Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Tantalising Testimony


Recommended Posts

Hey Boony, It is my understanding that the 'various' phenomena witnessed at Hessdalen and such places havent been concluded as plasma yet.

Even Erling Strand has had at least two observations of flying discs, which he believes are not part of the HP.

As LS has pointed out, Dr. Teodorani seems to have the opinion that the phenomena there is essentially plasma, though we still have much to learn about it. Yes I'm aware of Strand's comments and I really don't have much to say about them. Such things may have been observed, or the perception of such things at a minimum. As mentioned in my previous reply someone even saw what appeared to be a flying loaf of bread. Was it actually a flying french roll? Probably not. :hmm:

I also thought there were low frequency recordings? :tu:

I wasn't intending that to be a reference to the electromagnetic spectrum. I merely meant that these places see this phenomena more often, or more frequently; ergo- [at a] higher [rate of] frequency. :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As LS has pointed out, Dr. Teodorani seems to have the opinion that the phenomena there is essentially plasma, though we still have much to learn about it. Yes I'm aware of Strand's comments and I really don't have much to say about them. Such things may have been observed, or the perception of such things at a minimum. As mentioned in my previous reply someone even saw what appeared to be a flying loaf of bread. Was it actually a flying french roll? Probably not. :hmm:

Yes reading between the lines this does seem to be his opinion, although I am not certain that Erling Strand has the same opinion, if any. As scientists I am sure they brush their opnions to one side, hence my initial comment of the Hessdalen phenomena is still unknown, and not just in 5% of cases, which I think you agree with :)

A flying loaf of bread is used more of a description, i.e. similar to a cigar shaped UFO.....no one seriously suggests it is a giant cigar flying around but it is merely a description used.

I wasn't intending that to be a reference to the electromagnetic spectrum. I merely meant that these places see this phenomena more often, or more frequently; ergo- [at a] higher [rate of] frequency. :tu:

ahh I see, although isnt it difficult to propose a 'high frequency' as the phenomena is so varied in size shape colour etc....there is no direct correlation is there? therefore how do we know we are seeing the same thing elsewhere?

Edited by quillius
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most on UM just want to see evidence. Evidence that simply is not there for anyone to show.

Maybe you all need to sit down and list out the criteria for the kind of evidence you want to see. Is it actually achievable? Is this where complex psychology comes into play?

As an example if someone were to try and convince a stubborn minded individual that Australia exists they wouldn't be able to do it because the list of clever arguments against could be never ending.

This is exactly how I see a lot of skeptics to be. Too much intellectualism prevents one from seeing the wood for the trees. In a way it would pay to try and shed some of the formal education for a while and try to be a little less sophisticated. This is an assessment not a judgment or criticism.

Put it this way, if a youngster were able to review the material on this thread I would bet you that their conclusion would be in favour of the ETH.

Is it possible to convince a skeptic of anything at all would be my question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes reading between the lines this does seem to be his opinion, although I am not certain that Erling Strand has the same opinion, if any. As scientists I am sure they brush their opnions to one side, hence my initial comment of the Hessdalen phenomena is still unknown, and not just in 5% of cases, which I think you agree with :)

Yes, though opinions drawn from observations and study form the original bases of hypotheses.

A flying loaf of bread is used more of a description, i.e. similar to a cigar shaped UFO.....no one seriously suggests it is a giant cigar flying around but it is merely a description used.

Which is exactly the point I'm making. The phenomena can look like something but not actually be that something.

ahh I see, although isnt it difficult to propose a 'high frequency' as the phenomena is so varied in size shape colour etc....there is no direct correlation is there? therefore how do we know we are seeing the same thing elsewhere?

As stated there is a lot of room for additional learning with regards to plasma. Is it the same general thing that we are seeing elsewhere? A safe assumption is yes, or if you prefer; probably. Could there be additional variety in this naturally occurring phenomena that we haven't nailed down? I'd say it is very likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put it this way, if a youngster were able to review the material on this thread I would bet you that their conclusion would be in favour of the ETH.

A youngster is more prone to believe in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and monsters in their closets too. I'm not sure how this correlates to validation of the ETH though. :hmm:

Is it possible to convince a skeptic of anything at all would be my question.

Certainly. Verifiable evidence that can be conclusively shown to have no alternative explanations would be a good place to start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A youngster is more prone to believe in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and monsters in their closets too. I'm not sure how this correlates to validation of the ETH though. :hmm:

Wasn't it the young child who stepped out in front of the Emperor to point out that he was naked?

Maybe we could all learn a lot from being a little less sophisticated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Certainly. Verifiable evidence that can be conclusively shown to have no alternative explanations would be a good place to start.

and if that verifiable, physically conclusive evidence is classified and beyond the reach of the interested public?

what then?

.

Edited by bee
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

and if that verifiable, physically conclusive evidence is classified and beyond the reach of the interested public?

what then?

.

I'm sure that you are well aware of the logical fallacy this represents. If this is all you have in support of the idea, you'll have a very tough time convincing anyone, and it begs the question as to why there are so many that are convinced that the ETH is real if there is no verifiable evidence in support of it to be found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure that you are well aware of the logical fallacy this represents. If this is all you have in support of the idea, you'll have a very tough time convincing anyone, and it begs the question as to why there are so many that are convinced that the ETH is real if there is no verifiable evidence in support of it to be found.

That's a truly nasty thing to say, as if it's somehow their fault that this information is the most classified subject in the American government--and has been since the 1940s. Even you know that much, and of course I know more. LOL

Edited by TheMacGuffin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was in response to Zoser's The tiny fishing community has always had its stories... stories of giant sea serpents, man-eating squid, and ghost ships. The list of local color would see one more addition to its list: a story of a visit of a mysterious flying craft of unknown origin. This craft would visit the waters of Shag Harbor, permanently stamping the village's name in the public eye.

While true, but here might be the case, for radars at least.

Here is k-factor vs height using data from different stations around Stephenville (observations at 00Z 09 Jan 2008)

What a bunch of double talk that proves nothing.

Edited by TheMacGuffin
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a truly nasty thing to say, as if it's somehow their fault that this information is the most classified subject in the American government--and has been since the 1940s. Even you know that much, and of course I know more. LOL

How was that nasty in any way McG? My goodness, what a bizarre response to what I said.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK if you want first class evidence from a scientifically trained and experienced individual then watch this. I watched it all; if you could only spare 15 minutes to watch the first part that would be extremely useful.

It's clear, no waffle or assumptions, this is a no messing straight to the point individual with amazing credentials.

Please watch and report back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey 1963, apologies for my delay in responding. I've been a bit preoccupied of late with a new hobby which is entirely too much fun. :)

At any rate, yes I see where you're coming from and I understand your points. I'm well familiar with that episode of Arthur C Clarke's Mysterious World and it did have a good bit on ball lightning.

In particular I agree with your point regarding sprites. They are extremely short lived to the best of our knowledge which does make them an unlikely source for UFO sightings, but our understanding of these and other similar phenomena is still rather limited.

As pointed out by LS, we have learned a great deal from studies in Hessdalen and other parts of the world where plasmas occur in higher frequency, but there is still a lot more to learn. I find the accounts from Hessdalen residents prior to scientific investigation to be particularly compelling, as many described what appear to be nuts and bolts type of craft (and even a huge flying object which resembled a loaf of bread...) -- yet it is very likely what they actually saw was this plasma phenomena which can manifest with such a wide variety of characteristics.

Prior to my learning about said studies, if I had seen something like this go by my window or fly over my head I would be dumbfounded.

I recall another account of a Hessdalen resident who reported seeing a huge ball of light pass over their house or barn, and literally pass right through the roof as if it wasn't there. Wouldn't that be something to experience? Just imagine that you had no idea about plasmas and saw something like that? Also, what effects could something like that have on your perception if you came in contact with it? How many random firings might it induce in your synapses and what could that produce?

Truly amazing stuff in those hotspots like Hessdalen.

At any rate, I do understand that many are hesitant to seriously consider this as a possible answer for the UFO phenomena, and I don't personally think that this should be used as the only answer. Not at all. The UFO phenomena has multiple correct answers, not just a single answer which can be applied across the board. Each case should be taken within its own context to find answers and there are many that will never actually be answered. But there are quite a few which I think would fit quite nicely with the plasma explanation. That doesn't make it the answer for those cases by the way, but it certainly is possible if not highly likely in comparison to alternatives.

I'm comfortable with there not being an answer to many of these sightings, and I'm extremely hesitant to take the leap which the ETH requires as I'm sure you're well aware.

Cheers 1963, I hope you have a great week. :tu:

Hey Boony, no worries and thanks for replying my friend! :tu:

I have to agree 100% about the sprites, and after reviewing the 'Hessdalen Project' this morning [at Lost Shaman's prompting] I find that I am now in mind to give a lot more credence to the idea of the 'low altitude atmospheric plasma phenomenon' being a good candidate for certain UFO sightings!

