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 -

Ex-NASA scientist claims that UFOs are real


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, stereologist said:

It is patently clear that so far there has been zero support posted for Icke and his reptilian delusions.

There is also support for the made up menagerie of fake aliens.

Ahhhhhhh ....................................

I meant to say There is also NO support for the made up menagerie of fake aliens.

Big mistake. Sorry about that.

Truthseeker007 often pretends there are all sorts of aliens that are known.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stereologist said:

I meant to say There is also NO support for the made up menagerie of fake aliens

you were right the first time>Edit to add: I think???= there's tons of support for most being fake/ made up.

..

There is also NO support for the made up menagerie of fake aliens;)

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

On 7/1/2018 at 3:54 PM, Truthseeker007 said:

So to you anybody who asks questions is a CTer? I don't know about you but when I was a kid I was told to always ask questions about everything and never believe what you are told even if it comes from an "authority figure."

This is my precisely proclaimed definition of "high level comprehension" and call myself Dr. But never went to college...regardless there is a word to what you just defined

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 06/07/2018 at 7:55 PM, stereologist said:

Here is more made up malarkey.

The stream of malarkey being vomited into threads never ceases.

I'm all ears Stereo. What's the issue? Are you saying I am wrong? Are you saying all radar is the same? Are you saying the worlds most powerful radar system is worldwide constantly monitoring the globe?

Please. Instead of being vague and cryptic.., or just leaving multiple links for me to read (only to find out they don't back up anything you claim)..., can you please go into more detail from now on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/07/2018 at 1:21 PM, josellama2000 said:

what an idiot report. Anything you can't identify and flies is an UFO.

He is not saying the objects are identified. Its just his hypothesis.
People are entitled to their theories.., and science actually requires multiple hypothesis to exist as it only strengthens the correct conclusion.

Any anger directed towards other theories is only a primitive reaction. Even Einstein was dismissive of Quantum entanglement.., it was Feynman who said "Shut up and calculate"


Meaning.., stop pushing your own incomplete theories as gospel.., and do some effing work.

We can all blame "believers".., but if you can't see yourself doing the same thing.., then that's bias.

Edited by Fila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fila said:

He is not saying the objects are identified. Its just his hypothesis.
People are entitled to their theories..

Why did you change the word from hypothesis to 'theory'?  BIG, in fact HUMUNGOUS, Freudian slip right there, which gives away your biases.

They are NOT the same things.  Yes, everyone is entitled to their own hypotheses (and fantasies), but none of those need to be taken seriously UNTIL they meet the criteria for a theory.

Quote

and science actually requires multiple hypothesis to exist as it only strengthens the correct conclusion.

You've never had anything to do with science, have you?  That's laughable hogwash, and again you've used the wrong word.  But let me be quite clear, NOTHING other than direct observation, applicability, correctness (and to a lesser extent, simplicity) 'strengthens' a theory.  And again, science does not make 'conclusions'.  Any new *theory* is judged on its merits - if it is better than the previous one, the previous one gets replaced.

Seriously Fila, this stuff you are posting is ignorant drivel.

Quote

Any anger directed towards other theories is only a primitive reaction.

No anger, just dismissal of hogwash.

Quote

Even Einstein was dismissive of Quantum entanglement..

And as this was not a well documented and not even vaguely understood phenomenon at that time, Einstein was very much entitled to give his opinion - that opinion wasn't a theory, it was at best a hypothesis.  And NO-ONE has yet been able to reconcile QE with Relativity, despite Relativity having been tested over and over...  So Einstein was pretty much on the money, and still is - there is STILL stuff we don't yet have a handle on.

Quote

...stop pushing your own incomplete theories as gospel.., and do some effing work.

Out of the mouths of babes.....  Backatcha, Fila. 

Quote

We can all blame "believers".., but if you can't see yourself doing the same thing.., then that's bias.

Well, you do apply so much of that in your posts (along with errors like those above..) you should be able to recognise it...

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Why did you change the word from hypothesis to 'theory'?  BIG, in fact HUMUNGOUS, Freudian slip right there, which gives away your biases.

Please calm down and stop jumping to conclusions. "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves and wiser people so full of doubts.” ~Bertrand Russell

Please explain how this is being bias.

