Aliens, yay or nay?

[420mike]

so if you have debunked it all Anti, what's your explanation for some of the statements provided under oath in the disclosure project? that there seems to be quite strong evidence of something out of the ordinary going on. or are they all doing it with some kind of ulterior motive? it's just quite a large group of normally reliable people all telling of events that would lead one to believe they have had some kind of alien encounter, or at least encountered tech thats unknown to the general public. did you already cover this? might have missed it. but like i said it's a large group, consisting of pilots both military and commercial, radar operators, police, firefighters, military. what are they all seeing up there?

Its kinda pointless interacting with Anti on this issue. Seems to have his(or her) mind made up and is just looking to argue and stir the pot. No thanks.

 

[Jellyfish]

But Sagen is a crock.

Why is Carl Sagen a crock? He always seemed pretty credible to me.

 

[longearedfriend]

for sure

I welcome them with open arms

 

[Sóley]

What is old, is now made new again.

Resonate THAT.

 

[Anti]

Its kinda pointless interacting with Anti on this issue. Seems to have his(or her) mind made up and is just looking to argue and stir the pot. No thanks.

Much easier to piss and moan about what a dick I am than to put up some kind of credible evidence for your claims.

I've stated my open-mindedness many times. Have yet to see any actual evidence show up in the thread. Lots of people claiming to have seen the evidence, but damn little of it in the thread.

As far as whether I've debunked whatever gaiusmarius posted about... I haven't seen it yet. How can I respond without watching it first?


I found the website (http://www.disclosureproject.org/). Would you care to point me to a specific claim on the site, or am I expected to read the whole thing before offering an opinion?

 

[legalizeDK]

your last sentence says it all

 

[Anti]

your last sentence says it all

So I'm being unreasonable unless I sit down and read every bit of literature on their website, buy all the DVDs they want to sell me and then eat it all up like a good little believer?

it's completely unreasonable for me to ask the person who suggested the site to point me to ONE piece of VERY convincing evidence?

Really?

 

[HempKat]

Bomb, you are so busy trying to find something to argue with me about that you never stop to question exactly WHAT my argument is.

Yes. I am aware there are pictures, videos and testimonials out there. I've seen a lot of them. What I haven't seen is anything that is REMOTELY convincing.

In the spirit of keeping an open mind, I am asking people to PRESENT that evidence. Nobody is required to do so, but there's nothing wrong with me ASKING, is there?

Especially in the "Aliens, yay or NAY" thread.

If people want to say "I believe in aliens no matter what you say" I won't argue. But if people claim to KNOW (and several have) I am going to ask for evidence.

It's very reasonable.

I am participating in this thread for fun.

The problem I got with the stance you're taking is that you are making yourself the judge of what is and isn't evidence. Now that in and of itself isn't necessarily bad but what I'm trying to get you to see is that just because you can point to something that seems to debunk the evidence doesn't necessarily mean it's not evidence.

Like in that video a few pages back. They claim to debunk the notion that the work was done by Alien technology because they can show evidence of how humans in fact may have done it, even there on site, such as molds for the metal tools that would be needed. While convincing it doesn't actually disprove the alien theory it just makes it seem less likely. Having not been there at the time we can't say for certain what happened. For all we know aliens came when the natives were trying to build it but they were having difficulties and so the aliens did it for them and taught them how they could do it for themselves in the future if they were so inclined. I'm not suggesting that is what actually happened though just pointing out your evidence these alien theories aren't true is no more conclusive then the evidence they are true.

We like to think our Archeological Sciences are pretty accurate and in some instances it probably is. There have been enough mistakes made over the years however, and discovered much later thereby altering theories on certain things of the past, such that we have to be somewhat skeptical even about the things we think are proof. For a quick example, I forget the speciecs but there was a type of dinosaur that was believed to have existed and even skeletons found and put on exhibit but then it turned out the skull was actually found seperate from the body. Later on it was discovered that the skull was matched to the wrong body and the dinosaur we once were sure existed turned out to have never existed at all, at least not that we have any evidence of. Actually I decided to look it up rather then have you just take my word for it, it was what we once thought of as the Brontosaurus that never existed here's a link with the history of how the mistake happened.

http://www.npr.org/2012/12/09/166665795/forget-extinct-the-brontosaurus-never-even-existed

You keep claiming your being open minded by asking for evidence but if your going to just say someone elses opinion disproves anothers opinion then that's not being terribly open minded.

 

[forester]

If there anything like the greys lol the greys are from sci fi movies they are not real ffs

Jee whiz, sorry Dr Bill Cooper, I wasn't aware that you are the doyen of extraterrestrial/temporal/dimensional life.

Seeing as the "greys" are a pretty common part of the whole aliens mythos I thought I would give my two cents on them (if they are real the likely background in my view). A lot of people who claim to have interacted with aliens seem to think they have interacted with what we would call they greys. Should their accounts be disregarded purely because that is the imagery and form that Sci Fi has picked up on?

You seem pretty condescendingly certain the greys aren't real ("ffs") so why don't you deign to inform us mere plebs of which alien reports are the "real" ones.

Try contributing instead of being an unimaginative wet blanket.

 

[forester]

So no evidence, then?

There still isn't any hard evidence that Lance Armstrong was a doper. Apart from testimony, including his own, he would still be glorious 7 time champ.

Absence of evidence and all that....

 

[bill cooper]

Jee whiz, sorry Dr Bill Cooper, I wasn't aware that you are the doyen of extraterrestrial/temporal/dimensional life.

Seeing as the "greys" are a pretty common part of the whole aliens mythos I thought I would give my two cents on them (if they are real the likely background in my view). A lot of people who claim to have interacted with aliens seem to think they have interacted with what we would call they greys. Should their accounts be disregarded purely because that is the imagery and form that Sci Fi has picked up on?

You seem pretty condescendingly certain the greys aren't real ("ffs") so why don't you deign to inform us mere plebs of which alien reports are the "real" ones.

Try contributing instead of being an unimaginative wet blanket.

Theres nothing wrong with imagination as long as you can tell the difference from that and reality which seems to be a problem for you and a lot of others in this thread it's a debate on whether aliens exsist or not and if you claim to know they do you should not have a problem with backing your claims with evidence yet not one person has posted anything that is remotely close to evidence i wonder why lol and i have contributed try watching the video i posted which debunk's a lot of the nonsense which gets spouted about ancient aliens which i might add is backed up with studys by people who actually work in the field they are discussing not just random quotes that can't be backed up by history channel nut jobs or story's by cranks with over active imaginations

 

[High Country]

This is a bullshit thread.

 

[gaiusmarius]

Much easier to piss and moan about what a dick I am than to put up some kind of credible evidence for your claims.

I've stated my open-mindedness many times. Have yet to see any actual evidence show up in the thread. Lots of people claiming to have seen the evidence, but damn little of it in the thread.

As far as whether I've debunked whatever gaiusmarius posted about... I haven't seen it yet. How can I respond without watching it first?


I found the website (http://www.disclosureproject.org/). Would you care to point me to a specific claim on the site, or am I expected to read the whole thing before offering an opinion?

the thing is, it's a whole bunch of people who tell their experiences. all of them are prepared to testify under oath to what they witnessed. so to get a good picture it helps to look at them all to really see how strong their similar testimony makes the case for at least some un known technology being use in our air space. it's annoying how the word ufo has come to mean space ship with aliens inside, when actually it means unidentified flying object.

ps i suppose you could youtube the most convincing testimony of the disclosure project. you could watch the whole thing on youtube for free no need to buy their videos. seems to me it's either a psy op funded by the rockerfellers, or those people believe what they are saying and want others to know that something is up.

 

[gaiusmarius]

Theres nothing wrong with imagination as long as you can tell the difference from that and reality which seems to be a problem for you and a lot of others in this thread it's a debate on whether aliens exsist or not and if you claim to know they do you should not have a problem with backing your claims with evidence yet not one person has posted anything that is remotely close to evidence i wonder why lol and i have contributed try watching the video i posted which debunk's a lot of the nonsense which gets spouted about ancient aliens which i might add is backed up with studies by people who actually work in the field they are discussing not just random quotes that can't be backed up by history channel nut jobs or story's by cranks with over active imaginations

the problem with saying if someone knows that aliens exists, they should have no problem proving it, is that seeing is believing for most humans. so those folks that have some kind of encounter, will feel sure that they know that alien life exists, why because they saw it with their own eyes, i.e. abductions. so for that person, he knows what he saw, but he can't prove the truth of his words to another who wasn't there. so asking for proof from those who supposedly know, will not end this debate when they can't bring proof to the table. in the end no one can doubt that some thing strange is going on, there are just too many people claiming some kind of encounters for it all to be bs.

 

[bill cooper]

the problem with saying if someone knows that aliens exists, they should have no problem proving it, is that seeing is believing for most humans. so those folks that have some kind of encounter, will feel sure that they know that alien life exists, why because they saw it with their own eyes, i.e. abductions. so for that person, he knows what he saw, but he can't prove the truth of his words to another who wasn't there. so asking for proof from those who supposedly know, will not end this debate when they can't bring proof to the table. in the end no one can doubt that some thing strange is going on, there are just too many people claiming some kind of encounters for it all to be bs.

How many people believe in the bible or the quran doses that make them true ? There's alot of crazy people out there especially in the US ! Personally i think sleep paralysis explains abductions far better than aliens and if i seen something in the sky i could not explain my first thoughts would be the military or meteors or whatever which involves far less of a leap of faith than aliens which i have only seen in fictional tv programs and going by the vast distances between us and the nearest stars it seems impossible so until i see some proof to make me feel otherwise i'm calling bullshit

 

[gaiusmarius]

The problem I got with the stance you're taking is that you are making yourself the judge of what is and isn't evidence. Now that in and of itself isn't necessarily bad but what I'm trying to get you to see is that just because you can point to something that seems to debunk the evidence doesn't necessarily mean it's not evidence.

Like in that video a few pages back. They claim to debunk the notion that the work was done by Alien technology because they can show evidence of how humans in fact may have done it, even there on site, such as molds for the metal tools that would be needed. While convincing it doesn't actually disprove the alien theory it just makes it seem less likely. Having not been there at the time we can't say for certain what happened. For all we know aliens came when the natives were trying to build it but they were having difficulties and so the aliens did it for them and taught them how they could do it for themselves in the future if they were so inclined. I'm not suggesting that is what actually happened though just pointing out your evidence these alien theories aren't true is no more conclusive then the evidence they are true.

We like to think our Archeological Sciences are pretty accurate and in some instances it probably is. There have been enough mistakes made over the years however, and discovered much later thereby altering theories on certain things of the past, such that we have to be somewhat skeptical even about the things we think are proof. For a quick example, I forget the speciecs but there was a type of dinosaur that was believed to have existed and even skeletons found and put on exhibit but then it turned out the skull was actually found seperate from the body. Later on it was discovered that the skull was matched to the wrong body and the dinosaur we once were sure existed turned out to have never existed at all, at least not that we have any evidence of. Actually I decided to look it up rather then have you just take my word for it, it was what we once thought of as the Brontosaurus that never existed here's a link with the history of how the mistake happened.

http://www.npr.org/2012/12/09/166665795/forget-extinct-the-brontosaurus-never-even-existed

You keep claiming your being open minded by asking for evidence but if your going to just say someone elses opinion disproves anothers opinion then that's not being terribly open minded.

you killed the brontosaurus HK! arg! lol....i always liked the brontosaurus.

in the end it comes down to which theory is more plausible according to current understanding. alien lasers and levitation or human back breaking hard work and basic skills? how many times have you seen aliens making monuments or buildings? how many times have you seen masses of mankind making monuments or buildings? so although we can't say with 1000% certainty that aliens did not make those stone monuments we have to say that the likelihood is infinitely small compared to the likely hood of them being man made.

 

[420mike]

To me the Sumerian texts speak volumes towards the probability of alien interaction on this planet. Also, there is no real absolute proof without an alien coming up and introducing itself. The fact is that (IMO) there is so much compelling evidence that it seems unlikely (once again IMO) that there is any other explanation than alien intervention. I am not going to sit here and quote specific evidence or information however it is out there and it is overwhelming (IMO). That said, it would certainly be arrogant of us, as a people, to think that we are the only life in this universe...

 

[bill cooper]

To me the Sumerian texts speak volumes towards the probability of alien interaction on this planet. Also, there is no real absolute proof without an alien coming up and introducing itself. The fact is that (IMO) there is so much compelling evidence that it seems unlikely (once again IMO) that there is any other explanation than alien intervention. I am not going to sit here and quote specific evidence or information however it is out there and it is overwhelming (IMO). That said, it would certainly be arrogant of us, as a people, to think that we are the only life in this universe...

no one is saying we are the only life in the universe but saying they are visiting the earth is a totally different thing
I take it when you say the sumerian texts speak volumes you are talking about zacharia stitchins translation which has been proven to be made up nonsense by people who actually study sumerian texts for a living can you even post one thing that's not explainable without the need for alien intervention ,just one ?

 

[420mike]

Not gonna go there with confrontational people. I have my reasons for believing what I believe and am not trying to convince anyone. Do your own research and come to your own conclusions.

 

[bill cooper]

Not gonna go there with confrontational people. I have my reasons for believing what I believe and am not trying to convince anyone. Do your own research and come to your own conclusions.

What a suprise