That Damn UFO Thing
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-11-2014, 07:54 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(26-11-2014 07:37 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(26-11-2014 06:59 PM)Free Wrote:  No, it WAS a fireman who snapped the picture. He, the fireman, said the following:

"Our question is: have you heard of this thing, and if so, do you have this picture or others like? I, for one, would like to remind myself and some of the guys here that I may be getting on in years, but I'm still of sound mind and body. Again, it happened around 1927 or 1926. Thank you very much. You are doing a great service."

I actually have seen this picture, almost 35 years ago.

Free, I have no beef with you but people see all sorts of things they can’t explain or describe. That doesn’t propel the sighting into visitors from outer space. I’d love to know for certain there is intelligent life in the universe (I’m not so sure we qualify so I didn’t say “other”).

With the advent of the phone camera and video recorder (think the ubiquetous GoPro) everyone walks around with some kind of recording device, many are HD and yet, UFOlogists always trot out grainy, crappy photos or video Consider This alone should raise red flags for you. If these UFOs are a recurring phenomena then our lovely media would already have been inundated by volumes of photos and vids. There isn’t a conspiracy to hide this evidence, it just doesn’t exist.

I remain skeptical but hopeful (unless of course they come with Ray Guns, we don’t have Ray Guns yet). Weeping

I agree, but not all videos are poor quality or grainy.

The problem with modern photographs and videos is that, unless we have multiple pictures/videos from different people all pointing at the same object, we must be skeptical due to photoshop techniques and other methods designed to create a hoax.

But the thing is, there are literally tens of thousands of videos and photographs just from the last few years, but due to hoaxing, it's very difficult to know if something has been photoshopped or not.

This is why I prefer historical pictures, videos, and eyewitnes accounts. All pre-photoshop reports have more credibility with me.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 07:55 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(26-11-2014 07:26 PM)Free Wrote:  
(26-11-2014 07:17 PM)grizzlysnake Wrote:  I disagree, films about space travel and meeting aliens were being made way before then and lets not forget H.G. Wells War of The Worlds

There may have been 1 or 2 films created during the silent era, but the words "flying saucers" or "aliens" were not part of the American lexicon in 1927.

In fact, the term 'flying saucer" was not coined until 1947, yet here we have a picture of a flying saucer from 1927.

War of the Worlds was not broadcast until 1938, as far as mass media is concerned.
Why should that even matter when "flying saucer" or "alien" were coined? Don't get so caught up in semantics. They were only using terms that they could relate it to. There are also cigar shaped ships also, who knows what other terms they used to describe what they saw.
I was referring to the book not the broadcast.
All I'm saying is that the public had plenty of inspiration from science fiction stories and movies.

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 08:02 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(26-11-2014 07:55 PM)grizzlysnake Wrote:  All I'm saying is that the public had plenty of inspiration from science fiction stories and movies.

I have to disagree. We are talking about an era and location where a back water town had people akin to hill billies in 1927. In regards to my incident in 1973, I had seen movies about space monsters et al, but still to me they were just scary movies.

I never dreamed that an actual UFO would ever come into view in my life. It was the furthest thing from my mind.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 08:08 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(26-11-2014 07:54 PM)Free Wrote:  
(26-11-2014 07:37 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Free, I have no beef with you but people see all sorts of things they can’t explain or describe. That doesn’t propel the sighting into visitors from outer space. I’d love to know for certain there is intelligent life in the universe (I’m not so sure we qualify so I didn’t say “other”).

With the advent of the phone camera and video recorder (think the ubiquetous GoPro) everyone walks around with some kind of recording device, many are HD and yet, UFOlogists always trot out grainy, crappy photos or video Consider This alone should raise red flags for you. If these UFOs are a recurring phenomena then our lovely media would already have been inundated by volumes of photos and vids. There isn’t a conspiracy to hide this evidence, it just doesn’t exist.

I remain skeptical but hopeful (unless of course they come with Ray Guns, we don’t have Ray Guns yet). Weeping

I agree, but not all videos are poor quality or grainy.

The problem with modern photographs and videos is that, unless we have multiple pictures/videos from different people all pointing at the same object, we must be skeptical due to photoshop techniques and other methods designed to create a hoax.

But the thing is, there are literally tens of thousands of videos and photographs just from the last few years, but due to hoaxing, it's very difficult to know if something has been photoshopped or not.

