UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[EHocking]

I know the feeling.

Calimari rings are my weakness.

Oh noes! Aliens are even probing "fish"?

 

[Akhenaten]

Oh noes! Aliens are even probing "fish"?

Not all of them, fortunately.

I have it on good authority that my the Red Herring is quite safe.

 

[tsig]

How many times do you need to be told.

The reader already knows that it's you who is incapable of a correct interpretation of the available evidence.


Do you need to see it flashing down from the side of a blimp in order to realise this simple fact?


Blimp.

He needs a ride in the blimp.

Maybe an examination by the aliens.

OMG! There could be a connection to the gay rodeo here!

 

[tsig]

I've done something like this before, but looking it up (see below), it's not the same machine. In another place, someone suggested they made one in British racing green:

[qimg]http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg117/ThePsychoClown/heatshield.jpg[/qimg]

Which I thought was a bit of a cheesy idea

[qimg]http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg117/ThePsychoClown/cheeseshield.jpg[/qimg]

But I've got no idea what it actually is... It's labeled 'Heat shield'

I thought someone asked you not to use your powers for evil.

Teh Cheese is teh Evil.

 

[Akhenaten]

He needs a ride in the blimp.

Maybe an examination by the aliens.

OMG! There could be a connection to the gay rodeo here!

A phantom connection, no doubt, possibly involving oil well fires.

Well oil beef hooked, it's a blimp!

 

[tsig]

It certainly has the potential to become a huge underground success. Especially where the targeted audience completely misses the joke. The first issue should have one of those sound files that plays when you open the cover. It'll play Billy Preston's "Nothing from Nothing."

We could use Stray Cat's movie posters and pick posts at random from this thread. That should fill out the first couple of years.

 

[tsig]

A phantom connection, no doubt, possibly involving oil well fires.

Well oil beef hooked, it's a blimp!

Actually blimps sporting Russian radar sets tracking jets over the desert seems completely plausible after reading this thread.

 

[Stray Cat]

Actually blimps sporting Russian radar sets tracking jets over the desert seems completely plausible after reading this thread.

Wouldn't a Gay Rodeo blimp come at you from behind?... away from radar coverage.

 

[Toke]

Wouldn't a Gay Rodeo blimp come at you from behind?... away from radar coverage.

Sure, but not the rear radar coverage.

 

[tsig]

Wouldn't a Gay Rodeo blimp come at you from behind?... away from radar coverage.

I see you haven't followed the more technical posts.

The jets had passive radar detection so any object approaching from the rear and emitting radar waves would be detected.

Esp. blimps...or squid boats.. police cars...or ALIENS!!!

 

[Stray Cat]

I see you haven't followed the more technical posts.

The jets had passive radar detection so any object approaching from the rear and emitting radar waves would be detected.

Esp. blimps...or squid boats.. police cars...or ALIENS!!!

It must be true, it's in colour

And Blimp.

 

[Rramjet]

Just a quick question, but what do you think is wrong with Greer and disclosure project? I am specially interested in Rramjet´s point of view.

Why do you feel that Greer is a charlatan? What about the panel of people willing to testify their experiences?

There's many people on the panel who are sincere and genuine ...others are ...well ...let's just say some are not there for the right reasons ...including Greer (and let's just say he is not "disclosing" either).

 

[Rramjet]

How many times do you need to be told.

The reader already knows that it's you who is incapable of a correct interpretation of the available evidence.


Do you need to see it flashing down from the side of a blimp in order to realise this simple fact?


Blimp.

Speaking of which. You seem to ignore the fact that the "blimp" nominated by the UFO debunkers was an advertising blimp! Positively designed to be seen and recognised for what it was... a prime example of the UFO debunkers ignoring the evidence even when it is written in letters ten feet high! LOL.

 

[dafydd]

Speaking of which. You seem to ignore the fact that the "blimp" nominated by the UFO debunkers was an advertising blimp! Positively designed to be seen and recognised for what it was... a prime example of the UFO debunkers ignoring the evidence even when it is written in letters ten feet high! LOL.

Evidence of what?

 

[Sledge]

Rramjet. It's over. Done. Ok? You lost. Pick another subject and try again.

 

[Marduk]

sad, sad thread

 

[Stray Cat]

Speaking of which. You seem to ignore the fact that the "blimp" nominated by the UFO debunkers was an advertising blimp! Positively designed to be seen and recognised for what it was... a prime example of the UFO debunkers ignoring the evidence even when it is written in letters ten feet high! LOL.

Maybe when the blimp is flying at 200 feet over a football game.
But what about when it's estimated to be flying a 5,000 over a mile away?
What would it look like then?

Give you a clue:

Spot the blimp

 

[Rramjet]

They have been, ad nauseum. What do you think a plausible explanation for the Campeche sighting with FLIR imagery would have been if it had not been determined to be oil well fires? You may only use the FLIR data and witness testimony to arrive at your answer.

Yes of course, that is precisely what the UFO debunkers do – ignore the evidence we have available to analyse cases. FYI the “oil wells” explanation was a consensus opinion - it has not been shown for a fact that this is what they actually were. But of course this is another debunker trick, they claim certainty in their own assertions when no such certainty exists, and yet demand that UFO proponents provide absolute proof for their assertions in return!

Burden of proof, check. You don't want to understand it.

I make a claim, you (rightly) demand I produce evidence to support that claim.
You make a claim and I (rightly) demand you produce evidence to support that claim.
What don’t you get about that?

Strawman. You asked for plausible mundane explanations and I gave you one. Your dishonest attempt at twisting is noted.

Unfortunately for you “blimp” IS an implausible explanation. The object sighted was circular (like a coin and quite unlike a blimp), it had no engines, gondola or fins (unlike a blimp), it moved silently (do you realise how noisy the blimp engines – especially of the time - were?) and it moved at jet plane speeds (I’d like to see a blimp do that!) – not to mention the advertising logo emblazoned down both sides of a Goodyear blimp! Not only that, the historical records indicate no blimp at the time and place. You continual ignorance of the evidence is noted.

What would have been a plausible explanation for the objects seen around Campeche based on the eyewitness testimony (trained military observers) and the FLIR video?

Obviously it was “oil well fires” WAS the explanation.

Oh and I simply love the way the UFO debunkers have finally resorted to the “gods” hypothesis to explain UFOs. This just shows how desperate they have finally become in their search for answers and how far they are willing to go to support their own belief system. Demonstrably, they will go at least as far as arguing for something they do NOT believe! Now if THAT isn’t hypocritical, then nothing in the world is. LOL.

 

[Rramjet]

Whilst I appreciate the sterling work people have put into debunking Rramjet's stream of drivel, it's done. Over. Finished. He lost. He promised to present evidence but had none. Instead, he offered a pile of old cases from the My First Book of UFOs that had nothing of interest at the time and have aged about as well as football socks left in a locker over the summer holidays. We're left with the conclusion we all started from: sometimes people see something in the sky and don't know what it is. All research indicates that these are normal objects that go unidentified because identifying something without being able to judge it's size is difficult. The one real supporter Rramjet has had, SnidelyW, has apparently left. No lurkers have come forward to challenge the notion that Rramjet has failed in his task, so I assert that he has failed.

Of course, we remain open-minded. If Rramjet would care to put forward a hypothesis based on the available evidence, I'm sure we'd be happy to look at it. NEW cases would be equally welcome. But all he has to offer are these tedious old cases cribbed from UFO websites. They've been looked at. If they had anything to offer, the world would already be a different place.

So, Rramjet: bring something new or admit defeat with a touch of decorum. Don't go out in the kicking and screaming manner you've conducted yourself in the rest of the thread.

Oh, and stop throwing around the term "UFO debunker." It makes you look stupid.

So now I guess we have a time travelling book from Sledge (and I thought the UFO debunkers were claiming that time travel was impossible)! I presented the O'Hare case from Nov. 2006 - but of course you have ignored that!

 

[Sledge]

You lost. Deal with it.