UFO Footage Emerges from Recent Sightings (Follow-up)

[NJCher]

Liverpool:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/7472421.stm

Shropshire:

http://www.shropshirestar.com/2008/06/04/footage-of-aliens-in-shropshire/

And the Minister of Defense is being asked to investigate, as the large one near Cardiff plus a group of smaller ones were near a defense installation:

http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/ae9e1cbe5cd48af02fed30e1f9136c5a/MoD+may+probe+UFO+sightings.aspx

Here's the original thread I posted, in case you missed it:

"What's With All the UFO Attacks?"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=3494750



Cher

[Mabus]

1. I find all of this interesting

One time when I was a little kid, I couldn't have been more than 4 or 5, I was traveling with my grandparents up I-35. I know it was I-35 because we were driving from OKC to Lawrence, KS. And, based on the landscape I remember, we were in the Flint Hills area. I can't tell you what time it was but it was night because I remember watching out the stars through the back window. My grandparents were in the front seat and for most of the drive they didn't talk much.

Anyway, we were just tooling down the road when my grandparents started talking to each other and pointing at something in the sky. My grandpa slowed the car down and kept watch on whatever it was they were talking about. At some point I popped my head into the front seat - this was one of those old cars that had seats that were slightly better than a school bus, and seemingly as tall - and my grandma pointed at some light and told me that's what they were looking at. I wasn't really sure what they were talking about or why they were so interested in it but I climbed over into the front seat to join in the fun. I finally noticed the light they were talking about. It was a bright light and my grandfather was the one who said it looked like a cigar.

Grandpa kept driving and all three of us kept an eye on the bright light. My grandpa finally pulled over on the side of the road. My grandma was a little freaked out and, because she was, I was too. Grandpa said it was okay and pointed to several other cars that had pulled off the road too. We got out of the car and joined some of the other people who were staring and pointing. I don't know what they were talking about, mostly because I was so young and it was so long ago.

I do remember standing there and watching this light and people being excited by it. The light itself had stopped moving and that's why people were so excited. We kept watching it and it started to get bigger. Grandpa told us that if the light got too close that we should get in the ditch and cover ourselves. That seemed to have been the agreed upon plan because I remember the kids and the women were moved to closer to the road side so we could dive for the ditch. In the meantime a couple of more cars had stopped, as had a big rig or two. People were stopping and just watching the light. Cars on both sides of the road had stopped and got of their cars and were watching too. There must have been about twenty people standing around on the side of the road. Most of the people from the other side ran over to our side of the road.

That's when a couple of air planes came. Grandma told me they were planes. She said that planes had red blinking lights but that the bright light we had been watching didn't. The bright light had stopped moving and planes flew around it a few times. Everyone was watching. Like I said, we had been herded to the side of the road, so we could take cover if necessary, but we must have moved forward toward the road because my grandfather pushed me and grandma back toward the ditch. He stood between us and whatever was going on to protect us.

Now there was one light and three air planes around it. All of a sudden the light when straight up, very quickly and disappeared. The planes circled the area for a few minutes and then took off. We all stood around trying to figure out where the light went and watching the planes. Grandma and I got back into the car while my grandpa went to go talk to the other men folk. Grandma and I sat in the front seat staring at the sky trying to find the light. After a while grandpa got back in the car and I climbed in the back seat and was transfixed on the sky. My grandparents sat and talked for a while. Eventually Grandpa started the car along with the others and those of us on our side of the road drove convoy-style.

From that night until his death grandpa would sit out on the front porch or go for an evening walk and stare up at the sky. He got a telescope and would spend hours searching the skies. One of my uncles was in the Air Force (a lieutenant col.) and my grandparents had spent time visiting Air Forces bases around the country. Grandpa was familiar with air craft and what they were capable of. He insisted that what he saw that night was not a conventional air craft. He never said it was aliens and was open to the possibility that it was some sort of test plane (the Flint Hills is between the Boeing and Cessna plants in Wichita and Forbes Air Field in Topeka and Richards-Gebaur Air Force Base outside of KCMO) but he spent the rest of his life wondering and watching the night skies.

On the other hand, Grandma was never sure what to make of it but she developed an interest in UFO reports. Whenever there were reports in the newspaper she would check them out. She was more interested in the ones that described cigar shaped objects than she reports about other shapes. She reminded us that she was from Missouri, the "Show Me State", and so she knew there were cigar shaped objects but wouldn't believe stories about circular ones unless she saw it for herself.

Myself, I'm not sure what to think. I was too young to understand what was going on. I remember seeing the light that everyone was talking about. But I remember more what those around me were doing and how they were reacting. I just remember being both fascinated and scared at the same time. I do know that it changed my grandparents' lives. It even changed my mom's life. She and my grandparents were very close. They told her about what happened and my mom must have bought every book on UFO's, psychic phenomena and the supernatural that she ran across.

fwiw, I have seen other lights in the sky that didn't seem right since but I also try to be as skeptical as possible. I'm more like my grandmother. Unless I see it myself, I figure it could be a fake. Other members of my family have seen lights too. Anyway, I find these articles and discussions interesting and at some point it would be nice to know what they are.

[Buddyblazon]

2. Interesting story...

besides that...I spent many years as a kid in Lawrence myself.

[Mabus]

5. East side? North? Old West?

My grandparents lived in Old West Lawrence, just north of the stadium. I've lived all over Lawrence and I also lived in Baldwin for a few years. The last place I lived was in East Lawrence between Hobbs Park/Municipal Stadium and Freeman's Furniture. My husband and I moved to the DC area a few months ago. Or, as I like to think about it, Mabus - the third anti-christ predicted by Nostradamus - now lives near the belly of the beast.

[Cheap_Trick]

11. Emporia native here

Never have seen a UFO, but I believe.....

[Mabus]

22. Hey Emporia native!

You're familiar with the area I'm talking about. The road is kind of winding and there a few obstructions over the hills. I remember watching the El Dorado "flames" (the oil rig flames along the east side of I-35) and then seeing the light a little while later. So, it had to somewhere between El Dorado and Emporia.

I used to help a friend deliver the KC Star in Emporia. I drove all over that town between 1 and 4 in the morning several times. I went along to help keep my friend awake. I've also have a couple of friends who are from Emporia and a few who went to the "teacher's college" there. Every time I hear "teacher's college" I think of Emporia. It's a good little town.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

4. You might be interested in this article from an 1865 Kansas newspaper

Several years ago, I was doing genealogy research at an Historical Society, and was digging in old Lawrence KS newspapers... I was amazed to find this little article, and copied it as written.

Kansas State Journal - September 14, 1865
A Remarkable Phenomenon

I this morning witnessed the most remarkable phenomenon in the sky that I have ever seen. It was between the hours of three and four o'clock a.m. Lieut. Williams first saw the strange and singular phenomenon. It consisted of a stream of light, appearing about twenty feet in length, representing distinctly the three colors -- red, white, and blue. It represented to my mind, and to others also, a section of the American flag without the stars. I should have pronounced it a lunar rainbow, but there was no moon at the time. It was not a cloud, for there was not a cloud, not even the size of a man's hand, that could anywhere be seen. The sky was perfectly clear, and the stars shone bright and full, and appeared as large as onions. There are a little of the largest stars out west, and especially down in this country, that I have ever seen anywhere. Lieut. Williams tells me when he first saw the object it was at an angle of about forty degrees. It moved up to the zenith, near the milky way, and then assuming a serpentine form, gradually faded and disappeared from sight.

...Not the "cigar" shape you and your grandparents saw, but very interesting, nonetheless!

[Mabus]

6. Well that was way before the Air Force bases were there

I remember grandpa starting getting some magazines like "Fate" and there were articles allegedly from older times that described strange lights in the sky. You know, I'm willing to have an open mind but as I understand it, these lights in the sky have been around for a long time. I'm sure some of them were caused by natural phenomena but I'm not sure all of them were.

You know what's kinda funny? Being from Lawrence I was more hesitant to mention that my grandma was from Missouri than I was to tell my story. Then again, I am the descendant of Massachusetts liberals that moved to Lawrence to help fight the Missourian Border Ruffians. Talk about a mixed heritage.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

10. That it was pre-Air Force -- exactly what makes this especially interesting

Since this "apparition" wasn't described as having like a geometric or mechanical form, i also thought maybe it was a natural phenom. But who really knows? And interesting how he described it as going straight up then changing into a serpentine pattern.

Anyway I sure do understand, as a Kansan, that you are sensitive about your Missouri roots. Several branches of my family settled in Missouri, but I don't think I have any bushwhacker ancestors (or Redlegs for that matter!), and all the ones I've found Civil War (military) info on were Union sympathizers. One fought for the Union in Missouri, but his brother was a Confederate! I have another set of 4th great grandparents who were original Lawrence settlers (like you). One of their sons was killed in the Quantrill raid. There is some evidence to suggest that this group was involved in the Underground RR. Kansas has a VERY interesting history - I can hardly get enough of it (plus I love Lawrence!)

[Mabus]

21. Way cool!

Grandma was from Marshall, Missouri so she wasn't really from Ruffian heritage. Her family moved to Lawrence in the early 1900's when she was about 10. He had a dry goods store on Mass. St. for a while. My grandfather's family came to Lawrence at two different times. The first ones came very early on and my great-great grandmother was one of the youngest citizens of Lawrence. The other side came as part of the Massachusetts emigration societies a few years later.

One of my great-uncles and my grandfather's playmates was Langston Hughes. He lived with his grandmother across the street from my family's house It was an integrated neighborhood in the late 1800/early 1900's. And yet, when people think about Kansas schools they remember Brown vs. The Topeka Board of Education and segregation. My dad is a KU grad and my mom is a Haskell grad.

Our house (we still own it) in Lawrence is a block or so from Hobbs Park which houses Municipal Stadium where Satchel Paige pitched for the KC Monarchs. At the end of Hobbs is the Speers house. Speers was a printer targeted by Quantrill. His house was moved to Hobbs a while back to save it.


I love Lawrence too. I was born there but wasn't raised there. I used to visit my grandparents a lot and grew to love the place. As a biracial child Lawrence was a much friendly place than OKC. The only school I ever wanted to go to was KU. As soon as I graduated high school I high-tailed it to Lawrence and haven't wanted to leave. I miss it a lot and can't wait until we move back.

As for the Civil War, our branch of the family were Union. My uncle, the one in the Air Force, was stationed in Mississippi (Biloxi) and his wife was from the south. She was interested in genealogy and started checking out old cemeteries. They went out one day looking for her family and ran across a town of some of our relatives instead. The town was dead but the town once bore our family name and the cemetery identified the Confederate branch of our family. My uncle took some pictures of the grave stones and some of them identified their rank and units.

It's a small world! :hi:

[eowyn_of_rohan]

53. Wow - small world alright!

Boy do I know who John Speer is. My gggg-grand uncle worked for him! The father of John Haskell who founded the college was a neighbor and friend of my gggg-grandpa. I can picture most of the places you are talking about.

Verrrrry cool that your Grandfather's playmate was Langston Hughes! You are lucky to have gone to KU. What a beautiful campus! My gggg-grandma was buried in the cemetery on the hill - now on campus property, what is the name of that hill? Mt Oread? Anyway, in the late 1800s all the bodies of non-important people were moved to Oak Hill, and she was one of them.

Wouldn't it be fun to carry on this conversation at the Free State over a cold one? I invited MuseRider, too, below. LOL

:hi:

[Mabus]

91. I'd love to

if I were still in Kansas. I love Free State beer. What I wouldn't give for an Ad Astra or a John Brown right now. Next time I'm in the area I'll try to let you know. This summer my stepkids will be coming out here to the DC area. We probably won't make it back to Lawrence until around Thanksgiving.

You're talking about Pioneer Cemetery on Campus West. The closest hill (with a name) is across the street and that's Daisy Hill (think dorms).

[eppur_se_muova]

46. Sounds like a rare case of auroras showing up farther south ...

certainly unusual, but known to happen.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

50. I don't think this sounds at all like aurora borealis

This guy said the sky was very clear, no clouds, and the object was "20 feet" long, as if it was between himself and the outer atmosphere, that it went straight up then turned to serpentine shape. Doesn't sound like an aurora to me, having seen them many times, usually green, sometimes pink, never red, white and blue. But maybe I just wanna believe.

[defendandprotect]

178. Interesting that he reported it to newspapers and they printed . . .

.... people then were relying on one another for news --
and "tin foil hat" attacks hadn't been rolled out yet!

[NJCher]

9. wonderful story, mabus

You write well--I could see and feel the story happening as you told it.



Cher

[Mabus]

24. Thank you

It's one of those memories that has remained with me. I remember the seats in the car and how big and bright that light was. My memory of it is like a black and white movie because it was night. I remember people pointing and talking and that my grandpa was really concerned with making sure we were safe.


He also wasn't the type to pull over along the side of the road for no reason. Nor was he the type to overreact. One of the family stories is about the time he drove all the way from my parents' house to Lawrence with cactus needles in his leg. He got "hit" right before he left our house but he absolutely refused to say anything until he got home. Even then, according to grandma, he waited until after he unpacked the car. He was generally nonplussed and very easy-going. Grandma used to say it was because he was "too German" which was her way of saying he wouldn't complain if his shorts were on fire.

[Fox Mulder]

30. That's an interesting story.

Thanks for posting it. :)

[Mabus]

92. Coming from someone called "Fox Mulder"

means a lot.

[cascadiance]

3. Maybe we should ask Hillary if the Doctor knows what's going on?

Just kidding!... It does sound like a Dr. Who type of show script though!

[ReverendDeuce]

169. Most Americans think Dr. Who is a quirky sci-fi show... it's actually a DOCUMENTARY...

Life in Britain really IS that strange.

But seriously, I love the new Dr. Who series. I can handle the goofiness of some of it just fine, because the new writing is usually very good. Especially the current story arc!

[Clark2008]

7. Could this be related to the fact that we're nearing 12/21/2012?

The ancient Maya may have known something we can't grasp.

[autorank]

8. We've run out of days...

So that means "join the team" http://www.cafepress.com/elftrance54 :)

[Clark2008]

14. Cute!!

:)

[autorank]

166. Those two guys should wear them.

They'd pick up the occult and Mayan vote;)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. UFOs near Cardiff, eh?

Did it stop long enough to read "Police Box" on the top?

[galledgoblin]

106. my reaction as well

Captain Harkness will soon receive another memo on the importance of subtlety in Torchwood operations.

[scubadude]

13. Ever notice how often mylar balloons or kites are seen as UFO's?

Have you ever seen a mylar balloons after they are let go? The way they dodge about and twist in the wind. If the light is just right, say just after sunset, they glow with the suns reflected light. It is amazing how the air swirls as can only be shown by watching these balloons!

Kites also often appear as UFOs also. Do you remember the big hullabaloo over UFO's seen over Mexico city? In the video's they darted about, spinning in circles, seemingly under their own control. Under close scrutiny they are obviously kites at the end of strings.

Kites and balloons, especially when they are made out of highly reflective mylar, are often mistaken for UFO's and do a disservice to those who are studying them.

[anigbrowl]

39. I've been thinking about buy 50 mylar balloons and gluing them together

just to see how many 'ufo reports' the resulting odd shape would generate. The only reason I haven't tried it already is that I'm near 2 major airports and I'd hate to be the cause of an accident.

[defendandprotect]

179. No . . . as a matter of fact . . .

So . . . if we showed you a balloon in the sky, just after sunset, YOU would think it was a UFO?
hmmmm....

And, YOU would think that a kite was a UFO?

Interesting . . .

Good luck -- !!


On the other hand, hundreds of thousands of Mexicans watched for months, years, hours at a time
as UFO's moved overhead.
And, many thousands took videos -- many of them shown on TV.
And, I've NEVER head anyone but you suggest that they are "kites" or "balloons" --- !!!


Give us a report on how many kites and baloons you see in the video featured on this thread . . .

[Fire Walk With Me]

15. Aliens are as desperate as Americans to figure out how to pronouce "Worcestershire".

Losin' sleep n' stuff...

[eowyn_of_rohan]

17. It's WOOSTER -SURE :)

My mom drilled that into my head

[MuseRider]

45. LOL

just yesterday I looked that word up to get the correct pronunciation. I did that right after I looked up Edenburgh and that after I had looked up some wildflower pronunciations. Just got curious. Funny to me anyway.

Hello from Kansas by the way!

[eowyn_of_rohan]

51. How funny you just looked it up

Hello Kansas from Madison, Wisconsin - wish I could join you fellow DU'ers at the Free State Brewery for a cold one! :toast:

[MuseRider]

86. Mmmmm

If you ever come back for a visit Free State it is! Love that place. :hi:

[Marrah_G]

185. Here in Mass we pronounce it Woosta-shire sauce

What is amusing is hearing outsider trying to spell the name of the City of Woosta.

[bdamomma]

16. we are not certainly not the only "life" around.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. Well, he's right. They are unidentified.

Which means they could be almost anything. Extrapolating them to be aliens from another planet is about as likely as them being Santa's sleigh.

[LeftHander]

19. Easy...Plastic Bag caught in updraft....

seen it before...looks weird.

[anigbrowl]

20. Sigh....another one bites the dust

LONDON (AP) - Mysterious lights in the sky? Some British soldiers thought they might be unidentified flying objects. Then again, they might be those blazing Chinese lanterns released by the partygoers down the road - a new craze in England. Once they are lit, the small lanterns rise into the sky, much like hot air balloons. <...>

Some UFO experts are not convinced there is anything unusual going on, especially in light of a new craze that has spread to England - the practice of releasing lit Chinese lanterns into the night sky to celebrate weddings and other special events. It turns out that two newlyweds who had purchased 100 lanterns to celebrate their wedding had released them into the sky shortly before the purported UFO sighting in Wales, offering a logical explanation for the lights seen in the sky.

David Clarke, a UFO expert who helped the National Archives prepare thousands of pages of UFO documents for public release in May, said a helicopter pilot seeing the blazing lanterns at night could easily think he was looking at another aircraft. "Call me cynical, but what are the chances that a flying saucer would come down from outer space in exactly the same place where lanterns have been released?" he said.

http://apnews.myway.com//article/20080625/D91H79481.html

I wish people would make a greater attempt to exhaust the possible simple explanations before reaching for the complex ones. Lights in the sky don't even look like a spaceship, they just look like...lights. It's not all that hard to get things into the sky.

[JuniperLea]

23. What do space ships look like, pray tell? :)

When they move hundreds of miles in the sky in a split second, they probably aren't Chinese lanterns.

:)

[anigbrowl]

32. I never underestimate people's capacity for making poor observations

Most people are far less accurate observers than they would like to believe - being a pilot doesn't necessarily confer gifts of identification. Reading descriptions vs. looking at video of the same event has convinced me of that. If aliens are visiting earth and choose to reveal themselves then we won't have to argue about it because it'll be glaringly obvious. Evidence, it's a good thing.

[JuniperLea]

33. Glaringly obvious? I think not...

We cannot assume anything, or assign our standards of information. Mathematically speaking, we really cannot be the only living beings in the Universe. There are solar systems out there that are much older than our own. I would think advance beings would be able to observe us without revealing themselves, which is precisely the right thing to do, imho. I sincerely doubt that any race of intelligence that has spent any time at all observing us would know not to make their presence "glaringly obvious"... it just wouldn't be prudent for them, or for us.

I agree that most people are not accurate observers; however, there are several things, like unEarthly speed, that give pause.

[anigbrowl]

36. Sorry, not buying that line of reasoning

First of all, I said that IF they are here AND choose to reveal themselves it will be glaringly obvious. As in, you won't be trying to make guesses about whether it's a spaceship any more than you need help to identify a 747 or an aircraft carrier when its parked.

Second of all I give little credence to reports of 'unearthly speeds' made without depth cues or suchlike. People's distance perception is not all that great, especially when it comes to point sources.

[JuniperLea]

41. I've had personal experience...

On land and on sea... when a light travels from horizon to horizon and back, hovers for two hours, and zips out of sight on a clear night (or in the daylight) it is not of this Earth. I was with our Mayor and two city Counsel persons during one event. There was no alcohol involved:)

[anigbrowl]

48. Great, Let's see the photographs

It was hanging around for 2 hours, you had plenty time to go get a camera, or call someone who did. Also, can you give me a MUFON reference number to look up the report?

[anigbrowl]

71. --crickets--

[JuniperLea]

74. I was no where near a camera, forty miles out to sea off the coast of Catalina...

And they didn't give us a case number.

The second time I was at the park with my three kids, again, no camera and miles from home with no intention of hearing "mommy I want to go home" while I messed around with trying.

The think tank is Mensa... through a couple of their research groups.

I have blue eyes.

There's a small scar in my navel.

I usually use Charmin.

Any other questions?


:eyes:

[anigbrowl]

78. Surely MUFON gave you some way to track your report

after all they must have some kind of filing schema. Astounding how the kids prevented you trying to get hold of a camera, or alert anyone else to what would surely have been a journalistic scoop.

Please, feel free to share all of this with your Mensa think tank if you think it will entertain them.

[JuniperLea]

89. My kids always come first... not astounding in the least...

I was in Mile Square Park, which is exactly that size... alone with a 7, a 3.5, and a 1 year-old. Walk a mile in my moccasins then say again... And this was in the mid 80's, long before I had a cell phone.

I prefer Dr. Pepper to both Coke and Pepsi... and I don't like NASCAR... and I'm Agnostic.

MUFON is horrifically unorganized. A call just now to the then Mayor (who is a family friend from long before I was even born) only rendered another adjective to describe how horribly unorganized they are.

Closed minds are the bane of most Mensan's existances... If I only had $1 for every time I've heard: "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

[anigbrowl]

96. They're certainly the bane of this (former) mensan's existence

I too think Mufon are hopelessly disorganized, but they're the best thing the 'UFO community' has come up with so far. Maybe if a little more time were spent on the gathering and organization of UFO information it would start to resemble something like a useful data set. After all, every other branch of science relies on well-cataloged observations and suchlike.

[JuniperLea]

98. You coulda fooled me...

I swear I heard that iron brain door of yours slam shut a few times in this thread.

[DainBramaged]

221. Don't waste your time, insanity runs deep here

Bating is a hobby for that member.

[defendandprotect]

181. Agree with your wise words . . ..

Glaringly obvious? I think not...
Posted by Juniperx
We cannot assume anything, or assign our standards of information. Mathematically speaking, we really cannot be the only living beings in the Universe. There are solar systems out there that are much older than our own. I would think advance beings would be able to observe us without revealing themselves, which is precisely the right thing to do, imho. I sincerely doubt that any race of intelligence that has spent any time at all observing us would know not to make their presence "glaringly obvious"... it just wouldn't be prudent for them, or for us.

I agree that most people are not accurate observers; however, there are several things, like unEarthly speed, that give pause.

The speeds seem to be phenomenal, so it's always kind of humorous when someone suggests it's
"ours."

On the other hand, re witnesses . . . often there are large groups of witnesses --
sometimes even thousands and more as in Mexico -- and photos/videos also backing it up.

Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan both had sightings -- as well as some of our astronauts.
I'd trust those observations.

Since at least the 1950's, some corrupt parts of our government have assigned this other life
in the universe as "enemy" and planned Star Wars and the taking over of the "highest hill."
"Masters of Infinity" . . . a term used by LBJ -- I'm looking for the quote and will try to
post it later.

[defendandprotect]

133. Yeah. . . why should a helicopter pilot and two other men understand what they're

looking at --- poor fools!!

If there is any "evidence," the government has it ---

it wouldn't be in private hands very long.

[anigbrowl]

144. If it's not something they've seen before, why should it be surprising?

When you think about it, Chinese lanterns would behave rather oddly in a helicopter's downdraft. Amazing how the government is apparently perfectly efficient when it comes to this sort of stuff, even though the UK government is well known for losing data on a regular basis. I can find Al Qaeda terror manuals, details of spy satellites and all sorts of other things on Google, but anything involving aliens gets sucked up and disappears for ever.

I wonder why people are so hostile to a simple explanation when there is one available. You'd think people would be pleased to be spared a wild goose chase and concentrate on more interesting cases.

[defendandprotect]

147. Well, let's look at it this way . . ..

It may not be "something they've seen before" which suggests it's not something usually
seen in the sky --- not something NORMAL.

On the other hand, it's also not something you've seen, either!

So why should it be surprising that you have no idea what they're describing?

To suggest that anything like "Chinese Lanterns" would be the cause of something like this
is not only insulting, it's childish in its naivete --

Yes, it is peculiar how UFO documents disappear --- Rep. Steven Schiff found that out a few
years back with the most outrageous responses coming from government . . . and then
Rep. Schiff was no longer alive.

I think you'll find your explanation is a little too "simple" for anyone who does any
thinking at all on this subject. In fact, I doubt it's "hostility" . . .
More likely disbelief.

[anigbrowl]

160. You're making a few leaps here

"It may not be "something they've seen before" which suggests it's not something usually
seen in the sky --- not something NORMAL."

OK, but that doesn't mean it's of extraterrestrial origin. If you google on 'laser arrest pilot' you'll find numerous cases of people being arrested for (surprise) firing lasers at the cockpits of commercial planes, helicopters etc. This is a relatively recent phenomenon (as lasers of such power haven't been widely available for that long), and you can bet it caused some consternation when it first occurred before people worked out the cause.

"On the other hand, it's also not something you've seen, either!

So why should it be surprising that you have no idea what they're describing?"

I read all the reports when they first made the news a few days ago, and expressed gentle skepticism about making too many assumptions.

"To suggest that anything like "Chinese Lanterns" would be the cause of something like this
is not only insulting, it's childish in its naivete --"

Oh really. Let's see, they float, they're illuminated, they're light enough to bob about in the downdraft of a helicopter or in the wind, they're a relatively new fashion in the UK, we know 100 of them were released at a wedding party in that area on the evening in question. It's entirely possible that the helicopter crew were unfamiliar with them, especially if they appeared in bulk or there was a string of them. What part of this is insulting or naive? Why don't you offer your reasons for such a conclusion?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99mcdzAoeOg

"Yes, it is peculiar how UFO documents disappear --- Rep. Steven Schiff found that out a few
years back with the most outrageous responses coming from government . . . and then
Rep. Schiff was no longer alive."

Hmm, he asked the GAO to conduct a report, which they did (finding new data which shed light on the Roswell incident). Schiff died 3 years later, of melanoma. That's sad, but not so terribly unusual. Melanoma is a dangerous form of cancer.

'I think you'll find your explanation is a little too "simple" for anyone who does any
thinking at all on this subject. In fact, I doubt it's "hostility" . . .
More likely disbelief.'

I think that is exactly the problem. Some people would rather assume an elaborate but exciting conspiracy than accept a simple pedestrian explanation even if it adequately explains the reported facts.

[defendandprotect]

202. Doesn't mean it's not of ET origin ---

Are you imagining that people aren't aware of the laser incidents . . . some suspected
of bringing down political opponents?
It may be recent to you, however?

. . . . . but now you think it was LASER beam directed at the plane?

And they really are common in outerspace . . .

The only clear cut "assumption" any of us are making is in regard to the junk you post . . .

Schiff asked ALL areas of government to report --- absolutely no documents.
Something which doesn't seem odd to you . . . which is odd!
There was no new "light" on the Roswell reports; there was more inane comment and cover-up.

Rep. Schiff is but one more "convenient" death due to cancer.

No one wants to assume anything "elaborate" . . . nor simple minded . . .
which is why what you are saying makes little sense ---

[anigbrowl]

211. I give up. You can't even string a sentence together

...and you obviously have no grasp of logic or epistemology. It is pointless trying to have a rational discussion with you; you are more interested in your own paranoia than trying to either learn or inform.

[Forkboy]

25. "Name?" "Shropshire Slasher." "Occupation?" "Shropshire Slasher."

[Kaleko]

26. For those interested in serious research...

Revised Press Release - November 13, 2007 - Insiders Expose: Reason for Secrecy

http://www.DisclosureProject.org/PressReleaseNov132007-revised.htm




Note to all those receiving this second Disclosure Project press release entitled "Insiders Expose Reasons for UFO Secrecy". Please note that two paragraphs - those referring to Laurence Rockefeller and to Bill and Hillary Clinton - have been removed from the second one. The service we use for sending out press releases: PRNewswire.com refused to send out the original press release with those references. It was referred up the chain of command at their organization and censored by them. When you think that we have a free press, think again. This was not even censored by the outlets themselves, but by the entry point to those outlets!

INSIDERS EXPOSE REASONS FOR SECRECY (Revised)

Washington, DC


Disclosure Project (www.DisclosureProject.org) Director Dr. Steven M. Greer reports that government insiders have revealed the existence of a shadowy, highly classified program related to UFOs.

The reasons for the secrecy are simple: The inertia of highly classified programs, embarrassment over past illegal actions taken to enforce secrecy, and the fact that the energy and propulsion systems behind the mysterious UFO objects have been studied and fully understood. This disclosure would spell the end for oil, gas, coal and other conventional forms of power - and with that, the end of the current oil-based geopolitical order and economy. The truth is our tax dollars have been used to investigate this matter for decades and it is time for a dividend on that investment. The full disclosure of the facts will enable humanity to attain a sustainable civilization without global warming or the need for oil.

Recent calls for a US government investigation into UFOs have not taken into account the fact that such investigations are on-going, highly compartmented and top-secret.

Dr. Greer states "As early as 1993, when I personally briefed CIA Director James Woolsey on the UFO matter, we knew of on-going, secret projects to which President Clinton and Mr. Woolsey were denied access. The senior counsel for the Senate Appropriations Committee, then headed by Senator Byrd (D-WV) told me directly that upwards of $100 billion per year was going into so-called ‘black’ projects, including UFO programs, but that with a top-secret clearance and a subpoena power, he could not penetrate the veil of secrecy."

Since then, The Disclosure Project has uncovered thousands of official US documents and over 400 top-secret military and corporate witnesses to programs dealing with UFOs, along with project code names and numbers. Such operations are rogue and deny access to Congressional oversight committees.

The Disclosure Project is calling for open hearings in the Congress and UN so that these whistle-blowers may testify. Previous government/civilian panels, such as the Condon Committee of 1969, proved to be white-wash operations and were penetrated by CIA involvement. Dr. Greer states "We feel that an open hearing process would be the best avenue for our democracy to reassert control over these rogue operations. We have hundreds of heroic government whistle-blowers who need to be heard."

For further information or for an interview with Dr. Greer contact: www.DisclosureProject.org.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Much more info at the links. But you have to do some homework to get up to date.

[anigbrowl]

35. Training courses only $995! (lodging not included) .nt

[Kaleko]

40. The price of a training course has nothing to do with

the info I posted above. Clearly, you and a majority of others here are not interested in serious research. Only in having your prejudices confirmed by an equally ignorant mob.

Good bye.

[anigbrowl]

43. Serious research my ass. Greer is just a conspiracy peddler and you're buying

I have shelves full of textbooks and journals. I know what serious research looks like, and the stuff on Greer's site isn't it. I've been following the disclosure project since it was announced in 2001 and all they ever put out is material to convince people there's a big conspiracy going on. Their approach to science is just recycle whatever free-energy fads and so on are popular. If I was prejudiced I wouldn't have wasted nearly as much time reading such crap in order to be repeatedly disappointed.

You guys need to wrap your heads around around the concept of proper evidence, and hearsay doesn't meet that standard. It might provide motivation for an investigation, but not grounds for conclusions.

[JuniperLea]

75. Again with the "you guys" meme

I've not seen anyone try to convince anyone of a conclusion here, but I have seen a lot of people with open minds being smacked down with your bullying bullshit. You are right about a lot of things here, but your fucked attitude will keep others from listening.

Where I come from we allow people to think and talk and think out loud. You should try it sometime... you might learn something.

[anigbrowl]

81. What do you have against collective nouns?

I really don't care what you think of my attitude, especially since you started swearing at me about it. I am all for keeping one's mind open, but a mind just left agape catches bad ideas like a gaping mouth catches flies. Offering reasonable explanations involving simple causes (for example, that NASA footage is so obviously the result of poor focus that it's be irresponsible NOT to point it out) and asking for a better quality of evidence is not bullying.

[JuniperLea]

102. "you guys" is condescending

Much like "you people".

[anigbrowl]

107. That's what you get for relying on cliched arguments - a general address

If I had a time for every time I've heard some True Believer give me the 'science doesn't know everything!' argument I'd be rich. It's essentially the same fallacy that the creationists use to push their concept of 'intelligent design' and that Bush and Blair use to convince themselves and a gullible public that Saddam had WMD and planning to let them off at any moment.

Rational-but-boring arguments to the contrary were ignored in favor of the wildest and most exciting possibilities. Frankly, it's kind of irritating because when one politely suggests some mundane explanation for a reported phenomenon the UFO folks get all irritated and dismissive. Then when asked to provide evidence for their startling claims they get defensive and personal, this conversation being a case in point. But I guess being a true believer makes it OK to be rude to people.

[Duppers]

168. Pres. Jimmy Carter said he publicly that he was denied access

Almost unimaginable to deny a sitting president access to these documents!

Kaleko, I believe you. I've seen one.

[JuniperLea]

173. And yet the hard-assed nay sayers here will demand you go...

to the government and ask for the good film, or some such rot.

Yeah, right, our government. Now there's information you can bank on. :eyes:

I've seen things dash across the horizon, spanning hundreds of miles in an instant (on the ocean, clear summer evening). I've seen bolides, meteors, satellites, rockets leaving Vandenberg AFB that left bizarre vapor trails... I know what I saw, and it wasn't a freaking weather balloon.

Some will go to great lengths to shut people up... makes you wonder.

[anigbrowl]

182. How is the NASA video available to the public as is?

Obviously the TV station was able to get hold of it, which means other people can. You just call up NASA's media department and pay a copying fee, then digitize the high-quality copy.

The British government released some 25 years of UFO information to the public a few weeks ago (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ufos/), but I'm betting the conspiracy talk will go on and on. Nobody is trying to shut you up, just asking for good standards of evidence. You yourself say MUFON is too disorganized to be useful - is it any wonder UFO people don't get taken seriously when they can't even organize their own data?

Well, keep on 'knowing what you saw'. Religious people 'know what they saw' as well. When you upload it to a database somewhere and it can be cross-referenced and so on like an astronomy observation, let us know. That's not much to ask.

[Duppers]

189. thanks, Juniperx

Thanks to this thread, I had to put another person on ignore. He pissed me off so much by accusing open-minded people of "believing" in alien creationism, etc. Hell, I'm a fucking atheist and it's infuriating to lump me in a group of woo-woo believers. I don't believe anything; I look for rational explanations.

"Some will go to great lengths to shut people up... makes you wonder."
Yes, I was thinking the same thing.

My hubby, a physicist, use to be one of those "hard-assed naysayers" but he did a 180 a few yrs ago and not because of anything I said or saw.

[JuniperLea]

217. Very cool...

Yes, I vacillate between Atheism and Agnosticism, and I'm annoyed too. My oldest kid is a chemical engineer, and he had pretty much the same experience as your hubby. I understand how a scientific mind can require a lot more to be swayed, but the insults and condescension are just stupid and they lead me to think this is a personal issue instead of a scientific one for some.

[defendandprotect]

183. Rep. Steven Schiff also had trouble with the "veil of secrecy" . . .

His inquiries began from a petition in a magazine I used to read --- they were quickly gone.
Evidently, thousands of people had sent in the petition to Congress.

[anigbrowl]

194. And? why don't you note that he got his report?

It's here: http://www.gao.gov/archive/1995/ns95187.pdf

If you cared so much about people having access to this information, why didn't you just link to it the way people do for anything else? You seem much more interested in the 'veil of secrecy' than the actual data. It's so convenient to be able to blame the government for the lack of concrete information. Makes you wonder why they don't just shut all the UFO sites down and burn the books about the subject. Art Bell has been broadcasting his radio show for years and years now, surely it's only a matter of time before they catch up with him.

[NeedleCast]

27. How Come All Alien UFO sightings

Are captured on shitty camera phones from maximum distance in blurry, grainy footage?

Answer: The alien UFOs could have light bending force-shields that make focused photography impossible. More likely though, is that it's bullshit.

[Kaleko]

28. Footage filmed by NASA

from the space shuttle Columbia:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6490801364455302988&hl=en-CA


Btw, this is just one clip among many others.

[NeedleCast]

31. ROFL

Now it's grainy, fuzzy, unfocused footage from NASA of "UFOs" that look like sperms.

Excellent.

There are commercial satellites in space that can take one-meter or better resolution photos of the earth and this is the best NASA can do?

[anigbrowl]

34. IT's a camera problem. You can see the 'UFOs' change as the focal length is adjusted

Uv cameras still have optics. any camera with a through-the-lens viewfinder can be used to examine these artefacts. Get a camera with a long (telephoto) lens and play around with it for a while - in fact, try it in a dark room with a couple of small light sources like candles or LEDs. You'll see all sorts of 'ghost' images.

[NeedleCast]

47. I can see the "UFOs" change from objects that look like

swimming sperm into gasket shaped "saucers." Hell, one of the crew members even says in that footage that a could of space debris "follows" the shuttle. I'd bet my next pay check that those "UFOs" are nothing but particles of ice, dust and debris, poorly focused.

Again, I'll point out that there with all these thousands of UFO and extraterrestrial reports coming in, there remains a grand total of zero clear, well-focused images of a flying saucer.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[anigbrowl]

63. Interesting tactic

Someone offers a simple explanation based on existing knowledge (and mentioning visual phenomena which can be demonstrated with a fairly cheap camera), and you call him a dumbass who thinks he knows everything and suggests he feels inadequate about his genitals. But we're supposed to take YOU seriously.

[JuniperLea]

93. And I'll call him that again...

For ignoring the fact that most video tape deteriorates at a very fast rate... and most surveillance tape is used over and over again until everything is grainy and unintelligible. The visual phenomena of which you speak is a reflection of the aperture in a camera's lens. Most serious UFOlogists use simple pin-hole style cameras to avoid this phenomena AND this assumption.

But still, did you even look at the picture? Did you see the light change shape? This is not aperture distortion or reflection. This is not to say the photo/film is legit, it's only to say you seem to be hell bent on debunking to the point where you aren't being fair... to the point where your condescension evokes argument for argument's sake.

[NeedleCast]

101. Right

The challenge really is very simple, isn't it? With "thousands" of UFO sightings you'd think someone could get a halfway decent shot with a digital camera. Instead, we're subjected to a endless array of excuses about why the footage ALWAYS looks the same...grainy, out of focus, fuzzy.

In an era when I can go on Google maps and find a satellite image of my house with such clarity that I can tell the color, make and model of my car in the driveway is it really that much to ask that you "UFOlogists" actually produce a picture of something that doesn't look like a fuzzy blob with no definition?

Video tape actually deteriorates at a fairly slow rate. Movie Masters from decades ago are still used to re-produce "old" movies. Shit, the black and white, cheap as can be camera that monitors the entrance to my local Target and 7-11 have far superior quality to anything you "UFOlogists" seem to own.

Swing by my place. I'll let you borrow my shitty Sony Cybershot digital and you can go bring me some real evidence.

[JuniperLea]

103. Apples and oranges...

You can't compare high-metal content "master" tapes with commercial, buy at the drug store, pop in your VCR variety video tape, which is what is commonly used in surveillance cameras. Black and white film is much slower to deteriorate.

Anyone with half a wit knows you cannot just go out and take pictures; encounters are serendipitous at best.

Why all the government secrecy if there's no such thing? Do you think humans on Earth are the only life forms in the world? Hell, even the Catholic church is now admitting there are such things... not that I'd put stock in what ANY church says, still... why?

[anigbrowl]

110. You know, I think NASA uses the high quality ones

not the crap ones you buy at the drug store. So there goes one argument for why the images are so grainy. I'm sure anyone really interested can get a digitbeta copy from NASA at the highest possible quality.

Actually, encounters are not serendipitous. If all the UFO people pooled their data and actually catalogued it properly then they could probably identify areas of high and low-density and set up overservation stations in areas where there was a high-density of sightings, with motion-tracking or some input used to trigger. The hardware to do this is very inexpensive nowadays, a few thousand would get you going. Of course, you'd pick up a lot of planes and things, but that would be a good way to screen out false positive reports.

Why all the government secrecy...er, because governments (and especially ours) do have military secrets that they'd rather not broadcast, eg what sort of planes they're flying this year and what sort of missiles they have fitted, etc. This is the sort of stuff defense journalists investigate and report on. Oh and the vatican admits other life might exist? Well, looks like they read the drake equation. So what? They're not admitting that any of it is here on earth, just saying that intelligent life probably exists elsewhere and it doesn't matter whether or not its found Jesus.

[JuniperLea]

114. I was referring to this person's suggestion I get his camera and go take pictures...

Jesus... do you ever read?

[anigbrowl]

119. Time to move the goalposts again, I see

You know, I don't think he meant that you, personally, should go round and collect his personal camera and go snap some alien spacecraft. I do read and I also know how to read between the lines and know when someone is making a general point or using a rhetorical device. So do you, because you used the general second person in your own reply ('you can't just go and take pictures'). If you had really been responding to his suggestion on a personal level, you'd have used the first person (eg 'I can't just go and take pictures').

You seem a lot more interested in trying to get a 'win' in this argument than you are in trying to address the question of why there is such a dearth of good photos, or why UFO buffs can't get their collective shit together enough to attack the problem scientifically, like amateur astronomers or other aficionados of obscure subjects who manage to organize and do useful research via the net without necessarily needing finance, access to government documents, or whatever.

I find it telling that no UFO reports ever seem to come from amateur astronomers, even though they have a very good record in spotting things missed by academic astronomers. Also, astronomers like to get away from the city whenever possible so as to minimize light pollution and get better observations. You'd think one of them would have caught a UFO by now.

[JuniperLea]

122. You are obviously being willfully antagonistic...

I never said any of the photos are real. Now you want to read into pronoun choices... egad. Now you are a mind reader and know what I meant instead of what I said.

You'd think a lot of things. You'd think we would have known about all the peoples of the Earth by now, but no, we are only recently finding more who have had no contact with the modern world. You'd think we would have known about all the insects on Earth by now, but now... insects, fishes, all sorts of new discoveries year after year.

I (you, what the fuck ever word I should be using right now) cannot prove a negative. Yes, some photos can be debunked. Some cannot with certainly be discounted. How can anyone prove one of these otherwise unidentified objects is a "space ship" if one has never been seen before? Do you know what one looks like? I don't.

[anigbrowl]

129. Ah yes, the lost tribes of the Amazon

http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/international/May-June-08/-Lost--Amazon-Tribe-Story-Not-a-Hoax--Just-Misreported.html

"The Guardian set off a chain of accusatory articles with a June 22 report in which it said that Meirelles had acknowledged that he did not come across the tribe unexpectedly, as widely reported at first, and that the tribe had been known about for almost a century."

As for us not knowing what a speceship look like, this is nonsense. We don't know what alien space ships look like, to be sure, but since, as you say, it is impossible to prove a negative the onus is not on us to prove that a particular blurry photo is not a spaceship. The burden of proof is on those making the claim. If they say 'it must be a spaceship!' then it's up to them to refute all challenges to the contrary and offer evidence of their own to back up their claim. Since the things can (allegedly) be photographed, it's not unreasonable to ask for a decent quality photograph with a long lens. We manage to get great photographs of all sorts of other unusual phenomena.

[JuniperLea]

137. Hush Earthling...

HUSH EARTHLING -
You're not worthy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
You reek of turdy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
You flip me the birdy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
Now you gonna hurty -

HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH -

HUSH EARTHLING -
I've come a long way -
HUSH EARTHLING -
To make you my prey -
HUSH EARTHLING -
I've come to stay -
HUSH EARTHLING -
You taste like your gay -

HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH -

(Break) -

HUSH EARTHLING -
Do you want to die? -
HUSH EARTHLING -
Then look me in thee eye -
HUSH EARTHLING -
I come from the planet Szurdelifoy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
AHH your such a girlie boy -

HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH -





You forgot about the alien anti-photo device... Jesus... get a life.

[anigbrowl]

143. Ah, obscure band lyrics. Your arguments grow more sophisticated by the minute.

How will I survive this attack on my street cred? Good thing I have this seven-bladed wind-breaker.

[NeedleCast]

116. I believe strongly that there's extra terrestrial life

and I'm sure we'll come in contact with it someday. If that extraterrestrial life has a technology base far more advanced than ours, and they come here, I doubt they'd be up there fucking around in their space ships just to play with the humans. I don't know of course, but I'd like to think that a life for with the capability to travel the stars wouldn't be running around anal probing folks and turning cows inside out.

Regardless of the nature of the encounters, you'd think sooner or later someone would actually have a non-shitty camera with them. If, as you "UFOlogists" claim, there are thousands of encounters taking place, the law of odds says sooner or later these aliens are going to run into someone with the ability to focus a digital camera.

[JuniperLea]

125. I never claimed to be a UFOlogist... Jesus! I just used the fucking word, ok?

Who said any UFOs or Aliens are here just to play with the humans? And you are the first here to mention anal probing or mutilated cows! Don't hang that trash on me.

Do you know for a fact that there hasn't been an authentic photo taken? Have you seen all the photos? Have you seen all the photos and all the scientific explanations? Neither have I. Perhaps there is a reason no one has taken a proper photo... perhaps there is technology unbeknown to us that blocks that ability by means we have not the slightest clue about. Do you honestly think there is no other science in the world except ours?

I believe we are not alone in the universe, period. I make no other assertions except that many people have closed minds and are not thinking in terms of unknown technology. I also believe our government and the government of other nations are fucking liars and all information they give us should be taken with a grain of salt.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

192. LOL

"Who said any UFOs or Aliens are here just to play with the humans? "

Right here.

"Perhaps there is a reason no one has taken a proper photo... perhaps there is technology unbeknown to us that blocks that ability by means we have not the slightest clue about."

So the aliens are coming here but only revealing themselves to kooks and liars. And are using their fancy anti-proof ray guns to prevent us from taking any credible photographs of them.

Sounds pretty playful to me.

Much like the shy invisible dragon who lives in my garage but won't let anybody else see him, but he's 100% real and you're egocentric if you don't believe in him, on account of unknown science.

[anigbrowl]

105. Sorry, this is BS

1. NASA doesn't use the cheap video tape from the corner store. They are in fact the pioneers of digital photography because you want to minimize the number of mechanical parts that are going to be exposed to the cold vacuum of space. Considering that this video dates from 1996, it's doubtful whether they were still using videotape for anything other backup, rather than hard disk storage. Hard disks weren't nearly as beefy as they are nowadays but if you have NASA's budget they weren't out of reach either.

2. I highly doubt they recycle their videotape even if they did use tape at that time. I really, really think NASA actually archives that sort of stuff, especially when they're trying out procedures for the first time.

3. Phenomena is a plural noun. The singular is phenomenon.

4. 'A reflection of the aperture'? Nope. You are probably thinking of prismatic effects that often show up in photographs as colored shapes often known as sundogs, which are usually hexagonal due to the way lenses are constructed. But I explicitly said I was talking about changes in the focal length. It is true that aperture artefacts can multiple light sources in a dark image. However, this is not a problem unless you are only planning to photograph lights. Strangely, astronomers and photojournalists seem to get by quite well without resorting to pinhole cameras or being accused of not knowing what they're doing.

5. When you look at this video, it's quite obvious that much of it is out of focus. One giveaway is that these so-called alien craft are round but never turn sideways to the camera. When the focus is sharpened near the end of the video, all the 'UFOs' shrink down down in the same proportion - something you can easily do for yourself with a telephoto lens. It doesn't require anything exotic, my old Nikon and the 3 lenses I have for it are probably only worth $150. That's just the most obvious giveaway that optics are partly responsible.

I'm always hearing things like 'did you even look at the picture' from UFO folks. Of course I looked at it, even though I'd seen it before. It just isn't all that remarkable to me. They're letting the thing out on a tether and the tether snaps. I would expect there to be some very small scale debris floating around as the interior is opened to the vacuum, restraining bots are released, and the tether snaps. And you're shooing in a very high-contrast environment with the lens out of focus (because you had it focused on the near part of the tether which was going to be under maximum tension until snapped). But that's not as exciting as 'Aliens stole our satellite' for a lot of people. Oh well.

[defendandprotect]

151. If you understand that the tether is 12 miles long . . .

that's some pretty BIG "ice and dust" . . . !!!

Re this . . .
Again, I'll point out that there with all these thousands of UFO and extraterrestrial reports coming in, there remains a grand total of zero clear, well-focused images of a flying saucer.

I don't know about thousands, but certainly astronauts, pilots - both commercial and military --
and hundreds of thousands of witnesses have given us realistic descriptions.

As far as what occurs in space, we can't rely on the government making the BEST images of
UFO's available . . . can we???

[anigbrowl]

153. You know that when thins are out of focus it increases their apparent size, yes?

It's noticeable how much smaller everything gets at the end of the video when the lens gets into focus. Just sayin'.

[defendandprotect]

157. Nothing looked out of focus to me ---

the tether is CLEAR . . . it's 12 MILES long ---

how big a chunk of ICE are you suggesting -- ?

The UFO's change sizes as well --- materialize and dematerialize ---

come from no where --- return to nowhere ---


I remember a story on UFO's in the NY Times about ten years ago/? --

Front page below the fold . . .

Tens of thousands of Chinese citizens were seeing UFO and wow they all had cameras --
and sophisticated video cameras and there were pics all over China of these things!!!

OK . . . the photo on the front page was a woman pointing up into the sky showing where
she had previously seen a UFO.

Inside the paper --- story continues --- talks about all the photographic evidence ---
no photos!

So I have to agree with you, the photos were hard to see -- !!!


:)

[anigbrowl]

162. ?! It's obviously out of focus

Wind the video to just before 3:51 and then you can see the focal length adjustment. Have you never used a manual camera lens? You can tell it was badly out of focus because at 3:51 they adjust and it suddenly goes from blobby to sharp. You even hear the mission control guy mentioning the big improvement in contrast. Light intensity goes up when you have correct focus, which is why he mentions it.

You're just quoting the guy commenting on the soundtrack, instead of actively thinking about it. I can't believe you don't see it as out of focus - please borrow a manual camera, take it outside, point it at some lights far away and play around with the focus. When it's out of focus the lights will appear to pancake.

[defendandprotect]

186. Again ... how big a piece of ICE are you suggesting . . .???

The tether is 12 miles long ---

I didn't see anything out of focus -- in fact, I thought the photos excellent for "out in space."

Glad it was IMPROVED for you along the way ---

Maybe you're also seeing kites and balloons again ?

[anigbrowl]

195. If you can't see it's out of focus, I can't help you

Like I said, borrow a camera or a camcorder and spend some time with it. I even told you exactly where in the video it gets into focus, but apparently you're determined not to learn anything about how a camera works.

[defendandprotect]

198. Nor can I help you --- unfortunately, the video is quite clear as to what's happening . . ..

[anigbrowl]

203. Right...and focusing a camera lens is a government plot...

But hey, don't believe me. Show the video to some photographers and see what they tell you. Unless you think we're all in it together.

[defendandprotect]

206. If you say so . . .

I think it might be better if you just moved along now . . .

[Kaleko]

164. Those "chunks of ice" or debris would have to be 2 to 3 nautical miles in diameter

and have the ability do materialize and dematerialize.

Would it surprise you that "Brazil, India and China are taking the lead on extraterrestrial awareness", according to Mihir Sen, a reporter from the India Daily? (link no longer functional, sorry.)


But this link works: www.blog.agoracosmopolitan.com/?p=107,

...and it's just one of so many stories about America falling behind, down the sinkhole of its officially imposed arrogance and ignorance.

Excerpt:

UFO research is an appreciated and duly recognized science in China

Izvestia reports that China has a record number of UFO scientific and community-based organizations. There are many who even attempt to establish some sort of a contact with extraterrestrials. Their actions are protected by the National Society of the Extraterrestrial Studies, which was founded 25 years ago. This National Society is financed by the government.

Only professional scientists and engineers are allowed members in the Society. A person also required to have Ph.D. in science and have several published works about UFOs. About a third of all members of the society are also members of the Government of China.

The study and civic appreciation of Extraterrestrials are NOT systematically marginalized as the case in the industrialized West, which tries to use dogma to ridicule community and academic UFO research initiatives, and also the work of ‘Exopolitics’ groups.

Hundreds of scientists and engineers in China conduct thorough studies of apparent extraterrestrial phenomena.

----snip------


Western science and pseudo-religions share corresponding systems of dogma, which seek to deny human contact with Extraterrestrials

In order to appreciate the systematized denial of human extraterrestrial contact and influences on Human civilization, which prevails in the West, one needs to appreciate that “official science” and “institutionalized religion” in the West are two different “heads” of the same body politic. Yes, “official science” in the West talks of “evolution”, and Western institutionalized religion talks of “Creation”. However, both groups have reached an apparent consensus to disregard clear evidence of verifiable contact and influences by Extraterrestrials on Human civilization. This joint denial is based upon a shared oppressive ideology, which seeks to repress critical human knowledge of cosmic associations and interactions with Off-world Human and other ET civilizations.


More... www.blog.agoracosmopolitan.com/?p=107,

[defendandprotect]

187. Good to see so much interest in this thread ...... !!!

Those "chunks of ice" or debris would have to be 2 to 3 nautical miles in diameter

and have the ability do materialize and dematerialize.



Yes -- but the "kites" and "ballons" crowd will ignore that --- :)

Re your other comments below . . . it would be great to have other people on the planet
trying to investigate and make contact, without threat of annihilating the visitors!!
Evidently, we've only seen them as "enemies" and an opportunity to further arm ourselves
and create "Star Wars."

And this goes back to at least the 1950's . . .

Interesting comments --- thanks!


Would it surprise you that "Brazil, India and China are taking the lead on extraterrestrial awareness", according to Mihir Sen, a reporter from the India Daily? (link no longer functional, sorry.)


But this link works: www.blog.agoracosmopolitan.com/?p=107,

...and it's just one of so many stories about America falling behind, down the sinkhole of its officially imposed arrogance and ignorance.

Excerpt:

UFO research is an appreciated and duly recognized science in China

Izvestia reports that China has a record number of UFO scientific and community-based organizations. There are many who even attempt to establish some sort of a contact with extraterrestrials. Their actions are protected by the National Society of the Extraterrestrial Studies, which was founded 25 years ago. This National Society is financed by the government.

Only professional scientists and engineers are allowed members in the Society. A person also required to have Ph.D. in science and have several published works about UFOs. About a third of all members of the society are also members of the Government of China.

The study and civic appreciation of Extraterrestrials are NOT systematically marginalized as the case in the industrialized West, which tries to use dogma to ridicule community and academic UFO research initiatives, and also the work of ‘Exopolitics’ groups.

Hundreds of scientists and engineers in China conduct thorough studies of apparent extraterrestrial phenomena.

----snip------


Western science and pseudo-religions share corresponding systems of dogma, which seek to deny human contact with Extraterrestrials

In order to appreciate the systematized denial of human extraterrestrial contact and influences on Human civilization, which prevails in the West, one needs to appreciate that “official science” and “institutionalized religion” in the West are two different “heads” of the same body politic. Yes, “official science” in the West talks of “evolution”, and Western institutionalized religion talks of “Creation”. However, both groups have reached an apparent consensus to disregard clear evidence of verifiable contact and influences by Extraterrestrials on Human civilization. This joint denial is based upon a shared oppressive ideology, which seeks to repress critical human knowledge of cosmic associations and interactions with Off-world Human and other ET civilizations.


More... www.blog.agoracosmopolitan.com/?p=107,

[anigbrowl]

191. No, they wouldn't.

That's only the case if you assume the out-of-focus images were the correct size. On the other hand, they look considerably less impressive when the video is brought into focus.

Well by all means let's see translations of papers published by the Chinese Society of Extraterrestrial Studies. Between Google Translate and the legions of people interested in UFOs, getting them into English should present no problem. Is there a link for this society's website? My other half is Vietnamese-Chinese, so between us I'm sure we could find our way around it. Strangely, I find news reports about it on google but no website.

So many articles, so little data. As for your blog author's contention that there's a big conspiracy (yawn) I say it's the UFO people that are a pseudo-religion - endless talk of strange forces, evil powers and so on. I don't know what's wrong with using the same standards of evidence that are good enough for biologists, geologists, astronomers, and every other kind of natural scientist. The rest of our science and technology seems to get on fine with the idea of physical evidence and falsifiable propositions.

[defendandprotect]

199. Yes. . . and up is down . . .

So the video got the size of the tether right, but the size of the ice chunks wrong?

:eyes:

[anigbrowl]

204. You are assuming everything is in the same plane

Do you know anything at all about photography? Do you even know how a lens works? All you're doing is parroting the BS of the guy on the soundtrack. Your own eyes would tell you he's wrong if you would sit and do a few simple tests with a manual lens, but you'd rather believe him than look through a camera while you change the focus. Sad.

[defendandprotect]

209. And you are assuming . . ..

that it isn't . . .

prove that -- show us some evidence of that ---

This is excellent film which clearly shows the size of the tether . . .

and the size of the objects passing behind and in front of it --

It also shows objects materializing and dematerializing ---

[anigbrowl]

212. What's the point?

You don't want to acknowledge simple physical phenomena to do with basic things like a lens, you are clearly not going to be up for any kind of rational discussion of the subject at large. Go on believing it shows objects 'materializing and dematerializing'. Anyone with a little knowledge of cameras and geometry can see this is bunk, but it's a waste of time trying to explain it to you. You don't even acknowledge the most simple optical phenomena, and you're too precious to do anything like pick up a camera and try it for yourself.

[Fire Walk With Me]

127. "Now it's grainy, fuzzy, unfocused footage from NASA of "UFOs" that look like sperms."

Now we have proof that Mars DESPERATELY Needs Women.

[anigbrowl]

131. Hehe!

[Trillo]

73. Thank you for that link.

I'm certain I don't understand enough about light optics and physics to understand what is happening with the (was it) infrared or ultraviolet filters reportedly used.

I find it most interesting that instead of explaining these things, much of what is typed here is how crappy the resolutions are. Perhaps people who assert such objections have been watching too many Hollywood special effects.

[anigbrowl]

87. News and war footage is a better comparison

The UV filter is just a filter, nothing more. If you want to understand what's going on with the changing shapes in the image, just get an old film camera with a telephoto lens - an SLR rather than a compact, the kind where you can play around with the focus ring on the barrel. Old ones are not that expensive or you could probably borrow one.

[JuniperLea]

100. I've thought I caught UFO's a few times...

With my circa 1954 Argus 35mm (a gift from my father-in-law)... until I was shown that the arperture was the same shape as the "thing" I caught on film.

[anigbrowl]

108. OK, but that's not what I'm referring to here. /nt

[Trillo]

165. Sure, I can see that comparison. For some reason I keep thinking of Redshift.

I'm familiar with UV filters for cameras, as well many sunglasses have UV coatings applied, but both those typically block the UV band; as well I'm familiar with how the focusing ring on a lens typically works, from a user standpoint.

Is a UV block filter what this report was referencing, or was it a UV-pass type filter ( essentially blocking everything else)?

Okay, I just double checked the video, and the phrase I heard was very close to "a UV sensitive camera", so I'd interpret that as a UV pass filter, sort of the exact opposite of what is typically used as a filter for a camera or as an applied layer on sunglasses to block UV.

I'd expect that blocking the UV band would result in a much different picture than one that only sees the UV band. So checking it out with a typical camera would give much different results that what is reported as being used with respect to human visible light.

As you can see on the chart on this page http://www.lucytune.com/academic/freq_to_wave.html visible light is a narrow band where UV and InfraRed meet, wherease the entire UV spectrum is much wider and is of a shorter wavelength and higher frequency.

It is a EM frequency that we as humans are normally blind to.

[Trillo]

184. Wikipedia has some information on

UltraViolet Photography. In air, the only portion of the UV band that may be photgraphed is called... oh, here's the excerpt:

Only near UV is of interest for UV photography, for several reasons. Ordinary air is opaque to wavelengths below about 200 nm, and lens glass is opaque below about 180nm. UV photographers subdivide the near UV into:

* Long wave UV that extends from 320 to 400 nm, also called UV-A,
* Medium wave UV that extends from 280 to 320 nm, also called UV-B,
* Short wave UV that extends from 200 to 280 nm, also called UV-C.

Another excerpt that mentions a focus issue with respect to reflected UV photography:

Lenses based purely on quartz show a distinct focus shift between visible and UV light, whereas the later developed fluoride/quartz lenses are fully color corrected without focus shift.

And, because of many of these limitations, a special camera was developed that's used in space:

UltraViolet Camera and Spectrograph

George Carruthers, an African American inventor, has gained international recognition for his work which focuses on ultraviolet observations of the earth's upper atmosphere and of astronomical phenomena. Ultraviolet light is the electromagnetic radiation between visible light and x-rays. George Carruthers first major contribution to science was to lead the team that invented the far ultraviolet camera spectrograph. He developed the first moon-based space observatory, an ultraviolet camera that was carried to the moon by Apollo 16 astronauts in 1972. The camera was positioned on the moon's surface and allowed researchers to examine the Earth's atmosphere for concentrations of pollutants. Dr. George Carruthers received a patent for his invention the "Image Converter for Detecting Electromagnetic Radiation specially in Short Wave Lengths" on November 11, 1969.

He has been the principal investigator for numerous NASA and DoD sponsored space instruments including a 1986 rocket instrument that obtained ultraviolet image of Comet Halley. His most recent on the Air Force ARGOS mission captured an image of a Leonid shower meteor entering the earth's atmosphere, the first time a meteor has been imaged in the far ultraviolet from a space-borne camera.

Here are some (presumably) near UV flower photos compared to typical photos.

[anigbrowl]

196. Most interesting

I'll have to see if I can find some cheapie versions to try out with my camera. I've always liked the look of UV photography. The newer generation of camcorders are shifting to CMOS sensors now that they're finally fast and cheap enough, for example RED are planning to launch a camcorder (as opposed to their expensive pro camera) with 3k resolution for about $3000 next spring. This records everything in a non-lossy RAW format so it might also lend itself to UV photography, and will be high-resolution enough and fast enough to capture even quite elusive natural phenomena. I'm sure there'll be a stampede among serious researchers to get their hands on such an affordable and high quality tool.

[defendandprotect]

148. Thanks . . . never saw that before ---

Is what Google has very much different from what's available at YouTube . . . ?

[Kaleko]

161. Have you followed up on this piece of the disclosure project by any chance?

(I haven't compared YouTube to Google, so I can't answer your question, but I've done some fairly extensive research into the best evidence available so far.)

For anyone interested, please check out the credentials of the officials who came forward during the following event.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


PILOTS TO TELL THEIR UFO STORIES FOR FIRST TIME


http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2634


UFO Close Encounters -
The Reality as Seen by Former High Level Government and Military Officials


November 12th Group to call on US Government to Re-Open its Investigation

WHEN: Monday, November 12, 2007 11:00 AM

WHERE: National Press Club Ballroom Event open to credentialed media and Congressional staff only

The American public is not alone when it comes to sighting what the US Air Force has labeled Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs). So too have former governors, high level military and government officials, highly trained airplane pilots and aviation experts. The phenomenon is real. It happens worldwide. No one is sure about its nature. Experts from seven countries will divulge what they have discovered about UFOs at a November 12 panel discussion moderated by former Arizona Governor Fife Symington (R) at the National Press Club.

Just one year ago, pilots, mechanics and managers from United Airlines witnessed a metallic disc-shaped object hovering over the United Airlines Terminal at Chicago's O'Hare Airport. The clearly observed object shot straight up leaving a hole through the clouds. Despite the clear aviation safety issues involved, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) never investigated the incident and dismissed it as weather. This head-in-the-clouds refusal to investigate stands in sharp contrast to efforts by governments of other countries to understand these incidents.

“I believe that our government should take an active role in investigating this very real phenomenon,” said Symington, who was a witness to the famed "Phoenix Lights" incident seen by hundreds in Arizona while he was governor. “This panel consists of some of the most qualified people in the world with direct experience in dealing with this issue, and they will bring incredible, irrefutable evidence, some never presented before, that we simply cannot dismiss or ignore,” he said.

The group, using previously classified documents, will discuss many well-documented cases, including two investigated by the US government. The first involves a Peruvian Air Force pilot who fired many rounds at a UFO which was not affected. The second was an Iranian Air Force pilot's attempt to fire at a UFO, but whose control panel became inoperable. "This case is a classic that meets all the necessary conditions for a legitimate study of the UFO phenomenon,” stated the US Defense Intelligence Agency document on the Tehran incident. Both pilots will come forward to speak about these events publicly for the first time.

WHO:

Fife Symington, Former Arizona Governor, Moderator
Ray Bowyer, Captain, Aurigny Air Services, Channel Islands
Rodrigo Bravo, Captain and Pilot for the Aviation Army of Chile
General Wilfried De Brouwer, former Deputy Chief of Staff, Belgian Air Force (Ret.)
John Callahan, Chief of Accidents and Investigations for the FAA, 1980's (Ret.)
Dr. Anthony Choy, founder, 2001, OIFAA, Peruvian Air Force
Jean-Claude Duboc, Captain, Air France (Ret.)
Charles I. Halt, Col. USAF (Ret.), Former Director, Inspections Directorate, DOD I.G.
General Parviz Jafari, Iranian Air Force (Ret.)
Jim Penniston, TSgt USAF (Ret.)
Dr. Claude Poher, Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, founder, French GEPAN
Nick Pope, Ministry of Defence, UK, 1985-2006
Dr. Jean-Claude Ribes, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, France, 1963-98
Comandante Oscar Santa Maria, Peruvian Air Force (Ret.)

______________________________________________________

[Occulus]

37. Here's a better answer:

Camera phones are becoming ubiquitous, and very very few people carry around any other camera if they have a camera phone.

This isn't like bird watching or photographing lightning, both of which have a known 'range' for the phenomena in question. Black project aircraft can appear anywhere on the planet at any time, and their appearance isn't telegraphed in advance in any way.

Also, if you were piloting a black project air/spacecraft to test its systems, would you be under orders to visit or avoid populated areas?

These are 'ours', craft built by mankind, end of story. The only question is what form of technology they're using, and how far advanced it is from anything we've seen before. Given their reported behavior in the skies, I'm thinking the answer to those questions could be "mature 'antigravity'" and "very very far advanced".

Human technology is advancing rapidly in area many people have literally no knowledge of. These craft in the sky, to them, might be sufficiently advanced as to appear to be magic... or alien.

[JuniperLea]

44. A conspiracy theory to debunk a UFO theory...

We can't limit other life forms to our own known science. What we know is but a grain of sand, compared to all we don't know, which is like all the grains of sand on all the beaches in all the world.

[anigbrowl]

49. But we can calculate the distance between here and the nearest star...

and that business about the speed of light being a hard limit wasn't something Einstein just pulled out of his ass, but derived mathematically. Given that the theory of relatively has empirical support and offers testable propositions, saying 'there's a lot we don't know' just sounds like an alien version of creationism to me. Certainly there is life elsewhere, and probably intelligent life. Statistically, it seems almost inevitable. Odds that it's hanging around here? Pretty low.

You'd think that given the voluminous reports of UFOs, someone would have built a probability map by now and set up a low-budget observatory. Of course, that would require some rigorous research work.

[JuniperLea]

52. You should really make up your mind...

First you say you "can't accept that theory" then you do.


Alien version of creationism... what a crock... the first thing the most intelligent people in the world will tell you is that we don't know shit.

[anigbrowl]

54. I have no idea what you're talking about

When have I ever said I can't accept the theory of relativity? And yes I do think that most ufology is an alien version of creationism. So there's a lot we don't know...this is perfectly true, and perfectly OBVIOUS. It doesn't invalidate what we do know. Observing that the sum of human knowledge is small in comparison to the sum of potential knowledge isn't deep, it's trite. A ten year old can look up at the stars and appreciate that it's a big universe and we're only familiar with a small portion of it. But NOBODY ever discovered anything by sitting around musing on how much is unknown and unknowable. You discover things by making field observations, carrying out experiements, and studying the results.

We know quite a lot; the fact that much knowledge remains to be discovered doesn't mean that our scientific achievements (including the computer you are reading this on) are chopped liver. Ufologists love to coo over how much we don't know, as in proportion to the total knowledge available for future discovery, it minimizes the knowledge gap between themselves and legitimate scientists. People who want UFO studies taken seriously should try applying the scientific method to the information that they do have already and offering up some testable hypotheses, statistical breakdowns etc., instead of endlessly handing out links fuzzy videos and muttering about government conspiracy theories. The people at MUFON are the only ones who have even tried to take some kind of empirical approach, and even they don't have a proper searchable database up.

What do you guys have against things like statistics and standards of evidence? they're good enough for everyone else, but it seems when it comes to dealing with UFOs were supposed to throw all our hard-earned knowledge overboard and start giving equal weight to hearsay and guesswork.

[JuniperLea]

55. "you guys"

You should really try to keep up.

I'm emailing this conversation to the think tank to which I belong... this is really humorous.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

57. The think tank to which you belong?

Does it involve drums and a circle?

[JuniperLea]

58. Does it make your junk really big to bully and be mean to people? eom

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

59. Only when it involves people who can dish it out but not take it.

[JuniperLea]

66. You must need a wheelbarrow... eom

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

68. I'll say.

[anigbrowl]

62. You're the one trying to impress us with your anonymous 'think tank'.

If that's not a bully tactic, I don't know what is. You brought it up to chide me with how you were going to email the exchange so everybody in your think tank could laugh at it. Why does this remind me of 'I'll dis you to my friends and you won't be popular any more'?

[JuniperLea]

65. I have no idea why that would remind you of anything

I'm just alluding to an earlier comment... those with the most knowledge among us are the first to say we don't know shit. You clearly don't get that and continue trying to prove you know it all. I find it amusing.

[anigbrowl]

60. Empty rhetoric, as usual

Object to a plural description. Imply I'm not keeping up (but don't say with what). Dismissal with mockery. Invocation of anonymous authority of your 'think tank'.

Rhetorical devices: 4
Statements of rebuttal: 0
Examples of scientific work: 0

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

61. Examples of scientific work: 0

LOL. Claims of not knowing anything about science: at least 1.

[JuniperLea]

67. Uh huh... more bogus bullying because you obviously can't keep up...

Jesus. I hate wasting my time recreating when you could have just read the fucking conversation.

I'll paraphrase:

I said we don't know shit, that we can't compare what might be to what we know because we know too little. You twisted that around and said you didn't subscribe to that theory (never indicating which theory you were alluding to) and then went on to say nearly the same thing I said elsewhere.

Fucking bully.

[anigbrowl]

70. Nonsense

Anyone who bothers to go back and read it for themselves will see you are full of it, whether by accident or design. Keep on calling me a bully if it makes you feel better. I see you've moved onto swearing now, as if that would make your point more forcefully.

[JuniperLea]

77. You obviously didn't read both threads of our conversations here...

Or you aren't as smart as you think you are.

[anigbrowl]

83. I did. I just disagree with you.

I can't help noticing that your contribution to that other thread involved totally misreading what I wrote - arguing that aliens wouldn't make themselves glaringly obvious, even though I had prefaced my remarks with 'and if they choose to reveal themselves', but you decided to change the subject rather than just acknowledge the 'oops'. How did I reply to you several times in that thread if I didn't read it? Maybe you're the one suffering from delusions of cleverness.

[JuniperLea]

94. Obviously you didn't read what I wrote...

Because you missed the gist and you misquote and misrepresent.



"I would think advanced beings would be able to observe us without revealing themselves, which is precisely the right thing to do, imho. I sincerely doubt that any race of intelligence that has spent any time at all observing us would know not to make their presence "glaringly obvious"... it just wouldn't be prudent for them, or for us."



And then what did you say when I said we simply don't know enough and we can't use what we know to judge the science of others? Alien creationism? WTF?

[anigbrowl]

109. OK, you asked for it.

Me: "If aliens are visiting earth and choose to reveal themselves then we won't have to argue about it because it'll be glaringly obvious."

(emphasis added)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3516808&mesg_id=3519142

You: "I would think advanced beings would be able to observe us without revealing themselves, which is precisely the right thing to do, imho. I sincerely doubt that any race of intelligence that has spent any time at all observing us would know not to make their presence "glaringly obvious"... it just wouldn't be prudent for them, or for us."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3516808&mesg_id=3519176

Me: "First of all, I said that IF they are here AND choose to reveal themselves it will be glaringly obvious. As in, you won't be trying to make guesses about whether it's a spaceship any more than you need help to identify a 747 or an aircraft carrier when its parked."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3516808&mesg_id=3519282 ...after which you switched to talking about a UFO you saw once without responding to the correction.

And you say I didn't read what you wrote, missed the gist, and misquote and misrepresent? You should talk.

[JuniperLea]

112. There was no "oops" there was nothing I didn't get...

You didn't get it. "First of all, I said that IF they are here AND choose to reveal themselves it will be glaringly obvious.

I responded exactly appropriately to what you said... that I would think they could observe us without letting themselves be known... and further, any intelligent lives that did observe us wouldn't let themselves be known... they would NOT make their presence obvious... it wouldn't be good for anyone concerned.

You're losing it. I'm not sure what you have made up in your head, but what you have posted here only confirms my suspicions that you aren't reading this correctly.

[anigbrowl]

115. I'm afraid there was

The whole point (which you missed) was not the liklihood or wisdom of aliens making themselves obvious, but observation that if they chose to do so there would be no difficulty in identifying them. If a real spaceship was hanging over or landing Central Park (or wherever) as an announcement of alien presence, its alien nature would be glaringly obvious and we wouldn't need to have complex arguments over the photos on the front page of the New York Times. Any craft or sub-craft built by aliens capable of crossing insterstellar distances is going to be easily identifiable as something not of this earth, as opposed to being mistaken for a military plane or suchlike.

One more time for simplicity:

If aliens are visiting earth
and choose to reveal themselves
then we won't have to argue about it
because it'll be glaringly obvious.

I thought the meaning of this sentence was glaringly obvious as well (it uses a simple and well-tried contruction) but I guess, like the alien technology, it's just too advanced for some.

[JuniperLea]

120. I understood your meaning perfectly well from the very beginning...

And told you there's no way they'd make themselves known... YOU are the one who is confused, not me.

What you were suggesting is neither here nor there... unless they are coming to take over (now there's something we can hopefully both chuckle at) they will never make themselves known. There's no point. We are a violent lot, prone to explosions and projectiles... silly Earthlings... why the hell would anyone smart enough to travel through space so effectively make themselves known to us stupid, violent dumbfucks?

If you paid attention, you would have known this.

[anigbrowl]

124. No, you didn't.

You either misunderstood or chose to address the point that was being made, just as you doing again now - switching to an unrelated subject. In fact, looking back through this thread, its your technique every time you're confronted with an argument you don't want to refute - switch the topic and start preening about your superior understanding of the new one. Please spare your painfully literal-minded excuses, unless you want me to conclude that you're incapable of considering even the simplest hypothesis.

But since you're on your 'silly earthlings' trip now, perhaps you'd like to explain why anyone smart enough to travel through space would find it worth their while to even study 'us stupid, violent dumbfucks'. Indeed, one might wonder why our projectiles and explosions would be any great threat to beings smart enough to travel through space. If they are, it seems a bit incautious of the Aliens not to have gone public back when we were still using more primitive weapons. what a coincidence that just at the time in human history when our technology has developed far enough to allow us to imagine the requirements for interstellar travel and appreciate alien beings, our weapons have made it too dangerous for the beings to reveal themselves.

[JuniperLea]

128. I did, and you are clueless

As I have said many times, it's futile to try to explain something or some being far more intelligent than we are using our own simple terms and our own simple scientific explanations, which would no doubt be child's play to them. How the hell would I know why they find us interesting? Perhaps we are THEIR experiment... their reality TV. Perhaps they are time travelers and cannot change things here without changing the future and themselves.

You can't even take a fucking joke... you are one special Earthling there, bucko. So fucking superior that you can't imagine the rest of us having a clue or an idea. Take a clue card... there have been UFO sightings long before we've had any seriously dangerous to all mankind type weapons at all.

Conclude all you want about me... Goddess knows I've drawn my own conclusions about you. Free world, today anyway.

[anigbrowl]

142. More 'knowledge of the unknowable'

Again, the same argument used by creationists. 'You can't explain XYZ, so that proves there must be a designer'. You've just replaced 'god' with 'futuristic technology'. Again you write off science as simple, regardless of the fact that it's accomplished a great deal already even if the best is yet to come. You say it's futile to try to explain some thing or some being far more intelligent than us, despite having no proof at all that such beings exist local to us (as opposed to somewhere in the universe, which is almost a statistical certainty).

I really don't care about the futility of trying to analyze their motives, what I'd like is some actual evidence that they're here, or at least a methodical approach to establishing whether they are or not. This whole argument started because I pointed out a mundane fact (chinese lanterns are increasingly fashionable in the UK and 100 or so of them were set adrift on the evening of this supposed UFO encounter), but you weren't happy with that. You insist the sky holds things 'not of this earth' but reject requests for proof of this grandiose claim, and denigrate people's intelligence (or genitalia) for asking detailed questions about it.

As I've said several times now, I see no real difference between this and religious claims, apart from a change in term. It's 'aliens' instead of 'angels', 'advanced technology' instead of 'spiritual power' and 'UFO sightings' instead of 'visions'. Adherents of both turn away scientific inquiry by insisting such matters are somehow 'beyond science' or that science is somehow too philosophically deficient to deal with such matters. We're supposed to accept their testimony as evidence, but not to question its objectivity or use the analytical techniques that we apply to every other area of study. Suggesting the possibility that people's judgment is poor or they suffer from confirmation bias or indeed bringing up psychology at all is Right Out.

I can perfectly well imagine other people having a clue or an idea about unexplained phenomena, but if they make specific claims I don't see anything wrong with asking them to back them up with specific evidence. I've experienced a number of phenomena I can't explain in any way and which seem worthy of investigation, BUT I study such things without allowing myself to jump to conclusions. I look for mundane explanations and when possible I try to come up with experiments or ways to carry out objective measurements. Science doesn't have answers for everything, but it does have a very reliable methodology for the accumulation and verification of knowledge.

[defendandprotect]

158. Except . . . how many people claim to have seen "god" --

and how many hundreds of thousands of witnesses claim to have seen UFO's . . .?

How many people have photos/videos of "god" ---

and how many people have photos/videos of UFO's . . . ???

[anigbrowl]

163. Oh come on, entire books of the bible are written about visions

People say they see god/ the virgin mary/ saints all the time. People claim Mary or Jesus' face appeared on walls and other place. There was a case of that from the UK mentioned just the other day where a couple with a baby on the way think they saw the face of jesus on the ultrasound image. or the virgin mary on a wall, or bleeding statues or whatever. You would have to be living under a rock not to be aware of such claims. There's one on the news every other month. Here's one from last April in Chicago:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/20/national/main689630.shtml

How many of the UFO photos or videos are any good? Most of them just show lights or some tiny blob that often turns out to be dirt on the lens. Then there's a bunch of known fakes, from frisbees to Maya (some of the Maya ones are quite good). Videos are usually hopelessly juddery (why don't these people squat down or lean on something to get a steadier picture?). I have yet to see anything convincing that actually looks like a structure. If you have links to specific videos, that'd be great. I've been following this subject for years and all I ever see is random junk that might be a ufo is you screw up your eyes and imagine really really hard.

[defendandprotect]

170. Let me know when you get the Virgin Mary on video . . .

and a couple of thousand witnesses telling you what they saw -- currently.

The Virgin, Jesus appear frequently, of course, on Ritz crackers -- tacos -- etal
but no current video!
And it is quite humorous.
True we also have Fatima.
And that could be understood as a UFO event.

IN FACT, many of the Bibical events could be understood as UFO events.

Again, you are trying to suggest that the photos/videos of UFO's exist on their own-
of course they don't. There are often thousands of witnesses who you want to disregard.

And, I've seen many quite clear videos -- and heard many quite clear audio records --
the incident at BENTWATERS RENDLESHAM FOREST being one excellent example of that --
and the PHOENIX SIGHTINGS another.

The eye witnesses to the O'Hare sightings were also significant last year ---
quite some descriptions!

[anigbrowl]

180. You're being obtuse. Lots of people 'witness' religious phenomena and you know it.

That doesn't mean their witness testimony is reliable, and more than the testimony of UFO witnesses is reliable when it comes to drawing conclusions. Many people may see something, but that doesn't mean they saw a spaceship, just something they weren't able to identify.

I've never argued that subject is not worth investigating, but that one should not jump to conclucions about the cause. There seems to be this ongoing resistance in the UFO community to preferring simple explanations when they're available - for example, you insist on arguing about the size of the 'UFOs' on the NASA video when anyone who has any camera experience at all can tell the picture is out of focus. I feel that UFO folks would get taken a lot more seriously, and get more assistance in conducting investigations and gathering information, if they insisted on a higher standard of evidence and let things go when obvious explanations are available.

Per the example above of the Virgin Mary 'appearing' on a wall in Chicago, all those people think they saw something and they probably talk about the spiritual power they felt emanating from it and so on. They're resistant to the idea that water damage in concrete could possibly resemble a symbol which has important meaning for them. UFO believers act the same way a lot of the time, resisting straightforward explanations of phenomena and being unwilling to examine their own judgment. If they won't accept scientific standards of evidence and observation, then how do they expect to be taken seriously?

I mean, you go citing events here but don't even provide links for other interested parties to look up. It happens I've heard of all these before, but again when people search for information there's a story that something happened and then talk of a cover up. where are the follow-up field trips? Does the Rendlesham site in England still include unusual background radiation? Has anyone mapped the area? to find out whether it's otherwise consistent and low?

When UFO people start acting like scientists, they'll get taken seriously like scientists. I'm quite willing to believe they have found a phenomenon worth investigating, but it's up to them to present the evidence in a more convincing way and toss out anything that doesn't build their case.

[defendandprotect]

197. Fine . . . show me a video of Jesus from recent date, with thousands of witnesses . . . .

Meanwhile, as I said, the FATIMA event could be seen --- and has often been commented upon ---

as a UFO event.

Many events in the Bible --- "Chariots of Fire" --- can be seen as UFO events ---

Alien intervention in births --- UFO events --- our species as hybrids.

Vatican comments on that and has no problem with it ---

They say "aliens" are our sisters and brothers ---

Lots of people 'witness' religious phenomena and you know it.
That doesn't mean their witness testimony is reliable...

I'd agree with you here about "religious" descriptions/witnesses since the clergy were
often up to tricks in making miracles seen to occur ---


HOWEVER, yes, I do think when we have hundreds of thousands of people watching events in Mexico,
thousands watching events in Phoenix, backed up by amazing videos ....
I find no problem in finding their descriptions credible.

And their conclusions as I'm sure you've noted former Gov. Fyfe Symington of Arizona saying
that he too also saw the UFO that day and had no problem saying it was "real."

We also have the Jimmy Carter group, Ronald Reagan and other witnesses to his event, and
many astronauts to name just a few whose powers of observation I would find credible.

There isn't any growing "resistance" nor a "UFO community" --- but there is an obvious
nuisance and nonsense angle to dealing with comments like yours. It's like people who
still deny Gloal Warming. It gets too sadly humorous after a while.

As for this nonsense . . .

Per the example above of the Virgin Mary 'appearing' on a wall in Chicago, all those people think they saw something and they probably talk about the spiritual power they felt emanating from it and so on. They're resistant to the idea that water damage in concrete could possibly resemble a symbol which has important meaning for them. UFO believers act the same way a lot of the time, resisting straightforward explanations of phenomena and being unwilling to examine their own judgment. If they won't accept scientific standards of evidence and observation, then how do they expect to be taken seriously?

Maybe Reagan and Carter saw balloons and kites?

"Religion" often enters the picture when people can't deal with reality ---
NO ONE that I've ever heard of has ever done anything but find the recent religious
"sightings" anything but pitiful.

The "science" that has investigated UFO's in the past has been corrupt ---
that has been made clear by a former head investigator.

Not unlike other "science" today which is completely Bushed ---

[anigbrowl]

201. You know, I don't trust Reagan's judgment on anything

And the reason you hear 'balloons and kites' a lot is because people so frequently misidentify balloons and kites, no matter how much it galls you to admit this. According to you, no witness has ever made a false positive identification, and all science is 'corrupt'.

I've asked before and I'll ask again, how come amateur astronomers don't report UFOs? They go out to demote dark laces in search of minimal light pollution, they use large but cheap telescopes, and they know how to hook them up to cameras. Amateur astronomy is booming, because you can do so much with a small budget these days thanks to advances in cameras and software. Surely one of these people, who has nothing to lose academically, would have seen and photographed n alien ship right now, and uploaded it to the internet? UFO buffs have access to all this same equipment, are they using it to undertake systematic observations?

you don't need the government on your side to do science. You just need a small amount of cash and access to Ebay. I keep hearing about these alien implants, but try finding any analytical data on them...even though you can buy an electron microscope on Ebay for $10,000 (surely affordable to a serious researcher) or get picutres from a commercial microscopy lab for $100 (affordable to anybody).

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170231857774&indexURL=0&photoDisplayType=2#ebayphotohosting

[defendandprotect]

205. Others with Reagan saw UFO -- including pilot ---

Reagan also made "alien" comments at United Nations ---

Yeah . . . in outerspace, people are "misidentifying balloons and kites" all the time---!!!

And it's those "Chinese Lanterns" in Mexico in daylight which really get you -- !!!

Evidently, you've never either heard of MUFON . . . ??

One of the largest "UFO buffs" is a former Director of one of the UFO agencies which were
"de-bunking" UFO's . . . and trying to cover-up.

Up is down continues to work for you . . . or is it just playing dumb . . . works for you?

No one said you "need the government on your side to do science" . . .
You need the government not to destroy the scientific evidence --- i.e., EPA, Global Warming.

Yeah . . . get your microscope on E-Bay ---

Try not to rush back here --

[anigbrowl]

213. Even you fellow UFO believer thinks MUFON are no good

I was the one who introduced MUFON into the conversation. Once again you demonstrate that you can't string a sentence together, and you're averse to names, dates, places or other basic data. If the argument isn't going your way, just just jumble different bits of it together or make stuff up.

The difference between you and me is that I do have some scientific equipment and have learned how to use it. It's just a hobby and I like playing with optics, microscopes and suchlike to satisfy my own curiosity rather than in pursuit of original research...but you don't even want to do that. Anytime someone requests hard, specific information or examples, you just blow it off and start talking . . . in your special style -- no grammar needed . . . which is nothing more than a cover for your ignorance.

You're an embarrassment to serious UFO researchers.

[JuniperLea]

218. You are so full of it...

I never said that MUFON are no good. I merely said they are disorganized to the point where you can't get information from them once you submit it.

You are condescending and rude, and your personal attacks on DUers up and down this thread is an embarrassment to DUers.

[anigbrowl]

219. disorganized = no good, as far as I am concerned.

If you want to split hairs then go ahead, surely a basic feature of a good database or catalog is that you can go back and retieve information afterwards. There are better databases out there, like the one at ufoevidence.org, which I was surprised nobody bothered to mention.

You can complain about me being rude all you like; you're the one who goes around swearing at people and making snide remarks anytime technical information is introduced.

[JuniperLea]

135. Silly Earthing was a test... you failed the "cool" test...

HUSH EARTHLING -
You're not worthy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
You reek of turdy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
You flip me the birdy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
Now you gonna hurty -

HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH -

HUSH EARTHLING -
I've come a long way -
HUSH EARTHLING -
To make you my prey -
HUSH EARTHLING -
I've come to stay -
HUSH EARTHLING -
You taste like your gay -

HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH -

(Break) -

HUSH EARTHLING -
Do you want to die? -
HUSH EARTHLING -
Then look me in thee eye -
HUSH EARTHLING -
I come from the planet Szurdelifoy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
AHH your such a girlie boy -

HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH -

[anigbrowl]

145. Oh noes, excommunication looms...the other kids won't talk to me...

And you wonder why I point out a similarity with the religious thinkers.

[Kaleko]

90. The faux "expert" you are talking to is the first person on DU

who has made me check out a neat feature: ignored.

And you're right. It is a waste of time to argue with the thinly constructed strawmen he keeps throwing out.

[JuniperLea]

97. I had them on ignore before...

But cleared my ignore list after Obama became the apparent nominee... I guess I cleared too soon?


"Live and learn from fools and from sages" is something I try to live by here:) I leave it to the individual posters to decide which group they belong in... fools or sages... damn few sages around here:)

[anigbrowl]

111. Guess it's easier than trying to respond with facts, hm. Personal remarks are so much easier.

[JuniperLea]

130. You should know.... eom

[Kaleko]

64. "These are 'ours', craft built by mankind, end of story."

End of story? Not for people like the former Canadian Minister of Defense, Paul Hellyer.

Here you can find him discussing the UFO cover-up on MSNBC:

http://www.wanttoknow.info/051213paulhellyerufos


I won't inundate this thread with links to officials from all over the world who have come forward in different ways. But they are ***out there*** :-)

[anigbrowl]

72. Hearsay is never good evidence. that's why it's not accepted in court

And the standard of proof in court is a lot lower than the standard of proof in science. There are millions and millions of people int he world with cameras, and humans are capable of all kinds of ingenuity, but in ~50 years nobody has managed to get a convincing photograph of a UFO? It's hard to believe. If proponents of the UFO theory want to be taken seriously, then they need to come up with some good evidence.

Paul Hellyer was a defense minister back in the 60s. He says he's become convinced after reading a book suggesting a big government cover-up at Roswell. Well that's great but it's hardly what I'd call proof of anything. For all I know the whole 'Roswell' thing could just as easily be the remnants of a propaganda experiment designed to measure the credulity of the public. It's a sad commentary on the UFO community that the Wikipedia article on Roswell is better written, better sourced, and more comprehensive than anything you can find at 99% of UFO websites (which should have more and better organized info than Wikipedia).

[defendandprotect]

172. Right ... Roswell was a conspiracy by the town folks--!!!

And they forced the military press guy to issue a story about a "disc" --- !!!

[anigbrowl]

208. You're obsessed with conspiracies

I was referring to the fact that people are well known to be less good observers than they think they are. Ask an accident investigator. That's why scientists use instruments you know, because they know their OWN observational powers are unreliable and they want an objective record of their experiments. That's why research scientists work with lab partners and so on. But to you, it's all a big conspiracy.

[SidDithers]

79. Paul Hellyer is a fucking loon...

Citing him as an authority does far more to hurt your cause than help it.



Sid

[Kaleko]

95. I guess that makes you an authority on the former Canadian Minister of Defense

regarding his state of mind, right?

Right. It's a very convincing argument you provide. And a picture too!

[anigbrowl]

113. What makes the former MoD an authority? he says his belief is based on a book.

From Wikipedia
"In early September 2005, Hellyer made headlines by publicly announcing that he believed in UFOs. On 25 September 2005, he was an invited speaker at an exopolitics conference in Toronto, where he told the audience that he had seen a UFO one night with his late wife and some friends. He said that though he discounted the experience at the time, he had kept an open mind to it. He said that he started taking the issue much more seriously after watching ABC's Peter Jennings' UFO special in February 2005.

Watching Jennings' UFO special prompted Hellyer to finally read U.S. Army Colonel Philip J. Corso's book The Day After Roswell about the Roswell UFO Incident which had been sitting on his shelf for some time. Hellyer told the Toronto audience that he later spoke to a retired Air Force General who confirmed the accuracy of the information in the book. In November 2005, he accused U.S. President George W. Bush of plotting an "Intergalactic War". The former deputy prime minister told an audience at the University of Toronto: "The United States military are preparing weapons which could be used against the aliens, and they could get us into an intergalactic war without us ever having any warning" and "The Bush Administration has finally agreed to let the military build a forward base on the moon, which will put them in a better position to keep track of the goings and comings of the visitors from space, and to shoot at them, if they so decide." <2>"

This doesn't sound very convincing. It'd be something if he was saying he had been party to some super Alien secrets when he was the Canadian minister of Defense, but saying he made his decision based on a TV show and a book? That's not a good start. And intergalactic war? We're not just being visited by aliens from another star system, but from a completely different galaxy?

Does the phrase 'orders of magnitude' have any significance for you? Because for me, it's hard to take the guy seriously when he's all over the map like this. We're supposed to be getting into a conflict with a complete other galaxy? Which one?

[defendandprotect]

177. Star Wars --- militarization of the skies -- has been planned since 1950's . . .

Or . . . "Masters of Infinity" as it is also called ---

The next time you're in a book store -- and/or some libraries have it --
look for "Dark Moon" by Bennett and Percy and check out the chapter on "Masters of Infinity" --
a little later I'll try to find the comments LBJ makes back then on "the highest hill" and our
need to reach it.

Also, keep in mind that like other nay-sayers, most of us are happy to take this around with
you once or twice. However, Philip Klass game-playing is also easily recognized and
no one is going to waste their time with it.

[anigbrowl]

210. No, really? You don't say

Well I would just never have guessed that from knowing about the history of space exploration and defense technology. My, my, to think those satellites had an ulterior military motive the whole time! What would I do without people like you to open my eyes, and tell me that knowing how to focus a lens is all an illusion.

[defendandprotect]

171. In fact, you should bring forth whatever other info you have -- and thanks for this!

I read quickly and "faved it" --- am somewhat familiar with his comments in a different form.

I'd highly recommend "The Day After Roswell" if you didn't read it --- imagine you have???
And in some of the TV shows done later, Corso adds much more to what he's said in the book.

Just want to mention that the original hard cover copy had a Foreword by Sen. Strom Thurmond...
saying the aliens/UFO's were real -- and he later denied it in rather foolish nonsensical fashion.
Of course, in his right-wing thinking they were "enemies." New reasons to arm ourselves and be
ready to attack!

We also finally had the former Gov. of Arizona/Symington come forward to say that he had actually seen the Phoenix UFO that day -- and saying in his opinion something very real.
And, of course, they are --

[Kaleko]

176. Yes, I've read "The Day After Roswell" and saw several interviews with Colonel Corso.

In fact, I've got the original hardcover edition with Strom Thurmond's foreword right here. Didn't know he chickened out since, but there are hundreds more with greater credibility than the Senator who have come forward since. Heck, even Dennis Kucinich admits to having seen a UFO!

Not sure if I should post more of the most credible info I have in a thread like this where the single person on my ignore list constantly interrupts the flow.

[defendandprotect]

193. Post when you feel the time and opportunity are right . . . I think the naysayers

on this are about as effective now as those naysaying re Global Warming ---

and I think when so obvious that they are here to disrupt rather than to

make credible comments that everyone just goes by them ---

Yeah -- I read recently that Ole Strom had his office deny that he knew what

he was signing and that he completely misunderstood what the comments said!

It suggests that there is still a very powerful force keeping this covered up.

I'm right now looking for the LBJ quote which appears in "Dark Moon" . . .

I don't know if you're familiar with that book which disclaims the moon landing.

However, within it, you can see Star Wars and the tremendous amounts of money for

it being developed back into the 1950's!!!

"Aliens" as enemies . . . !!!


Things are a little slow re UFO's now on TV --- Larry King had a fairly interesting

program a few months ago -- or more? Some of the History Channel UFO shows have been

interesting --- some duds based on old info.

I'd always be happy to hear what you turn up --



:)

[defendandprotect]

136. Guess you've missed many of the videos . . .

the one from Mexico and the Phoenix lights --- to cite just two cases ---

are exceptional.

Additionally, to suggest that all you have are pictures --- either video or still camera ---

is nuts. There are often thousands of witnesses --- in other cases hundreds of witnesses.

[lumberjack_jeff]

207. ... by people who are in the grip of St Vitus' dance.

the quickest way to get motionsickness is to watch a video... ANY video purporting to show UFO's.

Maybe ET points his epilepsy beam at anyone holding a camera in his vicinity.

[Fox Mulder]

29. Now I've got something to research all afternoon.

Thanks for the links. :)

[bikebloke]

38. Cardiff, it figures...Torchwood

Torchwood will be on it.

[edhopper]

42. YES!!

You beat me to it. I can't believe we have a thread about UFOs in Cardiff and yours is the first post that mentions Torchwood.
Captain Jack Rules!!

On the other hand, I still haven't seen a shred of evidence that we have been visited by aliens.

[NJCher]

69. professional skeptics

Stanton Friedman said something really interesting the other night about people who disdain the idea of UFOs. He said, "Have you ever noticed they really know nothing about the subject?" He cited the standard debunkers who go on the air, like Michael Shermer. Time after time after time, Shermer could not show any evidence that he'd read any of the books, reports, journals, etc., even though he had plenty of advance notice of the book or topic that would be discussed. These people--and Shermer is only one of them--are disgustingly lame. Go read. Go do some research. Don't just sit there telling me it's all in my imagination. And stop with the ridiculous explanations like swamp gas. That's too easy and I will not let you get away with it.

Likewise for all the people here who want to chalk everything off to balloons, dust, etc. Give some credit to the people have seen them. I, for example, saw one as a young adult and it was only about 80 feet off the ground. It's an insult to my observational powers when you try telling me UFOs are a balloon or a speck of dust. Please.

There are plenty of very clear photos of spacecraft that are not of this planet out there. Just look! If you're on this thread complaining about grainy photographs, that just proves to me you know nothing of the topic and are of the same ilk as Michael Shermer.

There is a huge amount of material on the subject. Read voluminously and then come back and talk to me. You hold no credibility with me until you do.



Cher

[anigbrowl]

76. I have read voluminously. And been repeatedly disappointed.

Every time I've seen an impressive, high-quality photograph it turns out to be fake, or easily fakeable (the frisbee type being the most obvious examples). All too often the lighting simply doesn't match, or shadows are in the wrong, or whatever. If you have some great photos to share, link to them. I would love to see a good unfaked picture of a UFO.

Sorry if your observational powers are insulted, but I've gotten very skeptical of most people's observational powers. If you ever have to do jury service for a case involving a car accident you'll see how even a simple thing like that can get interpreted 10 different ways by 10 different people. So you saw one 80 feet off the ground. Well, I can't conclude anything from that - what elevation were you at? what was the horizontal distance? what structures or other markers were around? You may have answers for all this (and I'm happy to hear them) but saying something was 80 feet up by itself tells us little or nothing.

People make all kinds of mistakes, that's why accident investigators and such people don't rely on individual witness reports but try to build up a record of the event using evidence and multiple testimonies. It's painstaking, it's boring, but it's a lot more likely to get you an accurate answer.

[edhopper]

84. Sure like Phillip Klass,

who knew more about UFOs than Friedman would ever hope to. Who debunked the very best cases the UFO community had to offer. Is that the kind of expert who "knows nothing."
I've read, voluminously.
Read if you have an open, critical mind.
http://www.csicop.org/klassfiles/Home.html

[readmoreoften]

88. I tend to think that it's defense testing. With all the 1000s of classified ops since 2001

in the US alone and so many ops working on electricity, I seriously tend to think its advanced weaponry.

I'm not a skeptic or a non-skeptic. Or maybe I'm as skeptical about skeptics as I am about non-skeptics. How the fuck would I know if there are aliens? At least the people who believe in aliens have SOME evidence (even though I find it thoroughly inconclusive thus far) as opposed to the religious stuff.

