The UFO Thread [Archive] - Physics Forums

Rashid

Apr1-03, 11:01 PM

Hello,
I'm not supporting the claim that UFO's are Aliens. Now, say you were around back in the late 1800 and early 1900s when manmade aircraft were being tested and developed. If you wern't involved in the projects and if you saw an airplane flying over you're house then wouldnt you think it was something phenominal, unexplainable, and unachievable by man? Back in those days people would believe in psychics and astrology rather than men flying around in winged crafts. That was almost 100 years ago or more. For some reason it's been our goal as mankind to fly. Look at Divinci and all those people that strapped on wings to their arms to fly back in the really old days. So how is it impossible for us as mankind to Finally and eventually take off the wings and yet stay afloat in mid air? I think that some people are just so driven and educated in the sciences that they were able to put their knowledge into creative uses and find ways around our common and wasteful jet propulsion techniques. Look at Eintstein and the formings of nuclear technology as an example. Look at how advanced nuclear technology already is and where it was even in the 1950's. You could fit a bomb the equivelent to Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined, into a shell that fits into a Howlitzer cannon.
Don't limit Mankind to our current technology and your inability to look deeper into things or into the future.
UFO's are not extraterrestrial. In fact, if they were then wouldn't their actions as of today be considered hostile? They have entered our atmosphere uninvited, caused mass hysteria (the Arizona incident), and supposedly mutilated our livestock and implanted probes into people.
If you were to take all of what people have said about aliens and UFO's seriously then we would probably be at war already with some alien race that only lives in our imagination.
Don't underestimate your fellow Man, our race, and our potential.
Sincerely,
Lord Rashid

megashawn

Apr3-03, 08:38 PM

While I too think that there is no limit to what man is capable of, given enough time, I highly doubt these crafts we've been seing our alien. While no person can rule out the existance of aliens, not one can provide proof for there existance either. Look at the raeliens, for example.

And, if these crafts are of alien origin, what is with all the smoke and mirrors. I mean, making crop circles is impressive, but not out of mans grasp, and surely any being with the means to travel the universe would find a better way of communicating with us (telephone, internet, email). I mean, surely they could pickup on the millions of radio waves and figure out how to tap into our communications systems. Has this happened? no.

Honestly there is alot in common with a person who believes UFO's are of alien origin, and people who believe the universe is of spiritual origin. While you can believe this all you want, its merely a belief and does not hold any water against currently known facts, like, not being able to travel the vast distances of space in a feasible amount of time.

sir-pinski

Apr4-03, 03:13 AM

I agree megashawn ... besides the burden of proof is on those who claim that aliens have visited earth in U.F.O.'s. Why? Because current opinion based upon the available hard evidence forces us to conclude that U.F.O's are most likely not extraterrestrial in origin. If there is any hard evidence for aliens these individuals should present it and convince everybody else.

Raavin

Apr6-03, 11:16 PM

I tend to believe that there is no possibility for faster then light travel. Given that, if aliens got here it would have taken a huge amount of time. I can't see why they would just buzz over and not contact us. Even at close to light speeds, if their time was contracted during the trip, it would still be enough time on their planet that you would think that they would want to be able to say that they had met and engaged with life from another planet. I would like to think that there was other advanced life (assuming that we are) in the universe but don't believe they visit us on a regular basis.

Raavin [:D]

Nicool003

Apr7-03, 06:30 PM

What about crop circles? I'm not sure how else they could be made like that...

sir-pinski

Apr8-03, 04:02 AM

chosenone

Apr11-03, 12:21 PM

what if the aliens after rosewell,got smart.to prevent another accident there made there spacecrafts in the image of our own aircrafts to disguise them as our own.you would never be able to tell to difference between theirs and our own.

greeneagle3000

Apr12-03, 08:58 AM

there are millions and trillions of universes and galaxies. surely ET live exists. UFO and aliens have been mixed up and that dosen't matter now.

chosenone

Apr13-03, 10:50 AM

If aliens did disguise their ships as airplanes,so we would'nt think much of a plane going over head,so they can monitor us.they would have two advantages.one if their ships anti gravity system fails like it did last time,they would go to aerodynamics to stay aloft,and not drop like a rock.two if the government covered it up last time.if they crashed they would have a cover story that it was only a plane and not a alien spacecraft that crashed.to keep it a secret.

FZ+

Apr13-03, 03:38 PM

Now that's just paranoic. What if aliens disguised themselves as air? Then they will be utterly indetectable, and be easily able to go inside you and conduct experiments and stuff. So clearly we must STOP BREATHING NOW!

greeneagle3000

Apr13-03, 09:07 PM

there is nothing to be afraid of. the aliens are everywhere. they may be even us. we are aliens to them anyway. what's there to be afriad?
if you have fear, fear will eat you.

FZ+

Apr13-03, 09:14 PM

Erm... how does that work? How can one be alien to oneself?

russ_watters

Apr14-03, 12:55 AM

Originally posted by FZ+
Erm... how does that work? How can one be alien to oneself? No I think what he means is that if you ask an alien if he's an alien, he'll say "no, you are."

chosenone

Apr14-03, 10:57 AM

O.K. what if aliens are here,but they don't want to approach us.sorta like star treks prime directive.not to interfere with lesser species.plus would'nt it scare the s**t out of everybody.we would think they were going to destroy us.even if they were trying to be our friends.no one would fully trust them,always waiting for them to have some secret plan to subvert our attention before they do it.also if they did approach us.we would ask for there technology.if they had a good reason not to give it to us, we would see it as a sign that they can't be trusted,because they would'nt give us things we thought were'nt a big deal.also what do you think is the success rate of turning a begining technological people,ito highly advanced faster than light.know everything about science,and keep them from killing them self using it for self gain,or abusing the relationship with them,in the process?

sir-pinski

Apr15-03, 05:17 AM

Whoa ...... [:)]

Granted they could be among us ..... but why assume that. Surely it's more plausible to assume they are not here. Besides you could make the same argument about pixies or wizards or for that matter secret government conspiracies [:)] Nope easier just to assume no aliens until we see some evidence.

russ_watters

Apr15-03, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by sir-pinski
Whoa ...... [:)]

Granted they could be among us ..... but why assume that. Surely it's more plausible to assume they are not here. Besides you could make the same argument about pixies or wizards or for that matter secret government conspiracies [:)] Nope easier just to assume no aliens until we see some evidence. Because its FUN.

chosenone

Apr15-03, 09:29 AM

sorry to sound paranoid.I'm not, just though it sounded cool.but if you want what I would have say if I was.thats why you can't prove they exist because they hide behind the fact they do this for a living,as they explore the universe.they don't let the poeple on the planet their visiting find out their there.obviously.they don't want to disturb them or they would be responsible for genicide of a race.so they hind in our style of airplanes so we dont know their there.

Nicool003

Apr16-03, 09:25 PM

Firstly ... the individuals who created the first crop circles admitted to having created them and even demonstrated how they where done. Secondly does anybody actually believe that a civilisation capable of interstellar travel would choose to communicate by creating patterns in some fields. Crop circles I am afraid are just another of humanity's bizarre creations.

How do you know they did not lie? How do you know they really did it? They couldn't possibly have done them all they may have just wanted credit. Crop circles have been around longer than them probably.

russ_watters

Apr18-03, 11:05 PM

Originally posted by Nicool003
How do you know they did not lie? How do you know they really did it? They couldn't possibly have done them all they may have just wanted credit. Crop circles have been around longer than them probably. The hoaxsters DEMONSTRATED how they did it.

Bellatrix

Apr20-03, 12:12 PM

There is a belief that UFO's are inter-dimensional travellers, just as any of the elusive physical phenomenon are. For example, Sasquatch and aka's, Loch Ness Monster and aka's, etc. All beings and creatures moving through our dimension in a multi-dimensional reality. I feel that I agree with this theory, this possibility, as I believe our realities exist in a multi-dimensional reality. It's only logical that we experience travellers from other dimensions like we travel to other dimensions in our sleeping, waking and lucid dreaming states.

[a)]

username

Apr28-03, 09:14 AM

I find that theory almost plausable except for nessie,sasquatch etc. The only problem is that there hardly any evidence. If you start beliving in stuff that has no evidence you end up religious or beliving in flying banana's. Of course this is ok except there is more contradictory evidence than evidence supporting the theory.

chosenone

Apr29-03, 01:36 PM

maybe not another dimension,but what if they can focus a gravitational beam at another planet,latch on to it,use the gravity to stretch spacetime closer,then with time slowed down by the gravitatonal field itself,pull themselves to the planet earth.with the reduced distance by streching spacetime,and time slowed down for the traveller,and since gravity may travel faster than light,it just might work.

Ivan Seeking

Apr30-03, 05:41 AM

Crop circle are real!!!!!!!. They were studied by meteorologists as early as the forties. No doubt about it!! There are fake ones and there are real ones. I think all of the complicated ones are fakes. I also think aliens mind control drunken college students into making the fake ones.

Do Aliens come in UFOs?
Where's the evidence? To be honest, we don’t know if we are in a position to have any evidence. Is the government hiding things? Maybe. A lot ex-military people say they are. But to be practical, good evidence does not seem an easy thing to satisfy. How do we know what to look for?

Let’s just make a wild assumption that there are beings that travel here. Next, let’s say they are interdimensional beings who travel here by typical interdimensional modes of transport. Who can name the evidence that we can expect? Tell me exactly what I am supposed to find. If we had it, would we even know it? Ok let’s make things easier. If the aliens come in flying saucers, then just what are they made of? What parts should we expect to be falling off in order to satisfy science? What kind of chemical trail should we look for? Could they mine materials on this planet to produce ships? Wouldn’t that make more sense than flying them all here…if you were an alien? Haven’t we already realized this in our own plans for planetary exploration? Can we really even guess what evidence we can expect given the premise? Presently, I wonder if science is defined broadly enough to address the UFO issue. Are we like Kaku’s ants contemplating the distant rumble of cars on the highway?

I agree completely that we don’t have the evidence to satisfy science. Guess what, science does not have a monopoly on truth. In fact this is my point: Some true things exist that can never be proven by science. Things have happened in my life, nothing unusual but everyday things that I can never prove. I can never prove to you that I ate toast this morning...but I did. Unfortunately I can never satisfy science of this fact. Now, where do we draw the line? When does human testimony become unworthy of consideration? Science could never convict a criminal. He would never repeat the crime! Likewise, UFOs never seem to follow schedules.

So the real question is not where’s the evidence, instead I ask, how much would you bet?

sir-pinski

Apr30-03, 07:31 AM

I usually find that Hume's Maxim is most useful in these cases where extraordinary claimsare being made (i.e. not what I had for breakfast this morning):

That no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish.

When anyone tells me that he saw a dead man restored to life, I immediately consider with myself whether it be more probable, that this person should either deceive or be deceived, or that the fact, which he relates, should really have happened. I weigh the one miracle against the other; and according to the superiority, which I discover, I pronounce my decision, and always reject the greater miracle. If the falsehood of his testimony would be more miraculous than the event which he relates; then, and not till then, can he pretend to command my belief or opinion.

Ivan Seeking

Apr30-03, 08:33 AM

But I think you miss the point.

If someone claims to have experienced something, whether it be UFOS or toast, there may be nothing that they can do to satisfy your requirement. This does not make the experience any less real...if there was anything real about. Science cannot mandate what is and is not truth. This is not the job of science, but many seek to make it so. Madness lies not here but in the empty soul.

How many scientists have made a serious effort to investigate the UFO evidence. An unwritten assumption of silliness prevails that impedes honest inquiry. Most scientists will admit that life must exist out there. And, most scientists will admit that civilizations could easily exist that are millions of years more advanced than us. Our own theories inspire real designs for time machines and warp drive. We seek non-spaghettificating [sic] black hole solutions. We surmise the existence of 12 dimensional hyper-surfaces, quantum foam, and superpositions of existence that completely defy conceptualization, much less understanding. We look for tachyons, and we ignore the spooky part of entanglement. But UFOS? Silliness!

I should also add that according the the Quantum Cosmologists, as soon as you took measure of my position, YOU leapt into a superposition of eigenstates...so I guess you now agree and disagree: Exactly how do we define where the "silly line" is drawn anyway? I don't mean to insult science or scientists in any way here as I love the stuff. I am one of physic's biggest fans. I even bothered to get a degree. I only mean to compare and contrast the explanations that we accept [consider] and that we don't accept [are not willing to consider], without having direct evidence in either case.

sir-pinski

Apr30-03, 11:40 AM

The problem comes when people start making extraordinary claims that fly in the face of currently accepted ideas. If someone makes an extraordinary claim which is contrary to currently accepted ideas then that person better have some damn good evidence to back it up. It shouldn't be enough for someone to come along and say hey guess what I saw last night and then expect the entire scientific community to listen. It needs to be difficult to get controversial ideas accepted. If not then as scientists we would end up spending most of our time following up crack-pots and car headlights. I accept that every now and then a correct claim comes along but without good solid evidence it means nothing to consensus opinion which is what science is all about.

Now as far as U.F.O.'s go ... scientists do agree in the possiblity of alien life but to infer from that that we have been visited is an unfounded step. I might also point out that at least we have good evidence for entanglement and quantum superpositions and we have some good mathematics behind ideas like quantum foam do we have anything nearly as solid for U.F.O.'s?

This is not about silliness (quantum mechanics is fairly silly as it is). This is about evidence and the requirement of it for acceptance by other people.

Ivan Seeking

Apr30-03, 01:05 PM

---“The problem comes when people start making extraordinary claims that fly in the face of currently accepted ideas. If someone makes an extraordinary claim which is contrary to currently accepted ideas then that person better have some damn good evidence to back it up.”

I don’t agree. The observer may have no control over the evidence. The truth could exist even without the evidence. Is the position of science to be: Even if ET is here, it is only significant if we have proof? If I can’t measure ET he doesn’t exist, or, his potential existence is meaningless? I don’t think we need to collapse ET’s wave function.

--- “It shouldn't be enough for someone to come along and say hey guess what I saw last night and then expect the entire scientific community to listen. It needs to be difficult to get controversial ideas accepted. If not then as scientists we would end up spending most of our time following up crack-pots and car headlights.”

I agree. This is a problem.

-- I accept that every now and then a correct claim comes along but without good solid evidence it means nothing to consensus opinion which is what science is all about.

But we can’t derive or predict ET like we can black holes or quantum foam. In fact, the only thing science really has to say about ET of late is that he/she/it/they are likely out there.

---Now as far as U.F.O.'s go ... scientists do agree in the possiblity of alien life but to infer from that that we have been visited is an unfounded step.

Based on the science, I agree. Based on history and human testimony, I’m not sure. To assume that we have not been visited is equally unfounded.

--I might also point out that at least we have good evidence for entanglement and quantum superpositions and we have some good mathematics behind ideas like quantum foam do we have anything nearly as solid for U.F.O.'s?

Has anyone ever seen, measured, or even indirectly detected quantum foam? I can point to ten million people [or whatever the number is] who claim to have seen a UFO. Now, from a purely statistical point of view, [no preconceived notions of reality allowed] what would you normally think the odds are that at least one “witness” could give an accurate account?

--This is not about silliness (quantum mechanics is fairly silly as it is). This is about evidence and the requirement of it for acceptance by other people.

I completely agree that we cannot elevate human testimony to a level of proof. But, what scientific value does human testimony carry? Well, none. Here is the core of my objection. Things of great significance may exist which science has no way to address. This limitation is artificial. The purpose of science is to help humankind understand its place in the universe, and the universe itself. The desire for knowledge is not limited to what can be formalized in a theorem. Science is about what is and what is not; not just what can be measured! This is an artificial construct needed to satisfy a formalism. Ok. We use it in the lab. It works for subatomic particles. And, at the deepest levels these things are probably true. But sometimes we have to use other rules for the macroscopic world if we are to address some potentially real issues. I don’t have a model or a framework for what I argue. I only mean to suggest that the real purpose of science nearly lost in the details. In principle and in practice, I think we can do better.

By the way, I have never seen a UFO...at least not one likely piloted by ET. But I have spoken with otherwise credible people who claim they have.

megashawn

Apr30-03, 06:12 PM

. I can never prove to you that I ate toast this morning...but I did. Unfortunately I can never satisfy science of this fact.

Well, if it's only been since this morning, then science probably could satisfy that fact:)

Ivan Seeking

Apr30-03, 07:52 PM

No...I lied. I never had toast. But I do know someone who claims they really did have toast. [:D]

sir-pinski

May2-03, 05:51 AM

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
If I can’t measure ET he doesn’t exist, or, his potential existence is meaningless? I don’t think we need to collapse ET’s wave function.

To science he wouldn't exist. Science relies on measurement (not necessarily in a lab) and observation. If someone says hey I saw an alien last night of course science and the world demands some good evidence for that claim. I agree that it doesn't mean that the individual did or didn't see an alien but to the rest of the world that claim means nothing without hard evidence.

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
But we can’t derive or predict ET like we can black holes or quantum foam. In fact, the only thing science really has to say about ET of late is that he/she/it/they are likely out there.

Yes .... but we can observe and look for evidence.

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Has anyone ever seen, measured, or even indirectly detected quantum foam? I can point to ten million people [or whatever the number is] who claim to have seen a UFO. Now, from a purely statistical point of view, [no preconceived notions of reality allowed] what would you normally think the odds are that at least one “witness” could give an accurate account?

But I never claimed that quantum foam was a "fact" I just said that there was some theoretical justification for it. Human testimony is not the most reliable evidence. It can be coloured very easily by pre-conceived ideas and popular culture.

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
The desire for knowledge is not limited to what can be formalized in a theorem. Science is about what is and what is not; not just what can be measured! This is an artificial construct needed to satisfy a formalism. Ok. We use it in the lab. It works for subatomic particles.

It also works for other subjects which don't operate in the lab e.g. geology, meteorology, astronomy etc. Science has to work based upon observation because without it we are not aware of a particular phenomena. Observation in this context extends from somebody observing something with their naked eye to a scientist sitting in front of an oscilloscope. With these observations an explanation is sought i.e. we create a theory to explain the observations. This is not necessarily mathematical in nature. This definition means that any phenomena that can be observed can also be formalised into a theory, including your breakfast activities. [:D]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
I only mean to suggest that the real purpose of science nearly lost in the details. In principle and in practice, I think we can do better.

I don't think it is lost in the details. I also think it has done a fabulous job so far, more so than any other system of investigation. It's success speaks for itself.

Ivan Seeking

May4-03, 04:24 AM

I was going to make a point by point rebuttal, but instead I will sum up my position this way. On a few occasions science has taken an honest look at the UFO question. One symposium was held in the seventies and was privately funded by Rockefellers I believe. There was even a recent symposium on Alien Abduction held at MIT. [That one would have even been difficult for me to attend]. Whenever science has made an official INFORMED statement on the subject, the results are the same - a core of about 5% of the ten million “sightings” or so are seemingly inexplicable and “worthy of further investigation”. What kind of examples are these 5%? They sometimes involve multiple witnesses, multiple radar contacts, and objects that demonstrate incredible behavior such as 25g accelerations. but, the “further investigation” never seems to happen, and anyone who does address this issue is immediately considered fringe. Heck, even the SETI crowd takes some hits.

Science does give absolutely silly responses to some UFO reports. Usually the kind of response that insults the intelligence and questions the sanity of all involved. I remember the story that really first got my attention. I ran across this as a result of an English assignment in college. A Japan cargo flight was traveling a polar route…I forget the destination and such. There were six crewmen onboard and the plane had on-board radar. The pilot and crew reported that a craft followed them for two hours. It was seen at times behind them, and at other times directly alongside the plane. It was described as about the size of an aircraft carrier. The on-board radar and I think not one but two ground stations recorded the second craft.

At the time I subscribed to an astronomy magazine and in it I happened to find a response [from a respected scientist] to this particular UFO report. It was argued that Venus was unusually bright that night and it was likely the cause of the sighting. Now really! This response is just plain stupid! I have seen many other examples of this kind of closed minded garbage. Were the claims of the crew in anyway directly addressed and then some argument made about how they could have been so wrong, that might be reasonable. But the explanation clearly flies in the face of the evidence. It should be noted that the pilot was fired as a result of this event. He took Japan Airlines to court and won. He is now retired on full benefits. This is one particularly good example of hundreds I have found in my own informal investigations.

I realize that stories don’t make science, but we have more than just stories. We have photographs, videos and film, radar contacts, multiple witness sightings, residual radiation and other residual effects on the local flora associated with reported UFO landing sights. We have reports from highly credible witnesses. We have reports that contain information that yields insight only now after fifty years…that is, a report from 1950 for example that only makes sense now. A very sweet German lady reported with great anxiety what she thought was a Russian craft, a saucer that had landed in her pasture. She wanted to be sure the military knew about this new Russian technology. We can now be sure that no-one had the craft that she reported. There were the Foo Fighters from WWII. How many people have even heard of these? Plenty of WWII pilots have I can assure you. I’ll bet most scientists haven’t.

But above all else, this is the single most important reason for science to take this subject more seriously and to find better ways to investigate these experiences: If aliens really are visiting, the rest of science pales by comparison! If true, this is the biggest story in the history of science, and possibly for all of humanity. If not true, there are still some interesting mysteries out there to be solved. Unfortunately, I know that most people who are in a position to help provide answers here have really closed their minds to the possibilities...and that’s just bad science!

Ivan Seeking

May11-03, 12:29 AM

"I know that neither Russia nor this country has anything even approaching such high speeds and maneuvers. Behind the scenes high ranking officers are soberly concerned about the UFOs, but through official secrecy and ridicule many citizens are led to believe that the unknown flying objects are nonsense."

Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoeter, First director of the CIA.
1960 NICAP press conference.

Ivan Seeking

May11-03, 12:44 AM

"The UFO was bouncing around the 747. [It] was a huge ball with lights running around it….Well, I’ve been involved in a lot of cover-ups with the FAA. When we gave the presentation to the Reagan staff, they had all those people swear that this never happened. But they never had me swear it never happened. I can tell you what I’ve seen with my own eyes. I’ve got a videotape. I’ve got the voice tape. I’ve got the reports that were filed that will confirm what I’ve been telling you."

FAA Division Chief of Accidents and Investigations, John Callahan

Ivan Seeking

May11-03, 01:06 AM

" I have no doubt that something landed at this U.S. Air Force base [Bentwaters] and I have no doubt that it has got the people concerned in to a considerable state. The Ministry of Defense has doggedly stuck to it's normal line, that nothing of defense interest took place. Either large numbers of people , including the commanding general at Bentwaters,were hallucinating, and for an American Air Force nuclear base , this is extremely dangerous - or what they say did happen.
In either of these circumstances, there can be only one answer - that it was of extreme defense interest to the U.K.".

Admiral Lord Hill-Norton , former chief of the British Defense Staff

Ivan Seeking

May11-03, 01:23 AM

"A saucer flew right over [us], put down three landing gears, and landed out on the dry lakebed. [The cameramen] went out there with their cameras towards the UFO….I had a chance to hold [the film] up to the window. Good close-up shots. There was no doubt in my mind that it was made someplace other than on this earth."

Mercury & Gemini Astronaut, Colonel Gordon Cooper

Ivan Seeking

May11-03, 01:42 AM

"There is a [military] publication called JANAP 146E that has a section that says you will not reveal any information regarding the UFO phenomenon under penalty of $10,000 fine and ten years in jail. So the secret has been kept."

-----US Navy Pilot, Lieutenant Frederick Fox

Edit:JANAP 146E (http://rr0.free.fr/janp146e.html)

Ivan Seeking

May11-03, 01:57 AM

"I have frequently been asked why a person of my background—a former Chief of the Defense Staff, a former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee—why I think there is a cover-up [of] the facts about UFOs. I believe governments fear that if they did disclose those facts, people would panic. I don’t believe that at all. There is a serious possibility that we are being visited by people from outer space. It behooves us to find out who they are, where they come from, and what they want."

-Admiral Lord Hill-Norton , former chief of the British Defense Staff

Ivan Seeking

May11-03, 02:07 AM

I am sure that many of you have heard of Roswell, and all of those nuts who thought that a balloon was a crashed flying saucer...in 1947. These were the same guys in charge of the most classified weapon in history. Roswell was the base of the worlds only nuclear strike force. The Enola Gay flew out of Roswell. What a bunch of knuckle heads!

username

May12-03, 11:00 PM

Why do ufo's always have to come from outer space. Surely it makes much more sense that they are classified military projects considering that alot of the sightings happen at military bases.

Ivan Seeking

May13-03, 06:51 AM

Originally posted by username
Why do ufo's always have to come from outer space. Surely it makes much more sense that they are classified military projects considering that alot of the sightings happen at military bases.

I have no doubt that most sightings claimed near military bases by civilians are easily explained. I have a little more difficulty with this idea when the base security forces are involved, or when F14s respond, or when the base commander goes public. Check out the names above - the previous quotes. Most of these people were or are involved in the military. Many of the most compelling testimonials come from the military. For a time, I was nearly convinced that the only conspiracy in effect is one by the military to perpetuate the UFO myth - to hide actual technology behind the smoke screen of aliens from Alpha Centauri – thus discrediting actual sightings of real planes. To some extent they may take advantage of this, but ultimately it seems that too many events and testimonials contradict this notion. Also, I never said they were from another planet. I don’t know what I think. I do know that highly credible witnesses come with supporting evidence, and claims to have made direct observations of incredible technologies that simply could not be ours or due to confusion. It’s not the 95% that can be easily dismissed that interests me; it’s the other 5%...or in the case of military bases perhaps 0.5%, but surely more than zero.

I know this means little to any of you, but for me it was significant. After years of balking I finally got up the nerve to bring this subject up with an uncle who had been a lifer in the Marines. At one time he was a base commander. He is a Semper Fi, Leatherneck loyal, feet on the ground no BS type of guy. When I finally asked the big quesion - what do you think about this UFO stuff? [didn't want to sound too serious you know] - he looked me dead in the eyes and said "There's something out there". As it turned out, in Vietnam he had listened to a couple of UFO fighter jet intercepts on the radio. It seems there was no doubt in his mind.

Ivan Seeking

May15-03, 02:39 AM

"On August fifth [1926] - something remarkable! We were in our camp in the Kukunor district not far from the Humboldt Chain. In the morning about half-past nine some of our caravaneers noticed a remarkably big black eagle flying over us. Seven of us began to watch this unusual bird. At this same moment another of our caravaneers remarked, 'There is something far above the bird'. And he shouted in his astonishment. We all saw, in a direction from north to south, something big and shiny reflecting the sun, like a huge oval moving at great speed. Crossing our camp the thing changed in its direction from south to southwest. And we saw how it disappeared in the intense blue sky. We even had time to take our field glasses and saw quite distinctly an oval form with shiny surface, one side of which was brilliant from the sun."
- Nicholas Roerich, Altai-Himalaya

I contacted the Roerich Musuem in New York and confirmed this quote. The curator's assistant was very familiar with this excerpt. He then added that Roerich's wife was also on this expedition. In her diary she comments that this must have been a craft with people from somewhere else; and then suggests the existence of life on other planets.

EDIT: Minor changes to format

username

May15-03, 10:58 AM

I have come up with a new theory that ufos are piloted by rods and the so called abductions are cases of indescriminate roding, ok so thats not true but what if the human species discovered a way to manipulate time in the distant future could some of the ufos be from planet earth in the future ?
Probably not but I think its better than the idea of ET's.

username

May15-03, 11:45 AM

As for the Bentwater's ufo case, I thought the base was conducting high energy beam experiments at the time, if this is true it's not hard to imagine that some sort of airborne apparatus was involved (maybe this could account for the radioactivity as well).

Ivan Seeking

May15-03, 03:46 PM

Originally posted by username
As for the Bentwater's ufo case, I thought the base was conducting high energy beam experiments at the time, if this is true it's not hard to imagine that some sort of airborne apparatus was involved (maybe this could account for the radioactivity as well).

Don't you think the base commander and the security forces would have known about this? Also, the security detail reported direct observation of a craft.

EDIT: It is cases like this one that nearly convinced me that the military wants us to falsely believe in UFOs. In end however, in spite of the entirely unacceptable implications, this hypothesis seems to fail.

Ivan Seeking

May15-03, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by username
...what if the human species discovered a way to manipulate time in the distant future could some of the ufos be from planet earth in the future ?
Probably not but I think its better than the idea of ET's.

There is an old challenge: If time travel will ever be possible then where are the time travelers [from the future]?

If we saw some would we know it? Dunno.

FZ+

May15-03, 06:37 PM

Oh... easy solutions:

(1) They are busy watching the 3rd world war Dubya started
(2) They are all dead.

Ivan Seeking

May15-03, 06:43 PM

Originally posted by FZ+
Oh... easy solutions:

(1) They are busy watching the 3rd world war Dubya started
(2) They are all dead.
If I can just get my time machine working I will have known this.[:D]

username

May16-03, 11:41 AM

I read somewhere that the myth 'carrots help you see at night' was deliberate disinformation by the military to hide the fact RAF pilots had just developed radar in ww2. I know people who still belive this myth.
I think this is a bit like how the UFO thing started funny how it really took off just after the ww2. The military probably just hijacked a myth like fairies or elves and helped perpetuate it. I think by the end of ww2 the axis had developed saucer shaped aircraft and this technology fell into allied hands.
--
As for all these high ranking officials so called testimonies these military authority figures would be the last people on earth I would trust with telling the truth.

Ivan Seeking

May16-03, 05:23 PM

Originally posted by username
I read somewhere that the myth 'carrots help you see at night' was deliberate disinformation by the military to hide the fact RAF pilots had just developed radar in ww2. I know people who still belive this myth.
I think this is a bit like how the UFO thing started funny how it really took off just after the ww2. The military probably just hijacked a myth like fairies or elves and helped perpetuate it. I think by the end of ww2 the axis had developed saucer shaped aircraft and this technology fell into allied hands.
--
As for all these high ranking officials so called testimonies these military authority figures would be the last people on earth I would trust with telling the truth.

Perhaps. But this hypothesis requires that we ignore a slew historical evidence. What about Roewich and similar reports that predate WWII by many years, decades, and sometimes even centuries?

By the way, although keratin is needed for night vision, unless you have a deficiency, eating carrots makes no difference. I find that my night vision improves most with a flashlight. [a)]

username

May16-03, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Perhaps. But this hypothesis requires that we ignore a slew historical evidence. What about Roewich and similar reports that predate WWII by many years, decades, and sometimes even centuries?

Ghosts goblins and fairy tales and maybe some natural phenomenon thrown in.
--
I do however belive in the possiblity of life as we know it elsewhere in the universe.

Ivan Seeking

May16-03, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by username
Ghosts goblins and fairy tales and maybe some natural phenomenon thrown in.
--
I do however belive in the possiblity of life as we know it elsewhere in the universe.

Explain Roewich using known natural phenomenon.

Edit: Are we going to take every reputable account in history and assume that these people are all liars or nuts? Based on what justification? It seems the only one is the assumption that they are all wrong. Then of course we must assume the existance of, not a highly confined conspiracy imited to an elite few in high positions, but rather a general conspriracy by thousands of miltary persons to lie and claim that UFOs DO exist. This conspiracy includes my uncle, and nearly every other military person I have spoken with or who ever gone public with claims of UFOs. Now that's a consiracy! Does this really seem possible?

username

May16-03, 08:17 PM

I think these people realise (especially scientists) that there is a not a god as such but still feel the need for somehting else that is out there that is greater than them (maybe its hardwired into the human brain).

It would make an interesting study to see what percentage of alien abductee's are religious.

Ivan Seeking

May16-03, 08:30 PM

Originally posted by username
I think these people realise (especially scientists) that there is a not a god as such but still feel the need for somehting else that is out there that is greater than them (maybe its hardwired into the human brain).

It would make an interesting study to see what percentage of alien abductee's are religious.

Sorry username I edited after your post. Please see the edit above. Also, I don't do abducties...too much psycho-babble to contend with. I listen but I make no judgements. I agree that psychology surely plays a role here.

username

May16-03, 08:44 PM

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
... Then of course we must assume the existance of, not a highly confined conspiracy imited to an elite few in high positions, but rather a general conspriracy by thousands of miltary persons to lie and claim that UFOs DO exist ... Does this really seem possible?

Possibly the military is compartmentalised (componentised?) so that indeed it can be perpertrated by a limited few without the rest knowing. Maybe the thousands of military personnel are victims of disinformation a bit like the carrot thing. But Maybe this is just grabbing at straws :/

Ivan Seeking

May16-03, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by username
Possibly the military is compartmentalised (componentised?) so that indeed it can be perpertrated by a limited few without the rest knowing. Maybe the thousands of military personnel are victims of disinformation a bit like the carrot thing. But Maybe this is just grabbing at straws :/

Yes, I suppose such a conspiracy could be scaled down. I will think about this... For now at least, I maintain that if one considers the bulk of the evidence, and if one gives serious consideration to the person involved, the context the events, the motive to lie, the motive to not lie which is often greater, and the wealth of historical clues and evidence that strongly support modern claims, to dismiss everything as trivial requires a greater leap of faith than accepting that something very strange is afoot indeed. But, I don't leap into the realm of a believer either. Perhaps I will need put a UFO into transdimensional warp drive myself before I become a true believer.

Ivan Seeking

May16-03, 09:29 PM

Does this mean that we agree: A conspiracy must exist to either perpetuate or to discount UFO claims, but a conspiracy nonetheless?

Edit: One more possibility; that an effort is made to perpetuate and to discount UFO claims.

Here I do mean an effort by some entity within the government, the military and or the intelligence community.

username

May16-03, 10:52 PM

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
One more possibility; that an effort is made to perpetuate and to discount UFO claims.

I find this idea quite plausible. For example take the sinister nut job steven greer (who is very well connected with lawrence rockafeller etc) seems to fit the bill perfectly. Of course anything to do with this loon/scam artist will be eventually discredited.

Edit: I admit I dont know much about the rockafellers involvment in the government if at all.

Ivan Seeking

May16-03, 11:08 PM

username

May16-03, 11:16 PM

Well here is some alternative links to get started with.

http://www.skeptictank.org/hs/greer.htm
http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1996/dec/m13-003.shtml
http://www.rense.com/general10/mitch.htm

Ivan Seeking

May16-03, 11:21 PM

Originally posted by username
I find this idea quite plausible. For example take the sinister nut job steven greer (who is very well connected with lawrence rockafeller etc) seems to fit the bill perfectly. Of course anything to do with this loon/scam artist will be eventually discredited.

Edit: I admit I dont know much about the rockafellers involvment in the government if at all.

Hey, you threw me off track. I mean a conspiracy by the military - hence the statements that come from foot soldiers to admirals. I mean the claims of direct observations by multiple witnesses or other likewise compelling scenarios within the military, in addition perhaps to other elements of the "UFO community". Are you willing to agree that one way or the other, some entity of the government must be lying about this issue with motive? To me this point seems virtually inescapable. If so, then I think we can reduce the complexity of the question by orders of magnitude.

Ivan Seeking

May16-03, 11:33 PM

Originally posted by username
Well here is some alternative links to get started with.

http://www.skeptictank.org/hs/greer.htm
http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1996/dec/m13-003.shtml
http://www.rense.com/general10/mitch.htm

Well, on the first link; I have a hard time buying it. I have hear Greer speak for at least ten hours and he never expressed and such beliefs. Most of his arguments seem quite reasonable. It is possible that my exposure is not representitive, but I can normally spot the lunatic pretty quickly. So, I'm not sold. Next, his association with Rockafeller does not surprise me. As I said earlier in this thread, I thought that one of the major legitimate conferences on this subject was sponsored by the Rockafellers back in the 1970s. This may only indicate another strong source of legitimate interest. As far as the last link, it sound like Greer overstepped his bounds, as indicated in the discussion:

(Edgar Mitchell) Although I firmly believe it is time for openness and disclosure by government, I object to being misused in this fashion and acquire guilt by association with certain claims that simply are not true.

Perhaps Greer got carried away with some bad information. But note the first part of the comment - Although I firmly believe it is time for openness and disclosure by government...

You are not convincing me yet.

username

May16-03, 11:33 PM

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Hey, you threw me off track. I mean a conspiracy by the military - hence the statements that come from foot soldiers to admirals.

I think foot soldiers maybe not even admirals are not going to be told what they saw is some super secret military hardware.
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Are you willing to agree that one way or the other, some entity of the government must be lying about this issue with motive?

Yes.

Ivan Seeking

May16-03, 11:37 PM

Well, your response came up before my response to your response....so I will let the web site catch up with our flying fingers and go visit my wife for awhile. To be continued....
[:D] [:D] [:D] [:D]

username

May16-03, 11:46 PM

You are not convincing me yet.
I take it back about greer I think he is just another nut or at worst a scam artist maybe a bit of both. btw: the press disclosure was supposed to be about space weapons not ufos. He has a group that trains you to become an 'ambassador to the universe' meditating in fields with torches etc for ufo runways hehe like $500 dollars a go.

EDIT: you can see the URL for the storming of the underground space aliens base has been indexed by google: http://makeashorterlink.com/?A25E41994 however the document has been removed.

username

May17-03, 01:14 AM

To put it in a nutshell I guess the UFO question comes down to three answers.

1. Witnesses are mistaken or unreliable.
2. The military/government/security is involved in a coverup conspiracy.
3. Both of the above.

Hmm getting very late for me so hope this makes sense.

Ivan Seeking

May17-03, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by username
I take it back about greer I think he is just another nut or at worst a scam artist maybe a bit of both. btw: the press disclosure was supposed to be about space weapons not ufos. He has a group that trains you to become an 'ambassador to the universe' meditating in fields with torches etc for ufo runways hehe like $500 dollars a go.

EDIT: you can see the URL for the storming of the underground space aliens base has been indexed by google: http://makeashorterlink.com/?A25E41994 however the document has been removed.

I took a look and hit a dead link. I went to CSETI and saw that he is working to develop protocols for communication with ET. Look, I make no argument that scam artists and lunatics abound in "The UFO Community", but in order to be objective I think it is necessary to ignore this stuff. Once a true believer, anyone is bound to sound like a nut.

If ET really is visiting, and assuming that he/she/it/they are 1000, or 10,000, or 10,000,000 years ahead of us technologically and in some evolutionary sense, name one aspect of this "reality" that wouldn't sound bizarre and outrageous. Name one description of how ET should look that, if you saw him, would sound reasonable and easy to repeat to others. Likewise, how would a modern helicopter be interpreted by someone from the Bronze Age, or even in the middle ages? What would a witness sound like while trying to describe it to his neighbors? Given the premise of ET, what is normal behavior for those who have met him?

I try very hard to stick with the evidence and ignore the hype in all directions.

Ivan Seeking

May17-03, 06:57 PM

Originally posted by username
To put it in a nutshell I guess the UFO question comes down to three answers.

1. Witnesses are mistaken or unreliable.
2. The military/government/security is involved in a coverup conspiracy.
3. Both of the above.

Hmm getting very late for me so hope this makes sense.

All that one needs is a proof for the nature of the governement lies that must exist - whichever lies they may be.

Even if ET is nowhere near, I'll bet no one knows the entire truth.

Ivan Seeking

May18-03, 05:00 AM

"When Prof. Peter Sturrock, a prominent Stanford University plasma physicist, conducted a survey of the membership of the American Astronomical Society he found that astronomers who spent time reading up on the UFO phenomenon developed more interest in it. If there were nothing to it, you would expect the opposite.
---Bernard Haisch, Ph.D., director of the California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics.
[1998] "An international panel of scientists that convened to ponder the possibility of extraterrestrial visitors was not about to answer that question, but they said the physical evidence in some UFO sightings merits further serious scientific review."

1998 Scientific review of the UFO question (http://www.augustachronicle.com/stories/063098/tec_124-4879.shtml)

'Of course it is possible that UFO's really do contain aliens, as many people believe, and the government is hushing it up. I couldn't possibly comment! --- Stephen Hawking
Millennium speech (http://clinton5.nara.gov/Initiatives/Millennium/shawking.html)
EDIT: minor changes to format

FZ+

May18-03, 09:07 AM

"When Prof. Peter Sturrock, a prominent Stanford University plasma physicist, conducted a survey of the membership of the American Astronomical Society he found that astronomers who spent time reading up on the UFO phenomenon developed more interest in it. If there were nothing to it, you would expect the opposite."
---Bernard Haisch, Ph.D., director of the California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics
Er... no. People becoming more interested in a subject is a demonstration of willingness to believe, not of actual validity. The fact that people who enter into various cults gain fervour over time doesn't mean these cults have meaning - just that they offer the right things.
Not to infer UFOlogy is a cult, of course....[:)]

[1998] "An international panel of scientists that convened to ponder the possibility of extraterrestrial visitors was not about to answer that question, but they said the physical evidence in some UFO sightings merits further serious scientific review."
Incidentally, they always say that. But there is simply a lack of major physical evidence, outside of personal claims. And most UFOlogists refuse to really submit their research to serious review.

'Of course it is possible that UFO's really do contain aliens, as many people believe, and the government is hushing it up. I couldn't possibly comment!" --- Stephen Hawking
I always though he was suspicious. [6)]

Ivan Seeking

May18-03, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by FZ+
Er... no. People becoming more interested in a subject is a demonstration of willingness to believe, not of actual validity. The fact that people who enter into various cults gain fervour over time doesn't mean these cults have meaning - just that they offer the right things.
Not to infer UFOlogy is a cult, of course....[:)]

You have so little confidence in scientists! Really though I agree, scientists aren't immune to predisposed beliefs. That’s why many won’t seriously consider the existence of UFOS. And yes there are two cults around this issue to this to be sure; one for and one against. Then there are the rest of us who have an interest in what is clearly a mystery.

Incidentally, they always say that. But there is simply a lack of major physical evidence, outside of personal claims. And most UFOlogists refuse to really submit their research to serious review.

If you review the reports, you will see that it is evidence and not testimony that creates the interest.

Ivan Seeking

May18-03, 07:14 PM

Originally posted by FZ+
I always though he was suspicious. [6)]

Welllllllll, Ok. You've got me on that one. [g)]

Ivan Seeking

May19-03, 03:45 AM

"Dr. Peter A. Sturrock, Professor of Space Science and Astrophysics and Deputy Director of the Center for Space Sciences and Astrophysics at Stanford University; Director of the Skylab Workshop on Solar Flares in 1977:

"The definitive resolution of the UFO enigma will not come about unless and until the problem is subjected to open and extensive scientific study by the normal procedures of established science. This requires a change in attitude primarily on the part of scientists and administrators in universities." (Sturrock, Peter A., Report on a Survey of the American Astronomical Society concerning the UFO Phenomenon, Stanford University Report SUIPR 68IR, 1977.)

"Although... the scientific community has tended to minimize the significance of the UFO phenomenon, certain individual scientists have argued that the phenomenon is both real and significant. Such views have been presented in the Hearings of the House Committee on Science and Astronautics [and elsewhere]. It is also notable that one major national scientific society, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, set up a subcommittee in 1967 to 'gain a fresh and objective perspective on the UFO phenomenon.'

In their public statements (but not necessarily in their private statements), scientists express a generally negative attitude towards the UFO problem, and it is interesting to try to understand this attitude. Most scientists have never had the occasion to confront evidence concerning the UFO phenomenon. To a scientist, the main source of hard information (other than his own experiments' observations) is provided by the scientific journals. With rare exceptions, scientific journals do not publish reports of UFO observations. The decision not to publish is made by the editor acting on the advice of reviewers. This process is self-reinforcing: the apparent lack of data confirms the view that there is nothing to the UFO phenomenon, and this view works against the presentation of relevant data." (Sturrock, Peter A., "An Analysis of the Condon Report on the Colorado UFO Project," Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1987.)"
Source (http://www.etcontact.net/Other/QuotePages/QuotesScientists.htm)

Ivan Seeking

May19-03, 04:12 AM

Dr. J. Allen Hynek was a professor emeritus and chairman of the astronomy department at Northwestern University. Earlier, he was director of the Lundheimer Astronomical Research Center at Northwestern. He has written astronomy books and articles that have appeared in numerous science journals, as well as an astronomy column for Science Digest magazine. He was chief scientist for NASA's satellite tracking program, and for twenty years was the scientific consultant to the United States Air Force in the investigation of the UFO phenomenon. He is credited with coining the phrase "close encounters of the third kind" and was Steven Spielberg's technical consultant on the film of that name. Dr. Hynek died in April 1986.

"During the years that I have been its consultant, the Air Force has consistently argued that UFO's were either hoaxes, hallucinations or misinterpretations of natural phenomena. For the most part I would agree with the Air Force. As a professional astronomer--I am chairman of the department of astronomy at Northwestern University--I have had no trouble explaining the vast majority of the reported sightings. But I cannot explain them all. Of the 15,000 cases that have come to my attention, several hundred are puzzling, and some of the puzzling incidents, perhaps one in 25, are bewildering. I have wanted to learn much more about these cases than I have been able to get from either the reports or the witnesses....Getting at the truth of "flying saucers" has been extraordinarily difficult because the subject automatically engenders such instantaneous reactions and passionate beliefs. Nearly all of my scientific colleagues, I regret to say, have scoffed at the reports of UFO's as so much balderdash, although this was a most unscientific reaction since virtually none of them had ever studied the evidence. Until recently my friends in the physical sciences wouldn't even discuss UFO's with me. The subject, in fact, rarely came up. My friends were obviously mystified as to how I, a scientist, could have gotten mixed up with "flying saucers"Saturday Evening Post: 1966
Source (http://www.cohenufo.org/sepost_66_hynek.1.html)

Ivan Seeking

May20-03, 05:05 AM

"What I found [in doing research for the book Project Delta] was compelling evidence to claim that most of these aerial objects far exceeded the terrestrial technology of the era in which they were seen. I was forced to conclude that there is a great likelihood that Earth is being visited by highly advanced aerospace vehicles under highly 'intelligent' control indeed."
-Dr. Richard F. Haines, retired NASA senior research scientist at Ames Research Center and the Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science where he worked on the International Space Station.--From the preface of his book, CE-5, 1998.

Ivan Seeking

May20-03, 05:15 AM

November 25, 1896, California, USA
"When [the mysterious light] first appeared it was seen moving rapidly from the northeast and heading in a southwesterly direction. As it neared the southern boundary of the city [of Sacramento] it turned directly toward the west and after passing the city went south, being distinctly visible for upward of 20 minutes."-From the San Francisco Call, Nov 26, 1896--This light was observed by many prominent individuals including Deputy Secretary of State George A. McCalvy, District Attorney Frank D. Ryan, and E. D. McCabe, the governor's personal secretary.

Ivan Seeking

May20-03, 05:29 AM

3000 BC China: From the book " Memories of the Sovereigns and the Kings " published in the 3rd century AD in China:...in the third millennium B.C., before the birth of Huang Ti or of Chi You... "sons from the sky", would descend to Earth on a star which was the shape of a saucer.

username

May20-03, 10:59 AM

Well I did not know they had saucers back then but anyway it could mean like a saucer from the top or bottom which would be circular or round a bit like a meteor or comet. I think ancient testimonies are really more useless than modern ones.

username

May20-03, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
When [the mysterious light] first appeared it was seen moving rapidly from the northeast and heading in a southwesterly direction. As it neared the southern boundary of the city [of Sacramento] it turned directly toward the west and after passing the city went south, being distinctly visible for upward of 20 minutes.

Sounds like a flare to me. What was the wind doing at the time ?

EDIT: It really could be anything like a model airplane/helicopter with a light attached to it.

Ivan Seeking

May20-03, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by username
Sounds like a flare to me. What was the wind doing at the time ?

EDIT: It really could be anything like a model airplane/helicopter with a light attached to it.
I think you missed the date:
November 25, 1896, California, USA

Ivan Seeking

May20-03, 06:03 PM

Originally posted by username
Well I did not know they had saucers back then but anyway it could mean like a saucer from the top or bottom which would be circular or round a bit like a meteor or comet. I think ancient testimonies are really more useless than modern ones.

Yes I think we should throw away all of the history books...
especially if we don't like what they say. [;)]

Ivan Seeking

May21-03, 03:58 AM

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo6.pdf

Joint Chiefs of Staff Report (http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo17.pdf)

Ivan Seeking

May21-03, 04:16 AM

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo12.pdf

Ivan Seeking

May21-03, 04:43 AM

"A red and green glowing orb radiated as it hurtled across the southwestern Georgia skies that January 1969 evening. Ten minutes later, it vanished. That was Jimmy Carter's story — and he's sticking to it. Carter, then Georgia's governor, became the first major politician to risk achieving "crackpot" status by claiming he had had a close encounter."

"I don't laugh at people any more when they say they've seen UFOs," Carter said at a Southern Governors Conference a few years later. "I've seen one myself."

---Former President Jimmy Carter
ABC News interview

username

May21-03, 01:45 PM

I personally have seen a number of UFO's in my life but I attribute most of them due to the fact I need glasses not ET's.

EDIT: Maybe there is proof of UFO's but where is the proof of ET's piloting these objects?

Ivan Seeking

May21-03, 06:14 PM

Originally posted by username
I personally have seen a number of UFO's in my life but I attribute most of them due to the fact I need glasses not ET's.

EDIT: Maybe there is proof of UFO's but where is the proof of ET's piloting these objects?

What I have posted so far probably references about 1% of the information about which I am aware...without thinking too hard. I have mostly just grabbed and posted quick links and quotes that I recognize as legitimate [that I have personally verified or that comes from a very good source]. I haven't even started to dig into the last ten to fifteen years worth of archived information that I have on various computers; or the mountains of evidence and claims that accumulate daily. I have only posted a few of the highlights of the field known well to any serious investigator; even to a hobbyist like myself [I do have a real job]. More to come. You be the judge; but if you wish to judge please look first. [a)]

I don't know if it is ET, but if so the implications are staggering! Don't you agree?

I do think we have safely ruled out any justification for the "only idiots believe in UFOs" position.

Edit: Although I think that nuts and other fruits are indeed found in the UFO crowd, I also believe that some of them only sound nuts. Given the premise of ET, how can we possibly know which is which?

username

May21-03, 09:00 PM

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
You be the judge; but if you wish to judge please look first.

True, maybe I need a new pair of glasses ;)

I don't know if it is ET, but if so the implications are staggering!

I think the implications could be quite staggering even if there is no ET's involved.

Ivan Seeking

May22-03, 02:15 AM

On January 16, 1957 - the day after NICAP's Board of Governors met for the first time - Board Chairman Delmer S. Fahrney called a press conference. News media all over the country quoted his statements (see Associated Press story below), identifing him as one of the few "top brass" to speak out in defense of UFOs.
WASHINGTON AP - Retired Rear Adm. Delmer S. Fahrney, once head of the Navy's guided missile program, said Wednesday reliable reports indicate thst "there are objects coming into our atmosphere at very high speeds. Fahrney told a news conference that "no agency in this country or Russia is able to duplcate at this time the speeds and accelerations which radar and observers indicate these flying objects are able to achieve."
Fahrney said he never has seen a flying saucer but has talked with a number of scientists and engineers who reported seeing strange flying objects. He added there are signs that "an intelligence" directs such objects "because of the way they fly. They are not entirely actuated by automatic equipment," he said. "The way they change position in formations and override each other would indicate that their motion is directed."

An Air Force spokesman said that service is still investigating all reports but has found absolutely no concrete evidence that there are flying saucers. He said that a majority of the reports are found upon checking to have some logical explanation, but that a percentage remains unexplained.

Fahrney called a news conference following an organizational meeting of a new private group. the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, of which he is board chairman.

Fahrney told reporters he has no information or preconceived ideas as to whether the unidentified flying objects are from outer space, but believes they involve "a tremendous amount of technology of which we have no knowledge," and that their development must have taken a long period of time.

username

May22-03, 01:30 PM

Is there any testimonies from non military scientists and has anybody sweared under oath that the things they claim to have seen are real ?

Ivan Seeking

May23-03, 01:59 AM

Originally posted by username
Is there any testimonies from non military scientists and has anybody sweared under oath that the things they claim to have seen are real ?
Even though many scientists have spoken out on the subject, and I have seen the signed reports from Carter and others, beyond public statements I don't remember a particular report that would satisfy your request. I am sure there are so I will check. Are you looking for affidavits, or just absolute conviction about these person's opinions?

Edit: Bare in mind that any public statements about UFOs by a scientist qualifies professionally as extremely risky behavior.

One real interesting story in this is that of Hynek. As the official debunker for the Air Force, he was the originator of the swamp gas explanations and other bogus debunking. He was in fact the person responsible for much of the popular attitudes found today in people who are unfamiliar with the UFO phenomenon. He then made a complete and public reversal in his position and became a leader in the UFO community. I suggest reading his book "The Hynek UFO Report".

For the moment, here is another scientist's point of view:
Dr. Jacques Vallee, astrophysicist, computer scientist and world renowned researcher and author on UFOs and paranormal phenomena. He worked closely with Dr. J. Allen Hynek. Commenting on the need for science "to search beyond the superficial appearances of reality":
"Skeptics, who flatly deny the existence of any unexplained phenomenon in the name of 'rationalism,' are among the primary contributors to the rejection of science by the public. People are not stupid and they know very well when they have seen something out of the ordinary. When a so-called expert tells them the object must have been the moon or a mirage, he is really teaching the public that science is impotent or unwilling to pursue the study of the unknown." (Vallee, J., Confrontations, New York: Ballantine Books, 1990.)

Ivan Seeking

May23-03, 02:11 AM

Unidentified Flying Objects: An Historical Perspective
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Design Engineering Conference
George W. Earley
Americana Hotel, New York City
May 15-18, 1967

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/histper.htm

Ivan Seeking

May23-03, 02:23 AM

FIFTY-SIX AIRCRAFT PILOT SIGHTlNGS INVOLVING
ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECTS

Richard F. Haines, Ph.D.
Copyright 1992
http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/92apsiee.htm

Ivan Seeking

May23-03, 07:35 AM

"The UFO hypothesis and Survival Questions"
---declassified from SECRET.

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo35.pdf

Ivan Seeking

May23-03, 07:48 AM

Atmosphere or UFO?
by Bruce Maccabee Ph.D.
Optical physicist for the Navy Deparment
--on RADAR events
http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/pdf/maccabee.pdf

Ivan Seeking

May23-03, 10:07 PM

Originally posted by username
Is there any testimonies from non military scientists and has anybody sweared under oath that the things they claim to have seen are real ?

I just noticed that I misread your post. Yes. Plenty of affidavits and signed official reports do exist from many, many people. I thought that you meant a non-military scientist who has sworn under oath, such as in a court of law. I don’t know if you consider a signed official [legal] document acceptable or not. A number of the references listed include non-military scientists who have gone on the record.

Ivan Seeking

May24-03, 06:52 PM

Whewww! I have looked at so much stuff on Roswell.... I wanted to post this link since it provides at least one reputable source of information.

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo32.pdf

The economic benefit to Roswell - which had a military base and a Xmas tree ornament factory and I think that's about it - is undeniable. Aliens have put Roswell on the map. It is obvious to nearly anyone that an entire industry now exists around the alien claim; especially in Roswell. I would tend to accept the government's explanations of this particular event and be done with it, however a few bothersome facts still keep my interest:

1).The government has and now admits to having consistently lied about this event. I watched the news conference a few years ago in which the official "case closed" evidence was presented by the government. The four foot aliens seen were, according to the now "truthful" government explanation, really six foot test flight dummies that had been dropped for high altitude tests. This claim of alien bodies is about the most important one for the government to dismiss; due to the number of the witnesses and people who claim direct knowledge of the "events" of 1947. Some sharp reporter was wise to this explanation and asked how this happened considering that the dummies weren't used until five years later [this claim is correct]. The government official stammered a bit and said he would look into it.

2). It appears that many key government docs related to this event were illegally destroyed. Please see the attached nsa.gov link.

3). in an interview about the document at the attached link [the GAO report] Congressman Schiff complains about a seeming unwillingness for certain government agencies to comply with his request for information about Roswell records. This motivates his appeal to the General Accounting Office and the related report.

4). Recently, an archeologist was asked to investigate the supposed UFO crash site. Anomalies were found in the soil compaction that supports "eyewitness" UFO claims. The scientist met with the Governor of New Mexico and presented his findings.

5). Although clearly not all credible, many witnesses to the events of 1947 have video taped their testimony "for the record". One key witness, a dying Colonel Corso, effectively gives death bed testimony in which he claims "I saw the [alien] bodies!".

6). If claims or events like this one are true, then one would expect that over time, as the people involved in these events grow older, more and more of these people would come forward and tell their stories. This is exactly what has happened.

7). Many explanation for this event demand that we assume that the worlds only nuclear strike force - the 509th at Roswell - was comprised of idiots who can't tell a UFO from a balloon that they themselves had launched.

Edit: Almost forgot one:
8). Military records do not support the current explanation offered by the government. For example, the offical report indicates that the balloon and radar reflector debris were shipped to Wright Patterson AFB, the same base to which the alien bodies were allegedly shipped, yet no materials handling bills or personnel records are found showing that any transport was ever made.

Ivan Seeking

May25-03, 04:27 AM

http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/trentmac.htm

http://www.debunker.com/texts/BSMtrentPJK.html

http://www.nicap.org/cufospaper2.htm

Ivan Seeking

May25-03, 04:44 AM

ACCELERATION
Bruce S. Maccabee, Ph.D.
http://www.nidsci.org/articles/maccabee/acceleration.html

Ivan Seeking

May25-03, 04:51 AM

The Big Sur Filming
Big Sur, California
September 15, 1964

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/bigsurdir.htm

Edit: I attempted to speak with Mr Mansmann a couple of times. Unfortunately he was too ill to speak and then passed away. I did speak with his wife twice and she was kind enough to have a short discussion with me on both occasions. According to Mrs. Mansmann, Mr. Mansmann maintained the truth of this story until his dying breath.

Ivan Seeking

May26-03, 03:51 AM

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/shag.htm

Note: When I was checking for a good Shag Harbor source, I kept getting porno links. I couldn't figure out why at first...[g)]

Ivan Seeking

May26-03, 04:17 AM

UFO reports from the Air Force.

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo31.pdf

Ivan Seeking

May26-03, 05:18 AM

I have recently noticed a slight error developing in the government’s explanation that I would like to correct:

Page 3 of the government response to Roswell states:
http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo39.pdf

“There is no dispute, however, that something happened near Roswell in July, 1947, since it was reported in a number of newspaper articles; the most famous of which were the July 8 and July 9 editions of the Roswell Daily Record. The July 8 edition reported “RAFF Captures Flying Saucer on Ranch in Roswell Region.”

On page one, paragraph one, sentence one of the GAO report, we find that it was the Air Force, and not the Roswell Daily Record and “newspapers” that initiated the UFO report:
http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo32.pdf

“On July 8, 1947, the Roswell Army Air Field (RAAF) public information office in Roswell, New Mexico, reported the crash and recovery of a ‘flying disc’. Army Air Force personnel from the RAAF’s 509th Bomb Group were credited with the recovery.”

Ivan Seeking

May27-03, 04:12 AM

Case Directory
The Ellsworth AFB Case (RV)
August 5, 1953
Ellsworth Air Force Base, E. of Rapid City, SD

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/ellsworthdir.htm

Ivan Seeking

May27-03, 04:21 AM

FBI foia page for unusual phenomena:
http://foia.fbi.gov/unusual.htm

Ivan Seeking

May27-03, 04:26 AM

CIA web site: Users beware! [:D]
http://www.odci.gov/csi/studies/97unclass/ufo.html

username

May27-03, 02:12 PM

Why is http://www.physicsforums.com bringing up the CIA's website on my browser lol ?

EDIT: By the CIA's website I mean their homepage http://www.odci.gov/

FZ+

May27-03, 05:30 PM

"Skeptics, who flatly deny the existence of any unexplained phenomenon in the name of 'rationalism,' are among the primary contributors to the rejection of science by the public. People are not stupid and they know very well when they have seen something out of the ordinary. When a so-called expert tells them the object must have been the moon or a mirage, he is really teaching the public that science is impotent or unwilling to pursue the study of the unknown." (Vallee, J., Confrontations, New York: Ballantine Books, 1990.)
This guy is an idiot. If he thinks that telling the public what they want to hear is a good thing, then he has misunderstood science as a whole. If you state something, state it because scientifically you think the evidence points at it. Calling people skeptics doesn't help, and saying that science should pander to what people believe in doesn't help either. Simply on the account that you cannot persue the study of the unknown on the basis of what people want to be told.

Ivan Seeking

May27-03, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by FZ+
This guy is an idiot. If he thinks that telling the public what they want to hear is a good thing, then he has misunderstood science as a whole. If you state something, state it because scientifically you think the evidence points at it. Calling people skeptics doesn't help, and saying that science should pander to what people believe in doesn't help either. Simply on the account that you cannot persue the study of the unknown on the basis of what people want to be told.

Hey FZ+, I wondered where my other favorite foil had gone [:D]
I think I agree with the premise of your objection, but also I think it is a little out of context. What is the message to the individual who "knows what they have seen", but who is told that they didn't see what they saw? And then what about those people who know, trust, and believe this person? My answer to his point and yours is this: Rather than suggest that a person who claims to have seen a 30 foot diameter UFO hovering their back yard really saw Venus, or some explanation that completely dismisses the claims of the supposed witness, I think the answer should be that either we have no explanation to account for his testimony, or simply that nothing scientific can be said. The typical response is imply that the person was an idiot, and then to give some ridiculous explanation that itself defies reason.

Do you argue that all phenomena is explained?

FZ+

May27-03, 06:37 PM

Do you argue that all phenomena is explained?
No, neither do I argue that saying aliens are visiting is a always a better explanation than seeing venus. I am saying that it is understandable that there is doubt when we are dealing with eyewitness accounts from people who want to believe, or were in unusual mental conditions, or we see grainy, nasty images after tons of computer image enhancement.

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 12:15 AM

Originally posted by FZ+
No, neither do I argue that saying aliens are visiting is a always a better explanation than seeing venus.

Ivan says...I think the answer should be that either we have no explanation to account for his testimony, or simply that nothing scientific can be said.

FZ+ says...I am saying that it is understandable that there is doubt when we are dealing with eyewitness accounts from people who want to believe, or were in unusual mental conditions, or we see grainy, nasty images after tons of computer image enhancement.

It would seem that you haven't reviewed my posts. As a good example that the scenario that you present is not the state of the evidence, I will post this reference again for starters. Note that this comes directly from the National Security Agency:

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo6.pdf

Joint Chiefs of Staff Report (http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo17.pdf)

username

May28-03, 02:20 AM

Nonbody seems to care that something/someone temporarily redirected www.physicsforums.com to the cia homepage after reading one of Ivans dodgey posts, I was quite shocked!

I have a picture of it but no trace routes etc :(

EDIT: Sorry not really on topic but wtf

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 02:24 AM

Originally posted by username
Nonbody seems to care that something/someone temporarily redirected www.physicsforums.com to the cia homepage after reading one of Ivans dodgey posts, I was quite shocked!

I have a picture of it but no trace routes etc :(

Username, you are joking. [8)] Don't play with my head; I have a wife for that! [a)]

username

May28-03, 02:31 AM

Nope this is for real. My MS OS has all the latest service packs etc. It happened after reading a document that was linked to the cia website (your post with the joke warning). Must have lasted about 3 mins.

I know about echelon and all that but still ... how do they do it must have control of my isps dns servers or somthing ?

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 02:31 AM

Originally posted by username
after reading one of Ivans dodgey posts

Pronunciation: (doj'E), [key]
—adj., dodg•i•er, dodg•i•est.
1. inclined to dodge.
2. evasively tricky: a dodgy manner of dealing with people.
3. Chiefly Brit.risky; hazardous; chancy

Could you please indicate which option you mean. I hope you mean option 3: [g)]

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 02:33 AM

username

May28-03, 02:33 AM

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Pronunciation: (doj'E), [key]
—adj., dodg•i•er, dodg•i•est.
1. inclined to dodge.
2. evasively tricky: a dodgy manner of dealing with people.
3. Chiefly Brit.risky; hazardous; chancy

Could you please indicate which option you mean. I hope you mean option 3: [g)]
Three what else ;)

russ_watters

May28-03, 02:51 AM

Originally posted by username
Nope this is for real. My MS OS has all the latest service packs etc. It happened after reading a document that was linked to the cia website (your post with the joke warning). Must have lasted about 3 mins.

I know about echelon and all that but still ... how do they do it must have control of my isps dns servers or somthing ? Sometimes if a doc is linked incorrectly or a site with frames is written badly, you can get locked into a certain website and have to close your browser to get out of it. A lot of advertising sites do it on purpose as well.

username

May28-03, 03:29 AM

I did a right click and 'open in new window' on the link http://www.odci.gov/csi/studies/97unclass/ufo.html then trying to view another post in original window the CIA's homepage came up, same happened when I choose physicsforums from my favourites or entered it manually. Just before it happened I remember trying to do some next/prev in my history and the physicsforums server came back with some error about a refering page or something (maybe a customised 404). Seemed like a minute or two (probably less) I could not get physicsforums back , I guess it could have been some sort of cascade of iexplore bugs but nothing like this has ever happened to my browser before. Crazy paranoia stuff lol :/

EDIT: I think physicsforums was cached by the CIA for having a link to their site/documents on it. I dont think my ISP in UK would put up with one of those mysterious 'black boxes'.

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 03:32 AM

Originally posted by russ_watters
Sometimes if a doc is linked incorrectly or a site with frames is written badly, you can get locked into a certain website and have to close your browser to get out of it. A lot of advertising sites do it on purpose as well.

Now you tell me! I just burned everything in my file cabinets.[:D]

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 03:48 AM

Originally posted by username
I guess it could have been some sort of cascade of iexplore bugs but nothing like this has ever happened to my browser before. Crazy paranoia stuff lol :/

Would it make you feel better if I told you that for the first time since I installed this firewall a year ago, I have blocked at least 20 intrusion attempts in the last few days. My software says it's coming from San Jose California. Actually, I was about to report this. My theory is that it relates to a recent purchase I made; since the attacker is Walmart...so you can relax...I think [:D]

username

May28-03, 03:53 AM

I am behind a nat router with firewall so thats quite secure and no funny ports open that should not be etc.

Hmm maybe its time I got a virus/trojan scanner.

EDIT: of course I was joking about the virus scanner ... ;)

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 04:14 PM

Originally posted by username
I did a right click and 'open in new window' on the link http://www.odci.gov/csi/studies/97unclass/ufo.html then trying to view another post in original window the CIA's homepage came up, same happened when I choose physicsforums from my favourites or entered it manually. Just before it happened I remember trying to do some next/prev in my history and the physicsforums server came back with some error about a refering page or something (maybe a customised 404). Seemed like a minute or two (probably less) I could not get physicsforums back , I guess it could have been some sort of cascade of iexplore bugs but nothing like this has ever happened to my browser before. Crazy paranoia stuff lol :/

EDIT: I think physicsforums was cached by the CIA for having a link to their site/documents on it. I dont think my ISP in UK would put up with one of those mysterious 'black boxes'.

Gosh username, I would think that it must have been a glitch. Of course, I have spent a lot of time at the CIA, FBI, and at the NSA gathering and reviewing docs lately. Perhaps we drew a little attention. That wouldn't really be so incredible. If someone spent ten hours on my website I might also take a look. Also, Bush has been trying to undo some of the Freedom of Information Act; due of course to national security concerns.[;)] Some people claim that information useful to terrorists can be found at these locations. Assuming that this is true, to monitor certain traffic at these sites would really seem quite prudent. If I was uncle Sam, I would probably use this claim as a sort of terrorist fly paper. [;)]

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 04:29 PM

It is interesting that I have reams of UFO information downloaded from the CIA years ago. A good portion of this information now seems to be missing at the new CIA link; like nearly all of it![s(] I will have to boot-up the old Windows 3.11 machine and check on this.

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 08:58 PM

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 11:01 PM

Office of the Secretary of Defense/Joint Staff Electronic Reading Room Documents Concerning UFO's

http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/ufo/

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 11:08 PM

DOD UFO FAQ page

http://www.defenselink.mil/faq/pis/16.html

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 11:17 PM

DOD News conference; possibly nothing significant but a mention of another study.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Aug1997/t08051997_t0805asd.html

Q: On the UFO study that the CIA did over the weekend, or it was released or reported on over the weekend -- as Pentagon spokesman are you concerned about a report that says that the government willfully misled individuals to conceal programs?

A: I've read the CIA study, and I have read what they said about the Air Force. It's their characterization of what the Air Force said. I have not gone back and checked what the Air Force said at the time, so I'd prefer not to comment on what the study said. It is not the policy of Secretary Cohen or any of the people who work for him to mislead the public.

Q: Were you at all aware of any misleading of the public that was done by the Air Force prior?

A: I was not aware of that. I will say that one interesting aspect of the report was that for years, UFO people have been charging that we've covered up the fact that there really are UFOs, and the CIA study confirms, as has every other study done by the government, that we have no evidence of UFOs. We have no evidence of extraterrestrial visitors to this planet. The study goes on to say that one explanation for many of these sightings might have been airplanes that were being tested at the time.

Edit: Whoops!http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo6.pdf

Joint Chiefs of Staff Report (http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo17.pdf)

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo31.pdf

Q: Do you think that applies to any programs that might be tested now, or can you say categorically that the Department does not engage in that kind of public relations activity in terms of programs that are perhaps flying today?

A: First of all, we certainly have classified programs and we certainly have legitimate reasons for not disclosing some of the work we're doing, whether it's research and development or whether it's operations. I am not aware that we are putting out stories that misstate the truth about those programs. The distinction would be we just don't talk about the programs at all, so I certainly wouldn't talk about any of those programs today.

Ivan Seeking

May28-03, 11:57 PM

Investigation Casts Light on the Mysterious Flying Black Triangle

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/black_triangle_020805.html

Ivan Seeking

May29-03, 12:02 AM

COMITA UFO REPORT.

http://www.earthradiotv.com/cometa.html

NOTE:This report has not been investigated; I just happened upon this.

Ivan Seeking

May29-03, 12:12 AM

Navy FAQ UFO page

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq29-1.htm

Ivan Seeking

May29-03, 04:55 PM

It seems that my computer hacker is not Walmart. According to Walmart, he or she came in with a forged address; somehow. The last attack this morning was traced to Vienna, Austria; which obviously is not a Walmart address. Walmart already has the authorities involved.

Ivan Seeking

May29-03, 05:17 PM

Go to the Freedom of Information Act, CIA homepage; search UFO. Many additional reports are found.

http://www.foia.cia.gov/

Edit: I hit on this story some time ago; this is the second one listed after the intial search. This could be an interesting story for some follow up.

"SOMALILAND PRESIDENT EGAL SPEAKS ON MYSTERIOUS BOMB BLAST"

Ivan Seeking

May29-03, 05:21 PM

Raw reports. Only the most obvious hoaxes are elimated.

http://www.nwlink.com/~ufocntr/

Ivan Seeking

May29-03, 06:23 PM

Hey Username,
If the CIA doesn't have your tongue,[:D], which do you think is the lie?

DOD News conference; possibly nothing significant but a mention of another study.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Aug1997/t08051997_t0805asd.html

Q: On the UFO study that the CIA did over the weekend, or it was released or reported on over the weekend -- as Pentagon spokesman are you concerned about a report that says that the government willfully misled individuals to conceal programs?

A: I've read the CIA study, and I have read what they said about the Air Force. It's their characterization of what the Air Force said. I have not gone back and checked what the Air Force said at the time, so I'd prefer not to comment on what the study said. It is not the policy of Secretary Cohen or any of the people who work for him to mislead the public.

Q: Were you at all aware of any misleading of the public that was done by the Air Force prior?

A: I was not aware of that. I will say that one interesting aspect of the report was that for years, UFO people have been charging that we've covered up the fact that there really are UFOs, and the CIA study confirms, as has every other study done by the government, that we have no evidence of UFOs. We have no evidence of extraterrestrial visitors to this planet. The study goes on to say that one explanation for many of these sightings might have been airplanes that were being tested at the time.

Edit: Whoops!

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo6.pdf

Joint Chiefs of Staff Report (http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo17.pdf)

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo31.pdf

username

May30-03, 10:41 AM

http://dbarkertv.com/UPDATE.htm(appraised by NUFORC)

The Burden of Proof is on the U.S. Government. If they have such a craft, let them produce it before the American public and show us all how it can maneuver like a bat out of hell without making a sound.

The giant flying triangles commonly reported could have some sort of electron/ion powered propulsion system, which has been around since the the 1950's developed for the navy. see http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/liftbldr.htm (just imagine a scaled up version!).

I think these people are naive about disclosure but doing a great job.

EDIT: The experiments in the 1950's were apparently classified when electricity in the range of megavolts were applied to the disks on the apparatus.

username

May30-03, 11:13 AM

Hehe my tongue is still intact, call me mr smith err username :)

Q: On the UFO study that the CIA did over the weekend, or it was released or reported on over the weekend -- as Pentagon spokesman are you concerned about a report that says that the government willfully misled individuals to conceal programs?

A: I've read the CIA study, and I have read what they said about the Air Force. It's their characterization of what the Air Force said. I have not gone back and checked what the Air Force said at the time, so I'd prefer not to comment on what the study said. It is not the policy of Secretary Cohen or any of the people who work for him to mislead the public.

Q: Were you at all aware of any misleading of the public that was done by the Air Force prior?

A: I was not aware of that. I will say that one interesting aspect of the report was that for years, UFO people have been charging that we've covered up the fact that there really are UFOs, and the CIA study confirms, as has every other study done by the government, that we have no evidence of UFOs. We have no evidence of extraterrestrial visitors to this planet. The study goes on to say that one explanation for many of these sightings might have been airplanes that were being tested at the time.

Spoken like a true politician does not really say anything. When he say's "I was not aware of that" is he assuming the allegation is true?

which do you think is the lie ?
Assuming you are talking about the second question in the quote I would have to say the pentagon spokesman, but I have not read any of the other documents yet.

username

May30-03, 12:16 PM

Maybe some of these witnesses have been confused by a presence of strong EM fields which seems present in a lot of the cases. There is another thread about the effect of EM fields on the human brain somewhere.

Ivan Seeking

May30-03, 08:40 PM

Originally posted by usernam...er...uh...Mr. Smith
Maybe some of these witnesses have been confused by a presence of strong EM fields which seems present in a lot of the cases. There is another thread about the effect of EM fields on the human brain somewhere.

I think every defense lawyer in the country should be using this against all eyewitness testimony. [;)]

This is the very point that finally got to me: After a time, after reading hundreds of similar reports and documents, to dismiss all of the evidence in itself strains credibility. What's more, eyewitness testimony aside, in the Iran event and many others multiple radar locks were made by at least two systems.

I have been aware of and actually had the documents for the Iran incident for about seven years. Only recently however did I fine the original Joint Chiefs of Staff report to confirm the episode. All of this time I did have the original, I just had no way to confirm this fact. I have always felt that if verified, Iran76 is a key event in that all elements of the phenomenon are present - high strangeness, apparent intelligent control, multiple groups of witnesses, radar tracks, multiple UFO’s, and inexplicable technological responses, in short, all of the makings of a Spielberg movie. Of course, considering that Spielberg hired Hynek as a consultant for Close Encounters of the Third Kind [a phrase coined by Hynek], this correlation is to be expected between Hollywood and the real thing. It is art imitating life in this case.

BoulderHead

May30-03, 11:55 PM

http://www.thehollywoodextra.com/UFOs/ufo.html

Ivan Seeking

May31-03, 04:32 AM

National Institute for Discovery Science
http://www.nidsci.org/

Ivan Seeking

May31-03, 05:56 PM

This ends the introduction to UFO's. [:D]

Begin Chapter 1 of 50:

Review

Joint Chiefs of Staff report concerning the sighting of a UFO in Iran on 19 September 1976, (http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo17.pdf)

"Now You See It, Now You Don't" by Captain Henry S. Shields, HQ USAFE/INOMP (http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo16.pdf)

French Government UFO Study'' (http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo12.pdf)

Ivan Seeking

May31-03, 06:01 PM

RAF Woodbridge (http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/ufo/dep_ba1.pdf)

Many reports from the National Military Command Center (http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/ufo/assort1.pdf)

Ivan Seeking

Jun1-03, 08:59 PM

The general position of the USAF:
http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/ufo/usaf_f1.pdf

Project Bluebook:
http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/ufo/proj_b1.pdf

Secretary of Defense on the end of Project Bluebook
http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/ufo/asdpa1.pdf

And

http://www.af.mil/search/factsheet_print.asp?fsID=188&page=1

U.S. Air Force Fact Sheet
UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS AND AIR FORCE PROJECT BLUE BOOK

From 1947 to 1969, the Air Force investigated Unidentified Flying Objects under Project Blue Book. The project, headquartered at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, was terminated Dec. 17, 1969. Of a total of 12,618 sightings reported to Project Blue Book, 701 remained "unidentified."

The decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based on an evaluation of a report prepared by the University of Colorado entitled, "Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects;" a review of the University of Colorado's report by the National Academy of Sciences; previous UFO studies and Air Force experience investigating UFO reports during 1940 to 1969.

As a result of these investigations, studies and experience gained from investigating UFO reports since 1948, the conclusions of Project Blue Book were:

No UFO reported, investigated and evaluated by the Air Force was ever an indication of threat to our national security;

There was no evidence submitted to or discovered by the Air Force that sightings categorized as "unidentified" represented technological developments or principles beyond the range of modern scientific knowledge; and

There was no evidence indicating that sightings categorized as "unidentified" were extraterrestrial vehicles.

With the termination of Project Blue Book, the Air Force regulation establishing and controlling the program for investigating and analyzing UFOs was rescinded. Documentation regarding the former Blue Book investigation was permanently transferred to the Modern Military Branch, National Archives and Records Service, and is available for public review and analysis.

Since the termination of Project Blue Book, nothing has occurred that would support a resumption of UFO investigations by the Air Force. Given the current environment of steadily decreasing defense budgets, it is unlikely the Air Force would become involved in such a costly project in the foreseeable future.

There are a number of universities and professional scientific organizations that have considered UFO phenomena during periodic meetings and seminars. A list of private organizations interested in aerial phenomena may be found in "Encyclopedia of Associations," published by Gale Research. Interest in and timely review of UFO reports by private groups ensures that sound evidence is not overlooked by the scientific community. Persons wishing to report UFO sightings should be advised to contact local law enforcement agencies.

POINT OF CONTACT
Requests for copies of records and general information about Project Blue Book should be sent to: Modern Military Records, National Archives, 8601 Adelphi Rd, College Park, MD 20740-6001, (301)713-7250

April 2003

Ivan Seeking

Jun1-03, 09:10 PM

http://www.af.mil/lib/roswell.html

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo39.pdf

Ivan Seeking

Jun1-03, 09:15 PM

Posted earlier but worth re-posting:
CIA:
http://www.odci.gov/csi/studies/97unclass/ufo.html

NASA:
http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/ufo/nasa_u1.pdf

Please see page 6 paragraph 2 of the NASA report above. Here we find a clear example of the disparity between one eyewitness and the scientific explanation used to dismiss the claim.

"A red and green glowing orb radiated as it hurtled across the southwestern Georgia skies that January 1969 evening. Ten minutes later, it vanished. That was Jimmy Carter's story — and he's sticking to it. Carter, then Georgia's governor, became the first major politician to risk achieving "crackpot" status by claiming he had had a close encounter."

"I don't laugh at people any more when they say they've seen UFOs," Carter said at a Southern Governors Conference a few years later. "I've seen one myself."

---Former President Jimmy Carter
ABC News interview

Ivan Seeking

Jun1-03, 09:44 PM

A response from Richard Hall, former Assistant Diretor of NICAP

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo9.pdf

The government's Response to Hall.
http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo13.pdf

[:D]

Another position against the Government
http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo4.pdf

Ivan Seeking

Jun1-03, 10:01 PM

http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/ufo_reports/sturrock_condon/toc.html

http://www.ufoskeptic.org/condon.html

http://912a-87.umd.edu/condon/index.html

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/conrep.htm

http://www.cohenufo.org/nicapcondon.htm

Ivan Seeking

Jun1-03, 10:25 PM

http://ufos.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://ufoinfo.com

A beginners guide to UFOs:
http://www.rense.com/general/whatis.htm

http://www.rense.com/ufo/ufo.htm

http://www.unmuseum.org/ufo.htm

http://ufos.about.com/msub52.htm

One source of info:
http://www.fastdog.karoo.net/blue-book.htm

1896 Revisited:
http://ufos.about.com/library/weekly/aa052797.htm

November 25, 1896, California, USA
"When [the mysterious light] first appeared it was seen moving rapidly from the northeast and heading in a southwesterly direction. As it neared the southern boundary of the city [of Sacramento] it turned directly toward the west and after passing the city went south, being distinctly visible for upward of 20 minutes."-From the San Francisco Call, Nov 26, 1896--This light was observed by many prominent individuals including Deputy Secretary of State George A. McCalvy, District Attorney Frank D. Ryan, and E. D. McCabe, the governor's personal secretary.

Ivan Seeking

Jun2-03, 12:00 AM

Foo-Fighters

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

CUFON - UFO Information Service Seattle, Washington

History of UFO's During World War II
During world war II the accumulation of sightings of mysterious celestial objects, finally started to worry the military authorities.

In both camps, high-ranking officials of the intelligence services started to study these strange objects and investigation committees composed of military and scientific personnel were set up in various countries. They had a double purpose: first of all to determine the nature of these flying objects and then to see if they constituted a threat to the security of the nation.

During world war II, the Allies, just like the Germans, noticed the presence of these enigmatic flying objects above their secret bases. The first reaction of each side was obviously to suspect espionage on the part of their enemy.

In 1943 the British were the first to set up a special group to enquire into the question of these object. The British set up a small organization to collect evidence. It was headed by Lieutenant General Massey and was inspired by reports from a spy who, in fact was a double agent operating under the orders of the Mayor of Cologne. He had confirmed that the "Foo-fighters" were not German devices, but that the Germans thought that they were Allied weapons which, of course, the British knew was not so.

Later in 1966, was learned from the British Aviation Minister that project Massey had been officially classified in 1944. Perhaps it was pure coincidence, but the double agent was denounced and executed at the beginning of that year. For their part the Germans did not remain inactive. But in 1944, the Wehemacht asked Oberkommando of the "Luftwaffe (aviation)" to set up a center to collect information on all the various sightings of these mysterious celestial objects.

This was known as Sonderburo No 13 which, until the time of the German defeat scrupulously applied itself to its job. The short time that this commission was in existence prevented it from coming to any definite conclusions, but it collected an impressive amount of information.

The first sighting, studied by the Sonderburo, went back two years and came from Hauptmann Fischer, an engineer in civil life. On March 14,1942, at 5:35 p.m., Fischer landed at the secret air base at Banak, in Norway. At that instant the radar picked up a luminous object and Fischer was asked to go up and identify it. At about 10,000 feet the pilot caught sight of the object, and gave a description by radio to the base: an enormous streamlined craft about 300 feet long and about 50 feet in diameter. The "aerial whale" which was Fischer's title for it stayed horizontal for a long moment before rising vertically and disappearing at great speed.

It was not a machine constructed by the hand of man, Fischer stated in his report. On reading the report, Air Marshall Hermann Goering concluded that the solitude of the north does not seem to have done much for this pilot.

The report of another interesting incident was carefully preserved in the archives of the German Investigation Committee: that of the launching of an experimental rocket on February 12, 1944, at the Kummersdorf test center.

On that day the Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, S.S. Reichsfuhrer Himmler and S.S. Gruppenfuhrer Heinz Kammler were present at the launching which was being filmed. Some days later the authorities at the base organized a showing of the film. The astonished spectators, could see very clearly a spherical body which followed the rocket and circled around it.

The authorities immediately suspected Allied espionage. However, an agent informed Himmler that the English were themselves victims of the same sort of phenomenon and thought that it was a new type of German prototype craft. However, the most convincing evidence filed away by the Sonderburo came from a military flying ace.

On September 29, 1944, at 10:45 a.m., a test pilot was trying out a new Messerschmitt jet, ME 262 Schwalbe, when his attention was suddenly caught by two luminous points situated on his right. He shot at full speed in that direction and found himself face to face with a cylindrical object, more than three hundred feet long with some openings along its side, and fitted with long antennae placed in front up to about halfway along its length. Having approached within about 1,500 feet of the craft the pilot was amazed to see that it was moving at a speed of more than 1,200 m.p.h.
Source:
http://www.skiesare.demon.co.uk/foofight.htm

Other references:
http://www.altuit.com/webs/wray/TheUFODiet/FooFighters.htm

http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/newse/foo/

http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/newse/foo/foo2.html

http://ufos.about.com/library/weekly/aa101501a.htm

http://www.ufoarea.bravepages.com/events_foofighters.html

Warning: This site may be some newage garbage...I will have to take a better look. Still, sometimes these sites use legitimate references so I will leave for now:
http://www.germanufochatter.com/German-Foo-Fighters/German-UFO-Foo.html

http://www.foofig.narod.ru/eng/foo_fighters_of_wwii.htm

http://www.caus.org/miscufo/mu021901.shtml

BoulderHead

Jun2-03, 12:08 AM

You have been quite busy, Ivan Seeking !

I'll have to take some time to check those links out (well, at least so I can skim over the articles and get to the photos) [:D]

Ivan Seeking

Jun2-03, 12:11 AM

Originally posted by BoulderHead
You have been quite busy, Ivan Seeking !

I'll have to take some time to check those links out (well, at least so I can skim over the articles and get to the photos) [:D]

Oh I haven't even gotten warmed up yet! I have fifteen years worth of stuff to get off of my chest.[:D]

Ivan Seeking

Jun4-03, 03:10 AM

I will be adding to this post for some days I expect. If you are interested check back from time to time.

One potentially major WWII UFO event is inappropriately called The Battle of Los Angeles. I have some knowledge of this event since my dad was there. The newspaper reports are widely available and the only real question is at what, if anything, did the civil defenses of Los Angeles fire over 1400 anti-aircraft rounds in 1942. The following link provides mostly factual information. Please ignore any introductory hype. The reports that follow are directly from the local papers of the time. Next, a link to Bruce Maccabee's analysis of the photos is given.

http://www.rense.com/ufo/battleofLA.htm

http://www.rense.com/general28/histla.htm

Maccabee's analysis:
http://brumac.8k.com/BATTLEOFLA/BattleofLA.html

More from WWII:

http://www.ufo.it/german/

http://www.skiesare.demon.co.uk/rafufoxp.htm

Ivan Seeking

Jun5-03, 04:16 AM

I had missed this file on Iran '76. Included are the distribution list/ routing, and a brief analysis of the event. The comments read:

a) [not readable]...necessary for a valid study of a UFO phenomenon.

[not readable]

b) The credibility of the many witnesses was high (an air force general, qualified aircrews, and experienced tower operators).

c) Visual sightings were confirmed by radar.

d) Similar electromagnetic effects (EME) were reported by three separate aircraft.

e) There were physiological effects on some crew members (i.e. loss of night vision due to the brightness of the object).

f) An inordinate amount of maneuver-ability was displayed by the UFO's.

The distribution of this report from defense intelligence includes the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, CIA, NSA, White House, the CSA and others.

http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo20.pdf

Ivan Seeking

Jun6-03, 07:34 PM

I will copy many of the references I've posted to the new UFO Napster; in addition to many new posts.

Thanks Sting!

username

Jun8-03, 01:34 AM

I think one of the things that should be done to help try and explain the UFO phenomenon is to make some sort of flying saucer then see how it compares to witnesses accounts and perceptions of a UFO, could cost a fair bit but probably still within the reaches of some researchers.

Ivan Seeking

Jun8-03, 04:33 AM

Originally posted by username
I think one of the things that should be done to help try and explain the UFO phenomenon is to make some sort of flying saucer then see how it compares to witnesses accounts and perceptions of a UFO, could cost a fair bit but probably still within the reaches of some researchers.

Since it would be interesting to see a control group’s reaction, I have been tempted a couple of times to create a UFO hoax for just such purposes. Of course, I wouldn't do such a thing but its fun to think about.[:D]

I did make a UFO out of an 8 ft diameter weather balloon for a Cub Scout space camp once. When the alien mother ship [the balloon] was spotted rising above the camp, about 95 kids ran like wild to get a closer look; 5 ran the other way! [:D] [:D] [:D]...we all decided that these 5 were the smart ones.

username

Jun8-03, 12:31 PM

Here is an interesting site I came across what do think?

http://www.geocities.com/deyora/

Ivan Seeking

Jun9-03, 02:00 AM

Originally posted by username
Here is an interesting site I came across what do think?

http://www.geocities.com/deyora/

Interesting. Some of his ideas seem reasonable as a first quick read, but in the next section he challenges Einstein; uh oh! Then he mentions Tesla; UH OH! Finally, I have no idea who this person is. I will have to do a little exploring before I can really say anymore. I do know that some of these ideas are not uniquely his.

EDIT: I saw an interesting news item a few months ago. The claim was that a particular toy plane designer [I don't know his name but I'm sure the story can be found] has for decades, consistently and without significant errors released models of real and classified aircraft before their public debut and declassification. He claims this result from simple homework and knowing people in the industry. He says that the physical appearances of new craft are not really very secret, which is why he gets is able to get this information.

The point of the story is that his newest model is a saucer.

username

Jun9-03, 12:03 PM

Yeah I agree about that website, still it is very interesting about the anti-gravity effects the aircraft industry and scientists were going on about after the ww2 then all of a sudden nothing, I have read a number of books etc which confirm this.

For instance T.Townsend Brown's research might not be anti-gravity but it does not stretch the imagination that such a device could be scaled up, this kind of device could fit most UFO descriptions. In J Naudins continuation of researching phenonema (http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/main.htm) he only uses 25-40kv, T.Townsend Brown's work was classified after he applied only 150kv. Go figure...

EDIT: Ok maybe not most UFO descriptions but at least some. Why has a lifter not been made that operates on higher voltages and results released to the public, you would have thought the tesla hobbists would jump at the chance?

Ivan Seeking

Jun9-03, 09:52 PM

Originally posted by username
Yeah I agree about that website, still it is very interesting about the anti-gravity effects the aircraft industry and scientists were going on about after the ww2 then all of a sudden nothing, I have read a number of books etc which confirm this.

For instance T.Townsend Brown's research might not be anti-gravity but it does not stretch the imagination that such a device could be scaled up, this kind of device could fit most UFO descriptions. In J Naudins continuation of researching phenonema (http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/main.htm) he only uses 25-40kv, T.Townsend Brown's work was classified after he applied only 150kv. Go figure...

EDIT: Ok maybe not most UFO descriptions but at least some. Why has a lifter not been made that operates on higher voltages and results released to the public, you would have thought the tesla hobbists would jump at the chance?

Yes I have seen the early films of this stuff. But what of use is it? From what I have seen you can't go anywhere. At the same time, many people are claiming that some sort of electrostatic drive is being used by military blimps. One very common sighting is that of a silent triangular craft that seems to float and that does not move in a fashion typical of aerodynamic lift dependent vehicles. Last year, maybe the year before, the cops chased them all over Illinois; near White AFB about 60 miles out of St. Louis Mo. If these craft are not ET's, then they must be ours. The silent and rapid acceleration they exhibit, which has often been observed, seems to indicate something new or secret must be off the shelf here.
I am inclined to believe that these are military and not ET. Of course, genuine UFOs could exist in addition to these supposed military blimps. I say this because some reports do exist that seem to exclude/exceed any human technology.

I may have even seen one of these [the earthly kind] once but I can't be sure. What I saw displayed nothing dramatic other than it was completely silence as it passed over. Also, we had a difficult time making out any distinct details of the craft which appeared to be low and large. I was near Beale AFB at the time. Of course, for this reason I have always assume that this craft was something operated by the military. When I first heard the scuttle-butt about stealth blimps, the idea seemed to be consistent with what I have seen.

username

Jun12-03, 02:37 AM

To me there seems to a be alot of real evidence that UFOS are/have been man made but no evidence that UFOS are from outer space.
Even assuming the remote possibilty that some UFOS are extra terrestrial, it would make more sense in researching the extra terrestrial UFOS by first trying to explain the man made ones.

Here is an interview that gives a more down to earth explanation of UFOS:
1 http://www.paranetinfo.com/realaudio/show211-matthews.ram
2 http://www.paranetinfo.com/realaudio/show260-tmatthews.ram

username

Jun16-03, 10:10 AM

I guess the theory that all UFO's are man made might fall down if there was substantial evidence pointing to the exsitance of UFO's before say the industrial revolution. I mean more evidence than there is of a terrestrial origin e.g. flying bannana's erm vimana's maybe not going that far back.

Ivan Seeking

Jun16-03, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by username
I guess the theory that all UFO's are man made might fall down if there was substantial evidence pointing to the exsitance of UFO's before say the industrial revolution. I mean more evidence than there is of a terrestrial origin e.g. flying bannana's erm vimana's maybe not going that far back.

Sorry username. I have been distracted with little annoyances like making a living, so I have not yet listened to the entire interview that you posted. I'll be back. [:)]

Grakhul

Jul1-03, 09:51 PM

Most readily observed UFO's are probably prototype military aircraft as many of you have stated. But my curiosity is peeked when speculating about UFO's that do not appear to have their origin from earth. Though I lean heavilly towards the spiritual origin of the universe I try to keep an open mind about pretty much everything -which bring me to my point. If there were UFO's of extra terrestrial origin:
1. They would not try to contact us - any species able to construct spacecraft that can clear the vast distances of space would have no interest in our species.(we would be like insects to them with nothing to offer)
2. Extra terrestrial with spacecraft to travel the vast expanses of space would be so advanced that they would just come to this planet and exploit us.(Which is why I have a big problem with organizations wasting money broadcasting our coordinates widly though space for any rag tag alien species to pick up(Where over here guys!!))(If they exist this is not wise)

TO deviate from the above:
** Most UFO pics we taken back in the days. Why hasnt the number of UFO pics grown or why havent we seen any new UFO pics - now that almost every body has a camera or a camcorder. You would think that someone somewhere would have taken some decent footage by now.

Which brings me to:
Can anyone point me to a website with Heaven's gate UFO/Comet pictures. I cant seem to find them anywhere.

Ivan Seeking

Jul1-03, 10:28 PM

Hi there Grakhul and welcome to PF.com!

Originally posted by Grakhul
Most readily observed UFO's are probably prototype military aircraft as many of you have stated. But my curiosity is peeked when speculating about UFO's that do not appear to have their origin from earth. Though I lean heavilly towards the spiritual origin of the universe I try to keep an open mind about pretty much everything -which bring me to my point. If there were UFO's of extra terrestrial origin:
1. They would not try to contact us - any species able to construct spacecraft that can clear the vast distances of space would have no interest in our species.(we would be like insects to them with nothing to offer)

Well, of course you an entitled to your opinion, but I don't see the basis for the logic. Simply put, how can we know? Also, I am not sure that we know what ET means. We have a definition, but I often doubt that we use the correct one.

2. Extra terrestrial with spacecraft to travel the vast expanses of space would be so advanced that they would just come to this planet and exploit us.(Which is why I have a big problem with organizations wasting money broadcasting our coordinates widly though space for any rag tag alien species to pick up(Where over here guys!!))(If they exist this is not wise)

Who actually claims to know what they might be doing? Even most alleged abducties don't claim to understand what's going on. As for transmitting signals, not only could this be dangerous if they were to accomplish anything, it is also futile. Plenty of RF radiates from this planet already. This is the biggest problem that I find in trying to sort through potential evidence - once a true believer, people tend to go off the deep end. I think this happens because no explanations lie within our range of experience, or of our sensibilities. Since we don't have well defined boundaries for this reality, all bets are off. Who knows or can know what is possible?

TO deviate from the above:
** Most UFO pics we taken back in the days. Why hasnt the number of UFO pics grown or why havent we seen any new UFO pics - now that almost every body has a camera or a camcorder. You would think that someone somewhere would have taken some decent footage by now.
I have probably viewed over a thousand hours of good and recent video footage. Of course, if someone does get a good shot, all the skeptics cry FAKE! Here we find the rational that if its not obviously a fake, it must be a fake! Also, I have recently seen some fantastic film footage taken from the cockpit of a Russian Mig. The plane was chasing to intercept a cylinder [cylindrical UFO] which came well into clear and plain view. The cylinder then accelerates out of sight. This footage allegedly comes from recently recovered KGB files. It seems that much of the old Soviet is for sale; especially previously classified information. Much new information and evidence is coming from this. It will take some time to sort out the wheat from the chaff.

Which brings me to:
Can anyone point me to a website with Heaven's gate UFO/Comet pictures. I cant seem to find them anywhere.

I will contact the mother ship and get some pictures for you. [:D]

Ivan Seeking

Jul2-03, 02:04 AM

Originally posted by Grakhul
** Most UFO pics we taken back in the days. Why hasnt the number of UFO pics grown or why havent we seen any new UFO pics - now that almost every body has a camera or a camcorder. You would think that someone somewhere would have taken some decent footage by now.

If you go to the video archieves, you will find some fairly recent files. Also, the most dramatic recent footage is often copyright protected and sold to The Sci Fi channel and such. If you don't follow the UFO news, it is hard to see the latest and greatest.

One interesting note. It is reported that The journal Nature has agreed in principle to published well penned UFO papers.

Ivan Seeking

Jul7-03, 02:32 PM

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,992218,00.html

Shadow

Jul24-03, 04:04 PM

Astronauts and cosmotologist sightings of UFO's? I would like to roof of these reports, so if anyone could help me I would be extremely greatful. I have heard that there were recordings of people (i think someone even mentioned buzz aldrin) that went into space and said things to the effect of "dam those things are huge" (referring to a UFO) or "i hope we dont fight them" or saying things to that effect. I heard this from a friend of mine that can, in my opinion, be declared a UFO expert. He has books, taped specials on the discovery channel and history channel,and does many searches ont eh internet. Unfortunately he did not have his stuff with him when he visited me (he lives on the other side of the country) So can anyone tell me if they have heard of it or tell me where I can find it?

Ivan Seeking

Jul24-03, 04:59 PM

Originally posted by Shadow
Astronauts and cosmotologist sightings of UFO's? I would like to roof of these reports, so if anyone could help me I would be extremely greatful. I have heard that there were recordings of people (i think someone even mentioned buzz aldrin) that went into space and said things to the effect of "dam those things are huge" (referring to a UFO) or "i hope we dont fight them" or saying things to that effect. I heard this from a friend of mine that can, in my opinion, be declared a UFO expert. He has books, taped specials on the discovery channel and history channel,and does many searches ont eh internet. Unfortunately he did not have his stuff with him when he visited me (he lives on the other side of the country) So can anyone tell me if they have heard of it or tell me where I can find it?

Even though many astronauts including Buzz Aldrin believe in UFOs, any alleged transmissions of UFO discussions between mission control and space are suspect because we can't be sure they are authentic. Audio tapes are all too easy to fake; so unless they come directly from NASA, you might as well listen to fairy tales. You might follow some of the links in the UFO Napster. A number of them will lead you to these alleged transmissions. Then you may be able to confirm or disprove their authenticity by reviewing the public logs through NASA. I have never been able to confirm one of these discussions. I have never heard an astronaut confirm one of these either. Ham radio operators claim to intercept xmissions but I don't see how since if they were really so secret, they would be coded. The Hams claim that NASA just uses secret channels.

Shadow

Jul25-03, 01:01 AM

Even though many astronauts including Buzz Aldrin believe in UFOs, any alleged transmissions of UFO discussions between mission control and space are suspect because we can't be sure they are authentic. Audio tapes are all too easy to fake; so unless they come directly from NASA, you might as well listen to fairy tales. You might follow some of the links in the UFO Napster. A number of them will lead you to these alleged transmissions. Then you may be able to confirm or disprove their authenticity by reviewing the public logs through NASA. I have never been able to confirm one of these discussions. I have never heard an astronaut confirm one of these either. Ham radio operators claim to intercept xmissions but I don't see how since if they were really so secret, they would be coded. The Hams claim that NASA just uses secret channels.

Thanks Ivan. I have a question. Should I make posts about ET in this thread? It ties directly in with UFO's but I cant make one post without another. It seems pretty stupid for me to start a new thread but it involves quite a few different things...although as I said it does tie in directly with UFO's.

Ivan Seeking

Jul25-03, 02:30 AM

Originally posted by Shadow
Thanks Ivan. I have a question. Should I make posts about ET in this thread? It ties directly in with UFO's but I cant make one post without another. It seems pretty stupid for me to start a new thread but it involves quite a few different things...although as I said it does tie in directly with UFO's.

By all means. This thread is intended for all ET and UFO discussions. The napster is intended for links to credible news stories, government files and such. But PF made this sticky UFO thread for just such purposes. post away.[:D]

Ivan Seeking

Jul25-03, 08:59 PM

Latest UFO news:

http://www.paranormalnews.com/article.asp?ArticleID=690

Shadow

Jul26-03, 01:14 AM

I have heard (by person and television) that the great pyramids are out of line slightly (two smaller ones in line with the larger slightly out of line) and that this matched exactly to part of Orion's belt. I also heard that, although right now they are off, when built the pyramids faced exactly towards Orion's Belt. And being into astronomy, and having read Astronomy and Discover magazine and I am currently readind Complete Idiots Guide To Astronomy, I know enough about constellations and such that I know the closest galaxy to us (Andromeda) is in the Orions Belt constellation. Is this a coincidence? The Great Pyramids and cave drawings of UFO's were probably from around the same time... do you think that this is coincidence?

Ivan Seeking

Jul29-03, 03:44 AM

Originally posted by Shadow
I have heard (by person and television) that the great pyramids are out of line slightly (two smaller ones in line with the larger slightly out of line) and that this matched exactly to part of Orion's belt. I also heard that, although right now they are off, when built the pyramids faced exactly towards Orion's Belt. And being into astronomy, and having read Astronomy and Discover magazine and I am currently readind Complete Idiots Guide To Astronomy, I know enough about constellations and such that I know the closest galaxy to us (Andromeda) is in the Orions Belt constellation. Is this a coincidence? The Great Pyramids and cave drawings of UFO's were probably from around the same time... do you think that this is coincidence?

IMO, these kinds of claim are way overstated. For example, it was long thought to be miraculous that the dimensions of the base of the great pyramid and others contain a common factor of pi. When we consider that a wheel was used to measure length, the implicit pi value is actually a requirement; unless they chose a fractional value or measured wrong of course.

Ivan Seeking

Jul30-03, 03:58 AM

I have not reviewed this but here you go.

"John certainly
had a lot of interesting tales told to him during his decade on
the mall circuit, and I’ve selected a few of them which will,
in their different ways, stretch you a little. Are any of these
stories true? Who knows? All we can say is that these folks
told them to John earnestly, and so, just maybe they are.
Welcome to the Timmerman Twilight Zone."

http://216.128.67.116/pdf/timmermania.pdf

Jonathan

Aug1-03, 02:50 PM

Ivan Seeking

Aug1-03, 03:18 PM

Originally posted by Jonathan
..that the Eqyptians regarded the whole constellation of Orion as sacred or something become for them the figure traced out by the stars was the Supreme God, and God of the Underworld, Osirus. (I don't think I spelled that right.)
What does 'sticky' mean?

This potential history of this on the planet is a very interesting thing to consider. Can you imagine the implications??? [8)]

Sticky just means that it stays at the top of the forum. It doesn't move down with other activity like a normal thread does.

Jonathan

Aug1-03, 03:55 PM

I don't understand, how does the Egyptians thinking of a constellation as sacred have huge historical implications?

Ivan Seeking

Aug1-03, 06:33 PM

"SIGHTINGS CONTINUE WITH CLOSE ENCOUNTERS

"The purpose of these files is to report the UFO eyewitness and photo/video evidence that occurs on a daily basis around the world and in space."

http://www.paranormalnews.com/article.asp?ArticleID=697

Shadow

Aug5-03, 08:31 PM

..that the Eqyptians regarded the whole constellation of Orion as sacred or something become for them the figure traced out by the stars was the Supreme God, and God of the Underworld, Osirus. (I don't think I spelled that right.)

"Sticky" means the thread will be one of the top threads in this forum. Thus "sticking" to the top. Sorry, not to be mean or anything, butt I thought I would point out that Osirus was not the Egyptian God of the Underworld. Set was their God of Evil and Anubis was teh God of the Dead. They didnt exactly have a defined god of the underworld unlike the Greeks. (Hades was the Greek god of the underworld)

Jonathan

Aug6-03, 03:29 AM

I wasn't trying to be that specific. They had like ten thousand gods, who really cares which god they identified Orion to be? [:D]

Ivan Seeking

Aug6-03, 06:05 AM

Ivan,

I used to wonder alot why the
media didn't discuss cattle
mutilations more often, rather
than, say mad cow disease.

After thinking about this a long
time what I came up with was that
people don't like to think too
long about something that has no
answer or conclusion (especially
if it's weird)

UFO's are much the same. You fol-
low the subject for a while and
find no real answers.Finally you
say to heck with it. Ignoring
UFO's has more to do with this
lack of answers than predjudice
about stuff outside the norm.

When Orson Wells presented an
invasion from Mars as fact on the
radio it was taken very seriously
by alot of people without ques-
tion.

Even though there are many compel-
ling stories they defy sorting
and collating into a coherent
picture.

-Zooby
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree. I have been through a UFO phase at least three times in my life. With each phase I learned more about the subject, but then what are we to do; sit and wait for ET to land? However, this is the main point for me: We could do more. I feel that whatever the explanation this is [should be] a subject of science. I know that some of the UFO stories are true. I just don't know if we can account for all of them in any reasonable way without invoking the name of ET. Note however my signature says "Be Challenged", not "Be Convinced".

If this is all true then I consider my efforts a consciousness raising activity. If it’s not true, then I am simply exploring a genuine mystery.

zoobyshoe

Aug6-03, 06:54 AM

Ivan,

If someone donated 80 billion
dollars to created the UFO Inves-
tigation Foundation, what would
they do that isn't already being
done?

No one knows when the sightings
are going to take place or where.

In other words, how can it be
made a subject of science?

-zoob

Ivan Seeking

Aug6-03, 07:44 AM

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
Ivan,

If someone donated 80 billion
dollars to created the UFO Inves-
tigation Foundation, what would
they do that isn't already being
done?

No one knows when the sightings
are going to take place or where.

In other words, how can it be
made a subject of science?

-zoob

First, I would like to see the recognition that a mystery does exist. Due to all the hype and new age mysticism, a genuine mystery is lost in the fray. Most scientists that I have encounter - and bridged the subject with - know virtually nothing about the UFO phenomenon except for what they have seen in the grocery store papers. Also, investigating UFOs can ruin a career. Why do you think I remain anonymous here? Do you think I dare broach this subject with my customers? Heck no is the correct answer. I would be out of business. Does this sound like an objective attitude?

Then we have the issue of monitoring. I can think of a few things that could be done to better watch active areas. There are also active UFO areas that only require the effort to go and see for oneself; but how many do? Almost none. Is this objectivity? Next, we have materials that defy explanation. Is this information found in the science journals? How many UFO articles have you seen in the science lit? Have you checked the Napster? Many well penned articles can be found there. Recently, due to pressure from people like Prof Sturrock from Stanford, Nature has finally agreed in principle to publish well written UFO papers. This would be a first.

UFOs are pseudoscience by arbitrary definition only. Although I greatly appreciate this opportunity to post information and to make my arguments – I offer my most sincere thanks to Greg, Sting, and PF in general – I feel that UFOs should be a subject in the “real” science forum. However, considering the common attitude towards this subject, I am grateful for what I can get. [;)]

zoobyshoe

Aug6-03, 08:47 AM

Ivan,

What I percieve myself to be hear-
ing from you is that you would
first and formost like to have it
considered a respectable topic
of speculation among scientists.
Then you wouldn't feel you had to
be cautious about who you mention
it to.

I'm trying to imagine a group of
astronauts, airline pilots, mil-
itary pilots, and the like going
on TV discussing their encounters
such that everyone in the country
started taking it all very seriously. I think it would just
end up disturbing people, making
people uneasy.

Unless you have something definite
to tell people, conclusive things
it may just be a burden of distr-
action for them.

-zoob

Ivan Seeking

Aug6-03, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
Ivan,

What I percieve myself to be hear-
ing from you is that you would
first and formost like to have it
considered a respectable topic
of speculation among scientists.
Then you wouldn't feel you had to
be cautious about who you mention
it to.

I'm trying to imagine a group of
astronauts, airline pilots, mil-
itary pilots, and the like going
on TV discussing their encounters
such that everyone in the country
started taking it all very seriously. I think it would just
end up disturbing people, making
people uneasy.

Unless you have something definite
to tell people, conclusive things
it may just be a burden of distr-
action for them.

-zoob

Let me ask you the question that I have long asked myself: If ET is here, are we better off not knowing what's really going on?

