The best evidence for aliens on Earth

[badeskov]

Pilots are experts at what they see and identify in the skies as evident in the communications where pilots are asked to identify a B-757 from a B-737 and other aircraft in the skies. Ground controllers normally ask pilots to identify and pick out a certain aircraft from a number of other aircraft in the local airspace.

For an example, a pilot must be able to differentiate between a Cessna 172 and a Cessna Skymaster at some distance from his own aircraft, or even an F-16 from an T-38. Not able to do so in a timely manner when requested from ground controllers could spell disaster if the pilot can't find that particular aircraft that ground controller identified as heading directly for his aircraft.

Indeed, they are very good at identifying known objects such as other aircraft and the like. Unknown, no. They will try and map it into their aircraft frame of reference, which thus can lead to an overinterpretation of something otherwise benign. This is why what pilots describe should be taken with a grain of salt.

In the case of JAL, flight 1628, ground-based and airborne radars confirmed their sightings and the radar contacts were not indicative of natural phenomena, which is why it remains an unknown case to this very day.

They might not have been indicative, however, ruling it out we cannot do. It still might have been natural phenomena. But unknown, I can definitely agree with that

Cheers,

Badeskov

[badeskov]

Hello I believe in the BIBLE as historic Fact and I don t know how you call it a 2000 year old piece of fiction there is more proof that the Bible is real then not also by what knowledge do you quote such statements ??? UFO S and ET S are well explained in the Bible maybe if you read it you would understand everything about ET S and about how they bring in the end of the world and the return of CHRIST -- they have been here since the beginning of mankind and because of our refusal to believe they have been destroying us since and as the Bible says will be our final destruction they control everything from the government to what we watch on TV also our news and are the author of many religions

First of all, I am sorry if I offended you - that was certainly not my intention. But we deal in beliefs and personal opinions here; you believe in the bible and I respect that. I don't and honestly believe it to be a piece of fiction. A superb piece of fiction at that, but nonetheless a piece of fiction. UFOs and ET in the bible, not in my bible.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[Magnatude]

I take it badeskov wont take any eyewitness or photographic evidence as proof. Only a captured craft will satisfy his proof, nothing less.

So why debate with him?

The crux of this topic is (with what we have presented to the pubic) are these UFO's extra-terrestrial, natural or man-made... what is the best evidence for Aliens on earth?

(for me, only a captured/landing craft, in front of my face, Aliens popping out would fully satisfy my need of proof of Aliens visiting Earth. I think the idea is novel and I'd love to be witness to aliens visiting earth, but my mind prefers to choose a more logical conclusion before imagination.)

Edited February 10, 2008 by Magnatude

[skyeagle409]

Hi Metric,

Sorry, I should have been more clear in my explanation. Pilots actually have an incredibly high rate of correct identifications when identifying other aircraft and such.

\

Apparently, we don't agree with your assessment, and neither do the air traffic controllers.

A case in point; at any given time, air traffic controllers identify for us, the type and model of aircraft that they want us to confirm in our airspace and we do so on a regular basis with great accuracy.

Edited February 10, 2008 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

Indeed, they are very good at identifying known objects such as other aircraft and the like.

I KNOW that as a fact from many years of experience, and coming from a family of aviators, some who are still flying for the airlines as captains!

When they report a saucer-shaped vehicle next to their aircraft, then they are not reporing anything that has to do with plasmas.

Edited February 10, 2008 by skyeagle409

[badeskov]

I take it badeskov wont take any eyewitness or photographic evidence as proof. Only a captured craft will satisfy his proof, nothing less.

Something like that would be very nice, yes.

So why debate with him?

Why not? We are debating what the best evidence is and I am arguing the case that it isn't eye witnesses.

The crux of this topic is (with what we have presented to the pubic) are these UFO's extra-terrestrial, natural or man-made... what is the best evidence for Aliens on earth?

In my honest opinion there isn't really any evidence either way, although there are certainly lots of indications that something is going on. But is it natural, ET or something else, I cannot say and is still open.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited February 10, 2008 by badeskov

[Magnatude]

Something like that would be very nice, yes.

Why not? We are debating what the best evidence is and I am arguing the case that it isn't eye witnesses.

In my honest opinion there isn't really any evidence either way, although there are certainly lots of indications that something is going on. But is it natural, ET or something else, I cannot say and is still open.

