Poll

Are some flying saucers extraterrestrial in origin?

Yes
8 (61.5%)
No
1 (7.7%)
Not Sure
4 (30.8%)

Total Members Voted: 13

Voting closed: September 19, 2013, 10:57:21 PM

Author UFOs (Similar threads merged)  (Read 66173 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

retrieval

  • Guest
Re: UFOs - Physical in Origin? I Say Thee Nay!
« Reply #30 on: February 03, 2011, 05:38:32 PM »
I wonder if anyone is so naive to cling to the theory that these manifestations originate from the physical plane - that is, an assembly line on some far away distant world? John Keel stated he thought these were demonic or spiritual in origin, and I think Jacques Vallee has also abandoned the ET explanation, favoring an extra-dimensional explanation. Whatever these UFOs are, they are not from Mars or any other physical world. I believe these objects originate from the spiritual (another dimension of reality) realm. Are they demonic? I think so. Mr. Keel thought so, and Mr. Vallee seems to point in that direction. Opinions?

Have a tough time with the old man in the sky is also makin ufos... Of all the paranormal ufos are the subject most grounded in science rather than the metaphysical.

If they are manefestations of spiritual world could they be angels?

Re: UFOs - Physical in Origin? I Say Thee Nay!
« Reply #31 on: February 03, 2011, 06:18:23 PM »
Yes, I think they are angels. But the good ones or the bad ones? The Bible states 1/3 of the angels are fallen. I do believe the UFOs we see today are the fallen angels. How do I know this? Read the excerpts from the close-encounter witnesses. These UFOnauts always deny Jesus Christ. That's the clue!

Re: UFOs - Physical in Origin? I Say Thee Nay!
« Reply #32 on: February 04, 2011, 03:00:04 AM »
I wonder if anyone is so naive to cling to the theory that these manifestations originate from the physical plane - that is, an assembly line on some far away distant world? John Keel stated he thought these were demonic or spiritual in origin, and I think Jacques Vallee has also abandoned the ET explanation, favoring an extra-dimensional explanation. Whatever these UFOs are, they are not from Mars or any other physical world. I believe these objects originate from the spiritual (another dimension of reality) realm. Are they demonic? I think so. Mr. Keel thought so, and Mr. Vallee seems to point in that direction. Opinions?


so to solve the UFO phenomenon you add another layer of complexity?  you have this unexplained phenomenon and rather than reach for corporeal solutions you dip into the spiritual plane? 


start with the simplest solution first: mis-identified aircraft or anomalous weather activity.  then ... maybe some kind of obscure geomagnetic phenomenon.  then perhaps consider the possibility that there was an experimental craft.  and if that fails ... reach outside the box - consider an ET craft.  but reaching outside the dimension?  i don't see how that helps. 


regardless - it's all about the evidence.  were there radar contacts?  multipler witnesses?  other?

Re: UFOs - Physical in Origin? I Say Thee Nay!
« Reply #33 on: February 05, 2011, 05:10:59 PM »
Of course, in the days of Photoshop and After Effects it's hard to tell what is real and what is not. But, any serious UFO investigator will tell you to get away from the photos and videos. Examine the close-encounters and the witness testimony of those who have encountered these UFOnauts. A silver disc in a photo or video tells us nothing.
 

so to solve the UFO phenomenon you add another layer of complexity?  you have this unexplained phenomenon and rather than reach for corporeal solutions you dip into the spiritual plane? 


start with the simplest solution first: mis-identified aircraft or anomalous weather activity.  then ... maybe some kind of obscure geomagnetic phenomenon.  then perhaps consider the possibility that there was an experimental craft.  and if that fails ... reach outside the box - consider an ET craft.  but reaching outside the dimension?  i don't see how that helps. 


regardless - it's all about the evidence.  were there radar contacts?  multipler witnesses?  other?

I went to the "UFO Truth" event in Port Townsend, WA a couple weeks ago and it was mostly unremarkable except for Peter Davenport's (of the National UFO Reporting Center) presentation.

At the end of it he recalled the death of Todd Sees in PA but added something I'd never head before (this may have been the first time he told it), and I found interesting.

He said, a little more than a decade ago, the FBI asked to interview him and he spoke to them for about 4 hours during which time they asked him about the contents of the NUFORC files. (This fact was corroborated by the Seattle Weekly in an article they did about Davenport a few weeks ago. That is, they verified that the agents Davenport identified were employed by the FBI and the FBI did confirm that those agents did speak to Davenport on the dates he indicated and at their instigation, though they wouldn't confirm the details of that conversation.)

At the end of the conversation - and this is what I found interesting - the FBI asked if he had ever received a report that would indicate to him if "any agency of the United States government were engaged in extra-constitutional activities" (to which he replied, no).

I remain undecided on the alien visitation question and the wording of this question puts me further in the camp of belief that sightings/abductions are phenomenon created by humans acting outside or above the law and that, at least some segment, of the law enforcement apparatus is investigating this possibility.

[For those not familiar with Todd Sees, basically he was a guy in P.A. who went ATV'ing one day in 2003  and never returned. This coincided with neighbors reporting lights in the sky. His ATV was discovered with his clothes neatly folded and laying on top of it. After a 3 day search by 200 volunteers someone saw a severely mutilated human corpse in a tree. The local police, instead of removing the corpse, called the FBI who removed it and then, a few days later, returned it to the family in a lead coffin that had been bolted shut and welded at the seams. (Davenport says he thinks there was probably just dead weight in the coffin and no actual remains.) They listed the cause of death as a cocaine overdose.]

I went to the "UFO Truth" event in Port Townsend, WA a couple weeks ago and it was mostly unremarkable except for Peter Davenport's (of the National UFO Reporting Center) presentation.

At the end of it he recalled the death of Todd Sees in PA but added something I'd never head before (this may have been the first time he told it), and I found interesting.

He said, a little more than a decade ago, the FBI asked to interview him and he spoke to them for about 4 hours during which time they asked him about the contents of the NUFORC files. (This fact was corroborated by the Seattle Weekly in an article they did about Davenport a few weeks ago. That is, they verified that the agents Davenport identified were employed by the FBI and the FBI did confirm that those agents did speak to Davenport on the dates he indicated and at their instigation, though they wouldn't confirm the details of that conversation.)

At the end of the conversation - and this is what I found interesting - the FBI asked if he had ever received a report that would indicate to him if "any agency of the United States government were engaged in extra-constitutional activities" (to which he replied, no).

I remain undecided on the alien visitation question and the wording of this question puts me further in the camp of belief that sightings/abductions are phenomenon created by humans acting outside or above the law and that, at least some segment, of the law enforcement apparatus is investigating this possibility.

[For those not familiar with Todd Sees, basically he was a guy in P.A. who went ATV'ing one day in 2003  and never returned. This coincided with neighbors reporting lights in the sky. His ATV was discovered with his clothes neatly folded and laying on top of it. After a 3 day search by 200 volunteers someone saw a severely mutilated human corpse in a tree. The local police, instead of removing the corpse, called the FBI who removed it and then, a few days later, returned it to the family in a lead coffin that had been bolted shut and welded at the seams. (Davenport says he thinks there was probably just dead weight in the coffin and no actual remains.) They listed the cause of death as a cocaine overdose.]


This happens every day outside the United States.  His interview with the FBI could have been about several different topics, so it is a matter of conjecture based on his testimony at this point.  If it were true, perhaps there is a real X-Files after all.

This happens every day outside the United States.  His interview with the FBI could have been about several different topics, so it is a matter of conjecture based on his testimony at this point.  If it were true, perhaps there is a real X-Files after all.

I'm not quite following. What is a matter of conjecture?

I guess if it wasn't clear, the FBI agents who interviewed Davenport weren't expressing the opinion that an agency of the government was engaged in "extra-constitutional activities", they were asking Davenport the question if he had ever come across information that would lead him to believe "any agency of the United States government were engaged in extra-constitutional activities." To which he replied that, no, he had not come across any such information.

I guess I'm confused about the use of the word conjecture in this context.

I'm not quite following. What is a matter of conjecture?

I guess if it wasn't clear, the FBI agents who interviewed Davenport weren't expressing the opinion that an agency of the government was engaged in "extra-constitutional activities", they were asking Davenport the question if he had ever come across information that would lead him to believe "any agency of the United States government were engaged in extra-constitutional activities." To which he replied that, no, he had not come across any such information.

I guess I'm confused about the use of the word conjecture in this context.


The conjecture is his assertion as to what his conversation with the FBI was about.  We only have his statement asserting what his meeting with the FBI was about.  It could have been about anything. 

Apparently, only the fact that the meeting occurred can be corroborated, not the content of the meeting:


 "(This fact was corroborated by the Seattle Weekly in an article they did about Davenport a few weeks ago. That is, they verified that the agents Davenport identified were employed by the FBI and the FBI did confirm that those agents did speak to Davenport on the dates he indicated and at their instigation, though they wouldn't confirm the details of that conversation.)"


The conjecture is his assertion as to what his conversation with the FBI was about.  We only have his statement asserting what his meeting with the FBI was about.  It could have been about anything. 

Apparently, only the fact that the meeting occurred can be corroborated, not the content of the meeting:


 "(This fact was corroborated by the Seattle Weekly in an article they did about Davenport a few weeks ago. That is, they verified that the agents Davenport identified were employed by the FBI and the FBI did confirm that those agents did speak to Davenport on the dates he indicated and at their instigation, though they wouldn't confirm the details of that conversation.)"

Got it. I think you mean it's a matter of faith on our part that he is being honest about the topic of the meeting. "Conjecture" indicates he's opining on the topic of the meeting. While he may be honest or dishonest about what occurred in the meeting, since he was a party to it he wouldn't be wondering about what, exactly, was going on during the meeting.

But, yes, it goes without saying your observation is obviously correct that it is a matter of faith on our part he is being honest about what occurred in the meeting (inasmuch as it does anytime someone relates to us a story about their personal or professional lives).

Dan Aykroyd "Unplugged on UFO's"
« Reply #39 on: April 05, 2011, 11:14:25 AM »



Just watched this on Netflix.  I love Dan, but this had all the flair of being filmed on a flip-phone in a dorm room.  Really low budget, crappy production with zero information and really anecdotal stories.  90% of the budget must have been on the cover art here.  Anybody seen it?  If not, skip it.

Re: Dan Aykroyd "Unplugged on UFO's"
« Reply #40 on: April 05, 2011, 02:26:36 PM »
Yeah I recently saw the film. I agree with your analysis completely. And I think alot of aykroyd too. But this is a bad showing... I doubt he needs the money so it may well be his conviction. But still a bad showing.

Re: Dan Aykroyd "Unplugged on UFO's"
« Reply #41 on: April 05, 2011, 02:59:55 PM »
His movie might've been a disaster, but apparently his Crystal Head Vodka is very <a href="http://www.q13fox.com/news/kcpq-092909-danakroydvodka,0,2734147.story">highly rated</a>.

Re: Dan Aykroyd "Unplugged on UFO's"
« