Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   OlympusMyco.com Olympus Myco Bulk Substrate

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  [ show all ]
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal?
    #8789645 - 08/18/08 05:22 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)



Theres always been a huge mass of reliable evidence for the existence of ET's already visiting Earth but its always been witness evidence.  The disclosure project is something which is very hard to deny but still doesn't constitute scientific proof as it is just credible witness testimony.

But what about implants in abductees?  The labs which have tested these implants have stated they contain elements of extraterrestrial origin.  The labs were not aware that it was a suspected implant from an abductee.  They came to the conclusion that the material must be from a meteorite.

This is some serious evidence here.  Can we start talking about this in the realms of science yet or are we going to disregard the evidence and enforce our preconceived stigma of the phenomena?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDark_globe
Stranger
Male


Registered: 05/02/07
Posts: 250
Loc: NSW
Last seen: 13 years, 10 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8789677 - 08/18/08 05:50 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

meh, still not convinced, especially when Dr.Leir's claims "have not been independently verified." (as stated by wikipedia which is arguably a less reliable source)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHeavyToilet
The Heaviest OfThem All
Male

Registered: 08/06/03
Posts: 9,458
Loc: British Columbia
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8789936 - 08/18/08 08:48 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I wonder what an "extraterrestrial element" is. What, is it too 'alien' for them to see how many protons the element  it has? Sounds like bullshit.

Although I believe that there must be life somewhere else in the universe, as there are an estimated 10^22-10^24 stars, I don't think that they're taking people unnoticed and putting triangular shaped asteroids in them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: HeavyToilet]
    #8790005 - 08/18/08 09:07 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> I wonder what an "extraterrestrial element" is.

It is sloppy speak for "crystalline structure typically found in meteorites".  In this case, sloppy speak sounds much more like "alien technology".

The full conclusion:

Quote:

The first theory on the origin of these samples was initiated due to the relatively high hardness value obtained for the iron core of sample T1,2. It is well known that very hard iron alloys can be found naturally in meteorite samples. In fact, several characteristics of the specimens are similar to certain meteorite-type materials. Meteorites can be a complex combination of many different elements (see for example, McSween, 1987). This is the case particularly for sample T3, which contains at the very least 11 elements: Na, Al, Si, P, Cl, Ca, Fe, Ni, Cu, Mo & Sn. Typical of iron and stony-iron meteorites is the classic "Widmanstatten structure", consisting of lamelae (plate or needle-shaped crystals) of kamacite (alpha-iron) and/or taenite (gamma-iron), formed during the slow cooling of meteoroids [McSween, 1987; Budka et al., 1996]. Interspersed with the metal grains are other minerals rich in iron and/or nickel such as troilite, FeS, and schreibersite, (Fe,Ni)_3P. Based on my examination, the samples in question could possibly fit into this framework. Elemental analysis done by X-ray Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) indicated iron and phosphorus as major constituents of the cladding material surrounding the iron core. The (EDS) patterns resemble those recently reported for iron dendrites found in pockets and veins of the Yanshuang H6 meteorite [Brooks, et. al., 1995]. In addition, I identified a calcium phosphate mineral as a possible phase within the cladding of both samples.Interestingly, chlorapatite, Ca_5(PO_4)_3Cl is among the more common meteorite minerals [Wasson, 1974]. This would account for the presence of a substantial amount of calcium and smaller amount of chlorine detected. A problem with this theory, however, is that no nickel was detected in T1,2 and only a minute amount in T3. It has been stated that "most meteorites contain between 6 and 10 percent nickel"…and "no iron meteorites contain less than five percent nickel" [McSween, 1987]. This may not be a problem after all, since the specimens could be just a small fragment of a larger meteorite body.

An altogether different hypothesis can be formulated based on the fact that these specimens were extracted from an human body. An iron sliver, embedded in human tissue could possibly cause a calcification reaction. This would explain the presence of calcium and phosphorous on the surface of the samples. Chlorapatite and other calcium phosphate minerals are the major component of hard tissue (bones, teeth) along with collagen. In fact, calcium phosphate-based ceramics have been used in medicine and dentistry for nearly 20 years due to their bioactive nature [Hench, 1993]. In light of this, even if the cladding was not formed inside the body, but rather entered the tissue in its entirety as a sliver from a stone, it is not surprising that the body had no adverse reaction to the foreign object.

It must be stressed, these are only theories as to the origin of the specimens in question based on preliminary data and information. More in-depth studies would be required to prove either one.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Seuss]
    #8790322 - 08/18/08 10:43 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

So its basically inconclusive again.

Still highly suspicious though.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8790369 - 08/18/08 10:51 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

As far as Im concerned, extraterrestrial aliens visiting us is not even close to going from paranormal to normal.

The implant, though maybe inconclusive, doesn't at all point to alien abduction.  That is a thought superimposed on the implant by people and is nowhere implied by the properties of the implant.


When and if aliens visits are accepted by the scientific community, the evidence will be so apparent that threads like this wont be needed.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblebadchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,379
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: DieCommie]
    #8790433 - 08/18/08 11:06 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I think we should maintain a clear distinction between "youtube" and "science".


--------------------
...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge.  It is an indellible experience; it is forever known.  I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did.

Smith, P.  Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27.

...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely.

Osmond, H.  Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8791825 - 08/18/08 04:39 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Ego Death said:
This is some serious evidence here.  Can we start talking about this in the realms of science yet or are we going to disregard the evidence and enforce our preconceived stigma of the phenomena?



It always has been talked about in the realm of science. But a lot of people just don't like what science has to say so they choose to disregard it and believe in alien abductions or whatever. Those are the people you should blame for ETs being considered a paranormal phenomenon.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8791866 - 08/18/08 04:50 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Good answer!  It has been scientifically studied before, and people dont like the conclusion.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: DieCommie]
    #8791928 - 08/18/08 05:03 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
As far as Im concerned, extraterrestrial aliens visiting us is not even close to going from paranormal to normal.




Huh?  I don't know what you mean.

Quote:

The implant, though maybe inconclusive, doesn't at all point to alien abduction.  That is a thought superimposed on the implant by people and is nowhere implied by the properties of the implant.




So if its only alien abductees that have the implant and the implant appears not to be man-made you think its just superimposed ideas?  Fact is the labs had no idea these guys were abductees.

Quote:

When and if aliens visits are accepted by the scientific community, the evidence will be so apparent that threads like this wont be needed.




No doubt.  Since science doesn't cover common sense.

A person could be raped but have no physical evidence left thus the scietific method would conclude the rape did not happen at all but does that mean in reality that it didn't?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8791946 - 08/18/08 05:06 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Fact is the labs had no idea these guys were abductees.




Nor did they come to that conclusion.




Your last sentence is completely correct.  The scientific method is not perfect, and is never claimed to be.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8793316 - 08/18/08 10:43 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Ego Death said:
A person could be raped but have no physical evidence left thus the scietific method would conclude the rape did not happen at all but does that mean in reality that it didn't?



Er, no. The scientific method would conclude that there is not enough evidence to determine if a rape did or did not happen.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8793398 - 08/18/08 10:55 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Yes, right... good distinction.  You keep nipping it in the bud.  :gethigh:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8794053 - 08/19/08 03:27 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I'm just wondering what its gonna take for science to take it seriously?

SETI discovered signals but it was disregarded as the signal didn't last long enough.
Dr. Lear finds very interesting implants with a strange manufactured composition and containing rare elements usually found on asteroids.
Hundreds of highly credible witnesses get together in the disclosure project to tell the public the truth about ET.

Yet, I still see no proper scientific study of the phenomena.  Why?

Anybody with commen sense can see thats its true that ETs are visiting Earth.  If only one of those hundreds of witnesses is telling the truth then the greatest discovery of our age has happened but is being ignored.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8794065 - 08/19/08 03:37 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

You've already made up your mind that ETs are visiting the earth. That is not a scientific approach, yet you ask others to be scientific about it. I can assure you that they are doing so.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8794096 - 08/19/08 03:57 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

people have allready said that they'll take it seriously when the evidence suggests that extraterrestrials are most likely present.

To conclude that they are present though, I don't think its fallacious to demand a high level of probability that the evidence points to ET's to the exclusion of others.

Where is teh evidence about the probe being from meterites?  Source?  I'm really not interested in the youtube video, so could you point me somewhere?  Has it been published anywhere?


any idea why aliens would put rock in people?  That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense really

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8794122 - 08/19/08 04:19 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> I'm just wondering what its gonna take for science to take it seriously?

The big problem, in my opinion, is the "signal to noise ratio" of honest and accurate observations compared to the mass of drivel out there.  For every one thing that could be scientifically validated, there are a million things that are exaggerated, faked, or known phenomena.

A great example are these implants.  He makes claims that they give off RF (radio frequencies) while in the "active state" and he uses the RF to find the devices (with a frequency counter no less :rolleyes:).  At this point, rather than proceed to remove the implant, bring in some people to verify the claims.  Before destroying the evidence, by removing it from the body, let others verify the accuracy of the initial observations.  Rather than using DMMs (digital multimeters) and frequency counters, things I have sitting on my workbench at home, get some real lab gear.  Where was the spectrum analyzer, the rf signal meter, the vector network analyzer, etc...

The cynic in me knows that there is a lot of money to be made selling books to truthers.  Money is a huge motivator, and whenever I hear something about the paranormal, the first thing I do is look to see how many books the person making the claims has published on the topic.  In my mind, somebody that profits from the "noise" is immediately a suspect of fraud.

Take the video of the doctor removing the implant as another example.  Right at the climax of the surgery, as he is going to remove the object, what happens?  The camera zooms in, it gets blurry, there is a quick cut (look for the single black frame), then camera zooms back out, and the doctor has an implant that he removed.  I've watched enough surgeries, both on TV and in person to know that he could have easily shown the implant, moved it around while still attached, etc.  Why the fancy slight of hand camera work?  The question in the back of my mind when I noticed this was, "How many books does he have out on the subject?"

Finally, there are obviously a lot of people with implants if one doctor has removed 12+ of them in the last ten years.  Rather than blame science for not being interested, instead assume that science is interested and ask, "Why is nobody else finding implants to remove from their patients?"  Goes back to how many books has this guy written on the topic.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8794238 - 08/19/08 05:37 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

You've already made up your mind that ETs are visiting the earth.




I've seen overwhelming evidence.  I've seen a craft land behind my friends house.  I don't believe it is secret human technology simply because it was so advanced and other people have reported seeing the exact same craft and their alien occupants for such a long time.  For me to deny it I would have to assume me and my friends had the same hallucination and that all these other people who are seeing the same thing are also hallucinating.  Thats not logical especially considering the fact this craft actually left physical traces where it landed.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Seuss]
    #8794247 - 08/19/08 05:43 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Thats a fair point but I'm sure theres plenty of legitimate scientists making a lot of money out of books on their research.

I'm really asking you guys to help me understand what it would take for proof.  I mean what evidence is required for it to go from science fiction to fact?

Apart from an alien landing on Earth and letting itself be tested by several different respected scientists.  Even then, would that be proof?  After all, we are so used to automatically debunking anything UFO/alien related.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8794252 - 08/19/08 05:49 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

What kind of physical traces? Do you have photos of this event? Could the event have a non-extraterrestrial explanation? Can you provide evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt that an alien craft landed behind your friend's house?

These are the sort of questions that comprise the scientific investigation that you are asking for. The problem is that lots of believers have a lower standard of evidence than the scientific method requires. When it really comes down to the nitty-gritty of the investigation, the believers are willing to make leaps of faith that science does not allow.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Edited by zouden (08/19/08 05:51 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8794301 - 08/19/08 06:33 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> I'm sure theres plenty of legitimate scientists making a lot of money out of books on their research.

Not really.  Legitimate scientists tend to publish in journals, for which they make little to no money, or they patent and sell their technology.  There are a few exceptions, such as 'A Brief History of Time' and the like, but these are not the norm.  When they do publish books, the books tend to be oriented towards other scientists rather than the layperson.

> I mean what evidence is required for it to go from science fiction to fact?

If the implants are real, then it is enough!  That is why I went off on the lack of research done on the implants before they are removed.  Next time somebody comes in with an implant, get a team of doctors and scientists together from start to end to minimize the chances of fraud.

> Apart from an alien landing on Earth and letting itself be tested by several different respected scientists.  Even then, would that be proof?

I think it would be pretty hard to deny, were it to happen.  Of course people would be skeptical at first, but it wouldn't take long to prove that it was not a special effects hoax.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8796282 - 08/19/08 02:08 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
What kind of physical traces? Do you have photos of this event? Could the event have a non-extraterrestrial explanation? Can you provide evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt that an alien craft landed behind your friend's house?





Physical trace was the indentation left in the long grass where it landed.  I have no photos but they would not of helped anyway as theres already hundreds of photographed / videoed events.

There is a possible non-extraterrestrial explanation - that is if the craft was man-made.  I'm guessing but I don't think it was because of the characteristics of the vehicle (silently hovering and maneuvering) and the fact that many other credible people have seen similar craft and have met the alien occupants.

I have no idea why that craft would land where it did.  We lived in a small village in the middle of no-where.  There was acres and acres of farmland around us.  Why would anybody land a craft right behind the only houses for miles around?  If I was an alien or an advanced human craft pilot, I would of landed a mile away where nobody would of seen us.  Whoever owned/piloted that machine must of had a reason for landing there...

And why so many lights on it too?  It really is bizarre.

I spose I really do have a gripe about the fact this sort of shits going on and half the world thinks it bull, let alone has a rational explanation.  The ET stuff is just my best guess after evaluating all possible evidence.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8796882 - 08/19/08 03:52 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

So what you saw could easily be explained by a man-made craft of a type that you're unfamiliar with. This is a much more credible explanation than the idea that it's extraterrestrial.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8796975 - 08/19/08 04:03 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Plus ... and this is not intended as a flame or insult at all... you simply cannot trust your own senses completely.  People do hallucinate.  People do dream and confuse that with reality.  People do think the black man raised the knife when it was in fact the white man (reference to famous psychology experiment).  Any of these can happen to rational, intelligent people.  So for a scientist to be completely honest, he must acknowledge that his senses and interpretation of them is not sufficient evidence to prove anything (especially when considering phenomenon outside the norm)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8797847 - 08/19/08 07:04 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

It could easily be explained if your willing to disregard the mass of human testimony.  People who have experiences the same as mine but actually meet the pilots.

Even if this craft was terrestrial - a whole new can of worms is opened.  Who is hiding this super advanced technology and why?  Why are they dressing the pilots as aliens?  Why are they making themselves visible to civilians?

Quote:

This is a much more credible explanation than the idea that it's extraterrestrial.




Why is it more credible to assume that humans have had advanced anti gravity craft since the early 1900's and dressing the pilots as ETs?  Why is it unacceptable to say life exists beyond earth and is visiting us?

This is not based on science.  These ideas simply fit preconceived stigmas.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8798592 - 08/19/08 09:40 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

the first thing I do is look to see how many books the person making the claims has published on the topic

Sigh. At least five books and three videos:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=roger+leir&x=0&y=0

He also sells ad space on his web site.

The real clincher is how the 'implants' haven't been presented to a university openly for peer review by real scientists as required by the Scientific Method. Instead, they were given to Derrel Sims, a "hypno-therapist and abduction researcher" who passed them on to "one of the most advanced labs in the world" where they've been carefully kept away from any honest scrutiny. Which lab exactly hasn't been specified.

And then there's this gem:

http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/iscni24.html

where our buddy, Dr. Lier, states that the lab findings are "mind-boggling" and that for a small fee, you can subscribe to his newsletter and be boggled too.

All this boggling happened in March 1996. The world is still waiting for Dr. Lier to stop with the story-telling and newsletter-publishing and actually release the physical evidence to real scientists.

Sounds an awful lot like the recent Bigfoot hoax going around. Gullible people are a dime a dozen, and nothing ever changes.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8799590 - 08/20/08 04:05 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> Gullible people are a dime a dozen, and nothing ever changes.

The problem is that people want to believe in something greater.  The desire is wired into our being, somehow.  The reason why we have the scientific method is to combat this human trait.  I don't blame people for being gullible, but I do get annoyed when people take advantage of gullibility in order to profit.  Not only are they taking advantage of others, but they are making it much more difficult for the scientific community to tell the difference between legitimate observation and fakery.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Seuss]
    #8799626 - 08/20/08 04:25 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Exactly, there should be laws against this.  You can't go around and make stuff up about people its slander or libel (sp?) but a Dr. can claim that implants contain et isotopes etc to sell a book.  That fucking sucks, what an asshole.

I might as well go out and claim Jesus came and sat on my face and blessed me with the magic to cure the world if everyone buys my DVD.  Fucking beats a day job I spose.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8799722 - 08/20/08 05:34 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> I might as well go out and claim Jesus came and sat on my face and blessed me with the magic to cure the world if everyone buys my DVD.

The sad part is that if you google just a bit, you will find people that fit your example, selling "Jesus cures" and the like.

The bigfoot story in current events is another great example... animal DNA and a rubber suit.

The problem even extends into legitimate scientific research.  A resent survey of publishing researchers found that up to 12% admitted to having falsified research results before publication!

I won't completely discredit the implant claims made by Dr. Lier, but I seriously doubt that they are real.  Diploid summed up the reasons for my doubts with, "All this boggling happened in March 1996. The world is still waiting for Dr. Lier to ... actually release the physical evidence to real scientists."


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMinstrel
Man of Science
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Seuss]
    #8803042 - 08/20/08 09:36 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

There is one much bigger problem to the whole taking ETs thing seriously:  why should I care?

If space aliens are visiting earth, we, at least on the whole, don't perceive them to be doing much of anything, so why should it matter? 
If the only consequence of their existence is that a few dozen oddballs (out of the 6 billion humans) get anal probes at night every once in a while, then they can keep on doing their thing for all I care; it doesn't affect me or how my world functions in the least.


--------------------

Edited by Minstrel (08/20/08 09:38 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Minstrel]
    #8804155 - 08/21/08 03:54 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Why should I care that people kill each other?
Why should I care that people are starving?

Theres a little thing called compassion that clearly has been lost in this modern egotistical mindset.  Being abducted is not going to be a nice experience not matter who is doing it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8804308 - 08/21/08 06:54 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

LOL! Nobody's getting abducted. They're just telling stories. It's painfully obvious.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8805068 - 08/21/08 10:43 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Really?

Care to explain how a story of a saucer encounter burnt this man and gave him radiation poisoning?

Stephen Michalak


I can give another 100 examples which are painfully obvious that a UFO abduction has occured.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8805173 - 08/21/08 11:03 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Just because there is some phenomenon whos cause is not immediately obvious, that does not imply at all that there are alien abductions.  So the guy has dot shaped radiation burns... that does not imply at all that he was abducted by interstellar aliens and taken on their craft.  Thats a non sequitur of epic proportions.

You are taking events whos cause is not immediately obvious, like dot spot man here or your experience with lights... and then making the wild assumption that it must be an alien craft from light years away.  That is not scientific. 

I once saw crazy lights in the sky I cant explain... There were two of them and they were moving quite fast, and twisting around each other in a helix like shape.  Despite the fact that I dont know what they were, there is absolutely no reason to assume they were an alien craft.  Unknown cause does not imply alien craft.

You say you can give 100 examples, well thats not that many at all.  There are 6 billion people on the planet, Im sure there are more than 100 of those people with weird unexplainable events or characteristics.  Its a matter of statistics.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: DieCommie]
    #8805473 - 08/21/08 12:22 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

People have been telling abduction stories for decades, but none has ever produced a single microbe with DNA that isn't from Earth (or with no DNA at all). None has ever brought back a single fiber beyond our technology. None has ever brought back ANYTHING AT ALL other than stories full of holes and inconsistencies.

If I so much as walk into the same room you're in, I'd be covered in microbes and fibers from your body and clothing. Forensic investigations have demonstrated that it's virtually impossible to share a room with someone without necessarily taking away evidence of that encounter.

Sure, ET might not use fibers, and might not have germs, but that's a wild assumption that goes against everything we know. In science, we tentatively go with what we know pending new evidence that contradicts and updates that knowledge. We don't make new things up, as in jumping to the conclusion that some guy with red dots was probed by ET.

A guy who, SURPRISE!, made a tidy profit from the book and TV deal (with NBC) that immediately followed the incident.

Your pre-suppositions that red dots equals ET and that lights in the sky are aliens that have never been seen, whose environments contain no microbes and no fibers of any kind, and who can violate one of the most basic and thoroughly-tested principles in science (the light speed limit) are exactly what science is not.

It's because of fantastically unlikely pre-suppositions like these by ET proponents that these things are not taken seriously by scientists, and that should answer your opening question.

I can give another 100 examples

So what? I can give a million examples of people who claim to have seen Jesus, the Virgin Mary, and Bigfoot. Just like your examples, none of them has ever brought back any hard, physical evidence. But stories? They all have stories... and book deals! :shrug:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMinstrel
Man of Science
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8805889 - 08/21/08 01:41 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

So you'll admit that you feel some remorse for these 'abductees', right?  Do you know how people are most easily manipulated? 

Via their emotions, no less!


--------------------

Edited by Minstrel (08/21/08 02:00 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: DieCommie]
    #8806519 - 08/21/08 04:17 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

The guy said he experienced these burns as direct result from an apparent exhaust outlet on a landed UFO he investigated.  I think common sense can pretty much rule out lies and elaborate hoax.

Its possible the craft was man made but then theres the fact that in most abduction cases the occupants have appeared alien and the technology is apparently very different to anything we know of.

It may not be scientific but when I look at the broader picture emerging from credible cases common sense suggests to me the ET explanation is the most likely explanation.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8806535 - 08/21/08 04:21 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

As we are on the subject of scientific method I have to note that your answer is equally reliant upon assumption.  Why assume an alien would leave a DNA trace for you to find?  Who has even been looking for these traces when the scientific community at large is yet to accept them as worthy of investigation?

If I was abducted, I'd write a book and I'd keep the money.  That doesn't disprove the event.  It suggests possible ulterior motives but giving oneself radiation poisoning?  Thats going to far and is not likely.

Theres also reports from corroborating independent witnesses.  Theres reports from children.  Theres people who wait until their professional careers are over because they feared losing their jobs.  Theres plenty of people who do not sell books or wish fame from their experiences.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Minstrel]
    #8806546 - 08/21/08 04:24 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Yes I do.  I've seen first hand evidence though, that is enough for me and is not manipulation.

I accept its possible some human has kept advanced technology and is orchestrating the alien stuff as a cover but its doesn't seem a very logical answer to me.  If they can hide their technology then why not just keep it hidden.  There would be no requirement to dress dwarfs in aliens suits and have them act out this shit.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8806564 - 08/21/08 04:28 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

The guy said he experienced these burns as direct result from an apparent exhaust outlet on a landed UFO he investigated.  I think common sense can pretty much rule out lies and elaborate hoax.



I don't think it does.

But the scientific method doesn't care what you or I think - it only cares about evidence. Stronger evidence than this.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8806588 - 08/21/08 04:34 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

If we are gonna use scientific method then theres only 2 valid theories. 

1. Man created these machines
2. Man did not create these machines

We cannot deny the existence of the craft when theres cases such as the Belgium mass sighting.  Separate ground radar lock ons from several different radar stations.  100's of photographs and video recordings.  F-16 fighter jets scrambled and also getting radar lock-ons.  These so many cases like these theres no question whether or not the craft are real.

Fact is - if you throughly study the phenomena, its only logical to say that the evidence indicates they are more likely ET.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8806615 - 08/21/08 04:41 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Well, I'm not familiar with those specific cases, but being the devil's advocate here: those things you mentioned simply indicate a craft was present, not that it was ET.

The stealth bomber looks like an alien craft too if you don't know what it is.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8806636 - 08/21/08 04:44 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Skepticism is a belief system in which it's adherents are more firm in their belief than religious fundamentalists.

Their belief is so fuerte that they will claim that it is not belief.  They therefore are more impressive than the Roman Catholics and the rare Muslim Jihadists. 

Skepticism =  the new religion for intellectuals.

Behold skeptics!  Gigantic pulsating space donuts!
Will you contend and rationalize (ration lies) this?



Damn it! I want some green tea with my space donuts and they had best not be fried in animal fat! (I am vegetarian)

Edited by Mr.Al (08/21/08 04:54 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8806701 - 08/21/08 04:57 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Skepticism isn't new.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8806740 - 08/21/08 05:09 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I suppose that there is nothing new under B.O.B.

You are correct about that, o.k.

Skepticism: Just because it's kinky and people will assume you're smart without having to investigate anything!

Edited by Mr.Al (08/21/08 05:09 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8806793 - 08/21/08 05:17 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Why assume an alien would leave a DNA trace for you to find?

Because if we're to believe the abductees, the 'grays' are remarkably like us. They have a head, two eyes, two arms with one joint, two legs with one joint, a torso, a neck, a mouth, they are about our size, they walk upright, and so on. Given all those similarities, it stands to reason that they have other similarities to terrestrial life. Like the existence of microbes (with or without DNA) in their environment. Actually, a germ without DNA would conclusively prove ET visitation. Just one single germ is all it would take.

The leap of faith is that visiting aliens are so much like us, but somehow they don't shed skin particles (or any body particles of any kind) that might rub off on an abductee's clothing or body or get trapped in their nose hair. Or that they live in a totally microbe-free environment, or that they do not use fibers of any kind.

but giving oneself radiation poisoning?  Thats going to far and is not likely.

How so? People have done far weirder things for money.

Theres also reports from corroborating independent witnesses.

I know. Thousands and thousands of them. But somehow none ever comes back with hard, physical evidence. Only stories.

If we are gonna use scientific method then theres only 2 valid theories.

1. Man created these machines
2. Man did not create these machines


BZZT! Excluded Middle logical fallacy:

3. These things are not machines. Every month, when Venus is bright in the morning or evening sky, police departments get reports of UFOs. It's like clockwork.

4. These things are blimps, 5. birds, 6. weather balloons, 7. hoaxes, 8. etc.

Study the logical fallacies. It's because of them and the flawed thinking they represent that we have a drug war. It's because of them that we have people in this country who are against abortion and in favor of killing kids in Iraq. And it's because of them that people believe in Bigfoot, telepathy, and ET even though the evidence for those things is equivalent to the evidence for the Tooth Fairy.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8806889 - 08/21/08 05:32 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

The leap of faith is that they're so much like us, but somehow they don't shed skin that might rub off on an abductees clothing or body or get trapped in their nose hair, or that they live in a totally microbe-free environment, or that they do not use fibers of any kind...




You missed the point.  You have to make assumptions to say that.  The same as I have to make assumptions for my theories of likeliness.

Quote:

People have done far weirder things for money




I knew that was coming but I don't thinks its likely.  You wouldn't need to give yourself radiation poisoning to sell a abduction book.  Why risk not being able to spend the money at all if you kill yourself.

Quote:

somehow none ever comes back with hard, physical evidence.




We will have to remind abductees to use there anti-abduction guns so they can kill an alien and bring it back for testing.

Quote:

Venus




I shall have to wite a jounal on how venus landed behind my friends house.  Did you know venus is actually a floating saucer with multicoloured lights on the bottom that appears to be 40 foot wide and lands on earth to confuse people?

Quote:

Tooth Fairy




Shit I forgot about the time the military chased the tooth fairy because she was getting tracked on multiple radar stations and videoed by hundreds of people.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8806899 - 08/21/08 05:33 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

What about you friend?

Do you prefer coffee with your space donuts???

I am having some lovely organic Chinese green tea.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8807054 - 08/21/08 06:03 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

You have to make assumptions to say that.

These creatures have never been demonstrated to exist. EVERYTHING said about them is an assumption. What you're missing is the body of knowledge from which the assumptions are made.

ET proponents assume a light in the sky is ET and they make that assumption by pulling it out of thin air.

Critical thinkers assume a light in the sky is Venus, or a blimp, or a weather balloon, but they make that assumption based on 100 years of other sightings of lights in the sky that have been explained as Venus, or blimps, or balloons. They also realize that ET sightings and abductions were never reported before the invention of TV and radio shows about alien visitation.

See the difference? One is a pure assumption. The other is an assumption drawn as likely from a large body of knowledge and previous similar cases.

The guy said he experienced these burns as direct result from an apparent exhaust outlet on a landed UFO

You're saying that ET has such astonishing technology as faster-than-light travel, but somehow they drive jelopies that can't contain their exhaust and leak radiation all over the place? That makes no sense to a critical thinker; people who want ET to be real just skip over these and many other contradictions.

[sarcasm snipped]

This is classic. When an ET proponent (or psychic, or telepathy believer, or fanatical religious suicide bomber, or [fill in the blank with your favorite non-critical thinker]) is pinned down by logic, instead of accepting the logic (or showing why it's flawed) they resort to sarcasm and non-responses that contribute nothing to an honest search for the Truth. It's the classic response of someone who wants something to be true vs someone who wants to find the truth, whatever it may be.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8807482 - 08/21/08 07:17 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

:hulk:Space Donuts Diploid, or do you think they are bagels?  I'm sorry they must be weather balloons...

There are observable phenomenon here that need to be investigated.  It is very easy to claim that there is "nothing to see here, move along people".

Now, unless you have me on ignore, I will go make some more green tea for myself, take care of something important  (:nicekitty:) and perhaps I will see your opinion of aforementioned perfectly circular, pulsating, and at least a couple miles in diameter space donuts...

I don't care about my grammar.  I will check for your reply and post not again until said reply so no one in particular accuses me of trolling.

Peace.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8807622 - 08/21/08 07:40 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

There are observable phenomenon here that need to be investigated.

They HAVE been investigated.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMinstrel
Man of Science
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8807677 - 08/21/08 07:47 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Mr.Al said:
Skepticism is a belief system in which it's adherents are more firm in their belief than religious fundamentalists.

Their belief is so fuerte that they will claim that it is not belief.  They therefore are more impressive than the Roman Catholics and the rare Muslim Jihadists. 

Skepticism =  the new religion for intellectuals.

Behold skeptics!  Gigantic pulsating space donuts!
Will you contend and rationalize (ration lies) this?



Damn it! I want some green tea with my space donuts and they had best not be fried in animal fat! (I am vegetarian)






Regarding your little space donuts, if you just watch a neighboring video, you'll clearly hear the smart astronauts identifying the 'donuts' as bits of debris floating along with the shuttle, which appeared because they were moving into the sunrise, and the sunlight illuminated them brilliantly.  They are point specks, but they have a faint bloom around them because the focus of the camera is not on the specks, but the tether.  They are familiar with it; it's nothing to get excited over.



This fucker with the black board is a complete quack and a liar.  He wants to do his little 'size' analysis of the dots?  Makes himself look smart?
He assumes that tether is 12 miles straight, as it appears, but when it broke off, it clearly coiled up, hence, it appeared thick and short, and not 12 miles long. He neglects the NASA dialog where they explain the phenomenon. 

You can keep on being a fool and believing whatever you are exposed to, so long as its not the government saying it.  :tinfoil:


--------------------

Edited by Minstrel (08/21/08 07:58 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8807708 - 08/21/08 07:52 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Investigated by the U.S. government and their disinformation agents???

What is your view on said space donuts?

There were (in case it did not captivate your interest) some specimens which passed right behind the space tether.  Based upon that Mr.Sereda shows that some of them are quite large.  The objects in question are quite circular, and move at different velocities and directions.  This is clearly uncharacteristic of "space dust".  I mean, come on man, these things are freaking huge pulsating space donuts.

I can not claim to KNOW exactly what they are.  To paraphrase the late Osho: "Sometimes you have to call a spade a fucking spade."

Thank you for your reply though :hug:, I was beginning to think you put me on ignore!:heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8807718 - 08/21/08 07:53 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

To me they look very much like the out of focus stars and planets I see in my home telescope.  The hole in the center, the fuzzy shade of the circle... even the little cut out parts.  My telescope has a small mirror that obstructs the main mirror.  When its out of focus I can see this, and it is just like these cut out look like.


There is alot of shit in outer space and it could be any of that.  I see no reason to assume they are craft, they look nothing like any craft I have ever seen or conceived.  They look like out of focus debris to me.

(They guy talking isnt doing a very good job either, he makes some blatant mistakes of definitions regardless of the idea of his speech)

I assume you take this as conclusive evidence of alien visitation?



EDIT - 
Quote:

I mean, come on man, these things are freaking huge pulsating space donuts.




They are clearly out of focus, which is why they look big.  Next time you have access to a telescope, look for your self.  When you put a point source out of focus, it look like a large area.

I dont need any government information to tell me this, its basic first hand experience.

Edited by Qubit (08/21/08 07:57 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Minstrel]
    #8807743 - 08/21/08 07:58 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I suppose that is why said space dust is passing behind the tether??:rofl2:

The space dust is a couple miles in diameter, is clearly pulsating strangely, and is quite circular.

The space tether is about 80 miles away from the space shuttle.  You are "buying" the explanation N.A.S.A. is "selling" to you?

Skepticism is a very fuerte religion...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMinstrel
Man of Science
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8807763 - 08/21/08 08:02 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Mr.Al said:
I suppose that is why said space dust is passing behind the tether??:rofl2:

The space dust is a couple miles in diameter, is clearly pulsating strangely, and is quite circular.

The space tether is about 80 miles away from the space shuttle.  You are "buying" the explanation N.A.S.A. is "selling" to you?

Skepticism is a very fuerte religion...




No, jumping to insane, fanciful conclusions with poor evidence is the mark of a religion.  You are the zealot.

I just told you:  The moron's size estimate is based on his lie that the tether is straight and perpendicular to the observer (which it wasn't, it was nearly pointed directly away).  Any size estimate is VOID on that basis alone.  Once again, bloom on out of focus objects is no mystery.  The fact that they are all circular supports this hypothesis.  When you are dealing with bloom from out of focus subjects, there is no way to tell what is in front of what, anyway.

I don't 'buy' anything.  NASA never tried to sell me anything; they have a rational explanation.  On the other hand, this Sereda fuck will gladly sell you his wild ideas, and he'll expect you to shell out cash for them.

Don't you think the astronauts would happen to mention HUNDREDS of 2-3 MILE wide glowing discs if they were really there?


--------------------

Edited by Minstrel (08/21/08 08:24 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8807772 - 08/21/08 08:04 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

More fuzzy pics that could be anything, and still no hard, physical evidence. :shrug:

Humans have been around for 100,000 years, yet somehow ET never showed up in all that time until we invented ET movies. You do the math.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8807794 - 08/21/08 08:08 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I suppose it is easier for us barely evolved bipedal monkeys to consider ourselves to be the very pinnacle of intelligent life in this universe.

Skepticism is merely a propping up of our over inflated egos to see ourselves as such.

Really, when you get right down to the very bottom of this issue our human egotism is what prevents us from acknowledging the fact that it is damn near impossible that we are the most intelligent life form in the neighborhood.

I find it hilarious that Ego Death seems fine with the possibility of more intelligent life.  I will stop highjacking his thread now as I know this seems too much like talking to religious fundamentalists.

(No offense dudes, but being skeptical is just protection of our egos.  We feel insecure about our lack of evolution.)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8807823 - 08/21/08 08:13 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I suppose it is easier for us barely evolved bipedal monkeys to consider ourselves to be the very pinnacle of intelligent life in this universe.

No one is saying that we're the only life in the universe. There almost-certainly is other life, but from the available evidence (lack of evidence, actually), it isn't visiting Earth.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8807865 - 08/21/08 08:18 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I like how you just ignored my last post completely.  I take that as my points were irrefutable.  *pats himself on the back*

Question:  Have you ever actually looked through a telescope?  Have you ever had to focus one yourself and in the process see an out of focus point object?  If not, you should some day.  Its great fun, and educational.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMinstrel
Man of Science
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8807880 - 08/21/08 08:22 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I will take offense, because you suggest that because I have more exacting standards of what real objective evidence is, that I am somehow an inferior form of life.  This has absolutely nothing to do with egoism.  The fact that you are changing the subject implies that you feel threatened by the evidence I am presenting, because you cannot counter it, and hence, will not address it.


--------------------

Edited by Minstrel (08/21/08 08:24 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Minstrel]
    #8807902 - 08/21/08 08:27 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I am merely suggesting that WE are not presently very evolved.  You took offense?  I include myself in the statement about not being very evolved...

How about high speed turns in outer space?  I touched a nerve about us not being very evolved.

Checkout the vid at 6 minutes for interesting footage.

&feature=related

For something that has nothing to do with egos you dudes are kind of pissed...
Edit
Don't worry though, we're the smart monkeys that eat mushrooms...  Can you imagine homo erectus noshing some mushies and peering into a pool of water?  That must have been priceless...

Edited by Mr.Al (08/21/08 08:41 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: DieCommie]
    #8807925 - 08/21/08 08:33 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I am interested in your view given that you have access to a telescope. I haven't had access to one for about 4 years so...  Whatcha think about how those funky donuts appear to be pulsating?  Isn't it odd that said "debris" is flying in different directions and speeds?  Now, in regards to the second video, how is it that a high speed object just outside of our atmosphere can change direction so sharply and abruptly?  How did that other object obviously leave Earth's atmosphere without having some form of internal propulsion?  I'm not trying to ignore you friend.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMinstrel
Man of Science
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8807937 - 08/21/08 08:35 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Why are you so content to touch on my nerves?  That's not scientific debate.  You have NO hard evidience to support your UFO claims, and you are willing to lie to misrepresent ordinary phenomena, so why should I care about your ideas on the evolution of humanity?  I have a very good appreciation of my being in the universe thanks to know knowledge of science, and I don't need your self-denigrating dogma (yet another trait of organized religion, how about that?). 

Once again, you are a zealot.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8808056 - 08/21/08 08:58 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Well I've never been fond of Romans if that's what you mean.  Nowadays we even have (re)publicans!  The U.S. has been acting much like a (roman) empire, overextending itself militarily.  We even have senators and individuals starting wars to gain more political power!

As far as beliefs and such...  I have "met" some strange non-physical characters before, but I still don't claim that they are real...  I don't know either way...

But seriously what do you think about the high speed turn and the thing leaving Earth's atmosphere at a tremendous speed?

As far as self denigration is concerned, I acknowledge that my physical vehicle is not terribly evolved.  However I don't identify with be-ing my body so I feel o.k. with that.  I mean you don't feel uptight (or impressed with yourself) based upon the automobile you drive right?  Same difference.
EDIT
namaste dude.
Namaste (sanskrit): Greetings or fare thee well to the spark of consciousness that originally came from God (yes  that character is real too, universally speaking) that presently resides within and animates the physical form that I "see" here before me now.

Hey, the divine spark is within us all.  Even though we're kind of hairy and still not so good with the smart making.
Further EDIT
Hey and smoke a fat one if you got it...Wish I did:gethigh:
Peace friends, within and without

Edited by Mr.Al (08/21/08 09:16 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8808205 - 08/21/08 09:22 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

On the other hand, this Sereda fuck will gladly sell you his wild ideas

Or his misconceptions. Here's another great example of how people who want ET to be real usually refuse to dig into their 'evidence' with critical thought. Clicky the pic to read the original newspaper article:



The Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) is a device that orbits the sun just inside the orbit of the Earth and trailing the Earth. Its mission is to study the Sun.

One of the cameras aboard SOHO uses a Charged Coupled Device (CCD) similar to those found in digital cameras. Small manufacturing defects in CCDs are common and compensated for in software when the devices are put into service.

In the case of SOHO, there are known CCD defects which the scientists working on the project have been aware of since before the spacecraft was launched.  The defects are uncompensated because precision raw data is more important to an astronomer than a picture adjusted to look pretty. The defects appears over and over in the same pixels in every image.

Nevertheless, with every batch of images released into the public domain by the team, a spate of UFO claims pop up pointing to these known CCD defects as 'proof' of alien visitation. (See pic)

Here's a quote from one of the SOHO scientists:

In recent days, we've been receiving so many questions and claims that we'd like to set the record straight: We've never seen anything that even suggests that there are UFOs 'out there'.

People do see interesting things in SOHO images. Among the most common sources of UFO claims are imaging artifacts (cosmic rays, for example, can produce spots and streaks on the CCD detector); data and software flaws; planets.

Some instrument defects have been known since before launch, but the resulting artifact gets "discovered" and reported as UFOs over and over. Still, claims are looked into because SOHO does make discoveries, including more than 500 comets that were either rounding the Sun or on their way to a fiery death plunge.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8808318 - 08/21/08 09:37 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

How about high speed turns in outer space?

A few years ago something similar happened in New Mexico where virtually an entire town latched onto the most implausible of all explanations too. They saw lights in the sky that "couldn't" be from Earth because there were no airports or military bases nearby, and the lights made abrupt right-angle turns.

Turns out the lights were just car traffic in a town about 60 miles away on the other side of a mountain range. You see, the lights from the distant town were being refracted off a standing thermocline in the atmosphere, like a mirage on a hot roadway.

The effective angle of the mirror varied as the temperature gradient in the atmosphere moved with the wind flowing over the mountains. This gave the illusion of the "impossible" abrupt right-angle turns and explained the lack of sound.

Interestingly, the thermocline also gave false radar returns (radio waves refract just like light does) and lent false credibility to the ET proponents who insisted that "impossible" right-angle turns were recorded on radar. Nevermind that radar operators have long known about this effect which is a common occurrence when certain temperature gradients exist in the atmosphere.

This theme repeats over and over. The Phoenix Lights is another similar event that was definitively explained even though thousands of people insisted (and still do) that they were looking at alien ships. They were actually seeing military flairs as they fell.

When skeptics examined the video evidence, they found that the lights all vanished directly in-line with a mountain range between Phoenix and a nearby air force base.

In the dark against a dark sky, the outline of the mountains could not be seen, so the lights appeared to simply vanish. Superimposing an outline of the mountain range on the videos confirms this: the Phoenix Lights were flares that vanished from sight when they dropped behind the invisible outline of the mountain range.

It's also interesting that there are now hundreds of millions of high-quality cell phone cameras on the planet, yet fuzzy could-be-anythings are the best images anyone can come up with.

The explanation for this is simple. When the object is far enough away that you can't tell what it is, the mind immediately jumps on the ET explanation.

Then if the object gets close enough that you can tell it's an ordinary Earth object like an airplane or balloon, you discard the video. Why keep boring pics of airplanes and balloons right? Why show them to your friends who will laugh at you for confusing a 747 with ET?

This has the effect of filtering all the UFO images such that the ones that get close enough to be identified as an airplane or balloon are discarded, and the ones that stay far enough away that you can't tell what they are become "proof" of ET.

These kinds of misinterpretations and the complete lack of physical evidence are the defining characteristics of ET sightings.

Learn to think critically! It's the best way to filter out self-deception, wishful thinking, and honest mistakes from the Truth.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMinstrel
Man of Science
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8808339 - 08/21/08 09:40 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Mr.Al said:
Well I've never been fond of Romans if that's what you mean.  Nowadays we even have (re)publicans!  The U.S. has been acting much like a (roman) empire, overextending itself militarily.  We even have senators and individuals starting wars to gain more political power!

As far as beliefs and such...  I have "met" some strange non-physical characters before, but I still don't claim that they are real...  I don't know either way...

But seriously what do you think about the high speed turn and the thing leaving Earth's atmosphere at a tremendous speed?

As far as self denigration is concerned, I acknowledge that my physical vehicle is not terribly evolved.  However I don't identify with be-ing my body so I feel o.k. with that.  I mean you don't feel uptight (or impressed with yourself) based upon the automobile you drive right?  Same difference.
EDIT
namaste dude.
Namaste (sanskrit): Greetings or fare thee well to the spark of consciousness that originally came from God (yes  that character is real too, universally speaking) that presently resides within and animates the physical form that I "see" here before me now.

Hey, the divine spark is within us all.  Even though we're kind of hairy and still not so good with the smart making.
Further EDIT
Hey and smoke a fat one if you got it...Wish I did:gethigh:
Peace friends, within and without




Again, you are changing the subject, to imperialism and politics.  You have nothing to contribute science wise.  You continue this fallacy that these things are moving at high speed away.  This is because of the flawed assumption that you can determine how far away they are (which also debunks the idea that he can determine their size).  You can't, and since the camera is a moving frame of reference anyway, you have NO basis to judge absolute velocity.

Bunk.

Keep drinking the fluorinated water.  Ask your doctor if Paxil is right for you.


--------------------

Edited by Minstrel (08/21/08 09:46 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #8809310 - 08/22/08 01:55 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Mr.Al said:
Investigated by the U.S. government and their disinformation agents???




Statements like this weaken your case because not only do we have to believe that the evidence is real, now we have to believe that it's being actively covered up by the government. You have to pile on more assumptions while the skeptic doesn't.

I have a feeling everything has been said in this thread now...


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8809467 - 08/22/08 03:38 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Diploid said:
ET proponents assume a light in the sky is ET





No matter how much I tell you you just don't get it.

You think that people that have seen advanced flying craft up close are "ET proponents" and that all they see is a "light in the sky".

Yes there are many cases like that but why are you ignoring the real evidence?

I'm not talking about lights in the sky.  These have no interest for me or any other serious UFO researcher.

We are talking about close encounters.  Encounters where credible witnesses get to a very close distance or actually board a floating disc.  Encounters where several radars track the objects.  Encounters where pilots see huge discs next to their aircraft and they are also picked up on radar by air traffic control.  Encounters with that leave radiation and physical indentation in the ground as well as several military witnesses stating they stood within 40 foot of a metallic floating triangle with lights on it.

Just accept that these are not the planet Venus, the witnesses are not untrained observers and they are not ET proponents.

You clearly have hardly even studied the phenomena yet your willing spread your misguided judgment of it.  Go watch the disclosure project and educate yourself.

Theres people all of very high military ranking telling the truth.  The don't make any money out of it.  They actually risk losing their army pensions.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8809483 - 08/22/08 03:44 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

As some of you where on the subject of NASA


Now don't even get me started on Gorden Cooper and Edgar Mitchel etc ...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8809484 - 08/22/08 03:47 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Well, I'd sure like to see some high quality photos and videos that aren't grainy, blurry, jerky or underexposed. It's like with that bigfoot thing - I knew it was a hoax as soon as I saw the quality of the photo. An ordinary point-and-shoot camera can capture better photos than that.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8809499 - 08/22/08 03:52 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)



See the bit where a flash appears from a crater and and a UFO flys overhead?

NASA had seismometers on the surface of the moon this time as they thought these flashes must be impact activity but the seismometers picked up nothing.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8809504 - 08/22/08 03:56 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)



This is a photo of the Belgium craft that was picked up on several different radars.  Chased by F-16's who had repeated lock-ons but confirmed it outmaneuvered them and was also much of the time flying to high (out of Earths atmosphere).  It was also photographed, videoed and reported by hundreds of independent corroborating witnesses.  The Belgium government themselves admitted they thought ET explanation was likely.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8809515 - 08/22/08 04:03 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

That's a pretty cool photo... is there a video of that event?


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8809636 - 08/22/08 05:49 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Theres several although the videos I've seen are not as close up as the photo.

Search for Belgium UFO video and see what you can find.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePlasmid
Absent
Male
Registered: 06/01/08
Posts: 1,719
Last seen: 15 years, 4 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8887957 - 09/06/08 06:32 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Personally, I don't believe that there is reliable evidence that extraterrestrials have visited earth and abducted people.  I suspect that witnesses are lying, hallucinating and delusional.

Anyway, to answer your question simply:

No matter how absolutely stupid and groundless your assertions might be about how there is good evidence for ETs having visited (which I don't buy), there is absolutely no reason to consider the investigation of extraterrestrials "paranormal" phenomena.  ETs, like anything else, can be a part of empirical science.

If you really think there is good evidence, I'd be willing to look at it for sure, but often when I object to ideas like ESP or whatnot I get responses to websites with huge amounts of text describing events that may or may not have happened, with nothing substantial to back these stories up.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Plasmid]
    #8887998 - 09/06/08 06:46 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

>but often when I object to ideas like ESP or whatnot I get responses to websites with huge amounts of text describing events that may or may not have happened

Yeah or I get like 7 youtube videos, which I never watch either.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Plasmid]
    #8889902 - 09/07/08 07:44 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Your basing everything you've said on preconceived ideas and notions with no actual research.

What about when pilots see these craft up-close and they are also confirmed by radar?  There are hundreds of incidents where this has happened.  I can accept that its not likely all these pilots and the people working with radars are all in on a big lie or delusional at the same time.  Why anybody would think that to be more likely - I do not know.

If you do accept the testimony of the pilots and the corroborating radar evidence then you could claim its secret advanced human craft but did humans really have technology such as inertia cancelers back in world war 2 when hundreds of people witnessed "foo fighters".  We still haven't invented a device that could cancel inertia to date.

In terms of alien abductions or alien close encounters there have been cases such as Stephen Michalak where the witness was burnt by the craft.  He was hospitalized and suffered from radiation poisoning as a result of his encounter.  Do delusions and lies really account for an incident such as this?  I think not.



People claim that theres no cover-up.  No conspiracy.  Yet the British governments own UFO investigator Nick Pope (MOD) admitted that we did advise witnesses to keep quiet because the MOD did not want to publicly admit that there were craft in our sky that were so technologically advanced that they were beyond our control.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8889914 - 09/07/08 07:48 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Do you believe that the governments of the world are doing an effective job at suppressing knowledge of UFOs? Are they to blame for the supposed lack of scientific interest?


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8890075 - 09/07/08 08:42 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Especially the USA, who can't even manage to keep secret the goings on at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, or the illegal domestic wiretapping in the ATT/NSA wiretap room, or the illegal torture extradition flights by the military, but somehow they have managed to keep totally contained every last tiny scrap of hard, conclusive, once-and-for-all verifiable evidence of ET visitation despite 100 years of the press and a slew of nut cases trying to find it.

And since ET only crashes in Roswell but never on another country that hates the USA and would love nothing better than to be the first to show off a gen-u-ine ET, it all makes sense to this critical thinker.

Yeah, I'm convinced now... :what:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8890416 - 09/07/08 10:57 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

They certainly don't help the situation.

Most governments decide to keep quiet where possible because they do no wish to admit there are things in their airspace which are out of their control.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8890446 - 09/07/08 11:06 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

slew of nut cases




This tells me more about your opinion than anything else.

Theres "nut cases" in any subject.  If you blanket such a huge range of phenomena all into one section within your mind then you cannot possibly think critically about it.

I often see you address the phenomena in this way yet when I produce a fact such as pilot sightings and radar corroboration or the hospitalization of Stephen Michilak then you are quiet.

I'm presenting the good evidence - I'm not here to talk about heavens gate cult or any other crazy people.  I'm presenting reliable witnesses and the best physical evidence that exists.

Quote:


once-and-for-all verifiable evidence of ET visitation




Why don't critically think about this?

What would constitue a
Quote:

once-and-for-all verifiable evidence of ET


and why would anything advanced enough to get here leave it on Earth?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8890480 - 09/07/08 11:17 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

You do have witness, but there are only a few thousand of them, which is not alot at all.  Regardless; witness, no matter how smart or respected, dont constitute scientific evidence.

And you dont, contrary to what you say, have any physical evidence at all.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: DieCommie]
    #8890781 - 09/07/08 12:46 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Of all the UFO BS that I have seen, this is one of the few that leaves me wondering...



--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8891300 - 09/07/08 03:02 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Diploid said:
And since ET only crashes in Roswell but never on another country that hates the USA and would love nothing better than to be the first to show of a gen-u-ine ET, it all makes sense to this critical thinker.




Indeed. All it takes is a UFO to crash in a country with a sympathetic government we'd have all the evidence we'd want. But somehow the UFOs only visit countries whose governments want to suppress the existence of ET.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8892097 - 09/07/08 05:31 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Whats to say a craft would crash or the country would tell other countries?

You need to take every single incident individually.  People seem to disregard the whole phenomena because of the general consensus of ridicule and because people have hoaxed UFO events.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: DieCommie]
    #8892172 - 09/07/08 05:46 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Radar tapes, radiation, scars, video is physical evidence.  Its not solid proof.  Solid proof is not likely to happen until an ET hands itself in to the scientific community to study and declare real.  Thats not very likely.

If you study the phenomena properly it becomes painfully obvious that there is an ET presence.  Theres simply no other logical explanation.  Take the Belgium sighting or the Ruwa, Africa sighting.  These simply cannot be passed of as hoax, delusion, misidentification etc 

The next generation will laugh at how society did not notice all these events going on.  How we suppress them so we don't have to throw out our security blanket.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Seuss]
    #8892213 - 09/07/08 05:56 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Interesting video, but then why would ET interfere with some missile launches and not others? Why interfere with some missile launches, but not the recent ones by North Korea, or a thousand others by various governments around the world? Why would they interfere with some missile launches, but not two atomic bombs dropped on Japan?

As for the film referred to in the video? Lens flare? Non-homogenous emulsion on the film? A real ET? Who knows? The film is secret and amazingly, not one frame has ever been leaked by the same government that can't seem to keep anything else secret.

What makes even less sense is some military photographer talking about an observation he was explicitly ordered never to speak about (around 8:00 on the video), who here is speaking about exactly that on national TV.

Do you know how long it would take to land in a military prison for talking about something classified as a secret by the military and about which you're on record as being ordered not to talk about? Not very long, I suspect, but here we have someone claiming to do just that on CNN.

Occam's Razor: all else being equal, simple, straightforward explanations are more likely to be correct than complicated ones.

And once again, billions of cell phone cameras are now on the planet. Most of them can take sharp stills and video. Yet blurry could-be-anythings are all we have to show. Like I said, the reason is simple. When it's far enough away that you don't know what it is, it's ET. When it gets close enough that you can tell it's a bird, the image is deleted with a shrug. It's selection bias defined.

And to repeat myself once again, the critical thinker realizes that there were no ET abductions before Hollywood invented ET movies. Maybe that's because ET coincidentally showed up on Earth around the same time as Marilyn Monroe. Hell, maybe she was from Andromeda, but more likely the truth is that imagination is easily stirred up by good movies.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8892287 - 09/07/08 06:15 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> not one frame has ever been leaked by the same government that can't seem to keep anything else secret.

To be fair, the military is pretty good at keeping secrets, compared to the inept government.  Look at the history of the SR71 as a classic example.  Find a picture of the Aurora as another example.  (ok, there are a few photos of vapor trails, but not much more)

> Lens flare? Non-homogenous emulsion on the film? A real ET? Who knows?

Exactly.  However, the two guys that aren't writing books along with several witnesses throughout is what kind of left me wondering.  My guess would be non-ET before ET, but as far as an example of something I can't immediately explain, this one is high up on my list.  (not that my list is very big)

One thing that puzzled me a bit... the rate at which the "light" goes from the object to the warhead.  It has a slow propagation rate, almost as if it were drawn in, where it should be instantaneous if actually "light".  Perhaps an object that came off the missle, while still attached via wire, reflecting light as it spins?

Still, for me, this is one of the few "better ones" that is hard to discredit immediately as fraud.  If I were forced to make a guess, I would guess intentional misinformation by the military as part of a campaign to hide whatever secret military stuff they were working on.  (i.e. it wasn't a plane crash, it was a ufo, etc...)


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8892293 - 09/07/08 06:16 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Occam's Razor: all else being equal, simple, straightforward explanations are more likely to be correct than complicated ones.




The simple answer is UFO appears and all missiles shut down.

You started saying why would they do that.  Why don't they shut down other missiles.  Why would someone sworn to secrecy talk.  Thats complicating it.

ET explaination is the simple explaination in some cases.  Its not simple to claim ellaborate hoaxes or mass delusion that would be required to explain away something like the Belgium UFO.  The simple answer is that an advanced craft was present.  It displayed technology far beyond anything we have and was likely to be of non-human origin.

Or does your superior critical thinking tell you that this is a bird?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8892664 - 09/07/08 07:20 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

My superior critical thinking skills tell me that is yet one more fuzzy pic of a could-be-anything. :razz:

--

The So-called Belgian UFO Wave: A Critial View

by Marc Hallet

May, 2005
Many people who once believed in UFOs do not believe in them any longer. In contrast with a vast number of credulous people who believe in anything that gets into print, these former-UFO believers have started to check, systematically, the validity of the testimonies and of the literature that constitute the "UFO phenomenon". Their doubts have increased constantly. Indeed, as soon as one starts digging a little deeper into this matter, it becomes clear that ufology is unsubstantiated. Consequently, each year, more and more reputed ufologists admit that they have erred or were on the wrong track; after what they join the rank of the ex-ufologists. This important fact is generally ignored by those who believe in extraterrestrial UFOs and is often censored or falsely explained by the ufologists themselves.

One enters and stays "in" ufology just as if it were a cult, sheltered from any hard facts that could trigger a process of disbelief. Ufology is scientific neither in its methodology nor in its achievements. The so-called "Belgian UFO wave" is a fine example of that...

During quite a few years, SOBEPS, a private Belgian UFO organization, tried to convince the academic world that it had adopted a scientific attitude concerning the study of UFOs. In 1991, a few dozen Belgian scientists accepted to listen -without prejudice- to the "evidence" put forward by the main promoters of that group. These scientists came out both disappointed and unconvinced that UFOs haunted Belgian skies. Yet, three months later, the secretary-general of SOBEPS claimed on a French television channel: "scientists are joining us en masse." It was of course more than an ordinary exaggeration! (1)

In October 1991, SOBEPS published a first book about the alleged Belgian UFO wave; this book was entitled "Vague OVNI sur la Belgique" (UFO wave over Belgium). It will be referred to as "VOB" further in this article.

Ten Belgian scientists from the Universities of Liège and Bruxelles reacted very rapidly to the book and issued a press-release in which they criticized its content and professor Meessen's work in particular. Undoubtedly, there would have been many more than ten, had it not been for the urgency of drafting this rebuttal. (2)

In spite of this, SOBEPS leaders continued to claim that Belgian scientists took their work seriously. The crude fact is that, since the publication of their first report, SOBEPS collaborators have never been invited by any university in Belgium to defend their point of view and no highly respected Belgian scientist has joined the SOBEPS team or approved its conclusions. Yes, sometimes SOBEPS collaborators have lectured in university auditoria, but it was because they had hired these places as some private groups can do it and not because they had been invited by academic authorities. Yes, SOBEPS has kept in contact with the "gendarmerie" (a police force having then a military status) in order to get information about UFO sightings, but, in Wisconsin for example, a UFO organization founded by contactee Charlotte Blob has the same "privilege." Evidently, this is not a reason to recognize a UFO organization as a serious research partner. Authorithies accept to collaborate with UFO organizations because they realize now that the information they supply has little value. (3)

Let us examine the "hard facts" which received international publicity through SOBEPS...

First of all there are the "mysterious" radar signals recorded on board a F-16 on March 30-31, 1990. An incident which received world-wide publicity.

A physicist, Professor Meessen (now retired), who joined SOBEPS when it was founded in 1971 and who was convinced from the start that UFOs are from another world, has spent several months studying these recordings (4)

In VOB, professor Meessen wrote:

    "The conclusion that logically imposes itself is that ANY HYPOTHESIS OTHER THAN THAT OF UFOs IS TO BE EXCLUDED AT VIRTUALY ONE HUNDRED PERCENT (emphasis in original text)."

He also wrote:

    "...I think the only reasonable hypothesis is that of unidentified flying objects, the performances of which indicate an extraterrestrial origin." (5)

This is what ten Belgian scientists referred to in their press-release as an extravagance. According to them, there were several inconsistencies in the analysis conducted by this physicist and one of these scientists even told me that no university student would ever pass with honours for such an ambiguous work, full of contradictions.

It is important here to underline that the F-16 pilot saw no UFOs at all. I spoke with some of his friends who had laughed with him about the UFO hypothesis. Had it not been for the SOBEPS team, these so-called mysterious radar returns would have been labeled as ordinary "angels".

[Diploid: as a pilot for some 20+ years, I have some flown many radar-equipped aircraft and am personally familiar with the artifacts caused by changes in the radar beam's polarization, among other things, after it's reflected. Nothing special here. Radar angel artifacts have been known since the very first prototypes were tested in the lab in the 1940s.]

Another important thing is that at one point the "return" remained unchanged on the screen while the plane was maneuvring, which is indicative of an instrument failure. This is also what Lieutenant-Colonel Salmon from the Belgian Air Force Electronic War Center remarked when he was interviewed by journalists of Science & Vie Junior in 1992. And this is also what I had written in an article that the ten scientists had chosen to add to their press-release in October 1991. (6)

Now, SOBEPS has published a second voluminous "report" about the so-called "Belgian UFO wave". Not very surprisingly for those who were well informed, compelled as he was by the hard facts, professor Meessen distanced himself from his previous conclusions and admitted that very peculiar atmospheric conditions were probably the cause of the F-16 radar incident. He did it with a lot of verbose explanations, but he did it. (7)

Meessen's first conclusion was given world-wide publicity. Not his laborious retractation!

May I add that in their press-release, in October 1991, the ten Belgian scientists who had criticized professor Meessen's conclusion had already written :

    "The analysis made by Mr. Meessen seems to indicate that it could be a meteorological phenomenon whereas the (supposed) occurrence of subsonic speeds and sudden accelerations made by material objects is far from convincing." (2)

One should take into account that these mysterious signals (from a supposedly 100 % real extraterrestrial UFO!) constituted the ONLY "physical evidence" (not counting the Petit-Rechain picture I shall speak about later) that SOBEPS had gathered for its famous first book which journalists were influenced to announce as the "new bible on UFOs."

In scientific circles, when someone discovers something of interest, a report is drafted and submitted to a scientific publication. Then the article is checked by several referees, returned to the author and proofread until it stands up to stringent scientific standards. Why did professor Meessen choose another way of publication? Why does he prefer always to publish his "scientific UFO studies" in privately published books and magazines or through Internet? Maybe he knows that scientific publications would reject his "demonstrations"...

Here is a sad story about this now retired physicist. In September 1987, in France, a 10 year old boy claimed that he had tape-recorded sounds from a UFO. In what appeared at first sight to be a rigorous scientific study published by SOBEPS, professor Meessen concluded that the sound had such strange characteristics that the child's testimony had to be accepted. But professor Meessen is neither an expert in acoustics nor a radar expert. A CNRS researcher from the Acoustics Laboratory of the University of Provence, France, established that the sound was nothing more than a parasitic sound familiar to radio hams. This researcher commented on professor Meessen's conclusions in the following terms : "a façade of seriousness", "subjectivity" and even "an accumulation of clashing and ill-digested knowledge". The severity of these comments and those of the ten Belgian scientists is such that it should force anyone to question the way in which professor Meessen really conducts his research on UFOs.

Let us now look at the famous picture taken at Petit-Rechain. It was internationally distributed by the SOBEPS team and was used for the covers of the two books which this private organization published about the so-called Belgian UFO wave.

The document depicts a black triangular silhouette against a bluish background supposed to be the night sky. One irregular illuminated surface appears in each corner of the triangle. In the centre there is a luminous spot surrounded by a reddish aura.

There are discrepancies between the photo itself and the testimony of the young man who claims to have taken it. The picture was reportedly taken with a reflex-camera equipped with a 55-200mm zoom lens set at a minimum of 150mm. The photographer alleges that he used a long time exposure (between one and two seconds) and pressed the shutter release button for approximately two seconds. But he also said he simply held the camera with his hands against the corner of a wall. Even if he exaggerated, and the shutter button was pressed only for one second, the object photographed could not have had sharp edges; it would have been completely blurred. On the contrary, the triangular object shows at least one sharp edge. The young man said he saw the enormous object in the company of his girl friend. This second eye-witness was so little impressed by the extraordinary apparition that she didn't even keep her eyes on it! At one instance she said the object left instantaneously and at another time she admitted that she actually never saw it leave. More important: Pierre Magain, an astrophysicist from the Astrophisics Institute of Liège has mathematically demonstrated [Diploid: based on the focal length of the lens and the size of the film] that the size attributed to the object by the young photographer is completely different from what the camera captured. So, one can conclude that the testimonies of the two witnesses are completely irrelevant to the picture.

In this case, SOBEPS "researchers" have conducted a rather strange analysis. First, they tried to obtain a similar picture by using a wooden model. When this failed, they abusively concluded that if the document was a fake, it could only have been obtained by highly sophisticated means. This completed their "analysis". A strange way to do a photographic expertise isn't it?

Later, professor Marc Acheroy, from the Royal Military School, Bruxelles, authorized one of his students to use a digitalized version of this slide to test and increase its skills in computer processing and image enhancement techniques. As professor Acheroy explained to me in a personal letter, he never tried to judge what kind of object had been photographed (a sophisticated plane, a UFO or a model); the main reason why he accepted his student work on this picture was to achieve a better know-how of electronic data system. (9)

Professor Acheroy and SOBEPS have spoken abundantly about that work but few people have seen it. I have made a copy of it and asked for a scientific appraisal from two independent astrophysicists who are expert in image enhancement techniques. Thus, I learned that the digitalization had been so badly made that artefacts had appeared and that the cosine transform technique used by the student had also generated its own artefacts! The whole study was a poor one on a strictly scientific point of view but nevertheless some interesting characteristics emerged. For example, the object appeared to be surrounded by a luminous aura and this aura seemed to emit infrared light, just as if the object had been illuminated from behind by an ordinary spot light. (10)

At the beginning, the testimony of the young photographer was considered unbelievable by the SOBEPS team (11). After having failed to produce a comparable document, their conclusions evolved into a kind of credo that obscured the rather dubious origin of the document. This credo was so strengthened by the analysis conducted by a non-expert in image enhancement technique that they concluded the Petit-Rechain picture showed a real vehicle and that professor Meessen suggested the luminous spots on the slide were true plasma jets created by the magnetohydrodynamic propulsion mode used by the aliens! (12)

Far from sharing this enthusiasm, using very simple technique, astrophysicist Pierre Magain and his colleague Marc Remy from Liège University produced a picture that presented most of the characteristics of the Petit-Rechain slide. Moreover, former-UFO believer Wim Van Utrecht, from Antwerp, obtained also a similar picture with another simple photo-trick technique. These three men have at least proved the lack of imagination and knowledge SOBEPS collaborators have in photo faking.

Even ufologists admit that it is not always possible to prove that a picture has been faked. In this case, several elements seem to indicate a deliberate hoax. But SOBEPS knows there is no definitive proof of trickery and takes advantage of it. This is not a scientific attitude because contrary to what the facts seem to indicate, SOBEPS clearly tries to lead the public to believe that a UFO has really been photographed. This is the kind of argumentation that these UFO believers propose as "scientific evidence".

During the Belgian UFO saga many people observed strange triangular formations in the skies. Some captured them with video cameras. Mr. Alfarano, from Bruxelles, took the most famous one but it is generally unknown that he also claimed to be in telepathic contact with alien entities. Even the SOBEPS now admits that none of these films shows anything strange or inexplicable. Most of them depict ordinary aircraft lights in a triangular configuration. Nevertheless, most of these people were convinced that they had seen the Belgian triangular UFO. In these cases their testimonies could be checked by examination of the filmed images. What about all those cases in which witnesses claimed to have seen a UFO but weren't fortunate enough to capture it on film? Is there any reason to accept that they saw something else than those who filmed ordinary aircrafts? In the absence of relevant data it is often very difficult or impossible to identify what people have seen. SOBEPS takes advantage of this ambiguous situation and concludes that all unexplained observations are related to real UFOs, probably from an extraterrestrial origin. This is unscientific.

One can also doubt about the personal qualifications of the numerous improvised investigators SOBEPS worked with. Some of them were so blinded by their beliefs in UFOs they couldn't even see the most evident things. For example here is a drawing made by a witness and which was published in Inforespace 86 as a true UFO. The testimony and the drawing show evidently it was an ordinary helicopter.



SOBEPS claims that thousands of people saw the Belgian triangle and maintains there is a remarkable COHERENCE in these numerous sightings. This magic word "COHERENCE" introduced by prof Meessen as soon as he worked with SOBEPS has been used again and again by SOBEPS collaborators to try to persuade us that identical objects were seen in Belgium by thousands of people. Look at the two books published by SOBEPS. In many cases, the objects described were triangles; but in all these testimonies, the only point of convergence is the WORD "triangle". In reality all kinds of triangles were described, not only with very different angles but also with very different general structures and lights. In many cases people saw no triangular objects, but a quadrangle with four lights, a sphere or a disc surrounded with lights or even a rectangular platform as big as a football field reminiscent of science-fiction movies. People have also seen flying discs with cupolas, cigar or boomerang-shaped contraptions, symmetrical or asymmetrical complex geometrical shapes, and even something like an oval ship with paddle. That's what SOBEPS calls "COHERENCE"!

A valuable piece of information that SOBEPS chose not to publish is that Jean-Luc Vertongen, head of investigations at SOBEPS since its birth, left the group in December 1993. Since, we became friends and I can state that he now says that there was NO COHERENCE AT ALL in the testimonies that SOBEPS collected from our country over the years. But there is more: according to him, SOBEPS operates like a sect whose collaborators are devoted to the extraterrestrial hypothesis which, for them, offers the only logical explanation for the UFO phenomenon. (14)

Genevieve Van Overmeire succeeded immediately Jean-Luc Vertongen at the head of SOBEPS investigations department. Not for a long time: she left the group soon after and claimed also it worked just like a sect and didn't do a scientific or even serious job. At SOBEPS headquarter, a loud silence answered these grave charges.

I would like now to give you two kinds of examples showing how little serious SOBEPS work was in the case of the so-called "Belgian UFO wave".

On page 74 of VOB one can read the following about the sighting of a strange flying thing which looked like a bird :

    "It was devoided of lights."

Four sentences later we read :

    "Under the wings there were two big white lights and one fixed white light on the nose."

Surely, this text was checked more than once before it got into print. But, apparently, at SOBEPS headquarter they were unable to see this INCOHERENCE. Other examples of the same kind can be found in SOBEPS magazine Inforespace. In issue number 90, published in 1994, the following can be read about a man who was paralysed by a UFO :

    "he was unable to make a gesture."

Yet, on the next page we read:

    "To convince himself he was not dreaming, he pinched himself..."

On the same page (page 9) we are being told that the man though it was impossible to take a picture of the object against the starry sky. Whereas, on page 8, it is said that "not a single star was visible."

Another kind of INCOHERENCE is found in VOB on page 411, where Patrick Ferryn (who is SOBEPS photo-expert) explains that a UFO filmed with a video camera was nothing more than a street lamp. But, on page 280 and 281, in another chapter entitled "The March 12 mini flap" THE SAME UFO RESEARCHER uses this false UFO case as a real one to strengthen his conclusion that there were two real UFOs in the sky that night! And, on page 347 of the same book, physicist Leon Brenig writes about these March 12 sightings telling us that the testimonies "corroborated each other perfectly"! Last but not least, on page 290, speaking about two alleged UFO videos, Michel Bougard wrote :

    "These documents are really astonishing."

The distinguished SOBEPS President too seemed to ignore that one of these two films showed the now famous street lamp identified by the photo expert of his own organization.

That's how SOBEPS worked with ITS so-called "Belgian UFO wave". Surely, that's why they found it necessary to print with striking letters on the back cover of their first book:

    "An objective, rigorous and complete approach: a reference book."

That's how thousands of reader of SOBEPS books and magazines have been deluded.

References

  1. TF1 during a talk-show hosted by Patrick Sabatier, May 24, 1991
  2. La Wallonie, Oct. 26 and 27, 1991 page 9 (+ other Belgian newspapers and radio)
  3. Personal communication from US UFO researcher Richard W. Heiden
  4. SOBEPS : Vague d'OVNI sur la Belgique (VOB), Bruxelles, 1991, p. 358-359
  5. VOB, Bruxelles, 1991, p. 394
  6. Science & Vie Junior, Paris, January 1993, p. 14
  7. VOB 2, Bruxelles, 1994, p. 387-413
  8. OVNI-PrĂ©sence, Aix-en-Provence, n°40, August 1988, p. 19
  9. Personal letter from Marc Acheroy dated from September 24, 1992
  10. Prof. Acheroy during an interview, RTBF (Belgian public television) June 17, 1992 + VOB 2, Bruxelles, 1994, p. 234-240
  11. VOB, Bruxelles, 1991, p. 414-415
  12. Science & Vie, Paris, March 1976, p. 49
  13. Personal communication from Pierre Magain and Marc Remy + VOB 2, Bruxelles, 1994, p. 229-233
  14. Personnal interviews with Jean-Luc Vertongen + Personal communication from G. Van Overmeire to W. Van Utrecht

The author has published, in French, several more detailed studies on this subject:

  1. La vague OVNI belge ou le triomphe de la dĂ©sinformation, Liège, privately published, Sep. 1992
  2. L'art de la dĂ©sinformation, Liège, Privately published, June 1992
  3. La prĂ©tendue vague OVNI belge, in Revue Française de Parapsychologie, Toulouse, Vol 1, n° 1, p. 5-24

Also useful:

  1. Magain (P), Le rapport de la SOBEPS, Liège, 1992 (Chapter 5 of an unpublished collective book)
  2. VAN UTRECHT (W), Triangles over Belgium - A case of Uforia?, Antwerpen, Privately printed, September 1992
  3. VAN UTRECHT (W), The Belgian 1989-1990 UFO wave, in UFO 1947-1997 edited by Hilary Evans and Dennis Stacy, London, John Brown Publ., 1997
  4. HENDRICKX (P) : Bepaling van de impulsresponsie van een optisch systeem met als doel de restauratie van gemaakte beelden, Afstudeerwerk voorgelegd tot het bekomen van titel van burgerlijk ingenieur, Brussel, Koninklijke Militaire School, akademiejaar 1991-1992 + Personal communications from Pierre Magain (Astrophysics Institute of Liège) and Ronny Blomme (Royal Observatory of Brussels)

Marc Hallet

Marc Hallet has had an interest in UFOs for more than thirty years. During the first ten years he was convinced of their existence and of their extraterrestrial origin. In 1977 he expressed his first doubts by publishing a paper based on the methods of historical criticism, a methodology no ufologist had used till then. Later, through his books and papers, his readers were able to follow the slow but steady development of his skepticism. Finally, in 1989, he published a penetrating study, appreciated by astronomers, in which he concluded that extraterrestrial UFOs do not exist.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Diploid]
    #8894824 - 09/08/08 04:55 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Essentially the article is saying the radar returns were a malfunction despite them being picked up on separate ground and air radar systems and corroborating with 140+ witness sightings (the cause of the F-16's chase).

They then go on to discredit witness testimony itself and even suggest that all these witnesses saw was a helicopter.

Thats critical thinking?  I call that wishful thinking.

They also ignore the video and photographic evidence.

Its fair to say if you take each element individually you can break it down.  This is what happens in a court of law but it soon becomes apparent that any fact can be disputed. 

We have to use some common sense here though.  Look at the bigger picture.  Do you really thinks its likely that
1.  The separate radars all had a malfunction or false signal
2.  The 140+ witnesses all misidentified a helicopter
3. The photo and video from separate independent corroborating witnesses was all hoaxed
4. Somehow this all accumulated together at the same time into one big conspiracy just to convince UFO investigators that something happened in Belgium

Is is not more simple to just say its likely there was an unknown craft present?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8894839 - 09/08/08 05:07 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

>Is is not more simple to just say its likely there was an unknown craft present?

Yes, because it's true - it is an unknown craft. We don't know for certain what it was. It's a different thing entirely to say it's a known craft of extraterrestrial origin.

Let me turn your statements around:

We have to use some common sense here though.  Look at the bigger picture.  Do you really thinks its likely that
1. Aliens exist and possess interstellar travel technology
2. They know about our planet
3. They actually visit our planet
4. They allow their craft to be photographed and filmed,
5. Yet they don't make any attempt to contact the general population.

Is it not more simple just to say that people can get confused?


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8894871 - 09/08/08 05:25 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Those questions don't help anyone understand why the phenomena is happening.  It doesn't matter if you think aliens exist or interstellar travel exists.

I could think bee's don't exist but I'm wondering why everyone keeps seeing them and the pollen keeps disappearing from my flowers.

Of course, the pictures of bees are faked and the pollen was removed just to trick me into thinking bees were real.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8894887 - 09/08/08 05:35 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Okay, let's say you haven't seen any bees, but people tell you they are real, and the pollen disappears. That's the only evidence you have.
What's removing the pollen?
You may choose only one


Votes accepted from (09/08/08 05:35 AM) to (No end specified)
View the results of this poll



--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8895798 - 09/08/08 11:22 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

OK,
I agree theres no evidence for science but theres enough for common sense if people get past their preconceptions and stigmas and actually research the reliable incidents not the known frauds/cults.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: Ego Death]
    #8896820 - 09/08/08 03:17 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Yes, for certain values of 'common sense'. Many people will look at the evidence you have presented and be convinced, but the scientific method, as you have acknowledged, requires a higher standard. So do most people.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRuNE
bomberman


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/23/00
Posts: 2,331
Loc: tartarus
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: zouden]
    #8901418 - 09/09/08 10:40 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
We have to use some common sense here though.  Look at the bigger picture.  Do you really thinks its likely that
1. Aliens exist and possess interstellar travel technology
2. They know about our planet
3. They actually visit our planet
4. They allow their craft to be photographed and filmed,
5. Yet they don't make any attempt to contact the general population.

Is it not more simple just to say that people can get confused?





While I'm 50/50 on the subject, I don't understand what's hard to believe in what you pointed out there.  A good point UFO debunkers tend to make is the sheer chance of finding another source of life in the universe.  It's incredibly tiny. 

Considering they are real, there is the possibility that this advanced species has stumbled upon something very rare in their quest of knowledge across the cosmos...another civilization in the universe.  We are intelligent, but nowhere near their level.  What do WE do to rare species found here on earth?  We tag them, observe them, and let them exist in their natural habitat for study.  I know this is going to be a lame point, but if you watch star trek, they have rules against direct contact with species whom do not posses interstellar space travel.  Yet they observe them for study.  I realize it's a TV show, but none the less they make good points regarding 'moral' decisions like this.

The question is, what would you do if you were in their shoes?  You stumble upon a very rare (possibly the only) civilization in your years of searching, but realize they are still primitive, constantly at war, and power hungry.  Do you contact them?  Do you possibly (or accidentaly) give them access to your very highly advanced technology?

We haven't even figured out how to power our lights without destroying the planet, or killing each other.

>>4. They allow their craft to be photographed and filmed,

a) they can't really do much about it. (I mean, I'm sure they could take out a camera individualy, but taking out multiple electronics without major interference (to all electronics) would be a feat.)

b) they don't mind.  Considering some of the claims (1 mile ship floating low enough to hit with rocks) they might actualy WANT to be seen.  They might be testing our understanding.  We are very lonely in this universe.  Once we figure out that warring between ourselves is pathetic and self destructive, they might say a hello.  They might assume their presence could usher those feelings along. 

This is why I'm still 50/50 on the matter.  I'll see a convincing de-bunking argument, then a month later I'll read a report on a new telescope that can spot planets light years away, and determine if they can support life (I think it's at a 100+ now? I forget).  But wait, didn't we just invent the light bulb in the last 150 years? 

So with around 200 years of technology, we can travel faster than the speed of sound, destroy entire cities with a touch of a button, see millions of light years into space, and send probes to the furthest reaches of our solar system.  What could we do with 1000 years worth of techological development?  How about 3000 years?
The idea of another species who are a few steps ahead in cognitive development and technology doesn't sound so far fetched to me.


--------------------
~Happy sailing~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
Re: Is it time to classify ET under science instead of paranormal? [Re: RuNE]
    #8902649 - 09/09/08 03:21 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

>The idea of another species who are a few steps ahead in cognitive development and technology doesn't sound so far fetched to me.

I agree with you to some extent. But my point was that it's disingenuous to list all the separate premises on one side of the argument and then write "Is is not more simple to just say its likely there was an unknown craft present?" on the other. It's selectively glossing over the details to make one side seem like "common sense".


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   OlympusMyco.com Olympus Myco Bulk Substrate


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Speed of Gravity .. cleeen 1,612 9 07/27/07 11:08 AM
by Diploid
* Sciences fundamental flaw
( 1 2 3 all )
Ego Death 5,020 41 02/07/07 08:50 PM
by Salvia_Antics
* does "gravity" (whatever gravity is) insinuate the possibility of instantaneous interstellar travel?
( 1 2 all )
sleepy 4,369 38 01/15/08 03:26 AM
by karma35
* Jobs in Science recsol 1,332 11 08/16/21 07:29 PM
by psilocybinmansions
* The effect of complex star gravities upon the development of human brains . Mirth 1,201 7 05/04/05 11:51 AM
by ChuangTzu
* Civilian craft ready to make space history micro 808 3 06/20/04 12:01 PM
by Le_Canard
* Help me find ETs (as in Aliens) Supernova 853 5 01/20/05 05:39 PM
by AlteredReality
* Computer Science Books: Recommendations? SymmetryGroup8 849 4 06/04/07 05:03 AM
by Seuss

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: trendal, automan, Northerner
12,347 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.097 seconds spending 0.038 seconds on 20 queries.