The Proof for ETI

[crazymikey]

Also, perhaps you should actually put his line into context...

Clearly the present exponential growth cannot continue indefinitely. So what will happen? One possibility is that we wipe ourselves out completely by some disaster such as a nuclear war. There is a sick joke that the reason we have not been visited by extra-terrestrials is that when a civilization reaches our stage of development it becomes unstable and destroys itself. Of course it is possible that UFO's really do contain aliens as many people believe, and the government is hushing it up" I wouldn't like to comment on that. Personally I believe there is a different explanation why we have not been contacted, but I won't go into it here. However, even without that, there is a very real danger that we will kill everything on this planet now that we have the technological power to do so. Even if we don't destroy ourselves completely, there is a possibility that we might descend into a state of brutalization and barbarity like the opening scene of "Terminator"

That is in fact a valid argument. I do not dispute that, it is possible. Perhaps, before we can become capable of interstellar travel, we destroy ourselves, or are destroyed by a natural catastrophe. However, is it reasonabe to generalize and say all civilizations in the universe will do the same? For instance, had events allowed it, we would have reached the nuclear age many centuries earlier. If we had, we may not even be existing today. Thus, it is perhaps possible to survive future technological milestones.

I have this theory, that technology is directly proportional to level of civilization, it's intelligence and its spirituality, in conjunction with the stimuli. In layman terms, the more intelligent a civilization becomes, the more peaceful and civil it becomes. Otherwise it is at risk of destroying itself.

Then if you consider the theory of parallel universes, where we may have even destroyed ourselves already in nuclear war, then it means, that if we destroy ourselves in this world, there will always be a world, where we didn't. Therefore some civilizations could stand the test of time.

 

[Persol]

Do you enjoy changing the topic? The point was that your original quote didn't actually mean what it looked to mean. In context, it was a much less powerful sentence. In fact, he was claiming specifically that we HAVEN'T been contacted.

This is a common method of the poor man's UFO 'researcher', who give the actual ones a bad name. The majority of your links, especially The Disclosure Project, fall into this category of 'research by false innuendo'.

Planning to go into political sciences any time soon?

 

[crazymikey]

Such as. According to you they both gain 'nothing but ridicule'. For whatever reason, people still claim it. Lazar is the perfet example of this.

Such as:

Science and logic supports the existence of aliens
There are hundreds of thousads of UFO sighting
11% of them cannot be explained
There are thousands of abduction cases - (consult Budd Hopkins)
There have been sightings throughout history

More reasons, which I will explain in the course of this thread.

But this in NO WAY supports your claims. The Disclosure Project does the same thing, as many of their claims are simply people opinions.

There is an difference between an opinion, and a claim. Nor are these average joes.

And what do these 400 witnesses in CIA, NSA, NASA, Government, USAF, US army, us Navy gain. I ask you again. Answer, the question head on.[/b]
The same thing that people who see bigfoot and Elvis have to gain. For WHATEVER reason, people make claims that will get ridicule. They do it anyway.

You have evaded the question once again. Just tell me straight out, what those reasons are.

The point is that of the people listed, the credibility rating is low. Especially when you consider that their claims have been taken out of context and exagerated (such as you did with Hawkings). Many in no way offer evidence or even claim to have seen it, but they are used as support for the cause anyway.

They are not making claims to have seen it? Yet it is a witness testimony? Hear yourself. I suggest you actually see and read what you are talking about

 

[Persol]

I have no idea what the reasons are, and I could care less what the reasons are. People lie, knowing that they will be caught. This isn't at question, as we've all known someone who's done it. Why they do it is secondary to the issue. Showing that individuals make a habit out of this does not lend credence to their claims.

They are not making claims to have seen it? Yet it is a witness testimony? Hear yourself.
I did hear it, when this was mention months ago. Several of the people didn't talk about UFOs/ETs at all (such as Carol Rosin). Several more said things along the lines of 'I heard from a guy who was a cousin of a guy who knew the brother of somebody who dissected an alien."

 

[crazymikey]

How can I be sure you do I am sure however that Disclosure project does have the names, 21 of them I have seen already, and at less than 6 times your fee.
I'm offering 25 times more names for only 6 times the fee. More bang for your buck. If you want the information, it's at your fingertips. I am not here to convince you. You are a free soul, if you want to seek the truth, you seek it on your own

Again issue of credibility ABC vs Cartoon Network

 

[Persol]

Perhaps if you'd address even one of the Disclosure Projects false claims/witness that I listed I might take you seriously.

