• 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:
I think you make your best point, in the "Canals of Mars", analogy. To which I can only retort, that there ARE areas on Mars that look to have supported water flow...that someone saw these as man made irrigation tools is moot. There ARE darken areas where water once flowed. If 'I' am mis-identifying a common natural occurrence as something created by an intelligence, then it is not 'common' to me or anyone else I've presented my findings to.

Things lay undiscovered, where we can't go with ease...until the heavens are our playground, we likely will not be able to fully investigate or test my hypothesis.

As for how I portrayed this post...I can't say that your wording would have been anymore successfully in garnering serious discussion. I could be wrong... but I saw no serious difference between what I've requested, and your suggested topic.

I must have missed the polite, serious, to the point part(s)...
Click to expand...

You obviously did miss the posts in which I and others responded quite directly to your original post and your original question. It is of course almost impossible not to adopt a light and flippant tone in much of this, yet I believe we addressed the question with direct and pertinent considerations, regarding the likelihood under your stipulation that your plan could be implemented, the likelihood that if implemented it would succeed, and the likelihood that if it succeeded it would be a disaster.

If you see no serious difference between what you requested and the original topic, it's no wonder you're having problems here, because your original topic includes and invites possibilities far beyond anything you are prepared to accept with relation to what the ET are, what they might do, and whether the sort that you believe in exist at all. You've cherry picked your anecdotes, your possible approaches and your imagined results to exclude anything that you had not decided before you started the thread. It was never really a question at all. Bad faith there.
 
I Ratant said:
The horse is no more.
It has passed on.
It is a dead horse.
Click to expand...

They say old man your horse is dead
And we say so,and we hope so
They say old man your horse is dead
Oh poor old horse

He's as dead as a nail in the lamp room door
And we say so,and we hope so
He won't come and bother us no more
Oh poor old horse

We'll lower him down with a golden chain
And we say so,and we hope so
We'll make damned sure he don't come up again
Oh poor old horse.
 
bruto said:
You obviously did miss the posts in which I and others responded quite directly to your original post and your original question. It is of course almost impossible not to adopt a light and flippant tone in much of this, yet I believe we addressed the question with direct and pertinent considerations, regarding the likelihood under your stipulation that your plan could be implemented, the likelihood that if implemented it would succeed, and the likelihood that if it succeeded it would be a disaster.

If you see no serious difference between what you requested and the original topic, it's no wonder you're having problems here, because your original topic includes and invites possibilities far beyond anything you are prepared to accept with relation to what the ET are, what they might do, and whether the sort that you believe in exist at all. You've cherry picked your anecdotes, your possible approaches and your imagined results to exclude anything that you had not decided before you started the thread. It was never really a question at all. Bad faith there.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I can't agree 'completely' with you here. Any 'serious' considerations, suggestions, or analogies were dealt with in an appropriate civil manner, WHEN I FOUND THEM. It is NOT my job to mine for seriousness within a pile of mockery and ridicule.

The point you make about my assumptions about 'them' are equally misplaced. As the ONLY assumption I have made herein, is that "They exist." Anecdotes about them enslaving humans millennia ago, removing cattle organs, or probing people have NOTHING to do with the OP topic intended.

The only 'bad faith' exercised here are the pages upon pages of other posters calling me a liar, or someone who is unable to accurately remember experiences, atop the less than fully than serious comments about 'aliens'.

As evidence I'd like to point to the landslide of all the serious retorts that followed your edited OP suggestion...

The game here at JREF is skeptic woo-bashing. ANY conclusion, suggestion, or topic of discussion that contains 'woo' (intellectually dishonest name calling), is treated like a red-headed adoptee. There is no attempt to reach a common understanding, or to help those with unusual anecdotal findings to try to connect what they saw with other similar stories or positively identify it.

This place is wholly dedicated to woo- I.D. & bashing, while wearing a " scientific intellectualism" embossed mask.

Posting an OP like mine here, is like posting a Police Misconduct thread on an Officer's Forum. While you might garner one or two serious retorts, the landslide of responses are going to be attacks on you personally, outright distortions of the evidence presented, or point blank ignorance.

We all have our dug in positions, and chosen which side we are on. Debate, exchanging ideas, findings, or alternative conclusions don't or won't sway anyone, or so it would seem.

I have another thread asking how one would create a video featuring U.F.O.'s that could prove my conclusion. At least half the responses therein are of people saying ANY video, however it was created, regardless of it contents, would be worthless. Great, you are safe from ANY information presented here, contrary to your belief system.

From where I sit, JREF is THE place for skeptics to hide from the truth, and insulate themselves from contrary findings.

