Unless they don't care that we see them.
Honestly, folks, enough with ascribing motives to alien beings.
UFO 'filmed for 40 minutes' by Chinese scientists during eclipse
- Thread starter Bad Bishop
- Start date
Unless they don't care that we see them.
Honestly, folks, enough with ascribing motives to alien beings.
Oh, come come, Hneftafl. You're the one attempting to draw conclusions about supposed visitors from other worlds. FordSVT simply pointed out the most obvious weakness in your conclusion. Another would be simple mistakes ... if enough extraterrestrials were here, even the most unlikely accidental exposures would be sufficient to reveal them occasionally.
As I attempted to demonstrate with my anecdotes, I agree with Hneftafl that the problem is one of interpretation. While I saw two unknowns and chose to avoid leaping to conclusions about them, plenty of other people might be happy with claiming they saw flying saucers or fairies or leprechauns. It's best, in cases like these not to get too carried away with one's conclusions.
Let's assume one sees a disk-shaped machine descend from the sky and land in the desert. And after a few moments, two figures in environmental suits get out and walk around. Was a landing by creatures from another world just witnessed? Couldn't it have been a ship from the future? Or from a parallel Earth? Or maybe humans from this planet testing a new aircraft? Or just the work of well-equipped pranksters dangling a ship under a blimp?
It's even possible the whole event was a dream or hallucination.
Naturally, we could play the same games with anything seen. And in the criminal justice system, it's common for defense and prosecuting attorneys to question the reliability of human witnesses. But there's another element at work here. If I'm driving along and see a red traffic light in my way, I don't waste time doubting my senses, I come to a stop. Because the traffic light, like so many objects in modern life, is a common thing. But if I see a V-22 Osprey fly overhead, I shouldn't take much offense if my friends ask, "Are you sure you didn't see a helicopter or ordinary airplane?" because the V-22 is a less ordinary thing and it'd be quite possible for me to be mistaken about the conclusions I've come to based upon my observations. And if I see a V-22 with jet engines instead of props, then they have even more reason to doubt my testimony because to the best of my knowledge such a vehicle doesn't yet exist. And at that point, I should really be open to the possibility that I'm completely wrong about my sighting of a jet-powered V-22 unless I can back it up with careful observations of the mechanism or lots of very clear photographs.
And even than, I imagine there are people out there who will wonder if I've faked those photos.
There's nothing wrong with skepticism. It's possible to listen to the descriptions of witnesses politely and still not agree with their conclusions. It's possible to look at blurry photos and see a very different subject than the photographer thinks they've captured. You he might see a disk hovering in the distance, but I see a partially deflated mylar balloon much closer. I don't think it's impossible the photo shows a ship from another planet, but I'd like to rule out every other, more prosaic possibility first before I'm willing to accept that as the answer.
I agree with part of what you are saying. You cannot conclude from a blurry, far away light in the sky that it's alien technology--rather just something unexplained.
However, there seems to be a double standard involving UFO witnesses and any resulting proof from those kinds of sightings. People have been convicted of serious crimes and sent to their deaths based on a lesser caliber of evidence than is connected with many UFO sightings. Eyewitness accounts are deemed good enough for many mundane things, court testimony regarding crimes, etc, but are then deemed somehow invalid when applied to seeing something in the sky. What gives?
Even more troublesome, is when those UFO witnesses are actually trained observers--like pilots, policemen, military people and the like. I think this particular brand of debunking got started by Carl Sagan (whom I like and respect), who liked to say that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". This is pure bunk--there can only be one standard of evidence.
History is flush with solid eyewitness accounts of many events, from plane crashes to assassinations to natural disasters--and we don't automatically discount their data because of the nature or properties of what they have seen. There is a built-in ridicule factor associated with any UFO reporting that the public must get over before ANY progress on the UFO question can be made.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"This is pure bunk--there can only be one standard of evidence."
First of all, I disagree completely that it takes less proof to convict someone than it does to convince people that UFOs are alien spacecraft. Yes, there has been the occassional travesty of justice, but typically very strong evidence is required to convict, and even when it isn't the appeals process is there to correct things (which I think it usually does). As for alleged UFO sightings and encounters, I have never seen or heard any strong evidence for even one of them. The evidence invariably consists of grainy or blurry photos or video of something unidentifiable (hence the convenient out, "UFO") and/or the eyewitness testimony of one or a very few people that "something" was up there.
I think we can all agree that interstellar travel is a far more implausible occurrence than anything that might be testified to in a court of law. A highly implausible occurrence requires highly convincing evidence, because we weren't all born yesterday. That is what Carl Sagan was saying. The motive for a criminal eyewitness is that they have been summoned by the law to testify and must do so. What is the motive for claiming UFO sightings? 15 minutes of fame? A book deal?
Hneftafl, you speak in sweeping absolutes about a topic that you clearly know very little about. There is evidence--very real evidence of a caliber that would get someone convicted and sent to the electric chair were it regarding any other topic.
Strange craft landed on the ground, with multiple military witnesses in the UK in the 1990's (the Rendlesham Forest case). A police officer in New Mexico (the Lonnie Zamorra case), sees an egg shaped craft landed on the ground as strange, short beings putter about the outside and appartently conduct impromptu but needed repairs. They climb back into the craft when they spot the officer and it lifts off at great speed and is out of sight within seconds.
He files an official report. The ground is disturbed at the spot were he reported the craft, has been depressed due to great weight being set down upon it. Interestingly, the officer is very distraught at what he has seen, and is later described to be suffering from "shell-shock" by a Police Psychologist--a term that is outdated now, but was in use in the 1960's when the sighting occurred, and is now referred to as PTSD or post traumatic stress disorder. He has always been reluctant to speak publicly about his sighting, and has never profited from it.
There are cases when high level radiation is present in the area where a craft was said to have landed. There are witnesses--healthy people--who have had their hair fall out, gone to the hospital with what the attending doctors described as radiation burns, and then later died of unexplained cancers after being close to a landed object or from being underneath it as it flew overhead. They did not profit from honestly coming forward and reporting what they saw. They were impacted rather negatively, as is often the case.
Cases like some of those above were reported during the course of credible people doing their duties--not to get 15 minutes of fame or to make some money.
Commercial airline pilots have made numerous reports of near collisions with bizarre unidentified "aircraft" that bear no resemblance to any type of fixed-wing human technology. They did not seek fame, or money--indeed, many felt they were passed over for promotion or forced into early retirement due to the reports they filed. They were harmed by honestly reporting their sightings, and did not profit from them as you suggest.
Multiple cases exist where triangulation of witnesses exist:
A ufo is reported in the air by a pilot. The ufo is tracked on radar on the ground. Eyewitness on the ground see the same object, supplying visual confirmation.
I have no desire to do your homework for you. There is over 50 years of modern-era sightings to sift through. You are ignorant regarding this topic. That would not be such an offensive thing, but you go on and speak as if from some authority, or that you are knowledgeable. You are not.
Strange craft landed on the ground, with multiple military witnesses in the UK in the 1990's (the Rendlesham Forest case). A police officer in New Mexico (the Lonnie Zamorra case), sees an egg shaped craft landed on the ground as strange, short beings putter about the outside and appartently conduct impromptu but needed repairs. They climb back into the craft when they spot the officer and it lifts off at great speed and is out of sight within seconds.
He files an official report. The ground is disturbed at the spot were he reported the craft, has been depressed due to great weight being set down upon it. Interestingly, the officer is very distraught at what he has seen, and is later described to be suffering from "shell-shock" by a Police Psychologist--a term that is outdated now, but was in use in the 1960's when the sighting occurred, and is now referred to as PTSD or post traumatic stress disorder. He has always been reluctant to speak publicly about his sighting, and has never profited from it.
There are cases when high level radiation is present in the area where a craft was said to have landed. There are witnesses--healthy people--who have had their hair fall out, gone to the hospital with what the attending doctors described as radiation burns, and then later died of unexplained cancers after being close to a landed object or from being underneath it as it flew overhead. They did not profit from honestly coming forward and reporting what they saw. They were impacted rather negatively, as is often the case.
Cases like some of those above were reported during the course of credible people doing their duties--not to get 15 minutes of fame or to make some money.
Commercial airline pilots have made numerous reports of near collisions with bizarre unidentified "aircraft" that bear no resemblance to any type of fixed-wing human technology. They did not seek fame, or money--indeed, many felt they were passed over for promotion or forced into early retirement due to the reports they filed. They were harmed by honestly reporting their sightings, and did not profit from them as you suggest.
Multiple cases exist where triangulation of witnesses exist:
A ufo is reported in the air by a pilot. The ufo is tracked on radar on the ground. Eyewitness on the ground see the same object, supplying visual confirmation.
I have no desire to do your homework for you. There is over 50 years of modern-era sightings to sift through. You are ignorant regarding this topic. That would not be such an offensive thing, but you go on and speak as if from some authority, or that you are knowledgeable. You are not.
Last edited:
You speak as someone who is determined to believe in something for which there is very little, very weak evidence. You are not much different than any other religious zealot, in my opinion. The only evidence worth mentioning that you have listed above consists of photographs/video and eyewitness accounting. You have said nothing else to further your case than you had already said.
I'm not trying to "further" any case. I'm no "zealot", but I couldn't care less what you think of me. Reasonable people will not be suckered in by every con man with a photoshopped picture of a "ufo", but neither will they close their eyes and refuse to see the quality of the actual evidence at hand--if they care enough to seek it out.
Professional "Debunkers" will do what they have always done: lie, obfuscate, omit, distort and explain away what they cannot disprove. And if all else fails--alter the known facts in order to sumarily sweep them aside and exclaim "case closed!".
Oh, ye doubters of little faith! Can ye not put two and two together? The reason we have repeated random sightings of Bigfoot and Nessie, but can never find them when we mount actual scientific searches for them, is because the UFOs only bring them here for limited-duration visits!
Last edited:
The Rendelsham Forest incident (aka "Bentwaters" case) was in December 1980. FYI.
OK, but why do you believe there are aliens that are more advanced than we are?
Here is a question I have been wondering recently. We see in various SciFi stories (Contact and Explorers being two examples) that our radio and television signals leaving Earth should be able to be picked up by aliens. Anyone sitting within 100 ly of Earth should be able to detect our transmissions.
Wouldn't the converse be true as well? Shouldn't it or wouldn't it be possible for us on Earth to detect "primitive" radio and television style transmissions from other planets? Wouldn't we detect these signals first (unless said aliens have FTL capabilities)?
IDK if our (or their) old radio transmissions would really actually get out that far.
But I think people who say that Earth can't possibly be visited, are kind of ignoring the concept of random chance. Yes, the universe is VAST, and there are countless stars in it. But consider our own Hubble Deep Field survey... the Hubble was pointed to a purely random spot, in the southern sky, and look at what we saw from that. What if, just what if, WE are the absolutely random blotch, to the aliens? What if, by some astronomical happenstance, some alien astronomy team just pointed to some section of the sky at random, and that section of sky just happened to contain our solar system? It is highly unlikely, yes, but NOT impossible.
Or maybe finding Earth was an accident for them... maybe sometime way back, an alien ship was damaged, and had to come out of FTL, or whatever, and just happened to come out in our solar system, and find that there was a world with life on it, and reported that back to their people. Or maybe there was just some kind of alien survey mission, where they were mapping a new area of space, and discovered Earth that way. The point is, that there are many reasons why Earth could be discovered by a starfaring race.
Thing is, because the universe is so vast, and has so many bajillions of stars in it, no matter how far and long you travel, you are statistically going to come across something, sooner or later. If you have advanced FTL ability, and the means by which to scan for Earth-like worlds, those chances increase even more.
In this day in age, nobody will be able to prove that aliens exist... if we see a clear video, we say that it's Hollywood CG effects, or some talented kid with Photoshop. If we see an actual alien beside a human, again, unless we can touch it, or slice it open, people will say, oh, it's Hollywood CG or a great makeup job. Nothing short of a UFO crashing through someone's apartment in the middle of a big city, will convince anyone.
You're right, Zachary Smith, it was in 1990. Nice call, btw...
S
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Guest
If I ever actually saw aliens, there is no way in hell I'd ever take it public. I couldn't handle being tagged and looked at as a crazy lunatic.
(what can I say, i'm fragile :-P )
(what can I say, i'm fragile :-P )
You are referring to the Hubble Deep Field South image. It was preceded by the Hubble Deep Field image and followed by the Hubble Ultra Deep Field image. These were all produced by pointing Hubble at a random spot in the sky for ten days in a row (eleven for Ultra). They all look pretty much the same. This suggests the universe looks the same in all directions. In other words, Hubble didn't just happen to image a spot in the sky that's full of galaxies; all the spots in the sky are full of galaxies. If an alien species pointed its telescopes in our direction, it would probably be to look at something interesting that just happens to lie along the same line of sight as we do. Most astronomical images include foreground stars, but only the biggest and brightest are normally seen. Thus, our sun would probably not be noticed by any but the nearest stargazers.
We don't have any reason to believe there are any starfaring species. Perhaps travel between the stars is impossible or prohibitively expensive. Also, if it took the universe as long as it did to produce life here on Earth, why should it have happened any sooner or more quickly anywhere else? I think we'll become aware of aliens (if there are any) only when they want us to. IMHO, they will probably arrive as some sort of conquistadores (free-lance conquerers) and we'll be eventually wiped out, unless we're advanced enough by then to repel them. If we humans discovered a habitable planet elsewhere in the galaxy, you can be darn sure the first thought in our collective minds would be how to get there so we can live there; the aliens would probably be thinking the same thing about Earth!
K'riq Sa
Commodore
i know that ufo's exist and the government is actively covering it up. it is hard for me to believe that that many unknown things can fly around in our airspace and they claim that they are not aware of it, it is literally impossible. i have personally seen ufos, one as close as 100' off the ground. I sat and watched it for at least 15 min or so, as it hovered silently above me. then took off at speeds that no earthly aircraft could match, then made an abrupt right angle turn, that i knew was humanly impossible.
k'riq
k'riq
I've often pondered on the consideration that there may be countless other intelligent species scattered across the universe but the supreme irony would be that, for whatever reason, WE actually are the most technologically advanced.
Now THAT would be a hoot.
Now THAT would be a hoot.
I think that mathematically, there are "supposed" to be perhaps millions of planets in our galaxy alone that are capable of supporting life as we know it.
The odds would seem to favor many, many other intelligent cultures out there--at least SOME of them should be more advanced than us.....