UFOs - The Disclosure Project:Sirius

[RichLB]

A bit futile getting led into the game of attempting to prove a negative to a true believer. Somewhat akin to trying to tell the Greeks that there is not and never was a thunder god and/or telling a Thai that there really are no ghosts.

I suppose it comes down to determing which camp are the "true believers." One camp incorporates expert testimony, recordable visual evidence, governmental inconsistencies, and physical evidence (radioactive residue, burned turf, radar records, etc.). Sifting through these yields a conclusion. The other camp clings to traditional beliefs without confronting the "evidence" presented by the other side. Instead they resort to labeling like crackpot or true believer while avoiding the issue.

[Gaybutton]

Instead they resort to labeling like crackpot or true believer while avoiding the issue.

You know why I label it crackpot? Because it is crackpot. What issue do you think I'm avoiding? I don't know how many more times I'll need to say it. I am not denying facts, emphasis on the word "facts." I'm denying the interpretation of the facts. Some of what is presented is fact. Most of it, I believe, is contrived, distorted nonsense. I'll approach it in a different way. Instead of me denying that the only explanation is aliens, why are you so insistent that it is?

[RichLB]

I am not denying facts, emphasis on the word "facts." I'm denying the interpretation of the facts. Some of what is presented is fact. Most of it, I believe, is contrived, distorted nonsense. I'll approach it in a different way. Instead of me denying that the only explanation is aliens, why are you so insistent that it is?

Well, at least we agree the phenomena exist. And, I'm inclined to accept that you have no plausible explanation. As to why I believe it is alien visitation, my belief is that the evidence is overwhelming. I note that you have not addressed any of the documented cases or provided an altrnative explanation. Saying that you don't know and therefore discount the alien explanation without providing any reason other than it seems nonsenical to you seems mentally lazy, to me. Let's tackle the issue one case at a time. How about the Phoenix lights? Observers claim they are from an alien craft (as big as two air craft carriers laid end to end) and witnessed by tens of thousand residents over a 7 month period of time. I'm open to any other theory to explain this, but UFO seems most logical to me.

[Gaybutton]

Let's tackle the issue one case at a time.

Let's don't, but say we did. How can I tackle issues when I don't know what the Phoenix lights, or any other lights in the sky people witnessed, actually were? For all I know, maybe it really was aliens, but that's not my issue. My issue is proof that it's aliens. Nobody, including the crackpots, can prove what the lights were. But again, to leap to the conclusion that the explanation is it must have been aliens brings to mind only one word: Crackpot!

I believe you have earned your place along with the rest of the pseudo-science crackpots, but they've got one thing you haven't got - a diploma. Therefore, for outstanding achievement in convoluted logic, I hereby bestow upon you the following well-earned, but retroactive, diploma:

[Alex]

I know, we've discussed this before and I seem to be the only one convinced UFOs, alien visitations, and cover ups are real.

Actually, (I forget the actual number) the majority of people believe UFOs are real.

Don't these two statements contradict each other quite explicitly?

Or do you mean that you're the only one here (on GB's forum), but the majority of mankind at large does believe in UFOs?

I believe in the laws of probability and physics. The former tell me that it's unlikely that we're the only planet with what we call "intelligent life" in the whole universe. The latter tell me that it's unlikely (but not impossible from a theoretical point of view) that they are located close enough to make trips to visit us within a reasonable time span. So in my personal opinion, there's quite a high chance that they won't ever be able to visit us, and we won't ever be able to visit them. And no, I definitely don't believe that they've been here already and/or living among us. As much as I was delighted that MIB I and II were shown on Fox again last night, that's pure fiction as far as I'm concerned.

[bao-bao]

With the universe being as far reaching as we know it to be it seems more than a little silly (and egotistical) to think that we're the only comparable living things that have reached out into said universe as we've done - and in truth we haven't really scratched the surface - but what people seem to be quibbling about is proof that any have actually bothered to come here. I believe there are other life forms somewhere out there somewhere, but I don't think they've visited us. Yet.

[RichLB]

The latter tell me that it's unlikely (but not impossible from a theoretical point of view) that they are located close enough to make trips to visit us within a reasonable time span.

Alex, sorry I don't know how to do multiple quotes, but in response to your initial question, you are correct. Initially I was referring to readers of this forum (we've had this discussion before) and in the second statement I was replying to the statement that there is wide support in the general population for UFOs.

Now, in response to your quoted statement. Given the limit imposed by the speed of light, your conclusion that the time span required to reach Earth from a distant solar system is spot on. But, some (not many) physicists now believe that Einstein's contention is incorrect. For example, we now know that some particles (gravitons) are able to escape the pull of black holes. If they didn't, black holes in space would not be able to capture passing objects. These scientists go on to contend that to move from one point in space to another it is unnecessary to actually traverse space - it should be possible to pop from one location to another. Don't ask me to explain it (I can't) but the idea is not new. Shopenhaur (spelling?) in the early 20th century argued that time, space, gravity, and thought are a singularity - meaning that they come together at a single point. Believe it or not (and I don't understand it well enough to argue the point) it would be possible to go anywhere merely by thinking about it.
Who's to say that an advanced civilization has not mastered the technique. (Now would be an appropriate time to play the Twilight Zone theme!)

[Gaybutton]

Shopenhaur (spelling?) in the early 20th century argued that time, space, gravity, and thought are a singularity

Do you have a first name on him? I searched and I can't come up with anyone by that name, and I tried every spelling variation I could think of, who fits your description and I've never heard of him. Doesn't it stand to reason that if his theories negate any of Einstein's or had even remote scientific credibility, then he would have at least had a mention somewhere other than in the world of crackpots? He sounds like yet another crackpot to me. This is who you're trying to use to support your argument?



Crackpot

[Bob]

Now would be an appropriate time to play the Twilight Zone theme!

It's been playing in the background since the second post in this thread. Some people just don't hear it.

Your arguments and proof are, at best, underwhelming. We're back to the beginning, i.e., you believe it and no logic or anything else can convince you otherwise. You as well as everybody else are free to believe what they want but, at the same time, others are free to think that somebody's a few fries short of a happy meal when spouting nonsense unsupported by known science.

[Note: The "unidentified" in the term "UFO's" does not mean "alien beings." Well, at least not to those who understand the term and further understand that people have miss-perceived things for eons.]

[Gaybutton]

The "unidentified" in the term "UFO's" does not mean "alien beings."

It also doesn't apply to many of the lights-in-the-sky sightings. Unidentified Flying Object. Lights in the sky are not flying objects any more than the Aurora Borealis would be thought of as a flying object. And, by the way, the Aurora could easily account for many of these sightings.

Maybe some of these sightings are indeed space ships, but not alien spaceships. Isn't anyone going to argue that they could be spaceships that originate right here on Earth, but came back in time from the distant future? Why not? That makes as much sense to me as attributing these sightings to alien spaceships. Maybe that makes even more sense. Maybe some of these sightings are actually some future high school student doing his history homework, but if he makes contact with us he gets an "F." If one of them does make contact anyhow, let's at least find out what kinds of gay venues exist in the year 256,975,243. If evolution continues the way many of us hope, imagine the cock sizes yet to come. Unfortunately, even if he's really cute, better stay hands off. After all, if someone hasn't even been born yet, then he's for sure under-age. I wonder what the exchange rates will be that year . . .