With all the declassified shit I've read lately, I wouldn't discount anything.

[anigbrowl]

117. Hey, the relgious folks have their shroud of turin and so on

In fairness to the church people, they seem to give about equal weight to the angels enabling miracles as to the demons going around doing bad things. The aliens don't seem to be handing out any specific knowledge or cures, although a lot of people complain about being abducted or attacked. How come I never hear stories like 'Aliens plucked me from jaws of death' or 'Aliens offer solution to age-old mathematical mystery' or 'Old Lady's kitten beamed down from tree by Aliens'?

[defendandprotect]

138. It's true . . . and it always amazes me that people have so little interest

in a subject like this and seem to fear looking at anything strange and new.

Of course, there are the "professional" skeptics --- those getting paid to act dumb.

Plenty of those on TV!

[anigbrowl]

146. You know, maybe we are interested but we just have high standards

You know that phrase 'all that glitters is not gold'? Well, I just want some gold-standard evidence, but people keep arguing that skeptics just don't appreciate the beauty of iron pyrites. One might just as well ask why so many UFO buffs fear using rigorous standards of evidence and oranizing their information properly.

I'd like to see one UFO website that had the same presentation and sourcing standards as wikipedia, or one that had a searchable database with a consistent reporting format you could do statistical analysis on...would that really be so hard? Like, what months of the year or hours of the day consistently display the highest UFO activity? Do UFO sightings correlate with weather events? How about the distance from an airport? Sadly, when you got o look at UFO reports online half of them seem to be written by people with no grasp of sentence structure or punctuation. Why not give them a simple questionaire and use things like google maps to help narrow it down and catalog the information properly?

It's not that hard, I remember buying a copy of the 'Bermuda Triangle' 25 years ago and it had a copy of a government reporting form in it that asked simple questions like date, time, elevation, direction, weather, angle above horizon...NUFORC has a site like this but after personal data just take the report descriptions in free text. OK, so maybe people don't want to spend time making a detailed report, but they're certainly not going to have any credibility if the reports don't have any useful data.

[defendandprotect]

154. The prime interest seems to be in supplying silly alternatives . . .

"Philip Klassing" it . . . which is always silly and humorous ---

How can you have "high standards" when you ignore witnesses?
When you ignore the reality that more than 1500 people every year are claiming to be abducted?
Of course, there is the evidence of implants --
On the other hand, any physical evidence -- a craft or an alien body -- would be in the
hands of government!

When you haven't experienced something like this how do you "organize properly" what a helicopter
pilot, co-pilots, pilots of commercial and military craft, hundreds of thousands of eye witnesses
are saying? They've experienced it -- you haven't. Correct?

What would the "hours of the day" or the "months of the year" possibly have to do with giving
evidence of UFO's...??? How about the distance from a military base? That they appear most
frequently there is fact. They seem to be highly concerned with our blowing ourselves up with
nuclear weapons and it's said that they can switch them OFF.

Talking about "airports," did you read the reports at O'Hare ... I think it was a year ago?

Try MUFON --- I haven't spent a lot of time at their websites, but I think they have accurate
and current info.

And, any time I've seen witnesses discussing what they've seen --- and many of these are local
police officers -- but at any rate also just citizens -- they are clear as a bell on what they've
seen.

I think the Phoenix sightings were phenomenal --- and so were the witnesses!

[SidDithers]

80. ...

Sid

[anigbrowl]

85. Oh, you horrible bully, you.

How can you be so mean. I can see you're a close-minded person who could never appreciate my aura, because enlightened people understand that when you become enlightened you lose your sense of humor and willingness to be challenged. There is no room for such mental constructs any more because you are filled with TRUTH. The people of an obscure civilization knew this and encoded in their sculpture using mystical symbols, but you're too ignorant to understand that.

[JuniperLea]

104. Very funny...

I hope you are having fun.

[SidDithers]

155. Yup, skeptics are all horrible bullies...

nice job in this thread, btw. I've enjoyed reading your posts.

Anything to hold back the tide of woo on this board gets full marks from me. :hi:

Sid

[DemExpat]

82. Very interesting, this.

:kick:

DemEx

[and-justice-for-all]

99. I am going to call it Space Debris....

Which is in low Earth orbit, the Sun reflects off of the material leaving you with the impression of an Alien UFO. The material is still technically a UFO, because you do not know EXACTLY what it is, but it is not of the unknown Alien kind.

Until they land or we get a confirmed signal, I do not think that what people are seeing is 'Alien'. Why fly all this way to hover in the sky and make NO contact? I would not travel millions of light years to just sight see, so why would something with enough intelligence to travel around the Galaxy?

[truth2power]

118. I appreciate your efforts, NJCher. I don't know why there has to be

so much ridicule whenever this issue is raised. Why not just let it go if it's not someone's cup of tea?

From my own point of view, I think the vast majority of these sightings are of actual craft of some sort. Not balloons (mylar or otherwise) swamp gas, lenticular clouds, or any of a number of other explanations.

Too many credible people, over too many years, have reported these sightings. From my reading and research it seems to me that these craft must be powered by an anti-gravity propulsion system, thus the reports, especially regarding the huge triangular craft, that they're virtually silent and seem able to float motionless, directly overhead, and then accelerate at amazing speeds. (I would encourage people to research the triangles and electrogravitics. Fascinating!)

As far as where they originate, I don't know for sure. If our government were to announce, tomorrow, that extra-terrestrials were visiting earth, I think I would say, "How cool!" I don't expect I would be jumping out a window or anything. Life's possibilities amaze me.

More likely, IMO, is that these are military, US and/or others. It seems not in dispute that the B2 bomber charges its wing leading edge and its jet stream to high voltage, which appears to set up an artificial gravity field, thus operating on a kind of hybrid jet/anti-gravity propulsion system.

I don't see why these things are seen to be so "out-there". I think it was Arthur C. Clarke who said that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Lots of things are possible.

I'm not proselytizing here. If people think this is a lot of hogwash, that's ok. We all have to follow our own path. This is just what makes sense to me.

[anigbrowl]

121. FYI...

try googling for 'ionized gas radar scattering' and you'll find plenty of sources about this well known phenomenon. Meteors usually leave a trail of ionized gas as they burn their way through the atmosphere, for example, and this hinders observations. Whether charging the leading edge is part of the same process or meant to reduce drag reduction is unclear.

It's almost certainly not 'anti-gravity', however. You can build electrogravitic devices pretty easily and cheaply, but they're not true anti-gravity, because all they're doing is ionizing the air (which is why such devices have almost no lift - the air flow involved is tiny). They don't work at all in a vacuum - you could build a small one and put it in depressurized bell jar if you wanted to verify this. No air = nothing to ionize = no source of lift.

[JuniperLea]

140. As if on cue... eom

[anigbrowl]

150. Right, shoot me for providing more information that someone could actually use

At least I put a name to a phenomenon and told the poster about a simple science experiment they could perform to learn more about it. How awful of me. Clearly I should have just written some cant about the limitations of science.

[JuniperLea]

141. I agree...

We don't know much at all, and when we discuss, there's always some know-it-all all too willing to piss in everyone's Wheaties, and no one learns a damn thing. Especially not the know-it-all. There's a HUGE difference between dispelling a notion and tromping on people because one thinks they are superior.

I know a lot of very intelligent people, and without exception, they say we don't know enough about a lot of things to be drawing any conclusions one way or the other. So the intelligent thing to do is keep an open mind... and don't squash what you might think is a little thought. People need to be allowed to think and discuss without being trampled under foot.

[defendandprotect]

188. It was our government/CIA which devised the "ridicule" technique . . .

of keeping this subject taboo ---

People who don't think for themselves go along with it ---

it's an easy out for them.

[anigbrowl]

214. Have you ever heard of Socrates?

So, you think the ridicule technique was invented by the CIA, huh? That explains a lot.

[defendandprotect]

222. Was Socrates trying to dis UFO's . . .???

I didn't know that . . .

Lilith also used ridicule ---

and I imagine we could go back much further ---

but I was talking about UFO's . . .

[lovuian]

123. We will see more and more Disclosures so those who

don't believe they are going to be surprised

The Truth is out there

The Vatican got on the same page and said the extraterestial is our brother

[defendandprotect]

139. Hi -- what did I miss?

The Vatican got on the same page and said the extraterestial is our brother

I know the Vatican has said that Bibical references to "angels" could be aliens and
they have no problem with that --- !!

Is this something new?

Also -- they were threatening to release their records on UFO's . . . any idea what happened?

[anigbrowl]

152. Google is your friend (link inside)

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=5065245&page=1
http://padrefunes.blogspot.com/

Of course this has nothing to do with astronomers lately finding planets around remote stars and investigating the soil of mars to see if it ever supporter life. That would be too obvious.

[defendandprotect]

156. Thanks . . .

I "faved" it but took a quick look at the Christian report . . .

I think it's interesting that they're still prepared to JUDGE whether the aliens are "sinning"
or not --- !!!

Well . . . re space . . .

Could exploring space be as boring as we've been shown . . . ??
I have a feeling that the info is a little backed up -- !!!

Thanks -- interesting --- keep at it!

[Swamp Rat]

126. Everything is going as planned.

[JuniperLea]

134. LOL!!! Turbonegro has a sense of humor too... unlike some DUers!

HUSH EARTHLING -
You're not worthy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
You reek of turdy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
You flip me the birdy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
Now you gonna hurty -

HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH -

HUSH EARTHLING -
I've come a long way -
HUSH EARTHLING -
To make you my prey -
HUSH EARTHLING -
I've come to stay -
HUSH EARTHLING -
You taste like your gay -

HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH -

(Break) -

HUSH EARTHLING -
Do you want to die? -
HUSH EARTHLING -
Then look me in thee eye -
HUSH EARTHLING -
I come from the planet Szurdelifoy -
HUSH EARTHLING -
AHH your such a girlie boy -

HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH EARTHLING -
HUSH -

[defendandprotect]

132. Thanks for the updates - keep at it ---

I'm always very interested in UFO info ---

and crops circles, though they're keeping that very quiet these days ---

I like to catch the UFO programming whenever I can ---

Miss the old program "Sightings" ---

they're tamping everything down now ---

[gforces]

167. CHECK THIS OUT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0QtdpgT41k&NR=1


proof we are being invaded anytime soon

[defendandprotect]

190. The lanterns are delightful . . . and you thought they were UFO's . . . ???

[Phoonzang]

149. Phantom clown phenomenon!!!!

Sometime in the last century, there was a series of reported attacks by clowns wielding sleeping gas. These attacks never really happened and were most likely a case of rumor and mass hysteria. However....just because these incidents didn't happen doesn't mean that there aren't clowns, or that there haven't been evil clowns that have attacked people.

So...just because 95 percent of UFO sightings can be explained away as misidentifications, hoaxes, or the like, doesn't meant that some of them aren't alien space craft. It would be foolish to throw away the baby with the bathwater. The tiny baby in a bathtub the size of Lake Erie.

Er...don't ask me why that popped into my head or why I'm bothering to post it. I'm kind of tired and drugged up on cold medicine. I'm not even sure if there was a rash of phantom clown attacks or if my cold-addled mind spewed forth some nonsensical event. :+

[JuniperLea]

175. Clowns are kinda scary sometimes...

Especially John Wayne Gacy clowns!







There... now you have proof of at least ONE killer clown:)



I believe in the wind too, but I've never seen a picture of it. I'll bet money it exists though.



Now that the InterTubes are flooded with pictures of baby pigeons, I've seen a picture of a baby pigeon. For years and years I'd never seen one, but I would have always bet money on their existence.

[RNdaSilva]

159. Egocentrism...

we are but a speck of sand in the vast universe.

[JuniperLea]

174. I was called what amounts to a religious nutjob upthread for a similar statement...

Love your sig line, btw... very fitting here:)

[Baclava]

200. The bottom line is..."Unless you have seen one with your own eyes..."

....you should remain a doubter.

I had my own personal, up close encounter with a UFO sending down a cone-shaped beam of light near me, in some secluded woods near a cabin I was staying in.....I was outside, at night, smoking a cig.

It was on a dark night with no mooon, all's I could see was the light moving closer, directed downward from above, till it shut off suddenly, then I saw the oval shape blocking out the stars overhead. It shifted position long enough to see a row of blue lights circling the top half of the disc...then disappeared quickly straight off into the distance. No sound, except for a faint buzzing.

At first I thought it must be a helicopter with a seachlight...noooooo. Then the feelings hit me... I was frozen in one spot at it's approach. The hairs and tingeling up the spine I will never forget....at closest approach, it was maybe 50 yds away, at a few hundred ft vertically above the trees. About the size of a basketball, maybe bigger, held at arms length. The whole episode lasted maybe 3-4 min. I had a flashlight with me and almost turned it on to shine it upwards...NO! don't do it! I still get chills thinking about it.

I reported it and I was directed to a guy who wanted to put it is his book, with drawings. I declined.

[Dukkha]

215. I wonder how many militant UFO skeptics believe in a “God”

They’ll vehemently mock and ridicule any eyewitness account or the vast amount of psychical evidence available, be it from the public or the government. But they will adamantly believe without question that some magical being in the sky created the whole universe.

I live by the militant agnostic mantra "I don't know and neither do you." it applies to all the unexplained phenomena in the universe.

[anigbrowl]

216. I have no idea, have you tried to find out?

Most of the people I know who are interested but skeptical are, like myself, agnostic or atheist. I presume you mean physical evidence rather than psychical evidence, but unfortunately the physical evidence doesn't seem that good to me. Lot so pictures of lights or objects in the sky that are hard to identify, but it's a big leap from 'I can't identify this object' to 'it's a spaceship!!!!'. But as seen above, believers get mad when you try to apply more rigorous standards and resort to fallacious arguments...rather like religious people.

As I said elsewhere, this conversation reminds me in a depressing way of the people who were convinced by Powell's speech at the UN that Iraq had WMD. A lot of people would rather believe the dramatic explanation than the prosaic one. Look how well that worked out for them. UFOs are the WMD of the natural world...lots of people are sure they exist, but they have a million reasons why it's so hard to get a decent picture of one. Normal rules of evidence? Forget it.

[Baclava]

220. "I don't know and neither do you"

Good answer.

But I have to warn all you non-believers....

All y'all will be crawling like worms to beg me for a ride when I'm a Slavemaster on one of the breeding pen ships.