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 -
Fila

The best evidence for UFOs

369 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

XenoFish
Just now, AlienBoy123 said:

 

lol

Can you back your claim up? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlienBoy123

i can but emmm it is kinda not really posible becous its a yt video

ok so basicaly hitler invented things that shouldint have been invented

 

Edited by AlienBoy123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlienBoy123
22 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Can you back your claim up? 

sort of yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
Just now, AlienBoy123 said:

sort of yes

Then why don't you post it. Let's see this 'truth'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlienBoy123
Just now, XenoFish said:

Then why don't you post it. Let's see this 'truth'.

SCROLE UP  I POSTED IT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fila
On 18/01/2018 at 8:17 PM, psyche101 said:

No more than project blue book another official study of many that amounts to squat. 

Dr Allen J Hynek said he was told to lie about UFO reports, and try to explain them away as nothing of interest, like swamp gas, weather balloons, meteorites etc.

Its possible that the military wants to keep UFOs a secret.., for a variety of reasons. Nothing evil.., just their nature. I think we need a team of scientists on the job.

On 18/01/2018 at 8:17 PM, psyche101 said:

Your not going to get anywhere wallowing in campfire stories. If you want to investigate this you have to gather new data, the old data is made up of guesses that you are just taking again new information is the only way forward. 

I'm not talking about chasing one link to explain it all. I have always said that UFOS without doubt must have multiple explanations. From Naga Balls to Min Min lights to sprites to whatever the heck the heck the Fylingdales documented

There are hundreds of links for you to investigate legitimately and it is ridiculous for you to ask someone to list them all for you. If you really do have a genuine interest you will seek them out. Personally I have even contacted NASAs senior astrobiologist to discuss an Apollo mission UFO. I had to convince him that I was not a crank before he would take me seroiusly though, that's what UFOlogy has done to general investigation. 

Heck yea. I'm down for that hey. Let's do this! I'll keep looking around.., but that's all I could find. It really shows how much we need to improve our studies.

On 18/01/2018 at 8:17 PM, psyche101 said:

Again, this is why I see you as a 'believer' this is just a flood tactic. If you are too lazy to search them out you could at the very least approach one subject at a time. It's unreasonable to expect multiple answers which much work and debate has resolved already. One post to explain all the cases in sufficient depth to satisfy you would takes pages on its own. 

I can see your perspective. I guess my problem is when I search for a topic.., I am using Proquest and other databases for peer-reviewed journals and other papers. If I can't find anything.., I just ask everyone. Then look at their links. See what it says.., then check their references. Usually I cannot find any source list on UFO/sceptic websites.., so I attempt a google search but get websites of similar calibre.

Its really hard to find any credible data on this subject. It comes down to witness credibility.., which is a boring and at best gets nowhere.., which adds to the "mystery" of UFOs <insert X-files theme song here>

On 18/01/2018 at 8:17 PM, psyche101 said:

It has been investigated and verified by both UFO groups and rational groups like Bad Astronomy (Phil Plait - another good source for you) There is as much testimony from reliable professionals to conclude the more exotic explanations are simply illusory contours 

I agree that planes etc are most likely the right answer.., but I don't agree with the process in choosing the answer.

We can say its most likely planes.., but this is still not a conclusion. More of a hypothesis.

On 18/01/2018 at 8:17 PM, psyche101 said:

Yet your thousands statement makes you guilty of just that doesnt it. 

Not really. I was trying to make a point. but it seems lost.

I did reference this, but in a different thread. I was trying to show you that even though the information is here, its hard to find. So I challenge you to a duel. Let's each try and find each others information, and see how we go. It may help explain why I am hesitant when you tell me to "search for it".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fila
On 18/01/2018 at 9:41 PM, XenoFish said:

Then why don't you post it. Let's see this 'truth'.

Why would you say that?? lol

Edited by Fila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlienBoy123
Just now, XenoFish said:

Hope you've include yourself in that comment.

ye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
40 minutes ago, AlienBoy123 said:

watch all

No.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
19 minutes ago, toast said:

No.

It was seeing secure team that did it for you too.:lol:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erno86

"The thing about truth is, not a lot of people can handle it." - Connor McGregor

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fila

THE BEST EVIDENCE FOR UFOs.

So far we have:

 

Project Hessdallen

http://www.hessdalen.org/reports/hpreport84.shtml

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4XNfDZArig

 

CNES - GEIPAN

French government space agency

http://www.cnes-geipan.fr/index.php?id=206

 

CUFOS 

The Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) is an international group of scientists, academics, investigators, and volunteers dedicated to the continuing examination and analysis of the UFO phenomenon.

http://www.cufos.org/

 

UFO EVIDENCE

Scientific study of the UFO phenomenon and search for ET life

http://www.ufoevidence.org

 

UFODATA

We seek to create a systematic, rigorous science of UFO phenomena. Such a science is needed because of misplaced certainties on both sides of the UFO debate: “believers” convinced that UFOs are extraterrestrials, and “skeptics” equally convinced that UFOs do not even exist.

http://www.ufodata.net

 

LIST OF CREDIBLE CASES

Rendlesham Forest Incident (1980) - https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/283603-rendlesham-forest-ufo-sighting-new-evidence/.

Japan Air 1620 (1987)

Tehran UFO (1976)

Belgian UFO wave (1989)

Kirtland AFB (1957)http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/232293-kirtland-air-force-base-ufo-november-1957/#comment-4425527

Michigan UFO (1966)

Westwall (1966)

Hessdalen UFO wave (1981)

Phoenix Lights (1997) http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/305172-the-phoenix-lights/?page=2

 

(Feel free to add your own, or argue against anything on the list)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

The Phoenix Lights is one of the least credible cases. It was a squadron of planes. Anyone that suggests that the Phoenix Lights is one of the credible cases simply has no idea what they are talking about.

The Rendlesham incident is also a poor choice for a credible case.

The Belgian UFO wave was a poor case with the best evidence from those sightings being a hoax.

The Hessdalen lights do not fall into the same group of sightings as these other cases.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

The least credible cases for UFOs:

The Phoenix Lights

1997 - 5 planes and later flares dropped by planes

2007 - more flares dropped by planes

2008 - flares on balloons

Roswell 1947 crash

Betty and Barney Hill

Bob White's UFO artifact - from an industrial grinder

Kean's Chilean UFO

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fila
4 hours ago, stereologist said:

The Phoenix Lights is one of the least credible cases. It was a squadron of planes. Anyone that suggests that the Phoenix Lights is one of the credible cases simply has no idea what they are talking about.

The Rendlesham incident is also a poor choice for a credible case.

The Belgian UFO wave was a poor case with the best evidence from those sightings being a hoax.

The Hessdalen lights do not fall into the same group of sightings as these other cases.

Hi Stereo. I'd really like to discuss all of these cases in great detail. I have almost finished what I need to do IRL, and will have a lot more time to delve into all this over the next few months if you're keen.

All I ask for now is that we have case specific discussions in threads designed for that topic. I realise how arrogant that sounds, and I don't have moderator privileges.., but it would just help me out and maybe others.

You do have a great ability to find information I cannot.., and have shown you can grasp the data and understand it yourself, as opposed to simple copy and paste posters. I look forward to talking with you more in the future.

I will cross those off the list for now as you have challenged them. Should we find an old Belgium UFO wave thread, and resurrect it? Or would you like to start a new one. (I'd like to start a new one.., or find one with only 1 or 2 pages). I'll jump on the Hessdalen one cause I'm a huge fan of their work.

 

LIST OF CREDIBLE CASES

Rendlesham Forest Incident (1980) - https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/283603-rendlesham-forest-ufo-sighting-new-evidence/.

Japan Air 1620 (1987)

Tehran UFO (1976)

Belgian UFO wave (1989)

Kirtland AFB (1957)http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/232293-kirtland-air-force-base-ufo-november-1957/#comment-4425527

Michigan UFO (1966)

Westwall (1966)

Hessdalen UFO wave (1981)

Phoenix Lights (1997) http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/305172-the-phoenix-lights/?page=2

Edited by Fila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alien Origins
1 hour ago, Fila said:

Hi Stereo. I'd really like to discuss all of these cases in great detail. I have almost finished what I need to do IRL, and will have a lot more time to delve into all this over the next few months if you're keen.

All I ask for now is that we have case specific discussions in threads designed for that topic. I realise how arrogant that sounds, and I don't have moderator privileges.., but it would just help me out and maybe others.

You do have a great ability to find information I cannot.., and have shown you can grasp the data and understand it yourself, as opposed to simple copy and paste posters. I look forward to talking with you more in the future.

I will cross those off the list for now as you have challenged them. Should we find an old Belgium UFO wave thread, and resurrect it? Or would you like to start a new one. (I'd like to start a new one.., or find one with only 1 or 2 pages). I'll jump on the Hessdalen one cause I'm a huge fan of their work.

 

LIST OF CREDIBLE CASES

Rendlesham Forest Incident (1980) - https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/283603-rendlesham-forest-ufo-sighting-new-evidence/.

Japan Air 1620 (1987)

Tehran UFO (1976)

Belgian UFO wave (1989)

Kirtland AFB (1957)http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/232293-kirtland-air-force-base-ufo-november-1957/#comment-4425527

Michigan UFO (1966)

Westwall (1966)

Hessdalen UFO wave (1981)

Phoenix Lights (1997) http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/305172-the-phoenix-lights/?page=2

Quote

Hessdalen UFO wave (1981)

I know we cross this one off the list but here is a link on U-M about it:

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 hour ago, Fila said:

Hi Stereo. I'd really like to discuss all of these cases in great detail. I have almost finished what I need to do IRL, and will have a lot more time to delve into all this over the next few months if you're keen.

All I ask for now is that we have case specific discussions in threads designed for that topic. I realise how arrogant that sounds, and I don't have moderator privileges.., but it would just help me out and maybe others.

You do have a great ability to find information I cannot.., and have shown you can grasp the data and understand it yourself, as opposed to simple copy and paste posters. I look forward to talking with you more in the future.

I will cross those off the list for now as you have challenged them. Should we find an old Belgium UFO wave thread, and resurrect it? Or would you like to start a new one. (I'd like to start a new one.., or find one with only 1 or 2 pages). I'll jump on the Hessdalen one cause I'm a huge fan of their work.

 

LIST OF CREDIBLE CASES

Rendlesham Forest Incident (1980) - https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/283603-rendlesham-forest-ufo-sighting-new-evidence/.

Japan Air 1620 (1987)

Tehran UFO (1976)

Belgian UFO wave (1989)

Kirtland AFB (1957)http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/232293-kirtland-air-force-base-ufo-november-1957/#comment-4425527

Michigan UFO (1966)

Westwall (1966)

Hessdalen UFO wave (1981)

Phoenix Lights (1997) http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/305172-the-phoenix-lights/?page=2

There is zero need to resurrect any of those cases.

You have the JAL flight number wrong as well as the year. It is JAL 1628 in 1986.

http://badufos.blogspot.com/2014/07/jal-1628-capt-terauchis-marvellous.html

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
6 minutes ago, Alien Origins said:

I know we cross this one off the list but here is a link on U-M about it:

 

As I pointed out they are not like the other events. These are real events, but not the sort of things as the other events. I don't think they should be lumped in with these other stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80

Im continuously finding myself stupified when people just couple 'extraterrestrial' with anything unidentifiable and/or exemplifying behaviour our commonly known tech is unable to reproduce.

There is no indication what so ever these unidentified objects are coming from another place in the galaxy, none. Yet we have the most prominent experts just jumping to thesame 'ET' conclusion or insinuation almost every single time. In the Netherlands we even have a university aero- and space engineering scholar (Coen Vermeeren) who doesnt seem to mind at all to conclude thesame extremely premature claim without blinking. While this is a very rational individual normally, it seems to be some kind of inherent disbelief of such phenomena simply being terrestrial. Maybe because we have been inundated with the notion we have discovered any and everything this planet has to offer, our history, our flora and founa, 'reality'. Which is, ofcourse, false.

If anyone has any info indicating (some of) these 'UFOs' are in fact 'extraterrestrial', please forward it here. This excludes 'channelled info', for obvious reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alien Origins
4 hours ago, stereologist said:

As I pointed out they are not like the other events. These are real events, but not the sort of things as the other events. I don't think they should be lumped in with these other stories.

Oh I know....But he had it on the list with no link and I just happen to find a link to it here. And I agree with your statement it should not be.

Edited by Alien Origins
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alien Origins
4 hours ago, Phaeton80 said:

Im continuously finding myself stupified when people just couple 'extraterrestrial' with anything unidentifiable and/or exemplifying behaviour our commonly known tech is unable to reproduce.

There is no indication what so ever these unidentified objects are coming from another place in the galaxy, none. Yet we have the most prominent experts just jumping to thesame 'ET' conclusion or insinuation almost every single time. In the Netherlands we even have a university aero- and space engineering scholar (Coen Vermeeren) who doesnt seem to mind at all to conclude thesame extremely premature claim without blinking. While this is a very rational individual normally, it seems to be some kind of inherent disbelief of such phenomena simply being terrestrial. Maybe because we have been inundated with the notion we have discovered any and everything this planet has to offer, our history, our flora and founa, 'reality'. Which is, ofcourse, false.

If anyone has any info indicating (some of) these 'UFOs' are in fact 'extraterrestrial', please forward it here. This excludes 'channelled info', for obvious reasons.

Quote

Im continuously finding myself stupified when people just couple 'extraterrestrial' with anything unidentifiable and/or exemplifying behaviour our commonly known tech is unable to reproduce.

Thats the first rule in Ufology if you don't know what it is it's got to be alien.

Quote

There is no indication what so ever these unidentified objects are coming from another place in the galaxy, none. Yet we have the most prominent experts just jumping to thesame 'ET' conclusion or insinuation almost every single time.

Your right there's not. But who do we blame for such stuff? Ancient Aliens Show, You Tube, Conspiracy Theorists?  And it's a known fact that no matter how much rational folks know better there are those out there that are hell bent on proclaiming some unidentified object as "alien" without a shred of proof to the contrary. It is a burning need for some to have an explanation for something that is unknown weather that explanation fits into main science circles or fills a need for them to believe. There is no reasonable explanation for them other than its aliens from another planet so they run with that....

Edited by Alien Origins
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80
1 hour ago, Alien Origins said:

Thats the first rule in Ufology if you don't know what it is it's got to be alien.

Your right there's not. But who do we blame for such stuff? Ancient Aliens Show, You Tube, Conspiracy Theorists?  And it's a known fact that no matter how much rational folks know better there are those out there that are hell bent on proclaiming some unidentified object as "alien" without a shred of proof to the contrary. It is a burning need for some to have an explanation for something that is unknown weather that explanation fits into main science circles or fills a need for them to believe. There is no reasonable explanation for them other than its aliens from another planet so they run with that....

 

I think it might go much deeper than that. Like I said; I believe this flows, to a significant degree, from the popular and broadly accepted (false) notion we have discovered everything that is to be discovered on this planet. Which is grossly misplaced. Especially given other prevalent popular beliefs, being that things only 'exist' if and when it can be 'measured', quantified (with our present tech).. as well as supposing our present civilization is the zenith of human history.

Sure, the media you mention add to that specifically tailored to the subject at hand, but the core of this phenomenon (equating 'UFO' with 'aliens') follows from that fundamental assumption of us 'owning' and 'knowing' everything on this globe. A very soothing, but equally incorrect presumption, imho.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alien Origins
20 minutes ago, Phaeton80 said:

 

I think it might go much deeper than that. Like I said; I believe this flows, to a significant degree, from the popular and broadly accepted (false) notion we have discovered everything that is to be discovered on this planet. Which is grossly misplaced. Especially given other prevalent popular beliefs, being that things only 'exist' if and when it can be 'measured', quantified (with our present tech).. as well as supposing our present civilization is the zenith of human history.

Sure, the media you mention add to that specifically tailored to the subject at hand, but the core of this phenomenon (equating 'UFO' with 'aliens') follows from that fundamental assumption of us 'owning' and 'knowing' everything on this globe. A very soothing, but equally incorrect presumption, imho.

I agree but as humans we are not comfortable steeped in ignorance I don't guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80
Just now, Alien Origins said:

I agree but as humans we are not comfortable steeped in ignorance I don't guess.


I apologize if I seem a wee bit unagreable, but I think the direct opposite is true. I think the masses would rather be steeped in (blissful) ignorance than being aware of actual reality.. which is very sobering, even depressing in a lot of cases.

Red pill, blue pill sort of thing. Most - by far - would prefer the blue, I'd wager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alien Origins
24 minutes ago, Phaeton80 said:


I apologize if I seem a wee bit unagreable, but I think the direct opposite is true. I think the masses would rather be steeped in (blissful) ignorance than being aware of actual reality.. which is very sobering, even depressing in a lot of cases.

Red pill, blue pill sort of thing. Most - by far - would prefer the blue, I'd wager.

I don't know my favorite color is black..Is there a black one?:D

  • Like 1

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.