UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[Correa Neto]

How much to power up my flying object?
Since you're avalable?

Mr. Edge,

The Brotherhood of Aliens actively seeks humans willing to cooperate to its project for the future of mankind. It is the Brotherhood's goal to prepare Mankind for the harsh times about to come. Selected individuals will pave the way, spreading the Wisdom. Every human being which has seen (or even dreamt with) UFOs has been touched, probed by the Brotherhood, for its potential. The closer the experience, the deeper the probing, the higher the potential.

Our files register you as an individual selected for your sensitivity; you have already been touched, even if not truly deep inside, by the members of the Brotherhood. That you've asked for more contact, is an indicatiion of your desire and potential four another coming of the Brothers to you, touching deep in your soul. Your skills and sensitivity handling rods was not unnoticed in the preliminary probing the Brothers made not deep in to you. So, hear the Word of the Brothers and rejoice, for you have been chosen! Soon you will experience a close contact with the Brothers, a probing so deep that will fill your body and soul with the alien's love!

Of course, our Earthly operations require some funding to work, and alien currency is not yet accepted in this Orb. We then humbly ask you to deposit at least 10% of your incomes on a monthly base to help the Brother's Work. Once your commitment to the Brothers is proven, you will be Visited and blessed by receiving the Alien's Love deep inside you.

 

[John Albert]

The Brotherhood of Aliens actively seeks humans willing to cooperate to its project for the future of mankind.

I don't want nuthin' to do with none of those shiftless good-for-nothin' ayleeyuns. My next door neighbor Meepzorp is a typical example.

A lazy, oversexed slacker, always zipping around the neighborhood in that hot-rod saucer of his, waking me up in the middle of the night with that damn bright-blue glow. Future of mankind, my hairy ass. No son of mine is gonna flit around town like a fairy in no flying saucer. They gonna drive to work in pickup trucks like real Americans.

I wish they'd all just go back to wherever the hell it is they came from, cause I'm sick and tired of them living off the system, runnin' up my taxes with their perverted butt-probing parties. This pansy liberal PC bullcrap has gone too far. Butt-probing ain't "culture." They ought to be outlawed. Open Project Blue Book back up, that's what I say. Let our boys in the Air Force just shoot 'em all down.

 

[GeeMack]

The illustration is not "pure imagination".

Okay, it is not pure imagination. Then let's see what follows...

It is an illustration of what the object I saw from much farther away would probably seem like much closer up.

What it would probably look like? Probably? Like, as in, the picture is the result of you guessing what it might look like. In other words, it's from your imagination? Maybe we can borrow some laughing dogs from the cooperative helpful skeptics over in the 911 conspiracy section.

After you begged for people to name a few UFO hoaxes, any particular reason you've ignored the glowing orb hoax I described in Post #13790?...

Although it doesn't appear to be very widely known, there is much evidence to suggest the 1975 J. Randall Murphy glowing orb sighting is a hoax. There is no solid foundation to the story, no material evidence, and an intentional effort is being made to perpetuate the story by way of mass media.

The method? Make up an alien sighting that allegedly happened so long ago nobody can possibly verify its legitimacy. Set up a web site to spread the tale. Go around to some forums and tell the story over and over again, insistently, never let up no matter how often you're caught in attempts to deceive. Ignore all criticism then tell the story again. It's a similar strategy to some of the more underhanded political campaigns. Never let up. Lie if you have to. Repeat. Repeat. Eventually some folks will believe it even if they're just the stupidest and most gullible. It's not a unique method for growing a hoax, and it's probably marginally effective at least among those with a propensity to fall for such nonsense.

Of course nobody has actually admitted that the alleged alien sighting was made up from scratch, but the ever changing versions and demonstrated dishonesty in the telling of the tale certainly supports it being a hoax.

Or didn't you really want to discuss UFO hoaxes?

 

[GeeMack]

[...] cause I'm sick and tired of them living off the system, runnin' up my taxes with their perverted butt-probing parties.

Hey, what gives you the right to foist your self righteous morality on the rest of us? What are ya, some kind of aliephobe?

 

[John Albert]

Hey, what gives you the right to foist your self righteous morality on the rest of us? What are ya, some kind of aliephobe?

One of 'em ever probes my sons in the butt, he's gonna wish he was back in Uranus or wherever he came from.

All's I'm saying is, there's a reason they call 'em illegal aliens, alright? They's illegal, they got no business being here. Period.

 

[TjW]

Here is an illustration that gives a better idea of the
size of the core object for the UFO ( alien craft )
that I observed. I estimated it to be about as wide
as a VW Beetle.

I thought you estimated it to be as wide as the length of a VW Beetle.
Or did it change again?

 

[RoboTimbo]

ufolog, since you're making a total hash with your recent postings and simply embarrassing yourself further, perhaps you would like to return to the topic of this thread and post your top 10 list of UFOs (Unidentified Flying Objects) and the evidence which falsifies the null hypothesis which is:

"All UFOs are of mundane origin"​

Note that the evidence must be of such a nature that it falsifies the null hypothesis and would lead a rational person to conclude that a UFO is alien in origin.

Note also that you will not be allowed to Rredefine any words to suit your agenda. These include but are not limited to: UFO, rational, evidence, conclude, falsifies, person, alien, origin, null, hypothesis, the, mundane, such, be that, are, not, also, you, allowed, words, suit, and agenda.

 

[carlitos]

So, again you failed to explain how your "I know what I saw" is different from virgin of guadalupe-witnesses' "I know what I saw" or bigfoot believers' "I know what I saw." You already have the martyr complex down, so I'll leave out the jesus stuff.

For those new to the discussion, this was ufology's most thorough attempt to address this topic. I apologize for asking again and again and again, but it's frustrating. Does anyone here see how his LOGIC is different from believers in the various phenomena that I listed?

First off, thanks for replying in detail.

Re-reading my post, and it still seems reasonably coherent to me. Not my best writing, but hey, whatever.

ufology, above you indicate various beliefs. There is a "wider reality." You know "the truth." You "know what you saw" and you know that it's not of this earth (not mundane).

Please explain how your beliefs are different from the beliefs of claimed witnesses to:

• Ghosts
• Virgin of Guadalupe
• Jesus
• Werewolves
• Bigfoot
• Lady of Fatima
• Chupacabra

Thank you.

To be clear about my own sighting. The part about it not being "of this Earth" is not something I'm certain of, only that it was alien to human civilization.

You remember seeing a light (or lights) in the sky, when you were on a couch looking through a window, listening to Led Zeppelin II, or maybe Houses of the Holy (why not Presence? - Achilles Last Stand would fit nicely with the story). You have failed to eliminate mundane explanations, because your faith-based belief that aliens are visiting earth prevents you from doing so. This was the reason for me posting my list.

An extraterrestrial origin seems reasonable given what we know about the Earth, and what other people have reported, but thinking it's reasonable is different than "believing". Believing implies that you know it to be a fact. I didn't see it come from space or a giant mother ship. It came up from behind a mountain across the lake.

Assuming that what you saw is something for which no objective evidence exists is jumping to conclusions. As for "reasonable," that's why I posted the list below.

Ghosts: I've experienced the phenomena, but I don't know how to explain it. At one time, I was of the "life after death" persuasion. Now I don't accept that at face value. I suppose it might be connected to the alien phenomenon, but that's pure speculation. Because I've experienced ghost phenomena myself, I think it's reasonable to believe other people have had similar experiences that are equally puzzling.

• I'm not surprised that you claim to have experienced other paranormal phenomena. It seems that believers in one seem to believe in many. There are, of course, possible mundane explanations for your ghost stories, but you dismissed them because of your faith-based belief system.
• You think that other non-mundane phenonema are "reasonable" to believe because of your faith-based belief system. There is no objective evidence for ghosts.

Virgin of Guadalupe: I have no idea about that one. It's a religious thing, my experience was not.

Believers in the Virgin of Guadalupe have no objective evidence. They believe based on faith. There was a collection of anecdotes, and gradually the myth built up to where many separate anecdotes were attributed to the Virgin of Guadalupe. This was the reason for me posting my list.

Jesus: Seems to be a composite character base on myth and religion. I proposed before anyone else I'd read about that the shroud of Turin couldn't be genuine because the cloth it was made from didn't exist at the time Jesus was said to have died. Also, my ( our ) expereience was a real event concerning a sphere of light, not a mythological religious figure.

Right. Your experience was real, but Paul's vision on the road to Damascus was mythology. You both know what you saw, and it wasn't of this world, but your belief is completely different.

And as he journeyed, it came to pass that he drew nigh unto Damascus: and suddenly there shone round about him a light out of heaven

You believe that aliens visit the earth, and Paul believed that Jesus appeared to him. Those are two faith-based beliefs without objective evidence. This was the reason for me posting my list.

Werewolves: I thought they were pure horror fiction. What I saw wasn't a creature, and wasn't fictional, and couldn't have been imitated by a man in a suit.

You will note that I actually didn't ask about what you saw, but about your belief in alien visitation, and how it differs from other faith-based beliefs. People who have seen Werewolves know what they saw. They defend the werewolf mythology the same as ufologists defend your theory that ufo = alien visitors (for example, posting unclear youtube videos that leap to bizarre conclusions). This was the reason for me posting the list.

Bigfoot: A couple of my friends claimed to have seen one in the same valley I saw the UFO. Strange animals are possible, naturally and from genetic manipulation, and I believe they saw something. But big hairy man-like animals can also be faked. I proposed the Patterson film was fake back in the early 1990s. To me it was just obvious. Again, I don't know how anyone could fake the UFO I saw.

Your highlighted argument from incredulity aside (that's a logical fallacy, btw ) , I am a little disappointed that you believe that your friends saw something. They are telling campfire stories. Boo! Assuming that they did see something, to assume what they saw was bigfoot is based on faith. People (not saying you, just bigfoot believers) who want to see bigfoot seem to find him in films, still photos, all over the place. Bigfoot is like a paraedolia wet dream; he's even bigger than Jesus on toast. Anyway, there are a lot of people that claim whatever "strange animal" they saw was bigfoot without having objective evidence bigfoot exists. It's faith based. That's why I posted the list.

Lady of Fatima: Another religious thing. What I ( we ) saw was a sphere of light, not an angel or religious figure.

Let me fix that for you.

Lady of Fatima: Another faith-based thing. We attributed the light we saw to aliens, not to an angel or religious figure.​

You did exactly what Lucia Santos did, but you chose your mythology instead of hers.

On 13 May 1917, ten year old Lúcia Santos, her sister and her cousin Jacinta and Francisco Marto, were herding sheep at a location known as the Cova da Iria near their home village of Fátima in Portugal. Lúcia described seeing a woman "brighter than the sun, shedding rays of light clearer and stronger than a crystal ball filled with the most sparkling water and pierced by the burning rays of the sun.

Chupacabra: Another strange animal ... again, I suppose strange animals are possible, but getting an object to move like the object we saw is completely different. I don't know how it could happen naturally or with any known technology at the time.

I was talking about the belief system, not the "strange animal." People who attribute diverse stories about strange animals to chupacabra are superstitious. Their belief has no objective evidence and is faith-based. That is why I posted the list.

The above explains my personal perspective reagarding how the various other claims are different from the experience I had. If you're asking how they are more or less scientifically provable. I can't provide empirical proof. I can only provide my personal account. I know what I saw, but you can't, which gives you a reason to doubt, which is fair. Personally I doubt other people's stories too until I've satisfied myself that it is reasonable to believe them ... and again ... "reasonable to believe" is not the same as "believing in" as in having some leap of faith. I simply believe it is likely they are telling the truth as they recall.

