• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The UFO Stigma

Triskelion

Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
in the Project Blue Book era, UFO sightings were debunked by the US government. This may have been due to the same reasons that NASA wrote Stephen Spielberg a 20 page letter imploring him not to make Close Encounters of the Third Kind: Concerns over the possibilities of mass hysteria Spielberg had already proven capable of with Jaws. Only UFO hysteria could undermine pretty much any and all of society's institutions: religious authority, governmental authority, military authority, etc - once people began to realize that there could possibly be other models and technological paradigms to be known in the universe.

Or it could have just been cold war paranoia.

Well if you watch almost any UFO show, you see people being interviewed whose credibility lies somewhere between "mastery of the fryalator" and "mastery of some English language". Of course, you get the upper end of the spectrum too, with no shortage of astronauts and military-industrial VIPs weighing in with some VERY plausible experiences of their own.

And then there are the regular joes, people like cops and pilots, just doing their jobs and leaving weird-ass UFO paper trails a mile long following mass sightings of Very Unusual Things.

So my question right now is this: is society in general, do you think, opening up to the question of alien intelligence? And able to start pondering the implications of other life in the universe? Some things have changed - for example, we're now able to confirm that yes, there are other solar systems and planets out there, and that certainly helps us to generalize "billions and billions" of worlds across the cosmos.

And then there's science fiction in popular culture, gaining traction as everyday life begins to bewilder us with abilities and questions only society's most brilliant authors could conceive in the pre/industrial age.

And if there still is a stigma - is it worth defying, and committing career suicide in order to ask the questions that clearly, need to be asked by a species calling itself intelligent?

I think it might be worth it. How about you? Are we becoming more open to the questions?

Here's one question:
What if there were a whole other arm of our own military that operated with its own funds and its own arena, and without oversight or within lawful parameters (that are demarcated by mere continental borders, really)? What if our own species had super technologies that could make mince meat of conventional materiel? What if most people came to realize this? Would it change societies? How?


Well, add your UFO 2 cents here whatever it is. :bolian:
 
settled.png
 
Even though everyone's carrying around cameras, we're also better equipped to make hoaxes, and plenty of these are clogging Youtube. So the burden of proof has actually gone up as a result of technology.
 

That's nonsense because there are thousands of pictures, videos, testimonies, etc and the skeptics do what they do best...they scream "Fake! Forgery! CGI! Liars! Crackheads! Lunatics!"

You can't "prove" anything to the ignorant.
 
^

So those of us who don't believe them are ignorant? :lol:

BTW, testimonies are, by definition, not proof. No matter what the subject matter.
 
So those of us who don't believe them are ignorant? :lol:

No, those of you who are closed minded and don't allow for new possibilities are ignorant.

BTW, testimonies are, by definition, not proof. No matter what the subject matter.

"Proof" is subjective. What's your definition of proof? Skeptics demand proof and then give examples...pictures, videos, physical traces, and when all those are provided, they are immediately rejected and more criteria is added...and provided...and rejected again...and so on.

For whatever reason, some people just can't accept certain things so no amount of "proof" will ever be good enough for them.
 
That's the point. The rise in recording devices has not resulted in a corresponding rise in documented sightings.

Says who? The news services? You know, ridicule is a powerful weapon, it's kept people closed mouthed for years. Why provide pictures of Flying Saucers and Bigfoot when just about everyone who has done so in the past 6 or 7 decades has been ridiculed, lost their jobs, locked up or "permanently" silenced?
 
common sense is not ignorance in the realm of crackpot theories.

"Crackpot Theories" is also subjective and "proof" (enough) of what I said. Your mind cannot accept certain possibilities, therefore you have to lash out and label those possibilities as "crackpot" - somehow it makes you feel better.

Think about it, the possibility of other life in this infinite universe, who is more technologically advanced than the people on this planet is a "crackpot theory" to you?

I think that pretty much speaks for itself.
 
Not single recorded, documented form of evidence for monsters, mythological creatures, miracles, UFO's and or Ghosts in all of human history, despite the ability to clearly and easily record nearly everything that happens around us by the majority of the human race?

A cat can't yawn without three camera angles now. ET wouldn't stand a chance.
 
There probably are aliens, they just wouldn't bother contacting primitives like us. What would we have to offer them, anyway?
 
So those of us who don't believe them are ignorant? :lol:

No, those of you who are closed minded and don't allow for new possibilities are ignorant.

BTW, testimonies are, by definition, not proof. No matter what the subject matter.

"Proof" is subjective. What's your definition of proof? Skeptics demand proof and then give examples...pictures, videos, physical traces, and when all those are provided, they are immediately rejected and more criteria is added...and provided...and rejected again...and so on.

For whatever reason, some people just can't accept certain things so no amount of "proof" will ever be good enough for them.

I'm open-minded, but I've never seen evidence of a UFO that couldn't easily be attributed to something other than a UFO.
 
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Blurry photos/video don't cut it.

I'm open to the possibility of alot of these cryptids. I just have yet to see any evidence concrete enough to convince me.
 
Is this a bad time to bring up chemtrails?

I have some very nice pictures of clouds here.

The clouds are everywhere.

The clouds are behind you.

It's too late, the cloud has kidnapped your baby.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top