• 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 Their Return

King of the Americas said:
Had they flown and or operated in a normal manner, and with recognizable flight patterns, I'd have reached a different conclusion.
Click to expand...
I'm sure that the Mexican pilot who filmed a group of UFOs in his FLIR as they surrounded his plane over Campeche thought the same.

King of the Americas said:
I didn't just witness "lights"... The ability 'they' demonstrated led me to my E.T. non-human origin conclusion.
Click to expand...
As did the Mexican military.
 
Stray Cat said:
The main hurdle to overcome here though are the countless UFOlogists who don't actually do science and yet try to pass their work off as if they were. Mainstream science does right to not be involved with such shinanigans.

...

...The photos have been shown to be possible mundane in origin. If there is anything 'otherworldly' about them, it is not apparent in either the formation of the story nor the evidence commonly used to support it.


Mentioning them doesn't usually spawn ridicule. Ridiculous comments about them on the other hand...

...
Click to expand...

I wholly agree with your initial statement. Half-assed, underfunded, ill-equipped investigations aren't going to yield anything useful, which is why MANY have called for serious investigations. Project Blue Book was the last one...decades ago.

The sighting over D.C. was mundane in origin??? What was it??? Since the two sightings that scrambled jets, and caused the launch of PBB, how many times have similar sightings occurred over D.C.???

What kind of comments would spawn ridicule? Something like, "They exist.", perhaps???
 
King of the Americas said:
I wholly agree with your initial statement. Half-assed, underfunded, ill-equipped investigations aren't going to yield anything useful, which is why MANY have called for serious investigations.
Click to expand...
But the amount of money wasted by certain UFOlogists in chasing wild geese (a metaphor not wild Canadian mountain geese a la Kenneth Arnold ;)) ensures that they will never be able to actually do any science despite publishing and selling countless books claiming to be about the subject.

King of the Americas said:
Project Blue Book was the last one...decades ago.
Click to expand...
I'm not even sure that Blue Book was 'science', it was more akin to a crime investigation than anything. And of course depending on which bit is being cited for which discussion people are involved in, is regularly used to bolster Alien beliefs and cry government cover up. Sometimes in the same paragraph.

King of the Americas said:
The sighting over D.C. was mundane in origin??? What was it??? Since the two sightings that scrambled jets, and caused the launch of PBB, how many times have similar sightings occurred over D.C.???
Click to expand...
I didn't say it was mundane in origin, only that the mundane has not been ruled out and that the evidence points strongly (though not conclusively) to a mundane event occurring as a result of an unusual set of circumstances presenting themselves at once (as is usually the case with UFO reports).

King of the Americas said:
What kind of comments would spawn ridicule? Something like, "They exist.", perhaps???
Click to expand...
If it has the word 'blimp' in it.
If it is shaped like a 'blimp'.

Oh yes, and over reaching the evidence to make truth claims like 'they exist'... "I believe in them" would probably be more acceptable but on the JREF forum, even that would be open to some questioning.
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
They've ALWAYS existed. Our awareness of them began when the first person saw them, except that the awareness stayed with the initial reporter AND those who took his sighting as truth, and did not penetrate the walls of science.

'I' am amazed that you are still ignoring the heart of the argument here.

Dismissing anecdotes of unknown entities is STUPID.
Saying that someone couldn't have possibly seen what they propose, because said entity is presently unknown to science, won't lead to new discoveries.
Click to expand...
Dismissing may be, but doubting is not. But in this thread, at least, I'm not dismissing the anecdotes. I've been arguing all along that if the anecdotes were true your proposal would be a mistake.
 
bruto said:
Dismissing may be, but doubting is not. But in this thread, at least, I'm not dismissing the anecdotes. I've been arguing all along that if the anecdotes were true your proposal would be a mistake.
Click to expand...

And you know, this statement, and the thread in general, really demonstrates the problem with thinking that anecdotes are evidence.

Because what KoTA really meant was not "assume all the anecdotes are true" but "assume all the anecdotes that support my personal beliefs are true".

And that's the issue.

If we accept anecdotes as true...as evidence of something..., then we have to accept them all or reject them all based on the same standard. If someone claiming it makes it more likely to be true, then this has to apply even to the anecdotes you don't personally believe. Otherwise you're simply picking and choosing your evidence based on your beliefs.

And that's the problem. If you accept anecdotes as evidence, how do you seperate the "true" from the "false"? When people claim anecdotes are not evidence, they are NOT claiming anecdotes are false (as most believers seem to take the statement), but simply the point illustrated here: anecdotes have no value in determining truth from falsity.

The only thing anecdotes might be evidence for is that something is happening that peopel think is this, and it might be worth investigating. And in cases (like aliens, or psi powers, or speaking with the dead, or many other areas) where the anecdotes that have been investigated have turned out to be due to mistakes, illness, or hoax, and none has provided evidence supporting the explanation, then the odds say that the unexplained ones probably fall into those categories as well.
 
King of the Americas said:
Where we can't and or aren't looking...I presume.
Click to expand...
Hiding a civilization in the solar system would be extremely difficult. Very, very, unlikely. We have thousand of telescopes observing observing our neighborhood, including numerous satellites in transit . A single spacecraft could escape notice, sure, but you are talking about a race of beings. Long term survival off of Earth would require a high level of technology, which would leave obvious signs.
 
Stray Cat said:
Yes sure, there are plenty of reports on the internet so I just randomly chose this one from a pro UFO site: http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/mexico/mexico.dwt

And then you may like to balance that one against this from CSICOP: http://www.csicop.org/si/show/campeche_mexico_infrared_ufo_video

Notice the two entirely different approaches used?
Click to expand...

