• 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.

UFO'S: A possible explanation

makaya325 said:
What? Sky gods, dragons, etc. being alien ships?
Click to expand...

Given that they've ALWAYS been here, I see no reason to refer to 'them' as "alien".

Let's call them "heavenly agents". And here I hope to conclude that they exist in our historical texts, and people witnessed them and made record of the accounts.

They existed.

People STILL claim to see these things...

That 'something' is up there, is what I hope we can conclude.
 
King of the Americas said:
Given that they've ALWAYS been here, I see no reason to refer to 'them' as "alien".

Let's call them "heavenly agents". And here I hope to conclude that they exist in our historical texts, and people witnessed them and made record of the accounts.

They existed.

People STILL claim to see these things...

That 'something' is up there, is what I hope we can conclude.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your opinion.

Historical evidence of ufo's can be interpreted in many ways, and leading us nowhere.
 
makaya325 said:
Thank you for your opinion.

Historical evidence of ufo's can be interpreted in many ways, and leading us nowhere.
Click to expand...

Thank YOU for your opinion.

Historical evidence CAN be interpreted in the way I am suggesting, which just might lead is to the truth...

It's one possibility.

Right?
 
Well, but it might not lead us to the truth. Speculation could lead us astray as well, as I am sure we can agree. Isn't it better to stick with the facts as best as we can? IMO. Your experience might be real. Certainly is to you. But that doesnt necessarily give credence to your speculation. Maybe I am wrong.
 
Humanzee said:
Well, but it might not lead us to the truth. Speculation could lead us astray as well, as I am sure we can agree. Isn't it better to stick with the facts as best as we can? IMO. Your experience might be real. Certainly is to you. But that doesnt necessarily give credence to your speculation. Maybe I am wrong.
Click to expand...

Humanzee has shown everyone how, IMO, a perfect skeptical post should be made.
 
King of the Americas said:
The singularity, is NOT 'nothing'.

It was most certainly something, a VERY dense, very small, singular ball of matter...then it brought forth light...

14 billion years later, here we are.
Click to expand...

Looks like we can add cosmology to the list of things you don't understand.
 
Humanzee said:
Well, but it might not lead us to the truth. Speculation could lead us astray as well, as I am sure we can agree. Isn't it better to stick with the facts as best as we can? IMO. Your experience might be real. Certainly is to you. But that doesnt necessarily give credence to your speculation. Maybe I am wrong.
Click to expand...

Maybe...

Maybe 'I' am wrong, and maybe me and my friend suffered a psychotic break, and the whole thing was a delusion.

I can't say this isn't a possibility.

When you eliminate all the reasonable possibilities, that only leaves the unreasonable ones.
 
foxholeatheist said:
Wanna know what I think? I think that a bunch of the UFO reports are really UFOs- stuff in the sky which I cannot tell you what it is. The US Airforce is cooking all kinds of crazy stuff out in the deserts back there. These claims do have interesting evidence, like contrails and funding for blackops and the like. Cool stuff.

Check it out, if we're voting on visiting aliens then I am for it. But my emotions have nothing to do with the fact of the matter and the facts are is that nothing unexplainable has happened.
Click to expand...


And in support of that argument* is the obsevation that a lot of "unexplained UFO" sightings seem to be of "aircraft" (from the 1950's onwards) that seem to be (say) a few years in advance of known aircraft.

Interstelar-capable aliens would seem to have a surprisingly poor atmospheric technology, which also happens to improve at a similar rate to the major governments on Earth....




*(apart from the obvious known examples of the YF12A/SR71, the B2 and the F117)
 
jimbob said:
And in support of that argument* is the obsevation that a lot of "unexplained UFO" sightings seem to be of "aircraft" (from the 1950's onwards) that seem to be (say) a few years in advance of known aircraft.

Interstelar-capable aliens would seem to have a surprisingly poor atmospheric technology, which also happens to improve at a similar rate to the major governments on Earth....




*(apart from the obvious known examples of the YF12A/SR71, the B2 and the F117)
Click to expand...

I think what we are seeing ARE advanced 'unknown' aircraft...but 'again', I see no reason to tag them with an "interstellar-capable alien" label. We crash our craft, a lot, but we do make a lot of them. Not knowing truly how many flights they make, there's no way to calculate they success rates.
 
King of the Americas said:
I think what we are seeing ARE advanced 'unknown' aircraft...but 'again', I see no reason to tag them with an "interstellar-capable alien" label. We crash our craft, a lot, but we do make a lot of them. Not knowing truly how many flights they make, there's no way to calculate they success rates.
Click to expand...

You believe there is a civilization of non-human life here on Earth, with industrial capabilities superior to that of humans? Is that a fair characterization of your statements?
 
King of the Americas said:
I'll concede to your first point, and refer to your definition.

To your thought experiment, I'd say they may have identified "god", but NOT "God".
Click to expand...
Fair dice. Each has their own.

King of the Americas said:
I don't know what todays "sky gods" are purposed to do, but apparently, it ISN'T to warn/save us from natural disasters...
Click to expand...
They have a whole planet to look after. Do you really think we are so special as to recieve more attention than any other species on the planet? Let's go back to the Christmas Day tsunami in Sri Lanka, which (I think) is the event you were annoyed with on the World Peace thread. The earthquake causing said tsunami was part of the Earth's natural cycle. Shifting tectonics creates volcanoes, which in turn help the rock cycle, and allow a release of pressure from under the Earth's crust. Without earthquakes, earth itself would be stuffed. Natural disasters don't just happen because they feel like it. They happen so the cycle of nature can get back into balance. That's why it happened. Why a big voice didn't tell anyone to get away from the beach... they were way away from the beach before the tsunami hit. Our sensors picked up big a** wave, and told us to scram. We did so. The deaths (most of them) came from fatigue and starvation afterwards.
 
makaya325 said:
Not exactly. Asking what happened before the big bang is the same as asking what is north of the north pole: Nothing. It is the ONLY thing in the universe that is free from cause and effect.
Click to expand...

Which is not to say something didn't happen. We wouldn't be able to make anything of what did happen, but something did. To correct you, any event before the Big Bang would be free of the order cause and effect imposes. Cause and effect would still happen, but in the wrong order, like a timeline that's been knotted and twisted completely.
 
King of the Americas said:
So, humans, and their written history isn't a part of nature, and the sky gods that we've all seen wouldn't be considered a "phenomena"?

Interesting.
Click to expand...

When you say, and I quote "We've all seen" you are quite patently wrong. I haven't seen anything. Nothing from the media either. Friends and family? They've seen nothing. If everyone has seen extraterrestrials, there would surely be standing proof by now, contact, even. I'm assuming you are basing your ideas on the 'symbols' within art, religion and history? I've already addressed this statement, and you have yet to reply.
 
jimbob said:
And in support of that argument* is the obsevation that a lot of "unexplained UFO" sightings seem to be of "aircraft" (from the 1950's onwards) that seem to be (say) a few years in advance of known aircraft.

Interstelar-capable aliens would seem to have a surprisingly poor atmospheric technology, which also happens to improve at a similar rate to the major governments on Earth....




*(apart from the obvious known examples of the YF12A/SR71, the B2 and the F117)
Click to expand...

First time, new planet, different atmosphere, long journey, fatigue (quite possibly). I would like to see you land a craft in a different atmosphere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom