UFO Phenomenon - Any real scientific material

Rob Humanoid

dyer wrote: »

Which is exactly why people are looking for an alternative explanation

The Drake equation is fun to play with, but i think there are too many unknown variables for it to have any scientific validity.

This is it... But my alternative explanation is good old military flares. It just fits the bill from what I've seen and read also.

Yep, I agree with the Drake Equation. Too many variable and we didn't know quite as much back then.

The whole FTL thing tho' is very contentious tho'...Even if its plausible it does'nt means its actually possible (due to certain physical laws). it's not something that's easily answered by myself, as I'm not a physicist. Although it's always interesting one to ponder.

I still don't believe we've ever been visited tho'...Even if there was alien life with that Hi-tech. As the universe is absolutely vast so they may never even detect us.

But if hard evidence ever comes to light, I'll definitely change my mind. I really do think that if they were here we'd know. I feel that they would make their presence known. I really don't buy into the whole Alien Abduction conspiracy phenomena tbh.

Cheers,

Rob.

o1s1n

maccored wrote: »

Theres the problem there I think. In reality, no-one needs to prove anything to anyone. People really should understand what they 'believe' in from studying the subject themselves - not rely on someone else to 'prove' it to them.

Sorry but what? That's absolute gibberish!

If you want to believe in something yourself, fair enough. However don't come to me saying X exists without substantiated proof or you'll get laughed out of the room.

If someone else can disprove something to you then why would you believe in it yourself? That doesn't make any sense. (unless you have some blind faith religious type thing going on)

Surely you want to believe what is factual, right? you seem like a logical person?

Why would you believe something unless it was fact?

dyer

Rob Humanoid wrote: »

This is it... But my alternative explanation is good old military flares. It just fits the bill from what I've seen and read also.

I can't say here nor there, because i wasn't there.. so my opinion about it is just that, an opinion.. i wish i was there and had witnessed it myself. There are discrepancies in the time frame though.. the flares appeared 2hrs later in a different location and this was given as the legitimate explanation. There is an account of a pilot and his wife who saw both the craft and the flares. There are witnesses who say they saw the underside of the craft..and described it as being bigger than a football field, with other characteristics, as in a solid object, with form, so did they imagine all of that?

I've read about two studies done on the flares.. one scientist who said they categorically were not flares, and another who said they definitely were. Where's the science in that?

The US employed a rigid sceptic (who was a physicist iirc) to cut down every ufo story that emerged back in the days of project blue book, the usual.. it was a flare, a star, meteorite, balloon, sirius on the horizon etc.. funny thing is, that man now believes in extraterrestial phenomenon. His job was to say these things didn't and could not possibly exist. Btw the usual 1% that isn't identified being thrown around is far off the mark.. its actually more in the 30-40% with credible witnesses from the statistics ive come across. To cut a long story short, if they were doing it then, why dont people understand theyre very much doing it now?

All i'm saying is, don't believe everything you read. Like it or not, people are not being told the truth. It took i think 10 years for some pilot to come along and say he was on a training mission and dropped said flares at the end of his run.. flying warthogs no less.. dont you think someone might have heard them if they were there there? The initial response from the military when all of this happened was that they had nothing going on.. but they later recanted that story and said someone 'didn't check the right logs'.. and then the flare debacle began.. as if its totally normal to drop flares over an urban city. I might be wrong, been a while since i delved into this, but i think two f-16s were scrambled that night as well. You don't scramble two jets to chase flares do you..

Like i said, you cant trust the american military, or anyone they employ, as long as they are employed. That's not some kind of conspiracy theory, it's written in their contract.. it's how they operate. It's only when the people who worked there and have retired, and knew what happened, and want to share the truth, that things eventually come to light. But nobody seems to be listening. I don't blame anyone though, i believe because of my experiences.. if i hadn't had those experiences, i'd still be of the 'yeah life in the universe is not only possible but 100% probable, but i don't believe it because i've never seen it and there's no proof' ..seeing is believing.

If you bothered to check the link i gave ya in an earlier post.. the only scientific study ever carried out on ufo's by France's equivalent of NASA came to the conclusion that they were real, as in, the craft they had monitored and chased in their airspace, were not of this earth... while the american study, pretty much said 'nothing to see here, move along now'.. that particular study being funded by the USAF.

I really have nothing else to add, i hope one day all of you sceptics are fortunate enough to have your minds blown out of the proverbial water

ps. im throwing these in ad lib, but i think it's something anyone with any interest in this subject should see.. (scroll down to the bottom and click on the vids)

Millennium Simulation
Millennium Simulation II

if you're lazy just click here
and here.. these are mathematical models of the galaxies in our universe, how matter is distributed , and how theyre all connected by this unforseen force called dark matter (the yellow stuff) we're still trying to figure out.

bare in mind, if you watch either of the above, the bright spots that you are seeing aren't stars, they're galaxies.

and perhaps.. one of my favourites..

in case you didnt know, the blacked out areas are literally because our own galaxy blocks that out (we can basically only look up and down from our place in the milky way).. but theyre working on xrays and things to allow us to see through those clouds.. even more interesting, they thought it took a very long time for spiral galaxies like ours to form (that would be evolved enought to harbour life), theyve discovered spiral galaxies quite close to the moment of creation, or as far as science allows.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17jymDn0W6U

Rob Humanoid

I can see this going round and round.

I've not much to add either from my perspective. When I see proof (or hard evidence) from a broad scientific consensus I'll reconsider my position. But until then, as far as I'm concerned - There is some form of alien life out there, BUT I don't think they've ever visited us.

Ta da...

IRWolfie-

dyer wrote: »

The Drake equation is fun to play with, but i think there are too many unknown variables for it to have any scientific validity.

The Drake equation was designed to be a gimmick to use in presentations as part of SETI, not to have any rigorous scientific validity

dyer

Rob Humanoid wrote: »

Ta da...

I can understand that, the whole subject has an air of circular reasoning.. just not when you've seen it yourself though. It's only the most important thing that has ever happened to humanity, but who cares, live your life and forget about it, it's only wishful thinking, after all. We're all way too smart to let something so significant fly over our heads.. aren't we!

Rob Humanoid

dyer wrote: »

It's only the most important thing that has ever happened to humanity, but who cares, live your life and forget about it, it's only wishful thinking, after all. We're all way too smart to let something so significant fly over our heads.. aren't we!

'Has happened'? I think you're the one getting into wishful thinking territory there matey. :rolleyes:

maninasia

Dyer has had a couple of UFO sightings, what he saw seemed to be 'out of this world', so yeah from his perspective he may be correct.

I try to look at this from an evolutionary perspective. I don't know why life would stop and not spread through the entire galaxy. Everything on Earth points to life evolving and spreading to access new resources under the pressure of competition. Darwin had it pretty much figured out 200 years ago.

I've given rough numbers earlier for travel at sub par life speeds
* 500,00-1,000,000 years for an intelligent civilisation/life form to spread through the galaxy in a directed way
** 1 million years - 10 million years in a haphazard manner


So I believe the probability that other forms of life are or have been in the vicinity to have been extremely high. Why haven't we detected them?

These are my theories

1) Our limited technological reach is the main factor.
2) Much of the life is microbial, and perhaps living subsurface like Earth but on other planets, rocky bodies etc.
3) We haven't recognized other form of life that is exotic to Earth, perhaps plasma based, or microbes that don't use nucleic acids or proteins.
4) The other lifeforms are so advanced they can easily avoid detection by us
5) We have been cordoned off as per the zoo hypothesis
6) The life forms are in our face but we simply don't recognize them as living things.

okioffice84

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AlutIvGAZw

Rob Humanoid

Looks like the Governor has also been taken in as well by the military flares - Maybe he's going to write a book or charge for appearances...It's a rather lucrative industry I hear.

I can't remember the name of the documentary I saw, but they had a decent skeptic (for once) and he showed a shot of where the infamous 'V' would have been during the daytime. At night, what you can't see, as the flares start winking out, is that they are disappearing behind a mountain range. Which when overlayed with the day shot, the lights wink out perfectly within the mountains silhouette.

For more, have a listen to Skeptoid's podcast on it. It's very interesting indeed.

@Maninasia,

I'm sure Dyer believes what he saw, but unfortunately its only an anecdote to me, so it carries little no weight (with no disrespect to Dyer intended here).

I don't quite agree with some of your own theories tbh (again, no offense intended here).

I'd agree that currant technology is one of the big limiting factors, as well as physics and the infrequency of intelligent life itself. It's possible to 'miss' some exotic lifeforms I'm sure. However, when they have such incredible technology we can clearly see that there would be intelligence behind it. While I've said that I do believe intelligent life exists out there. I don't believe they have visited us based on the evidence presented so far. It may well happen in the future...

Also, if they did possess that technology, I'm sure they could easily remain 'invisible' to us (as you said). But why would they? Alien abduction, cattle mutilations, hybrids or resource stealing. I think these are all fabrications of the human mind. Why cordon us off? Surely, they can't think we will be a threat to them... I just don't see it myself.

maninasia

The idea of the zoo hypothesis is not that we are a threat to them, but they are a threat to us. In our history pretty much every encounter with a more advanced civilization or more technologically advanced species has ended disastrously for the original population.

Rob Humanoid

maninasia wrote: »

The idea of the zoo hypothesis is not that we are a threat to them, but they are a threat to us. In our history pretty much every encounter with a more advanced civilization or more technologically advanced species has ended disastrously for the original population.

Ah, I stand corrected, apologies. So, observing from a far?

Alas, it's not something that can easily be tested.

maninasia

Rob Humanoid wrote: »

@Maninasia,

I'm sure Dyer believes what he saw, but unfortunately its only an anecdote to me, so it carries little no weight (with no disrespect to Dyer intended here).

I don't quite agree with some of your own theories tbh (again, no offense intended here).

I'd agree that currant technology is one of the big limiting factors, as well as physics and the infrequency of intelligent life itself. It's possible to 'miss' some exotic lifeforms I'm sure. However, when they have such incredible technology we can clearly see that there would be intelligence behind it. While I've said that I do believe intelligent life exists out there. I don't believe they have visited us based on the evidence presented so far. It may well happen in the future...

Also, if they did possess that technology, I'm sure they could easily remain 'invisible' to us (as you said). But why would they? Alien abduction, cattle mutilations, hybrids or resource stealing. I think these are all fabrications of the human mind. Why cordon us off? Surely, they can't think we will be a threat to them... I just don't see it myself.

I'd agree there is no obvious evidence we have been visited so far. However I'd say it's very likely we have been visited in the past, or at least Earth has, simply due to the age of the universe, 14 billion years old, life was established on Earth 4.5 billion years ago. And if were visited in the past, we are probably on their radar right now. Why we don't know they are around, I've proposed some ideas above. It's a possibility that a rare fraction of UFO sightings could account for these visitors.

Why would these advanced lifeforms/AI units make the odd appearance in this case, if indeed they are around? According to the law of entropy and Heisenberg's principle, everything breaks down over time and nothing is 100% predictable. In fact the more complex the system the harder it is to predict all future possibilities. Therefore even though they have far more advanced technology at their disposal, they are still impacted by wear and tear which needs to be repaired, they need energy and materials, and they sometimes suffer from unpredictable events. They may also have configurations whereby they become visible in certain situations, much like a Stealth aircraf becomes visible close up to an observer and flies slower due to it's aerodynamic profile i.e. they have limits of design, form and function, they are advanced, but not Godlike creatures. If they use their iPhone version 3,000,000 it probably still runs out of juice in one day!

I've given the timelines for spreading through the galaxy at sub light speed, the galaxy is about 100,000 light years across so it's fairly easy to do the math, needless to say spread through the entire galaxy could be achieved fairly easily in the millions to tens of million of years. There's no big assumptions in there, using ion drives and tech just a little bit more advanced that what we have now we could do it too (or at least our robotic probes could). So give it a slow poke civilisation at 20 million years to get around the galaxy. Well it's still only 1/50th of 1 billion years and we've had 4.5 billion years of life on Earth, or 1/225th of time of life on Earth. Now add in perhaps 4.5 billion years previous to life on Earth getting estabished (around universe year 5.5 billion years), they only need 1/450th of the total time allocated to get around the whole galaxy! Once they got around it, they should have mapped it and know what's going on where. So another way to imagine it is needing perhaps 2 days of the year to get around the Earth and map it completely or 1 day of the year in more favourable conditions! Odds are there are civilisations who are well aware of our existence. Are they interested in us? I'd hazard a guess some of them will be.



Other schemes could involve building a quantum teleportation network, whereby all the quantum information of an object is recorded and sent at the speed of light and reconfigured in another location (this process destroys the original object, it's not possible to make copies, nor is it possible to transmit information faster than the speed of light). One could imagine a galactic network of quantum encryption and deciphering stations that had been physically put in places millions of years prior to use. In this manner the artificially intelligent entities could move throughout the galaxy at the speed of light. In a simpler format, they could simply beam new software upgrades or instructions to hardware that has been placed remotely in different parts of the galaxy (much like Curiosity was rebooted with new operating software after landing on Mars), again the communication network would be limited to the speed of light. It doesn't make huge sense to be moving massive objects around if it can be helped, the amount of energy required to accelerate objects increases exponentially until it becomes infinite energy at the speed of light!

Rob Humanoid

Interesting post... But there's a lot of 'could haves' and 'may'. Again not trying to be rude..

As there's no tangible evidence yet. I personally, I still don't think we've been visited now or in the past. Could we in the future? It's possible...Who can say.

Any 'evidence' that have been proposed by the likes of Von Danaken , etc. Is highly dubious at best (not saying that you believe his 'theorys').

Also, trying to predict future tech is notoriously hard, if not near impossible (especially as the prediction goes further into the future).

Cheers,

Rob.

maninasia

I realise there are a lot of unknowns, but at the same time we can work with the knowns to posit theories that make some sense. As pretty much everybody says these days, it would be crazy to think we are the only intelligent civilisation out there. I also think it would be crazy to think that there are only a few, when, given the vast size of the galaxy and the universe, there should be huge numbers of civlisations! We are talking possibly up to the millions.

Some of them are going to get space faring..and when they do that..space is their oyster..just like the fish in the ocean. It's evolution on a large scale, competition for resources and pressure of survival. The species that figure it out get to spread, the ones that don't die. They'll keep going. Now that goes for microbes and non intelligent life forms too. It could also work in terms of microbes seeding the galaxy, and civilisations springing up as these microbes evolve over time to more complex animals with neural networks.

I'm fine with different views on what's going on, as long as people put in the effort to get an UP TO DATE and CURRENT understanding of the universe before saying things are impossible, when they are not. My pet hate is the use of 'distance' and 'speed of light' to say that Earth is isolated. It is not. It is moving very rapidly through the galactic plane AND it is perfectly possible to travel through the entire galaxy over periods of millions of years.

To get back to the technological aspects of why we haven't detected civlisations, it's fairly simple if you switch it around. Right now we haven't succeeded in visually observing a planets atmosphere or satellites directly. We even have trouble picking out orbits of smaller planets. Now imagine if we sat our best telescopes on these newly discovered planets and pointed them back at Earth, they wouldn't be able to detect us either, even though we are putting on a lightshow every night for any denizens of our solar system!

Rob Humanoid

However, it's equally frustrating when someone looks at a blob in the sky (or in a photo) and automatically assumes that it's 'alien in origin' without applying even the simplest bit of critical thinking or analysis before leaping to such a wild conclusion.

It's also pretty frustrating when people make claims about being visited in the past and propose certain theories that say it 'may' be possible.

But for me this is all very simple. You say we've been visited in the past, and I say I'd need proof. You propose a theory that says it's (may be) possible. Just because something is possible doesn't make it probable. I may be struck by a meteorite, doesn't mean I will be (not trying to sound flippant here).

But back to the question, is there any REAL proof that we have been visited in the past or present? I say no, due to lack of tangible evidence.

Cheers,

Rob.

maninasia

Rob, I'd like to qualify a few things, but enjoying this reasonable debate on boards for once .

I'm not saying dogmatically, 100%, 'we have been visited in the past'. What I would say is that 'we have very probably been visited in the past and even now we very probably have others aware of our existence'. Not only me but many scientists including Fermi has posited the same thing over the years (since Fermi opined on this subject we have discovered large numbers of planets, which just makes this probability stronger, not weaker).

Again, as we currently recognise things, we have no proof of being visited by extraterrestrial civilisations. I've given plenty of reasons why that may be the case above (not including the obvious reason, but unlikely in my book, that we have simply never been visited).

As I have mentioned already, our very existence could have depended on microbes landing here from somewhere else, so WE could be the proof, of extraterrestrial life, but we simply haven't figured that out yet.