Admittedly, I only read the second link.

The interesting thing I found there was that skeptics immediately jumped to "ball lightening"...or some other such nonsense, without seriously investigating the sighting.

Truth is best served by serious investigation...
 
Marcus said:
Hiding a civilization in the solar system would be extremely difficult. Very, very, unlikely. We have thousand of telescopes observing observing our neighborhood, including numerous satellites in transit . A single spacecraft could escape notice, sure, but you are talking about a race of beings. Long term survival off of Earth would require a high level of technology, which would leave obvious signs.
Click to expand...

Only one side of the moon 'faces' Earth...

Didn't the first Apollo mission to orbit the moon return from the dark side to report, "Santa Clause does exist."...?

Now, please don't take this to mean me saying "They DO exist 'on the moon'." as my stance.

I am merely saying it is one possibility.

How much evidence of our existence will still be around 2,000 years from now?
 
Hellbound said:
And you know, this statement, and the thread in general, really demonstrates the problem with thinking that anecdotes are evidence.

Because what KoTA really meant was not "assume all the anecdotes are true" but "assume all the anecdotes that support my personal beliefs are true".

And that's the issue.

If we accept anecdotes as true...as evidence of something..., then we have to accept them all or reject them all based on the same standard. ...
Click to expand...

Here and now, all that is asked is that participants within this thread accept that- "They exist."

AND propose manners of getting them to descend.

With that, you may assume any anecdote about them is true. That they are good, bad, reptiles, or greys...

The question is "How do we get them to descend?" Cover as many bases as you'd like.
 
King of the Americas said:
Only one side of the moon 'faces' Earth...

Didn't the first Apollo mission to orbit the moon return from the dark side to report, "Santa Clause does exist."...?

Now, please don't take this to mean me saying "They DO exist 'on the moon'." as my stance.

I am merely saying it is one possibility.

How much evidence of our existence will still be around 2,000 years from now?
Click to expand...
The dark side of the moon has been investigated, photographed, observed and probed. Why would anyone think that it could harbor a large and active contingent of extraterrestrial aliens [note, if they live elsewhere than earth, they're aliens - live with it!] and their spaceships.

There will most likely be abundant evidence of our existence 2000 years from now, as there is abundant evidence of creatures that lived many many times longer ago than that now, and a pretty good collection of artifacts of our own ancestors who lived longer ago than that.

I can rummage along the shores of Lake Champlain and find credible scientific evidence of the existence, and even the morphology, of creatures that have been extinct for millions of years. We have more credible scientific knowledge of the ancestors of corals that lived half a billion years ago than we have of your anecdotal gods from space.
 
King of the Americas said:
Here and now, all that is asked is that participants within this thread accept that- "They exist."

AND propose manners of getting them to descend.

With that, you may assume any anecdote about them is true. That they are good, bad, reptiles, or greys...

The question is "How do we get them to descend?" Cover as many bases as you'd like.
Click to expand...

If the anecdotes are true and they are Vogons, we don't want them to descend. We don't want to make way for a hyperspace bypass.
 
bruto said:
I can rummage along the shores of Lake Champlain and find credible scientific evidence of the existence, and even the morphology, of creatures that have been extinct for millions of years. We have more credible scientific knowledge of the ancestors of corals that lived half a billion years ago than we have of your anecdotal gods from space.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

But that doesn't mean that evidence can be found everywhere you look.

Evidence exists of something WHERE that thing existed.

I have found evidence of sea fossils in my back yard. I am hundreds of miles away from any ocean, so how did these things get here? The answer is that at one time, my back yard WAS an ocean.

My point? Oceans move, so if we haven't seen evidence of this lost civilization, maybe we should look under our oceans...?

Have you ever heard of a civilization called Atlantis? Supposedly, they were very capable technologically speaking, but 'sank' one day. Rather than suggest they didn't exist, maybe we should keep looking in places we haven't.
 
King of the Americas said:
Only one side of the moon 'faces' Earth...

Didn't the first Apollo mission to orbit the moon return from the dark side to report, "Santa Clause does exist."...?

Now, please don't take this to mean me saying "They DO exist 'on the moon'." as my stance.

I am merely saying it is one possibility.
Click to expand...

The moon has been very well observed in the years since Apollo, most recently by the LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter). Other countries have gotten into the act also, China is on their second moon probe. Farside has been observed using numerous imaging technologies. No civilization there.
How much evidence of our existence will still be around 2,000 years from now?
Click to expand...
At 2,000 years, the evidence would be quite obvious, ruins laying around. If you want to go to say, 500,000 years, digging would be required, but no paleontologist would be deterred.
 
King of the Americas said:
Have you ever heard of a civilization called Atlantis? Supposedly, they were very capable technologically speaking, but 'sank' one day. Rather than suggest they didn't exist, maybe we should keep looking in places we haven't.
Click to expand...

Atlantis was a story told by Plato to illustrate some of his philosophical ideas. It was never meant as a literal account of history.

Try checking your facts.
 
Correa Neto said:
Pyramids! We should build pyramids!

Oh, no, wait, we can't. Modern technology can't build them. Lets go back to birds and monkeys.
Click to expand...
No, let's go back to the birds and the bees. Somone get me Salma Hayak.

King of the Americas said:
Had they flown and or operated in a normal manner, and with recognizable flight patterns, I'd have reached a different conclusion.
Click to expand...
What a pity that we've previously established that you don't have the expertise to make this judgement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom