Could Aliens be Hidding?

[phlogistician]

When you have to beat your own drum my friend because no one else will - well that speaks for itself.

So comprehension isn't your strong point eh? I'm not alone here, asserting that UFO implies some sort of craft.

As for ad hominems, go look up the definition and then go back and look at your posts.

There are none, that's why you haven't quoted me.

Do you have proof UFO's are extraterresterial? If so, let's see it.

You are missing the point. The term U.F.O. was coined by people researching the possibility of extra terrestrial visititation. Just because they didn't find it, doesn't mean they weren't looking, nor that the term is not related to Extra Terrestrials. That their findings had prosaic explanations, does not mean we redefine the term.

And the term UFO clearly speaks for itself.

Yeah, it means extra terrestrial craft, as has been demonstrated to you, and I even pasted a quote from Project Sign, to illustrate it. I also showed how literal interpretations of words can be misaligned with their usage.

If earlier on or at various times people have thought they were the product of an extraterrestrial intelligence has nothing to do with the term UFO.

Projects Sign, Grudge, and BlueBook were all searching for Extra Terrestrial craft, which were referred to as U.F.O.s. The term is synonymous with Extra Terresrtial Craft.

As stated earlier, your logic is very disjointed. UFO is the phenomena it is not the cause, it is the observation.

No it is not. You have got your cart before your horse. As I have explained, they were searching for evidence of Extra Terrestrial craft, but the fact they didn't find any does not redefine the term.

Your logic is very fuzzy. You don't seem to be able to understand the difference between the observation and the cause.

Listen kid, this is why the accepted term in use NOW is UAP, not UFO, because of the etymology and history of the word UFO, and it's implications. It's not my fault you are ignorant of history, and what's more wantonly ignorant, and too lazy to read the information that would set you straight.

So I am glad that you can applaude your intellectual prowness, because no one else here is doing same.

Learn to spell, kid.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Big enough box, and yes you could. Stop wriggling.

You wriggling, you made this irrelevant statement about needing a box, why do I need a box again?

Your interpretation of flying is already too broad.

Its within its definitions, so its valid usage.

That's not what Isaid. I said if something was flying, it's under some level of intelligent control. IE, it was designed and launched, or it is some animal.

Same thing to me.

The rock is not flying, because the rock is not generating any lift! A ballistic trajectory is not flight, DUH!

Look at the definition of flying, no lift required! Oh am I being to broad with my definitions, tough tits, I'm still using the word correctly grammatically, you need to revise your statement in light of its poor usage of words, not my fault.

 

[joepistole]

So comprehension isn't your strong point eh? I'm not alone here, asserting that UFO implies some sort of craft.

There are none, that's why you haven't quoted me.

You are missing the point. The term U.F.O. was coined by people researching the possibility of extra terrestrial visititation. Just because they didn't find it, doesn't mean they weren't looking, nor that the term is not related to Extra Terrestrials. That their findings had prosaic explanations, does not mean we redefine the term.

Yeah, it means extra terrestrial craft, as has been demonstrated to you, and I even pasted a quote from Project Sign, to illustrate it. I also showed how literal interpretations of words can be misaligned with their usage.

Projects Sign, Grudge, and BlueBook were all searching for Extra Terrestrial craft, which were referred to as U.F.O.s. The term is synonymous with Extra Terresrtial Craft.

No it is not. You have got your cart before your horse. As I have explained, they were searching for evidence of Extra Terrestrial craft, but the fact they didn't find any does not redefine the term.

Listen kid, this is why the accepted term in use NOW is UAP, not UFO, because of the etymology and history of the word UFO, and it's implications. It's not my fault you are ignorant of history, and what's more wantonly ignorant, and too lazy to read the information that would set you straight.

Learn to spell, kid.

Here is you problem, your arguements are weak. Your thinking is illogical and you invent new meanings for old words. Further, you refuse to go to the dictionary.

And when pressed into a corner you have to beat on your own chest. Because no one else will. And the other thing is you never have proof of claim. So all you can do in cast meaningless insults in an attempt to cover your illogical and faulty thinking.

I am sorry for you friend.

 

[phlogistician]

Here is you problem, your arguements are weak.

You can't even spell 'argument'.

But anyway, here's a quote from you, where you yourself, in your very own words, equate UFO with Extra Terrestrial:

I think very close. There are too many UFO experiences that just cannot be adequately explained. Something is going on. They may be closer than we think. American astronauts think we are being visited by aliens as well as many military officers.

Your thinking is illogical

Nah, I backed up everything I said with links, quotes, and excerpts from the dictionary. Clearly comprehension is not your strong point.

and you invent new meanings for old words.

Technically, it's an acronym, not a word. It's also an acronym associated with Extra Terrestrial Craft, because the people that created the term meant it to have that association!

From Wikipedia, emphasis mine:

"An unidentified flying object (usually abbreviated to UFO or U.F.O.) is any unusual apparent object or phenomenon in the sky whose cause cannot be identified by the observer, or (in a narrower definition) by investigators; though in popular usage it more loosely means alien spacecraft, "

Further, you refuse to go to the dictionary.