There will be no changes to skeptical stances, until 'they' THEMSELVES IN THE FLESH decide to descend. Asking skeptics how to get 'them' to do so is a waste of time and energy...
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
Resistance is NOT futile...
Click to expand...

Argument by Star Trek probably isn't the best game plan when some people are already apt to believe you cobbled your religion together watching too many science fiction shows.

Of course, it's a lot better than your "stupid brown people" argument.

Carry on.
 
carlitos said:
Just a reminder that most of the anecdotes claim that UFOs are aliens. You know, since we're trying to be all honest and open-minded about this.
Click to expand...

But that's an unqualified statement... They COULD be alien, winged horses, or pointy tailed demons NONE of which have been positively identified and studied.

I was hoping to purpose the general notion of 'an existence' beyond our knowledge, but not awareness. The problem I think is in the telling of an unknown entity. By putting 'wings' on floating angelic beings hovering in clouds, the artist 'defines' that as what he saw, or what someone said they saw... but, unless you have it right in front of you you DON'T know what it is.

That said, we can know what it isn't, based on the characteristics it/they display.

I don't know what they are, but I do know that they are...'up there'.
 
Sean84 said:
Argument by Star Trek probably isn't the best game plan when some people are already apt to believe you cobbled your religion together watching too many science fiction shows.

Of course, it's a lot better than your "stupid brown people" argument.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

Do you have a suggestion as to how to get 'them to return'?
 
King of the Americas said:
But that's an unqualified statement... They COULD be alien, winged horses, or pointy tailed demons NONE of which have been positively identified and studied.

I was hoping to purpose the general notion of 'an existence' beyond our knowledge, but not awareness. The problem I think is in the telling of an unknown entity. By putting 'wings' on floating angelic beings hovering in clouds, the artist 'defines' that as what he saw, or what someone said they saw... but, unless you have it right in front of you you DON'T know what it is.

That said, we can know what it isn't, based on the characteristics it/they display.

I don't know what they are, but I do know that they are...'up there'.
Click to expand...
How can they be up there? You claimed that they never left and were always here. Have you heard of something called logic?
 
King of the Americas said:
I'm sorry, but I can't agree 'completely' with you here. Any 'serious' considerations, suggestions, or analogies were dealt with in an appropriate civil manner, WHEN I FOUND THEM. It is NOT my job to mine for seriousness within a pile of mockery and ridicule.

The point you make about my assumptions about 'them' are equally misplaced. As the ONLY assumption I have made herein, is that "They exist." Anecdotes about them enslaving humans millennia ago, removing cattle organs, or probing people have NOTHING to do with the OP topic intended.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, those anecdotes, ridiculous as they may seem to you and to me, are among "all the anecdotes" that are stipulated in the original post, and this continues to be a barrier to your understanding of why things are going so badly for you. You have, from the start, rejected anecdotes that you don't like, while insisting on the absolute reliability of those you do.
The only 'bad faith' exercised here are the pages upon pages of other posters calling me a liar, or someone who is unable to accurately remember experiences, atop the less than fully than serious comments about 'aliens'.

As evidence I'd like to point to the landslide of all the serious retorts that followed your edited OP suggestion...

The game here at JREF is skeptic woo-bashing. ANY conclusion, suggestion, or topic of discussion that contains 'woo' (intellectually dishonest name calling), is treated like a red-headed adoptee. There is no attempt to reach a common understanding, or to help those with unusual anecdotal findings to try to connect what they saw with other similar stories or positively identify it.

This place is wholly dedicated to woo- I.D. & bashing, while wearing a " scientific intellectualism" embossed mask.

Posting an OP like mine here, is like posting a Police Misconduct thread on an Officer's Forum. While you might garner one or two serious retorts, the landslide of responses are going to be attacks on you personally, outright distortions of the evidence presented, or point blank ignorance.

We all have our dug in positions, and chosen which side we are on. Debate, exchanging ideas, findings, or alternative conclusions don't or won't sway anyone, or so it would seem.

