nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Do you believe in UFOs & flying saucers ?

Hamsterchops

Have you every seen an unidentified flying object?

A UFO of course is just an aerial phenomenon that you can't explain (hence unidentified), & probably not at all connected to little green men from Mars.

So what are UFOs and have you ever seen something in the sky that you couldn't explain?

In the past many people have mistaken aircraft, weather balloons, silver party balloons, and even bright planets in the night sky as UFOs, but of course under scrutiny they usually have a rational & logical explanation. More recently drones have been mistaken as UFOs.

Then in the last month we've had video clips released from the Pentagon actually showing real UFOs filmed darting around at amazing speeds & doing manouvers that would be impossible for any manned craft to do. The G forces would be so powerful as to kill any human occupants, so what was witnessed by the US Navy pilots and the aircraft carrier radar?

Are UFOs terrestrial or extraterrestrial craft?

Illusions or really there, imagination or reality?

What are UFOs !

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ohnonotgmail

silliussoddius wrote: »

Pure woo, invoking him doesn't help the current UFO conversation.

In this Training Session, you'll learn:

Your innate ability to open two-way communication with extraterrestrial civilizations
Authentic tools for making direct contact using consciousness, remote viewing, sound, and light
The science of consciousness, physics of infinite mind, and the universe as a conscious living being
Meditation techniques using Sanskrit mantra, breathing meditation, and advanced techniques in sacred geometry
How we transform the earth through mass consciousness, creating a peaceful, universal civilization that travels among the stars
Practical guidance on how ETs appear and what to look for: trans-dimensional physics and travel, teleportation, and experienced phenomena
How to become an authentic ambassador to the universe: useful guidance on how to organize and implement your own CE-5 Contact team

That is a lot of woo. A LOT.

emo72

Yeah, we'd be better off leaving Greer out of this conversation. I've watched his documentaries work an open mind, but he definitely comes across as a charlatan.

Fuzzyduzzy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well you started by saying that his words in the video were "Nonsense" and then when called to explain that - you have not actually shown anything he has said to be nonsense.

So now you appear to be abandoning that in favour of attacking his character instead. But I suspect if I ask you to explain that - you will similarly fail. But let us try all the same. What has he said or done that shows him to be close minded exactly? Where has he valued his own opinion over evidence exactly?

Or is getting annoyed at the sense of humour of others - and name calling - all you have?

The "tone" you say that in makes it sound huge. But considering the number of people in a city of that size and the time frame involved - it is the opposite. It is hardly anything at all.

That so many people - over such a stretched period of time - would occasionally see something that they themselves can not explain - is statistically uninteresting to be honest.

We are looking at someone who's too engrossed in their own opinion to ever change their mind. The facts are dismissed and silly remarks are made. The same can be said for Neil, although at least he makes a living out of it ðŸ˜

Fuzzyduzzy

Ninthlife wrote: »

Whether he ran one or not doesnt really change his opinion or experience on the subject.

The story behind him having no college degree is stated that it was 'erased' to discredit him. Records show he did work a Los Alamos National Lab

I think that court case actually helped his story, as the judge was denied access to his work and education history which he, while in court under oath, repeated that they were where he studied and worked. That would have been a good time to not comment or come clean.

kingtiger

Ninthlife wrote: »

Steven Greer talks a good bit about conciousness in the documentary Unacknowled

That's the sort of bollocks that makes actual scientific studies of UAPs unpalatable for most scientists

Ninthlife

kingtiger wrote: »

That's the sort of bollocks that makes actual scientific studies of UAPs unpalatable for most scientists

Im not into the consciousness stuff i was just stating to taxAHcruel who said he liked the idea of consciousness that Greer speaks about it.

I watched that documentary, Close Encounters of the 5th Kind, and the consciousness theory wasnt very convincing.

kingtiger

Ninthlife wrote: »

I watched that documentary, Close Encounters of the 5th Kind, and the consciousness theory wasnt very convincing.

I had the misfortune as well to sit through 20 mins of Close Encounters

What a load of sh1te

Ninthlife

kingtiger wrote: »

I had the misfortune as well to sit through 20 mins of Close Encounters

What a load of sh1te

The other I mentioned was the better one, Unacknowledged.

Fuzzyduzzy

https://twitter.com/ufobelievers/status/1404207949774561292?s=20

Hamsterchops

So what was the upshot of this Phoenix event in 1997.

Still Unidentified, still Unexplained?

Fuzzyduzzy

Hamsterchops wrote: »

So what was the upshot of this Phoenix event in 1997.

Still Unidentified, still Unexplained?

Yes it just got left there, ignored. In my opinion the greatest modern mass sighting.

[Deleted User]

Fuzzyduzzy wrote: »

We are looking at someone who's too engrossed in their own opinion to ever change their mind. The facts are dismissed and silly remarks are made. The same can be said for Neil, although at least he makes a living out of it ðŸ˜

So rather than answer the questions I asked you - about the personal comments you are throwing at other people - you have ignored the question and simply repeated the personal comments.

You know repeating something over and over does not magically make it true - right?

What you have not done is shown anything the man said to be "nonsense" or any of the personal attacks on him warranted. You just insult and run basically.

Ninthlife wrote: »

Im not into the consciousness stuff i was just stating to taxAHcruel who said he liked the idea of consciousness that Greer speaks about it.

Of course by "Like it" I would mean it would be cool to live in that kind of universe

I do not "like it" in terms of actually thinking any of that nonsense is remotely true.

Hamsterchops

UFOs are suddenly all the talk in Washington.

After 75 years of taboo and ridicule, serious people can finally discuss the mysterious flying objects, and even skeptics say that's a good thing.

NBC News https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/truth-embargo-ufos-are-suddenly-all-talk-washington-n1270560

[Deleted User]

I think sceptics always thought it was a good thing to discuss the unknown and theorise as to what possible explanations there are.

The only thing sceptics take issue with generally is jumping to conclusions like "I saw something flying - I don't know what it was - therefore aliens"

But I am yet to meet a sceptic who ever said something like "I saw something flying - I don't know what it was - so let's never speak of this again"

[Deleted User]

:pac: Gravity propulsion? Inexplicable physics? Data that suggests the region around some of these craft is colder than the surrounding space?

With all due respect, that is nothing more than an amalgam of half-truths and ill-informed speculation.

What we are dealing with here folks is obviously a 'time propulsion' system that uses crystals to create a time horizon around the craft. During these phases the craft actually moves nowhere in time or space but it appears to 'travel' because the rest of the universe keeps on moving in time and space around it. Quite frankly, it's a lovely design that is also quite economical since time crystals are cheap and the system doesn't require massive engines to travel large distances.

These craft look to us like objects that can move huge distances in earth's atmosphere at incredible speeds. This is only partially correct. What we are actually witnessing are craft that go nowhere while the earth moves around them. Hope this helps.

(Propulsion is a bit of a misnomer since the principle behind these craft is 'let the Universe do the work' but I use the phrase out of kindness to make it easier for earthlets to understand, for the full description please buy my ebook or visit my Patreon 'Alien Patriots for Q' and make a donation.)

Hamsterchops

MeepMeep2021 wrote: »

What we are dealing with here folks is obviously a 'time propulsion' system that uses crystals to create a time horizon around the craft. During these phases the craft actually moves nowhere in time or space but it appears to 'travel' because the rest of the universe keeps on moving in time and space around it. Quite frankly, it's a lovely design that is also quite economical since time crystals are cheap and the system doesn't require massive engines to travel large distances. Hope this helps.

(Propulsion is a bit of a misnomer since the principle behind these craft is 'let the Universe do the work' but I use the phrase out of kindness to make it easier for earthlets to understand, for the full description please buy my ebook or visit my Patreon 'Alien Patriots for Q' and make a donation.)

Hope this helps, really :cool:

Think you've been watching too much Star Trek.

[Deleted User]

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Hope this helps, really :cool:

No good deed goes unpunished. :pac:

steddyeddy

Deleted User wrote: »

I think sceptics always thought it was a good thing to discuss the unknown and theorise as to what possible explanations there are.

The only thing sceptics take issue with generally is jumping to conclusions like "I saw something flying - I don't know what it was - therefore aliens"

But I am yet to meet a sceptic who ever said something like "I saw something flying - I don't know what it was - so let's never speak of this again"

You're classifying sceptics as an homogenous entity. Your characterisation is demonstrably untrue for some individuals. Even a cursory glance at this thread or the broader sceptic world would reveal that some self described sceptics ridicule those for even discussing this subject.

[Deleted User]

steddyeddy wrote: »

You're classifying sceptics as an homogenous entity. Your characterisation is demonstrably untrue for some individuals. Even a cursory glance at this thread or the broader sceptic world would reveal that some self described sceptics ridicule those for even discussing this subject.

Sure I am talking in generalities. There are always exceptions to any generalities. I thought that was a given.

But having said that the word "sceptic" has a very clear definition.

Well actually two if we want to be pedantic. But the older philosophical usage is probably less relevant than the vernacular usage here on this thread and is more akin to what Huxley meant when he created the word "agnostic".

But the definition of sceptic like "a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinion" is pretty clear and if someone is ridiculing anyone for even discussing something - then I question whether you can validly call him sceptical at all.

But we can be sceptic and still ridicule people leaping to conclusions. The people who are taking a video of a few lights - and calling other people arrogant for not falling over and accepting it is aliens - very much deserve our ridicule. That is not mutually exclusive with scepticism. The two can be done entirely in parallel.

But if someone is genuinely being an asswipe - then "sceptic" is not the right label to be using there

Fuzzyduzzy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So rather than answer the questions I asked you - about the personal comments you are throwing at other people - you have ignored the question and simply repeated the personal comments.

You know repeating something over and over does not magically make it true - right?

What you have not done is shown anything the man said to be "nonsense" or any of the personal attacks on him warranted. You just insult and run basically.

Of course by "Like it" I would mean it would be cool to live in that kind of universe

I do not "like it" in terms of actually thinking any of that nonsense is remotely true.

Re-read what I said if it does not make sense.
Honestly, I've read some of your other posts and I can see why he appeals to you so much. Focus on the positives of your interests and not the negatives of other people's interests, that can be a lonely road.

yourdeadwright

Hamsterchops wrote: »

UFOs are suddenly all the talk in Washington.

After 75 years of taboo and ridicule, serious people can finally discuss the mysterious flying objects, and even skeptics say that's a good thing.

NBC News https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/truth-embargo-ufos-are-suddenly-all-talk-washington-n1270560

Smoke & mirrors there hiding something ,It's an look over here & not what we are doing over here job ,

If the US government and the US military really had no idea what was going on they would be at defcon 5 trying to figure it out , it's all way to relaxed,

Sure look at the panic over a virus that 98% of us survive ,

Convinced they are military drones & the military are using the whole oh we don't no what they are either tactic

Fuzzyduzzy

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Smoke & mirrors there hiding something ,It's an look over here & not what we are doing over here job ,

If the US government and the US military really had no idea what was going on they would be at defcon 5 trying to figure it out , it's all way to relaxed,

Sure look at the panic over a virus that 98% of us survive ,

Convinced they are military drones & the military are using the whole oh we don't no what they are either tactic

The same objects with the same characteristics have been reported for 70+ years. This is not a recent weapon or gadget the Americans have invented. My guess is that the grip is loosening on the top security clearance military factions that have had the reigns of this.

Hamsterchops

Fuzzyduzzy wrote: »

The same objects with the same characteristics have been reported for 70+ years. This is not a recent weapon or gadget the Americans have invented. My guess is that the grip is loosening on the top security clearance military factions that have had the reigns of this.

Well said, it's what a lot of 'Newbies" to this topic always overlook, that is the fact that this phenomon has been with us lone before 21st century drones were even thought of.

So many sightings, from "the Foo Fighters" in WWII, right up to the Phoenix incident in 97' long before drones were around, and even if they were, it wouldn't explain many of the sightings.

I admit I don't have a theory myself, and I doubt it's aliens, I know it's not US test vehicles, I also know it cannot be Chinese or Russian, not if you take accounts from several decades ago, so then what are they?

For a while I was going down the ball lightening track [to a dead end], because then we hear US Navy eye witness accounts that these things really are whitish-metallic craft, which takes me back to square one again - So I have zero idea what they are.

Ten days to go till the report is released . . . .

Fuzzyduzzy

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Well said, it's what a lot of 'Newbies" to this topic always overlook, that is the fact that this phenomon has been with us lone before 21st century drones were even thought of.

So many sightings, from "the Foo Fighters" in WWII right up to the Phoenix incident in 97' long before drones were around, and even if they were it wouldn't explain many of the sightings.

I admit I don't have a theory myself, and I doubt it's aliens, I know it's not US test vehicles, I also know it cannot be Chinese or Russian, not if you take accounts from several decades ago, so then what are they?

For a while I was going down the ball lightening track to a dead end, then we hear US Navy eye witness accounts that these things really are whitish-metallic craft, which takes me back to square one again - I have zero idea what they are.

Ten days to go till the report is released . . . .

Very true, the most logical viewpoint to have at the moment is "I don't know". Anyone on either side, those who make closed-minded jokes on t.v. about it not being real or those who state it's definitely extra-terrestrial are clearly talking out their arses.

Steve012

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Well said, it's what a lot of 'Newbies" to this topic always overlook, that is the fact that this phenomon has been with us lone before 21st century drones were even thought of.

So many sightings, from "the Foo Fighters" in WWII, right up to the Phoenix incident in 97' long before drones were around, and even if they were, it wouldn't explain many of the sightings.

I admit I don't have a theory myself, and I doubt it's aliens, I know it's not US test vehicles, I also know it cannot be Chinese or Russian, not if you take accounts from several decades ago, so then what are they?

For a while I was going down the ball lightening track [to a dead end], because then we hear US Navy eye witness accounts that these things really are whitish-metallic craft, which takes me back to square one again - So I have zero idea what they are.

I have been looking at this topic for 20 years, a lot of high up people, actually don't know if they are from other planets or inter dimensional. All I know is they are there... This upcoming report will be interesting.

steddyeddy

Deleted User wrote: »

Sure I am talking in generalities. There are always exceptions to any generalities. I thought that was a given.

Indeed but what you refer to as exceptions are actually prominent figures in scepticism.

But having said that the word "sceptic" has a very clear definition.

Well actually two if we want to be pedantic. But the older philosophical usage is probably less relevant than the vernacular usage here on this thread and is more akin to what Huxley meant when he created the word "agnostic".

But the definition of sceptic like "a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinion" is pretty clear and if someone is ridiculing anyone for even discussing something - then I question whether you can validly call him sceptical at all.

Well again these are definitions. I'm talking about key players in the modern sceptic movement.

But we can be sceptic and still ridicule people leaping to conclusions. The people who are taking a video of a few lights - and calling other people arrogant for not falling over and accepting it is aliens - very much deserve our ridicule. That is not mutually exclusive with scepticism. The two can be done entirely in parallel.

Ridiculing people and shutting down views isn't what the scientific method is about. Sceptics who do it are actually holding back science. There's many cases of scientists being ridiculed and dismissed by sceptics throughout history. It's OK to make conclusions based on incomplete data. It is not, however, OK to expect your conclusions be accepted based on incomplete data.

I don't know what these things are but the evidence goes against conventional aircraft, balloons or weather phenomenon.

Jumping to conclusions is also something that prominent self described sceptics such as Mick West does. He states that the objects being seen and described by pilots and radar operators as being more advanced than anything we have are all prosaic objects such as balloons, flares or commercial aircraft. He has no evidence for that and his analysis of the FLIR videos taken by pilots was described as amateur and ridiculous by the pilots themselves.

In other words some sceptics have difficulty saying the words scientists often have to say and that is "we don't know what these things are". Trained radar operators, Navy pilots and aerospace engineers (Chad Underwood) are saying we don't know what these things are. Ridiculing them for reporting this like some sceptics are doing is antagonistic to all things science.

[/QUOTE]But if someone is genuinely being an asswipe - then "sceptic" is not the right label to be using there

[/QUOTE]

I think people can be asswipes and sceptics as they can be asswipes and scientists.

Fuzzyduzzy

https://twitter.com/JeremyCorbell/status/1404880177734119424?s=20

Psychlops

UAP Intercept?

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41089/hawaii-based-f-22s-scrambled-on-faas-request-but-nobody-will-say-why

Hamsterchops

Fuzzyduzzy wrote: »

https://twitter.com/JeremyCorbell/status/1404880177734119424?s=20

Amazing if that's the disturbance Fravor & Co were describing, but what is it, what is that thing in the water?

Fuzzyduzzy

https://twitter.com/NickMadrid16/status/1404980580769468419?s=20