The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth General => Topic started by: Timeisup on May 29, 2021, 01:47:17 AM
-
Though not directly linked to the FE question it stlll none the less has some significant bearing on the issue. The up and coming report on UAPs due out soon is going to set the UFO/UAP debate alight.
How does this affect the FE debate? For example it shows how ‘things’ can not be kept secret, people will eventually talk.
Having watched some of the interviews with former agency staff, pilots, government officials snd read what former President Obama thinks along with watching some of the actual Navy/Airforce footage it’s something that can no longer be ignored. That’s what firm evidence does from credible sources, something the FE has never been able to do.
It looks like these UAPs are real, but what they actually are and ‘who’ or what made them is currently open and unanswered. No doubt there will be cranks who join in claiming to have been probed by aliens or had them round for coffee and it’s this separating out the nonsense from the hard facts that is going to be the challenge.
Personally I find it quite exciting having been a real UFO sceptic but that’s what hard factual evidence can do, change minds. It also throws out the window many of the FE claims made against the system and those who disagree with them. Hard evidence changes minds.
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
-
Though not directly linked to the FE question it stlll none the less has some significant bearing on the issue. The up and coming report on UAPs due out soon is going to set the UFO/UAP debate alight.
How does this affect the FE debate? For example it shows how ‘things’ can not be kept secret, people will eventually talk.
Having watched some of the interviews with former agency staff, pilots, government officials snd read what former President Obama thinks along with watching some of the actual Navy/Airforce footage it’s something that can no longer be ignored. That’s what firm evidence does from credible sources, something the FE has never been able to do.
It looks like these UAPs are real, but what they actually are and ‘who’ or what made them is currently open and unanswered. No doubt there will be cranks who join in claiming to have been probed by aliens or had them round for coffee and it’s this separating out the nonsense from the hard facts that is going to be the challenge.
Personally I find it quite exciting having been a real UFO sceptic but that’s what hard factual evidence can do, change minds. It also throws out the window many of the FE claims made against the system and those who disagree with them. Hard evidence changes minds.
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
UFO means 'Unidentified Flying Object'
If I attach some lights to a frisbee and throw it at night and you see it sail over your backyard, to you, it is a UFO because you dont know what it is
There is always a reasonable explanation for what we see. To some, the object is a UFO. To the government, they are weather balloons
-
UFO means 'Unidentified Flying Object'
If I attach some lights to a frisbee and throw it at night and you see it sail over your backyard, to you, it is a UFO because you dont know what it is
There is always a reasonable explanation for what we see. To some, the object is a UFO. To the government, they are weather balloons
I like the rebranding to UAP (unidentified aerial phenomenon) though.
Seems that someone decided that when you say UFO, everyone immediately associates it with aliens. So they changed to UAP which everyone seems to have immediately associated with aliens.
-
Though not directly linked to the FE question it stlll none the less has some significant bearing on the issue. The up and coming report on UAPs due out soon is going to set the UFO/UAP debate alight.
How does this affect the FE debate? For example it shows how ‘things’ can not be kept secret, people will eventually talk.
Having watched some of the interviews with former agency staff, pilots, government officials snd read what former President Obama thinks along with watching some of the actual Navy/Airforce footage it’s something that can no longer be ignored. That’s what firm evidence does from credible sources, something the FE has never been able to do.
It looks like these UAPs are real, but what they actually are and ‘who’ or what made them is currently open and unanswered. No doubt there will be cranks who join in claiming to have been probed by aliens or had them round for coffee and it’s this separating out the nonsense from the hard facts that is going to be the challenge.
Personally I find it quite exciting having been a real UFO sceptic but that’s what hard factual evidence can do, change minds. It also throws out the window many of the FE claims made against the system and those who disagree with them. Hard evidence changes minds.
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
UFO means 'Unidentified Flying Object'
If I attach some lights to a frisbee and throw it at night and you see it sail over your backyard, to you, it is a UFO because you dont know what it is
There is always a reasonable explanation for what we see. To some, the object is a UFO. To the government, they are weather balloons
I think before you comment you should go and look at the evidence that was screened on 60 mins in the USA this week and await the publication of the governmental report. In addition the news feature was concerned with reports from military personnel, defence spokesman and senior politicians. Did you not read my post. Your Frisbee remark apart from childish does not take into account both the evidence and the sources.
-
UFO means 'Unidentified Flying Object'
If I attach some lights to a frisbee and throw it at night and you see it sail over your backyard, to you, it is a UFO because you dont know what it is
There is always a reasonable explanation for what we see. To some, the object is a UFO. To the government, they are weather balloons
I like the rebranding to UAP (unidentified aerial phenomenon) though.
Seems that someone decided that when you say UFO, everyone immediately associates it with aliens. So they changed to UAP which everyone seems to have immediately associated with aliens.
That could well be the case. I would suggest you watch the CBS 60 min feature which is on their YouTube channel.
-
Though not directly linked to the FE question it stlll none the less has some significant bearing on the issue. The up and coming report on UAPs due out soon is going to set the UFO/UAP debate alight.
How does this affect the FE debate? For example it shows how ‘things’ can not be kept secret, people will eventually talk.
Having watched some of the interviews with former agency staff, pilots, government officials snd read what former President Obama thinks along with watching some of the actual Navy/Airforce footage it’s something that can no longer be ignored. That’s what firm evidence does from credible sources, something the FE has never been able to do.
It looks like these UAPs are real, but what they actually are and ‘who’ or what made them is currently open and unanswered. No doubt there will be cranks who join in claiming to have been probed by aliens or had them round for coffee and it’s this separating out the nonsense from the hard facts that is going to be the challenge.
Personally I find it quite exciting having been a real UFO sceptic but that’s what hard factual evidence can do, change minds. It also throws out the window many of the FE claims made against the system and those who disagree with them. Hard evidence changes minds.
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
UFO means 'Unidentified Flying Object'
If I attach some lights to a frisbee and throw it at night and you see it sail over your backyard, to you, it is a UFO because you dont know what it is
There is always a reasonable explanation for what we see. To some, the object is a UFO. To the government, they are weather balloons
I think before you comment you should go and look at the evidence that was screened on 60 mins in the USA this week and await the publication of the governmental report. In addition the news feature was concerned with reports from military personnel, defence spokesman and senior politicians. Did you not read my post. Your Frisbee remark apart from childish does not take into account both the evidence and the sources.
Oh yes. American 60 minutes. The bastion of truth, independant and ethical journalism. ::)
-
Oh yes. American 60 minutes. The bastion of truth, independant and ethical journalism. ::)
Before you throw the baby out with the bathwater, there's F-18/F-16 footage from both the USN and USAF that show some stuff that is just, strange. 60 minutes is picking up something that got declassified under the Trump administration, that doesn't mean anything regarding what sort of truth value the content has because that show broadcasted it. This is something that could be more than it appears, or it could be nothing. The videos I've seen from military operations is really bizarre. When I was in aviation, there's a chapter in the 7110.65 (the FAA ATC rulebook) covering UFO's and how to report them. I think a lot of aviators don't report because the don't want to be embarrassed by their peers. With knowledge that these events happen, I think that stigma might be reduced and we'll see more incidents reported.
In short, I think there's more to this and it would be hasty to throw it out based solely on a media outlet reporting on it.
-
Oh yes. American 60 minutes. The bastion of truth, independant and ethical journalism. ::)
Before you throw the baby out with the bathwater, there's F-18/F-16 footage from both the USN and USAF that show some stuff that is just, strange. 60 minutes is picking up something that got declassified under the Trump administration, that doesn't mean anything regarding what sort of truth value the content has because that show broadcasted it. This is something that could be more than it appears, or it could be nothing. The videos I've seen from military operations is really bizarre. When I was in aviation, there's a chapter in the 7110.65 (the FAA ATC rulebook) covering UFO's and how to report them. I think a lot of aviators don't report because the don't want to be embarrassed by their peers. With knowledge that these events happen, I think that stigma might be reduced and we'll see more incidents reported.
In short, I think there's more to this and it would be hasty to throw it out based solely on a media outlet reporting on it.
I think we can safely assume it's not aliens. Cool if it is, no problem in desiring to find out answers to questions but the jumping to conclusions of one of the least likely explanations is just click baity rubbish that I'm not into. Anything that tries it my judgment going in is already tainted
UFOs and to a lesser extent by also by extension UAPs acronym is designed to invoke 'aliens' to the audience. While I believe the universe is large enough to be teeming with alien life, I also know that the vast distances and timeline makes the chance an advanced alien race encounters an advanced alien race capable of understanding the concept makes that chance a fraction of a poofteenth.
-
Though not directly linked to the FE question it stlll none the less has some significant bearing on the issue. The up and coming report on UAPs due out soon is going to set the UFO/UAP debate alight.
How does this affect the FE debate? For example it shows how ‘things’ can not be kept secret, people will eventually talk.
Having watched some of the interviews with former agency staff, pilots, government officials snd read what former President Obama thinks along with watching some of the actual Navy/Airforce footage it’s something that can no longer be ignored. That’s what firm evidence does from credible sources, something the FE has never been able to do.
It looks like these UAPs are real, but what they actually are and ‘who’ or what made them is currently open and unanswered. No doubt there will be cranks who join in claiming to have been probed by aliens or had them round for coffee and it’s this separating out the nonsense from the hard facts that is going to be the challenge.
Personally I find it quite exciting having been a real UFO sceptic but that’s what hard factual evidence can do, change minds. It also throws out the window many of the FE claims made against the system and those who disagree with them. Hard evidence changes minds.
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
UFO means 'Unidentified Flying Object'
If I attach some lights to a frisbee and throw it at night and you see it sail over your backyard, to you, it is a UFO because you dont know what it is
There is always a reasonable explanation for what we see. To some, the object is a UFO. To the government, they are weather balloons
I think before you comment you should go and look at the evidence that was screened on 60 mins in the USA this week and await the publication of the governmental report. In addition the news feature was concerned with reports from military personnel, defence spokesman and senior politicians. Did you not read my post. Your Frisbee remark apart from childish does not take into account both the evidence and the sources.
Oh yes. American 60 minutes. The bastion of truth, independant and ethical journalism. ::)
Where is your free thinking open mind?
-
Though not directly linked to the FE question it stlll none the less has some significant bearing on the issue. The up and coming report on UAPs due out soon is going to set the UFO/UAP debate alight.
How does this affect the FE debate? For example it shows how ‘things’ can not be kept secret, people will eventually talk.
Having watched some of the interviews with former agency staff, pilots, government officials snd read what former President Obama thinks along with watching some of the actual Navy/Airforce footage it’s something that can no longer be ignored. That’s what firm evidence does from credible sources, something the FE has never been able to do.
It looks like these UAPs are real, but what they actually are and ‘who’ or what made them is currently open and unanswered. No doubt there will be cranks who join in claiming to have been probed by aliens or had them round for coffee and it’s this separating out the nonsense from the hard facts that is going to be the challenge.
Personally I find it quite exciting having been a real UFO sceptic but that’s what hard factual evidence can do, change minds. It also throws out the window many of the FE claims made against the system and those who disagree with them. Hard evidence changes minds.
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
UFO means 'Unidentified Flying Object'
If I attach some lights to a frisbee and throw it at night and you see it sail over your backyard, to you, it is a UFO because you dont know what it is
There is always a reasonable explanation for what we see. To some, the object is a UFO. To the government, they are weather balloons
I think before you comment you should go and look at the evidence that was screened on 60 mins in the USA this week and await the publication of the governmental report. In addition the news feature was concerned with reports from military personnel, defence spokesman and senior politicians. Did you not read my post. Your Frisbee remark apart from childish does not take into account both the evidence and the sources.
Oh yes. American 60 minutes. The bastion of truth, independant and ethical journalism. ::)
Where is your free thinking open mind?
That was my free thinking open mind. No one made that thought for me. I know that sort of thinking is a novel concept for you but you should try it some time
-
Oh yes. American 60 minutes. The bastion of truth, independant and ethical journalism. ::)
Before you throw the baby out with the bathwater, there's F-18/F-16 footage from both the USN and USAF that show some stuff that is just, strange. 60 minutes is picking up something that got declassified under the Trump administration, that doesn't mean anything regarding what sort of truth value the content has because that show broadcasted it. This is something that could be more than it appears, or it could be nothing. The videos I've seen from military operations is really bizarre. When I was in aviation, there's a chapter in the 7110.65 (the FAA ATC rulebook) covering UFO's and how to report them. I think a lot of aviators don't report because the don't want to be embarrassed by their peers. With knowledge that these events happen, I think that stigma might be reduced and we'll see more incidents reported.
In short, I think there's more to this and it would be hasty to throw it out based solely on a media outlet reporting on it.
I think we can safely assume it's not aliens. Cool if it is, no problem in desiring to find out answers to questions but the jumping to conclusions of one of the least likely explanations is just click baity rubbish that I'm not into. Anything that tries it my judgment going in is already tainted
UFOs and to a lesser extent by also by extension UAPs acronym is designed to invoke 'aliens' to the audience. While I believe the universe is large enough to be teeming with alien life, I also know that the vast distances and timeline makes the chance an advanced alien race encounters an advanced alien race capable of understanding the concept makes that chance a fraction of a poofteenth.
I don't think any one can assume anything. Let see what the USA governmental report has to say. Going by all the declassified footage and interviews there is obviously 'things' of UAP s flying around. What they are no one can definitively say, not even you.
-
Though not directly linked to the FE question it stlll none the less has some significant bearing on the issue. The up and coming report on UAPs due out soon is going to set the UFO/UAP debate alight.
How does this affect the FE debate? For example it shows how ‘things’ can not be kept secret, people will eventually talk.
Having watched some of the interviews with former agency staff, pilots, government officials snd read what former President Obama thinks along with watching some of the actual Navy/Airforce footage it’s something that can no longer be ignored. That’s what firm evidence does from credible sources, something the FE has never been able to do.
It looks like these UAPs are real, but what they actually are and ‘who’ or what made them is currently open and unanswered. No doubt there will be cranks who join in claiming to have been probed by aliens or had them round for coffee and it’s this separating out the nonsense from the hard facts that is going to be the challenge.
Personally I find it quite exciting having been a real UFO sceptic but that’s what hard factual evidence can do, change minds. It also throws out the window many of the FE claims made against the system and those who disagree with them. Hard evidence changes minds.
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
UFO means 'Unidentified Flying Object'
If I attach some lights to a frisbee and throw it at night and you see it sail over your backyard, to you, it is a UFO because you dont know what it is
There is always a reasonable explanation for what we see. To some, the object is a UFO. To the government, they are weather balloons
I think before you comment you should go and look at the evidence that was screened on 60 mins in the USA this week and await the publication of the governmental report. In addition the news feature was concerned with reports from military personnel, defence spokesman and senior politicians. Did you not read my post. Your Frisbee remark apart from childish does not take into account both the evidence and the sources.
Oh yes. American 60 minutes. The bastion of truth, independant and ethical journalism. ::)
Where is your free thinking open mind?
That was my free thinking open mind. No one made that thought for me. I know that sort of thinking is a novel concept for you but you should try it some time
So thats an example of your open mind! gee I wonder what your closed mind is like?
-
Though not directly linked to the FE question it stlll none the less has some significant bearing on the issue. The up and coming report on UAPs due out soon is going to set the UFO/UAP debate alight.
How does this affect the FE debate? For example it shows how ‘things’ can not be kept secret, people will eventually talk.
Having watched some of the interviews with former agency staff, pilots, government officials snd read what former President Obama thinks along with watching some of the actual Navy/Airforce footage it’s something that can no longer be ignored. That’s what firm evidence does from credible sources, something the FE has never been able to do.
It looks like these UAPs are real, but what they actually are and ‘who’ or what made them is currently open and unanswered. No doubt there will be cranks who join in claiming to have been probed by aliens or had them round for coffee and it’s this separating out the nonsense from the hard facts that is going to be the challenge.
Personally I find it quite exciting having been a real UFO sceptic but that’s what hard factual evidence can do, change minds. It also throws out the window many of the FE claims made against the system and those who disagree with them. Hard evidence changes minds.
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
UFO means 'Unidentified Flying Object'
If I attach some lights to a frisbee and throw it at night and you see it sail over your backyard, to you, it is a UFO because you dont know what it is
There is always a reasonable explanation for what we see. To some, the object is a UFO. To the government, they are weather balloons
I think before you comment you should go and look at the evidence that was screened on 60 mins in the USA this week and await the publication of the governmental report. In addition the news feature was concerned with reports from military personnel, defence spokesman and senior politicians. Did you not read my post. Your Frisbee remark apart from childish does not take into account both the evidence and the sources.
Oh yes. American 60 minutes. The bastion of truth, independant and ethical journalism. ::)
Where is your free thinking open mind?
That was my free thinking open mind. No one made that thought for me. I know that sort of thinking is a novel concept for you but you should try it some time
So thats an example of your open mind! gee I wonder what your closed mind is like?
Why should I close it? That's dumb
-
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
There are lots of hard facts and compelling evidence for both the world being flat (or at least, not spherical) and for the reality of ufos (and by that I mean flying saucers and related flying machines) over the past century. The evidence hasn’t changed - advertising and media has.
I have a background in ufology, and feel very strongly that it is a great place for an independent researcher to cut their teeth and build the skills necessary for independent research. Sadly many are lost in the endeavor, because they allow belief and fiction to consume them.
Evidence and facts are quite easily ignored, and this is what affirmative bias (confirmation bias) is all about. Regardless of what you want to believe, it is embarrassingly easy to ignore everything that contradicts it and only see what you want to see. More facts and data are not required, in flat earth research nor ufology, rather it is the skills necessary for objective research that are conspicuously lacking.
-
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
There are lots of hard facts and compelling evidence for both the world being flat (or at least, not spherical) and for the reality of ufos (and by that I mean flying saucers and related flying machines) over the past century. The evidence hasn’t changed - advertising and media has.
I have a background in ufology, and feel very strongly that it is a great place for an independent researcher to cut their teeth and build the skills necessary for independent research. Sadly many are lost in the endeavor, because they allow belief and fiction to consume them.
Evidence and facts are quite easily ignored, and this is what affirmative bias (confirmation bias) is all about. Regardless of what you want to believe, it is embarrassingly easy to ignore everything that contradicts it and only see what you want to see. More facts and data are not required, in flat earth research nor ufology, rather it is the skills necessary for objective research that are conspicuously lacking.
"Evidence and facts are quite easily ignored"
"More facts and data are not required"
So very clearly true.
I have yet to see any compelling flat earth evidence, or evidence that UFS are flying saucers built by aliens. Certainly nothing convincing like some alien technology or, you know, an alien.
But thanks for the insight, for fields like flat earth and ufo-ology where you simply have no supporting evidence or facts to work with, I suppose it makes sense to redefine research to not need any of that.
-
I like the rebranding to UAP (unidentified aerial phenomenon) though.
There is a normal reason for that though.
UFO refers specifically to a flying object.
UAP refers to any phenomenon.
A light in the sky is not necessarily a flying object.
Your Frisbee remark apart from childish does not take into account both the evidence and the sources.
Not really.
It points out exactly what UFO/UAP means.
It does not mean aliens, it simply means it isn't identified.
From what I have seen so far, including from the military and government sources, there is no reason to conclude they are aliens or really anything special.
There are lots of hard facts and compelling evidence for both the world being flat (or at least, not spherical) and for the reality of ufos (and by that I mean flying saucers and related flying machines) over the past century. The evidence hasn’t changed - advertising and media has.
Well you are right about one part, the evidence hasn't really changed much. There is no significant evidence supporting either of those claims.
But with youtube, people can market it loads more to pretend both of those positions are supported by evidence, even without any.
Evidence and facts are quite easily ignored, and this is what affirmative bias (confirmation bias) is all about. Regardless of what you want to believe, it is embarrassingly easy to ignore everything that contradicts it and only see what you want to see. More facts and data are not required, in flat earth research nor ufology, rather it is the skills necessary for objective research that are conspicuously lacking.
And I certainly agree with pretty much all of this.
Those who believe in aliens will take almost any footage where it isn't easy to identify what is there, and conclude it must be aliens, even though there isn't really anything to support the idea it is aliens.
Those who believe Earth is flat will take almost anything that they think can support the idea that Earth is flat (or not round) and use it to claim it shows beyond any doubt that Earth is flat/not round.
Neither seem to carry out the objective research necessary to exclude other possibilities.
-
Those who believe Earth is flat will take almost anything that they think can support the idea that Earth is flat (or not round) and use it to claim it shows beyond any doubt that Earth is flat/not round.
Neither seem to carry out the objective research necessary to exclude other possibilities.
Considering the number of times you have jumped up and down screaming like a lunatic that something is a hypothesis or a theory, demanding proof to every discussion, you appear to be describing yourself.
-
Considering the number of times you have jumped up and down screaming like a lunatic that something is a hypothesis or a theory, demanding proof to every discussion, you appear to be describing yourself.
What does this have to do with UAPs?
-
Considering the number of times you have jumped up and down screaming like a lunatic that something is a hypothesis or a theory, demanding proof to every discussion, you appear to be describing yourself.
What does this have to do with UAPs?
Logic isn't his strong suit.
-
What lessons should the FE community learn from this? Possibly get some hard facts and compelling evidence.
There are lots of hard facts and compelling evidence for both the world being flat (or at least, not spherical) and for the reality of ufos (and by that I mean flying saucers and related flying machines) over the past century. The evidence hasn’t changed - advertising and media has.
I have a background in ufology, and feel very strongly that it is a great place for an independent researcher to cut their teeth and build the skills necessary for independent research. Sadly many are lost in the endeavor, because they allow belief and fiction to consume them.
Evidence and facts are quite easily ignored, and this is what affirmative bias (confirmation bias) is all about. Regardless of what you want to believe, it is embarrassingly easy to ignore everything that contradicts it and only see what you want to see. More facts and data are not required, in flat earth research nor ufology, rather it is the skills necessary for objective research that are conspicuously lacking.
There is no compelling evidence whatsoever for the earth being flat. All the evidence points to it being a sphere. unfortunately due to you conspiracy driven and anti- science beliefs you discount that evidence.
PS.
There is no such thing as flat earth research. There is no such thing as flat earth researchers. There are no such thing as flat earth scientists. Let's get that straight. What you do have is a bunch of people who look stuff up and may well post the odd video on Youtube. Thats not research.
You could prove me wrong by posting some links to some of the original research you claim is being carried out. I hope you understand the meaning of the word research and all what it entails. Let me remind you
"the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions"
based on that we would need to see some facts and conclusions. To date Ive never seen one flat earth fact ever published. Most flat earth output is concerned with nitpicking conventional science.
-
Considering the number of times you have jumped up and down screaming like a lunatic that something is a hypothesis or a theory, demanding proof to every discussion, you appear to be describing yourself.
What does this have to do with UAPs?
Logic isn't his strong suit.
Neither is giving straight answers.
-
I like the rebranding to UAP (unidentified aerial phenomenon) though.
There is a normal reason for that though.
UFO refers specifically to a flying object.
UAP refers to any phenomenon.
A light in the sky is not necessarily a flying object.
Your Frisbee remark apart from childish does not take into account both the evidence and the sources.
Not really.
It points out exactly what UFO/UAP means.
It does not mean aliens, it simply means it isn't identified.
From what I have seen so far, including from the military and government sources, there is no reason to conclude they are aliens or really anything special.
There are lots of hard facts and compelling evidence for both the world being flat (or at least, not spherical) and for the reality of ufos (and by that I mean flying saucers and related flying machines) over the past century. The evidence hasn’t changed - advertising and media has.
Well you are right about one part, the evidence hasn't really changed much. There is no significant evidence supporting either of those claims.
But with youtube, people can market it loads more to pretend both of those positions are supported by evidence, even without any.
Evidence and facts are quite easily ignored, and this is what affirmative bias (confirmation bias) is all about. Regardless of what you want to believe, it is embarrassingly easy to ignore everything that contradicts it and only see what you want to see. More facts and data are not required, in flat earth research nor ufology, rather it is the skills necessary for objective research that are conspicuously lacking.
And I certainly agree with pretty much all of this.
Those who believe in aliens will take almost any footage where it isn't easy to identify what is there, and conclude it must be aliens, even though there isn't really anything to support the idea it is aliens.
Those who believe Earth is flat will take almost anything that they think can support the idea that Earth is flat (or not round) and use it to claim it shows beyond any doubt that Earth is flat/not round.
Neither seem to carry out the objective research necessary to exclude other possibilities.
Ive not mentioned aliens. Who know who is responsible for these UAPs. I for one have no clue. I've watched the interviews and have found the evidence for their existence compelling. Their exact nature is a totally different question, which as far as I know, there is no available data. Who built them or what they actually are remains unknown. I think the clue is in the U.
-
Ive not mentioned aliens. Who know who is responsible for these UAPs. I for one have no clue. I've watched the interviews and have found the evidence for their existence compelling. Their exact nature is a totally different question, which as far as I know, there is no available data. Who built them or what they actually are remains unknown. I think the clue is in the U.
Part of the point I was making is that it is not necessarily a who, but it could be a what.
There is certainly something, but there is no reason to believe it is anything special.
-
“It was an afternoon of much anticipation and excitement – followed by the saddest trombone sound echoing across the internet.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jun/25/ufo-pentagon-report-reaction
-
I just took a picture of an unidentified object in the sky! I think it's aliens trying to send a message.
Can anyone identify it? What are they saying?
They must be very advanced because it was there one moment and then next it was gone. Clearly the intelligence behind whatever this is must be vast and powerful. Probably really smart, and handsome.
I also seem to have lost time... at least 5 minutes of my life are missing that I'll never get back. Scary.
(https://i.imgur.com/rlzUmmg.jpg)
-
I just took a picture of an unidentified object in the sky! I think it's aliens trying to send a message.
Can anyone identify it? What are they saying?
They must be very advanced because it was there one moment and then next it was gone. Clearly the intelligence behind whatever this is must be vast and powerful. Probably really smart, and handsome.
I also seem to have lost time... at least 5 minutes of my life are missing that I'll never get back. Scary.
(https://i.imgur.com/rlzUmmg.jpg)
Amazing! This is a rare and special picture. Few people have the honour of contact with the mysterious race known to UFOlogists as the fuq ‘ew.
-
I have yet to see any compelling flat earth evidence, or evidence that UFS are flying saucers built by aliens.
The point was that there is a ton of compelling evidence (for the earth not being spherical, and for the existence of flying saucers and related craft), but you (one) can always ignore/debunk/rationalize it away with little difficulty.
As for aliens, you are correct. Aliens are completely fiction with no solid evidence to support them (and have been a major discrediting/slander tool by the oss/cia since the very beginning). All flying craft are only built by one creature known to exist.
But thanks for the insight, for fields like flat earth and ufo-ology where you simply have no supporting evidence or facts to work with, I suppose it makes sense to redefine research to not need any of that.
Independent research is not for everyone. Most are much more comfortable repeating what they are trained to through conditioning by rote under the guise of education. Ufology is a great subject to study for developing the critical skills required to research objectively. As I said, discerning reality from fiction is very difficult for conditioned parrots - and many lose their way even further.
-
I have yet to see any compelling flat earth evidence, or evidence that UFS are flying saucers built by aliens.
The point was that there is a ton of compelling evidence (for the earth not being spherical, and for the existence of flying saucers and related craft), but you (one) can always ignore/debunk/rationalize it away with little difficulty.
As for aliens, you are correct. Aliens are completely fiction with no solid evidence to support them (and have been a major discrediting/slander tool by the oss/cia since the very beginning). All flying craft are only built by one creature known to exist.
But thanks for the insight, for fields like flat earth and ufo-ology where you simply have no supporting evidence or facts to work with, I suppose it makes sense to redefine research to not need any of that.
Independent research is not for everyone. Most are much more comfortable repeating what they are trained to through conditioning by rote under the guise of education. Ufology is a great subject to study for developing the critical skills required to research objectively. As I said, discerning reality from fiction is very difficult for conditioned parrots - and many lose their way even further.
Ufology is a terrible terrible subject to study to develop critical thinking skills. Reality in ufology is subjective and all conjecture with unsubstantiated proofs. The entire field is a fringe subject.
As for the compelling evidence for earth not being spherical - only if you restrict your entire world to a localised area at ground or sea level. The moment you increase your altitude, all that "compelling" evidence for earth not being spherical, starts to sink, along with the physical horizon.
-
The point was that there is a ton of compelling evidence (for the earth not being spherical, and for the existence of flying saucers and related craft), but you (one) can always ignore/debunk/rationalize it away with little difficulty.
No, there isn't.
There is a ton of "evidence" which is only "compelling" to those who already believe they are aliens/Earth is flat.
There is insufficient evidence to compel a rational person to aliens have visited Earth or that Earth isn't round, especially not a rational person that actually understand what is required for it and, in the latter case, all the evidence against.
Ufology is a great subject to study for developing the critical skills required to research objectively.
Not really. At least not the way the vast majority of "ufologists" do.
Developing critical skills and researching objectively requires one to critically examine the evidence and look for possible explanations, rather than just taking anything which might be aliens as proof of aliens like so many seem to do.
That means when you see such "evidence" your first conclusion should not be "aliens" or even some experimental craft.
Instead you should look to see if it can already be explained by well known and well established phenomenon.
You also need to consider errors and uncertainty.
That means if you really have no idea, that still doesn't mean it is aliens. Instead you would need to know enough to exclude other options.
It means if you cannot exclude other far more rational options, it isn't evidence for aliens.
-
I have yet to see any compelling flat earth evidence, or evidence that UFS are flying saucers built by aliens.
The point was that there is a ton of compelling evidence (for the earth not being spherical, and for the existence of flying saucers and related craft), but you (one) can always ignore/debunk/rationalize it away with little difficulty.
No, there is no compelling evidence for the existence of alien spacecraft, and none for the earth being flat. Name any?
You claiming there is compelling flat earth evidence without producing any compelling evidence doesn't change that.
Your comment here is a perfect example of why I can ignore it. You simply saying it doesn't make it true.
As for aliens, you are correct. Aliens are completely fiction with no solid evidence to support them (and have been a major discrediting/slander tool by the oss/cia since the very beginning). All flying craft are only built by one creature known to exist.
Well again, you are making some claims here without evidence, so I'm going to continue to consider them complete fiction, just like the existence of aliens here on earth. That at least we can both agree with.
-
Given the history of men perpetuating the concept of the divine right of kings in seeking to subjugate and dominate others, the entirety of the UFO narrative, as delivered and handled by world governments to the populace, can be chalked up to the "further effective management through fear mongering," handbook.
-
Given the history of men perpetuating the concept of the divine right of kings in seeking to subjugate and dominate others, the entirety of the UFO narrative, as delivered and handled by world governments to the populace, can be chalked up to the "further effective management through fear mongering," handbook.
I see. Kings ruled by divine right... so obviously modern governments are lying about UFOs to scare people.
Does that really make sense in your head? Try saying it out loud and see if it still means something to you.