Stephen Greer Attempts to Stiff Supporters With Possible ET Stiff

[Newbeak]

You know of no case where a USAF fighter has been vectored by RADAR to intercept an alien craft either. If you have objective evidence to falsify that position, you should post it in one of the threads purportedly offering evidence for the existence of aliens.

What about the 1976 Tehran incident? Okay,not a USAF incident,but they were our allies at the time,and our intelligence people sure took a great deal of interest in the case.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Tehran_UFO_incident

 

[Stray Cat]

What about the 1976 Tehran incident? Okay,not a USAF incident,but they were our allies at the time,and our intelligence people sure took a great deal of interest in the case.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Tehran_UFO_incident

No they didn't.
If you locate and read the relevant pages on the moderated UFO evidence thread, you will see that this was a story exaggerated by tabloid press and misreported. Nowhere in any original documentation is an alien craft mentioned... but like I said, there is already a (moderated) thread to discuss UFO evidence.

 

[Stray Cat]

Secondely, my understanding of the problem of the difficulty of detection of asteroid, their erratic trajectory and small size, so if you are pretending that your slow star ship is around 10m radius, you have a valid objection, but note that many many sighting are about *gigantic* UFO which could not possibly be undetected. I also have to really ask how ET would survive the travel over thousands of year with a small star ship (which HAS to decelerate from 0.01C to zero or otherwise shoot through our Solar system without stopping, which means a lot of energy amd that even if you pretend they have gigantic quantity of anti matter on board) , but I am pretty sure you will wave the magic wand.

As usual, our resident UFOlogist is attempting to talk around the problem by conflating several concepts that are in fact incompatible.
What is usually called a "Generation Ship" (a craft that conveys populations at slower speed but can maintain it's occupants over hundred or thousands of years) was what was first being hinted at. These craft would have to be miles across, not small objects like asteroids... OK still a needle in a haystack compared tot he vastness of space but we can already spot and plot much smaller random objects... and yet no one's ever seen an alien craft... funny that.

 

[GeeMack]

You know of no case where a USAF fighter has been vectored by RADAR to intercept an alien craft either. If you have objective evidence to falsify that position, you should post it in one of the threads purportedly offering evidence for the existence of aliens.

What about the 1976 Tehran incident? Okay,not a USAF incident,but they were our allies at the time,and our intelligence people sure took a great deal of interest in the case.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Tehran_UFO_incident

So, what about it? No aircraft from any air force, not the USAF, any of our allies, or any other, no commercial aircraft, no private aircraft, hot air balloon, helicopter, or hang glider has been vectored by RADAR to intercept an alien craft. Like I told ufology, if you have objective evidence to falsify that position, you should post it in one of the threads purportedly offering evidence for the existence of aliens.

 

[Newbeak]

So, what about it? No aircraft from any air force, not the USAF, any of our allies, or any other, no commercial aircraft, no private aircraft, hot air balloon, helicopter, or hang glider has been vectored by RADAR to intercept an alien craft. Like I told ufology, if you have objective evidence to falsify that position, you should post it in one of the threads purportedly offering evidence for the existence of aliens.

Okay,how about this Condon Report radar case? http://files.ncas.org/condon/text/case02.htm "Interception by RAF fighter aircraft was attempted; one aircraft was VECTORED to the UFO by GCA radar..."

 

[StankApe]

UFO's exist, alien aircraft don't , must differentiate betwixt the two

 

[Newbeak]

UFO's exist, alien aircraft don't , must differentiate betwixt the two

I couldn't agree more.We may be witnessing some novel physical phenomena here,so it would be nice for certain members of this forum to stop slavishly defaulting to the UFO=alien space ship conclusion.

 

[StankApe]

or they could have just made, ya know, a mistake man....

 

[GeeMack]

So, what about it? No aircraft from any air force, not the USAF, any of our allies, or any other, no commercial aircraft, no private aircraft, hot air balloon, helicopter, or hang glider has been vectored by RADAR to intercept an alien craft. Like I told ufology, if you have objective evidence to falsify that position, you should post it in one of the threads purportedly offering evidence for the existence of aliens.

Okay,how about this Condon Report radar case? http://files.ncas.org/condon/text/case02.htm "Interception by RAF fighter aircraft was attempted; one aircraft was VECTORED to the UFO by GCA radar..."

Again, what about it? Read this carefully...

No aircraft from any air force, not the USAF, any of our allies, or any other, no commercial aircraft, no private aircraft, hot air balloon, helicopter, or hang glider has ever been vectored by RADAR to intercept an alien craft.​

And again, if you have objective evidence to falsify that position, you should post it in one of the threads purportedly offering evidence for the existence of aliens.

 

[Newbeak]

[QUOTE
And again, if you have objective evidence to falsify that position, you should post it in one of the threads purportedly offering evidence for the existence of aliens.[/QUOTE]
The Condon report researchers were objective,were they not?? How can you be more objective?

