Proof for ETI: Part 2
- Thread starter crazymikey
- Start date
- Status
grover
The believers also have nothing intelligent to offer, so where does that leave this thread?
It would appear we have a thread in which everyone participating is wasting their time.
Are you therefore saying that you should be allowed to waste your time on this forum and I not?
What if I were to state that ETI are in fact physical manifestations of invisible pink unicorns? Would you demand I provide evidence as to how I know the unicorns are pink?
And what of the rights of all invisible pink unicorns everywhere? Will you also pass judgment on them?
The believers also have nothing intelligent to offer, so where does that leave this thread?
It would appear we have a thread in which everyone participating is wasting their time.
Are you therefore saying that you should be allowed to waste your time on this forum and I not?
What if I were to state that ETI are in fact physical manifestations of invisible pink unicorns? Would you demand I provide evidence as to how I know the unicorns are pink?
And what of the rights of all invisible pink unicorns everywhere? Will you also pass judgment on them?
BigBlueHead said:
It's somewhat more than that. A tesla coil is, as you said, a transformer, but with a special resonant circuit. It is able to generate very high frequency voltage and power, from just a low voltage current. Now, how it inducts from the magnetic field from the earth, is by forming a natural circuit with the ionsphere via a phantom loop, using ionosphere to complete the circuit at both ends.
What this suggests, is that electrical output can be enhanced by inducting from the field energy itself. We can actually modify magnetic fields into electrical fields. This is why ZPE devices are able to generate there energy. They are not violating the laws of thermodynamics - they are simply using energy that is present. We are also doing that when we generate electricity, but we are extracting less energy than we could with a more sophisticated system. It's actually very simple, it always has been.
Using the principle of a tesla coil, you could create a system of directed energy electric bolt weapons, and more efficient energy devices. I do know that ZPE and overunity devices use Tesla's principles, and can be constructed with regular components. Meanwhile, more advanced ZPE technology uses more advanced systems.
Remember, the energy contained within a vacuum can be more than 10^70. That is how much energy that is available to us. What we produce out of that, is not even peanuts of peanuts.
Hathor said:
Thank you Hathor, and welcome to the forum.
Let's actually do a checklist of ETI/UFO claims and those that have been confirmed. Note: all these claims were made long before they were confirmed.
1. The existence of a shadow government
- http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A20584-2002Feb28?language=printer
- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1850236.stm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26212-2002Mar1?language=printer
Note: It's interesting how they are disclosing this as some new development on the false pretexts of terrorism. Although it is enough that they have disclosed this structure.
2. The existence of black budget, black technology, and technology control
- http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0B17FC3A5B0C748DDDAB0894DA404482
- http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/09/05/wow.tech.black.world/
- http://hotwired.wired.com/collections/encryption/3.11_paul_mcginnis6.html
3. The existence of Anti gravity and ZPE technology
- http://uplink.space.com/showflat.ph...=673267&page=3&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=
- http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/01/28/1043534050248.html
- http://www.janes.com/aerospace/civil/news/jdw/jdw020729_1_n.shtml
4. The existence of advanced ETI technology: nanotechnology; mind control; particle beam weaponary; tractor beams
- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3485918.stm
- http://www.totse.com/en/conspiracy/mind_control/
- http://us.altnews.com.au/article.php?sid=376
- http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1984/jul-aug/roberds.html
- http://www.datafilter.com/mc/nonlethalWeapons.html
- http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/dew.pdf
- http://www.idsa-india.org/SAARCHIVES/SA200102/AN-FEB-7-01.HTML
- http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/abl/abl011.htm
- http://www.guerrillanews.com/forum/...=281083&page=20&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&part=
- http://www.nano.gov/
- http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/tractor_beam_wg_010504.html
- http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/16sep_rightstuff.htm?list433924
5. The existence of government cover-up's of ETI/UFO
http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publications/foi/ufo/ufofilepart1.pdf
http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publications/foi/ufo/ufofilepart2.pdf
http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publications/foi/ufo/ufofilepart3.pdf
http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publications/foi/ufo/ufofilepart5.pdf
6. The existence of ETI
- Not completely confirmed yet. Although one only had to use power of deduction.
That is 5/6 claims confirmed. Meaning the Skeptics have a 17% chance of being right about the non existence of ETI, while the existence of ETI has an 83% chance - approx 5 times more likely.
Hence: It is more rational to support the existence of ETI from the confirmed claims. The skeptics, frankly have little water to swim in.
If I am right, I have already anticipated the skeptical argument: It does not mean, because all other claims have been confirmed, the last claim would be confirmed too. Therefore, untill the claim is not confirmed, it remains unsubstantiated and pseudoscience and crackpot fantasy.
That is partially correct - it does not mean that last claim would be certainly confirmed too. It does mean , however, that the last claim is 5 times more likely to be confirmed.
Now look at this model:
Suppose, there will come a day of disclosure where the believers of ETI and non-believers of ETI will be told the truth. You have been asked to cast your vote in advance before the deadline of disclosure and have been given the following data:
ETI Win: 100% pleasure and 100% immortality
ETI Lose: Nothing
Non ETI Win: Nothing gained and nothing lost
Non ETI Lose: Nothing gained and nothing lost
Odds of ETI winning: 83%
Odds of Non ETI winning: 17%
Now how would someone with a logical mind bet:
If they bet on ETI, and win, they gains everything
If they bet on Non ETI, and lose, they gain nothing
If they bet on ETI, they have an 83% chance of winning
If they bet on Non ETI, they have an 17% chance of winning
Therefore, a person with a logical mind, would bet on ETI, that is 5 times more likely of winning and gaining everything. Than something that is 5 times less likely to win and gaining nothing.
Now, skeptics, are you therefore, illogical?
1. The existence of a shadow government
- http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A20584-2002Feb28?language=printer
- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1850236.stm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26212-2002Mar1?language=printer
Note: It's interesting how they are disclosing this as some new development on the false pretexts of terrorism. Although it is enough that they have disclosed this structure.
2. The existence of black budget, black technology, and technology control
- http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0B17FC3A5B0C748DDDAB0894DA404482
- http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/09/05/wow.tech.black.world/
- http://hotwired.wired.com/collections/encryption/3.11_paul_mcginnis6.html
3. The existence of Anti gravity and ZPE technology
- http://uplink.space.com/showflat.ph...=673267&page=3&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=
- http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/01/28/1043534050248.html
- http://www.janes.com/aerospace/civil/news/jdw/jdw020729_1_n.shtml
4. The existence of advanced ETI technology: nanotechnology; mind control; particle beam weaponary; tractor beams
- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3485918.stm
- http://www.totse.com/en/conspiracy/mind_control/
- http://us.altnews.com.au/article.php?sid=376
- http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1984/jul-aug/roberds.html
- http://www.datafilter.com/mc/nonlethalWeapons.html
- http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/dew.pdf
- http://www.idsa-india.org/SAARCHIVES/SA200102/AN-FEB-7-01.HTML
- http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/abl/abl011.htm
- http://www.guerrillanews.com/forum/...=281083&page=20&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&part=
- http://www.nano.gov/
- http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/tractor_beam_wg_010504.html
- http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/16sep_rightstuff.htm?list433924
5. The existence of government cover-up's of ETI/UFO
http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publications/foi/ufo/ufofilepart1.pdf
http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publications/foi/ufo/ufofilepart2.pdf
http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publications/foi/ufo/ufofilepart3.pdf
http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publications/foi/ufo/ufofilepart5.pdf
6. The existence of ETI
- Not completely confirmed yet. Although one only had to use power of deduction.
That is 5/6 claims confirmed. Meaning the Skeptics have a 17% chance of being right about the non existence of ETI, while the existence of ETI has an 83% chance - approx 5 times more likely.
Hence: It is more rational to support the existence of ETI from the confirmed claims. The skeptics, frankly have little water to swim in.
If I am right, I have already anticipated the skeptical argument: It does not mean, because all other claims have been confirmed, the last claim would be confirmed too. Therefore, untill the claim is not confirmed, it remains unsubstantiated and pseudoscience and crackpot fantasy.
That is partially correct - it does not mean that last claim would be certainly confirmed too. It does mean , however, that the last claim is 5 times more likely to be confirmed.