No specific case in mind,... but I think that the reports of 'glowing UFO's of undetermined shape that appear to come from nowhere and have the typical characteristic's of short spells of seemingly erratic behaviour and then end by simply vanishing, fading away or even explosively disappearing into a different dimension ...could be decent targets for that particular theory!

But as you say,...by no means could this explanation be used as a catch-all for the whole of the UFO enigma , ...but if used prudently, I can foresee no unreasonable opposition from either side of the fence to the linking of the two events!... :tsu:

Cheers Buddy.

Edited by 1963
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure that you are well aware of the logical fallacy this represents. If this is all you have in support of the idea, you'll have a very tough time convincing anyone, and it begs the question as to why there are so many that are convinced that the ETH is real if there is no verifiable evidence in support of it to be found.

ok.....as you are twisting what I asked, to your own advantage.....

here's an example....

In the first 2 minutes of this video...Stephen Lovekin describes what appeared to be a metalic piece like a yardstick that had

an encryption on it.....and was told (with others) that it had come from one of the craft that had crashed in New Mexico.....

Now.....the public haven't been shown this or told officially about it....it is obviously a highly classified piece of debris...

But we have Lovekin who has told us about it. (for the record I believe he is being honest and frankly...brave...to talk about it)

I and others are not in a position to use this piece of debris as verifiable, physically conclusive evidence....but that doesn't mean that this

piece of evidence doesn't exist.......

.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How was that nasty in any way McG? My goodness, what a bizarre response to what I said.

Do you think it's THEIR fault that this information is classified and they can't see it? Is that their responsibility? No, they did not do it and neither did I, for that matter. That decision was made long ago, and there is no doubt about that.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok.....as you are twisting what I asked, to your own advantage.....

here's an example....

In the first 2 minutes of this video...Stephen Lovekin describes what appeared to be a metalic piece like a yardstick that had

an encryption on it.....and was told (with others) that it had come from one of the craft that had crashed in New Mexico.....

Now.....the public haven't been shown this or told officially about it....it is obviously a highly classified piece of debris...

But we have Lovekin who has told us about it. (for the record I believe he is being honest and frankly...brave...to talk about it)

I and others are not in a position to use this piece of debris as verifiable, physically conclusive evidence....but that doesn't mean that this

piece of evidence doesn't exist.......

.

It doesn't mean that it does exist either. Supposing it does exist though, it doesn't mean that it is actually what he was told it was.

Do you see where I'm going with this bee? People can tell all kinds of stories, that doesn't make the stories real. This gentleman may be telling the absolute truth. He may have been shown this piece of debris and told exactly what he has shared with us. That doesn't mean that the people who showed it to him were on the up and up or that the object in question was genuine.

Of course there is the possibility that it both exists and that it is genuine as well, but we will probably never know, and that is the crux right there.

For some this may be sufficient evidence, but for me it is just an interesting but unsubstantiated story. It could be true and it could be false. Plain and simple. :hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think it's THEIR fault that this information is classified and they can't see it? Is that their responsibility? No, they did not do it and neither did I, for that matter. That decision was made long ago, and there is no doubt about that.

I didn't assign blame or fault in this hypothetically hidden physical evidence scenario, so I honestly don't understand what you are on about.

I certainly wasn't trying to be offensive.

All I'm saying is that this is just one more unsubstantiated claim and isn't evidence of anything at all except certain people's proclivity to embrace that which they want to believe from what appears to be an extremely weak evidential premise.

Saying that "the government hid it" is nothing more than a cop out, even if it is true. And I'm not saying that it is true or false, I'm just saying that an argument from ignorance isn't going to persuade people unless they are already inclined to believe the notion in the first place.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't assign blame or fault in this hypothetically hidden physical evidence scenario, so I honestly don't understand what you are on about.

I certainly wasn't trying to be offensive.

All I'm saying is that this is just one more unsubstantiated claim and isn't evidence of anything at all except certain people's proclivity to embrace that which they want to believe from what appears to be an extremely weak evidential premise.

Saying that "the government hid it" is nothing more than a cop out, even if it is true. And I'm not saying that it is true or false, I'm just saying that an argument from ignorance isn't going to persuade people unless they are already inclined to believe the notion in the first place.

Would all male thread viewers who's ID begins with a 'B' please review the material offered in my last post.

Much to discuss and so little time. If I get time tomorrow I will post individual sections of the clip.

Come on guys let's get busy talking UFO's.

If your ID begins with anything other than a B or if you are female you are also welcome of course.

Gee I made that complicated; I guess you know what I was getting at!

Edited by zoser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok.....as you are twisting what I asked, to your own advantage.....

here's an example....

In the first 2 minutes of this video...Stephen Lovekin describes what appeared to be a metalic piece like a yardstick that had

an encryption on it.....and was told (with others) that it had come from one of the craft that had crashed in New Mexico.....

Now.....the public haven't been shown this or told officially about it....it is obviously a highly classified piece of debris...

But we have Lovekin who has told us about it. (for the record I believe he is being honest and frankly...brave...to talk about it)

I and others are not in a position to use this piece of debris as verifiable, physically conclusive evidence....but that doesn't mean that this

piece of evidence doesn't exist.......

[media=]

[/media]

.

What a cracking testimony and exactly what this thread is all about. This guy has really seen some things. Why would he lie? Keep them coming Bee :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would all male thread viewers who's ID begins with a 'B' please review the material offered in my last post.

Much to discuss and so little time. If I get time tomorrow I will post individual sections of the clip.

Come on guys let's get busy talking UFO's.

If your ID begins with anything other than a B or if you are female you are also welcome of course.

Gee I made that complicated; I guess you know what I was getting at!

I've seen it before zoser, and I'm afraid that I don't share your opinion of Stanton Friedman and his list of supposed 'evidence.' I disagree with his conclusions. I disagree that the evidence for the ETH is overwhelming. I disagree that there is any kind of 'Cosmic Watergate.' I disagree with his assessment of how skeptics have confronted these cases.

But I do agree that if we were actually being visited by aliens that it would be a pretty big deal and I'd want to know about it.

That said, I just watched the first 15 minutes again per your request and I still don't find it compelling.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen it before zoser, and I'm afraid that I don't share your opinion of Stanton Friedman and his list of supposed 'evidence.' I disagree with his conclusions. I disagree that the evidence for the ETH is overwhelming. I disagree that there is any kind of 'Cosmic Watergate.' I disagree with his assessment of how skeptics have confronted these cases.

But I do agree that if we were actually being visited by aliens that it would be a pretty big deal and I'd want to know about it.

That said, I just watched the first 15 minutes again per your request and I still don't find it compelling.

Fair enough; you tried. What about the photo's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough; you tried. What about the photo's?

Here's a good YouTube video which summarizes why photographic evidence in itself can't be considered reliable from an evidential standpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't assign blame or fault in this hypothetically hidden physical evidence scenario, so I honestly don't understand what you are on about.

I certainly wasn't trying to be offensive.

All I'm saying is that this is just one more unsubstantiated claim and isn't evidence of anything at all except certain people's proclivity to embrace that which they want to believe from what appears to be an extremely weak evidential premise.

Saying that "the government hid it" is nothing more than a cop out, even if it is true. And I'm not saying that it is true or false, I'm just saying that an argument from ignorance isn't going to persuade people unless they are already inclined to believe the notion in the first place.

You do realize that there have been all kinds of lawsuits to get this information declassified, don't you? Various agencies that denied having UFO records like the FBI, NSA, DIA, CIA and so on were found to be lying and forced to make some of this information public, although very rarely at the level of Top Secret or above.

Are you saying that this was all imaginary or some kind of fantasy? If so, you haven't got a leg to stand on.

Are you saying that no more classified information on aliens and UFOs exists? If so, I know you are wrong about that, since we find new records all the time--and not just the ones I have seen myself.

Honestly, I think you have an extremely weak case if this is what you are trying to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize that there have been all kinds of lawsuits to get this information declassified, don't you? Various agencies that denied having UFO records like the FBI, NSA, DIA, CIA and so on were found to be lying and forced to make some of this information public, although very rarely at the level of Top Secret or above.

Are you saying that this was all imaginary or some kind of fantasy? If so, you haven't got a leg to stand on.

Are you saying that no more classified information on aliens and UFOs exists? If so, I know you are wrong about that, since we find new records all the time--and not just the ones I have seen myself.

Honestly, I think you have an extremely weak case if this is what you are trying to say.

I guess it's probably a good thing that I'm not trying to say that then isn't it?

Sure there are plenty of documents about UFOs which have been released through the years, and some of those documents even speculatively mention the possibility that ET is involved. What does this evidence support? It supports that the UFO phenomena is very real, something which I fully agree with. Does it support or validate the ETH? No, I'm afraid it doesn't.

Are there more documents? Probably. I wouldn't be surprised if there are a lot more documents. But so what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.