 

[GeeMack]

And again, if you have objective evidence to falsify that position, you should post it in one of the threads purportedly offering evidence for the existence of aliens.

The Condon report researchers were objective,were they not?? How can you be more objective?

Perhaps you'd like to point out where in the Condon Report it was objectively determined that anything or anyone was ever dispatched to intercept an alien craft. But before you dig yourself any deeper in that faulty "ufology" illogic, consider that no alien craft has ever been objectively demonstrated to exist.

 

[Stray Cat]

The Condon report researchers were objective,were they not?? How can you be more objective?

The Condon report didn't show any evidence of Alien Craft.
It concluded; "Our general conclusion is that nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past 21 years that has added to scientific knowledge"

Today, that 21 years can be extended to over 60 years... way to go UFOlogists!

 

[nablator]

The "possible ET stiff" was human. What a surprise...

 

[Mister Earl]

Source, nablator?

 

[TjW]

I'll vouch for Hungry81. I mean, I wasn't there, but surely you aren't suggesting they'd have someone less than credible doing investigative work?

 

[Newbeak]

What about the McMinnville, Oregon case

The Condon report didn't show any evidence of Alien Craft.
It concluded; "Our general conclusion is that nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past 21 years that has added to scientific knowledge"

Today, that 21 years can be extended to over 60 years... way to go UFOlogists!

Condon was a close-minded , dyed in the wool skeptic from the start of the study,so his statement "Our general conclusion is that nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past 21 years that has added to scientific knowledge" is BS,IMHO.
If you look at the opinion of the people who actually did the legwork in the Condon report,you get comments such as this one: "This is one of the few UFO reports in which all factors investigated, geometric, psychological, and physical appear to be consistent with the assertion that an extraordinary flying object, silvery, metallic, disk-shaped, tens of meters in diameter, and evidently artificial, flew within sight of two witnesses. It cannot be said that the evidence positively rules out a fabrication, although there are some physical factors such as the accuracy of certain photometric measures of the original negatives which argue against a fabrication".
My only point is that SOME well documented ufo cases are quite intriguing,and indicative of some novel phenomenon worthy of further study. I am NOT suggesting that these are necessarily alien spacecraft,although that possibility cannot be ruled out.

 

[nablator]

Source, nablator?

There is another thread about the recent developments:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=257335

Here is a quick summary. Long before Greer was involved Dr. Etxeberria (MD, Professor of Forensic Medicine of the University of the Basque Country, Spain) called it a perfectly normal mummified human fetus :
http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/el_feto_humano_de_sirius

The more recent DNA analysis failed to show anything uncommon:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...y-human-claim-scientists-new-documentary.html

Dr. Nolan's report:
http://siriusdisclosure.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Chile-Specimen_GPN-Summary.pdf

Dr. Lachman report:
http://siriusdisclosure.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/signed-Lachman-report.pdf

The two anomalies noted by Dr Lachman (epiphyseal plate and missing ribs) might be easily explainable :
http://paolov.wordpress.com/2013/05/04/atacama-alien-mystery/

 

[Hungry81]

I'll vouch for Hungry81. I mean, I wasn't there, but surely you aren't suggesting they'd have someone less than credible doing investigative work?

Thank you. No one can question my integrity now, and now every witch I accuse had better rest assured that they are guilty.
Oh and as an aside, on a totally unrelated matter, your cheque is in the mail.

 

[Stray Cat]

Condon was a close-minded , dyed in the wool skeptic from the start of the study,so his statement "Our general conclusion is that nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past 21 years that has added to scientific knowledge" is BS,IMHO.

Cool your opinion is noted.... as is Condons and Condon was there and the report is there to read in full.
If you disagree with it's conclusion, don't use it to support your PoV.

If you wish to really refute Condon's claim, then perhaps list some scientific knowledge that has come from the study of UFOs.

If you look at the opinion of the people who actually did the legwork in the Condon report,you get comments such as this one: "This is one of the few UFO reports in which all factors investigated, geometric, psychological, and physical appear to be consistent with the assertion that an extraordinary flying object, silvery, metallic, disk-shaped, tens of meters in diameter, and evidently artificial, flew within sight of two witnesses. It cannot be said that the evidence positively rules out a fabrication, although there are some physical factors such as the accuracy of certain photometric measures of the original negatives which argue against a fabrication".

I also really wouldn't want to cite a comment about Trent's hoaxed photos to make a point about how much integrity those leg workers had.
If you want the real McMinnville story (and one which was even hinted at in your quote mine) look up the vast amount of research and examination of Macabee's methods and misrepresentations in our moderated UFO evidence thread.

My only point is that SOME well documented ufo cases are quite intriguing,and indicative of some novel phenomenon worthy of further study. I am NOT suggesting that these are necessarily alien spacecraft,although that possibility cannot be ruled out.

And I agree that UFO reports are worthy of study... that's why I study them... But to date, not a single one has ever turned out to be an alien craft, so though I don't rule it out, It's waaaaaaay down on the probability scale... further down than witches riding on broomsticks.