• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged U.S.O.'s...what if...

King of the Americas

Banned
K
Joined
Nov 15, 2001
Messages
6,513
...they explain how U.F.O's aren't extra-terresterial...and thus far more likely to be real?

I mean one of the arguments 'against' U.F.O's being 'alien craft', is the sheer distance between us and the nearest star, much less the nearest habitable planet.

If U.F.O.'s were from the oceans, we know so little about...then maybe 'they' aren't visiting, but rather maybe they've ALWAYS been here.

;)

...and Bigfoot was the animal they bred/mixed with, to get 'us'...

It's just a thought...

:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
King of the Americas said:
If U.F.O.'s were from the oceans, we know so little about...then maybe 'they' aren't visiting, but rather maybe they've ALWAYS been here.

;)

...and Bigfoot was the animal they bred/mixed with, to get 'us'...

It's just a thought...

:)
Click to expand...
Well that explains it all (can't stop laughing).....

How, pray tell, did you come up with this “explanation”? Or did you read it someplace (if so, please provide the source)?
 
Last edited:
What do you mean?

People 'claim' to have seen Unidentified SUBMERGED Objects, shaped like 'saucers', that moved in and out of the water with ease and grace.

Some U.F.O.'s have been seen to be or become U.S.O.'s...

If U.F.O./U.S.O.'s are 'terresterial', would that make them more likely than an 'extra-terresterial' U.F.O. piloted by little purple men from planet X?
 
King of the Americas said:
What do you mean?

People 'claim' to have seen Unidentified SUBMERGED Objects, shaped like 'saucers', that moved in and out of the water with ease and grace.

Some U.F.O.'s have been seen to be or become U.S.O.'s...

If U.F.O./U.S.O.'s are 'terresterial', would that make them more likely than an 'extra-terresterial' U.F.O. piloted by little purple men from planet X?
Click to expand...
What credible sources are you citing, or you just going off the junk you see on the History Channel's "UFO" shows?

King of the Americas said:
Some U.F.O.'s have been seen to be or become U.S.O.'s...
Click to expand...
Really? Stop the presses!!

When, where, who has seen this, what credible proof is there of such claims?
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
If U.F.O.'s were from the oceans, we know so little about...then maybe 'they' aren't visiting, but rather maybe they've ALWAYS been here.
Click to expand...



Except, if you accept the commonly suggested capabilities of UFOs as real, they must possess a level of technology far beyond our own, such that they could easily dominate us at will.

And if this is true, then why haven't we spent all of history hiding from them?
 
King of the Americas said:
...they explain how U.F.O's aren't extra-terresterial...and thus far more likely to be real?

I mean one of the arguments 'against' U.F.O's being 'alien craft', is the sheer distance between us and the nearest star, much less the nearest habitable planet.

If U.F.O.'s were from the oceans, we know so little about...then maybe 'they' aren't visiting, but rather maybe they've ALWAYS been here.

;)

...and Bigfoot was the animal they bred/mixed with, to get 'us'...

It's just a thought...

:)
Click to expand...


"and Bigfoot was the animal they bred/mixed with, to get 'us'..."

Aliens breeding with Bigfoot, huh? I guess that would explain a dwarf that is extemely hairy

:eek: :jaw-dropp
 
Last edited:
Really, let's not jump all over the person.

Because not everyone has seen much more than the television versions.

This is a good place for education, not making fun.

Good questions. And really some good simple answers for those that believe in UFO's are needed for the lay person. You can't just go into some long explaination.

Saying "well the nearest star is...." (which is pretty convincing in itself) and then go on with "there could be so many other explainations that don't involve the impossible". I like to bring up the "invisible unicorns could by flying them" theory (Once I know they have a sense of humor). When someone says "that's impossible" or "silly" I'll point out that it's as real as the odds of someone flying in from the nearest star (IF it supports life that IS advanced enough to travel here).

I do often get the "well they use black holes to travel through space". I'm not totally up on that one yet, but I do kind of point out if we had a black hole really near us it would NOT be a good thing.
 
Credible evidence...?

Hummm...

What is the standard for or of proof?

I mean is an accredited pilot's statement, 'credible evidence'? Is digital video, credible evidence? I think not.

This being a scientific community, what is required here is 'testible' reliable absolute proof, and that is sorely lacking here.
 
Horatius said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shag_Harbour_incident


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_submerged_object
Click to expand...
Note, I did say credible.

Shag Harbour, you have a hand full of people who make the claim of seeing something at 11:20pm....and thats it.

Oh, I forgot "Harry" (no last name) who claimed to be a an American diver and took pictures of it.... I always find it interesting when that key witness, the keeper of the "holy grail" of proof does not want to give a name.

If we accept these kinds of claims as proof...then you'd have to allow that the Shag Harbour incidenct could also have been a "Flying Saucer" created as part of Hitler's secret weapon programs (which is also cited in the Wiki article).

I'm not thinking this type of "proof" supports the USO/"BF" claims.

King of the Americas said:
This being a scientific community, what is required here is 'testible' reliable absolute proof, and that is sorely lacking here.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
Credible evidence...?

Hummm...

What is the standard for or of proof?

I mean is an accredited pilot's statement, 'credible evidence'? Is digital video, credible evidence? I think not.

This being a scientific community, what is required here is 'testible' reliable absolute proof, and that is sorely lacking here.
Click to expand...
First, look up the definitions of "evidence" and "proof".
Second, note that the definitions are different, and thus non-interchangeable.
Third, when someone asks for evidence, do not even bring up the terms "proof" or "absolute proof".

Thank you.
 
Oh, those. That would be X-Com testing their new Triton and Barracudda subs, just in case some evil aliens decide to invade our oceans. Seriously, dude, watch some news, willya:P?

Seriously, though - yes, it's technically possible that the UFOs come from the seas. Just like it's technically possible they come from inside the Earth or space. Seeing we've got next to no evidence of them existing in the first place, though, it doesn't really matter.
 
I would think that the technological challenge of creating industries large enough to develop, test, and manufacture UFO's in the deep ocean without generating any noticeable waste or other byproducts makes the whole notion, um, unlikely.
 
:whistling If your looking for me.... you better look under the sea... cause that's where you'll find me...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom