UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

Status
Not open for further replies.
Precisely! Straight from the horses mouth (as the saying goes). But if mere handwaving dismissal as anecdote is the best you've got, then you need to think again.


Why? What happens if we don't 'think again'? What are the likely consequences of nobody believing a word you say?


My hypotheses are that UFOs exist (as unidentified aerial phenomena - meaning also unidentifiable as mundane objects) and that "aliens" exist (as a hypothetical explanation for UFOs - meaning NOT necessarily ET in spaceships).


Hypothesis 1: UFOs exist.

What a load of garbage. That's not an hypothesis. It's a blatant statement of the bleeding obvious. And you've been told so dozens, if not hundreds of times.


Hypothesis 2: UFOs are aliens.

At least this is an hypothesis. Got any evidence for it?

Nothing you've presented so far is evidence, by the way, so reposting it will only add to the joke this thread has become. Please, go right ahead though, since the valid point has been made that it's educational for the beginners and helpful to have such a weak case to practice on.


I have been presenting cases to support my hypotheses.


Not very well, apparently. Nobody believes you.

Whatever you think may be the reason for that is irrelevant. The bottom line is that your mission has failed, and since you were the only one to whom the mission mattered, you bear this burden alone.

To everyone else it's just infotainment, of no lasting value whatsoever.


There is no such thing as a "best case' in this regard - merely a preponderance of evidence as represented in a number of cases.


As you've been told numerous times, and as you are undoubtedly aware yourself (despite protestations otherwise), a preponderance of rubbish is still just rubbish. Having a bigger pile of rubbish is actually worse, when you think about it.

And maybe you should think about it.

If someone comes here with a single, easily-debunked anecdote about a UFO incident, they might end up feeling a bit foolish, but they'll hopefully learn from it and not make the same mistake again.

You on the other hand, have brought a 'preponderance' of easily-debunked anecdotes, increasing the foolishness to astrophotographical levels, and yet have not availed yourself of the offset of having learned anything.

Not a good look, and pretending to be a dead Pharaoh is the height of credibility, by comparison.
 
Last edited:
The part of this story that immediately jumped at me when I first came across it was the reluctance by Cash to provide the car (with the claimed finger prints molded into the dash board) for examination to the investigator, making what seemed to me (opinion only) to be a lame excuse which lead to no photographs or verified account of the existence of such a fantastic physical feature of this story. Also I don't believe anyone checked with the highways department to see if the piece of road (reportedly burned and resurfaced within 24 hours) had actually done any road resurfacing and what reason they gave if they had carried out works.

Rramjet - You realise that the level of detail about Betty Cash's 'medical condition' are not detailed enough for a third party to be able to make any sort of accurate speculation as to the cause?
I've no idea why you'd be against anyone seeing her medical records unless you were unsure they actually supported your UFOlogists conclusion... which of course is based upon 'the level of detail available' which isn't enough to conclude or speculate much.
See, in my opinion, it would either totally debunk the Radiation story, or it would add to the mystery... personally, either way is cool by me.
Not that I don’t trust your sources… but do you have any verifiable reference for the assertion that Betty cash was “reluctant” to provide her car for examination?

There is a “purported” witness to the highway paving being done (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread428048/pg1) but it is merely a “recollection” posted to a blog… do you have any more “solid” or verifiable references to this?

I have NO objection to ANYONE obtaining the medical records of Betty Cash – indeed, I would be personally interested to see them! I am merely interested in the verifiable facts of the case. If anyone is interested, a revealing TRANSCRIPT of taped interview held at Bergstom Air Force Base Law Library Building 2102, 17 August 1981, between Betty Cash, Vicki Landrum, Colby Landrum and representatives of the United States Air Force in the persons of Captain John Camp, Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Captain Terry Davis, Claims Officer, and Miss Pat Wolf, Assistant Claims Officer, conducted 8 months after the incident can be seen here: (http://www.ufocasebook.com/CashLandrum1.html). It makes for some rather compelling reading…
 
Last edited:
The part of this story that immediately jumped at me when I first came across it was the reluctance by Cash to provide the car (with the claimed finger prints molded into the dash board) for examination to the investigator, making what seemed to me (opinion only) to be a lame excuse which lead to no photographs or verified account of the existence of such a fantastic physical feature of this story. Also I don't believe anyone checked with the highways department to see if the piece of road (reportedly burned and resurfaced within 24 hours) had actually done any road resurfacing and what reason they gave if they had carried out works.

Rramjet - You realise that the level of detail about Betty Cash's 'medical condition' are not detailed enough for a third party to be able to make any sort of accurate speculation as to the cause?
I've no idea why you'd be against anyone seeing her medical records unless you were unsure they actually supported your UFOlogists conclusion... which of course is based upon 'the level of detail available' which isn't enough to conclude or speculate much.
See, in my opinion, it would either totally debunk the Radiation story, or it would add to the mystery... personally, either way is cool by me.

Not that I don’t trust your sources… but do you have any verifiable reference for the assertion that Betty cash was “reluctant” to provide her car for examination?

There is a “purported” witness to the highway paving being done (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread428048/pg1) but it is merely a “recollection” posted to a blog… do you have any more “solid” or verifiable references to this?

I have NO objection to ANYONE obtaining the medical records of Betty Cash – indeed, I would be personally interested to see them! I am merely interested in the verifiable facts of the case. If anyone is interested, a revealing TRANSCRIPT of taped interview held at Bergstom Air Force Base Law Library Building 2102, 17 August 1981, between Betty Cash, Vicki Landrum, Colby Landrum and representatives of the United States Air Force in the persons of Captain John Camp, Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Captain Terry Davis, Claims Officer, and Miss Pat Wolf, Assistant Claims Officer, conducted 8 months after the incident can be seen here: (http://www.ufocasebook.com/CashLandrum1.html). It makes for some rather compelling reading…


Been posting long?
 
Has the mysterious transformation of anecdotes into data started?
NO? Not a little bit? What a disappointment! LOL.

It requires the crap to reach a certain critical depth, creating enough heat and pressure, and then the bottom-most layer of posts will convert to diamonds. Several hundred more pages should do it. Plenty of fuel for the crap-generation too. From the original list, we've seen just a few cases discussed. This could go on for thousands...

A
 
So now I understand why you don’t seem to understand the importance of the cases I am presenting.

If an “unidentified” person walked into a bar, and they look and act like any other human in that bar, then we would have no reason to assume they were anything other than human.

However, if they started floating near the ceiling, disappearing from one end of the bar to suddenly appear at the other with no intermediary steps, or moving across the room without moving their arms or legs, then we would have to begin to consider alternate hypotheses...

Do be sure to come right back as soon as you have any credible evidence of this actually happening, OK?
 
a revealing TRANSCRIPT of taped interview held at Bergstom Air Force Base Law Library Building 2102, 17 August 1981, between Betty Cash, Vicki Landrum, Colby Landrum and representatives of the United States Air Force in the persons of Captain John Camp, Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Captain Terry Davis, Claims Officer, and Miss Pat Wolf, Assistant Claims Officer, conducted 8 months after the incident can be seen here: (http://www.ufocasebook.com/CashLandrum1.html). It makes for some rather compelling reading…

To me this doesn't sound like a very reliable witness. I haven't read it all but some things pop out:

the heat was so intense, I didn't know whether to run, to get back in the car, or what, and I stood there for few minutes.
<snip>

the door handle was so hot I couldn't stand it with my bare hand
This does not compute. How (and why) can she stand there for a few minutes (saying later ~15 in such an intense heat?

Let me ask you did you report it to any law enforcement authorities.

BC: Yeah, sure.

CJC:Who did you report it to?

BC:I didn't report it to any of 'em,

Hmmm...she reported but didn't...

there was helicopters completely around the object.
<snip>
I counted twenty three.
<snip>
I don't think they'd be... that they were that far (from the object), maybe so, I can't, I won't say. Because unless I can be sure I'm not going to say.

She could count to 23 helicopters very close to the objet but can't say how far away they were (feet, a football field etc.)

CJC: OK. Uh... What exactly did you see on the side of the helicopters? what exactly did it say?

BC: Uh... "United States Air Force"

CTD: Written out (clears throat) completely long?

BC: No.

CTD: OK, what..

BC: It was round

CTD: No, I mean you saw the words "United States Air Force" all the words were spelled out

BC: No.

Again, very confusing answers.

I also would like to see documented some of the physical phenomena like burned trees, fingerprints on a melted dashboard, etc.
 
Not that I don’t trust your sources… but do you have any verifiable reference for the assertion that Betty cash was “reluctant” to provide her car for examination?
I'm working from memory here as I haven't read anything about this case for a few years. It may have been a piece written by Bob Pratt that I read that mentioned this.
Again, from memory Betty Cash was asked to bring the car so that photos of the fingerprints could be taken. She said the car was 'downstate' (?) maybe at her sisters or something for some reason. The car was sold very soon after and therefore no photos of the claimed fingerprints melted into the dash were ever taken.

Schuessler claims to have tested the car for radiation and yet took no photos of the fingerprints either... or if he did, he hasn't ever published them.

So if you disagree with my point, please provide some photos of these amazing pieces of physical evidence that don't confirm aliens but will at least confirm Betty Cash's story because at the moment, like every other UFO story, it's lacking verification.

There is a “purported” witness to the highway paving being done (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread428048/pg1) but it is merely a “recollection” posted to a blog… do you have any more “solid” or verifiable references to this?
And as much use as an article from Earthfiles then.
Again, it may have been form the same article I read a few years ago.
The claim within the story was that the road the UFO hovered above was burned, yet no photos of the burning were taken. A repair was mentioned within the story and yet no verification of this has been given. It is these (apparent) small points which leads one to believe the event has not been as thoroughly looked into as the UFOlogists would have you believe.

I have NO objection to ANYONE obtaining the medical records of Betty Cash – indeed, I would be personally interested to see them! I am merely interested in the verifiable facts of the case.
You say this whilst apparently not realising the amount of potentially verifiable stuff that has been completely overlooked by the UFOlogists, which would add credibility to their work had they bothered.
When they don't bother, one had to wonder "why?"


If anyone is interested, a revealing TRANSCRIPT of taped interview held at Bergstom Air Force Base Law Library Building 2102, 17 August 1981, between Betty Cash, Vicki Landrum, Colby Landrum and representatives of the United States Air Force in the persons of Captain John Camp, Acting Staff Judge Advocate, Captain Terry Davis, Claims Officer, and Miss Pat Wolf, Assistant Claims Officer, conducted 8 months after the incident can be seen here: (http://www.ufocasebook.com/CashLandrum1.html). It makes for some rather compelling reading…
I'll have a look at that later when I get a minute and if I come across the article I remember reading, I'll post a link.
 
I have been presenting cases to support my hypotheses. There is no such thing as a "best case' in this regard - merely a preponderance of evidence as represented in a number of cases.

How about a different approach Rroger

using your logic, how many zeros do you have to add up to make one ?

:rolleyes:
 
Not a good look, and pretending to be a dead Pharaoh is the height of credibility, by comparison.

But...but...but you mean...you're not really a dead Pharaoh? All my illusions have just shattered. :eek:

Excuse me a while - I have to go and think things over.
 
But...but...but you mean...you're not really a dead Pharaoh? All my illusions have just shattered. :eek:

Excuse me a while - I have to go and think things over.


Slight misunderstanding here.

I was referring to dead Pharaohs. As there is no evidence (teh body) that Akhenaten actually died, your illusions, which aren't illusions at all, remain supportable.


Ankh udja seneb
 
Akhenaten is obviously not dead, if he were dead he could not post here.

Anyway, I am back from 3 weeks of no net connection.
Have any evidence of aliens appeared? :)

I saw some bright red lights in the sky at the exit from the pirate section of the bay of
Aden. They were moving away from the vessel at high speed and making a great noise.
 
Akhenaten is obviously not dead, if he were dead he could not post here.


Your logic is impeccable, as always. I hope others aRre taking notes.


Anyway, I am back from 3 weeks of no net connection.


About time too. Missed ya :)



Have any evidence of aliens appeared? :)


Back into the jokes already?


I saw some bright red lights in the sky at the exit from the pirate section of the bay of Aden. They were moving away from the vessel at high speed and making a great noise.


Tracer.
 
:)

Our naval guard team were unloading some of their ammunition at the time, it looked remarkably good. (There would have been some problems with getting it through customs):)
 
Precisely! Straight from the horses mouth (as the saying goes). But if mere handwaving dismissal as anecdote is the best you've got, then you need to think again.
Why? What is there in anything you've presented that isn't anecdote? Some people saw something and didn't know what it is. In internet vernacular, "cool story, bro" but so what? A cop's car had a dent in it. Ok. And? This isn't evidence, they're barely interesting stories.
My hypotheses are that UFOs exist (as unidentified aerial phenomena - meaning also unidentifiable as mundane objects)
Stop. Once more: no one is disputing UFOs exist. We are disputing your interpretation of what they are. You do not need to prove a hypotheis that UFOs exist.
and that "aliens" exist (as a hypothetical explanation for UFOs - meaning NOT necessarily ET in spaceships).
Again, please tell us what your hypothesis is. Perhaps you should go and look at what the word means first.
I have been presenting cases to support my hypotheses. There is no such thing as a "best case' in this regard - merely a preponderance of evidence as represented in a number of cases.
Ok, you've successfully shown that people sometimes see stuff in the sky and don't know what it is. No one was disputing this, but OK. Now what? Nothing you've put forward proves aliens, and you apparently don't have a case that does, so how does a collection of UFO stories prove aliens? As we've been asking since the beginning, how does a collection of bad evidence combine into a piece of good evidence? Please, explain your reasoning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom