More proof of aliens

[BlueMerle]

I'm a skeptic, 99% of all claims of alien visitation etc seem to be nonsense, nonetheless there is a body of evidence out there that is hard to explain.

<snip>

There are countless phenomena that can't be explained. Many rational and reasonable people have observed things they can't explain. The inability to explain a given observation in no way leaves open the possibility of alien visitation anymore than hearing something going bump in the night leaves open the possibility ghosts.

 

[GGizmo]

You saw these things on Ancient Aliens, a series regularly debunked by actual science.

Like many issues in these times, where are the good debunking shows?

The only place these series are "regularly debunked" is on parts of the Internet. It would be good for the general populations conversation if they were debunked. But the only programme I know about debunking is MythBusters, though I don't think they cover subjects like this.

I do find it worrying though that people fall back to 'science says no' when in reality most science in these areas are educated guesses and opinions.

Also I don't believe that everyone who claims to see a UFO is delusional or doing it for the laughs, especially when quite a lot of those people these days hold senior positions in society. The fact is we can't be sure either way 100% Everything is an educated guess based on many things. This means some people will tend not to believe while others will give people more of the benefit of doubt.

 

[mrk]

I do find it worrying though that people fall back to 'science says no' when in reality most science in these areas are educated guesses and opinions.

Ah are we actually going down this road again like countless other GD threads on similar topics?

You have shown a lack of understanding for what scientific theory is vs "theory" in the standard sense.

And the reason why there aren't shows dedicated to the debunks? Shows like that don't interest the general population and fewer viewing audience = lower ratings = No revenue for the production houses. In the same way KFC recently binned off the failed healthy chicken options from their menu simply because after years of trying, they just didn't sell because most people eating fast food don't care about personal health.

Plus, the prospect of ALIENS!!!! is far more exciting television than cold hard facts.

Actual facts are a fingertip swipe and tap away when any of these claims crop up from those shows anyway. But as above, most people just don't care.

 

[Angilion]

[..] I've never said I believe these things were made by aliens, in the sense I don't think we've been visited by creatures from another planet. My personal theory is that this is an advanced race was from earth and left thousands of years ago and visit us every so often. Again this is my personal thoughts that I'm not putting forward 100% proof of, and not saying I'm 100% correct. I wouldn't know that unless it became common knowledge. [..]

It amounts to the same thing, really. Where the superior entities came from is a minor detail, as is whether they are gods or aliens.

So...where's the evidence? You're putting forward the idea that in the past on Earth there were people with technology and infrastructure far in advance of ours today, who for some reason all left Earth. Why is there no evidence of their existence? It's not just the technology, it's also the infrastructure. It takes a lot of infrastructure to develop a society with such advanced technology and abundance of resources and processed resources. Why is there no sign of it on Earth? We have found evidence of the technology of people from 2 million years ago, when small groups of hunter-gatherers roamed around. How could an entire civilisation with towns and cities and transport systems and factories and all the rest of it simply disappear only thousands of years ago, leaving no trace at all?

You'd be better off with a supernatural explanation. Just make your "advanced race" gods or spirits or whatever and give them magic instead of technology. Works exactly the same and "explains" the total lack of evidence.

[..]
''With careful planning and simple technologies, Nickell proved that a small team of people could recreate even the largest figures within days, without any aerial assistance''
Knowing you had made the image would have made them worth doing. [..]

As well as that, a plausible explanation is that the Nazca lines were religious. People have often made monuments to their gods. Why not figures that could have course be seen by the gods above? Or some other ritual purpose - if you believe an image has some benefit, e.g. a fertility symbol to bring good harvests, why not make it as large as you can?

 

[Angilion]

[..] I do find it worrying though that people fall back to 'science says no' when in reality most science in these areas are educated guesses and opinions.

No. Just no. "educated guesses and opinions" are not science and science is not "educated guesses and opinions". You're making it look as though you have no idea what science is, which is a sadly common thing since science is so often misleadingly reported in order to gain views.

 

[enkoda]

Like many issues in these times, where are the good debunking shows?

The only place these series are "regularly debunked" is on parts of the Internet. It would be good for the general populations conversation if they were debunked. But the only programme I know about debunking is MythBusters, though I don't think they cover subjects like this.

I do find it worrying though that people fall back to 'science says no' when in reality most science in these areas are educated guesses and opinions.

Also I don't believe that everyone who claims to see a UFO is delusional or doing it for the laughs, especially when quite a lot of those people these days hold senior positions in society. The fact is we can't be sure either way 100% Everything is an educated guess based on many things. This means some people will tend not to believe while others will give people more of the benefit of doubt.

An unidentified flying object isn't extraordinary, it's just unidentified. Claims of alien spacecraft are extraordinary though.
These people certainly aren't delusional, it's when the claim sways from 'UFO' to 'alien spacecraft' that a huge, pyramid-sized (he-he!) pinch of salt is needed.

And why would you believe someone's claim simply because they hold a senior position?

 

[=XDC=FluphyBunny]

But that assumes that when we say 'aliens' that we're meaning totally different people to us. Maybe they were us in the past and took off from our planet and have been monitoring us since then.

All the major religions make reference to what we'd refer to as aliens and ufo's in the religious texts.

There are tribes in different parts of the world that have stone drawings that depict flying objects. How are these tribes all drawing similar things when back then the world was a bigger place and neither would know each other existed.

There are also objects on earth that we can't recreate even with our current technology. People put forward theories about the pyramids, yet for projects of that size I'd have expected that it would have been in text books back then e.g. like the tower of babel is mentioned.

Say what? Like pyramids for dummies?

I will give you all a hint, if you find yourself in agreement with Lysander you forgot to take your meds.

 

[BlueMerle]

No. Just no. "educated guesses and opinions" are not science and science is not "educated guesses and opinions". You're making it look as though you have no idea what science is, which is a sadly common thing since science is so often misleadingly reported in order to gain views.

Well said.

 

[Blackjack Davy]

There are also objects on earth that we can't recreate even with our current technology. People put forward theories about the pyramids, yet for projects of that size I'd have expected that it would have been in text books back then e.g. like the tower of babel is mentioned.

Like what, pyramids? Of course we can create them with current technology they're just blocks of stone piled up on top of one another nothing magical about that. Why are they in that particular shape? Because the egyptians didn't have mortar and you can't build vertical walls of stone without it, a pyramid is simply the most reliable way to build stable structures out of stone for any height that has only friction to hold it together. You can try yourself out of kid's building blocks try piling them up to any height and you'll find a pyramid is the most stable shape. Its not like the egyptians didn't make mistakes the desert is littered with them failed and half completed pyramids that didn't make it for one reason or another, like any other building project with no blueprints it took trial and error before they got it right.

 

[GGizmo]

And why would you believe someone's claim simply because they hold a senior position?

Because they have more to lose by making their claim.

No. Just no. "educated guesses and opinions" are not science and science is not "educated guesses and opinions". You're making it look as though you have no idea what science is, which is a sadly common thing since science is so often misleadingly reported in order to gain views.

You've nearly said what I've said, that a lot of people fall back on saying something is scientific when its not.

 

[Sankari]

Aliens have technology beyond our comprehension. They use it to visit Earth.

Upon arrival, they draw a bunch of lines in the sand. Then they leave.

Seems legit.

 

[enkoda]

Because they have more to lose by making their claim.

Wouldn't you rather believe something because it was true?
If someone, in fact anyone, told me they'd seen a UFO I would probably believe them regardless of social status - we're only talking about flying objects that they can't identify after all. Go back a few decades to when the B-2 stealth bomber was being flight tested and imagine your average Joe Public seeing it for the first time - it's not beyond the realms of possibility that many people would have called it a UFO or even an "alien spaceship".

The issue we have is people claiming video evidence of alien tech flying around when all we see is blurry, shaky, over-exposed footage, with nothing to measure distances or the size and velocity of the object in question. Basically the usual "I can't account for what I've seen, therefore it's aliens".

 

[Resistance]

Not real enough said

 

[BlueMerle]

Aliens have technology beyond our comprehension. They use it to visit Earth.

Upon arrival, they draw a bunch of lines in the sand. Then they leave.

Seems legit.

You forgot "they fly in crazy zig zag patterns". Other than that, you may be on to something.

 

[GGizmo]

Wouldn't you rather believe something because it was true?
If someone, in fact anyone, told me they'd seen a UFO I would probably believe them regardless of social status - we're only talking about flying objects that they can't identify after all. Go back a few decades to when the B-2 stealth bomber was being flight tested and imagine your average Joe Public seeing it for the first time - it's not beyond the realms of possibility that many people would have called it a UFO or even an "alien spaceship".

The issue we have is people claiming video evidence of alien tech flying around when all we see is blurry, shaky, over-exposed footage, with nothing to measure distances or the size and velocity of the object in question. Basically the usual "I can't account for what I've seen, therefore it's aliens".

I was replying to a question asking why I would more believe someone in a senior position. Because they have more to lose. Many people don't report sightings because there are people with attitudes that will ridicule them.

I agree that many sightings won't be anything mysterious and are just unidentified. But there are sightings that can't be explained even by governments. For a recent example of this, those videos released recently showing American pilots trying to chase an object. The American government have said they don't know what they are. I have a tendency to believe them when they say that because what would be the motive to lie? They usually wouldn't comment at all.

Like what, pyramids? Of course we can create them with current technology they're just blocks of stone piled up on top of one another nothing magical about that. Why are they in that particular shape? Because the egyptians didn't have mortar and you can't build vertical walls of stone without it, a pyramid is simply the most reliable way to build stable structures out of stone for any height that has only friction to hold it together. You can try yourself out of kid's building blocks try piling them up to any height and you'll find a pyramid is the most stable shape. Its not like the egyptians didn't make mistakes the desert is littered with them failed and half completed pyramids that didn't make it for one reason or another, like any other building project with no blueprints it took trial and error before they got it right.

I think the practical problem of moving massive stones is the main hold up to us being able to build a pyramid. Then precisely placing them. Then for the whole structure to be aligned in a specific way to the stars above.

Of course people can build a pyramid. But so far, even with our machines, nobody as attempted to move stones that big. Many things work in theory but can't be done in reality.

 

[esmozz]

To conclude that unexplained lights are the result of an alien intelligence would be a ludicrous leap of reasoning.

Armstrong went for a reason. He did'nt find anything but he thought something was there. As far as I'm aware he believed there may have been gold tablets in the caves and that the caves may have been the remnants of an ancient civilisation.

I'm not suggesting that a single sighting of lights in the sky infers an alien visitation, as I said previously 99% of all sightings can be explained rationally, nonetheless those that remain leave an open question,

Finally, back to the OP of this tread. The footage of unkown objects, moving at hypersonic speed, manoevring in a manner which is impossible to explain with current technology (dropping rapidly from 80,000 ft to 20,000 and hovering as described by one pilot), is unusual and difficult to explain. Objects that where acquired both visually by the pilots (one describes an object 40 feet long, shaped like an oval) and acquired by both airborne and shipborne radar systems multiple times.

It is hard to discredit the events and if true seem to represent a technology far in excess of ours. One possible explanation which is incredible is that they represent an alien technology, there could be other explanations (indeed it is likely that there are), nonetheless at this time the incredible one cannot be discounted.

But feel free to try, I'd genuinely like to hear a more mundane explanation of the events.

 

[enkoda]

I was replying to a question asking why I would more believe someone in a senior position. Because they have more to lose. Many people don't report sightings because there are people with attitudes that will ridicule them.

I agree that many sightings won't be anything mysterious and are just unidentified. But there are sightings that can't be explained even by governments. For a recent example of this, those videos released recently showing American pilots trying to chase an object. The American government have said they don't know what they are. I have a tendency to believe them when they say that because what would be the motive to lie? They usually wouldn't comment at all.

The impact of the internet literally forces the authorities to make some comment to appease those desperate for answers - if they don't then they're accused of hiding something, if they say they don't know they're accused of denying us the truth.

The only ridicule someone would face is if they claimed to have seen an alien spaceship when the correct thing to say is they've seen something they can't adequately explain.

Finally, back to the OP of this tread. The footage of unkown objects, moving at hypersonic speed, manoevring in a manner which is impossible to explain with current technology (dropping rapidly from 80,000 ft to 20,000 and hovering as described by one pilot), is unusual and difficult to explain. Objects that where acquired both visually by the pilots (one describes an object 40 feet long, shaped like an oval) and acquired by both airborne and shipborne radar systems multiple times.

It is hard to discredit the events and if true seem to represent a technology far in excess of ours. One possible explanation which is incredible is that they represent an alien technology, there could be other explanations (indeed it is likely that there are), nonetheless at this time the incredible one cannot be discounted.

I must be watching a different video - where do the pilots mention a rapid drop in altitude (duration of said drop?), hypersonic speed (what speed?) and impossible manoeuvrability? I've watched an RAF Typhoon (a 15 year old aircraft) literally come to standstill in mid-air above me at an airshow in Dawlish, so no, these manoeuvres aren't representative of "a technology far in excess of our own", they might show us a step up from technological advances in aircraft design and propulsion from years ago.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

Like what, pyramids? Of course we can create them with current technology they're just blocks of stone piled up on top of one another nothing magical about that. Why are they in that particular shape? Because the egyptians didn't have mortar and you can't build vertical walls of stone without it, a pyramid is simply the most reliable way to build stable structures out of stone for any height that has only friction to hold it together. You can try yourself out of kid's building blocks try piling them up to any height and you'll find a pyramid is the most stable shape. Its not like the egyptians didn't make mistakes the desert is littered with them failed and half completed pyramids that didn't make it for one reason or another, like any other building project with no blueprints it took trial and error before they got it right.

I've been to Giza 3 times plus other assorted Temples and Pyramids all over Egypt.
When people say that Aliens built the Pyramids they should stand next to them and it soon becomes apparent that the Egyptians chose any block and made it fit.
If we built them today we would make all the blocks exactly the same size like Lego.
And like you say, if Aliens built the pyramids they built 100s of crap ones before getting right.

 

[Lysander]

I must be watching a different video - where do the pilots mention a rapid drop in altitude (duration of said drop?), hypersonic speed (what speed?) and impossible manoeuvrability?

It's from this article in the New York Times:

For two weeks, the operator said, the Princeton had been tracking mysterious aircraft. The objects appeared suddenly at 80,000 feet, and then hurtled toward the sea, eventually stopping at 20,000 feet and hovering. Then they either dropped out of radar range or shot straight back up.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/us/politics/unidentified-flying-object-navy.html

 

[esmozz]

I must be watching a different video - where do the pilots mention a rapid drop in altitude (duration of said drop?), hypersonic speed (what speed?) and impossible manoeuvrability? I've watched an RAF Typhoon (a 15 year old aircraft) literally come to standstill in mid-air above me at an airshow in Dawlish, so no, these manoeuvres aren't representative of "a technology far in excess of our own", they might show us a step up from technological advances in aircraft design and propulsion from years ago.

There's plenty out there on the internet from fairly trustworthy sources, including the article above, which backs up everything I stated and you quoted. The terms 'rapid drop', 'hypersonic speed', and 'impossible manoevrability' were those used by the pilots and radar operators who observed the event. All of whom would be very familiar with what current technology was capable of.

For info, you didn't see a Typoon stop above you at an airshow, you saw it appear to do so, simply because a Typoon is not capable of such a manoeuvre. It was an optical illusion caused by the aspect you were viewing the aircraft and the way it was being flown, designed to wow crowds at airshows.

And just to quote the article above and the F18 pilot who was involved, when asked about it by a colleague.

'"I have no idea what I saw,” Commander Fravor replied to the pilot. “It had no plumes, wings or rotors and outran our F-18s. But, he added, “I want to fly one.”'

I have no idea what he saw either but if what he says is true then it could represent a technology far in advance of ours.