See above for Wikipedia's view on the matter, heres one from a dictionary!

UFO   /ˈyuˈɛfˈoʊ or, sometimes, ˈyufoʊ/ Show Spelled
[yoo-ef-oh or, sometimes, yoo-foh] Show IPA

–noun, plural UFO's, UFOs.
any unexplained moving object observed in the sky, especially one assumed by some observers to be of extraterrestrial origin.

(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/UFO)

And when pressed into a corner you have to beat on your own chest. Because no one else will.

Nobody else, not one person on this thread has agreed with me, and disagreed with you huh?

come off it Joe! The term sensuo stricto matches your definition, but in most discussions on the topic, especially on internet forums (and especially this one), UFO means flying saucer means aliens. You aren't dumb enough not to know that, therefore you must be being deliberately obtuse. It doesn't suit you.

Oh no, you've been PROVEN wrong, yet again.

And the other thing is you never have proof of claim.

So all the proof I have posted isn't proof?

So all you can do in cast meaningless insults in an attempt to cover your illogical and faulty thinking.

Quote me. You can't, it's just more BS and rhetoric.

I am sorry for you friend.

I'm sorry for the people that know you.

 

[joepistole]

You can't even spell 'argument'.

LOL, if that is all you have my friend, then you have nothing. On occasion I do misspell words and make typos as I don't spend much time proofing what I type. I would much rather be guilty of that great offense than not be able think rationally.

And I would not be so quick to point to the occassional spelling errors others make when you yourself make a lot of spelling and gramatical mistakes as well.

But we both know this is just a distraction intended to remove the attention from your illogical arguements and intimidate people.

But anyway, here's a quote from you, where you yourself, in your very own words, equate UFO with Extra Terrestrial:

Now show me where in that text did I say UFO's equaled extra terrestrial in that text? I repeat my suggestion that you back to the dictionary and look up the meaning of equate and then properly apply it to my text.

And as stated many times before, UFO's are observations. They are not the cause. This is something that you have difficulty comprehending.

Nah, I backed up everything I said with links, quotes, and excerpts from the dictionary. Clearly comprehension is not your strong point.

Yes you posted links. Are they in anyway related to the issue at hand? No.
So again, you attempt intimidation by throwing insults. Unfortunately for you, that stuff does not work with me.

Technically, it's an acronym, not a word. It's also an acronym associated with Extra Terrestrial Craft, because the people that created the term meant it to have that association!

From Wikipedia, emphasis mine:

"An unidentified flying object (usually abbreviated to UFO or U.F.O.) is any unusual apparent object or phenomenon in the sky whose cause cannot be identified by the observer, or (in a narrower definition) by investigators; though in popular usage it more loosely means alien spacecraft, "

See above for Wikipedia's view on the matter, heres one from a dictionary!

UFO   /ˈyuˈɛfˈoʊ or, sometimes, ˈyufoʊ/ Show Spelled
[yoo-ef-oh or, sometimes, yoo-foh] Show IPA

–noun, plural UFO's, UFOs.
any unexplained moving object observed in the sky, especially one assumed by some observers to be of extraterrestrial origin.

(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/UFO)

I am glad you made a journey to the dictionary. Now let's use the dictionary definition. What words does it use to define UFO? Notice the word "observed" in the definition? Notice also the words assumed and some. They do not mean that UFOs are of extraterrestrial origin. You are to ready to make assumptions. And that is where you go off into the land of fuzzy logic where nothing has any meaning, logic or reason.

Nobody else, not one person on this thread has agreed with me, and disagreed with you huh?

Oh no, you've been PROVEN wrong, yet again.

LOL, you have to prove me wrong once friend before you go onto again. I suggest you reread the text again. It backs me up. It says I am correct. It appears you overlooked that part. Gee, why am I not suprised?

"The term sensuo stricto matches your definition". And it was obvious to Ophiolite what was being discussed. It appears you have not yet reached that level of understanding.

So all the proof I have posted isn't proof?
Quote me. You can't, it's just more BS and rhetoric.
I'm sorry for the people that know you.

What you have posted is not relevant to the issue at hand. As previously pointed out on many occasions. UFO's are observations. They are not the cause. People like yourself are eager to attribute causes to UFO's and that is wrong.

Also as previously stated many times, not all UFO observations can be fully explained. They are enigmas. A possible explanation for them is that they may be the product of some alien action or intelligence. But that is an unknown and to say that they are is just wrong. There is no scientific proof upon which to make that claim. There are however observations of a phenomena which we refer to as UFOs. There are speculations about UFOs and what they are, but don't as you have done, confuse speculation of cause with the observation.

Words are important friend and that is why we must be careful when we use them. If you start smearing the meanings of words making their meanings vague, then the words become meaningless. Clear thinking requires precision and words with precise meanings.

You assume too much.

 

[phlogistician]

Reported for trolling.

 

[joepistole]

Reported for trolling.

Well I guess that makes us even, I reported you for insulting several days ago.

But I suggest you look up the definition of troll.

 

[phlogistician]

Well I guess that makes us even, I reported you for insulting several days ago.

But still you can't find a single thing to quote me on, where I have done that.

But I suggest you look up the definition of troll.

You are a troll, I've given you the dictionary definition of U.F.O., the Wikipedia definition, and quoted your own words where you equate the two, and reposted Ophiolite's rebuke of you twisting the term, yet still you come back, trying to get a reaction.

You are a troll flogging a dead horse. you've been proven wrong. Give up.

 

[joepistole]

But still you can't find a single thing to quote me on, where I have done that.

You are a troll, I've given you the dictionary definition of U.F.O., the Wikipedia definition, and quoted your own words where you equate the two, and reposted Ophiolite's rebuke of you twisting the term, yet still you come back, trying to get a reaction.

You are a troll flogging a dead horse. you've been proven wrong. Give up.

Instead of calling people names and being rude and proclaiming yourself victorious. I suggest go back and read this thread with a dictionary close at hand friend. Your claims just don't ring true.

 

[phlogistician]

Instead of calling people names

And still you fail to quote me. Because there is nothing to quote.

and being rude and proclaiming yourself victorious.

Well kid, you have been utterly PWNED.

I suggest go back and read this thread with a dictionary close at hand friend.

You didn't like the dictionary quote I already provided which proved you wrong?

Your claims just don't ring true.

You spelled claims wrong, it spelled P R O O F S.

 

[joepistole]

And still you fail to quote me. Because there is nothing to quote.

I didn't quote you becuase your illogical arguement is obvious and blatent. Just reread your post after looking up the definition of ad hominem.

Well kid, you have been utterly PWNED.

Pounding on your chest again I see.

You didn't like the dictionary quote I already provided which proved you wrong?

Ah now you are back to making stuff up again either that or you have a serious problem with understanding the written language.

I didn't like the dictionary quote you provide so much I used it in post 65.

"I am glad you made a journey to the dictionary. Now let's use the dictionary definition. What words does it use to define UFO? Notice the word "observed" in the definition? Notice also the words assumed and some. They do not mean that UFOs are of extraterrestrial origin. You are to ready to make assumptions. And that is where you go off into the land of fuzzy logic where nothing has any meaning, logic or reason." - Joepistole post 65

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2702948&postcount=65

Please try to use logical, truthful and material arguments.

You spelled claims wrong, it spelled P R O O F S.

Now you are lying again. Perhaps you need to take some spelling lessons. I suggest you look up the spelling of "claims" in the dictionary.

 

[Randwolf]

This may be presumptuous of me, but do you two (Joe and Phlog) ever intend to get around to discussing the actual topic implied by the title? Assuming that "hidding" was intended to be "hiding"...

That, or perhaps move the whole mess to the linguistics section? The concept seems to be the same between UFO (strictly speaking) and UAP, the latter technically being a more nearly accurate description of the subject at hand. Nonetheless, if the intent is to discuss those funny things appearing to hover about in the air which people often are unable to put a name to, then who cares what you call them? How about "inexplicable funny things that appear to hover about in the air"? Works for me.

Let's just pick one (or maybe both - "UAP/UFO") and get on with it.

It seems that the two of you have become embroiled in semantics to the point of abandoning the original thread. Or maybe I'm missing the point entirely, which is of course, quite possible...

 

[phlogistician]

"I am glad you made a journey to the dictionary. Now let's use the dictionary definition. What words does it use to define UFO? Notice the word "observed" in the definition? Notice also the words assumed and some. They do not mean that UFOs are of extraterrestrial origin. You are to ready to make assumptions. And that is where you go off into the land of fuzzy logic where nothing has any meaning, logic or reason." - Joepistole post 65

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2702948&postcount=65

.

"in popular usage it more loosely means alien spacecraft"

 

[ElectricFetus]

This may be presumptuous of me, but do you two (Joe and Phlog) ever intend to get around to discussing the actual topic implied by the title? Assuming that "hidding" was intended to be "hiding"...

That, or perhaps move the whole mess to the linguistics section? The concept seems to be the same between UFO (strictly speaking) and UAP, the latter technically being a more nearly accurate description of the subject at hand. Nonetheless, if the intent is to discuss those funny things appearing to hover about in the air which people often are unable to put a name to, then who cares what you call them? How about "inexplicable funny things that appear to hover about in the air"? Works for me.

Let's just pick one (or maybe both - "UAP/UFO") and get on with it.

It seems that the two of you have become embroiled in semantics to the point of abandoning the original thread. Or maybe I'm missing the point entirely, which is of course, quite possible...

No, not at all.

 

[NietzscheHimself]

If "they" are hiding... they need to learn how to drive and stop crashing so we don't have to worry about them anymore.

Think of all the countless hours humanity has wasted on the thought with nothing to show but major amounts of disinformation from the military and skewed fable stories of ancient astronauts meant to misinterpret our own history. Civilization is going downhill quickly. I blame aliens without a belief either way of their existence.