RE: Recent Mass UFO Sightings 2011 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Kirata -> RE: Recent Mass UFO Sightings 2011 (4/20/2012 5:31:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake

Paranoid bullshit?

Well, but there ya go. The studies they've done made the right recommendation. It's just unfortunate that the rest of us have to be denied the truth because there are so many in our society whose brains would implode if it was ever disclosed.

[:)]

K.



FrostedFlake -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 5:39:45 AM)

I don't know Dolan from donuts, but the link is on topic and insightful. He's talking over the nature of the "National Security State' that has been created in response to the UFO Secrecy imperative. This points out one of the compelling reasons for disclosure. Secrecy is not good for democracy.



FrostedFlake -> RE: Recent Mass UFO Sightings 2011 (4/20/2012 5:43:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake

Paranoid bullshit?

Well, but there ya go. The studies they've done made the right recommendation. It's just unfortunate that the rest of us have to be denied the truth because there are so many in our society whose brains would implode if it was ever disclosed.

[:)]

K.

Maybe back in the day, but not anymore. And even if a few freak, the damage that comes of coddling them is just too great.



Anaxagoras -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 5:45:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake
I don't know Dolan from donuts, but the link is on topic and insightful. He's talking over the nature of the "National Security State' that has been created in response to the UFO Secrecy imperative. This points out one of the compelling reasons for disclosure. Secrecy is not good for democracy.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but if I were to put credence in anyone's views on such a controversial topic that is benighted by fancy, lunacy and hoaxing, it would have to be someone who is otherwise credible, and his 101 Alex Jones Koolaid conspiracism precludes him, I'm afraid.



FrostedFlake -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 5:58:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake
I don't know Dolan from donuts, but the link is on topic and insightful. He's talking over the nature of the "National Security State' that has been created in response to the UFO Secrecy imperative. This points out one of the compelling reasons for disclosure. Secrecy is not good for democracy.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but if I were to put credence in anyone's views on such a controversial topic that is benighted by fancy, lunacy and hoaxing, it would have to be someone who is otherwise credible, and his 101 Alex Jones Koolaid conspiracism precludes him, I'm afraid.

I am listening to the ideas presented. I find them convincing. Ultimately, I will have to decide what to do with the data. To me, the source is important, thus my reliance on NASA, above. But the fellow is making his points. I invite you to listen to them and consider. Mocking what you have not heard is, beneath you.



Kirata -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 6:21:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

You are of course entitled to your opinion but if I were to put credence in anyone's views on such a controversial topic that is benighted by fancy, lunacy and hoaxing, it would have to be someone who is otherwise credible, and his 101 Alex Jones Koolaid conspiracism precludes him, I'm afraid.

So you say, but you completely ignored the 1952 memo from the Assistant Director of Scientific Intelligence to the Director, Central Intelligence, which was excerpted in my post -- as well as my mention of the Malmstrom AFB incident when missile launch consoles went to a "no go" condition coincident with a UFO hovering over the base -- solely in order to jump on Richard Dolan as an excuse to wax dismissive and start handing out tin-foil hats.

That demonstrates fairly clearly that your willingness (or ability) to keep an open mind is somewhere near zero.

And here's another thought, since you mention giving credence. Why should you (or anyone) give credence to anyone's views on the issue, no matter who they are? Do you have to be told what to think? There is plenty of information available, documents that slipped out through FOIA requests (like the Chadwell memo), NASA videos, and hours of testimony from former intelligence and military personnel. Think for yourself for a change. What a concept, eh?

K.



Rule -> RE: Recent Mass UFO Sightings 2011 (4/20/2012 7:34:11 AM)

I had one passing six meters over my head a long time ago. They are ours. Very hush-hush.



FrostedFlake -> RE: Recent Mass UFO Sightings 2011 (4/20/2012 7:46:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

I had one passing six meters over my head a long time ago. They are ours. Very hush-hush.

If so, there are a few problems with that.

1/ Where did we get them?
2/ Why are we still flying firecrackers?
3/ What the fuck good is it to us to have the technology if we can't use it?
4/ How do we recapture the rogue portion of the Government that is operating them?



Anaxagoras -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 8:42:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
quote:

ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake
I don't know Dolan from donuts, but the link is on topic and insightful. He's talking over the nature of the "National Security State' that has been created in response to the UFO Secrecy imperative. This points out one of the compelling reasons for disclosure. Secrecy is not good for democracy.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but if I were to put credence in anyone's views on such a controversial topic that is benighted by fancy, lunacy and hoaxing, it would have to be someone who is otherwise credible, and his 101 Alex Jones Koolaid conspiracism precludes him, I'm afraid.

I am listening to the ideas presented. I find them convincing. Ultimately, I will have to decide what to do with the data. To me, the source is important, thus my reliance on NASA, above. But the fellow is making his points. I invite you to listen to them and consider. Mocking what you have not heard is, beneath you.

I don't think so. If someone expresses absurdist opinions relating to the very topic at hand then it is nigh-on impossible to give credence to their stance with regard to the rest of the topic. It discredits him as a source.

If you look at the well established ethical frameworks in relation to historians for example, the trust and reliability of the historian is an absolutely crucial element in evaluating their work. That's why reputations for accuracy are so highly valued.



Anaxagoras -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 8:56:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
You are of course entitled to your opinion but if I were to put credence in anyone's views on such a controversial topic that is benighted by fancy, lunacy and hoaxing, it would have to be someone who is otherwise credible, and his 101 Alex Jones Koolaid conspiracism precludes him, I'm afraid.

So you say, but you completely ignored the 1952 memo from the Assistant Director of Scientific Intelligence to the Director, Central Intelligence, which was excerpted in my post -- as well as my mention of the Malmstrom AFB incident when missile launch consoles went to a "no go" condition coincident with a UFO hovering over the base -- solely in order to jump on Richard Dolan as an excuse to wax dismissive and start handing out tin-foil hats.

I don't know much about the memo in question. As you well know, it does not behove of anyone on here to reply to every point in a post. I did not strip your point about Dolan of context - I merely pointed out that he as a source is problematic to say the least.

quote:


That demonstrates fairly clearly that your willingness (or ability) to keep an open mind is somewhere near zero.

And here's another thought, since you mention giving credence. Why should you (or anyone) give credence to anyone's views on the issue, no matter who they are? Do you have to be told what to think? There is plenty of information available, documents that slipped out through FOIA requests (like the Chadwell memo), NASA videos, and hours of testimony from former intelligence and military personnel. Think for yourself for a change. What a concept, eh?

LOL I would suggest there is oceans of bullshit out there too that has been shown to be the case time and time again, which you seem unwilling to acknowledge. I find it hard to take any of this seriously after the frenzy over the Rozwell Film in the 90's. Given cause I often disagree with the sources I read. My point is simple. We all have to have some faith in the sources of information we rely on because it is simply impossible to investigate every issue we take an interest in ourselves. Thus the accuracy and reliability of sources is important - very much especially when it comes to such a contentious subject as UFOlogy, which is riddled with very many assertions impossible to unjustify, and so many hoaxes.



Karmastic -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 11:16:06 AM)

Okay, interesting thread!

First, I think suggesting there isn't other life out there is absurd as suggesting the earth is flat.

I agree with many others who mentioned that it could be natural phenomenon, hoaxes, or our military testing secret projects. But that doesn’t exclude some sightings being real.

Humans are still infantile bugs in the scheme of things. We don't even know or understand the majority of what constitutes our universe, calling it "dark matter". Think of the exponential leaps microscopes and telescopes allowed humans to make. Now imagine a resolution and sensory bandwidth billions of times greater than what we can achieve now.

There are all types of different energies everywhere, all around us in the air we breathe, as well as shooting through us (maybe faster than the speed of light, like quarks). We don’t even have the tools to detect this energy, let alone harness or direct it.

And just think how infantile humans are, in that we're still sucking and pushing air (or molecules) to generate thrust and movement. I think the real jump will be when we start to grasp how to get from point/time A to point/time B without having to physically "move" the molecules we're transporting. I know it's totally absurd, but think Futurama and how their ship didn’t move, the universe moved around the ship as stationary. That concept goes way beyond wormholes or gates.

Re our government having alien artifacts - we may or may not have such things (I think we do). But I seriously doubt we have been able to figure them out, anymore than a dog would know what to do with an oscilloscope.

ps - let's not leave out extra-dimensional possibilities! Fringe that!



FrostedFlake -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 3:25:58 PM)

quote:

I agree with many others who mentioned that it could be natural phenomenon, hoaxes, or our military testing secret projects. But that doesn’t exclude some sightings being real.


Yeah. Some are real. That is why I reopened this thread.

From the responses, it seems many are not opening the (admittedly many) links I provided.

So I am going to hang this picture in front of you, so you can't avoid looking at it.

quote:

Source citation:
The LPI is managed by the Universities Space Research Association (USRA), a national, nonprofit consortium of universities chartered in 1969 by the National Academy of Sciences at the request of NASA. USRA operates programs and institutes focused on research and education in most of the disciplines engaged in space-related science and engineering. Institutional membership in USRA now stands at 100 leading research universities.

The LPI is operated by USRA under a cooperative agreement with the Science Mission Directorate of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.


This is NASA photo number AS13-61-8865. The reference is to Apollo 13, magazine 61, photo 8865. You can look it up. Here is the link to the close-up.

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/print/AS13/61/8865.jpg

The description NASA gave this image is : LUNAR DISC WITH BRIGHT DISC PARTIALLY COVERING MOON.

Now, before I hang this photo, I gotta ask. Can you imagine a more credible proof? If so, please, don't keep it to yourself. Write down what it would take to change your mind and post it.



[image]local://upfiles/769649/26279A70933D476F95D4D7E90F135958.jpg[/image]



Karmastic -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 3:56:36 PM)

woooooooooooooosh!

i saw the pic b4 and didn't understand what was wrong. what are we looking at besides the moon? are u saying the BRIGHT DISC isn't identified, and is a UFO?



hardcybermaster -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 3:57:08 PM)

and that is your proof that aliens exist?



ResidentSadist -> RE: Recent Mass UFO Sightings 2011 (4/20/2012 5:27:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

...Now I'm off to buy weapons, water and canned goods, and move to a non-disclosed uninhabited (until I get there with my family) safe place. 

Me too.



Kirata -> RE: Recent Mass UFO Sightings 2011 (4/20/2012 5:57:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

We all have to have some faith in the sources of information we rely on

What would you consider to be a credible source for a claim that UFOs are real?

The Air Force has sent its commands a warning to treat sightings of unidentified flying objects as "serious business" directly related to the nation's defense, it was learned today. ~New York Times (full story is paywalled)

The story reports that the issuance of the directive was confirmed.

"Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about the UFO's... But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense." ~Vice Admiral R. H. Hillenkoetter (Ret.)

Hillenkoetter is a former Director of Central Intelligence. His statement appears in the previously cited NY Times story. Sorry about the paywall, but the quotes are accurate. I have the article. It is extremely difficult to find, however, because -- for reasons I'll leave to the conspiracy theorists -- the normally meticulous New York Times mis-spelled 'Air Force' in the story title (it reads: "Air Forge").

By the way, I've restored the original subject line from your edit to "Foil be thy name". How about being a nice fellow and leaving it alone? You can at least pretend to be open-minded, right?

K.



MasterJohnSteed -> RE: Recent Mass UFO Sightings 2011 (4/20/2012 6:05:47 PM)

Here is the thing,

first if they are coming from millions if not billions of miles away they see us as a curiosity and not a threat. Because if they can travel that distance is a relatively short time then they would have the tech to wipe us out they haven't done it.

second yes the government knows about it and is either powerless to stop them or is in with them

why do I say the government is in with them? simple, if you had tech to destroy the oil producing countries would you???? Our whole society is based off oil, if they have an energy source that allows them to travel billions of miles then they don't have to stop at the inter-galatic gas and go.

So lets imagine if that tech was put in, a car, a truck, a boat, a plane. No more gas companies, no more need for cars that wear out , etc or connect that power to a house, no need for a power company right, its all self contained. So guess what that puts the power company out of business.

So yes they governments of the world would be more than happy to keep tech like that out of the public's hand because why? it dosn't destroy society as we know it.



Kirata -> RE: Recent Mass UFO Sightings 2011 (4/20/2012 6:45:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJohnSteed

they would have the tech to wipe us out they haven't done it... the government knows about it and is either powerless to stop them or is in with them

governments of the world would be more than happy to keep tech like that out of the public's hand because why? it dosn't destroy society as we know it.

Yes, it looks like a trade-off of sorts initially. But at this point it's questionable whether the government knows much at all. Reports suggest that Carter, Kennedy, and Clinton all tried to get information on the subject and were rebuffed. The oversight of black projects seems to be in the hands of a consortium involving the CIA and certain large private contractors with the expertise and capability to engineer the technology, pretty much what Eisenhower warned us about.

There's fly in the ointment, however. Our nuclear arsenal is being fucked with. We have been powerless to prevent missiles from being spun down from Strategic Alert status to a "No Go" condition. There are even some noises suggesting that certain military launches have been destroyed in flight before achieving orbit. Whatever whoever was thinking in the beginning, they weren't expecting anything like that. The nervousness is palpable, and the secrecy is desperate.

K.



FrostedFlake -> RE: Foil be thy name... (4/20/2012 7:23:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hardcybermaster

and that is your proof that aliens exist?

Can you think of any way that anyone could have put that object in between the moon and Apollo 13? can you think of any more reliable source? What are you hoping to see? Are you holding out until I dragoon a half dozen assorted E.T.s to march back and forth in front of your house chanting slogans and waving picket signs?

Let me put this in bold caps :

WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO CONVINCE YOU, HARDY? ARE YOU JUST ARGUING FOR THE FUN OF IT?

If you don't come up with something, I am going to hide you.



Anaxagoras -> RE: Recent Mass UFO Sightings 2011 (4/20/2012 7:55:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

We all have to have some faith in the sources of information we rely on

What would you consider to be credible source for a claim that UFOs are real?

An impartial source that has demonstrated some objectivity with other controversial topics.

quote:


The Air Force has sent its commands a warning to treat sightings of unidentified flying objects as "serious business" directly related to the nation's defense, it was learned today. ~New York Times (full story is paywalled)

The story reports that the issuance of the directive was confirmed.

"Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about the UFO's... But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense." ~Vice Admiral R. H. Hillenkoetter (Ret.)

Hillenkoetter is a former Director of Central Intelligence. His statement appears in the previously cited NY Times story. Sorry about the paywall, but the quotes are accurate. I have the article. It is extremely difficult to find, however, because -- for reasons I'll leave to the conspiracy theorists -- the normally meticulous New York Times mis-spelled 'Air Force' in the story title (it reads: "Air Forge").

I looked up the quote. It seems authentic. There seems to be a link to the article on his wiki page so the conspiracists can stand down for now. To my mind the question has to be what is the consequence of the statement. The article says Hillenkoetter was a member of a pro-UFO group accusing the Pentagon of serious cover ups. The Pentagon may have taken UFOs seriously but it seems a reasonable concern if one applies the Occam Razor principle. Its well known UFO sightings multiplied since the 40s, at a time of heightened tensions during the Cold War - the two quotes you reproduced were from 1952 and 1960, and obviously UFO's aren't necessarily extra-terrestrial. Thus it would be perfectly reasonable to deem the sightings a matter of national security. Being at the time a relatively new phenomenon, it would have been remiss of the Pentagon not to treat it seriously.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.640625E-02