Show Yourself!
- Thread starter (Q)
- Start date
RoyLennigan
Registered Senior Member
i think it would be similar to the book 'contact' where we'd recieve a message that we'd have to decifer to understand. and then we'd send a message back. sort of like cosmic instant messaging. only 'instant' means a few years at the least.
Yeah, Mecca, Medina, Jerusalem, Vatican City, Washington D.C. or during some world meeting, wherever the location happens to be.
I'd rather it not be the relgious cities though because you'd then have half of em commit suicide for worshipping aliens, then the other half becoming fanatical and following their alien god's every order.
- N
I'd rather it not be the relgious cities though because you'd then have half of em commit suicide for worshipping aliens, then the other half becoming fanatical and following their alien god's every order.
- N
They should abduct and observe us for years, never revealing themselves to everyone in the world. 
No seriously.. in this day and age, I would stay away from America. President Bush (after 9-11) would fear their spacecraft was a terrorist ploy.
I think it's much more difficult than people realize for another life form to "prove their existance to everyone". France would be a good place. No chance for military action.
No seriously.. in this day and age, I would stay away from America. President Bush (after 9-11) would fear their spacecraft was a terrorist ploy.
I think it's much more difficult than people realize for another life form to "prove their existance to everyone". France would be a good place. No chance for military action.
Brownfield, TX. We've got a nice big brown field for them to land in, and I want to greet them personally when they show up. Cuss them out a little for taking so damn long about it.
btimsah said:No seriously.. in this day and age, I would stay away from America. President Bush (after 9-11) would fear their spacecraft was a terrorist ploy.
"we have dealt with your kind before, in our favorite patriotic movies...prepare to be smoked out of your hidey holes, E.T..... we will not tolerate this terrorist method you have used on our anuses for decades! prepare to be freed from your oppressive way of life!!!"
You'd have to remember that if they do exist, they don't know what's going on enough to pick "A good time" to show themselves. If they wanted to make themselves known, they'd prolly land in a heavily populated area.
If they wanted to land somewhere they thought would be of significance to us (though where ever they landed would instantly be significant) they would probably choose a place with big, monolithic structures. That would most likely mean someplace like Egypt.
Of course, this is all speculation, as we have no clue if aliens are even capable of coming here.
JD
If they wanted to land somewhere they thought would be of significance to us (though where ever they landed would instantly be significant) they would probably choose a place with big, monolithic structures. That would most likely mean someplace like Egypt.
Of course, this is all speculation, as we have no clue if aliens are even capable of coming here.
JD
Land on the Moon, and beam a message from there. It's a nice, safe distance, and people can look up, and know ET is just 250,000 miles away, and get used to the idea that 'we are not alone' for a while, before the species actually meet.
'Culture Shock' could set off all sorts of civil unrest, with various doomsday prophesizers sparking mayhem. I'd hope the aliens had managed situations like this before!
'Culture Shock' could set off all sorts of civil unrest, with various doomsday prophesizers sparking mayhem. I'd hope the aliens had managed situations like this before!
Surely. However, I don't know if they can ever adequately prepare for the fear humanity is capable of.phlogistician said:
Ironically, if the aliens landed on the moon, they'd undoubtedly be somewhat puzzled by the Earth's first request for knowledge: "Can you send us down some photographs of the Sea of Tranquility, to prove that we've been there?phlogistician said:
Then, when they did, the Moon Hoax people would say "Aliens in cahoots with Government and NASA!!"
M
Mr Anonymous
Guest
kazbadan said:Someone said : washington DC...sorry but not in that place! Thats in hollywood movies. I would say: Africa, where they coudl offer some help
Actually the Washington DC bit apparently did happen, or many somethings did a splendidly fine impression. Back in the 50's the capitol was buzzed over the course of one weekend by very bright, apparently intelligently guided objects, dozens of the things apparently. Thousands of people witnessed them, Eisenhower even went on record acknowledging the incident during the course of a press conference, made the headlines all over the country.
They came, they caused enormous speculation... they buggered off again.
A rather similar incident took place over the capital of New Zealand circa 1976/77. Latterly they seem to favour Phoenix for some ungodly reason.
Edit -
Actually, it was 1952 and that would have been president Truman, not Eisenhower, and the incident repeated itself the following week. >tsk!< My memory....
Last edited by a moderator:
Maj. Gen. John Samford, the Air Force's director of intelligence explains the dc sightings......
He arrived in Room 3E-869 precisely at 4, accompanied by Ruppelt and several other officials. He opened with a rambling monologue on the history of UFOs, which, he noted, dated "to biblical times." He mentioned UFO sightings in 1846 but never got around to the UFO sightings of 1952.
When reporters asked about the Washington sightings, Samford told a story about radar picking up a flock of ducks in Japan in 1950. When they asked if radar at National and Andrews had seen the same blips simultaneously, he speculated about the definition of the word "simultaneously." When they asked if the UFOs could be material objects, he mused about the definition of the word "material." When they asked if the F-94 pilot who chased the strange light was a qualified observer, he wondered about the meaning of the word "qualified."
Speaking about what that pilot saw, Samford uttered a sentence that ought to have a place in the Bureaucratic Gibberish Hall of Fame: "That very likely is one that sits apart and says insufficient measurement, insufficient association with other things, insufficient association with other probabilities for it to do any more than to join that group of sightings that we still hold in front of us as saying no."
Along the way, Samford mentioned the "temperature inversion" theory -- that a layer of hot air in the sky might have caused radar to mistake things on the ground for flying objects. First, he said it was a "possibility." Later, he said it was "about a 50-50 proposition." Then he said it was a "probable" explanation.link
and there you have it. a govt shill covers up their incompetence
He arrived in Room 3E-869 precisely at 4, accompanied by Ruppelt and several other officials. He opened with a rambling monologue on the history of UFOs, which, he noted, dated "to biblical times." He mentioned UFO sightings in 1846 but never got around to the UFO sightings of 1952.
When reporters asked about the Washington sightings, Samford told a story about radar picking up a flock of ducks in Japan in 1950. When they asked if radar at National and Andrews had seen the same blips simultaneously, he speculated about the definition of the word "simultaneously." When they asked if the UFOs could be material objects, he mused about the definition of the word "material." When they asked if the F-94 pilot who chased the strange light was a qualified observer, he wondered about the meaning of the word "qualified."
Speaking about what that pilot saw, Samford uttered a sentence that ought to have a place in the Bureaucratic Gibberish Hall of Fame: "That very likely is one that sits apart and says insufficient measurement, insufficient association with other things, insufficient association with other probabilities for it to do any more than to join that group of sightings that we still hold in front of us as saying no."
Along the way, Samford mentioned the "temperature inversion" theory -- that a layer of hot air in the sky might have caused radar to mistake things on the ground for flying objects. First, he said it was a "possibility." Later, he said it was "about a 50-50 proposition." Then he said it was a "probable" explanation.link
and there you have it. a govt shill covers up their incompetence
M
Mr Anonymous
Guest
... Yes, that and the official enquiry findings into the Kenneth Arnold sightings do rank somewhat highly when it comes to rank ineptitude - I've singularly yet to fathom quite how a committee of over-nine year olds can take several months to conclude that on the one hand you have a pilot with eyesight keen enough to discern quite clearly a flock of migrating Wild Canadian Geese from a distance of over 100 miles yet singularly incapable of distinguishing between regular migrating Wild Canadian Geese and those other ones we get made out of bright, highly reflective metal....Still, rather scuppers the notion the Government knows, or knew, bugger all about anything really..
Mr Anonymous said:
very true and quite an interesting angle at that. i bet it is imperative from their pov to offer up an explanation. any explanation. one that will keep the masses mollified and off the streets.
govts are probably like us watching helplessly and speculating wildly while et calmly holds their 50th annual airshow over the planet earth
/cackle