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
PurpleFlower486

Any Alien signs after abduction?

24 posts in this topic

Hi, I was wondering if anyone has or have any physical signs, evidence from an alien abduction? Other than the 72 signs on the internet. 

Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Sadly I know someone who had a boil lanced and claimed ufo'ry but the evidence was just puss. Nothing there but was full blown on the alien implant thing. Gross.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Kurzweil said:

Sadly I know someone who had a boil lanced and claimed ufo'ry but the evidence was just puss. Nothing there but was full blown on the alien implant thing. Gross.

Oh my 0_0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, PurpleFlower486 said:

Hi, I was wondering if anyone has or have any physical signs, evidence from an alien abduction? Other than the 72 signs on the internet. 

Thank you!

The best answer is that there is no good answer to your question.

What '72 signs' do you refer to?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

The best answer is that there is no good answer to your question.

What '72 signs' do you refer to?

I believe this is the original '72 signs' blogspot page: http://ufothetruthisoutthere.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/72-possible-signs-of-alien-abduction.html

It might not be the original though, and no idea how it was compiled. But a pretty crazy list...

Edit: 'Crazy' meaning there are a bunch of very mundane things in between very absurd things, which pretty much suggests everyone has been abducted.

For example: 42 – BEHIND YOUR EYE: A headache, especially in the sinus, or in just one ear.

Edit 2: TBH, it's a very entertaining list and well worth a cheeky little peruse. I highly suggest it.

Edited by Timonthy
Edit, Edit 2.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

alien25.jpg

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just watched a documentary on investigating the truth into UFOs.  The team were comprised of a sceptic, someone who had been abducted plus 2 other neutral researchers.  This programme revealed tangible evidence of an alien sighting at Hopewell, Ohio (following the findings and confirmation at a thorough lab analysis).

To cut to the chase, Ben Foggin shot at the orb sighting and produced physical evidence which was analysed!  The piece of metal was found to be a form of aluminium alloy containing a form of strontium not yet known.  The team also had radiation equipment and found that, where the UFO was seen, had a higher than average reading for radiation.

Ben Foggin said that when he shot at it, the orb made a strange, washing machine type sound then there was silence and the sound of something dropping before it disappeared.   He saw a piece of something on his gravel driveway, tried to pick it up but it was too hot.  The lab confirmed finding bits of gravel deeply embedded into the crevice of the piece of aluminium alloy.

Now, here's the thing. Having just seen this programme, I immediately looked for more about this case on the net but found only a youtube of him discussing his abductions experiences.  Why do you think that might be?   Of course such evidence would be solid proof and the powers that be don't want that do they?  Hmmm....

Edited by sees
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

72 signs of alien abduction?

I thought I'd died and gone to heaven when I read 'No. 12 - Sperm Samples' and 'No. 15 - Balls of Light' but then 'No. 64 : The Compulsion to Study Quantum Physics' disabused me of the dream.

As requested by the OP I would like to add another of my own which I think should really be No. 1:

No. 73 - Having Memories of Being Abducted by Aliens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, sees said:

Of course such evidence would be solid proof and the powers that be don't want that do they?

Well it wouldn't be solid proof but anyway - my question is this:

If the authorities (powers that be I guess) wanted to hide it and are actively deleting and removing content then why did they allow the documentary to be aired?

You've essentially just said you saw something on TV that nobody wanted you to see.  I'd hate to be responsible for ratings on that channel.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

Well it wouldn't be solid proof but anyway - my question is this:

If the authorities (powers that be I guess) wanted to hide it and are actively deleting and removing content then why did they allow the documentary to be aired?

You've essentially just said you saw something on TV that nobody wanted you to see.  I'd hate to be responsible for ratings on that channel.

It would constitute solid proof since the piece of aluminium alloy contained a form of strontium not yet known, i.e. more advanced than what is currently known to us.

Also I didn't say that no one wanted me to see the programme!  I implied that evidence was being censored from being available on the net.

It might be that the powers that be didn't deem the TV channel worthy of censorship (it does a mixture of programmes).

Edited by sees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, sees said:

contained a form of strontium not yet known

Even if true it doesn't mean it's from an Alien spacecraft.  Without being able to examine the results of the study (which was obviously carried out by several independent labs?) no one can really say.  Documentaries are kind of known for stretching evidence to fit their agenda (getting more views).

13 minutes ago, sees said:

Also I didn't say that no one wanted me to see the programme!  I implied that evidence was being censored from being available on the net.

It still makes no sense to me that they would leave the documentary untouched and delete evidence online.  Do you have any proof of the deletions or were you just assuming that's what happened? 

15 minutes ago, sees said:

It might be that the powers that be didn't deem the TV channel worthy of censorship (it does a mixture of programmes)

As opposed to the internet which is single track...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

 

It still makes no sense to me that they would leave the documentary untouched and delete evidence online.  Do you have any proof of the deletions or were you just assuming that's what happened? 

As opposed to the internet which is single track...

How do you prove a censorship/deletion?  Ha!  Any idea? 

The fact is that, in the documentary, evidence was produced and analysed at an independent lab (remember, the documentary was about investigation of the truth, not a bias) and that something this revealing would SURELY be available on the internet i.e. why can I find only his name and his abduction experiences without the whole picture of the situation, i.e. his physical evidence of the sighting?   Kinda suspect don't you think!?

Edited by sees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sees said:

How do you prove a censorship/deletion?  Ha!  Any idea?

It's hard to prove but at least one other person claiming this would add credence.  Perhaps one of the people in the documentary? Have you tried to contact them to ask why it's not available? Maybe it was removed after further analysis showed a mistake in the original? 

9 minutes ago, sees said:

why can I find only his name and his abduction experiences without the whole picture of the situation, i.e. his physical evidence of the sighting?   Kinda suspect don't you think!?

Not really.  If the evidence failed further testing this would explain it perfectly and without the need for a conspiracy.  Is the documentary available online? I don't mind sending an email on your behalf.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

It's hard to prove but at least one other person claiming this would add credence.  Perhaps one of the people in the documentary? Have you tried to contact them to ask why it's not available? Maybe it was removed after further analysis showed a mistake in the original? 

Not really.  If the evidence failed further testing this would explain it perfectly and without the need for a conspiracy.  Is the documentary available online? I don't mind sending an email on your behalf.

Unfortunately it was a recorded programme and, after watching it, I deleted it before noting the channel, name of the programme or looking at the credits at the end.  I didn't think I needed to, i.e. I felt sure that such a revelation would easily be backed up/supported by something online....  VERY strange that there is a total absence of what was seen and explored in this documentary...in fact, highly suspicious.  If what you say is true, i.e. that further tests were done and found wanting...then surely this would be on the web, i.e. a debunker's delight!

I have contacted a UFO truth magazine and am waiting to hear what they know about this.

Edited by sees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, sees said:

Unfortunately it was a recorded programme and, after watching it, I deleted it before noting the channel, name of the programme or looking at the credits at the end.  I didn't think I needed to

Could this be it?  Sorry about the language but it's just a cursory search.

PRODUCTION TITLE: Aliens Investigated (Uncovering Aliens)

COMPANY: Raw Television

LINE MANAGER: Fiona McDonald

PROGRAMME LENGTH: 60 minutes

SERIES: 1

GENRE: Factual Entertainment

SECTOR: Broadcast Television

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the documentary online. It was originally made in English but the one online is overdubbed in Portuguese. It is one of those made for daytime TV. It's made to entertain, not educate. The reason there is nothing about it on mainstream media or in academic litetature is because its claims re extraterrestrials are scientifically bogus.

There is also another video on youtube of Ben Foggin speaking to camera for over 30 mins about his UFO and extraterrestrial encounters. Apparently he has lived in various places and everywhere he goes he finds 'activity'!

For both videos type 'youtube ben foggin hopewell'. They come straight up.

Edited by Ozymandias
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

Could this be it?  Sorry about the language but it's just a cursory search.

PRODUCTION TITLE: Aliens Investigated (Uncovering Aliens)

COMPANY: Raw Television

LINE MANAGER: Fiona McDonald

PROGRAMME LENGTH: 60 minutes

SERIES: 1

GENRE: Factual Entertainment

SECTOR: Broadcast Television

 

That's it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

Could this be it?  Sorry about the language but it's just a cursory search.

PRODUCTION TITLE: Aliens Investigated (Uncovering Aliens)

COMPANY: Raw Television

 

Yes that's it - from 26.25 mins in

Edited by sees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sees said:

No - it wasn't pro Aliens.  As mentioned, it was a documentary exploring the truth (or otherwise) of the situation.

Eh what? So that isn't the documentary? Even though it's as you described and has the person you described at the end, he's even waving his shotgun around and can be seen holding the piece of aluminium you mentioned.  So now we are looking for a really similar documentary with the same story in it but not this one.

What a shame you couldn't provide even a clue as to what it might be, when it was, where it was or what it was called...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

I found the documentary online. It was originally made in English but the one online is overdubbed in Portuguese. It is one of those made for daytime TV. It's made to entertain, not educate. The reason there is nothing about it on mainstream media or in academic litetature is because its claims re extraterrestrials are scientifically bogus.

There is also another video on youtube of Ben Foggin speaking to camera for over 30 mins about his UFO and extraterrestrial encounters. Apparently he has lived in various places and everywhere he goes he finds 'activity'!

For both videos type 'youtube ben foggin hopewell'. They come straight up.

How do you substantiate that the claims are scientifically bogus?  Did you watch it i.e. the lab analysis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, I'mConvinced said:

Eh what? So that isn't the documentary? Even though it's as you described and has the person you described at the end, he's even waving his shotgun around and can be seen holding the piece of aluminium you mentioned.  So now we are looking for a really similar documentary with the same story in it but not this one.

What a shame you couldn't provide even a clue as to what it might be, when it was, where it was or what it was called...

You are too fast!  I edited my post once I realised ....it didn't start the same way as the programme I watched.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that people still believe in this stuff.:rolleyes:

"I have a headache." Must be aliens trying to communicate with me.:lol:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sees said:

How do you substantiate that the claims are scientifically bogus?  Did you watch it i.e. the lab analysis?

My Portuguese isn't great so I'm going to need to find an English version or a translator before addressing anything else (I know this wasn't directed at me but just saying).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, sees said:

How do you substantiate that the claims are scientifically bogus?  Did you watch it i.e. the lab analysis?

No, I didn't, but before you rush to judgement consider this:

I looked in the academic literature for articles about this new alien alloy and the discovery of the alleged new form of strontium and found nothing.

The programme does not identify the four investigating experts clearly enough to determine their qualifications, academic affiliations and research profiles. You might think I am being an academic snob but without this information to establish their bona fides to set themselves up as trustworthy and authoritive judges of the matter being investigated on our behalf it is quite impossible to accept their findings. So I am not in the least surprised that nothing is forthcoming from the internet or elsewhere regarding their 'research'. They did not publish their work. Why?

The same problem arises with regard to the lab that tested the 'alien' sample and the people who worked there. Was it an internationally recognised and reputable facility? Was its reputation, standards and people respected and trusted in the international scientific community? Why didn't they publish their work on this truly remarkable 'alien' alloy?

The silence in these quarters tells me, an engineer and scientist, they had nothing to announce to the scientific community. [The 'alt' version is to say there is a conspiracy to hide the truth!]

 

Edited by Ozymandias

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.