This is why I prefer historical pictures, videos, and eyewitnes accounts. All pre-photoshop reports have more credibility with me.
Old photos can also be hoaxed, even without the film development process.
I'm sure you don't believe the authenticity of ectoplasm photos.

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 08:12 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(26-11-2014 08:02 PM)Free Wrote:  
(26-11-2014 07:55 PM)grizzlysnake Wrote:  All I'm saying is that the public had plenty of inspiration from science fiction stories and movies.

I have to disagree. We are talking about an era and location where a back water town had people akin to hill billies in 1927. In regards to my incident in 1973, I had seen movies about space monsters et al, but still to me they were just scary movies.

I never dreamed that an actual UFO would ever come into view in my life. It was the furthest thing from my mind.
You have no idea what they knew, or is there an eye-witness report I'm missing.
Your experience is your experience, I'm not talking about that.

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 08:28 PM (This post was last modified: 26-11-2014 08:38 PM by Free.)
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(26-11-2014 05:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(26-11-2014 05:48 PM)Free Wrote:  Neither do I, actually. Consider

I respect him, but for some reason lately his posts towards me have been ... viperous.

I have meant no ill will towards him, and hopefully things will improve.

The issue may well be that what you consider evidence is not evidence.
That annoys the crap out of those of us who value actual evidence. Drinking Beverage

Let me make something perfectly clear here.

The fact that UFOs exist has been conclusively proven.

That may sound like a bold statement, but it is true. The words "unidentified flying object" merely mean the object could not be identified as anything that can be referenced as being man-made. This does not necessarily mean they cannot be identified, however. Only that they have not.

And that is evidence.

The bigger questions are:

1. What are they?
2. Who pilots them?

When we look at the first question, and they have not been identified as being man-made, and they have been observed by multiple witnesses as performing and maneuvering far beyond the capabilities of all known man-made craft, then this reasonably gives us pause to consider non-human possibilities.

After all, if mankind is incapable of producing such vehicles- so demonstrated by the fact that these vehicles have been documented before and during the time when we were flying to the moon in a rickety space craft- then it is certainly not unreasonable to look at non human possibilities.

Point blank, we did not have the technology in the 50s, 60s, or 70s to create these kinds of vehicles.

So who did?

That brings us to question # 2, and the obvious answer.

Non human possibility.

If even 1 of any of these reports are true- historical to the modern age- then we can eliminate humans as being responsible for the construction and piloting of these vehicles.

Does this prove that aliens exist? That depends on how you decide to reason with it.

The evidence is all there. You don't need an alien to sit down to dinner with you to demonstrate the greater probability.

Personally, I do not see how anyone could possibly think that a claim that aliens exist would be some kind of extraordinary claim.

I find it extraordinary for anyone to say they don't exist.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 08:53 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(26-11-2014 08:28 PM)Free Wrote:  
(26-11-2014 05:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  The issue may well be that what you consider evidence is not evidence.
That annoys the crap out of those of us who value actual evidence. Drinking Beverage

Let me make something perfectly clear here.

The fact that UFOs exist has been conclusively proven.

That may sound like a bold statement, but it is true. The words "unidentified flying object" merely mean the object could not be identified as anything that can be referenced as being man-made. This does not necessarily mean they cannot be identified, however. Only that they have not.

And that is evidence.

The bigger questions are:

1. What are they?
2. Who pilots them?

Question 2 assumes facts not in evidence. Many UFO sightings turn out not to be vehicles at all.

Quote:When we look at the first question, and they have not been identified as being man-made, and they have been observed by multiple witnesses as performing and maneuvering far beyond the capabilities of all known man-made craft, then this reasonably gives us pause to consider non-human possibilities.

And non-intelligent possibilities, i.e. natural occurrences.

Quote:After all, if mankind is incapable of producing such vehicles- so demonstrated by the fact that these vehicles have been documented before and during the time when we were flying to the moon in a rickety space craft- then it is certainly not unreasonable to look at non human possibilities.

And non-intelligent possibilities, i.e. natural occurrences.

Quote:Point blank, we did not have the technology in the 50s, 60s, or 70s to create these kinds of vehicles.

Again, you are assuming facts not in evidence. There is no credible evidence of vehicles.

Quote:So who did?

That brings us to question # 2, and the obvious answer.

Non human possibility.

If even 1 of any of these reports are true- historical to the modern age- then we can eliminate humans as being responsible for the construction and piloting of these vehicles.

Does this prove that aliens exist? That depends on how you decide to reason with it.

The evidence is all there. You don't need an alien to sit down to dinner with you to demonstrate the greater probability.

Your confirmation bias is strong.

Quote:Personally, I do not see how anyone could possibly think that a claim that aliens exist would be some kind of extraordinary claim.

I find it extraordinary for anyone to say they don't exist.

The extraordinary claim is that aliens are visiting Earth, not that aliens might exist.

No one is saying they don't exist. There simply is no credible evidence that aliens are visiting Earth.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Chas's post
26-11-2014, 09:26 PM (This post was last modified: 26-11-2014 09:31 PM by Free.)
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(26-11-2014 08:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(26-11-2014 08:28 PM)Free Wrote:  Let me make something perfectly clear here.

The fact that UFOs exist has been conclusively proven.

That may sound like a bold statement, but it is true. The words "unidentified flying object" merely mean the object could not be identified as anything that can be referenced as being man-made. This does not necessarily mean they cannot be identified, however. Only that they have not.

And that is evidence.

The bigger questions are:

1. What are they?
2. Who pilots them?

Question 2 assumes facts not in evidence. Many UFO sightings turn out not to be vehicles at all.

Just because "many UFOs turn out not to be vehicles at all" does not in any way eliminate that ALL UFOs turn out not to be vehicles. If many UFOs turn out not to be vehicles, then they have of course been eliminated as requiring a pilot.

Therefore, Question 2 is valid for all remaining UFOs that demonstrate vehicular characteristics.

Quote:
Quote:When we look at the first question, and they have not been identified as being man-made, and they have been observed by multiple witnesses as performing and maneuvering far beyond the capabilities of all known man-made craft, then this reasonably gives us pause to consider non-human possibilities.

And non-intelligent possibilities, i.e. natural occurrences.

Same answer as I stated above also applies here. All remaining UFOs that demonstrate vehicular characteristics remain in play.

Quote:
Quote:After all, if mankind is incapable of producing such vehicles- so demonstrated by the fact that these vehicles have been documented before and during the time when we were flying to the moon in a rickety space craft- then it is certainly not unreasonable to look at non human possibilities.

And non-intelligent possibilities, i.e. natural occurrences.

Same answer as I stated above also applies here. All remaining UFOs that demonstrate vehicular characteristics remain in play.

Quote:
Quote:Point blank, we did not have the technology in the 50s, 60s, or 70s to create these kinds of vehicles.

Again, you are assuming facts not in evidence. There is no credible evidence of vehicles.

Actually, I am using solid reasoning based upon a valid argument from silence. An argument of silence can be a valid argument when evidence that is reasonably expected is not present.

Considering that we could barely make it to the moon- and failed with Apollo 13- yet we have dozens if not hundreds of photographs, videos, and simultaneous eyewitness accounts of UFOs demonstrating vehicular characteristics, then the evidence shows us that if mankind had the technology demonstrated by these UFOs we wouldn't be failing to go to the moon, or exploding on the launchpad, or disasters such as the space shuttles.

The silence is deafening, the argument persuasive.



Quote:
Quote:So who did?

That brings us to question # 2, and the obvious answer.

Non human possibility.

If even 1 of any of these reports are true- historical to the modern age- then we can eliminate humans as being responsible for the construction and piloting of these vehicles.

Does this prove that aliens exist? That depends on how you decide to reason with it.

The evidence is all there. You don't need an alien to sit down to dinner with you to demonstrate the greater probability.

Your confirmation bias is strong.

No confirmation bias here. Using evidence and reasoning only. That should be obvious by the structure of my arguments which demonstrate said reasoning.



Quote:
Quote:Personally, I do not see how anyone could possibly think that a claim that aliens exist would be some kind of extraordinary claim.

I find it extraordinary for anyone to say they don't exist.

The extraordinary claim is that aliens are visiting Earth, not that aliens might exist.

No one is saying they don't exist. There simply is no credible evidence that aliens are visiting Earth.

And I have made a positive claim somewhere that says they do?

I have repeatedly said it was possible, and will even go so far as probable, but I have not said it was a 100% fact.

Perhaps you and your buddy whom you've defended should start reading this thread from the beginning?

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 09:44 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
I find the following report to be very very credible:

Chicago O'Hare Airport UFO 2006

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 09:48 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(26-11-2014 09:44 PM)Free Wrote:  I find the following report to be very very credible:

Chicago O'Hare Airport UFO 2006

And I find it unconvincing. Show me evidence. Radar from the tower? Photograph?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: