Is it all over ?

H

HAL

Guest
Has anyone else noticed that the whole ufo scene these days consists of retired generals, ex-government officials, and aging air force staff who are coming out of the woodwork to push their accounts of secrets that they took an oath not to divulge. ?
Either that or it is endless re-writes of things like Rendlesham.

Come on, guys, we've been reading all that for fifty or more years. Enough already.

Where is the new stuff.
We can detect meteoroids not much bigger than baseballs (providing we happen to be looking in the right direction. And read car registration plates from satellites.

But we can't get a handle on glowing objects purported to be the size of football fields.

Is it still worth the trouble ?

HAL.

:alien:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr Wu
A

Alien Origins

Guest
Has anyone else noticed that the whole ufo scene these days consists of retired generals, ex-government officials, and aging air force staff who are coming out of the woodwork to push their accounts of secrets that they took an oath not to divulge. ?
Either that or it is endless re-writes of things like Rendlesham.

Come on, guys, we've been reading all that for fifty or more years. Enough already.

Where is the new stuff.
We can detect meteoroids not much bigger than baseballs (providing we happen to be looking in the right direction. And read car registration plates from satellites.

But we can't get a handle on glowing objects purported to be the size of football fields.

Is it still worth the trouble ?

HAL.

:alien:
Is it still worth the trouble ?
In a word Hal no its not...A lot of what you said makes sense...The entire UFO communities case rest on weather or not the government can prove their case for them because without it all they have really is hear say...
 
D

Dundee

Guest
Has anyone else noticed that the whole ufo scene these days consists of retired generals, ex-government officials, and aging air force staff who are coming out of the woodwork to push their accounts of secrets that they took an oath not to divulge. ?
Either that or it is endless re-writes of things like Rendlesham.

Come on, guys, we've been reading all that for fifty or more years. Enough already.

Where is the new stuff.
We can detect meteoroids not much bigger than baseballs (providing we happen to be looking in the right direction. And read car registration plates from satellites.

But we can't get a handle on glowing objects purported to be the size of football fields.

Is it still worth the trouble ?

HAL.

:alien:
The problem as I see is simple. All these old accounts like Rendlesham happened back in the day. Low tech, lotsof secrets, half the people that were there are dead or old. We talk about Roswell as the holy grail, man that was 3/4 of a century ago.

Skeptics have set the bar to a position of impossibility. Science is swung at us like a baseball bat to the head.
If I can't show you DNA results verified and peer reviewed as Alien, it is thrown out the door as anecdote.

What is being required by the skeptics is Proof of GOD.
There are new reports everywhere everyday, but to be honest I often dont even bother becasue I know I will be hit with all the usualls, Oh its blurry, how do we know it is not CGI, why did it cut off here, and the old thread killer, "Show me the Proof".
How many interesting threads in the UFO community has died the showme the proof death.

So instead of me posting and enjoying the wonder of something interesting. I only ever post about the really good ones like the Tic Tac. I choose not to post to save the inevitable fight, or in some ways worse the statment made by key members not comenting at all. I don't get intimidated by hard line skeptics, but I do think why bother.
I like to enjoy talking about it, but have no iterest in spending 20 posts defending my beleif.

Look at what Doom said to your response, look at other hard line responses. If I can't bebothered with the fight.
How likely is a newb with little experience who might be lurking to join and post. They know what they saw, but know they would get shot down.

If i went and looked I bet I could find a ton of new UFO sightings in recent months, and every thread would be killed by the skeptics.
 
D

Dundee

Guest
To be honest, in my opinion hard line skeptics that swing the science bat, and demand proof are not only scaring people away, they are destroying the credibility of the subject just as surely as the crazies who saw Elvis get out of a UFO at 7:11
Only on the other side of the line.
 
H

HAL

Guest
If one doesn't require some kind of proof, then it is simply faith.

There are a lot of things reported, but no one can check the veracity of the claims. This is the problem.

By the way, I would ask for proof of God.

But I do know it will not be forthcoming.

That's why I am an atheist.

In the end , no one can know anything except what is in his own head.

And that is the solipsistic viewpoint.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alien Origins
D

Dundee

Guest
If one doesn't require some kind of proof, then it is simply faith.

There are a lot of things reported, bu no one can check the veracity of the claims. This is the problem.
I disagree, you and I are sitting having a beer, you get up and go for a leak. While your gone, my can of Beer tips over and spills from on the coffe table, I am a meter from it, I didn touch it. It just tipped. At the same time the door to the kitchen opens and I see an undefined shape flash past in the dark.

I am shitting bricks, you come back from the toilet and see me pale and frightened.

So by your reasoning we have nothing to discuss, you sit back down and grab your beer and say Ghosts ar not real, show me proof. An hum along to the song.

That is the shutdown that follows a skeptic.

Surely you would see my fear and have a look, youd check the table, check for drafts that might have opened the door. Turn the light on to ee if it was the dog, you would ask me questions, talk about possibilities.

You don't have to say "It 100% was a ghost"

What if there were no drafts, no dog, the coffe table was steady.

Do you then call me a liar, or say i am halucinating?

My argument is, that buy demanding proof and shutting the door to anything but proof is counter productive.
 
D

Dundee

Guest
I am confused to the motivations of hard line skeptics.
We know that until ET lands in a skeptics garden and fry's his dog as proof you guys will not be happy.
I think we can agree that may happen one day but I am not holding my breath.

So what is it your asking for in your first post?
I could google up a dozen sightings but your going to just throw the show me the proof line and kill the thread like so so many before you.

Look at the position skeptics took on the whole Tic Tac UFO thing.
That's recent, and we have folks trusted to access threats to our well being that has the potential to start WW3
We value there training to the point that they can phone home to the folks with big hats, that can push the big red button that sends us back to the stone age.

Yet, when radar operators, pilots, co-pilots, crewman and so on say, that they are looking at some crazy arse shit.
When clearly they are alluding to ET at times but are not willing to come right out and say it.
We have a radar operator who tracked one of them that i forget now, went from sea level to 80,000 feet in 0.6 seconds???

But the skeptics say, nope, no proof, and dismiss everything with no justification or explanation.
How many times in places did I try to call this lazy approach out and was hit with.
"The onus of proof is on the person making the claim"
No one is claiming anything other than this is what I saw, and this is what I think.
No where that I saw did Fravor or any of the witnesses say "This is ET"

No claim, no proof needed,
I say to the skeptics, ( not directed at you mate :) )
Don't be lazy, show me the proof the radar was faulty, show me the proof that Fravor was lying.
Otherwise I think the skeptics are throwing the baby out with the bathwater with the whole UFO topic.
 
D

Dundee

Guest
I have an Aussie almost first hand story for you, but first, what are your thoughts on crop circles?
 
H

HAL

Guest
Crop circles. Tricky one that.

Some are man made. We have even seen how they do it.

But some seem to be so intricate it is hard to see how it was done in the dark by a bunch of people using boards.
My problem with them is, if they were made by some 'other' beings, why do it in secret ? why at night ? Why not contact us and say 'look, go to farmer Joe's big field in Kent (grid loc XXX,YYY) and set up all the cameras etc that you can. At midnight on the tenth of June we will demonstrate for you.'

But it doesn't happen. No logic to it.

I'll address the other stuff in a while.
 
D

Dundee

Guest
Crop circles. Tricky one that.

Some are man made. We have even seen how they do it.

But some seem to be so intricate it is hard to see how it was done in the dark by a bunch of people using boards.
My problem with them is, if they were made by some 'other' beings, why do it in secret ? why at night ? Why not contact us and say 'look, go to farmer Joe's big field in Kent (grid loc XXX,YYY) and set up all the cameras etc that you can. At midnight on the tenth of June we will demonstrate for you.'

But it doesn't happen. No logic to it.

I'll address the other stuff in a while.

:) good answer,
OK so here goes,

My ex wife is a country girl, believes in nothing, no ghosts, no Aliens, nothing. Does not even care enough to have an opinion.

A year or two before I hooked up with her.
She was horse riding in a huge farm with one of her country mates. Thousands of acres.
They were riding for a couple of hours and miles from any road, any track and any boundary they rode into a large...depression in the paddock.

They came across a crop circle, in the depression (small valley?) it was 30 or 40 meters across. A perfect circle flattened. They were several kms from any road and this is a long long way away from any town, and the closest town was very small.
It was on private property.

So it was next to impossible to get to from a public area, it would require kms of driving to get to on private property. Kms from any road or viewing location. In short, other than my ex stumbling across it.

Effectively it would never ever have been found by anyone if they had not by chance stumbled across it.

So I am not saying it was aliens, I am just giving you the facts.
I see three possibilities.

1. A prank,
2. Some natural effect,
3 ET,

1, If a prank, why make one in a place that would have virtually 0% chance of ever being seen by anyone.
2. If natural, ok cool. give me a hint.
3. You tell me
 
A

Alien Origins

Guest
If one doesn't require some kind of proof, then it is simply faith.

There are a lot of things reported, but no one can check the veracity of the claims. This is the problem.

By the way, I would ask for proof of God.

But I do know it will not be forthcoming.

That's why I am an atheist.

In the end , no one can know anything except what is in his own head.

And that is the solipsistic viewpoint.
We can acknowledge that there are things in the sky sometimes we do not know what they are or where they came from. And UFOs for all intents and purposes do exist, but the question is in what form? Balls of light? Round objects? Tic Tac shaped? The list goes on. Where ufology runs into trouble is when they try to associate these objects with aliens when there is no proof they are.
 
D

Dundee

Guest
We can acknowledge that there are things in the sky sometimes we do not know what they are or where they came from. And UFOs for all intents and purposes do exist, but the question is in what form? Balls of light? Round objects? Tic Tac shaped? The list goes on. Where ufology runs into trouble is when they try to associate these objects with aliens when there is no proof they are.
Ok to address one single point, why folks associate say the Tic Tac to UFOs is this.

One single point.

What is your alternate explanation for the sea level to 60 or 80 thousand feet in 0.6 of a second.
Don't hold me to those numbers I can't remember exactly. (if you insist I will get the numbers but the principle holds)

But I did some rough calculations on the original numbers and something like a 5kg object would have 1000s of kgs of G force on it. The craft itself would crush itself to bits.
It went something like stationary at 60,000 feet to stationary at sea level in 0.6 seconds.

Unless you can show me some star trek inertial dampeners.
What is your alternate explanation.

Remembering of course that before you call computer error this is the US state of the art tech and the recordings were taken by morning by the men with big hats?
 
H

HAL

Guest
:) good answer,
OK so here goes,

My ex wife is a country girl, believes in nothing, no ghosts, no Aliens, nothing. Does not even care enough to have an opinion.

A year or two before I hooked up with her.
She was horse riding in a huge farm with one of her country mates. Thousands of acres.
They were riding for a couple of hours and miles from any road, any track and any boundary they rode into a large...depression in the paddock.

They came across a crop circle, in the depression (small valley?) it was 30 or 40 meters across. A perfect circle flattened. They were several kms from any road and this is a long long way away from any town, and the closest town was very small.
It was on private property.

So it was next to impossible to get to from a public area, it would require kms of driving to get to on private property. Kms from any road or viewing location. In short, other than my ex stumbling across it.

Effectively it would never ever have been found by anyone if they had not by chance stumbled across it.

So I am not saying it was aliens, I am just giving you the facts.
I see three possibilities.

1. A prank,
2. Some natural effect,
3 ET,

1, If a prank, why make one in a place that would have virtually 0% chance of ever being seen by anyone.
2. If natural, ok cool. give me a hint.
3. You tell me
That's what I meant about no logic.
One can easily see it as being a prank, but what is the point of it if no one is likely to see it ?

Could be some natural effect. I have witnessed whirl winds in the desert. localised spinning vortexes that would flatten a small area of grass (there was no grass where I was, just sand) but these only produce circles.
 
D

Dundee

Guest
That's what I meant about no logic.
One can easily see it as being a prank, but what is the point of it if no one is likely to see it ?

Could be some natural effect. I have witnessed whirl winds in the desert. localised spinning vortexes that would flatten a small area of grass (there was no grass where I was, just sand) but these only produce circles.
But my question is, instead of just saying meh...I dunno.

You have a perfectly round circle of flattened crop in a place where no one would ever ever see it unless by chance,
It is not just a bit of flat grass blown over by wind, it is a atypical crop circle in the middle of nowhere,

If you are forced to make a a call on possible causes, NOT prove it, just make a guess.
What might it be caused by.
What is your possible list of causes.
 

LETA

4☆babbler
Staff
Where is the new stuff.
This is largely due to the effective truth embargo the U.S. has over the subject. And people currently working on UFOs are not going to jeopardize their livelihood and possibly their freedom just to satisfy our curiosity. We are simply going to have to wait until the powers that be decide to fully disclose or wait for the aliens to do it for them :-0
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dundee
H

HAL

Guest
Now you are shifting the goal posts.
The first question should be 'is the ET hypothesis valid ?
That requires proof positive that ET as a physical entity actually exists.
As no one saw the circle being made, you can't exclude the natural causes idea. And until you can exclude the more likely causes then there really is no reason to invoke ET.
I couldn't even go with Natural causes as I don't know what you would be likely to find in Australia. So it is fair to say, sorry, no idea; insufficient data.
 
D

Dundee

Guest
Now you are shifting the goal posts.
The first question should be 'is the ET hypothesis valid ?
That requires proof positive that ET as a physical entity actually exists.
As no one saw the circle being made, you can't exclude the natural causes idea. And until you can exclude the more likely causes then there really is no reason to invoke ET.
I couldn't even go with Natural causes as I don't know what you would be likely to find in Australia. So it is fair to say, sorry, no idea; insufficient data.
So am I correct in assuming you think we are alone in the universe, there is no intelligent life anywhere other than us?
 
H

HAL

Guest
Re post 7.

I can give you a better example than the tic tac.

Stephensville.

That appears to be something very much in the ET domain. Huge craft seen by many, photographed, captured on radar.
Examined by an expert who plotted the radar returns and showed that there was something else there beside the planes.
It was also tracked for some considerable distance .

But where is the story now ?

You have to remember that a skeptic is different to a denier. A skeptic will reconsider his view when presented with new evidence.
In the case for the ufo I am not saying they don't exist; I couldn't as I have seen one. But I can't add the ET tag to them as we have no solid evidence. No Hanger 18.
However, as I have said here before, the logic that says they are ours falls flat when you consider that such capability would be of enormous value to the whole of humanity, as well as showing which country was untouchable. So there would be no reason to hide it.

As for the other , more 'paranormal' stuff, I have also experience of that.
My overall view is that there is something going on that is way beyond our understanding. And certainly way beyond out technology. probably beyond out physics.
We can only wait and see what happens.