57 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

You've never had anything to do with science, have you?  that's laughable hogwash, and again you've used the wrong word.  But let me quite clear, NOTHING other than direct observation, applicability, correctness (and to a lesser extent, simplicity) 'strengthens' a theory.  And again, science does not make conclusions.  Any new *theory* is judged on it's merits - if it is better than the previous one, the previous one gets replaced.

Seriously Fila, this stuff you are posting is ignorant drivel.

lol, of course observations strengthen a result. No one is claiming this to be false. This is a redundant statement. But this is not the ONLY thing that helps. If you want to make the claim that more hypotheses do NOT help find the correct answer.., then I would love to hear some more information on why you think this.

"The use of multiple working hypotheses to gain strong inference is widely promoted as a means to enhance the effectiveness of scientific investigation."

http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/4/1/160756

 

57 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

And as this was not a well documented and not even vaguely understood phenomenon, Einstein was very much entitled to give his opinion - that opinion wasn't a theory, it was at best a hypothesis.  And NO-ONE has yet been able to reconcile QE with Relativity, despite Relativity having been tested over and over...  So Einstein was pretty much on the money, and still is - there is STILL stuff we don't yet have a handle on.

Conflicting ideas are commonplace. Multiple hypothesis are commonplace. You are confusing this with spamming your ideas.., day after day after day. On a topic that has no real evidence for either hypothesis to be correct.., yet you still act as though your idea is gospel, The one true answer (without evidence).

There should be a term for this. Shilling a product? Hype man? Ignorance combined with arrogance?

Like Einstein whining about "spooky action at a distance". Instead of spamming your opinions as gospel.., shut up and calculate. Otherwise we will just keep going around and around. If you believe this is the way to find the correct answer.., then your procedure is flawed. 

57 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

No anger, just dismissal of hogwash.

Your definition of anger seems different to mine. I feel like your attempts at "informing people" may be taken as anger. If you want to ignore this.., then that merely shows the type of person I'm dealing with. 

 

57 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Out of the mouths of babes.....  Backatcha, Fila. 

Oh really? What have you done for UFOlogy?

Nothing but armchair dismissing.., and attempting to make flimsy assumptions fit in any way possible while yelling at anyone else with a different POV.

Meanwhile I am writing a study guide.., creating an app for all devices.., designing an automated observation station.., reviewed hundred's of governemt files regarding UFOs (not just YouTube clips and junk posts).

Posted various threads discussing new options to move forwards.., raining major issues / hurdles we need to overcome like (how to document UFOs) and the inherit bias amongst believers.., and ask how we can overcome this (initally regarding "believes" only to realise everyone is in the same boat).

I have asked us all to work together from day one of my arrival.., only to be met with anger, false accusations and defamation attempts.

So I guess.., outta the mouths of babes (whatever that means)..., right.., back.., atcha ChrLzs.

57 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Well, you do apply so much of that in your posts (along with errors like those above..) you should be able to recognise it...

You are unable to see the double standards / hypocrisy. I guess this is such common issue that it deserves a thread of its own.

Edited by Fila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Fila said:

especially due to your past record of being wrong.

I am wrong from time to time - you don't have that problem, I gather? :D

Anyway, please post the relevant example to which you refer.

As for your bias - your choice of video was .. er... a good one to illustrate that .. in exactly the wrong way....

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

I am wrong from time to time - you don't have that problem, I gather? :D

Anyway, please post the relevant example to which you refer.

As for your bias - your choice of video was .. er... a good one to illustrate that .. in exactly the wrong way....

My post history will clearly show when I have made errors.., that I have rectified the issue, and made it very clear that it happened and who corrected me. The reason you decided to say this.., while ignoring the rest of my reply merely shows you are not capable of a rational discussion.

12 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Anyway, please post the relevant example to which you refer.

Yawn.., already you prefer to discuss personal attributes over UFO facts.
You like to ignore my posts.., then make more accusations.., then ask more questions from me. I will bite a few times.., but eventually I will be bringing you back to respond properly. If it continues.., you will have the same stezza boycott rules applied until you reply.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/318774-mystery-object-spotted-over-whidbey-island/?do=findComment&comment=6471435

Also the thread where you and Stereo accused me of lying about 1x zoom.., and that my formula was wrong.., and yours was better.

12 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

As for your bias - your choice of video was .. er... a good one to illustrate that .. in exactly the wrong way....

Please feel free to go into more detail. Or keep giggling behind my back hoping for some "likes" if you prefer. Whatever floats your boat.

Edited by Fila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you STILL do not admit you were wrong regarding the 1x zoom stupidity?

Talk about 'arrogant tossers' (your words).  Is there anyone else here who is still confused as to what that 1x meant?  Ie that it was NOT the final zoom figure and was referring to optional (additional) digital zoom, ON TOP OF the huge amount of ACTUAL zoom due to the telescopic lens optics?

And you haven't answered the question - where was I wrong, relevant to this topic?

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChrLzs said:

So you STILL do not admit you were wrong regarding the 1x zoom stupidity?

ChrLzs. If I am young.., then you are old. Its VERY possible that you may be experiencing memory loss. Please refrain from getting angry and making accusations without checking.

From that thread: "1 more time Stereo.., then I am going to have to ask your peers for advice on how to handle this situation. I cannot keep repeating myself.

I got the information from here: https://coi.tothestarsacademy.com/2015-go-fast-footage/

Here is where I referenced the 1x zoom.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/316365-another-released-video/?do=findComment&comment=6439938

If you re-read my post.., you will see I am saying the same thing. Once we know the camera specs.., we can get an estimated size. I simply showed the process as an example.., then asked us to work together to find the real specs. You don't seem to understand this. You keep claiming I am arrogant, when all I am trying to do is work together."

Try this link.., then re-read the original post. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=example

1 hour ago, ChrLzs said:

And you haven't answered the question - where was I wrong, relevant to this topic?

I think you are confused here. When did you ask this question earlier? I think you confused it with other threads.

Do you not see the double standards? How you avoid the majority of my threads points.., and avoid answering questions.., then attack me saying "And you haven't answered the question"

Edited by Fila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2018 at 11:49 PM, Truthseeker007 said:

That is what you think but you sir are wrong.

If theres an ounce of truth to the utter nonsense Icke and his ilk claim, where is the proof? You can't tell me what he is saying is proof, it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. He has sucked in thousands over the years, why can't a single one of them provide any proof at all? Why is it always third hand stories that don't have any support at all and nothing that can be verified? Why can't you blow the whistle with something solid yourself? What's so compelling about hard to believe stories which are not supported that have real world explanations which actually are supported? Sure there's probably life out there, but there's no real evidence that any such species has visited here. There's anecdotes and some pretty extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence. I mean what actual case has more hard proof behind it than Walkers alien God claim? 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Fila refuses to admit is that the correct zoom was already posted in the thread. 

Fila also did not state where they got their wrong idea from for multiple posts.

Even after being informed of the correct zoom Fila did not correct their position.

What we have is a clear demonstration of willful ignorance post after post after post.

The same has occurred in multiple threads including the Phoenix Lights thread in which Fila made two clearly false statements about the consensus of witnesses to those lights. Those two claims were both wrong and they contradicted each other. In fact after repeatedly claiming consensus Fila was unable to post anything but two lies. They were lies because Fila made them both up and they were not based on any witness reports.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

People. Get real, nothing organic can survive thousands of light years on a ship warping across the galaxy. We are digital and physical. Trillions of us live in a giant data pool on the mothership. We just download into meat suits ready for whatever environment exists below when we want some R&R.  Some of us can even look like you. Relax, we have plenty of time before you guys screw your world up so bad we can claim it. For us 100 yrs is like a blink of the eye. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Varelse said:

People. Get real, nothing organic can survive thousands of light years on a ship warping across the galaxy. We are digital and physical. Trillions of us live in a giant data pool on the mothership. We just download into meat suits ready for whatever environment exists below when we want some R&R.  Some of us can even look like you. Relax, we have plenty of time before you guys screw your world up so bad we can claim it. For us 100 yrs is like a blink of the eye. 

Been a while since I've seen that logo.

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, GlitterRose said:

Been a while since I've seen that logo.

:D

Feeling old. It was that or process.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/1/2018 at 3:54 PM, Truthseeker007 said:

So to you anybody who asks questions is a CTer? I don't know about you but when I was a kid I was told to always ask questions about everything and never believe what you are told even if it comes from an "authority figure."

Quote

So to you anybody who asks questions is a CTer?

Nope..Asking questions is one thing; being entrenched in conformation biased is something else I guess. When I was a kid I was not worried about weather the government was lying about anything...Matchbox cars and horror movies like Creature from the Black Lagoon, The Wolfman and The Mummy...I am talking the old versions of these films not the tripe they put out today and call them horror movies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Alien Origins said:

Nope..Asking questions is one thing; being entrenched in conformation biased is something else I guess. When I was a kid I was not worried about weather the government was lying about anything...Matchbox cars and horror movies like Creature from the Black Lagoon, The Wolfman and The Mummy...I am talking the old versions of these films not the tripe they put out today and call them horror movies.

Well it may be time to learn that governments lie to you. After all governments are the biggest terrorist in the world while they go around telling it is the simple man that is the terrorist. So now we get to go through airports treated like criminals because of the governments of the world. Hey bend over Stan. We are here to protect you.:lol:Yea right!!lol!!

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Truthseeker007 said:

Why are you confused Golden Duck?

The whole "ebil gubmint" thing; and the vagueness being obfuscated by ambiguity.

How is occaisionally getting tested for explosives being treated treated like a criminal?

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

15 hours ago, Truthseeker007 said:

Well it may be time to learn that governments lie to you.

And time for you to grow up, and stop these silly generalisations..  Yes, government is a human endeavour.  Yes, there are bad people that get elected, I mean, just look at the USA.......  And yes, sometimes they lie.

15 hours ago, Truthseeker007 said:

After all governments are the biggest terrorist in the world

Prove it.  Your handwaving just gets wider and wider and less supportable by facts as you post this drivel..

15 hours ago, Truthseeker007 said:

while they go around telling it is the simple man that is the terrorist.

So you are denying the existence of small and large terrorist organisations?  It's only governments?  I'd suggest you go back and read my first paragraph again.  You are completely contradicting yourself.

15 hours ago, Truthseeker007 said:

So now we get to go through airports treated like criminals because of the governments of the world.

Do you feel scared and guilty when you go through airports?  I love flying and airports, and nobody makes me feel like a criminal.  It was quite fun recently when I got selected for a random explosives check!  They swabbed my clothes and carry on bag in a few places, and let me watch how they used the chemical analysis machine - it was uninvasive, interesting and no problem whatsoever..  Apart from that, I've also lost a small pen knife that I forgot I had hanging on my key ring - but they kindly offered to keep it until my return..

I feel safer on my flights because they do this stuff.

15 hours ago, Truthseeker007 said:

Hey bend over Stan. We are here to protect you.:lol:Yea right!!lol!!

Do you not realise how you look with that sorta posting?  Ah well, your choice...  And hearing all this, I'm glad they are focusing on you...

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Truthseeker007 said:

So now we get to go through airports treated like criminals because of the governments of the world. Hey bend over Stan. We are here to protect you.:lol:Yea right!!lol!!

i wonder how many innocent people would be dead now if there were not these strict & annoying checks?

we could always stop the checks & take a chance i guess-- what do you think?

Edited by Dejarma
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/07/2018 at 10:29 AM, psyche101 said:

If theres an ounce of truth to the utter nonsense Icke and his ilk claim, where is the proof? You can't tell me what he is saying is proof, it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. He has sucked in thousands over the years, why can't a single one of them provide any proof at all? Why is it always third hand stories that don't have any support at all and nothing that can be verified? Why can't you blow the whistle with something solid yourself? What's so compelling about hard to believe stories which are not supported that have real world explanations which actually are supported? Sure there's probably life out there, but there's no real evidence that any such species has visited here. There's anecdotes and some pretty extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence. I mean what actual case has more hard proof behind it than Walkers alien God claim? 

 

hey Psyche, hope you are well!!!

 

whats happened to all the decent debates here on UM....

I pop in from time to time and get frustrated and leave.........

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, quillius said:

whats happened to all the decent debates here on UM....

I pop in from time to time and get frustrated and leave.........

2

you can start a decent debate if you want= what ya got?

  • Like 1
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.