The aims of Aliens - Only for believers

@xris,

xris wrote:

Is this a self generating perpetual comic book scenario conversation.Have you two actually considered what you are proposing. I thought common sense would be your first consideration in your pondering but left alone it becomes wilder and wilder.This subject ive decided is not worth persuing, on one side we have scoffers on the other we have true believers, even my joke comments are taken seriously.Its a shame but in reality i did not expect anything else.

Sad, but true, xris. And this is what I was saying earlier - we must try to avoid these fantastical conjurations.

--

Ghost, all that you speak of their technology, genetic manipulation, and intent is really all just completely unfounded. I don't even see you using common sense or even a method of reasoning here. You're just throwing darts and seeing where they land. This is what we were trying to avoid. Let's stick with the objective evidence we have available to us, instead of conjuring up this nonsense. Really, it is nonsense, it's silly rhetoric. And don't say that I'm discriminating against "aliens" and I wouldn't have done the same with "god". The hell I wouldn't!

I see you're involved in that E.T community - do they allow ardent evaluation of the evidence presented? Do you have any backing behind that little zip file of quotes from military officials? How do you explain what Aedes said a few postings back? Where again did you come to the conclusion that we are genetically manipulated... just a hunch?

I even tried to humor you guys a few postings back, but this is just getting ridiculous. Let's get back on track, guys...

@xris,

xris wrote:

Is this a self generating perpetual comic book scenario conversation.Have you two actually considered what you are proposing. I thought common sense would be your first consideration in your pondering but left alone it becomes wilder and wilder.

It hasn't really changed actually, was it the fact that they can create any element out of energy, what flipped the lid on your can? Hahaha.....I couldn't stop laughing when I read your post, funny.
EDIT: I do have a strong belief that every thing in the universe is nothing but energy in one form/state or another, it's basically proven in science, hence the fact that I think they are very past the whole materialistic mindset, and onto a philosophical and spiritual one.

@GHOST phil,

The government put outrageous claims into the mix and put people off the subject, they dont have to you do it for them.I cant conceive of aliens without being influenced by all this nonsense. Those interviews, i can see a few reasonable accounts but alot of them are pure fiction and they detract from the whole subject..you appear to believe anything any one tells you, have you seen these bunkers with perpetual motion machines, alien bodies, flying saucers made by man..Sorry i am really prepared to admit there could be a cover up but not to the degree you are contemplating.Remember there has been thousands and thousands of government employees four hundred with vague accounts does not constitute an alien invassion or a government cover up.

@xris,

xris wrote:

Sorry i am really prepared to admit there could be a cover up but not to the degree you are contemplating.Remember there has been thousands and thousands of government employees four hundred with vague accounts does not constitute an alien invassion or a government cover up.

Wouldn't the cover up need to be to the extent I am contemplating to even have a chance of working? Did I mention an invasion? And how many do you need, 500, 600, 1000, 2000, so what when it reaches this number, you need it to reach 5000, but wait, when it reaches this number, it still won't be enough.

@GHOST phil,

GHOST wrote:

Wouldn't the cover up need to be to the extent I am contemplating to even have a chance of working? Did I mention an invasion? And how many do you need, 500, 600, 1000, 2000, so what when it reaches this number, you need it to reach 5000, but wait, when it reaches this number, it still won't be enough.

Wait, why exactly would the government be covering anything up again? And let's not forget that when we mutter "Government", we're muttering an abstract notion. What exactly do you mean by "Government"? You mean there's just a conspiracy between a few hundred Federal Government officials to cover up these claims?

More importantly, is this only the United States Federal Government you're speaking about? This must be a world-wide effort, no? I mean, if you think NASA is the only agency with supposed evidence needing cover-up for a mass conspiracy such as this, I highly doubt that.

@GHOST phil,

GHOST wrote:

Wouldn't the cover up need to be to the extent I am contemplating to even have a chance of working? Did I mention an invasion? And how many do you need, 500, 600, 1000, 2000, so what when it reaches this number, you need it to reach 5000, but wait, when it reaches this number, it still won't be enough.

Your reasoning is based on eye witness accounts as is mine. I am not having an encounter of the third kind but of third hand.We must take every bit of evidence with suspicion and the more outlandish the more suspicion we should have.Two hundred ...some are just foot soldiers should i feel the need to believe them more than Joe Bloggs ? I have told you the evidence request we question but not the conclusions we see here exhibited.If you cant take believers like me alone with you how do expect to bring sceptics.You tell me how many do you believe one hundred percent ?

@xris,

No, about 90% of them, but I think the main point here, is that we are only theorizing and philosophizing on Aliens, do you expect the assumptions made to not sound outlandish, to you expect them to sound from this word, would you expect the correct answer to sound any less outlandish...think about it. Oh, and I just found an interesting document SO-1 CLASSIFIED ARMY UFO MANUAL - ebook, top, and ufo Let me know what you guys think.

@GHOST phil,

GHOST wrote:

No, about 90% of them, but I think the main point here, is that we are only theorizing and philosophizing on Aliens, do you expect the assumptions made to not sound outlandish, to you expect them to sound from this word, would you expect the correct answer to sound any less outlandish...think about it. Oh, and I just found an interesting document SO-1 CLASSIFIED ARMY UFO MANUAL - ebook, top, and ufo Let me know what you guys think.

Did you read the feed back from this report on the very same link..I think youve shot yourself in the foot.Just scroll down and read..

@xris,

xris wrote:

Did you read the feed back from this report on the very same link..I think youve shot yourself in the foot.Just scroll down and read..

Yeah, I did actually, and a lot of what they say doesn't make sense. I looked at photos from the same date, some were better. As for the satellite, this guy states it pretty well

Quote:

I would also like to comment that even though sputnik I was the first satellite to be declared in orbit around the earth, if i was a world leader experimenting with a new type of technology i'd be keeping quiet about it. the military were using high def satellite pictures over two decades before those same images became available to us all via google earth,

And the last issue is sorted with what this guy says:

Quote:

To newsphobic, fibreboard was manufactured as early as 1912 using the leftover materials when processing sugarcane. The manufacturing of hardboard started in the late 1920s

@GHOST phil,

GHOST wrote:

Yeah, I did actually, and a lot of what they say doesn't make sense

What, specifically, doesn't make sense concerning the counterpoints those members made?

Here's the problem: You just readily assume that document is true when there are tons of fakes floating around. You can't just readily assume that the document is real without considering what those members have stated, right?

So, we'll place this in the consideration pile, NOT the evidence pile.

@GHOST phil,

Zetherin wrote:

Ghost, all that you speak of their technology, genetic manipulation, and intent is really all just completely unfounded. I don't even see you using common sense or even a method of reasoning here. You're just throwing darts and seeing where they land. This is what we were trying to avoid. Let's stick with the objective evidence we have available to us, instead of conjuring up this nonsense. Really, it is nonsense, it's silly rhetoric. And don't say that I'm discriminating against "aliens" and I wouldn't have done the same with "god". The hell I wouldn't!

I'm not saying that you are discriminating against "Aliens", I'm saying you don't get the idea, WE ARE THEORIZING AND PHILOSOPHIZING ON ALIENS AND THEIR INTENTS, and if you read through every page of this thread, you will see the reasoning and refining of my theory, and as a matter of fact, my reasoning is based on what the evidence tells me, it is based on whatever makes logical sense, and Pusyphus has been squeezing logical, consistent reasoning out of me, so that my arguments might seem valid and consistent with what the evidence presents us with. We are only working with what we have. I think most of this might sound like nonsense to a species that is anything up to several billion years behind the species we are talking about, I posted earlier:

Quote:

we are only theorizing and philosophizing on Aliens, do you expect the assumptions made to not sound outlandish, to you expect them to sound from this word, would you expect the correct answer to sound any less outlandish...think about it.

Zetherin wrote:

I see you're involved in that E.T community - do they allow ardent evaluation of the evidence presented? Do you have any backing behind that little zip file of quotes from military officials? How do you explain what Aedes said a few postings back? Where again did you come to the conclusion that we are genetically manipulated... just a hunch?

I came to that conclusion in my OP, but I did update my theory since then, a few posts later, and it has been refined throughout this thread.
EDIT: I also came to the conclusion that we are genetically manipulated beings, due to the following - The fossil situation, and the fact that our DNA shows signs of artificial manipulation.

Aedes wrote:

Considering that the number of independent and academic researchers dwarfs that of NASA, they have far more money in aggregate, and they have access to the same technology as NASA, I doubt that. Scientists are trained to recognize anomalies, so things like a disproportionate velocity for mass, nongravitational locomotion, or anomalous shape and composition would attract attention.

Lets consider that they do have the same technology, they even have exellent training in recognizing anomilies, they still can't prove that a little, fuzzy looking ball or other shape, is nothing but a little peice of dust floating past the lens, how can they prove this thing is actually massive in size, making it impossible for it to be a UFO, do they have anyway of actually proving it is not just dust? We must not forget the probabality of actually seeing a UFO through a telescope either.

GHOST wrote:

True, but maybe they do see them (when they are lucky enough, if they ever have been) and just assume it's some sort of dust, debris, or unwanted noise, often like what they look like in NASA footage, so they just disregard anything of the type. They could also assume it will just bring unwanted skepticism and mockery their way, when they can't really prove anyway, that these things are really UFO's.

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

What, specifically, doesn't make sense concerning the counterpoints those members made?

Here's the problem: You just readily assume that document is true when there are tons of fakes floating around. You can't just readily assume that the document is real without considering what those members have stated, right?

So, we'll place this in the consideration pile, NOT the evidence pile.

What makes you think it's in my evidence pile immediately, it is in my consideration pile, and I can see it's very hard to consider such evidence when there are lots of fakes around, but this one looked above average and well done, so I thought I would present it, jeez, I just asked what you guys thought. You stated that people had valid arguments against it, and I gave you my arguments against theirs...I really don't mind debating this, but it is off topic, so play nice, and don't put words in my mouth, like everyone has been doing this whole thread.
EDIT: Sorry for the double post, it slipped my mind... Very Happy

@GHOST phil,

This fossil situation was explained to you, either in this thread or your other. I'll try to dig up the posts concerning this. Mind you, humans are not the only species that have missing 'links' in their evolutionary chain. This is not uncommon and it can be explained rationally. And this was the only piece of evidence your theory on genetic manipulation stands on? Bleh, done.

Next, let's take what you've said to Aedes one step further:

GHOST wrote:

they still can't prove that a little, fuzzy looking ball or other shape, is nothing but a little peice of dust floating past the lens

Why can't all of the sightings have been dust? Is this not possible? If not, then answer your own question, why not? They can't actually *prove* it, right? Well, if they can't why are you so wholly convinced? And what do you mean when you said, "We must not forget the probability of actually seeing a UFO through a telescope either." Are you implying it's easier to see a UFO with a best buy camcorder?

GHOST wrote:

What makes you think it's in my evidence pile immediately, it is in my consideration pile, and I can see it's very hard to consider such evidence when there are lots of fakes around, but this one looked above average and well done, so I thought I would present it, jeez, I just asked what you guys thought. You stated that people had valid arguments against it, and I gave you my arguments against theirs...I really don't mind debating this, but it is off topic, so play nice, and don't put words in my mouth, like everyone has been doing this whole thread.
EDIT: Sorry for the double post, it slipped my mind...

Can you agree then that you have no evidence and that everything is in the consideration pile?

@Icon,

Zetherin wrote:

This fossil situation was explained to you, either in this thread or your other. I'll try to dig up the posts concerning this. Mind you, humans are not the only species that have missing 'links' in their evolutionary chain. This is not uncommon and it can be explained rationally. And this was the only piece of evidence your theory on genetic manipulation stands on? Bleh, done.

It is uncommon, because the gap supersedes any other species, I remember what your "rational" answer was, but it's all to coincidental for me, especially when we are now seeing unnatural signs of DNA manipulation.

Zetherin wrote:

Why can't all of the sightings have been dust? Is this not possible? If not, then answer your own question, why not? They can't actually *prove* it, right? Well, if they can't why are you so wholly convinced? And what do you mean when you said, "We must not forget the probability of actually seeing a UFO through a telescope either." Are you implying it's easier to see a UFO with a best buy camcorder?

Some will look at the circumstantial evidence and chose not to believe it, others with begin to see that there is more than enough circumstantial evidence and witness testimony to close the case, I have made my decision, you have made yours. As for the chance thing, I said earlier:

Quote:

Aedes wrote:

So with all these poor academicians up there at 14,000 feet trying to discover something interesting to become famous, using the best technology we have, why is it that the footage of flying saucers comes from people on the ground using a camcorder they picked up at Best Buy?

UFO RESEARCH QUEENSLAND | ARTICLES

Quote:

About 6% of the population has had one or more sightings of UFO's.

Quote:

The level of public acceptance is probably about 90% of the population.

Now consider what xris just said, the fact there 6,759,406,059 people in the world, and compare this to telescopes, now, our eyes are always open and viewing things around us, except when we sleep obviously, 6% of people in Queensland Australia have actually witnessed UFO's, so imagine what the chances of a telescope capturing one would be.

Zetherin wrote:

Can you agree then that you have no evidence and that everything is in the consideration pile?

Well yes, I agree that no one has to move any of this to the evidence pile, but for me, it proves more than enough.

@GHOST phil,

I am taking an anthropology class right now on human evolution, and I know I posted info on this either in this thread or another. One of the main reasons for the fossil gap can be accounted by the fact that not everything that dies has the proper conditions to fossilize. Organic creatures usually decompose rapidly after death, so the proper conditions must be met in order for fossils to form. Typically, for something to be fossilized, it must be buried with sediment shortly after death.

Not to mention, there is not a major evolutionary gap for humans in the first place. People tend to pick and chose so it appears that way, but based on the text book I have been reading, it seems biological anthropologists have a very good lineage of where humans came from. As I get farther in the course I could continue to go more in depth on the subject.

@Theaetetus,

So does human fossil gap not supersede any other species fossil gap? look that one up...

@GHOST phil,

GHOST wrote:

So does human fossil gap not supersede any other species fossil gap? look that one up...

But if you're telling him to look that one up because you're not even sure, then why in the hell are you believing in this so adamantly? It's as if you have this "it proves more than enough" stance only until you're proven wrong. This is what's irritating and was the fundamental reasoning behind what was said pages ago.

Quote:

I have made my decision, you have made yours.

No, I haven't made any decision, because I'm not versed in any of this enough to have an educated opinion either way. And neither are you, obviously. You're just seeking your 'credible sources' attaching 'evidence' where you wish to meet your desired end, as I said earlier.

I don't even understand the disparity in your brain right now. You outwardly admit now (after how many pages?) that this information isn't fully conclusive and you have no evidence, and you still say it's "enough for me"? HUH? It's enough for you? If it's enough for you, why in the hell are you here even discussing this with us!? I'm sorry mate, but you've really gotten me to my breaking point with this contradictory logic and psychobabble. Your title suits you well: Psychonaut

Oh, and I want a link to your claim of "unnatural signs of DNA manipulation."

Jeez man, you've literally given me a headache.

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

But if you're telling him to look that one up because you're not even sure, then why in the hell are you believing in this so adamantly? It's as if you have this "it proves more than enough" stance only until you're proven wrong. This is what's irritating and was the fundamental reasoning behind what was said pages ago.

Can you prove me wrong? There is certainly enough evidence for it, and your right, until they have evidence disproving it I will believe they exist.

Zetherin wrote:

No, I haven't made any decision, because I'm not versed in any of this enough to have an educated opinion either way. And neither are you, obviously. You're just seeking your 'credible sources' attaching 'evidence' where you wish to meet your desired end, as I said earlier.

Look, I will believe what I want, I don't care if I can prove it beyond a doubt, not everyone see's things the same way as you.[/quote]

Zetherin wrote:

I don't even understand the disparity in your brain right now. You outwardly admit now (after how many pages?) that this information isn't fully conclusive and you have no evidence, and you still say it's "enough for me"? HUH? It's enough for you? If it's enough for you, why in the hell are you here even discussing this with us!? I'm sorry mate, but you've really gotten me to my breaking point with this contradictory logic and psychobabble. Your title suits you well: Psychonaut

I never said my evidence is fully conclusive to everyone, or you, but it is to me. As I have said, I don't mind discussing this, but it is off topic, you and a few others are the one's so adamant about discussing it, if you understand this can't be concluded, why the hell are you discussing it? Why would you insult the name "psychonaut as a philosopher, do you know what a psychonaut is?

Zetherin wrote:

Oh, and I want a link to your claim of "unnatural signs of DNA manipulation."

I will have a look for some good sources.

Zetherin wrote:

Jeez man, you've literally given me a headache.

I'm sorry you get so worked up over our off-topic discussion which you seem so keen to propagate.

@GHOST phil,

What's on topic for you then if not the evaluation of the very claims you're making???!!!

Don't say "Can you prove me wrong", as if you have a conclusive theory here! You don't! You don't even know the scientific backing providing the foundation for your whole hypothesis! If Thea comes now with some good material concerning our evolutionary pattern and DNA, what in bloody hell are you going to do? Still say "I'll believe what I want"? Huh?

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

What's on topic for you then if not the evaluation of the very claims you're making???!!!

Don't say "Can you prove me wrong", as if you have a conclusive theory here! You don't! You don't even know the scientific backing providing the foundation for your whole hypothesis! If Thea comes now with some good material concerning our evolutionary pattern and DNA, what in bloody hell are you going to do? Still say "I'll believe what I want"? Huh?

Read the thread title, add "and for people who are willing to just assume, for the sake of conversation, that Aliens exist", you know, I really don't want to go through all this again, just participate constructively, or don't, I don't mind the casual, off-topic debate on Alien existence, but you always start getting hostile and headachey, chill.
EDIT: If someone came along with some good facts that made me rethink things, then I would, damn, I'm not stuck in permanent mental rut which throws out any evidence that goes against my theory, that's the last thing I want to do, mimicking what most of the skeptics do. I just believe it because the enormous amount of evidence points to it, why do you flip out over this? I will obviously have to make new conclusions if I am forced to, but until then, Aliens exist in my mind, it's as simple as that.

Philosophy Forum

The aims of Aliens - Only for believers

Quick Links

My Account

able2know