The evidence as it stands, possibly in the form of rare and legitimate UFO sightings of craft, may not be acknowledged because it is not easily analysable or predictable in nature. This is not regarded as scientific evidence because of these reasons, and you know what, I agree. It's not enough evidence to base a good scientific theory on. Even though I tend to believing some of these reports are legitimate sightings of extraterrestrial craft, it does not give us enough data or material to work with in a scientific sense.

dyer

Rob Humanoid wrote: »

However, it's equally frustrating when someone looks at a blob in the sky (or in a photo) and automatically assumes that it's 'alien in origin' without applying even the simplest bit of critical thinking or analysis before leaping to such a wild conclusion.

In my case Rob, and perhaps many others, it wasn't just a blob in the sky.. it was something that was over my head so close i could have thrown something at it. Everything about how it looked, sounded and maneuvered told me it was something that was not of this earth. It was large.. it was long, it was silent, it had no wings, it had no windows, looked like it was made out of some kind of metallic chrome.. and last but not least, the whole thing was surrounded by what i can only describe as clouds of electromagnetic waves glowing in different colours. These are not the only experiences i've had. Is that tangible evidence? Nope. But considering what we have to go on, i reckon it at least amounts to a little bit.

As far as the military explanations go, again, nope.. there's no way they could do what these things can do. I've seen them fire off into space like laser beams. The speeds they travel, the inertia involved in the turns they take.. it's not possible, even by the most advanced military standards, i don't even think the most secret aircraft in darpa are capable of doing anything like this unless they managed to reverse engineer a downed ufo or something, even then, i don't think there's a single human being alive today capable of flying such a machine.

So you see, it's very healthy to theorise.. because, at least in my view, these things are happening.. it's only a matter of time before we can do it too if we put our minds to it.. and you can bet, behind closed doors, "we" are trying to.

Myrddin

Spotted this in CVPL. I don't know anything about Paul Hellyer, but from someone with a cv such as his, this is very interesting stuff

Rob Humanoid

Hey Dyer,

It's always hard to respond to someone who tells a story like this and not to come across as just being another Skeptical 'naysayer'.

So in fairness, if I had the experience that you had (in the exact same way you said it happened) I'd probably be convinced that we were being visited too - That is, after I tried to have explain it rationally first. So that there is tangible proof for you, but not really for anyone else unfortunately, as you were the only witness.

The unfortunate problem is that no one can verify your story. On boards you come across as genuine person. However, my only assumption, because there's not proof from my perspective, can be that you were mistaken somehow, and misinterpreted the information that you saw. So, I believe that you believe it, if that makes sense? I think that you are one of the genuine UFO guys.

Having such an experience would inspire you (and others) to seek out theories that may explain your encounter. I'd be doing the same thing if I was in you shoes…But I'm not, so I have to interpret your story form a skeptics point of view. And work off a 'null hypothesis' (again I'm not saying you are lying here).

While I think you are genuine in your beliefs. I feel that the vast majority of UFO proponents are either cranks, mistaken or just plain old cash hounds. The first question I always ask myself in these matters is, what will someone gain from making their story public? All too often they have a website, and are writing yet another book or willing to give a lecture (for a bloated fee of course). Unfortunately, people's appetite for Psychics, UFOs, Auras, etc. Is nearly insatiable and this can leave them in a vulnerable position by certain 'snake oil salesman' types. Especially when people want and need to believe in something… I mean, what I wouldn't give to communicate with my Mum one last time. But I know that it's not possible… I'm with Houdini on this one.

A while ago I saw an interview with an Airforce pilot a few years ago, he encountered a UFO. and again, I believe he saw something. He believed it was E.T. in origin. Personally I think he was probably mistaken. Interestingly enough though, he had nearly the same views as myself regarding the majority of the UFO community. He said that 99% were all mistaken, fakers and just in it for the cash. He said that the 1% were actually genuine cases and were probably ET Crafts. He said that he was thoroughly frustrated that most of the genuine cases were getting washed away by the other hog wash that is connately thrown at us (ie, the Bob Lazars of this world).

When I look into some of these famous cases out of interest there's usually some genuine people who were just probably mistaken to begin with. I believe that Jesse Marcel was genuine for example, but probably didn't quite know what he was actually looking at. Interestingly enough tho', he never mentioned aliens per se. That is, he never saw any, but believed the crash was probably ET in origin.

But much later out of the woodwork suddenly came lots of people making all sorts of bizarre claims about little green men, and second crash site, etc. I believe they were telling outright lies for publicity, writing a book, or just to get some cash from a TV appearance.

Same goes for the Wrendalsham forest incident. I believe that Lt. Col. Holt (and the few guys with him that second night if I remember correctly) really believed that the saw a sweeping light, and thought it was alien in origin. However, again more stories 'suddenly appear' that one of the chaps on a different night actually went up an touched the 'triangular craft'. I believe this is untrue, and was a claim made many years after the fact and not the right reasons.

So, even if someone has the best intentions of reporting something there's way too much other dubious material to sift through. As well as dubious science experts to claim all sorts of things including having a plethora of tangible evidence, but yet this evidence is are never peer reviewed. When asked 'why', the predictable response is usually something like, 'the sample is too precious to leave the lab'. Hmmm…

Another interesting case, where I believe the pilots definitely saw something. I can't remember the exact details as I saw it a few years back. But you can clearly here 2 pilots (flying different planes) communicating about a very fast moving cylindrical object. I think it was clocked by the tower as well. One is clearly worried, as it's very close to his position, and moving at incredible speed in a straight line. Not long after the second pilot verifies seeing the same object. It still seems to be traveling in a straight line as well. Personally, I believe they saw some sort of new military aircraft or drone. I say this because it was traveling in a straight line. Plus, that would be my first conclusion, as I see it being more likely.

Anyway, like I said, I think you did see something, but because I wasn't there I can't make an informed decision an what you actually saw. I've not always been a skeptic I did believe in UFOs some years back, but I became increasingly frustrated with the lack of evidence that would never bee presented.

Cheers,

Rob.

Rhys Essien

Rob Humanoid wrote: »

Another interesting case, where I believe the pilots definitely saw something. I can't remember the exact details as I saw it a few years back. But you can clearly here 2 pilots (flying different planes) communicating about a very fast moving cylindrical object. I think it was clocked by the tower as well. One is clearly worried, as it's very close to his position, and moving at incredible speed in a straight line. Not long after the second pilot verifies seeing the same object. It still seems to be traveling in a straight line as well. Personally, I believe they saw some sort of new military aircraft or drone. I say this because it was traveling in a straight line. Plus, that would be my first conclusion, as I see it being more likely.

Id say this is the Japan Airlines cargo plane flying over Alaska that you are refering to.Seems one of the few credible UFO stories.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Air_Lines_flight_1628_incident

Also another pilot here saw one over the English Channel.He is interviewed here by Richard and Judy.

maninasia

I'm a bit of a student of UFO sightings, those two cases have some relation to mirages, and the Japanese captain was supposedly known for jumping ahead to conclusions. But I am not 100% saying he didn't see a genuine UFO either (obviously a mirage is not a flying object).

IMO, there are many better cases which can be used for evidence of something extraordinary in our skies. These cases seemed to cluster in specific periods of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970 and especially notable were the late 40s early 50s, late 60s and early 70s. There was a massive UFO wave in 1973. Even now I have noticed a pattern of reports that are made for the first time about old close up metallic craft sightings, usually they cluster in those years.

http://www.cohenufo.org/UFOWaves-RoleofNICAP-byRichardHall.htm

So here is my favourite case of all time, the Coyne Incident, from 1973.

Dyer will like this one.

Major Coyne's description of the object

"We looked up and saw it stopped right over us," Coyne said. "It had a big, gray metallic-looking hull about 60 feet long." "It was shaped like an airfoil or a streamlined fat cigar. There was a red light on the front. The leading edge glowed red a short distance back from the nose. There was a center dome. A green light at the rear reflected on the hull."

Rob Humanoid

@Rhys E,

Thanks mate, but that's not the one (although it's very interesting)...

The one I saw involved a cylindrical object moving at a very high velocity. And the conversation was between 2 different pilots (the onther was 7 miles behind (if I remember correctly) as well as the aircraft tower. But imo, it was probably some form of experimental (maybe unmanned) aircraft. But both pilots were spooked because of the objects hi velocity, as it's close proximity. In the description they cave it was a long black cylinder.

Cheers,

Rob.

dyer

I understand your frustrations rob, i'm in the same boat to be honest.. even though i've seen things i never thought could possibly exist. You can read as many witness testimonies and books and whatever else, but it will never amount to what it feels like to actually see it with your own eyes, unfortunately that's all we have to go on right now. To be honest, sometimes i wonder if im blessed or cursed because of what ive seen. Blessed i suppose, but it's almost painful because most people don't believe me or think i'm making it up.. and at the very least, want to explain to you that what you saw wasn't what you saw at all, just something arbitrary that you weren't smart enough to figure out or something military that you weren't privileged to know about. So you can understand then, why people who have had these experiences might gravitate towards each other and start to ignore the bias that exists in the world around this topic, or why we might start to imagine the things theyre doing which our common logic and knowledge of everything we know collectively as a species hasnt yet achieved. I've studied science and ive been fascinated with space for as long as i can remember. I don't make hasty decisions without good reason. I have mates with all sorts of backgrounds and degrees and phds in maths, chemistry, marine science, physics, astronomy whatever, i doubt you'd be surprised to hear they don't believe me either.. and that's even more frustrating than talking to people i don't know about it online.

I really wish i could plug my memories into a box and share them with everyone.. but it doesnt quite work like that, but if i could i would, and i would have nothing to hide, i'm pretty sure there are many others out there like me who wouldn't have a problem with it either. I don't feel ashamed for what i've seen and experience, but the world being the way it is today, sure does make you feel like that. You think it's hard to find any truth in this whole thing when you've never seen it yourself? it's a thousand times worse when you have.. believe me.. because then you want to know the truth, you don't just think about it as some kind of second hand story you heard.

I, like many others, have seen these ufo's cross the entire night sky like they were playing with it.. not only that, splitting up into pieces, flying around in circles and coming back together again.. glowing brighter than any star in the sky.. and then zipping around quite literally as fast as you can imagine.. doing right turns at these speeds etc.. ive done the math before, theyve been captured travelling way faster than any known aircraft and doing right angled turns every few seconds without ever slowing down.

Have you ever heard the term "the tyranny of the rocket equation?" if you can imagine an object travelling at that speed with mass.. the amount of energy to bring it to a stop.. never mind making it move in a different direction, especially a right angle (without so much as blinking an eye), is pretty much exponential. That's without making it stop.. just turning on it's heels and continuing as if it didn't care about our silly laws of physics.. and the G's, well it'd be more like, Geez. As you well know, at high velocities, we're only good for one thing, travelling in a straight line at best, and hopefully, without blowing ourselves up.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/tryanny.html

To put it into perspective, if we ever happened to invent any kind of realistically usable ion propulsion drive, it would still take us probably 300 hundred years or more to go out and bring voyager back.. and that's the best we have to offer right now.

I gave up debating this topic online a while back, cause it's utterly futile.. but i will speak about it, because, i do really think it's that important and we shouldn't ignore it.

okioffice84

Do you have a link to a description of what you saw dyer. Don't want you to re-hash it here if you've already done so.

Rob Humanoid

Hey Dyer,

I totally get that you need to talk about your experiences. If I was in the same boat I'd be doing it too, and I also understand your frustration. Like yourself, I never really get into arguments on the net re. belief vs non belief. Because each party already has their own beliefs. So, it's always going to be an uphill struggle either way…

To be honest I only enter a discussion on a purely skeptical forum tbh (a la the Skeptics Corner). I generally don't like discussing the matter with the other side, on a paranormal forum because it's generally futile for both parties.

As I said in my previous post to you and I meant it. If I saw what you saw in the way you said it happened I'd be a believer too. Because, that to me would proof right there. You experience is like a badly smudged photo, or a 'twinkle' in the night sky - as too many people pounce on these days. Simply because they don't know what they are really looking a,t or don't conceive the notion that it could have been faked.

The problem arises again, when you say (or others) that you've seen stuff zipping across the sky doing impossible right angles, etc. Again, there's no proof nothing tangible for me, or any skeptic tbh. There's all sorts of phenomenon in the sky at night that seem to be very strange. Do people really know what they are looking at? It's very hard to gauge speed, distance and speed against a skyline.

Again, I've no problem with people believing what they want, but in a skeptics forum it's always going to be tough for you. Same for me, if I went onto the Mufon website and started posting.

My only problem real problem with some of the UFO community, is that there are some guys and gals out there, that use trickery and lies to make a lot of money. Basically, they prey upon peoples need to believe in something which I think is wrong.

Cheers,

Rob.

djerk

I wiped my last account cause i know lots of ppl inrl that use boards and might be reading my ufo stories and it kind of embarrasses me! thats just my mates.. you can imagine what it would be like for anyone working in the 'field' to talk about any of this. As you can imagine, inrl, theres only a certain amount of people that ive met that you can have this kind of conversations with. I get that you think you know what youre saying, but the reality of it is, any skeptic who hasnt seen it with his or her own eyes cant exactly call bull$hit, because they lack the necessary evidence to tick any of the boxes. Life isn't that simple. We don't even understand our own reason for being alive yet we fight so hard to establish how much we know about nothing. I appreciate the fact that you said you thought i was being honest, but you still demean my experiences by basically insinuating it could have been something normal and predictable, i assure you, it was not. Most skeptics are pretty much demanding solid evidence in some kind of tangible form which could plausibly exist as simply as they imagine the rising sun does every morning or perhaps something they learned in school. Predictable and safe. As we were taught, so long as everyone else believes it, it must be true.

To make a blunt and obvious point, at this stage in my life, i really don't care if people believe in this or not anymore. I'm not here to make anyone believe in anything. I'm actually happier in my life, when i choose to ignore it! but.. in the long run, i'm not very happy with what we're doing to the planet. So is ignorance bliss or what? Are we selectively choosing the easy way out? Is it possible a superior race is visiting us and we still can't put 2+2 together? I actually don't know the answer to that question, i don't have the answer to that question.. all i'm saying is that i've had some pretty extraordinary experiences which led me to believe that we aren't so alone.. or half as smart as we think are.

maccored

djerk wrote: »

I get that you think you know what youre saying, but the reality of it is, any skeptic who hasnt seen it with his or her own eyes cant exactly call bull$hit, because they lack the necessary evidence to tick any of the boxes.

I think the term is 'illusion of knowledge' As Hawking said: “The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.”

Quite a few 'Skeptics' (as in pseudo skeptics/cynics) - and many 'believers' it has to be said - tend suffer this a lot in that they tend to believe certain things dont or do exist, without actually having any knowledge to back it up.

maninasia

Well society is full of people walking around with full on illusions. Probably more than 50% of Irish people are still Christians of some sort, never mind that there is no real logic or evidence to back any of these beliefs handed down from pre scientific revolution days.

Due to this historical hangover it's okay to believe in THOSE wacky theories but RIDICULOUS to believe in the possibility of aliens whizzing around in our skies.

You got to ask yourself, WHICH belief is more outlandish?

Rob Humanoid

maccored wrote: »

Quite a few 'Skeptics' (as in pseudo skeptics/cynics) - and many 'believers' it has to be said - tend suffer this a lot in that they tend to believe certain things dont or do exist, without actually having any knowledge to back it up.

That is true... But then again, the responsibility is on the person who's making the claim in the first place. It's far more likely that you'll get a believer making a statement before the skeptic. That said, a dedicated skeptic should be armed with as much current data as possible.

I would also class myself as a cynic and it's saved my ass quite a few time in life - so it has it's merits too. It's my first 'reality filter' and not just about the paranormal. It gives one great intuition on just everyday living.

maninasia wrote: »

You got to ask yourself, WHICH belief is more outlandish?

Most, and I say this in a general sense, of the Skeptical community do not believe in god or some kind of divine providence. There's are a few exceptions but overall we are pretty well protected from such fallacious beliefs.

Personally, I do NOT accept the term 'agnostic skeptic'. You either believe or don't, and if you 'don't know', then you fall under the agnostic category.

djerk wrote: »

To make a blunt and obvious point, at this stage in my life, i really don't care if people believe in this or not anymore. I'm not here to make anyone believe in anything.

I totally respect your stance here... And I feel the exact same as you do, but on the other end of the scale.

And I'm happy to wait and see what happens also. I mean, what could I do if aliens want to watch the Earth (with that type of technology). We couldn't do anything. It's the type of thing I'll worry about when it happens. Which I doubt will be in the near (or far) future. So, there's no real point in getting in too much of a flap about it.