"The absolute, honest truth about UFOs"

jakesteele said:
Rendlesham Forest Lights -- lightship What is a lightship.

The rest of your explanations are nothing more than the Official Story which a person like yourself with a high need for cognitive closure automatically gravitates toward. All safe answers but not really disproven.
Click to expand...

There is no official story. The Kenneth Arnold case was solved a couple of years ago. It was the side reflection of the pilots own instruments
 
jakesteele said:
Follow the money. JREF wouldn't make money if the UFO reports which you can't really disprove, so you just come up with a safe answer that doesn't disrupt your herd mentality.
Click to expand...

RoboTimbo said:
What were they proven to be that needs disproving?
Click to expand...

I missed this post by jakesteele the first time around. It reminds me a bit of a comment by a Randi detractor that claimed that Randi used his supernatural powers to prevent people from succeeding at the million dollar challenge. ETA: I always liked the mental image of a dowser that can really find stuff with his dowsing being stymied by Randi using his supernatural powers to interfere with the signal to the dowsers dowsing rod.

I'm a little surprised that the herd is hanging together as well as it is after Randi dumped the forum. Apparently you guys are all getting the JREF secret stipend to keep obscuring the evidence for extraterrestrials. Why not me? I even have a picture of Randi in my avatar. I would have thought that qualified for a bonus on the skeptic stipend. Damn. As an aside could the person that's holding the photographs that prove the existence of extraterrestrials please email me a copy. I won't tell anybody.
 
Last edited:
How far does evolution have to go until a sentient being is smart enough to leave their own planet and travel light years across the universe to visit us? Or do they make just one trip here and camp close to observe? What if we are just some type of aquarium and occasionally one of us gets pulled out of the aquarium to get tagged for some reason by extraterrestrials? We might have too high of an opinion of our own intelligence.
 
Last edited:
MG1962 said:
There is no official story. The Kenneth Arnold case was solved a couple of years ago. It was the side reflection of the pilots own instruments
Click to expand...

Nice try. If you have flown in a light plane in very bright sunlight with the sun anything but directly overhead (as I have) you do tend to get a lot of reflections and bright smears of light but in Arnold's case what he saw were birds.

If you go back to his original statements you will see that he never claimed to have seen anything saucer-shaped at all. The objects were actually 'bat-like' and "flew like many times I have observed geese to fly in a rather diagonal chain-like line as if they were linked together - they were flying
diagonally in echelon formation". The objects flapped and glided.

They were birds. He misinterpreted the distance because he thought they disappeared behind a mountain as the flew. Really they flew into the shadow of the mountain and ceased to be lit from the light reflected from the snowy surface below. James Easton did all the research on this incident. Do your own Google. ;)
 
Jodie said:
How far does evolution have to go until a sentient being is smart enough to leave their own planet and travel light years across the universe to visit us? Or do they make just one trip here and camp close to observe? What if we are just some type of aquarium and occasionally one of us gets pulled out of the aquarium to get tagged for some reason by extraterrestrials? We might have too high of an opinion of our own intelligence.
Click to expand...

Maybe and maybe not. It is all amusing speculation and very readable Science Fiction.

When we do know, the answer will be obvious. ;)
 
I imagine it would be very difficult for a tadpole to understand what a human being is.
 
Let me phrase it another way, how could a human communicate with something as devolved as a tadpole?

Obviously you can't so if any alien intelligence is here I doubt we are of any interest to them whatsoever, other than as a source of food, or biological resources. Since there doesn't seem to be a great harvest of human beings occurring, I'm going with the later option for the planet as a whole.
 
Last edited:
Donn said:
This seems off. I could be wrong, but turning the stick to flip a plane around to cover a large slice of the sky would be something out of a World War Two dog fight; I can't see pilots doing dangerous, unplanned manoeuvres just to look for a bogey.

i.e. They see straight ahead mostly and the UFOs they see are other planes within sight.
Click to expand...

Please, stop with the nonsense. You're trying to color what I said to try to debunk what I said. Who said that to look behind him I have to be in a dog fight? Planes can bank at a slow rate, which is all they do except in case of some kind of emergency. Did you look at the live time planes in the air link I posted? There are a lot more planes 24/7 than there are amateur astronomers. There are lists of police, military, commercial and amateur:eek: astronomers.
 
MG1962 said:
There is no official story. The Kenneth Arnold case was solved a couple of years ago. It was the side reflection of the pilots own instruments
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Just how was this determined? Are there links from independent sources (non-debunker) that prove this absolutely beyond any reasonable doubt or is a typical debunker type of explanation?
 
SezMe said:
You've got it bassackwards. Your claim; your burden of proof. Or, at least your burden of providing evidence.
Click to expand...

No, it's your burden. You all are the ones that said that there is no UFOs and claim you have debunked all the major UFO incidents way before I made my post. Prove what you say is true.
 
Jrrarglblarg said:
Despite Rule of So and all, you are actually correct. Mistaken identity and fraud pretty well cover all UFO reports thus far.
Click to expand...

Except for that approx. 5%-10% that can't be explained. Here is an interesting post from physicsforum, sorry I don't have the link, unintentional omission on my part. But anyway, here's the post

Ivan Seeking
Dec6-03, 04:29 AM
First I want to say that some of the harsher comments made here are not intended towards anyone at this forum. This applies more to the trench warfare that takes place in lesser forums, on television, and in the popular media in general.

My first serious review of the UFO literature was for a college English essay. Before this, I found the subject to be bizarre, cultish, and mostly nonsense. I had some interest, but any actual story was too far out for my worldview. Only after reading about 10 books for my essay writing - The Hynek UFO Report being the most significant of these – did the subject carry any real weight in my own thoughts. From my own experience, it is easy to ignore or ridicule the subject, if you have ignored the subject, but an informed opinion is another matter altogether.

Now, any two people may interpret the same information is different ways; this is an unavoidable consequence of being human. And to say that the subject of UFOs opens the floodgates for conflict is an understatement at least, but to say the subject is all hogwash is to demonstrate ignorance. On the other hand, if this comes as an informed opinion, there is only one explanation for this behavior that makes sense: Fear. This would explain quite a few paradoxical aspects of our beloved debunkers. Here are a few of these paradoxes.

If this subject is all nonsense, then why do so many people spend so much time and energy trying to disprove it. This is really strange since for one, the subject never can be disproved. This would violate basic logic. We can never prove that some elusive visitor is not here. Any good skeptic would know this so this begs the question: Why do they try so hard? Some might say they dedicate their time to help free the world of its nonsense notions? Nonsense! If they have half a clue about human nature they know this is not possible. Also, given that any good skeptic must know this, one must wonder why they don’t have something better to do? Of all the things that one might do with their time, why spend so much effort trying to show everyone else how silly they are? Even if this results from plain old meanness, or unfulfilled potential, failed dreams, boredom, or even if dad or mom didn’t love them enough, even if some reason like this exists, why attack the UFO crowd?

I have considered this question a bit, and it seems to me that the answer is fear. This is why the attacks are so misguided and personal. Note that the debunkers often try to debunk the messenger and not the message. This is one reason that I tend to stick with the study of government files as my focal point; this is the only source of UFO records that have some built in validation. But when faced even with intelligence reports that went to all of the highest levels of government including the White House, I have had debunkers ignore these official records as if they were from the National Enquirer. This leaves only one possible conclusion: the debunkers are rarely objective. This implies motive, or at least insincerity. What kind of motive? The preservation of their world view seems the only consistent explanation. What else could it be? What else would be so important that a person would donate so much time to a hopeless pursuit to disprove what they believe is nonsense, and which can never be disproved? Clearly our skeptics are quite uniquely bothered by this particular phenomenon. The reason is that deep down they realize just how important the subject might be.

Of course, as for our TV skeptics, it’s about the money.

Of course, we do still have to account for the insincere attackers: These are mostly people with personality disorders. They know that since UFOs are so elusive and controversial, the UFO buffs are easy targets. This allows them to be mean and lazy, which is usually all they really want.

To those who attack but have not studied the subject, I can understand your misguided malice. I once felt the same way about much this stuff.

 
Jodie said:
Let me phrase it another way, how could a human communicate with something as devolved as a tadpole?
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as devolved. A tadpole is as evolved as you or I. We are all expressions of DNA at the outer edge of the bush of life. An ant, an elephant. A human. A frog. All modern. All now.

You mean, sentient, I think. Able to comprehend. Well, sure, a tadpole is going to have a disadvantage in that department.

.. if any alien intelligence is here I doubt we are of any interest to them whatsoever..
Click to expand...

Well, that may be, or not. Either way, we humans will know what is happening should an alien arrive, and the alien will know that we know. No problem. Unless it's an alien tadpole without sentience.
 
jakesteele said:
Can you give us some sources on that or is that just your opinion?
Click to expand...

In 1978 I was a kid in Boise. I had, by the spring at the end of fifth grade, read literally every UFO book in the Boise public library. One day while up a tree watching paper wasps build a hive, I thought about all the UFO reports, and the Bermuda Triangle incidents and a few other of the improbable things filed in the "zeros" part of the Dewey Decimal system. I realized that the totallity of events failed to create a consistent pattern of any kind.

Today I have more vocabulary to describe my conclusion. There are no sightings confirmed by outside sources. There are no repeatable results that lead to sightings. There are no falsifiable tests of sightings.

But if you look at the evidence as a skeptic and not a gullible kid fascinated by mysteries, all UFO sightings DO form a pattern: all reported sightings from "the dawn of time" to now are either misidentified phenomena or lies. Including breathless interpretation of petroglyphs from the "dawn of time."

And now we have a planet-wide nuclear powered supercomputer in everyone's pockets and the Russians have ubiquitous dash cams. And surprise, UFO reports have actually dropped, not increased, since the days of the plastic pocket camera.

So I cite The Entire Boise Public Library as my source.

What's yours?
 
jakesteele said:
Please, stop with the nonsense. You're trying to color what I said to try to debunk what I said.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying anything. I said what I said; in a tentative tone, to boot.

You're in a plane, on the stick. You see something zoom across and out of sight. You can't grab the stick and yaw over to follow it. Seems clear to me, but I'm not a pilot.

Who said that to look behind him I have to be in a dog fight?
Click to expand...
You. Right ^^ there.

Planes can bank at a slow rate, which is all they do except in case of some kind of emergency.
Click to expand...
No! I would never have guessed that a plane could change direction slowly in the air!

There are a lot more planes 24/7 than there are amateur astronomers. There are lists of police, military, commercial and amateur..astronomers.
Click to expand...
Meh. More pilots not looking at the entire sky is not impressive.



jakesteele said:
Here is an interesting post from physicsforum..

Now, any two people may interpret the same information is different ways;
Click to expand...
Doesn't make the two interpretations equal. Gnat vs. elephant on a see-saw.

.. but to say the subject is all hogwash is to demonstrate ignorance.
Click to expand...

Well, the truth claims of alien beings in those UFOs are hogwash because they're not demonstrably real. Q.E.D

The rest of the subject is quite deep and reveals a lot about how human minds work and malfunction.

On the other hand, if this comes as an informed opinion, there is only one explanation for this behavior that makes sense: Fear.
Click to expand...

Lol.
 
jakesteele said:
Just how was this determined? Are there links from independent sources (non-debunker) that prove this absolutely beyond any reasonable doubt or is a typical debunker type of explanation?
Click to expand...

I will see if I can get you a link to the video.

They explored three cases. Arnold, Martel and Roswell. In the case of Arnold, they used the plane that he flew on the day he flew it on the course he said he had flown. Initially the documentary makers thought it was a bust.

No one saw anything out of the ordinary at all. It was only later as they processed and began to edit the footage of their failed experiment they saw that Arnold's flight instruments had been reflecting on the the quarter panel glass of his plane, a sort of accidental HUD before such things were common.
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
Pretty much. Do you have an exception?
Click to expand...

You say, "pretty much" that leaves room for doubt and in your mind the possibility.

"Do I have an exception such as one that I know to be true? My exception is things like this

http://www.educatinghumanity.com/2012/07/ufo-sighting-by-pilots-crew-and.html

I know you're going to try to kill the messenger but the message is that I put far more weight on the testimony of pilots, high ranking military officers, radar operators, etc., than I do the words of someone who is probably under 40 who sits in front of a computer screen being an a priori
armchair quarter back who's bought into the group think/herd mentality.
 
jakesteele said:
I know you're going to try to kill the messenger but the message is that I put far more weight on the testimony of pilots, high ranking military officers, radar operators, etc., than I do the words of someone who is probably under 40 who sits in front of a computer screen being an a priori
armchair quarter back who's bought into the group think/herd mentality.
Click to expand...

And what is your excuse for me? I am over 40, have spent close to 45 years studying the sky, which is far more than most pilots ranking military officers and radar operators. I have seen cigar shaped objects, triangle objects, floating lights, formations of lights, flashing lights, that all without fail have been eventually identified by myself as anything but a visitation from an alien civilization.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom