Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
nopeda

How many of you can get to the starting line?

355 posts in this topic

SO by this argument, no one will ever accept anything, even official documents, unless they can see it with their own eyes? So people never will be convinced, even if the U. S. Govt. was to release pictures and documents of ETs and ET craft, unless everyone can verify it as being what was claimed?

Official documents have also been used for the purposes of mis-direction. And quite effectively too, particularly during the Cold War. That doesn't really help to validate the claim of ET's any.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For years I was convinced that xts could not be flying around in our atmosphere or humans would be able to detect them with radar. I was less convinced about whether or not they had been here in the past. Later after seeing the evidence AA presents I re-thought my original belief and realised that if beings could travel from one star to another then they can probably absorb or reflect electromagnetic energy pretty much as they wish meaning we wouldn't be able to detect them with radar unless they allowed it or had a malfunction, which seems less likely from my pov. I had to figure out on my own how it could be possible though, because no one explained it to me or has even seemed to think it's significant since I started mentioning it to people.

I've never made much study of all the UFO reports from the distant past, but have no problem with the idea that some of them have been around for a very long time, and that time probably does not mean the same thing to them that it does to us. We're talking about civilizations that may have qualitatively different ideas from ours when it comes to space, time, science, intelligence, biology and so on, including the existence of intelligent machines.

I don't doubt that they have craft that can be invisible or stealthy, not detectable on radar, at least not unless they want to be detected. They have been known to monitor our communications and sometimes even mimic IFF signals, although generally they do not respond when contacted by radio.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course not. No one :no: does. So what specifically is it you think you're trying to talk about?

There's a difference between a cover-up to hide the existance of ET's and a cover-up to hide the truth. One doesn't necessarily equate to the other. I would have expected you to know the difference between the two but then I guess I was wrong. It's just as valid an argument IMO that the original story (your Roswell allusion) was a cover-up to direct peoples attention away from what the military really didn't want people to know, whatever that happened to be.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any evidence that any other earthlike planets have been discovered? If so, please present it. It's not that I doubt they exist, but I don't believe we can tell yet.

Well everyone favourites NASA

http://why.knovel.com/all-engineering-news/2189-nasas-kepler-mission-suggests-billions-of-earth-like-planets.html

http://www.zmescience.com/research/studies/how-many-planets-earth-milky-way-29032012/

Here is a winner :

http://www.space.com/19201-most-earth-like-alien-planet.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is logic 1on1 ... you have trillions of solar systems that are very very similar to ours.. so saying there is no other life or no proof exists of such thing is pure ignorance...

The problem is in vastness of space for start... You will find building blocks of life on all of those earthlike planets... missing materials from which primitve life started here on earth, is in my theory brought by asteroids and meteorites... so that brings us to how many similar events happened out there..

If drake equation would be at least 1% right we are looking at possible 50 alien civilizations nearby ( by nearby i mean million of light years away ). Even then the real science made calculations of probability ( they took in all that we knew at the time ). I for one don't need any proof of such a obvious thing...

....the question for me is when?

Edit: Sorry nopeda for going abit offtopic..

Edited by Nuke_em

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the documents and pictures of three ET bodies in a crashed "saucer" that were collected in the field. It was somewhere in the Southwest around 1953 and had a lot of similarities to the rumored crash at Kingman, Arizona. I don't know where all this was sent for examination, but I suspect that it was more than one location, not just Wright-Patterson.

'

Trying to find that out is a big shell game.

Yet

it is just your claim and may not be factual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For years I was convinced that xts could not be flying around in our atmosphere or humans would be able to detect them with radar. I was less convinced about whether or not they had been here in the past. Later after seeing the evidence AA presents I re-thought my original belief and realised that if beings could travel from one star to another then they can probably absorb or reflect electromagnetic energy pretty much as they wish meaning we wouldn't be able to detect them with radar unless they allowed it or had a malfunction, which seems less likely from my pov. I had to figure out on my own how it could be possible though, because no one explained it to me or has even seemed to think it's significant since I started mentioning it to people.