It has been suggested: If the gov knows about ET, perhaps it is denied for good reasons. The woman who authored the definitive book on the Bentwaters incident [England] recently and publicly claimed to have had a conversation with Margaret Thatcher. In regard to the subject of UFOs, she quotes Thatcher as saying: "You have to have the facts. The people cannot be told". If true, this is disturbing. Still, my take is [has been] that no one knows what's really going on. Personally, I want to know the truth no matter what it may be. If our hypothetical visitors wished us harm, they surely could have done so by now. So, I guess that my feeling is that I don't give the government permission to hide this information.

Edited.

Zantra

Aug6-03, 06:00 PM

And the question is WHY don't they know? First off, it stands to reason assuming that the roswell crash did happen, and things progressed from there, that some element of it would have leaked out by now. Plus, we'd now have the technology to detect spacecraft more accurately, and certainly we would have gleened something of thier technology by now.

I mean, other than an x-files scenario where we are being invaded, I don't see the need for keeping this a secret so long. The public could have been slowly brought to full awareness by now if this was the case.

Ivan Seeking

Aug6-03, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by Zantra
And the question is WHY don't they know? First off, it stands to reason assuming that the roswell crash did happen, and things progressed from there, that some element of it would have leaked out by now. Plus, we'd now have the technology to detect spacecraft more accurately, and certainly we would have gleened something of thier technology by now.

I mean, other than an x-files scenario where we are being invaded, I don't see the need for keeping this a secret so long. The public could have been slowly brought to full awareness by now if this was the case.

Go to the Napster video section and see the interview with Col. Corso. [I made a notation next to the link. See page 2 of the Napster]. I know that it has been established that Corso worked in intelligence. Not only his credentials, but also many pictures are found of him with the President; and with other high ranking officials. He tells quite a story. [I have not come to any conclusion on this point.] He implores the gov to come clean and tell the public. This tape was made just before his death. Since he knew he was dying, one might consider this death bed testimony.

Ivan Seeking

Aug6-03, 08:51 PM

Zantra

Aug6-03, 09:04 PM

One of the videos - a news report on UFOs- Dr Greer presents a plausible theory. If namely, a new source of energy that would make current fossil fuels obsolete, thereby impacting the economy at the multi-trillion dollar level. Also, it would stand to reason that initially it was kept secret for fear of other countries getting thier hands on the technology.

I don't know it seems all too possible with so many credible witnesses-not just jim bob down on the idaho farm who claims he was abducted by elvis, but military personell, high ranking officials, and people who just wouldn't make this stuff up.

But even if they do exist, the government will not release the information any time in the near future. If the secret has been kept this long, there's no telling how long they could conceal it, barring them landing outside a burger king to "have it thier way"

Ivan Seeking

Aug6-03, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by Zantra
One of the videos - a news report on UFOs- Dr Greer presents a plausible theory. If namely, a new source of energy that would make current fossil fuels obsolete, thereby impacting the economy at the multi-trillion dollar level. Also, it would stand to reason that initially it was kept secret for fear of other countries getting thier hands on the technology.

I don't know it seems all too possible with so many credible witnesses-not just jim bob down on the idaho farm who claims he was abducted by elvis, but military personell, high ranking officials, and people who just wouldn't make this stuff up.

But even if they do exist, the government will not release the information any time in the near future. If the secret has been kept this long, there's no telling how long they could conceal it, barring them landing outside a burger king to "have it thier way"

Greer has done some big work. He has assembled a highly reputable group of compelling witnesses that go "on the record". They now pursue the legal argument that they are not bound by their privacy oaths [edit: I meant secrecy oaths] because the UFO information is controlled by an illegal entity of the government; therefore their oaths are null and void. Interesting.

However, Greer now scares me. I think he has become so embedded in the possibilities that he has completely lost perspective. Of course, it is possible that we lack perspective...[g)]

Zantra

Aug6-03, 09:53 PM

Well I've read the position of cseti- If everything they are alledging is accurate, he's not overstating it at all. I'll admit this has grabbed my attention. they're alleging that z-point engery is a reality. And this is something that the scientific community has already speculated on.

The only way to expose these things, if they are true, is an executive order from the president of full disclosure. I mean, If I were the president, and information was being witheld from me, I'd use every resource available to me to obtain that information. If the goverment as a whole were to take this seriously, it certainly could not resist exposure, but obviously that hasn't happened yet through half dozen presidents, so who knows?

Ivan Seeking

Aug6-03, 10:26 PM

Originally posted by Zantra
Well I've read the position of cseti- If everything they are alledging is accurate, he's not overstating it at all. I'll admit this has grabbed my attention. they're alleging that z-point engery is a reality. And this is something that the scientific community has already speculated on.

The only way to expose these things, if they are true, is an executive order from the president of full disclosure. I mean, If I were the president, and information was being witheld from me, I'd use every resource available to me to obtain that information. If the goverment as a whole were to take this seriously, it certainly could not resist exposure, but obviously that hasn't happened yet through half dozen presidents, so who knows?

The basis for the legal argument is that US Presidents have been kept out of the loop.

Zantra

Aug6-03, 10:37 PM

So you're telling me none of the successive presidents ever would have had the insight simply ask the right people "do these places exist?" or question it? I mean MJIC and other related info like area 57 are public knowledge. Surely he has the authority to simply say "take me to the base"? Or maybe not? I don't know...

zoobyshoe

Aug7-03, 12:41 AM

Ivan,

In response to this:

"I think the reason that my motives are not obvious is that you don't perceive this question [UFOs = ET?] as potentially true."

You are essentially correct. It is
true that I leave the door open a
small crack for the possibility
that beings from another planet
are behind all this, but for the most part I find that this particular explanation has it's
basis in fiction. That is: the
wide spread notion of life on
other planets has its origin in
H.G.Wells' The War Of The Worlds.
That book, in turn, was based on
the speculation about life on
Mars after the discovery of the
Martian "Canals". In other words:
the fiction came first and then
people started trying to fit the
host of inexplicable occurances
into the fictional model.
Before ET it was "The Wee Folk"
of the British Isles. Almost every
Native American tribe has lore
about a race of Liliputian peoples
who are generally invisible or live in small tunnels. The Mexi-
cans today still have the legend
of the Duendes- dwarfish beings
who prey upon people out alone in
isolated areas.
Now, if President Bush went on
TV tomorrow and announced that all
the coverups were at an end and
that the governent was !00% sure
earth was being visited by crafts
from another planet, but that we
didn't know why, where they were
from, or anything else about them,
I do not believe this would have
the exhilarating, mind expanding
effect on the general population
you think it would.
You have to detach from your own
reaction and think realistically
how this would effect people who
have totally different lives and
concerns than you. You cannot throw a monkey wrench into peoples
sence of reality without some very
bad consequences. Again, I remind
you of Orson Wells' mistake in this regard.
You, as one individual, may be
able to handle the truth, and want
it to be revealed to you, but the
governments job is to look after
the welfare of the greatest num-
ber.
-zoob

Zantra

Aug7-03, 02:50 AM

Well I think I've just been sucked in.

I've just finished watching the congressional hearing dubbed "project full disclosure", and I can say it's the most convincing evidence I've ever heard. I began watching the video with a 20 percent belief in this, and have come away with a 90 percent belief.

The testimony given by top military personnel, people attached to the government with documented proof, many of whom have top secret clearance and above. These are not like the stories I've seen, these are credible people. The main question is why isn't this being made more public? is it just being written off as more UFO "bunk?" Has the media bothered to investigate these allegations. I remember reading about carter being blocked from UFO info disclosure years ago. This isn't some bumpkin hayseed in a cornfield going "welp, dem's not from here", this is very convincing. It's virtually impossible to be skeptical in the face of such evidence. Has anyone else seen this video I'm talking about ? what is your take on it? Zero point energy? Mach 20? Faster than light speed? I mean, I'm skeptical by nature, but this doesn't seem so easy to explain away. And you can't just offhandedly discredit some of the people on that list.

Comon skeptics-watch the video and I would like to hear your view on it.

Ivan Seeking

Aug7-03, 07:05 PM

Originally posted by Zantra
So you're telling me none of the successive presidents ever would have had the insight simply ask the right people "do these places exist?" or question it? I mean MJIC and other related info like area 57 are public knowledge. Surely he has the authority to simply say "take me to the base"? Or maybe not? I don't know...

Greer and his people [some of which were high ranking authorities themselves] claim that certain presidents are denied access - Carter and Clinton most recently. I guess that one can only ask for what is known to exist.

Zantra

Aug7-03, 07:47 PM

Well the way it was presented by greer wasn't that they were told it doesn't exist-exclusive of UFO's, black budget projects do exist. They were simply told that they were not allowed access to it.

And if something doesn't exist, then you have nothing to hide, and nothing to deny access to. They are prepsing that Carter was going to reveal the truth the American people.

Ivan Seeking

Aug7-03, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
Ivan,

In response to this:

"I think the reason that my motives are not obvious is that you don't perceive this question [UFOs = ET?] as potentially true."

You are essentially correct. It is
true that I leave the door open a
small crack for the possibility
that beings from another planet
are behind all this, but for the most part I find that this particular explanation has it's
basis in fiction. That is: the
wide spread notion of life on
other planets has its origin in
H.G.Wells' The War Of The Worlds.
That book, in turn, was based on
the speculation about life on
Mars after the discovery of the
Martian "Canals". In other words:
the fiction came first and then
people started trying to fit the
host of inexplicable occurances
into the fictional model.
Before ET it was "The Wee Folk"
of the British Isles. Almost every
Native American tribe has lore
about a race of Liliputian peoples
who are generally invisible or live in small tunnels. The Mexi-
cans today still have the legend
of the Duendes- dwarfish beings
who prey upon people out alone in
isolated areas.
Now, if President Bush went on
TV tomorrow and announced that all
the coverups were at an end and
that the governent was !00% sure
earth was being visited by crafts
from another planet, but that we
didn't know why, where they were
from, or anything else about them,
I do not believe this would have
the exhilarating, mind expanding
effect on the general population
you think it would.
You have to detach from your own
reaction and think realistically
how this would effect people who
have totally different lives and
concerns than you. You cannot throw a monkey wrench into peoples
sence of reality without some very
bad consequences. Again, I remind
you of Orson Wells' mistake in this regard.
You, as one individual, may be
able to handle the truth, and want
it to be revealed to you, but the
governments job is to look after
the welfare of the greatest num-
ber.
-zoob

I think you make some good points; so let me beat you up a bit and then I will concede to another good point that you make. First, you need to understand that I don't believe ET is visiting - but I must admit that I think this is highly likely...even all but certain. I suspect that nearly anyone else in my shoes would be a complete believer by now. I desperately hold on to skepticism out of principle; I have to or I will just fade into the woodwork as another true believer.

I want the truth; not any particular answer. However, I really believe that if anyone reviews the links that I have posted in the Napster, in their entirety, and they then review the related links, they would be hard pressed to maintain a skeptical position. In my experience, with only a handful of exceptions, the only people who think this is all hogwash are those who have not seen a full accounting of the evidence. I can say this with a high degree of confidence since after 15 years of study; I can easily dismiss most objections without ever thinking hard. My personal opinion on all of this is based on the government docs posted in the Napster, and on other evidence that I find to be virtually indisputable. As a judge once commented after considering the evidence for ET: “If this were a murder trial there would have been a hanging long ago.”

As far as your historical example of the little people and such – this could just as easily be interpreted as cases of mistaken identity. The arguments that similar legends exist across cultures only serve to argue that ET has been here for a very long time.

As to whether or not this potential reality should be explored, this is more difficult for me to answer. I agree with you that this could be dangerous. I tend towards this position: First, I think you are wrong. The first time that we know as a planet that we are not alone, the human race will be changed forever…unless this knowledge is somehow [once again] lost. This point has been made before – by Carl Sagan for example. I can also argue this based on the influence that physics has had on religion, philosophy, and our world views in general. This however is another discussion entirely, so I will leave this there for now.

Next, what about ET could be worse than the concept of Satan and hell? How disturbing is it for a 10 year old to be told that he could end up burning in hell for all of eternity? What about ET could be worse than what we do to each other? I would rather be taken hostage by ET than hostile humans. Human beings do everything imaginable and the unimaginable to each other. I just don’t see what new aspect of fear ET would bring to the mix. Burglars can come into your home at night; I would take ET over a burglar any time. At least ET puts you back to bed when he’s done!

Ivan Seeking

Aug7-03, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by Zantra
Well the way it was presented by greer wasn't that they were told it doesn't exist-exclusive of UFO's, black budget projects do exist. They were simply told that they were not allowed access to it.

And if something doesn't exist, then you have nothing to hide, and nothing to deny access to. They are prepsing that Carter was going to reveal the truth the American people.

Zantra, I buried the CSETI link a bit. Do you think I should highlight this link? This stuff is so direct that I thought that people may not give this a chance.

Also, if this got you worked up, read the rest of the Napster links. I don't know how much of this stuff you have seen before, but you have only touched the surface of what hooked me. Watch the video of Corso and Gordon Cooper. Cooper say point blank that he saw a UFO [disc] land at Edwards AFB. He says that aliens then get out and did something around the craft, and when jeeps approached with cameras rolling, the aliens got back into the craft and took off. Cooper was in charge of test flights at the time.

Ivan Seeking

Aug7-03, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by Zantra
Comon skeptics-watch the video and I would like to hear your view on it.

[:D] [:D] [:D]

Boy do I know how you feel...hence the Napster. Watch out though; your conviction will not translate to others. It will create walls...even with family members.

zoobyshoe

Aug7-03, 08:58 PM

Ivan,

I read it over three times and
couldn't find the concessions.

-zoob

Ivan Seeking

Aug7-03, 09:01 PM

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
Ivan,

I read it over three times and
couldn't find the concessions.

-zoob

I was speaking to this idea:
You cannot throw a monkey wrench into peoples
sence of reality without some very
bad consequences.

I acknowledge your concerns here:

As to whether or not this potential reality should be explored, this is more difficult for me to answer. I agree with you that this could be dangerous

Then I present an alternative point of view for consideration.

Ivan Seeking

Aug7-03, 10:28 PM

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
...concessions.

-zoob

A few other things to consider; an entire catalog of high ranking military officials, now retired, have gone public with personal knowledge of UFOs. Nearly all of the people who were allegedly closest to this phenomenon encourage public disclosure. What's more, Corso argues that this information is not in the best hands. Greer and his group pursue the legal argument that this issue, and the way that it has been managed, qualify as a failure of constitutional law.

Finally, it is claimed that something like 55-65% of all Americans already believe that UFOs = ET. I wonder what the real number is for physicists….

Ivan Seeking

Aug7-03, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by Zantra
These are not like the stories I've seen, these are credible people.

The main question is why isn't this being made more public? is it just being written off as more UFO "bunk?"

Has the media bothered to investigate these allegations.[?]

This isn't some bumpkin hayseed in a cornfield going "welp, dem's not from here",

this is very convincing.

It's virtually impossible to be skeptical in the face of such evidence.

Has anyone else seen this video I'm talking about ? what is your take on it?

And you can't just offhandedly discredit some of the people on that list.

Comon skeptics-watch the video and I would like to hear your view on it.

frustrating isn't it.[s(]

Zantra

Aug7-03, 11:06 PM

When you bring up high ranking military officers with long distinguished careers in the military, with above top secret clearance,and harvard lawyer, who actually have physical evidence.. I mean cmon people. You waiting for mr alien to bring over a pie and play some poker?

These are not "UFO hunters" or typical "conspiracy theorists". These are obviously highly intelligent people, some of whom are only recently retired from the military.

I mentioned this to my fiancee. And she's as skeptical as anyone. Then I made her watch the video. By the time she finished, she was practically convinced.

I think the problem is that people 1.are in denial- it would have such wide ramifications on religion, and our place in the universe, not to mention the social and economic implications, that many people would refuse to accept it if they landed and started talking to us.
2. Have been trained for so long to believe that aliens and ufo's are just a hoax, that they refuse to look at any evidence as credible because the government and "UFO wackos" have jaded everyone.