UFOs - The Disclosure Project:Sirius

[Gaybutton]

I'm aware of only four which UFO proponents attribute to house such artifacts

Of course you're not aware of more. They're all keeping it shhhhhhhh - a secret. Not only that, but they will continue to keep it a secret. Can't let the world know aliens actually exist and have been here on Earth, now can we . . . ?

I can think of lots of reasons why they would elect not to do so - fear of panic, wishing to keep any pirated technology to themselves, destabilizing of religious dogma, exposing decades of government misinformation, putting themselves up for the kinds of ridicule non-believers substitute for reason

1. Do you really think people will panic if they find out aliens are real? Would you? Personally, I'd love to find out aliens are real. I'm hoping to live long enough to see genuine proof that life indeed does exist elsewhere. If I found out that aliens are real, I'd be thrilled, not afraid. I'd be even more thrilled if we find out it's intelligent life. Maybe I give people much more credit than you do.

2. How would revealing the existence of aliens make the technology any more available to others than it already is? Who says that whatever government has it it going to share it. If they share it with anybody, I wish they'd share it with Boeing and Airbus. And if we've got this technology, where is it? Do you see any evidence of it being used for anything? I don't.

3. Destabilizing religious dogma? What do you think is already going on worldwide due to religion? Destabilizing that would be one of the best things ever to happen.

4. Exposing decades of government misinformation? You say that as if that has never happened before and isn't still happening.

5. Putting themselves up to ridicule? Since when are governments not put up to ridicule? And if a government presented tangible, provable evidence, then where would the ridicule part come in?

Only one word comes to my mind with all of this: Crackpot

[RichLB]

1. Do you really think people will panic if they find out aliens are real? Would you? Personally, I'd love to find out aliens are real. I'm hoping to live long enough to see genuine proof that life indeed does exist elsewhere. If I found out that aliens are real, I'd be thrilled, not afraid. I'd be even more thrilled if we find out it's intelligent life. Maybe I give people much more credit than you do.

Well, it's happened before - remember Orson Wells and the War of the Worlds? The think back to the 1950's when the nation was so convinced the communists were coming we all had "drop drills" in school where we were taught to hide under our desks. So, yeah, I think a huge number of people would panic.

2. How would revealing the existence of aliens make the technology any more available to others than it already is? Who says that whatever government has it it going to share it. If they share it with anybody, I wish they'd share it with Boeing and Airbus. And if we've got this technology, where is it? Do you see any evidence of it being used for anything? I don't.

Many argue that many of the advances we've already seen during the last 50+ years have been due to backward engineering of downed UFOs. There, of course, could be other technologies which have sufficient military advantage that they have yet to be revealed and thus keeping the source of the science secret would be imperative.

3. Destabilizing religious dogma? What do you think is already going on worldwide due to religion? Destabilizing that would be one of the best things ever to happen.

I sure agree that such an abandonment of religious dogma would be fantastic, but I don't underestimate the power and influence of those entrenched in the various churches.

4. Exposing decades of government misinformation? You say that as if that has never happened before and isn't still happening.

Sure I believe it continues to happen. But, when has the government admitted to deliberately misleading the public. Where are those weapons of mass destruction and, of course, Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone because the government told us so.

5. Putting themselves up to ridicule? Since when are governments not put up to ridicule? And if a government presented tangible, provable evidence, then where would the ridicule part come in?

Oh, I dunno. When there are people who use ridicule to substitute for logic when confronted with thousands upon thousands personal testimonies, radar evidence, photographic and video evidence (not all of which are bogus), historical descriptions of UFOs in ancient texts, "weather balloons" which can not be shot down even after several hours of effort (see the Battle of Los Angeles - I forget the year but I think it was 1942), and several other data leading to the same conclusion one must assume ridicule coupled with incredulity will be rampant. Quack pots are not beyond denying evidence.

[Gaybutton]

Well, it's happened before - remember Orson Wells and the War of the Worlds?

That was because people thought we were under attack. That was back in the days when most people still believed there were canals on Mars. I fail to see how a credible revelation today that aliens have visited Earth or crash landed here would make anyone think we are under attack. I'll do my panicking as soon as the tripods start rising from beneath the ground.

Many argue that many of the advances we've already seen during the last 50+ years have been due to backward engineering of downed UFOs.

I think you mean many crackpots make that argument.

I sure agree that such an abandonment of religious dogma would be fantastic

At least we finally agree on something.

when has the government admitted to deliberately misleading the public.

I don't know of any government that ever did in all of human history - with the possible exceptions of Albert Speer during the Nuremburg trials and General Schwarzkopf's strategic misleading during the Gulf War. Governments don't admit to deliberate misleading. They get caught misleading. Do you believe any government in the world has been caught deliberately misleading the public about the existence of aliens?

not beyond denying evidence.

I wouldn't deny it either if there were any credible, tangible evidence on public display and that evidence was accepted and supported by credible scientific sources such as universities, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory scientists, well known scientists and astronomers such as Machio Kaku and Alex Filippenko - you know, people like that. When I hear it from them, then there wouldn't be anything to deny. The only evidence I've seen you produce is referring to documentaries and crackpot scientists nobody ever heard of.

I don't deny that aliens exist. I believe they do and I believe they exist in countless numbers all over the universe and probably many with intelligence and technology equal to or greater than ours. What I do deny is that any of them have ever been to Earth. There simply is no undeniable, irrefutable proof.

[RichLB]

Do you believe any government in the world has been caught deliberately misleading the public about the existence of aliens?

Yep, I do. We don't need to resurrect Roswell, although I still need to know why the government needed so much secrecy when carting off what they finally said was a weather balloon. But the Battle of Los Angeles in 1942 must make the most committed believer in government explanations of UFO snicker. For an hour they fired 1400 12.8 anti aircraft shells at a clearly visible UFO and failed to bring it down. The explanation was a weather balloon. That was either the most impregnable balloon ever made or the government was "deliberately misleading the public"

[Gaybutton]

the Battle of Los Angeles in 1942

A photo published in the Los Angeles Times on February 26, 1942 has been cited by modern day conspiracy theorists and UFOlogists as evidence of an extra-terrestrial visitation. They assert that the photo clearly shows searchlights focused on an alien spaceship; however, the photo was heavily modified by photo retouches prior to publication, a routine practice in graphic arts of the time intended to improve contrast in black and white photos. Los Angeles Times writer Larry Harnish noted that the retouched photo along with faked newspaper headlines were presented as true historical material in trailers for the film Battle: Los Angeles. Harnish commented, "if the publicity campaign wanted to establish UFO research as nothing but lies and fakery, it couldn't have done a better job."

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

I don't know what they were shooting at. The fact that I don't know what it was, and apparently nobody today can be sure what it was, does not mean that it must have been an alien spacecraft.

[RichLB]

I don't know what they were shooting at. The fact that I don't know what it was, and apparently nobody today can be sure what it was, does not mean that it must have been an alien spacecraft.

It must make one wonder, though, what it could have been. Much like Roswell several years later, the military initially identified the object as a UFO. They were convinced enough that their attack resulted in the deaths of several civilians as the spent shells rained down and much damage to buildings on the ground. Then, of course, they trotted out the weather balloon explanation. Now which seems more logical - UFO or impregnable weather balloon?

[Gaybutton]

identified the object as a UFO.

Considering the "U" part of UFO means "unidentified", that's a very good oxymoron.

Now which seems more logical - UFO or impregnable weather balloon?

You say that as if there are no other choices. How about neither of those seems logical, at least in the sense that you mean it. Of course it was a UFO - they were not able to identify what it was, and that makes it a UFO. But it doesn't make it an alien spaceship.

On second thought, maybe it wasn't a UFO - maybe just a UF. It was unidentified and it was flying, but since nobody knew what it was, maybe it wasn't an "object" at all. You seem to think that if anything appears in the sky and can't be identified, then it must be an alien spacecraft. My response to that kind of so-called logic: Crackpot

Wouldn't it be nice if one of these alien spacecraft of yours ever actually lands? None ever do. They did in ancient times, though - after all they taught the Egyptians how to build the pyramids. Today they only stick around long enough to make crop circles. What's the matter, can't we use a few new Pyramids today? According to your "scientists" they either crash or hover around for awhile and then disappear forever.

[RichLB]

Now which seems more logical - UFO or impregnable weather balloon?

You say that as if there are no other choices. How about neither of those seems logical, at least in the sense that you mean it.

Ok, fair enough. Those are the two explanations given by the military experts of the time. I'd be interested in hearing another possibility. Certainly if it's not a UFO you can come up with something better than a weather balloon.

Wouldn't it be nice if one of these alien spacecraft of yours ever actually lands? None ever do.

There are several incidences of alien spacecraft landing. You might want to check out the Rendlesham forest incident or the Livingston Incident (aka Robert Taylor incident) for starters. These have both been well documented and subjects of scientific scrutiny by mainstream scientists.

[Gaybutton]

There are several incidences of alien spacecraft landing. You might want to check out the Rendlesham forest incident or the Livingston Incident (aka Robert Taylor incident) for starters. These have both been well documented and subjects of scientific scrutiny by mainstream scientists.

I did check them out. I had never heard of either incident. Both were discredited (except by the crackpots).

Who are these mainstream scientists you're talking about? I've never heard of any of them. The only stream they're main on is Crackpot River.

[RichLB]

I did check them out. I had never heard of either incident. Both were discredited (except by the crackpots).

Who are these mainstream scientists you're talking about? I've never heard of any of them. The only stream they're main on is Crackpot River.

Now you are making claims without support. Neither of the cited incidents have been discredited - not even by government spokesmen. I suppose in some arcane article somewhere you could find a quackpot who still believes the earth is flat to state some theory that only the most gullible could believe.
As to who the "mainstream scientists" might be, I doubt if either of us recognize their names (read the documentations). However, there are several affiliated with respected institutions with which you are undoubtedly familiar.