If you cannot see the contradictions in the two highlighted statements, I'm afraid that you will never understand why I will not accept your particular flavor of faith. You can't remember what album was playing but you "know" that it was aliens visiting us based on seeing a light through a window. The thread title is apt - "believers." Your beliefs are no different from ghosts, bigfoot or Christianity; they have exactly the same amount of objective evidence.

Does this help?

Yes, thank you.

ufology, you just hand-wave away religion or bigfoot as "not enough anecdotal evidence" or "off topic," but you haven't once shown how your logical process of back-fitting facts to fit your predetermined conclusion of "alien craft" (which is pseudoscience^TM) is different from the logic of other true believers. Why not give it an honest try? It could help us with the research, the evidence, for UFOs.

 

[edge]

Mr. Edge,

The Brotherhood of Aliens actively seeks humans willing to cooperate to its project for the future of mankind. It is the Brotherhood's goal to prepare Mankind for the harsh times about to come. Selected individuals will pave the way, spreading the Wisdom. Every human being which has seen (or even dreamt with) UFOs has been touched, probed by the Brotherhood, for its potential. The closer the experience, the deeper the probing, the higher the potential.

Our files register you as an individual selected for your sensitivity; you have already been touched, even if not truly deep inside, by the members of the Brotherhood. That you've asked for more contact, is an indicatiion of your desire and potential four another coming of the Brothers to you, touching deep in your soul. Your skills and sensitivity handling rods was not unnoticed in the preliminary probing the Brothers made not deep in to you. So, hear the Word of the Brothers and rejoice, for you have been chosen! Soon you will experience a close contact with the Brothers, a probing so deep that will fill your body and soul with the alien's love!

Of course, our Earthly operations require some funding to work, and alien currency is not yet accepted in this Orb. We then humbly ask you to deposit at least 10% of your incomes on a monthly base to help the Brother's Work. Once your commitment to the Brothers is proven, you will be Visited and blessed by receiving the Alien's Love deep inside you.

LOL
Touché

NoNo No It’s my turn to do the probing!
Besides that price seems way too expensive.
I wouldn’t charge anything I promise.

 

[ufology]

So the illustration is consistent to the story. If that was how large it appeared 3km away the object was far larger than described.

In the more distant night illustration with one of the objects coming over a mountain at night, the core object is a bit larger and the apparent distance a bit closer. But it's much more accurate and gives a much better impression than the little squiggle that was posted by someone else suggesting that the object was so small as to be undiscernable.

 

[Resume]

But it's much more accurate and gives a much better impression than the little squiggle that was posted by someone else suggesting that the object was so small as to be undiscernable.

Based on a memory from 37 years prior? C'mon now.

 

[R.A.F.]

...it's much more accurate and gives a much better impression...

"Impression"?? If you are trying to impress someone, you're really going about it the wrong way.

The only thing you have is a 40 year old story that you keep "retro-fitting" in an attempt to "make it" something extraordinary.

So far you have failed, miserably.

 

[Akhenaten]

In the more distant night illustration with one of the objects coming over a mountain at night, the core object is a bit larger and the apparent distance a bit closer.

Rubbish.

But it's much more accurate and gives a much better impression than the little squiggle that was posted by someone else suggesting that the object was so small as to be undiscernable.

Also rubbish. I would never use a non-word like 'undiscernable'.

 

[GeeMack]

In the more distant night illustration with one of the objects coming over a mountain at night, the core object is a bit larger and the apparent distance a bit closer. But it's much more accurate and gives a much better impression than the little squiggle that was posted by someone else suggesting that the object was so small as to be undiscernable.

At 3km away any detail on object the size of a Volkswagen would be indiscernible. A glowing object the size of a Volkswagen, 3km away, at night? It would be nearly impossible to discern even its distance or size. Unless you are claiming to have some kind of magical powers of superhuman vision, your argument is nonsense. But now if it was just all made up, like an attempted hoax...

So how's about that UFOlien hoax stuff you so desperately wanted to talk about a few posts ago? I described what appears to be a bogus alien craft sighting and you've totally ignored it. Any particular reason you don't want to discuss the glowing orb hoax I mentioned in Post #13790? What is it about that story that makes it any more likely to be real than just another stale UFO hoax?

 

[Tomtomkent]

In the more distant night illustration with one of the objects coming over a mountain at night, the core object is a bit larger and the apparent distance a bit closer. But it's much more accurate and gives a much better impression than the little squiggle that was posted by someone else suggesting that the object was so small as to be undiscernable.

So it isn't accurate in anyway then. The size is wrong. The distance is wrong. And it gives a better impression tham the little squiggle that was of accurate size for the "calculated" dimensions and distance?

Pffffft

 

[ufology]

At 3km away any detail on object the size of a Volkswagen would be indiscernible. A glowing object the size of a Volkswagen, 3km away, at night? It would be nearly impossible to discern even its distance or size. Unless you are claiming to have some kind of magical powers of superhuman vision, your argument is nonsense. But now if it was just all made up, like an attempted hoax...

So how's about that UFOlien hoax stuff you so desperately wanted to talk about a few posts ago? I described what appears to be a bogus alien craft sighting and you've totally ignored it. Any particular reason you don't want to discuss the glowing orb hoax I mentioned in Post #13790? What is it about that story that makes it any more likely to be real than just another stale UFO hoax?

Wrong. We've already had someone calculate the apparent size and compare it to known celestial objects so your proclaimation is in error. Go back abd find the posts.

 

[Akhenaten]

Wrong. We've already had someone calculate the apparent size and compare it to known celestial objects so your proclaimation is in error. Go back abd find the posts.

Did you bother to read this post, olog?

At first I didn’t pay much attention to your personal eyewitness account, ufology. Inasmuch as you had already confessed that you had no empirical evidence to justify your position, admitted that “ufology” was not a science, and were even unable to definitively separate it as a belief system from the more mundane religions, bothering with what was obviously just another anecdotal sighting seemed to serve no real purpose.

But you have belabored us with your defense of this incident for several pages now and it is worth noting that, if true, it points more to your superhuman abilities as an observer than anything else.
I am not engaging in hyperbole here. If the incident is as you claim, then you are possessed with what could only be described as superhuman powers of observation.

An experienced military reconnaissance scout, under optimal conditions, should be able to determine the type, model, and often make, of a large vehicle (say a tank, or self propelled howitzer) at 1000 meters. If the distance is known, and a fixed object is available, he can also determine an approximate speed.
At 1500 meters he should be able to recognize the type of vehicle, but most likely not the make.
At distances beyond 2000 meters he needs binoculars.
According to your statements, you were able to determine, under less than optimal conditions, the altitude, speed and, most importantly, approximate size of an object at a distance of three miles. That’s about 4800 meters, well over twice the distance a normal person would be able to make out any detail.
Are you claiming that your visual acuity exceeds that of a Carlos Hathcock or Chuck Yeager? If not, then this a glaring inconsistency in the very piece of “evidence” that you claim converted you to the belief system, isn’t it?

 

[Tomtomkent]

So maybe folo means the post that described it as about four times the size of venus. Far smaller than his image, much closer to the smaller one.

 

[Resume]

Now this VW Bug, would it be the old-school model, the 98 through 2010 model, or the brand spankin' new 2012? Or perhaps the hushed, whispered Firefly Bug concept?

 

[RoboTimbo]

Wrong. We've already had someone calculate the apparent size and compare it to known celestial objects so your proclaimation is in error. Go back abd find the posts.

Have you come up with your Top 10 best UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) cases yet? Top five? Even one that would falsify the null hypothesis?