UFO Hunters are idiots!
- Thread starter Lookingglassman
- Start date
The "silliness" is just dismissing something out of hand (despite the fact that verifiable and scientific conditions exist to support the point of view that alien life may exist) because it makes you feel somehow "superior"...
There are UFOs all over the place. Anytime you cannot identify something in the sky you have a potential "Unidentified Flying Object." The real question is: are any of those objects from somewhere else other than Earth? Are any of those sightings genuine extraterrestrial craft?
Strictly speaking UFOs are real, but their origin is remains to be determined.
I think extraterrestrial alien life, particularly alien intelligence, is a given even based on what little we know of the universe and the nature of life. Whether such intelligence has ever visited Earth recently or in the distant past is a reasonable possibility, but one that hasn't been proven beyond doubt.
Whether the U.S. government has hold of and/or is working with alien technology is not absolutely impossible yet I seriously doubt it. It may take decades but information like that almost always gets out eventually, but in this information age I'd say it's next to impossible to keep a lid on this kind of thing. Stuff gets leaked out of governments all the time. And I'd say government spin and disinformation is a lot harder today.
On the hand I could envision governments fostering and encouraging conspiracy theories just to distract people from what they really want to keep secret. They could periodically even stage "encounters" and "abductions" just to encourage the wild stories. It may seem farfetched, but governments have done some rather fucking strange things to their own populations.
I believe in alien life and alien intelligence, but in all these years I haven't seen or heard one thing that I found as convincing evidence of their presence on Earth.
I believe alien encounters, abductions and government conspiracy theories akin to religious beliefs: some people have an intense, perhaps even desperate need to believe in something greater and more fantastic beyond the mundanity of everyday life and the familiar known world. It gives their life meaning. And for the most part I find them harmless even if perhaps misguided.
Strictly speaking UFOs are real, but their origin is remains to be determined.
I think extraterrestrial alien life, particularly alien intelligence, is a given even based on what little we know of the universe and the nature of life. Whether such intelligence has ever visited Earth recently or in the distant past is a reasonable possibility, but one that hasn't been proven beyond doubt.
Whether the U.S. government has hold of and/or is working with alien technology is not absolutely impossible yet I seriously doubt it. It may take decades but information like that almost always gets out eventually, but in this information age I'd say it's next to impossible to keep a lid on this kind of thing. Stuff gets leaked out of governments all the time. And I'd say government spin and disinformation is a lot harder today.
On the hand I could envision governments fostering and encouraging conspiracy theories just to distract people from what they really want to keep secret. They could periodically even stage "encounters" and "abductions" just to encourage the wild stories. It may seem farfetched, but governments have done some rather fucking strange things to their own populations.
I believe in alien life and alien intelligence, but in all these years I haven't seen or heard one thing that I found as convincing evidence of their presence on Earth.
I believe alien encounters, abductions and government conspiracy theories akin to religious beliefs: some people have an intense, perhaps even desperate need to believe in something greater and more fantastic beyond the mundanity of everyday life and the familiar known world. It gives their life meaning. And for the most part I find them harmless even if perhaps misguided.
The absurdity is that Checkmate MADE his point--a not particularly valid point BTW--and is merely repeating himself while applying varying degrees of sarcasm rather than making any effort to discuss things reasonably.
Okay, he doesn't think that blacked-out areas on government documents demonstrate that aliens are visiting Earth. Guess what? He's RIGHT. At the same time, NO ONE--ABSOLUTELY NO ONE has suggested that these censored documents demonstrate ANYTHING beyond the fact that the government is NOT offering FULL disclosure on the subject. And that point is uncontestable.
Yeah, the government MAY have very good reasons for the censorship. We just don't KNOW, do we? Until and unless we have information what is under those black bars, one can only wonder why, if there is "nothing to the stories" it become NECESSARY to withhold information about something that does NOT exist.
NO. It isn't "proof" of anything other than the fact that the government is unwilling to provide FULL disclosure on the subject. We can theorize about the "why" of that til the cows come home. Such actions LEND credence to the argument by some that the government "knows more" than it allows out. Taken in a literal sense, this is absolutely the case as there IS information the government "knows" that IS being withheld. Whether it is revealing of anything earth-shaking or even interesting is subject to speculation (I, personally, BTW, do NOT especially subscribe to the belief that the government has any greater knowledge regarding the origin of UFOs than is already available to the average person) But in creating an atmosphere of clandestine operation and censorship and withholding information, the government throws fuel on the fire of those conspiracy minded people who believe, for whatever reasons, that there are great revelations being hidden by the government. They FOSTER such beliefs with their actions.
Last edited:
No less than Bill Clinton admits to having made inquiries concerning Roswell during his presidency. What an "idiot", huh?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3F3CXspsuo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3F3CXspsuo
Well, I'll refrain from commenting on the former President, but there is nothing wrong at all with investigating Roswell...
I just haven't seen the smoking gun that proves it was the crash of an alien ship...I'm still hoping to see that.
Thespeckledkiwi
Vice Admiral
What physical evidence? There isn't any.
Almost? It's a flimsy deduction that Atlantis = Minoan. There isn't any substantial proof.
You've have obviously done zero research and base you opinions on a totally superficial "knowledge" (or lack of same) on BOTH subjects. Try reading this book to begin with (if you're REALLY interested) Sasquatch: The Legend Meets Science . Yeah, actually there IS physical and compelling circumstantial evidence in support of Bigfoot. MANY samples of unidentified hair have been recovered which appear to have primate characteristics but can be isolated to no known hominid. PHYSICAL evidence, though not proof. Hundreds, if not thousands of casts of footprints and other body parts have been made. Many of these hold details that are difficult if not impossible to hoax, including the presence of dermal ridges ("finger-prints") and even sweat-pores. It's debatable whether this can be called "physical evidence" but if one considers that it would require extremely sophisticated forgers to create these artifacts (and it has been richly debated whether they CAN be manufactured--it hasn't been done well enough to fool expert examination in cases in trial efforts) you have to question WHY anyone with the means to create such pristine "fakes" would A: do it in the first place and B: do it for years on end without any recognition for their skill. Further, there have been "individual" bigfoot tracks which have shown up for many seasons (upwards of 15 years or more) over a given range of area that have unique identifying characteristics. One in particular shows what appears to be a congenital deformity--a "club-foot" deformity--that has been found in multiple locations over a span of many years. Initially, it was thought this "deformed" demonstrated proof of a HOAX because the first researchers to look at it indicated it was wrongly formed. As it continued to be found over a period of years and time passed, more sophisticated examines using computer models demonstrated the first researchers to examine the cast had failed to take into account both size and WEIGHT of the subject. When adjusted for both parameters, suddenly the deformity was considered accurate. The BEST scientific research at the time the tracks first started appearing would have had hoaxers making the fake tracks WRONG. It took years before science and computer models demonstrated that the scientists were wrong and the tracks made sense all along. Now, you have to accept one of two possibilities in this instance: either SOMEONE faked these tracks, either getting lucky or using a sophistication beyond the known science of the time when they first appeared and subsequently went around planting the fakes for MULTIPLE seasons adding up to years or, there is a REAL creature with a deformed foot leaving these tracks. COMPELLING circumstantial evidence, IMHO. When you consider the possibility of hoax you have to use the same criteria as in a crime scene; means, motive and opportunity. It is more likely that some unsung genius with an understanding of biomechanics and skills of model-making far beyond those of anyone known--capable of rendering MICROSCOPIC details in these "fake" tracks--has been going around for the better part of two decades PLANTING hoaxed footprints for a joke? Or does the preponderance of evidence, both circumstantial AND physical seem to suggest that perhaps there might be something TO these creatures (an analogue to which EXISTS in the fossil record in the form of Gigantopiticus Blacki).
This is long enough at this point here so I'll leave "Atlantis" to another post. Suffice to say the parallels between the events at Thera in mid-15 century BC and the Legends of Atlantis are numerous AND exacting in many ways. If you are unfamiliar with the island of Thera and the eruption there, you should read up on it before you comment about the "myth" being a "theory and nothing more".
Checkmate
Commodore
You can't have a reasonable conversation with a lunatic or a fanatical zealot, and so-called "UFOlogists" are almost always both.The "silliness" is just dismissing something out of hand (despite the fact that verifiable and scientific conditions exist to support the point of view that alien life may exist) because it makes you feel somehow "superior"...
This thread is a perfect example. They point to any government document with blackened text as... you know, I can't even figure out what they'd call it. "Reverse proof" maybe? "It's not proof, but it proves that there's something to prove! Why are they making us ask more questions?! Why?! WHY?!?!" But then when someone points out that they do that for pretty much any kind of document they release, that summarily gets ignored and dismissed because it shatters their world view completely. I mean, by their logic, I need to start pulling my hair out while wondering if my grandfather was an alien due to all the blackened text I received about his military career.
So mocking them is all that's really left as far as I'm concerned.
Well, it's easy to disprove for archeologists who actually understand the history and iconography of the respective cultures. UFO chasing community college dropouts, not so much.
These redacted documents have been fetishized enough by both parties in this thread. Let's see some of them. Show me a redacted document that invites the possibility of an ET encounter, please.
I think he merely pointed out the need for a rational, logical analysis structure of any and all "proof" about UFOs in a humorous manner. No embarrassment. Just being funny. The problem with true believers(in any area) is that they twist the evidence to support their beliefs rather than observe the evidence and draw rational conclusions from what is. IMO.
Dude, DO your OWN research if you're really interested. Don't expect me to hold your hand. Buy a book. Scan the net. I just wrote a fricking near-thesis about Bigfoot to try to educate some clown who has formed an opinion without bothering to check the available data. All I've EVER advocated RE the censored documents is that they DEMONSTRATE CONCLUSIVELY the government is not releasing ALL that it could regarding UFOs. And I stand by that point and it is INARGUABLE. If you bother to READ my earlier post I said outright that I DOUBT the government knows anything significant beyond what the average person knows. If you're not going to bother READING what I've already said, I'm sure not going out for any extra effort for you now.
Good GOD, the smugness of you "skeptics" is pathetic. In general, you're uneducated about the subject your "debunking" having made NO significant study of it and basing your OPINION on superficial information you've picked up in passing regard. You can't DEBATE the subject because you're uneducated about the data that's available so you expect everyone ELSE to do your leg-work for you and present to you research and information that is EQUALLY available to you if you had a genuine interest just so you can take potshots at it all without REALLY having to be bothered with putting forth your own effort. Sad, really.
I will concede if a UFO did crash at Rosewell then the govt probably has it and may have even figured out how it worked and all the UFOs flying around now are US pilots testing them out.
As for Bigfoot, Zachary you made a very convincing argument. I beleive there is SOMETHING running around out there, but the one thing that nags at me is how come there aint like a bunch of them running around? At the most people see one. If these things have been around hundreds of years how come there aint a bunch of them running around and discovered by no? Are they asexual and give birth and then die off with the baby left to grow up on its own? Do they have some secret colony that is yet undiscovered? I just think if there are Bigfoots running around that we would have absoulute proof by now because there would be a bunch of them running around and easy to find.
As for Bigfoot, Zachary you made a very convincing argument. I beleive there is SOMETHING running around out there, but the one thing that nags at me is how come there aint like a bunch of them running around? At the most people see one. If these things have been around hundreds of years how come there aint a bunch of them running around and discovered by no? Are they asexual and give birth and then die off with the baby left to grow up on its own? Do they have some secret colony that is yet undiscovered? I just think if there are Bigfoots running around that we would have absoulute proof by now because there would be a bunch of them running around and easy to find.
There ARE actually reports of sightings of families or family-like groups of Bigfoots with even a few tales (I'm skeptical) of people being "held" hostage for a few days in a Bigfoot community. Close examination of the famous Roger Patterson film shot in the 1960's seems to demonstrate that the specimen (if real) in that footage was FEMALE, with rather pendulous breasts. The Patterson film has a weird and interesting pedigree and at various times I've been convinced it was a hoax and at one point a man stepped forward and claimed he was the person "in an ape-suit" for the film. He replicated the kind of strange gait the "creature" showed and it seemed a situation of "case-closed". Further analysis and enhancement using computers and detailed measurements though demonstrated that this man COULD NOT POSSIBLY have been the figure in the film and that the relative proportions of limb and body length ratios did not match up to human proportions. Further, detailed enhancement of the film showed an area on the "creature's" leg where apparently the hair had been worn away, showing bare skin beneath and even showed the working of the thigh muscle as the "creature" walked, complete with a bulge that was extremely consistent with a type of herniated thigh muscle rupture found in heavy-set human athletes. These kinds of details go FAR beyond "a guy in a monkey-suit" which this film has been said to be by detractors and such details are impossible even today to do with a "suit", much less it having been possible in 1966. I'm moderately convinced the Patterson film is the real deal at this point and I've ALWAYS, even at my most doubtful times about it, wondered why I've NEVER seen even a professional attempt at creating a Bigfoot hoax look so "real".
There is another video, taken a few years ago of a rather "small" reported Bigfoot, hurrying across a field. This video tape is rather grainy and shows a figure estimated to be about 5 1/2 feet tall, again with a strange gait. What is compelling about the footage is that, while it's pretty grainy, toward the end of the video, as the figure is passing out of the clearing of the field and into some underbrush, it suddenly shifts in a weird way and appear to get about a foot and a half taller. It has been speculated this footage showed FEMALE (based on its small size) and the sudden "increase" in height is thought to be the female shifting a previously hidden infant back up onto her shoulders. Such behavior has also been reported among apes, where a mother wold interpose her body between her infant her a potential predator/threat and otherwise generally carry her baby on her shoulders.
Yeah, I'm VERY troubled by the fact that no bodies have been recovered or other incontrovertible remains. Unidentified hair with primate characteristics are interesting but in the end, just food for speculation. If, though, these creatures do exist, they must by virtue of their description be HIGHLY intelligent--more so than the brightest apes, though clearly less so than humans as they have no "civilization" and live more or less as animals. It's also clear based on their reported reactions to seeing humans that they desperately want to avoid us. Their intelligence and desire to avoid us may be why we haven't found "groups" of them and only catch relatively isolated sightings. They are highly intelligent and are ACTIVELY seeking to avoid us. It's true that there are still large terrestrial animals waiting to be discovered. Every few years or so another gets found someplace. Few of those, if any, are actively seeking to AVOID being found and it's taking us a while to get around to them. In the case of Bigfoot, it may just be he's smarter than the rest and doesn't WANT to be found by us. In most reported instances, rather than attacking or showing curiosity when they've encountered humans, Bigfoots have just run like hell from us. For being "monsters" reports of them attacking are EXTRREMELY rare.
Thespeckledkiwi
Vice Admiral
The one thing 'Bigfoot' has going for it is the fact that the Northwest part of the US has large tracks of land still really not touched by human. The deforestation of this area though is troubling that no real habitat has been found as of yet.
The question that begs to be answered is this; how often is a large mammal found that was previously undiscovered? There have been species of animals that were thought to be extinct until someone rediscovers them but actual brand new species? I know smaller animals like reptiles and the such are discovered a few times a year but nothing big.
The tracks bring up an interesting theory but I am reminded of the crop circles. There are some that are fake, some that are 'real' in that they can't be explained at all.
*yawns* Sorry I'm tired.
I got to read the Mothman Prophecies again. Fascinating book about the UFO phenom in the 60s.
The question that begs to be answered is this; how often is a large mammal found that was previously undiscovered? There have been species of animals that were thought to be extinct until someone rediscovers them but actual brand new species? I know smaller animals like reptiles and the such are discovered a few times a year but nothing big.
The tracks bring up an interesting theory but I am reminded of the crop circles. There are some that are fake, some that are 'real' in that they can't be explained at all.
*yawns* Sorry I'm tired.
I got to read the Mothman Prophecies again. Fascinating book about the UFO phenom in the 60s.
The problem with Bigfoot and the Loch Ness sea monster is that you can't just have ONE of something -- there has to be a whole population of them. And if that were the case, we would have already discovered that.
The forests of Oregon and Washington state aren't THAT big...if there was a whole undiscovered species, we would have discovered it by now...
I don't buy into these monster stories...
This is a desperate effort to spin Checkmate's remarks and retroactively imbue them with some intelligence. FAIL.
When it comes to UFO evidence, debunkers routinely twist or ignore inconvenient evidence so that they can find conventional explanations for cases. Example: In the Rendlesham forest incident (England, 1980), almost everything seen up close on the ground was ignored by the "experts" so that the UFO could be explained to be a lighthouse that was several miles away.
Similar threads