Cheers,

Henrik

(I agree a lot, sorry I wasn't able to "edit" my previous post fast enough, lol)

[badeskov]

\

Apparently, we don't agree with your assessment, and neither do the air traffic controllers.

No, apparently not. But I respect that and we will just politely have to disagree

A case in point; at any given time, air traffic controllers identify for us, the type and model of aircraft that they want us to confirm in our airspace and we do so on a regular basis with great accuracy.

I have no doubt of that and have never contested their abilities in that respect.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[badeskov]

(I agree a lot, sorry I wasn't able to "edit" my previous post fast enough, lol)

LOL, it happens to me too at times Good post, though!

Cheers,

Badeskov

edited: weird merge of two posts

Edited February 10, 2008 by badeskov

[badeskov]

I KNOW that as a fact from many years of experience, and coming from a family of aviators, some who are still flying for the airlines as captains!

When they report a saucer-shaped vehicle next to their aircraft, then they are not reporing anything that has to do with plasmas.

OK.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[anarkhy]

hey badeskov do you believe in black holes? Can you provide some evidence of their existence?

[skyeagle409]

No, apparently not. But I respect that and we will just politely have to disagree

I disagree, and do so from my own experience, and those within the aviation community.

If a pilot can't differentiate between a Beech Baron and a Beech Bonanza, then that pilot has no businees flying into congested airports because controllers will sequence aircraft and expect every pilot to identify each aircraft he is told to follow, or to look out for. Otherwise, a serious situation will developed if the controller tells the pilot fo follow the Cherokee and he follows a Cessna instead.

A case can develope where the Cherokee aircraft the pilot was suppose to follow, mates up with his aircraft behind the wings.

[Evangium]

"discussions of the UFO issue have remained narrowly polarized between advocates and adversaries of a single theory, namely the extraterrestrial hypothesis ... this fixation on the ETH has narrowed and impoverished the debate, precluding an examination of other possible theories for the phenomenon."-Sturrock, 1999

I know I've posted this before, elsewhere, but this is the core problem with the UFO debate. Unfortunately the UFOlogists in the ETH camp have been exceptionally vocal in declaring all Unidentified Phenomena as alien spacecraft (who knows, maybe they're right), and adversaries of the ETH have been just as vocal in saying it ain't (and again, it's possible they're right as well). This has had the net effect of effectively drowning out any reasonable and moderate research into the phenomena, or it's used by either side of the debate as 'evidence' to support their argument.

SOBEPS has disbanded, and in their News about our Society portion of their webpage, the explanation (to my understanding) is offered that they themselves cannot find any conclusive evidence to support either side. It is also my understanding that they're work will continue through 2 new organisations, each pursuing a different line of thinking of the phenomena. If we're to find our 'proof' then we need to follow their example and start realistically looking outside the ETH-'nuff said.

move now, out.

[Choatis]

I mean they could very well be from our own future for all we know, or secret military projects.

I think the big question here is, if they are in fact 'military' projects... whats with all the anal probing? If they're really that interested I'd imagine it's easier to visit a local proctologist than create flying saucers to abduct people with.

Or perhaps thats what they want us to think. Why would the military do that?

[badeskov]

hey badeskov do you believe in black holes? Can you provide some evidence of their existence?

Yes, I believe in black holes and I do so because:

1) They are valid solutions to physics as we know it, i.e. their existence is theoretically possible.

2) We can repeatedly and independently observe the behavior of what corresponds to our physical description of black holes many places in the universe (examples are vast).

3) The most likely explanation is thus black holes given physics as we currently know it (we don't have any other explanations for what we observe).

ET is only one of many solutions to the unknowns that we currently see and ET consistently denies us the option of independent and repeated observation and measurement. Until we have ruled out all but one solution, we won't really have an answer. And that is why the ET answer requires more tangible evidence than what we currently have. If we knew that something unexplanable would show up every day at a certain place and time we could prod and probe it and come up with evidence.

A much better example is actually the Higgs boson. It is theorized to exist and can explain quite a few unexplained observations in particle physics. Yet we have not been able to show it's existence (although people are working very hard on the matter). Here we have something that we have no evidence for yet, but I believe it to exist. I do not know that it exists and nor can I provide any evidence, but given that the theory behind it is sound and consistent I think it would be a fair bet that we will actually one day have the proof

Cheers,

Badeskov

[DBunker]

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!!!

Another good post hazz.

And yes indeed,nothing has changed. The believers dont need any more evidence as they already "know" that ET exists,and have found us, and found a way to get here. Me,I need better evidence.

Not the Skyeagle kind....REAL evidence.

Edited February 11, 2008 by DEBUNKER

[skyeagle409]

Another good post hazz.

And yes indeed,nothing has changed. The believers dont need any more evidence as they already "know" that ET exists,and have found us, and found a way to get here. Me,I need better evidence.

Not the Skyeagle kind....REAL evidence.

Well, my evidence is real evidence that has been validated by investigators, some of which were presented just the other day on TV!!

So here is where I have for long periods of time saying; "this is this," and "that is that," and the skeptics say, "We don't believe you," and then comes along a program that validated my statements. Did you seriously think that I was just making all of this up with nothing to back it up?

How did you think that I was able to ascertained the true facts regarding Project Mogul even before other UFOlogist had done so?

You can ascertain those facts by making inquiries under the FOIA in order to obtain the declassified government UFO files that I have used as references.

It is just a matter of time!

"UFO Reality Is Breaking Out" by Richard J. Boylan, Ph.D.

A prestigious three-day international conference was held at the Sheraton Washington in Washington, D.C. on May 27-29, 1995 on the subject of what should be Earth's proper response, when it comes out in the open that we are being visited by cultures from elsewhere.

The "When Cosmic Cultures Meet" International Conference featured presentations by scientists, academics, governmental spokespersons, research professionals, military officers.

Edited February 11, 2008 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

Yes, I believe in black holes and I do so because:

1) They are valid solutions to physics as we know it, i.e. their existence is theoretically possible.

2) We can repeatedly and independently observe the behavior of what corresponds to our physical description of black holes many places in the universe (examples are vast).

3) The most likely explanation is thus black holes given physics as we currently know it (we don't have any other explanations for what we observe).

Do you have any physical evidence on hand?

[Tommyo]

7 pages later, about 5 pages taken up by Skyeagle's JAL matra, still no proof. There never will be proof until they, if they really do exist, present themselves to us. Don't hold your breath folks, thats not going to happen either because if they are out there, then showing themselves would have no benifits to themselves. And if they do show themselves, I'd be very VERY worried of their intentions, because you don't just come light years away to give someone a helping hand for nothing.

[skyeagle409]

7 pages later, about 5 pages taken up by Skyeagle's JAL matra, still no proof.

Goes to show how much you don't know!

Official records on that incident have already been released and look what you posted! Sometimes, skeptics reveal just how much it is, they don't know, by what they post.

Edited February 11, 2008 by skyeagle409

[badeskov]

Do you have any physical evidence on hand?

Do I have a piece of black hole in my hand? No! Do I need it to prove the existance of black holes as we theorize them to be? No!

Cheers,

Badeskov

[Tommyo]

Goes to show how much you don't know!

Official records on that incident have already been released and look what you posted! Sometimes, sketics reveal just how much it is, they don't know, by what they post.

Official reports are not proof, and most of your reports are 3rd hand information at best. Then you also are sold on radar hits, which radar is quite helpful in air traffic, it is equivilent to a lie detector. Works great but is not 100% infallible. Meaning you can get false hits on atmospheric or other phenomia. And yes I think pilots are human, meaning that they could easily misidentify or misclassify objects that they see, trying to compare them to what they know. Its not a personal attack bud, I know you take what you believe seriously, from the ammount of research you do, but its not concrete proof.

[skyeagle409]

Do I have a piece of black hole in my hand? No! Do I need it to prove the existance of black holes as we theorize them to be? No!

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

[Tommyo]

Do I have a piece of black hole in my hand? No! Do I need it to prove the existance of black holes as we theorize them to be? No!

Cheers,

Badeskov

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

[skyeagle409]

Official reports are not proof, and most of your reports are 3rd hand information at best.

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

Then you also are sold on radar hits, which radar is quite helpful in air traffic, it is equivilent to a lie detector. Works great but is not 100% infallible.

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

The more you post, the more it becomes evident you have no idea what is being discussed, but then again, that is typical of "armchair debunkers" who think they know it all, but in all actuality, they don't.

Edited February 11, 2008 by skyeagle409