If we have stealth technology that can evade radar, I think aliens are perfectly capable of evading radar if they choose. Here's another reason on why commercial air traffic controller might not be able to detect them.

Here's what it said, "Normally, in a planes formation of seven planes, only the lead plane would turn on is transponder so air traffic controllers could track it. If the lead plane's transponder was turned off, however, the seven planes could passed by without detection"

Another part said, "The Air Traffic System is designed to identify aircraft who want to be identified. I have been aware of instances where the transponder of a medium sized aircraft failed and we flat never saw the guy on the digitized radar. It is very easy to elude FAA radar..."

http://home.comcast.net/~tprinty/UFO/azconc.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At one time, Europeans didn't know the existence of the Americas. It was inhabited all along!

Damn, you skeptics are hard to please. If Kate Upton wanted to sleep with one of you, you'll needs to hire a biologist to take her DNA and have a lab confirmed that she is an actual female. Even then the lab could make a mistake, so you'll need to hire a gynecologist to examines her. Meanwhile, she'd move on to one of us "believer". Since we believers trust our eyes and ears, we'll just go for it. Lets say she got pregnant by a "believer" and gave birth. You skeptics will now believe that she's an actual female. I guess you guys will be 2nd or 3rd or 4th. :D

@ Rlyeh A wise man sometime admits defeat and move on. Quillius pointed out to you multiple times, but you just failed to see the logic. You do not do yourself any favor. you are making no sense at all.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we have stealth technology that can evade radar, I think aliens are perfectly capable of evading radar if they choose. Here's another reason on why commercial air traffic controller might not be able to detect them.

Here's what it said, "Normally, in a planes formation of seven planes, only the lead plane would turn on is transponder so air traffic controllers could track it. If the lead plane's transponder was turned off, however, the seven planes could passed by without detection"

Another part said, "The Air Traffic System is designed to identify aircraft who want to be identified. I have been aware of instances where the transponder of a medium sized aircraft failed and we flat never saw the guy on the digitized radar. It is very easy to elude FAA radar..."

http://home.comcast..../UFO/azconc.htm

You realize of course that it depends on how the radar is configured right? Or do you think that enemy jets have their transponders turned on? Configured correctly, radar can get returns on a wide variety of airborne objects, even birds. Transponders were only invented as an assistance to commercial radar and are not required to detect objects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You realize of course that it depends on how the radar is configured right? Or do you think that enemy jets have their transponders turned on? Configured correctly, radar can get returns on a wide variety of airborne objects, even birds. Transponders were only invented as an assistance to commercial radar and are not required to detect objects.

I am just saying it's possible not to be detected. Do you think comercial radar is configured to detect anything other than commercial airlines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am just saying it's possible not to be detected. Do you think comercial radar is configured to detect anything other than commercial airlines?

No, but it would then follow that it is useless to use no returns on commercial radar as evidence of anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet

it is just your claim and may not be factual.

It is factual, and I invite you to look into all this on your own if you don't believe me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but it would then follow that it is useless to use no returns on commercial radar as evidence of anything.

When people seen something that didn't register on radar. Would it be valid for the skeptics to point to it not being on radar as conclusive evidence that its was never there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When people seen something that didn't register on radar. Would it be valid for the skeptics to point to it not being on radar as conclusive evidence that its was never there?

No, It would only mean that the sighting doesn't have corroborating radar evidence, not necessarily that nothing was there or that nothing was seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, "The government are, if nothing else, expert at the art of mis-direction."

cormac

You've summed it all up in a "nutshell" already knowing that the proof & evidence you seek in this forum, has already been dissected by specific government agencies whose agenda it is to intentionally mis-direct through the leaking of false & mis-leading information to the public.

Edited by NiteMarcher
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've summed it all up in a "nutshell" already knowing that the proof & evidence you seek in this forum, has already been dissected by specific government agencies whose agenda it is to intentionally mis-direct through the leaking of false & mis-leading information to the public.

Riiiiight, that's probably what I'd say if I were gullible enought to believe in unevidenced ET's visiting earth while the various governments were carrying on with their multi-billion dollar "Black Projects" right under my nose. Gotta love the gullibility of the AA crowd, they make it soooo easy for governments and their military to hide what they do. :D

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More have seen Santa than aliens and you're calling him a myth?!

I'd say no living person has seen the real St Nick who has been impersonated and lied about although it is done in a nice way, but many have seen the myth of Santa. So more people alive have seen what they call "aliens". Doesn't mean aliens are ETs from another star system, they could be something else much closer to home and the stories about them grew from lack of knowledge and tales just like the Santa Claus.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, It would only mean that the sighting doesn't have corroborating radar evidence, not necessarily that nothing was there or that nothing was seen.

This we can agree on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Riiiiight, that's probably what I'd say if I were gullible enought to believe in unevidenced ET's visiting earth while the various governments were carrying on with their multi-billion dollar "Black Projects" right under my nose. Gotta love the gullibility of the AA crowd, they make it soooo easy for governments and their military to hide what they do. :D

cormac

In the name of "National Security", i would not put anything pass them. History proven it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my pov it seems that in a forum called Extraterrestrial Life & The UFO Phenomenon the starting line is to consider the possibility that xts HAVE BEEN HERE in some realistic way(s). It doesn't mean you have to accept it as what actually happened, and certainly not all claims and evidence that it has happened, but also certainly that it COULD HAVE happened. Yet the majority of people in this forum don't seem able to think realistically about the possibility that they have, but only about the possibility that they have not. And not always realistically about that either. For example I've never heard or read a good explanation about how people could microwave the stems of plants making them lay down and form complex designs in fields using no light and making no sound in about 3 hours time, but some just seem to take it for granted that people are doing it. How to produce the microwave energy without a generator people could hear? How to control and direct the energy if they could? How to control the fall of so many plants so they lay in the correct way while the microwave energy is somehow being created and applied?

There are also countless other things in addition to crop circles that would require being able to realistically consider the influence of xt influence in order to get to the starting line. Yet it seems that not only can most posters in this forum not :no: get to the starting line, but on top of that they're also often critical and insulting toward people who can and do. Good :yes: fun!

A lot of cover-up types come to these forums doing their PR. A troll and debunk routine to marginalize the subject matter. Anti-alien spin doctoring that sort of thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Riiiiight, that's probably what I'd say if I were gullible enought to believe in unevidenced ET's visiting earth while the various governments were carrying on with their multi-billion dollar "Black Projects" right under my nose. Gotta love the gullibility of the AA crowd, they make it soooo easy for governments and their military to hide what they do. :D

cormac

Actually if there was nothing to ET it wouldn't be effective disinformation just like people wouldn't be make a huge fuss over ET.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one has ever exaplained why ETs if flase would make effective disinformation like the Russians or Chinese would drink that kool-aid and you making a huge stink over aliens even though there is nothing to them have it all figured out. Blame it on secret Black buget stealth craft using tales of aliens to mask their activity. G T F O H

Edited by topsecretresearch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh dear, you really don't like people who aren't persuaded by your arguments, do you? Perhaps you might want to try to make your arguments a bit more persuasive, or perhaps use better analogies, then perhaps you might not have to respond in this manner. Perhaps you might want to think about trying that next time,

Or perhaps you want to read what I'm replying to. You aren't very bright are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually if there was nothing to ET it wouldn't be effective disinformation just like people wouldn't be make a huge fuss over ET.

There's a real simple analogy for that. If one is concentrating so hard on the con-man's (military/government's) right hand, then they're NOT paying attention to his left. And from what I've seen from the AA crowd they can't seem to pull their attention away from the right hand. They're fed just enough BS to make it believable. I think it's so hilarious that some people/groups are so willing to be lied to. I wonder how many go snipe-hunting as well. :w00t:

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is factual, and I invite you to look into all this on your own if you don't believe me.

that sarbacher was told about it?

S: I was told that they had recovered a UFO with some people in it.

F: Bodies, whatever.

S: I don't know, that's what I think was told.

http://www.presidentialufo.com/the-canadian-cover-up/144-stanton-friedman-robert-sarbacher-interview-1983

bridge-for-sale.png

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.