Why us?

[bignos]

So here we have the conspiracy card, which is a well worn favourite of those people who have an undying wish to believe ion ETs and their presence here on earth but have no rational evidence to support such a belief system. I'm sorry but the whole UFO movement is simply another aspect of human beings to express a need in religious experience of powerful being (aliens, demons, etc.) to feed their primitive instincts. Why has there never been compelling evidence in terms of photographic or video records of anything genuinely ET? We are told that there was a movie made of the Rendlesham UFO but that it was confiscated. How convenient!

What surprises me is that someone of the stature of Gordon Cooper said he witnessed UFOs. Does this insanity affect anyone?

why waste your time enrolling and commenting on here? i dont get it...

[webplodder]

The reason I comment here is to put forward the alternative argument to test the many claims of people who have witnessed UFOs because without placing such claims under the most stringent examination they remain dubious. Personally, I want some UFOs to be of ET origin but whenever one examines the cases closely enough things seem to simply evaporate into nothingness as there is never anything that could be considered as scientifically valid. This, then, tends to raise the question about whether the witnesses are seeing things that they misinterpret or even make-up and such a hypothesis appears to fit the facts more than the ET one. Pilots, scientists, police officers, etc. are, after all, just human and therefore subject to human misperceptions so the argument that credible witnesses report UFOs does not really stand up, in my view.

[David Bryant]

What a specious load of faeces!
You think your scepticism gives you the right to question the sanity of people like Gordon Cooper, Joe Walker, Deke Slayton, Ed Mitchell, Jim McDivitt and ME???
I haven't been to Australia: that doesn't give me carte blanche to insult people who tell me they've experienced the place personally.

You write: 'there is never anything that could be considered as scientifically valid'
Well: instead of remaining just another anonymous sniper, give us your name and proof of the scientific qualifications you pretend to possess.

I agree with bignos: you're just a cynical time waster with NOTHING intelligent or original to say.

[David Bryant]

I'm ahead of you 'Silvertop' (Another anonymous poster, albeit a moderator!)
If I reply 'The Edwards AFB incident', you'll point out GC only saw the film, not the actual craft. (As if that devalues the whole account!)
Cooper reported several other UFOs, beginning in 1951:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Cooper#UFO_claims

[Ignis Fatuus]

[webplodder]

David Bryant, I have never accused anyone who has seen a UFO of being insane; I have seen UFOs myself on several occasions and could not explain what they were but that does not mean they were ET visitors, just something unusual I could not account for. Experimental aircraft or very unusual atmospheric phenomena could be one explanation. Hoaxes could be another. The famous 'Phoenix Lights' case, for example, is now thought to have merely been flares dropped by USAF planes on manoeuvres. Also, since when do you have to possess academic qualifications to pass an informed view about UFOs?

The RFI is all based on hearsay, no matter how compelling the witnesses thought what they saw were ET in origin. My conclusion is that a) It was all simply made up; b) It was a cover story for something that occurred those nights that would have been embarrassing to the US and UK governments had the truth come out; c) An elaborate hoax; d) An extraordinary occurrence of natural events that appeared as if something 'out of this world' was happening.

[webplodder]

I'm ahead of you 'Silvertop' (Another anonymous poster, albeit a moderator!)
If I reply 'The Edwards AFB incident', you'll point out GC only saw the film, not the actual craft. (As if that devalues the whole account!)
Cooper reported several other UFOs, beginning in 1951:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Cooper#UFO_claims

I do not wish to upset you but here is another example of a UFO case that has very circumstantial evidence. Cooper never actually saw the craft so that one possible explanation is that the photographers were simply conning him by artificially creating an image on the film with the intention of gaining public recognition by using Cooper's celebrity status. You will also notice that Cooper said he never actually saw the movie film that was taken of the UFO! Case closed, I think.

Why has Randi never had to pay $1,000,000 to anyone providing solid evidence of paranormal phenomena??

[David Bryant]

I have never accused anyone who has seen a UFO of being insane

What surprises me is that someone of the stature of Gordon Cooper said he witnessed UFOs. Does this insanity affect anyone?

Weblodder: if you can't be sensible, at least be consistent. Also: you were the one calling for UFOs to be' validated scientifically'. As we all know, I AM a professional scientist and can therefore apply scientific rigour to my sightings and to my analysis of other people's. Can you? Or do you just bring prejudice to the party?

Cooper said that he examined the film and its contents before sending it off and neither he nor the two photographers achieved any fame / notoriety or financial reward from the Edwards event. I feel the fact that Cooper was always adamant he never saw a UFO during his Mercury mission suggests he was a reliable witness not prone to exaggeration.

I have seen a number of UFOs: on one occasion I watched a half-vic of three pass from horizon to horizon. I was standing at a bus stop with a large group of women, all of whom saw the objects, all of whom were 'excited' by what they saw. These objects were METALLIC, were obviously INTELLIGENTLY controlled and were NOT terrestrial in origin: this was forty years ago, so had they been US / Soviet machines, we'd know about it by now!

Do I believe GC's report from Edwards refers to an extra-terrestrial object? Yes, for the reason mentioned above. I assume many readers of this forum have read 'Haunted Skies' by John Hanson & Dawn Holloway: the two volumes so far published are FULL of compelling descriptions by reputable individuals of what can not realistically be thought of as meteorological phenomena / secret aircraft / hallucinations etc etc.

[webplodder]

David Bryant, if we accept the ET hypothesis then 1) How on earth did they get here as the enormous distances between star systems is going to make inter-stellar travel insurmountable, not only in my view but in the view of many scientists?; 2) Even assuming they had the ability to get here why would they expend the resources to visit a primitive society - what would they have to gain?; 3) Why has there been no physical evidence of their presence that cannot be attributed to any other source?; 4) If they are here why haven't they made proper contact with the appropriate authorities? 5) Where do they go when they are observed to either 'disappear' or speed away at tremendous velocities? 6) Why is there not one clear image of one of these 'craft' that leaves no doubt about their authenticity?

Just doesn't stack up, does it?

If you did see an intelligently controlled metallic object then may I respectfully suggest that it may have been either an experimental aircraft or some kind of elaborate hoax?

BTW, when I said 'Does this insanity affect anyone' I did not mean that people who see UFOs are insane.

[Observer]

Perhaps they got here via a 'Worm Hole'

Obs

[David Bryant]

More undistributed premises!

1) How on earth did they get here as the enormous distances between star systems is going to make inter-stellar travel insurmountable, not only in my view but in the view of many scientists?

Firstly, unless you are a cosmologist / physicist / rocket scientist, your opinion is of no value! Secondly: who are these 'many scientists'? I've never, ever read that interstellar travel presents insurmountable problems. The nearest star to the Earth is only four years and change away at light speed. At the fastest velocities so far achieved by ion-driven projectiles, the trip would take 57,000 years.
More importantly: how does extraterrestrial = interstellar? It might be that UFOs are exploring the Earth from bases within the solar system

2) Even assuming they had the ability to get here why would they expend the resources to visit a primitive society - what would they have to gain?

Well that's just plain silly! So Europeans didn't spend centuries visiting 'primitive societies'? Or 29 billion exploring the Moon? What is gained is knowledge! Let me commend the thought to you!

3) Why has there been no physical evidence of their presence that cannot be attributed to any other source?

How can you possibly know whether this is true???? Are you a member of the President's inner cabinet?

4) If they are here why haven't they made proper contact with the appropriate authorities?

Do tell! Who exactly are the 'proper authorities'? And, as above, how do you know they haven't? Are you a member of the security council? Majestic? The ONI?

5) Where do they go when they are observed to either 'disappear' or speed away at tremendous velocities?

See point one!

6) Why is there not one clear image of one of these 'craft' that leaves no doubt about their authenticity?

You need to get out more, Plodder! There are HUNDREDS... THOUSANDS! The fact that people like you don't know about them is a tribute to disinformation and the way the whole subject has been cleverly manipulated. Besides: the photos from Apollo 11 are hardly clear and conclusive, otherwise there wouldn't be so many 'Moon Conspiracy' believers! (No! I'm NOT one of them!)

[webplodder]

Why is it that many advocates of the ET hypothesis always have 'good excuses' with which to defend their case. David Bryant, you are presenting nothing more than speculation and wishful thinking and you will never be able to substantiate any of your claims because they are all based on myth and half-truths.

[David Bryant]

I'm sure you'd love to continue this 'battle of wits' but I make it a principle not to fight an unarmed opponent!

Last response to you:

I despair, I really do! I answered your previous post with HARD FACTS such as the distance to Proxima Centauri and the maximum velocity so far achieved by mankind. I've suggested credible answers to all your ill-considered points, and your only response is rudeness.

I've seen the zodiacal light, the aurora borealis, the gegenshine, total eclipses of Sun & Moon, noctilucent clouds..... The reason I've seen these (And I bet you've seen NONE of them!) is because I spend lots of time looking up into the sky. I've also seen 420+ species of bird in the UK for the same reason.

My belief system is based upon EXPERIENCE, EDUCATION and OBSERVATION: yours, apparently, is based upon PREJUDICE, IGNORANCE and DOGMA

As long as you continue your trivial, ill-informed, anonymous sniping on this forum, no-one will take you seriously. You have nothing to offer except vituperation and negativity.

[webplodder]

David, then allow me to test you.

Can you please explain how aliens get from their star system to ours? What kind of power source do they use? If they travel at near light speed velocities how do they overcome the increase in mass that occurs the nearer to the speed of light you travel? If they use worm holes how do they manage to keep them open for long enough to travel through because it takes a tremendous amount of negative energy to achieve this? How do their spacecraft manage to avoid impacts with space debris, which would destroy their craft at near light speed? Or, do we simply assume aliens have solved all of these problems?

You see David, you have to provide real answers to convince serious scientists of the validity of ET visitations. You also haven't provided me with a reason why a superior technology would want to visit earth. We are a very warlike species, as history attests, so why would ET take the trouble? We can't even get on with one another so how much less would we with an alien species?

[webplodder]

6) Why is there not one clear image of one of these 'craft' that leaves no doubt about their authenticity?

You need to get out more, Plodder! There are HUNDREDS... THOUSANDS! The fact that people like you don't know about them is a tribute to disinformation and the way the whole subject has been cleverly manipulated. Besides: the photos from Apollo 11 are hardly clear and conclusive, otherwise there wouldn't be so many 'Moon Conspiracy' believers! (No! I'm NOT one of them!)

David, there are indeed many pictures of wheel hub-caps, balloons, clouds, birds, ball lightening, conventional aircraft seen from peculiar angles, stealth fighters, helicopters, heat inversions, lighthouse lights, Chinese lanterns, fireworks, hoaxes, advertising blimps, flares, asteroids, man-made satellites, Venus, stars ..... shall I go on?

[David Bryant]

No: please do not go on, you're becoming tedious! You're a sceptic: we get it. (By the way: it's LIGHTNING: no 'e' Find some way to prove you were right about that too! )

[bignos]

yawn

[Observer]

When Profesor Steven Hawkin was asked about the possibility of aliens visiting earth, he simply replied, "We should keep our heads down".
Obs

[David Bryant]

You display your usual meticulous research, Observer: the name is Stephen Hawking!

Just a thought, 'Silvertop':
We KNOW that physical travel through space is possible. Velocities of 150,000mph have already been achieved by experimental projectiles in space: the potential for velocities five times this have been demonstrated experimentally. The idea that velocities approaching the speed of light cause the traveler to acquire infinite mass is predicted by the general THEORY of relativity: but some of Einstein's work has been found to require review / revision: after all: photons travel at the speed of light, as do many sub-atomic particles, but they don't acquire infinite mass! Neither relativity nor quantum theory can be used to fully describe the Universe: they represent what was credible at the time they were disseminated.
There is absolutely NO evidence that time travel is possible. In fact logic predicates against it: if time travel is ever going to be achieved, we should always have known about it because people from the future would've come back and told us!

[IanR]

There is absolutely NO evidence that time travel is possible. In fact logic predicates against it: if time travel is ever going to be achieved, we should always have known about it because people from the future would've come back and told us!

So, in your opinion, Penniston and Burroughs are wrong about this time travel business then?

Ian