UFOs - proof?

jugger0 · 22-01-2012 05:08PM

Solair wrote: »

I assume people realise that the UFO explanation is a very handy way of covering up military testing of new aircraft, drones, missiles and other airborne devices?

Most UFO sightings in the United States oddly enough occur in places where you'd quite likely expect that kind of activity to be going on e.g. New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona etc etc.

Does it surprise anyone that China is quite likely doing some very sophisticated military aircraft development?

You can be 100% sure that the Chinese military has extremely high-tech equipment under development. They have a full-blown space programme under development and are now have some of the highest technology in the world at their disposal. So, of course they have all sorts of high tech and strange experimental aircraft in the skies.

When someone spots one of these devices, or they accidentally overfly a built up area, military authorities deny they exist. Then, they just allow the folklore around alien spacecraft to provide an explanation. This sweeps it under the carpet and also makes those reporting the sightings and any footage seem rather non-credible.

Most of these sightings quite likely have a rather mundane military explanation.

These things have been around far longer then the American/Chinese Military, if they are man made it would mean that they have been around since at least the 40's yet still none of these wonderful amazing craft capable of ridiculous speeds and maneuvers have ever been use for space exploration, why send men into space on rockets when you have ufo's? why would they keep it a secret? seems like a fleet of ufo's would be a good deterrent to would be attackers.

Wibbs · 22-01-2012 05:26PM

Not quite Yahew. Read up on the slave labour involved in the construction of said rockets with many of the big names who the Americans(and Russians) brought home with their blood on their hands. Very few of which were ever publicly examined, much less tried and found guilty. Lesser members of the Nazi war machine ended up on the end of ropes or looked down the barrels of a firing squad for a fair bit less.

Others who directly supported and helped finance, fuel and arm the Nazi war machine walked away scot free. Having a delve into the company of IG Farbren is worth a look. One of the biggest industrial companies/cartels in the world at the time, with many names of sub companies well known today(BASF, Agfa etc). Without this industrial cartel it's almost inconceivable that Hitler could have risen to a position to prosecute a war. It was an IG company that built Aushwitz (camp 3 was the slave labour camp to run the IG Buna(artificial rubber) concern) and furnished the zyklon B that murdered millions. None of the company directors and few of their subordinates were ever brought to justice. Some of the directors were brought to trial a good time after the hullaballo had died down, but walked away. Their "cooperation" was worth more than the publicity and spectacle and feelings of righteous revenge that followed the trials and executions of the uniforms.

Behind the guns there is always the money and the money rarely ends up being prosecuted. So while I may agree with you about Bomber Harris et al, that yes they have blood on their hands, I would say it's a very grey area indeed to try and equate the two as equals in evil, however fashionable it may be today to do so.

PS between them the V1 and V2 rocket attacks killed nearly 10,000 people in southern England and injured three times that.

Yahew · 22-01-2012 06:55PM

Wibbs wrote: »

Not quite Yahew. Read up on the slave labour involved in the construction of said rockets with many of the big names who the Americans(and Russians) brought home with their blood on their hands. Very few of which were ever publicly examined, much less tried and found guilty. Lesser members of the Nazi war machine ended up on the end of ropes or looked down the barrels of a firing squad for a fair bit less.

Others who directly supported and helped finance, fuel and arm the Nazi war machine walked away scot free. Having a delve into the company of IG Farbren is worth a look. One of the biggest industrial companies/cartels in the world at the time, with many names of sub companies well known today(BASF, Agfa etc). Without this industrial cartel it's almost inconceivable that Hitler could have risen to a position to prosecute a war. It was an IG company that built Aushwitz (camp 3 was the slave labour camp to run the IG Buna(artificial rubber) concern) and furnished the zyklon B that murdered millions. None of the company directors and few of their subordinates were ever brought to justice. Some of the directors were brought to trial a good time after the hullaballo had died down, but walked away. Their "cooperation" was worth more than the publicity and spectacle and feelings of righteous revenge that followed the trials and executions of the uniforms.

Behind the guns there is always the money and the money rarely ends up being prosecuted. So while I may agree with you about Bomber Harris et al, that yes they have blood on their hands, I would say it's a very grey area indeed to try and equate the two as equals in evil, however fashionable it may be today to do so.

PS between them the V1 and V2 rocket attacks killed nearly 10,000 people in southern England and injured three times that.

You were talking about rocket scientists, not capitalists in league with the Nazis. So this entire argument is a strawman with regards to that. The Nazi rocket scientists built rockets which could, and were, used to take ordinances to London, and they could also have scientists who worked on radar, ordinance guidance equipment, and the planes which did most of the damage. None of this was war criminal, as far as I can see. The same technology can be, and has been, used for civilian purposes.

There were some claims of some of the scientists - like Wernher von Braun - knowing or visiting camps. He himself says he was tol to shut up when he complained. Most of the others taken by the Americans just worked in labs.

The Numerberg trials were victors history, anyay, and fair enough. But if contributing scientifically to a war effort was a war crime, then the allies had scientists who were war criminals.

Wibbs · 23-01-2012 09:08PM

Yahew wrote: »

You were talking about rocket scientists, not capitalists in league with the Nazis. So this entire argument is a strawman with regards to that.

It wasn't a strawman, it was simply illustrating that one man's war criminal is another man's business leader, when such arrangements suit, just as it suited operation Paperclip and similar Soviet missions(though the Soviets were a lot tougher about it).

None of this was war criminal, as far as I can see. The same technology can be, and has been, used for civilian purposes.

Zyklon B was used (and still is under other names) for civilian purposes as an insecticide and fumigant. It's how such things are used that marks the difference.

There were some claims of some of the scientists - like Wernher von Braun - knowing or visiting camps. He himself says he was tol to shut up when he complained. Most of the others taken by the Americans just worked in labs.

"Just following orders" no doubt. Operation Paperclip had to ready up false work biographies for the majority of the scientists they brought back to the US to bypass the congressional order forbidding anyone with more than a passing and understandable connection to the Nazi war machine(and that order was actually quite lax).

There are not just "some claims". Von Braun certainly visited the camps. It's a historical fact. He admitted he visited the labour plant on a regular basis. Naturally as he was head of the operation, though he downplayed his role in any wrongdoing. Though given his position this doesn't exactly ring too true. He was also a member of the Nazi party, a commissioned officer(major) in the reserve SS and a decorated "war hero" of the Nazi party. Hitler even conferred the title of Professor of the Reich on the guy. He was steeped in the Nazi war machine. He claimed he only took Nazi party membership and a commission in the SS to further his career, though at the time in the early 30's the SS weren't the least bit interested in his research. He claimed he never wore the uniform until a photo showed up with him sporting it. Then he claimed it was only the one time(subsequently more pics have shown up) He claimed not to have seen or taken part in punishments in the labour camp, yet quite a few witnesses came forward who put him there in the action, including floggings and beatings and an incident where a group of men were hanged from the ceiling by chains.

The Numerberg trials were victors history, anyay, and fair enough. But if contributing scientifically to a war effort was a war crime, then the allies had scientists who were war criminals.

Mengele was the very epitome of a war criminal, who would be described as contributing scientifically to the war effort, along with other Nazi scientists who used human guinea pigs in often fatal research. This marks out a difference. Someone like Willy Messerschmitt would have been much more a grey area by comparison(though he was still imprisoned after the war for a few years for using slave labour). Frank Whittle working in the same areas would not be a grey area as he had no direct blood on his hands in his war research. The list of allied scientists that one could link to atrocities while furthering their research would be one of the worlds shortest lists.

Like I said it has become fashionable to take an objective look at both sides and that's a good thing, but revisionism can go too far the other way too. If there was ever a "good" versus "evil" war prosecuted, the war against the Nazi regime(and in many ways moreso the Japanese) would be as close to qualifying as one could get.

shizz · 23-01-2012 09:43PM

galwayrush wrote: »

The nearest star that could possibly have life containing planets is 84,000 light years away, so even if they sent us a message at the speed of light it would take generations to get here, so there's no way anyone on earth has ever seen an actual visitor..

Woooooooooooooah Where did you pull this out of? The nearest star with a confirmed "super earth" type planet in it's habitable zone, is 620 light years away.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler-22b

The Kepler mission is springing up many many planets and man candidates to harbour life. To think that the nearest star that has planets which could harbour life is 84,000 light years a way is ludicrous.

44leto · 23-01-2012 09:56PM

Originally Posted by galwayrush View Post
The nearest star that could possibly have life containing planets is 84,000 light years away, so even if they sent us a message at the speed of light it would take generations to get here, so there's no way anyone on earth has ever seen an actual visitor..

I watched the whole vid in the OP and the radio station bit at the end of the vid got me thinking. Although I think that was some sort of publicity stunt, the person on the phone said they are not extra terrestrial beings but extra dimensional beings.

So if they are here and they are extra dimensional beings and I will add I am not convinced. The distances are negated, if they have the tech to slip in and out of different dimensions they don't have to travel that far. They could be right next to you.

The_Thing · 23-01-2012 10:14PM

44leto wrote: »

I watched the whole vid in the OP and the radio station bit at the end of the vid got me thinking. Although I think that was some sort of publicity stunt, the person on the phone said they are not extra terrestrial beings but extra dimensional beings.

So if they are here and they are extra dimensional beings and I will add I am not convinced. The distances are negated, if they have the tech to slip in and out of different dimensions they don't have to travel that far. They could be right next to you.

The radio show in question was the syndicated Coast to Coast AM and the presenter taking that call was Art Bell

Here's a recording of another phone call that Art Bell took on his show from the pilot of a light aircraft who is attempting to fly into Area 51.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mezlcGGA4BY

Yahew · 23-01-2012 10:42PM

Wibbs wrote: »

It wasn't a strawman, it was simply illustrating that one man's war criminal is another man's business leader, when such arrangements suit, just as it suited operation Paperclip and similar Soviet missions(though the Soviets were a lot tougher about it).

You didnt prove the war criminality.

Zyklon B was used (and still is under other names) for civilian purposes as an insecticide and fumigant. It's how such things are used that marks the difference.

Yes, but we are talking about scientists. If scientists invent Zyklon B, it is the politicians, or soldiers who carry it out who would be guilty of war crimes if any.

"Just following orders" no doubt. Operation Paperclip had to ready up false work biographies for the majority of the scientists they brought back to the US to bypass the congressional order forbidding anyone with more than a passing and understandable connection to the Nazi war machine(and that order was actually quite lax).

That's a congressional law. What we are talking about is simple - are scientists war criminals for working on stuff which can be used as a weapon

There are not just "some claims". Von Braun certainly visited the camps. It's a historical fact. He admitted he visited the labour plant on a regular basis. Naturally as he was head of the operation, though he downplayed his role in any wrongdoing. Though given his position this doesn't exactly ring too true. He was also a member of the Nazi party, a commissioned officer(major) in the reserve SS and a decorated "war hero" of the Nazi party. Hitler even conferred the title of Professor of the Reich on the guy. He was steeped in the Nazi war machine. He claimed he only took Nazi party membership and a commission in the SS to further his career, though at the time in the early 30's the SS weren't the least bit interested in his research. He claimed he never wore the uniform until a photo showed up with him sporting it. Then he claimed it was only the one time(subsequently more pics have shown up) He claimed not to have seen or taken part in punishments in the labour camp, yet quite a few witnesses came forward who put him there in the action, including floggings and beatings and an incident where a group of men were hanged from the ceiling by chains.

In the latter case he would be guilty by association, although he himself says he could do nothing. The question for most Rocket Scientists is this - is the rocket science itself a war crime.

Mengele was the very epitome of a war criminal, who would be described as contributing scientifically to the war effort, along with other Nazi scientists who used human guinea pigs in often fatal research. This marks out a difference. Someone like Willy Messerschmitt would have been much more a grey area by comparison(though he was still imprisoned after the war for a few years for using slave labour). Frank Whittle working in the same areas would not be a grey area as he had no direct blood on his hands in his war research. The list of allied scientists that one could link to atrocities while furthering their research would be one of the worlds shortest lists.

Except most of the men in Operation Paperclip were merely scientists working on rocketry, thats all. So Mendele is a straw man.

Like I said it has become fashionable to take an objective look at both sides and that's a good thing, but revisionism can go too far the other way too. If there was ever a "good" versus "evil" war prosecuted, the war against the Nazi regime(and in many ways moreso the Japanese) would be as close to qualifying as one could get.

I dont agree with that either, and not because of any sympathy for the Nazi regime. However the idea that one side was good and not racist, and the other side racist and evil is simple and historicaly untrue. Britain caused Inida to starve during the war - killing 3 million, or so. And they ran India from ideas of racial supremacy ( a "beastly people" said Churchill). The Nazis were worse, both sides were very bad.

However the main topic here is whether rocket scientists just working on rocket science ( not in human experiments in camps) were "war criminals" because they worked for one side, and not the other. I disagree.

44leto · 23-01-2012 10:43PM

The_Thing wrote: »

The radio show in question was the syndicated Coast to Coast AM and the presenter taking that call was Art Bell

Here's a recording of another phone call that Art Bell took on his show from the pilot of a light aircraft who is attempting to fly into Area 51.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mezlcGGA4BY

That sounds a bit fabricated as well, kind of over and under acted. I am not totally convinced, he never would have got that far into that area, its a no flyzone and I would imagine they would know if even a bat was on course to enter that airspace.

Wibbs · 24-01-2012 01:17AM

Yahew wrote: »

You didnt prove the war criminality.

Seriously? You missed the point I was making? OK.

Yes, but we are talking about scientists. If scientists invent Zyklon B, it is the politicians, or soldiers who carry it out who would be guilty of war crimes if any.

Really. So scientists who develop say the atom bomb(which I'd put bets on you have issue with. Most nouveau moral equivalents do) as a viable weapon knowing the outcome if used would be "clean"? That they would be less morally accountable compared to some 20 year old farm boy who presses the button in action?

That's a congressional law. What we are talking about is simple - are scientists war criminals for working on stuff which can be used as a weapon

Way to avoid the points made. Kudos. Most of these particular scientists were steeped in Nazi ideology and practice and were happily "working on stuff" to prosecute that ideology. A practice that was handily ignored because they were useful. That's the point.

In the latter case he would be guilty by association, although he himself says he could do nothing.

Very convenient and we're back to "just following orders". This is not an individual caught up in the mechanism of daftness, this is an individual who pimped himself out to that daftness, this is an individual who joined the Nazi party early, who held the (decorated) rank of major in the SS, who accepted the position over a forced labour camp and was awarded an academic honour from Herr Hitler himself, an individual who ignored or went along with all of the aforementioned to further his own aims, an individual who was happy to change sides when his first choice went tits up, an individual who was all too complicit in fostering this new identity created for him. I dunno about you, but to me that smells strongly of immoral behaviour at best. For me it hoves into view of morally repugnant on so many levels. Lest you think I'm all for the allies, they facilitated this whole ballsology and they're just as complicit morally as enablers.

The question for most Rocket Scientists is this - is the rocket science itself a war crime.

Handy get out clause for you. And again I point out to you that it's more than this. If your selfish reasons are knowingly causing suffering in their development and you're fully aware of this, is that OK? Remember 3 times more people died in the process of building the V1/2 than died in their application. A process and result that Von Braun and others were all too well aware of. He admitted that himself

Except most of the men in Operation Paperclip were merely scientists working on rocketry, thats all. So Mendele is a straw man.

Right so. It looks like I'm gonna have to break out the crayons at this point. No this was not "all". Most were fully paid up members of the Nazi party. Many were commissioned officers in the Waffen SS. Many were directly connected to more than questionable practices in their scientific endeavours. The people behind Operation Paperclip were sufficiently concerned about these dubious backgrounds that they invented cleaner backgrounds for all but two of these scientists. What does that tell you? I fear not enough.

I dont agree with that either, and not because of any sympathy for the Nazi regime. However the idea that one side was good and not racist, and the other side racist and evil is simple and historicaly untrue

Oh god. Moral equivalence can only take one so far.

Britain caused Inida to starve during the war - killing 3 million, or so.

Are you talking about the Bengali famine? Are you seriously trying to make the case that that was equivalent to the officially sanctioned genocidal policies of the short arsed Austrian? Read more books. Seriously.

And they ran India from ideas of racial supremacy ( a "beastly people" said Churchill).

Yep, such was the 19th century mindset, but I hate to break it to you Ted, they could quite easily do so as the Indians themselves had run India on racial/class/caste grounds for millennia.

The Nazis were worse, both sides were very bad.

*facepalm* I assume you have heard of the lesser of two evils?

However the main topic here is whether rocket scientists just working on rocket science ( not in human experiments in camps) were "war criminals" because they worked for one side, and not the other. I disagree.

Yea but that's the issue. They simply couldn't just "work on science" in a vacuum. Their very work was predicated on human misery. A misery the vast majority were happy to ignore or offer platitudes after the fact to their new paymasters.

Orando Broom · 24-01-2012 01:45AM

books4sale wrote: »

^^^^^^^LOL

so if someone sends up a chinese lantern, you look up and see it, don't know that its a chinese lantern, then it's a UFO....

ehhhhh....no....it's still a chinese lantern!

If you can identify it as thus. Or is everything you see in the sky a Chinese lantern?

bergheim · 24-01-2012 03:00AM

I think it is likely ET's look like us. I think they exist

44leto · 24-01-2012 04:24AM

bergheim wrote: »

I think it is likely ET's look like us. I think they exist

I think I agree, the craft seen and the experiences witnessed is beyond human rational explanation there is something happening beyond our tech and our science. We are been visited.

That post makes me sound like a crank a conspiracy theorist or a loon, but what if I was a pilot, an army officer, a guard or an american or british policeman or perhaps a doctor treating radiation burns.

Wasn't it Sherlock Holmes who said if you rule out all the .............

bergheim · 23-02-2012 10:40PM

I try avoid conspiracy theories and instead look at factual proof and witnesses reports and apply logic to it all. This tells me extra-terrestrials do exist. I think with their technology they are able to visit us. We lack the technology to visit them. Before we evolute to their level they are not interested in official contact with us. So it appears.

enfant terrible · 23-02-2012 10:45PM

RichieC wrote: »

Danny Dyer believes you ****ing **** ****s :pac:

"Danny Dyer has recently done a show called Danny Dyer-I believe in UFOs.I'm planning a show called Frankie Boyle-I believe in Danny Dyer, where I interview people around the country to try to work out if Danny Dyer is a genuine human being or, as I suspect, a character actor constantly auditioning to play the part of a gay garage mechanic with a serious brain injury"

RichieC · 23-02-2012 11:05PM

44leto wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpMLyfwpq5s

I thought this was strange, it was a sighting recorded during Obama's inauguration speech. The reason I thought it strange is it was recorded by multiple networks and angles, also if it is a military secret craft they are not going to fly it over such an event especially one with their new commander an chief being sworn in.

Likely a fake, but interestingly it looks very similar to the S4 "sports model" UFO that Bob Lazaar claims the US government has been reverse engineering in groom lake since the 40s

http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/Bob_Lazar_S4_Disc_Images/S4_Disc.gif

Dr Expired · 23-02-2012 11:40PM

Foo Fighters....now back off punk....your getting too close.

Capt'n Midnight · 24-02-2012 01:49AM

Fermi paradox

UFOs - proof?

Comments