find
plenty.
Getting desperate to support your beliefs huh? Please, remain civil and dont result to "You're just not looking for it!" and other crappy arguments like that.
QUOTE
"Seek and you shall find". Any reason for you NOT to
look for the truth? The cover-up.
No "truth" can be found, only conspiracy theories, and there are plenty of them out there... some ranging from "The greys are our friends" to "the greys are our enemies"
QUOTE
Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Its the doctrine of man that changes a lot. The Bible strongly testifies
to the existance of fast flying, metallic, objects that shoot beams of
light, provide illumination for Israel in Bible times, and provide shade
during the day, confuses or paralizes the Egyptians.
You havent answered my question. And btw, all that you say is just interpretation. I dont use interpretation as hard evidence, and neither should anyone.
QUOTE
wrong again, Stellar.Ronald Reagan
Wrong again? I dont think I've been wrong so far. Anyone mind backing me up here?
QUOTE
"... when you stop to think that we're all God's children, wherever we may live in the world, I couldn't help but say to him, just think how easy his task and mine might be in these meetings that we held if suddenly there was a threat to this world from some other species from another planet outside in the universe. We'd forget all the little local differences that we have between our countries and we would find out once and for all that we really are all human beings here on this earth together."
Thats not a witnessed event. Thats a hypothetical situation. Notice the clever use of the "if".
QUOTE
White House transcript of "Remarks of the President to Fallston High School Students and Faculty," December 4, 1985.
"In our obsession with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world."
Again, another hypothetical situation. He was an actor, and, IIRC, he did act in some sci fi shows/movies and enjoyed sci fi. This is only him creating a hypothetical situation, its not evidence of him admitting that aliens exist and are our enemies.
QUOTE
Speech to the United Nations General Assembly, Forty-second session, "Provisional Verbatim Record of the Fourth Meeting", September 21, 1987.)
"I occasionally think how quickly our differences, worldwide, would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world."
Once again, same hypothetical story.
QUOTE
From a speech with President Mikhail Gorbachev, in 1988. He made almost the same comment on many occasions.
"I was in a plane last week when I looked out the window and saw this white light. It was zigzagging around. I went up to the pilot and said, "Have you ever seen anything like that?" He was shocked and he said, "Nope." And I said to him: "Let's follow it!" We followed it for several minutes. It was a bright white light. We followed it to Bakersfield, and all of a sudden to our utter amazement it went straight up into the heavens. When I got off the plane I told Nancy all about it. But we didn't file a report on the object because for a long time they considered you a nut if you saw a UFO..."
I never heard of that... and I find it very hard to chase something zigzagging through the air from within a passenger plane... and notice he *didnt* know what it was.
Again, no hard evidence that it was alien in origine...
QUOTE
1974, Reagan was often quoted referring to the possibility of an alien threat.
There is a possibility of an alien threat. Theres just no hard evidence (at least, not that the public has access to) that proves it. Also, the meaning of many of Reagans speeches were twisted, just like you have done. His speeches arent informing that the world might soon be under attack by aliens, his speeches are about how the world would unite *if* something like that happened.
QUOTE
AND THATS NOT THE ONLY PRESIDENT... trust me I know.
I cant trust anything you say it seems, seeing as how you even managed to twist Reagans hypothetical situation speech into something its not.
QUOTE
The government can only do so much as cover up crash sites, and create
a massive conspiracy that influences the media which influences what people
think.
Yep, if there is a massive conspiracy. Theres no hard evidence of that neither.
QUOTE
true. I know ABOUT aliens. I don't know all there is to know,
but I know about them to a limited extent.
Thx for fixing that... but you still have it wrong. You think you know about aliens. You have no evidence to back up what you think you know about them.
QUOTE
BTW: I need not to proove the existance of aliens or UFOs, because its already
been prooven. What is new? People trying to disproove aliens. So, go ahead.
[right][snapback]253565[/snapback][/right]
Umm... when has it been proven? It hasnt... The possibility should be accepted, and is widely accepted... but it hasnt been proven...
--------------
Now, let me clear things up a bit more on what Im talking about when I say you dont have hard evidence. Does anyone know about the Mahabharata? Anyway, it describes what can be (quite evidently) interpreted as nukes, a nuclear war, flying vehicles, lasers, a war using those technologies, etc. It even goes to the extent to describe the fall out effects of a nuke quite accurately, and it does give a limited composition of what a Vimana was made of, and even its engines (I forget the exact quote but it had to do with mercury spinning which somehow caused the Vimana to fly.) Theres even a section that describes how a pilot would train to fly it... But even so, this isnt evidence... its largely interpretation. It is actually more credible than the Bible when you're talking about flying objects and such, because it has very good descriptions of the functionality, and things that we have today (nukes)... but again, its not hard evidence, because it could all be imagination, and others could just be plain misunderstandings of what they truely wrote about. Its kind of like talking about StarTrek... they have warp engines, and they use matter/anti-matter reactions to propell it... but the detailed and exact functionality of these engines is not described, so you really cant rebuild the engine based off of it and test it. It is amazing that people could accurately describe a nuke and its fallout effects way back in the past... but still, maybe they imagined it. This is definitly not hard evidence. What would be hard evidence, is texts which accurately describe the construction of an interstellar space ship, or something else technologically advanced, like an anti gravity engine... That would elevate the credibility of the Mahabharata, and infact that text that talks about how to construct the engines and ships would be hard evidence that the people back then posessed such knowledge! Actually, a text like this has been discovered in 98 it seems... I've heard about it when reading on the Mahabharata... but I cant find a news report on it, so I dont say "Its evidence! Hard evidence! They found it!" I simply consider it what it is... a rumour so far, because the find cannot be verified.