 

[crazymikey]

I have no idea what the reasons are, and I could care less what the reasons are. People lie, knowing that they will be caught. This isn't at question, as we've all known someone who's done it. Why they do it is secondary to the issue. Showing that individuals make a habit out of this does not lend credence to their claims.

If you don't know why they would "lie" how do you know it's a lie? You have no case, if you can't produce a motive.

I did hear it, when this was mention months ago. Several of the people didn't talk about UFOs/ETs at all (such as Carol Rosin). Several more said things along the lines of 'I heard from a guy who was a cousin of a guy who knew the brother of somebody who dissected an alien."

That is heresay, from what I recall, each of them, made a claim that was directly related to them, and the common denominator of all their claims was ETI based. They are not fools, that they would join an organization that projects itself as a disclosure of ETI, when they have nothing to do with it.

Most of the 2001 conference video, was about UFO sightings, alien technology, and one argument about the weaponization of space.

 

[Persol]

That is heresay
Well actually, it's not. Look it up.

from what I recall, each of them, made a claim that was directly related to them, and the common denominator of all their claims was ETI based.
Perhaps you should listen again.

that they would join an organization that projects itself as a disclosure of ETI, when they have nothing to do with it.
As I've pointed out, several of the people The Disclosure Project list want nothing to do with it. MUFON themselves have denounced the site.

If you don't know why they would "lie" how do you know it's a lie? You have no case, if you can't produce a motive.
Because in the past they've been shown to have lied about other extraordinary things. They didn't have an obvious motive then either.

 

[crazymikey]

Do you enjoy changing the topic? The point was that your original quote didn't actually mean what it looked to mean. In context, it was a much less powerful sentence. In fact, he was claiming specifically that we HAVEN'T been contacted.

Well, as I did not say, he was claiming them, that should answer your question. Incidentally, he did not say, it was unlikely What is your basis for saying it is "unlikely"?

Can you please deal with questions head on.

 

[Persol]

"Personally I believe there is a different explanation why we have not been contacted"
If he thought it was likely, would he have followed it up with the above statement? Regardless, the unlikely was my comment... which should also have been obvious seeing as how I was honest enough to actually put the context of what he was saying down, and not just extract a single line as you have done.

 

[crazymikey]

Perhaps you should listen again

I have a good memory I even remember how I was fretting over, how most of them were only talking about seeing UFO's. It was 2 months back.

that they would join an organization that projects itself as a disclosure of ETI, when they have nothing to do with it.

As I've pointed out, several of the people The Disclosure Project list want nothing to do with it. MUFON themselves have denounced the site.

And some have praised this site, and this movement. Opinions are a dime a dozen.

Please outline the names of several. As for the 21 present at the 2001 conference, they must be blind, as the claims were made right in front of their face.

If you don't know why they would "lie" how do you know it's a lie? You have no case, if you can't produce a motive.
Because in the past they've been shown to have lied about other extraordinary things. They didn't have an obvious motive then either.

 

[crazymikey]

"Personally I believe there is a different explanation why we have not been contacted"
If he thought it was likely, would he have followed it up with the above statement? Regardless, the unlikely was my comment... which should also have been obvious seeing as how I was honest enough to actually put the context of what he was saying down, and not just extract a single line as you have done.

Yes, the unlikely was your comment, that you linked to Hawking's comment, so who is taking it out of context? What Hawking's explanation is, could be anything, so I would rather not speculate what he meant.

Now, how about explaining why you think it is unlikely. What is your basis for this statement.

 

[Persol]

Your claim is that these people's comments are evidence. I showed how several of the people listed have been inconsistent in the comments used as evidence, how others have been demonstrated to lie on similar topics (without any obvioud reason to do so), and how some comments have been taken out of context. The fact that The Disclosure Project then continues to use these people as 'evidence' drops their credibility to ZERO.

Please outline the names of several.
John Callahan
Edgar Mitchell
Don Phillips
Robert Wood
Probably others who do not realize they are even on the list.

 

[crazymikey]

Fair enough, I will research further into your claims. The Disclosure project, is not the only proof of the Aliens you know

That's only 4 names out of 400, however

In the meanwhile, can you answer the question I've asked you three times already:

Now, how about explaining why you think it is unlikely. What is your basis for the statement, that it is unlikely that UFO's are alien based. Please support your claim.

 

[Persol]

That's only 4 names out of 400, however
4 names which case serious doubt on that site's integrity. Especially combined with the errors other witnesses have made in their statements. (Already outlined above)

What is your basis for the statement, that it is unlikely that UFO's are alien based.
A complete lack of evidence, science, or reason. The same reason I think it is unlikely that UFOs are Santa based. Aliens are the 'Gods' of today. Don't know what it is, must be aliens.

Aliens exist. Likely.
Aliens can travel in space. Possible.
Aliens can reach Earth (and want to). Who knows?
Aliens can reach Earth, but still seem unable to avoid crashing. Unlikely.
Aliens can reach Earth, seem unable to avoid crashing, government manages to hide it. Damn near impossible.
Aliens can reach Earth, seem unable to avoid crashing, government manages to hide it, and don't attempt to use the secret miracle technology to make a buck. You're kidding, right?

Not that any of this has anything to do with your claim of evidence.....

 

[crazymikey]

As I suspected, your claims are total hogwash.

First and foremost, Edgar Mitchell DOES demand disclosure and full openess from the government. According to the questionable item you produced.

Although I firmly believe it is time for openness and disclosure by government,

However, Steven Greer has has wrongly misused his claim without his consent. However Mitchell's original claim DOES to have knowledge to do with UFO's:

I, nor any crew I was on (I was on three Apollo crews), received any briefing before or after flights on UFO events, saw anything in space suggesting UFOs or structures on the moon, etc. We did it just like we said in official reports. My only claim to knowledge of these events is from the individuals, mostly of yesteryear, who were in government, intelligence, or military; were there, saw what they saw, and now believe it should be made public.

Further more, how credible is this news. Do you have another source. I do not quite trust Rense.com. Does anybody?

Secondly: Out of the names you quoted, none of the others have dropped out. I asked you distinctly, name the several that have dropped out.

Luckily, I have found transcripts and summaries of all of the testimonials and the names of the witnesses, saving me from downloading the video again!
There is no doubt in my mind now, that they are speaking anything but the truth in totality. I will produce the testimonials here, for you, and all to see.

Here is a full list of witnesses: (not full 400)

Brigadier General Stephen Lovekin: Army National Guard Reserves
Merle Shane McDow: US Navy Atlantic Command
Lt. Col. Charles Brown: US Air Force (Ret.)
Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt: US Marine Corps
Maj. George A. Filer, III: US Air Force (Ret.)
Nick Pope: British Ministry of Defense Official
Larry Warren: US Air Force, Security Officer
Sgt. Clifford Stone: US Army
Master Sgt. Dan Morris: US Air Force, NRO Operative...

http://www.disclosureproject.org/aboutexecsumm.htm

 

[Rick]

Zion, what is this "get a life", don't we already have lives, and choose to live it in a way we choose. If I choose to live it, by seeking truth, then that is my choice.

Good bye to you.

Sounds Like Fox Mulder...Oh yeah ,the Truth is out there... yeah please continue.

bye!

 

[crazymikey]

Zion, if this disclosure benefited you, would you be interested?

 

[craterchains (Norval]

Hello crazymikey
Welcome to the wonderful world of Internet information control agents. The intense attacks on ones that put forth information about the ETI’s give it all away. The tactics and techniques are always the same. It is very obvious that disclosure is not wanted. Those agents can only knock a few rocks lose, but they will never bring down the mountain of evidence that exists about ETI’s. Keep on seeking, keep on asking, you will find out.

 

[Tononi6]

For those of us who have been lucky enough to see Flying Saucers at close quarters, say within 100 yards, there exists no doubt that there is a cover up. Reading books on this subject and listening to other people broadens and enhances ones knowledge; but you will never, ever convince someone who asks for 'proof' when proof of a tangible variety is scooped away to secure locations and proof of an anecdotal nature is suppressed by contractual obligations imposing secrecy, between government, the military and outside contractors.
So it is difficult for those who have not had an encounter to believe that this subject is worthy of serious consideration. At the same time, it is my belief that one or two people on this board are absolutely determined, for whatever reason, not to believe; or to say that they do not believe.