Now look at this model:
Suppose, there will come a day of disclosure where the believers of ETI and non-believers of ETI will be told the truth. You have been asked to cast your vote in advance before the deadline of disclosure and have been given the following data:
ETI Win: 100% pleasure and 100% immortality
ETI Lose: Nothing
Non ETI Win: Nothing gained and nothing lost
Non ETI Lose: Nothing gained and nothing lost
Odds of ETI winning: 83%
Odds of Non ETI winning: 17%
Now how would someone with a logical mind bet:
If they bet on ETI, and win, they gains everything
If they bet on Non ETI, and lose, they gain nothing
If they bet on ETI, they have an 83% chance of winning
If they bet on Non ETI, they have an 17% chance of winning
Therefore, a person with a logical mind, would bet on ETI, that is 5 times more likely of winning and gaining everything. Than something that is 5 times less likely to win and gaining nothing.
Now, skeptics, are you therefore, illogical?
Last edited:
Let's actually do a checklist of ETI/UFO claims and those that have been confirmed. Note: all these claims were made long before they were confirmed.
Why does Mikey need to deceive everyone to make his point? He posts articles that have absolutely nothing to do with ETI, UFO's or other such nonsense and makes a claim for the confirmation of ETI's existence.
This thread should be closed.
Why does Mikey need to deceive everyone to make his point? He posts articles that have absolutely nothing to do with ETI, UFO's or other such nonsense and makes a claim for the confirmation of ETI's existence.
This thread should be closed.
crazymikey said:
How is this confirmation of UFO/ETI? You didn't even bother showing a correlation and the evidence to back up a correlation... all you did was post some links to secondary sources.
crazymikey said:
"False pretexts of terrorism?" You really have had your head in the sand. While I agree that the neo-conservatives of this age are probably using the terrorism card to further their agenda, there definately is a terroristic threat that can be empirically measured, unlike your "58 alien races."
crazymikey said:
Again, nothing but spurious correlation. There is a more credible reason for black budget than the alien hypothesis crap: national security. But it's obvious that you've fallen head first into the conspiracy theory characteristic of UFO/ETI lore.
crazymikey said:
You call this "confirmation of ETI?" You truly are crazy. You take a few legitimate research and development advancements and sprinkle some UFO/ETI garbage and call it confirmation?
Then, when criticized for calling spurious links "evidence" or "confirmation," you respond by accusing everyone of wanting you to do all the work of "investigation." It seems clear that there's nothing to investigate.
Close the thread.
From the above reply, it seems that really is the case. Sorry Skinwalker, but you ain't got a leg to stand on.
crazymikey,
Tell me this why is your theory free from occam's razor? SkinWalker points out there are many simpler and thus more likely theories for your evidence then Alien conspiracies.
Tell me this why is your theory free from occam's razor? SkinWalker points out there are many simpler and thus more likely theories for your evidence then Alien conspiracies.
WCF, the UFO and Alien evidence I've already provided, tons of it in fact.
Now the checklist only shows how many of the claims made by prior witnesss testimony have been confirmed. Hence, we could use Occams razor, to remove the less likely theory - non existence of ETI, which has a 1/6 chance of being right from the confirmed claims
Now the checklist only shows how many of the claims made by prior witnesss testimony have been confirmed. Hence, we could use Occams razor, to remove the less likely theory - non existence of ETI, which has a 1/6 chance of being right from the confirmed claims
No crazymikey eyewitness testimony counts for nothing, millions of people claim to have seen Santa, that does not make him any less fictitious.
As for UFOs identified by camera and radar, they could be unmarked aircraft (military possibly) they could be plasma spheres or natural unintelligent phenomena or they could be hoaxs set up by pranksters, all of these are more likely evidence over aliens.
As for UFOs identified by camera and radar, they could be unmarked aircraft (military possibly) they could be plasma spheres or natural unintelligent phenomena or they could be hoaxs set up by pranksters, all of these are more likely evidence over aliens.
WCF, eyewitness testimony, first-hand testimony does count for something. Otherwise we could do away with the judicial system.
Radar, camera cases, are in their thousands - explain to me flying craft travelling at Mach 15 and above, detected on multiple radar, with eye witness accounts, and that can be chased across the sky, that intelligently change altitude and change direction - in the 1940's
Explain to me huge glowing indepedence day flying ships, that are seen by thousands, that are shot at for 35 min, and then fly away into the wilderness - in 1941
Explain to me a flying ship travelling at Mach 15, recorded by Edmond Haley, in the 19th century.
Explain to me, how in 1947, multiple witnesses, including intelligence officers, come upon a bizarre debris at Roswell, that does not burn, cut, or dent, and is thin as tin-foil, and are given orders by the man who was in charge of the first nuclear strike, to declare it is a UFO - and a few hours later, it's called a weather baloon. Then the state goes into a state of emergency, and all evidence is consfisticated of all, and armed forced are stationed at the crash site of the "weather baloon" And today we know that material as nanotube technology.
Explain to me what is a flying saucer UFO doing around Mary, beaming a light on her?
Explain to me why do 400+ high brass, scientists, intelligence officers from NSA, CIA, NASA, USAF, would put their jobs, and lives on the line, and claim there is ETI and government cover-ups.
Explain to me why ETI is so unlikely, when it's existence is scientifically supported, and when interstellar travel is scientifically supported.
Explain to me how we have gone from horse-pulled buggies to anti-gravity space ships, mind control, vacuum physics, nanotechnology, particle beam weaponary, quantum computers, tractor beams in 100 years, when we could not even do the same in 1000 years?
If you can explain them all, satisfactorily, then i'll accept there is no ETI.
Radar, camera cases, are in their thousands - explain to me flying craft travelling at Mach 15 and above, detected on multiple radar, with eye witness accounts, and that can be chased across the sky, that intelligently change altitude and change direction - in the 1940's
Explain to me huge glowing indepedence day flying ships, that are seen by thousands, that are shot at for 35 min, and then fly away into the wilderness - in 1941
Explain to me a flying ship travelling at Mach 15, recorded by Edmond Haley, in the 19th century.
Explain to me, how in 1947, multiple witnesses, including intelligence officers, come upon a bizarre debris at Roswell, that does not burn, cut, or dent, and is thin as tin-foil, and are given orders by the man who was in charge of the first nuclear strike, to declare it is a UFO - and a few hours later, it's called a weather baloon. Then the state goes into a state of emergency, and all evidence is consfisticated of all, and armed forced are stationed at the crash site of the "weather baloon" And today we know that material as nanotube technology.
Explain to me what is a flying saucer UFO doing around Mary, beaming a light on her?
Explain to me why do 400+ high brass, scientists, intelligence officers from NSA, CIA, NASA, USAF, would put their jobs, and lives on the line, and claim there is ETI and government cover-ups.
Explain to me why ETI is so unlikely, when it's existence is scientifically supported, and when interstellar travel is scientifically supported.
Explain to me how we have gone from horse-pulled buggies to anti-gravity space ships, mind control, vacuum physics, nanotechnology, particle beam weaponary, quantum computers, tractor beams in 100 years, when we could not even do the same in 1000 years?
If you can explain them all, satisfactorily, then i'll accept there is no ETI.
None of that is supported by evidence and only someone with a very low educational background or mental deficiency would believe that any of it was evidence.
As to "first-hand" testimony in the judicial system, this is rarely relied upon as primary evidence and only used to support or corroborate physical evidence. Again, telling of one's educational level to believe that forensics isn't a MAJOR part of criminalistics.
Most telling is your belief that someone of the 19th century could measure a speed of Mach 15. Each point you've made above, or one similar has been addressed by myself or others throughout your silly threads. Yet you have not been able to show even one "radar report" you claim exists, produce one metalurgic analysis report of the indestructable "tin-foil," explain how 13th through 17th century artists come to believe that religious iconography represents "alien ships" and not "god's light/angels" shining from above (a motif that was borrowed from Greek nikes, by the way), or demonstrate any evidence that current technology is not the culmination of human ingenuity. You are simply wowed by the achievements of the species you reject as capable and speculate greatly on the cosmological importance of that which is around you.
And then you get offended when someone suggests that this fanatacism of yours is a belief system that resembles modern religous thought.
But most of all, you exhibit all the classic signs and symptoms of a pseudoscience proponent. You fail to revise. You appeal to the ancients. You appeal to authority when it suits you, reject it when it doesn't. You shift burden of proof when the going gets tough. You copy/paste crap from other pseudoscience websites because you are wow'ed by it. You believe in conspiracy theories. You rely on spurious correlations. You probably aren't reading this or looking at any citations that others give you since it isn't what you want to hear. You claim those that criticise or question your claims are "ignorant," "not scientists," "pseudo-intellectuals," and "pseudo-skeptics" simply because you cannot live up to their expectations of evidence.
If there are any pseudo-intellectuals on this board, it is you. You pretend to investigate, pretend to understand, pretend to be un-biased, pretend to follow scientific method... etc. But when these pretensions are pointed out, you don't revise your position or even properly refute the arguments. You merely state the opposition doesn't know what they're talking about.
If you want to be taken seriously on a science board, you'll have to act serious.
I've said it before, if you claims have merit, take them to the Astornomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology forum.
As to "first-hand" testimony in the judicial system, this is rarely relied upon as primary evidence and only used to support or corroborate physical evidence. Again, telling of one's educational level to believe that forensics isn't a MAJOR part of criminalistics.
Most telling is your belief that someone of the 19th century could measure a speed of Mach 15. Each point you've made above, or one similar has been addressed by myself or others throughout your silly threads. Yet you have not been able to show even one "radar report" you claim exists, produce one metalurgic analysis report of the indestructable "tin-foil," explain how 13th through 17th century artists come to believe that religious iconography represents "alien ships" and not "god's light/angels" shining from above (a motif that was borrowed from Greek nikes, by the way), or demonstrate any evidence that current technology is not the culmination of human ingenuity. You are simply wowed by the achievements of the species you reject as capable and speculate greatly on the cosmological importance of that which is around you.
And then you get offended when someone suggests that this fanatacism of yours is a belief system that resembles modern religous thought.
But most of all, you exhibit all the classic signs and symptoms of a pseudoscience proponent. You fail to revise. You appeal to the ancients. You appeal to authority when it suits you, reject it when it doesn't. You shift burden of proof when the going gets tough. You copy/paste crap from other pseudoscience websites because you are wow'ed by it. You believe in conspiracy theories. You rely on spurious correlations. You probably aren't reading this or looking at any citations that others give you since it isn't what you want to hear. You claim those that criticise or question your claims are "ignorant," "not scientists," "pseudo-intellectuals," and "pseudo-skeptics" simply because you cannot live up to their expectations of evidence.
If there are any pseudo-intellectuals on this board, it is you. You pretend to investigate, pretend to understand, pretend to be un-biased, pretend to follow scientific method... etc. But when these pretensions are pointed out, you don't revise your position or even properly refute the arguments. You merely state the opposition doesn't know what they're talking about.
If you want to be taken seriously on a science board, you'll have to act serious.
I've said it before, if you claims have merit, take them to the Astornomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology forum.
Skinwalker, like I told you, you don't have a leg to stand on anymore. Now, you're even dealing in open insults. You have become so desperate. Next time I respond to the contents of your post, is when you say something worthy of addressing.
Now, if you don't mind, those questions are for WCF. You've had your chance, and failed miserably. So, I would to like to see how others deal with those cases.
Now, if you don't mind, those questions are for WCF. You've had your chance, and failed miserably. So, I would to like to see how others deal with those cases.
No really Persol? Damn, and I thought we destroyed their mothership with our windows 95 virus
crazymikey,
SkinWalker answer my questions for me.
I got questions for you:
How could every goverment on earth be keeping aliens a secret?
Why would these aliens look humanoid? Why don’t they look like octopi or something totally non-terrestrial? Two eyes, a nose, mouth, head, two arms, two lags, ect to unlikely.
Why would these aliens need to constantly abducted people, breed human alien hybrids in human women, why not simply extract our DNA and grow their own clones? Why would there biotech worse then ours???
Humens can’t even reproduce with chimps how the heck could a alien with a totally foreign biochemistry even reproduce with us!?!?
Why not do a MRI over an anal probing, or use micro-robots, both of which we have, why would aliens from another star system have worse medical technology then us?
Why not render all the abductise unconscious so they have no hidden memories of this, again we do this in surgery why can’t aliens?
Why mutilate cows, I mean seriously why???
Why fly around so erratically, do some of them have a drinking problem or what?
Why fly around in such shiny well light spacecraft and do a lot of acrobatic stunts?
Why make crops circles, don’t they think of better ways to communicate?
SkinWalker answer my questions for me.
I got questions for you:
How could every goverment on earth be keeping aliens a secret?
Why would these aliens look humanoid? Why don’t they look like octopi or something totally non-terrestrial? Two eyes, a nose, mouth, head, two arms, two lags, ect to unlikely.
Why would these aliens need to constantly abducted people, breed human alien hybrids in human women, why not simply extract our DNA and grow their own clones? Why would there biotech worse then ours???
Humens can’t even reproduce with chimps how the heck could a alien with a totally foreign biochemistry even reproduce with us!?!?
Why not do a MRI over an anal probing, or use micro-robots, both of which we have, why would aliens from another star system have worse medical technology then us?
Why not render all the abductise unconscious so they have no hidden memories of this, again we do this in surgery why can’t aliens?
Why mutilate cows, I mean seriously why???
Why fly around so erratically, do some of them have a drinking problem or what?
Why fly around in such shiny well light spacecraft and do a lot of acrobatic stunts?
Why make crops circles, don’t they think of better ways to communicate?
WellCookedFetus said:
Then, even you have not answered the questions I asked you.
You will find all of those questioned have been answered already in other topics.
Not every government is involved with ETI. The secret is kept by disinformation, compartmentalization of information, media and social sanitation as well as threat and assassinations.
There are a multitide of different alien species, some look hominoid and some don't. While Greys have some similarities to us, they also have a great many differences. Yet, you would find Nordics, hard to believe, as they look almost identical to us, but almost like gods: 7 feet tall, muscular, blue almond eyes, blonde hair, and perfect features - Hitlers, elite children - he did not just fabricate the "Aryan" race.
Other reasons for the bi-pedal homonoid form being common in the universe, is simply because it is an efficient evolutionary design and configuration. There maybe other designs, of course, we do not know what those designs are at this stage. I'm sure the government does though
Why they abduct humans, is best know to them. It could be because we provide them genetic material for research etc, or they are trying to alter our genome. It's best you ask them
Who said they reproduce with us? From what I hear, greys no longer have a reproductive or disgestive tract.
That is a cliche. They do have much advanced medical technology, because they can make laser-precise incisions and implant us with neural chips. Now, what they do with the data, is again, something only they know better.
I'm sure they can, and perhaps, they deliberately leave them with memories of the encounter. Again, for reasons, best know to them.
Cow DNA is almost identical to Human DNA.
Which ones fly erratically? Elaborate for me.
How do you know, they cannot go into invisibility mode, or change colour of the craft? Some of these UFO's people see, are actually guided by humans or are humans tests of the technology. While some are ETI, and it appears ETI want's to be seen, yet only to an extent that raises awareness.
I never said they make crop circles. Yet if they did, it would probably be the very same reasons as leaving memories in abductees, allowing mass sightings etc - to raise awareness of their existence - and again, for reasons better known to them.
I am not a contactee, and nor do I have an alliance with ETI, so I cannot tell you exactly why they do it, although I can speculate on it. Yet, simply because you do not understand their logic or way of thinking, does not mean they don't exist. If that was the case no one on this planet would exist.
Last edited:
no man the gray look way to much like us, the biped design is not common inf act, no other life on earth other then are close reletive even has a body plan like ours.
Why don't the aliens happen to talk to othe countries?
If they have technology so inferior that they can be detected and there ways seem stupid and antiquated by our technological standards they certainly aren’t intelligent or at least sane. But hey for all we know this might be proof the hitch hikers guide to the galaxy got it right on the money.
then you should read some books about abductees and what they say happened to them.
There is no reason to mutilate cows, period! They could grow cows on ther ships or at least their organs; they could do all their experiments on those easy, uncontaminated clean specimens.
Why is it that on many of the UFO video they fly around erratically?
Why don't aliens talk to us directly, at least the majority of the human populace?
Why don't the aliens happen to talk to othe countries?
If they have technology so inferior that they can be detected and there ways seem stupid and antiquated by our technological standards they certainly aren’t intelligent or at least sane. But hey for all we know this might be proof the hitch hikers guide to the galaxy got it right on the money.
then you should read some books about abductees and what they say happened to them.
There is no reason to mutilate cows, period! They could grow cows on ther ships or at least their organs; they could do all their experiments on those easy, uncontaminated clean specimens.
Why is it that on many of the UFO video they fly around erratically?
Why don't aliens talk to us directly, at least the majority of the human populace?
- Status