I have another thread asking how one would create a video featuring U.F.O.'s that could prove my conclusion. At least half the responses therein are of people saying ANY video, however it was created, regardless of it contents, would be worthless. Great, you are safe from ANY information presented here, contrary to your belief system.
Click to expand...
Considering your opinion above of the tenor of these forums, I would say that's a very good ratio for someone whose ideas are as near the fringe as yours. You did, in fact, get some serious answers, with advice on what would be required in order to make a UFO video convincing. Maybe you didn't like the advice, and maybe you didn't think it relevant, but I think if you got any relevant responses you did pretty well for a subject like this.
From where I sit, JREF is THE place for skeptics to hide from the truth, and insulate themselves from contrary findings.
Click to expand...
There are no findings. You do not seem to understand what are even the most rudimentary requirements for something to be considered a reliable finding.
There will be no changes to skeptical stances, until 'they' THEMSELVES IN THE FLESH decide to descend. Asking skeptics how to get 'them' to do so is a waste of time and energy...
Click to expand...
Well, on that last score I agree for the most part. There will be no change to skeptical stances until something better than anecdotes is shown. I differ, however, in one point. I believe (as I have repeatedly stated here) that attempts to get "them" to descend would be a waste of energy whether or not they exist and whether or not they are what you think they are. The choice is theirs and their preference (not to descend) has been amply demonstrated over millennia.
 
I Ratant said:
.
Proper counseling and medications can make them go away.
Click to expand...

Can you address this:

"Let us assume for the moment that E.T. of a particular sort exist. The assumed E.T. are technologically advanced beings, once resident on earth, and correspond to the myths of ancient gods. It is stipulated for the purposes of this thread that their existence is supported by evidence, so the quality of that evidence is not a subject of discussion. If you wanted them to come back to earth, how would you go about this? Disallowed in this thread are questions about the veracity of the E.T. themselves, suggestions that the E.T. are something other than those specified, and discussions of whether we should wish them back at all."
 
King of the Americas said:
Can you address this:

"Let us assume for the moment that E.T. of a particular sort exist. The assumed E.T. are technologically advanced beings, once resident on earth, and correspond to the myths of ancient gods. It is stipulated for the purposes of this thread that their existence is supported by evidence, so the quality of that evidence is not a subject of discussion. If you wanted them to come back to earth, how would you go about this? Disallowed in this thread are questions about the veracity of the E.T. themselves, suggestions that the E.T. are something other than those specified, and discussions of whether we should wish them back at all."
Click to expand...

We should devote time, money, and resources towards scientific projects of exploration and discovery. Terrestrial telescopes, space telescopes, SETI projects, space probes and planetary landers and rovers, etc... And not just space... the oceans and remote areas of planet Earth too. In other words... we should do exactly what we are doing, and what we have been doing for thousands of years... demonstrating a desire for, and commitment towards, discovery.

The message this sends to the ETs should be perfectly clear. Certainly much clearer than the cheap and silly theatrics of a televised 'looking up' ceremony lasting a few minutes.
 
Last edited:
bruto said:
On the contrary, those anecdotes, ridiculous as they may seem to you and to me, are among "all the anecdotes" that are stipulated in the original post, and this continues to be a barrier to your understanding of why things are going so badly for you. You have, from the start, rejected anecdotes that you don't like, while insisting on the absolute reliability of those you do.

Considering your opinion above of the tenor of these forums, I would say that's a very good ratio for someone whose ideas are as near the fringe as yours. You did, in fact, get some serious answers, with advice on what would be required in order to make a UFO video convincing. Maybe you didn't like the advice, and maybe you didn't think it relevant, but I think if you got any relevant responses you did pretty well for a subject like this. There are no findings. You do not seem to understand what are even the most rudimentary requirements for something to be considered a reliable finding.

Well, on that last score I agree for the most part. There will be no change to skeptical stances until something better than anecdotes is shown. I differ, however, in one point. I believe (as I have repeatedly stated here) that attempts to get "them" to descend would be a waste of energy whether or not they exist and whether or not they are what you think they are. The choice is theirs and their preference (not to descend) has been amply demonstrated over millennia.
Click to expand...

I wanted to assume all the anecdotes THAT they exist, were true. I did not mean to suggest that we should assume that all the anecdotes about them were true, as these findings are wholly without any factual basis.

In regards to the other thread, there IS plenty of good earnest advice that I very much plan to heed. My point is that many who posted under that thread, stated forthright, that a video, regardless of its contents wouldn't be evidence of anything. So, as far as what can be 'shared' here: Anecdotes & Videos, skeptics are safe from facing evidence contrary to their belief system. If you can get a free pass, to ignore first person reports and the video images they capture, then you are literally impenetrable to amendment. *If you can't be proven wrong, then you ARE wrong.

Lastly, I don't think it IS solely 'their' preference to descend or not. If the tribe came out every day, en masse, to greet the L.W.B., I think those flying it would feel obligated to at the very least make minimal efforts to meet them face to face...

When we act as a global community, to request or invite contact, I think this will 'move' them to some sort of action. That said, if they refused again to show themselves upon the world asking them to step out of the mist...then I think there is serious cause for concern.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom