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

[Reiku]

A documentary made by the woman that wrote (and profited) from a book?

Quote:

"it seemed an intelligent presence was staring back"

when eye witnesses come out with crap like that, you know they are delusional.

Sounds to me like she saw a formation of chinese lanterns. Here's a vid I took of chinese lanterns:

http://youtu.be/h_Djd8kJ6n8

Please, you need some discernment.

Stop attacking the people and please evaluate the evidence. It is quite clearly not flares. Some experts in their fields show you what flares look like and how they decend. The pheonix lights do NONE OF THIS.

Attack the evidence please, not the people.

 

[Reiku]

I stopped watching the vid when they introduced Lazar. If that's their level of fact checking the rest is probably bullshit and not worth wasting my time on.

You need credible sources.

They make a mention of the CIA's statement on UFO's. I am sure the credibility of this cannot be questioned.

You tell me please, how many documentaries nowadays make a mention of Bob lazar? He's become as famous as any part of the UFO culture. Doesn't mean I believe in him. I still find it disingenuous that you would not watch the video to compare the information I spoke about and instead trying to make it out that this was in reference to Bob Lazar. He's a crank. Period.

 

[Reiku]

In fact, I am going to make a thread on the Pheonix lights in reference to the Military Statement they were their own flares and uncover their lies.

 

[Reiku]

A documentary made by the woman that wrote (and profited) from a book?

Quote:

"it seemed an intelligent presence was staring back"

when eye witnesses come out with crap like that, you know they are delusional.

Sounds to me like she saw a formation of chinese lanterns. Here's a vid I took of chinese lanterns:

http://youtu.be/h_Djd8kJ6n8

Please, you need some discernment.

Also, I can't help notice but you've ignored my questions for a second time phlog. If you are going to present theory on why the military embrace UFO sightings, you should be able to explain away my questions.... I can't help but feel my questions have stumped you.

 

[Reiku]

http://youtu.be/h_Djd8kJ6n8

Please, you need some discernment.

Well I now I know you are a typical skeptic.

Can I also state that the objects in your video do not remain equally equidistant from each other. The space between them changes drastically in the matter of seconds.

The distance of the lights in the Pheonix case remain properly even throughout the entire hour and a half. Of course, if you had actually watched the video, this was actually a point made by the professionals in the video. That it could not have been flares (and in your case as you have demonstrated) chinese lanterns because the space between the lights never vary. I gave your video 20 seconds and I could see them vary almost immediately.

I don't need discernment. You need proper scientific measure.

 

[Reiku]

I know! It's almost as if UFO conspiracy theorists have some kind of ... secret knowledge. What are they holding back from us?

How about a better understanding of the facts? Or perhaps, not disillusioned by any explanations that will be made to fit the bill, just because they are conventional? In other words, just because a bunch of lights are seen in the sky, I won't naturally assume it must be chinese lanterns for instance, without evaluating how plausible that explanation might be. If the evidence shows it cannot be that, then of course I am willing to explore more unconventional explanations.

Of course, in many instances, the UFO conspiracy theorists don't even need to have a secret knowlegde on the subject, though many have had their own experiences of maybe viewing a UFO which may defy all current technological abilities. All we need to do, is sit back half the time. The fact the Military, the Government and agents under the governement have denied their involvement in UFO activity just tells me and of course tells a lot of UFO nuts that there is more to the truth than which meets the eye.

The pheonix lights are an amazing example of this. The Military made no statement on it for a while after that event. It wasn't until they realized it was making major headlines all over the world that they decided to falsely state that it was flares shot from their own planes. Of course, there is no evidence suggesting they had and close analysis of video evidence quite clearly shows that they weren't flares. Even a school child who is shown two different video's, one of real flares and the other of the pheonix lights would be able to discern major differences.

They weren't even chinese lanterns and you can evaluate my evidence on that too above.

I am UFO believer (that is to say) I believe that UFO's are real and that they may be civilizations from another planet. I think it would be fair to say of me, that I don't obviously call all UFO cases to be evidence of this, nor do I simply take a UFO account at face value and be naive and cite it. I actually study the phenomenon first then make a proper judgement on it.

 

[Reiku]

Possibly. But the main thing they are trying to keep hidden (but actually revealing VERY obviously) is their stupidity, ignorance and gullibility. Plus, as I've been saying for years, their dreary boring lives which leaves them yearning for something exciting!

We've had numerous people here who fit those conditions perfectly - and they are just a part of a group who WANTS to believe in aliens, bigfoot, Nessie, the 9-11 conspiracy, etc., etc. Oh... and don't forget those who believe in Rossi and his stupid e-cat!

What an ugly post.

A UFO believer does not make them gullible or niave. A true believers and true to the facts avoids being gullible and naive by evaluating all the evidence. The only gullibility and naive behaviour often comes from those who will try and apply the conventional means of explanations to an event in a desperate attempt to wash the sighting away. It serves only the causes of those who are in control of the evidence and proof.

There are many intelligible believers out there. Much more intelligent than yourself, I would presume.

 

[Reiku]

But, but, but... didn't the US government openly admit that it had been dealing with various races of extra-terrestrials, reverse-engineering their technology, breeding human-alien hybrids and also admitted to being complicit in a secret world-takeover plan engineered by these aliens?
I'm sure they did so in the promised (by the pro-UFO lobby) disclosure of 2001, the one that was put back to 2002, um, 2005, er... when exactly did the disclosure happen, I forget.

The government has never admitted to such a thing. There has been a lot of denial - from the FBI to NASA to even the Government involving their involvement in investigations involving UFO's.

The FBI later released 1,100 documents of UFO investigations. NASA had also been caught out lying... and let us not even begin on the deceptive nature of the government. In light of your post, you just sound like you are being sarcastic.

 

[Read-Only]

What an ugly post.

A UFO believer does not make them gullible or niave. A true believers and true to the facts avoids being gullible and naive by evaluating all the evidence. The only gullibility and naive behaviour often comes from those who will try and apply the conventional means of explanations to an event in a desperate attempt to wash the sighting away. It serves only the causes of those who are in control of the evidence and proof.

There are many intelligible believers out there. Much more intelligent than yourself, I would presume.

Your whole problem lies in your last three words above - you presume FAR too much.

You talk about "facts and evidence" and yet have neither. You and your ilk are actually nothing more than a religion - blind faith based on hearsay, anecdotes and fuzzy, out of focus pictures and videos. :shrug:

 

[Reiku]

Your whole problem lies in your last three words above - you presume FAR too much.

You talk about "facts and evidence" and yet have neither. You and your ilk are actually nothing more than a religion - blind faith based on hearsay, anecdotes and fuzzy, out of focus pictures and videos. :shrug:

Rubbish. I know what evidence you are looking for. Absolute disclosure. In the meanwhile, UFOlogists need to evaluate the evidence (and there is a difference between evidence and proof) so that skeptics are confronted with accurate debates.

Take my Pheonix Lights case. Phlog above stated that it seemed very likely that what they saw was Chinese Lanterns. But with a proper evaluation of the evidence, you can rule out Chinese Lanterns. You can also rule out demonstratably and conclusively they weren't flares either.

So believers like myself are actually conducting this investigation more rigourously than the skeptics. The reason why I believe, is because the skeptics already believe by default that a conventional explanation can be applied to each and every case. The very idea it could constitute an explanation outside the conventional means doesn't even cross the skeptics mind. And we are the one's being called ''nuts'' because of it.

 

[Reiku]

The governor of Arizona originally washed the claims away with his team as being a load of hoolah and made a mockery of the UFO nuts concerning what happened in Pheonix. The Governor actually witnessed the event first hand and became quite ashamed of his actions. He then started to admit there was something otherworldly about the lights, and even states at the end of this documentary http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08NudZZCH90&feature=related that the lights could not have flares. I have shown they couldn't have been chinese lantern.

The only nuts I really see are the skeptics, who believe in such childish explanations. They should all be stuck in a play pen, with sand and rattles.

 

[phlogistician]

Attack the evidence please, not the people.

The woman the wrote the book is a flake. She looked at some lights in the sky and claimed she could feel an intelligence looking back at her.

That is complete and utter fabrication. I do not trust ANYTHING ELSE she has to say.

Oh, on evidence, a guy with a telescope looked at the Phoenix lights and saw aeroplanes. How's that for evidence?

 

[phlogistician]

I can't help but feel my questions have stumped you.

Simply the organisations that need secrecy use misinformation. Little green en visiting Earth was just such a smokescreen. I'd like to think people aren't gullible enough to entertain that any longer.

 

[Reiku]

Simply the organisations that need secrecy use misinformation. Little green en visiting Earth was just such a smokescreen. I'd like to think people aren't gullible enough to entertain that any longer.

That is not answering my questions. That is you simply reinstating your last beliefs. Comon phlog, if you are going to play, atleast play fair. Answer my questions properly.

 

[Reiku]

The woman the wrote the book is a flake. She looked at some lights in the sky and claimed she could feel an intelligence looking back at her.

That is complete and utter fabrication. I do not trust ANYTHING ELSE she has to say.

Oh, on evidence, a guy with a telescope looked at the Phoenix lights and saw aeroplanes. How's that for evidence?

I get it that you are a skeptic. You don't need to be a jerk about it. The video's in the documentary speak for themselves. The professionals who analyse the lights and rule out flares are completely independant of her own beliefs.

Besides, her own opinions on ''how she felt'' is hardly convincing evidence. You are the one who made a thread to discredit UFO nuts... atleast show you have the intelligence to hold up a proper arguement against a believer. All I see are some very weak counterarguements and attack people, not the evidence, which is a no-no in anyone's book.

 

[phlogistician]

Well I now I know you are a typical skeptic.

Can I also state that the objects in your video do not remain equally equidistant from each other. The space between them changes drastically in the matter of seconds.

And I posted that video in reference to the three lights the MD said looked back at her with some intelligence, NOT the Phoenix lights video.

The MD described the lights keeping a defined form, just like the paper of a chinese lantern does, and the lights dimming and winking out, just like chinese lanterns do, so I posted a vid of chinese lanterns,....

I don't need discernment. You need proper scientific measure.

Ha, that's funny, considering I studied physics at University and then worked in a Physics department with Postgrads for four years. But to bring the scientific method to bear, requires there's something we can measure. There isn't anything we can get quantitative data on wrt UFOs, is there?

And yes, you need discernment. That MD is a flake and Bob Lazar is a liar. You need to avoid material that incorporates these people. It's pop trash for retards who watch the SiFi channel. It is not real.

 

[Reiku]

''Oh, on evidence, a guy with a telescope looked at the Phoenix lights and saw aeroplanes. How's that for evidence? ''

Proof please.

 

[Reiku]

And if it was planes, why did you say it was chinese lanterns... sounds like your full of shit.

 

[Reiku]

And I posted that video in reference to the three lights the MD said looked back at her with some intelligence, NOT the Phoenix lights video.

The MD described the lights keeping a defined form, just like the paper of a chinese lantern does, and the lights dimming and winking out, just like chinese lanterns do, so I posted a vid of chinese lanterns,....



Ha, that's funny, considering I studied physics at University and then worked in a Physics department with Postgrads for four years. But to bring the scientific method to bear, requires there's something we can measure. There isn't anything we can get quantitative data on wrt UFOs, is there?

And yes, you need discernment. That MD is a flake and Bob Lazar is a liar. You need to avoid material that incorporates these people. It's pop trash for retards who watch the SiFi channel. It is not real.

The intelligence ''is related to the pheonix lights'' --- but stop holding onto that. I don't see why you are holding onto this. Assume with the facts of the evidence. Attack like evidence, not the people! What part of this do you not understand???

And just because you have ''studied physics at university'' does not make your claim any more strengthed or not. Stanton Friedman is a nuclear physicist and a UFO proponent. How do you say to that one?

 

[Reiku]

And I also made a point of saying Bob lazar was a crank. Why you bringing him back into the subject? He was never really part of this talk anyway.