'No evidence' for extraterrestrials, says White House,....

phlogistician said:
You got it wrong again. They may not APPEAR to move, but that doesn't mean they aren't.

Just like I also keep saying, just because people didn't hear any sound, doesn't mean there wasn't any. I mean, the A-10s that dropped those flares have two jet engines, yet weren't heard. That simply means they were beyond hearing, not that they were flying silently.

Basically, you got nothing. No close up pictures, not altitude reading, no size information, no radar trace, nothing.
Click to expand...

No. They ain't moving. It's not an illusion Phlog. Not by much anyway.

For it to be an illusion, they'd need to be travelling the opposite direction of the way the camera was viewing it, which, if anyone here has any sense of ''geometrical'' spatio-distribution in their heads, is clearly not the case.

I've had enough of this conversation. THEY AREN'T MOVING. PERIOD.
 
(What a ridiclous arguement... he claims the statement by Stanely is ''FACT'' yet he is ready to admit there is no trace on radar. yea, thanks for highlighting that for us) ;)
 
From the Wiki page: "callers began reporting the object was definitely solid because it blocked out much of the starry sky as it passed over"

See, this is false inference. Definitely solid? Sorry, but no, it doesn't mean it's definitely solid at all. What it means is that the light in the formation is considerably brighter than the stars behind it, so your eyes adjust to the brightness of the brighter object, meaning you can no longer see the dim one.

This effect is why you can't see stars in the background sky of the Lunar missions. There's no solid object blocking them out on the Moon, just the ambient light changing the f-stop and exposure on the camera, so faint objects don't register.

See, science is great isn't it? If you understand how things work, you can explain shit.
 
Last edited:
Mister said:
(What a ridiclous arguement... he claims the statement by Stanely is ''FACT'' yet he is ready to admit there is no trace on radar. yea, thanks for highlighting that for us) ;)
Click to expand...

You haven't got a radar trace for a massive object. I didn't say there weren't traces for individual planes. Got that?
 
Mister said:
I've had enough of this conversation. THEY AREN'T MOVING. PERIOD.
Click to expand...

You can't make that statement. All you can say is that they don't appear to move.

Here is is, explained with humour:

A philosopher, a physicist, a mathematician were
travelling through Scotland when they saw a black sheep through the
window of the train.

"Aha," says the philosopher, "I see that Scottish sheep are black."

"Hmm," says the mathematician , "You mean that some Scottish sheep are
black."

"No," says the physicist, "All we know is that there is at least
one sheep in Scotland, and that at least one side of that one sheep is
black!"
 
No evidence for UFO's?

What about all the friggin aliens?

I think there is more people who claim to have seen evidence than should be dismissed without pause. I am willing to keep an open mind.

Many will not believe it even if a flying saucer was buzzing around in a glass jar in front of them.
 
Last edited:
phlogistician said:
From the Wiki page: "callers began reporting the object was definitely solid because it blocked out much of the starry sky as it passed over"

See, this is false inference. Definitely solid? Sorry, but no, it doesn't mean it's definitely solid at all. What it means is that the light in the formation is considerably brighter than the stars behind it, so your eyes adjust to the brightness of the brighter object, meaning you can no longer see the dim one.

This effect is why you can't see stars in the background sky of the Lunar missions. There's no solid object blocking them out on the Moon, just the ambient light changing the f-stop and exposure on the camera, so faint objects don't register.

See, science is great isn't it? If you understand how things work, you can explain shit.
Click to expand...


Yes, science is brilliant I agree with you. I deal with it every day. I love learning physics. But you know what else is brilliant, studying the facts first. Only a few people admitted to an object being seen in the sky: Those who did said ''it was a massive mile wide, triangular shaped object with lights attached.''

This is a far cry from individual tiny planes scattered throughout a mile. Also, not everyone admitted seeing a structure, in fact those who did, where not many.

I don't even know why I am even replying to this. I really don't have the patience any more. I know the objects aren't moving. To be moving, as I said, they would need to be moving in the opposite direction. If you watch video evidence of the lights at their final stages alined horizontally to the camera, they ain't even moving left or right. That must mean the way they appear stationary in the video I linked, is certainly evidence they ain't moving at all. Especially considering you could discern this anyway, by anyone with a capable spatio-distribution in their heads.

I am off now, I have more pressing, real life issues to deal with.
 
Last edited:
kwhilborn said:
No evidence for UFO's?

What about all the friggin aliens?

I think there is more people who claim to have seen evidence than should be dismissed without pause. I am willing to keep an open mind.

Many will not believe it even if a flying saucer was buzzing around in a glass jar in front of them.
Click to expand...

I've seen skeptics change their mind so quickly upon seeing UFO's for themselves. I pray many skeptics do, because the more skeptics call us ''UFO nuts'' and whatnot, is just downright degrading and derogatory. I have seen a lot of it in this thread and admittedly I got angry over it.

We are not all stupid, crack pots who believe in myths and fairytales and the end of the world in 2012.
 
There appears to be an abundance of historical references dating back to the Sumerians, and plenty of people who have taken unaltered photos. I think science has more to gain from believing in possibilities rather than thinking we know it all.

Maybe science should examine the moon more closely. If there was ancient space travel or UFO's then you would think some debris might be found on the moon somewhere. Any artefact would be proof of something.

Many astronauts have claimed there are UFO's and many of these guys are educated and physically fit.

One of the original Mercury Astronauts and the last American to fly in space alone. On May 15, 1963, he shot into space in a Mercury capsule for a 22 orbit journey around the world. During the final orbit, Major Gordon Cooper told the tracking station at Muchea (near Perth Australia) that he could see a glowing, greenish object ahead of him quickly approaching his capsule. The UFO was real and solid, because it was picked up by Muchea's tracking radar.
Cooper's sighting was reported by the National Broadcast Company, which was covering the flight step by step; but when Cooper landed, reporters were told that they would not be allowed to question him about the UFO sighting.

Major Cooper was a firm believer in UFOs. Ten years earlier, in 1951 he had sighted a UFO while piloting an F-86 Sabrejet over Western Germany. They were metallic, saucer-shaped discs at considerable altitude and could out-maneuver all American fighter planes.

Major Cooper also testified before the United Nations:
"I believe that these extra-terrestrial vehicles and their crews are visiting this planet from other planets... Most astronauts were reluctant to discuss UFOs."
Click to expand...

Apollo astronaut Edgar Mitchell returned from his mission to the moon a changed man. He has spent the last 35 years trying to use the tools of science to figure out what happened. Along the way, he says that people knowledgeable about an alleged crash of an alien spaceship in Roswell, N.M., shared the information with him.
Click to expand...

We used to accept verbal testimony as evidence in this country.

Open eyes will see more than closed eyes. Let's not write off the possibility out of religion, fear or belief our science is the end-all.
 
Last edited:
Mister said:
I don't even know why I am even replying to this. I really don't have the patience any more. I know the objects aren't moving.
Click to expand...

You are cherry picking your eye witnesses statements again, and forgetting we already covered this; several people reported the object as having 'flown overhead', so YES, it allegedly moved. I don't know why you are denying this.
 
kwhilborn said:
Many astronauts have claimed there are UFO's and many of these guys are educated and physically fit.
Click to expand...

And they are just people. Just as flawed as the rest of us. Buzz Aldrin has suffered from depression and alcholism, James Irwin got God.

Here's a question for you,... why did WWII pilots report seeing 'Foo Fighters' during sorties,.... but now there are more people in the air than then, on commercial flights, they don't report seeing them?

Is it because of the stress of combat, and the pilots perception also being under stress? Do you think the Astronauts that flew in space weren't in a stressful situation? So you think their perception was flawless?
 
phlogistician said:
You are cherry picking your eye witnesses statements again, and forgetting we already covered this; several people reported the object as having 'flown overhead', so YES, it allegedly moved. I don't know why you are denying this.
Click to expand...

Phlog, I am well aware of what the witnesses have said. I am arguably the best informed here on the pheonix lights and witness statements.

I am aware the ''objects'' moved overhead and traversed quite a bit of the city. I am not denying this.

I am stating at the end of their journey, they remain stationary for a good 2-3 minutes before completely dimming out. What part of that can't you understand? I even gave you a video to watch, in which you reply ''they only appear to be standing still.''

Fact is they come to a stand still after their journey, before dimming.
 
Last edited:
phlogistician said:
And they are just people. Just as flawed as the rest of us. Buzz Aldrin has suffered from depression and alcholism, James Irwin got God.

Here's a question for you,... why did WWII pilots report seeing 'Foo Fighters' during sorties,.... but now there are more people in the air than then, on commercial flights, they don't report seeing them?

Is it because of the stress of combat, and the pilots perception also being under stress? Do you think the Astronauts that flew in space weren't in a stressful situation? So you think their perception was flawless?
Click to expand...

Not that I am disagreeing with you in this case, but there were hundreds of cases of foo fighters, so I'd be careful not to just assume each case can be attributed to mental illusion.
 
phlogistician said:
Nope, that video does not support your assertion, where the lights appear in shot, they don't _move_ into the scene.
Click to expand...

We can leave it here and agree to disagree. We've exhausted everything else we could possibly say to each other.

I will remind you it is offensive by some to simply call UFO believers nuts and crackpots. It is condescending and speaks no truth of the people who view these things.
 
If you like you could turn your attention to my own thread, The Washington Sightings. I'd like to hear your explanation on that event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top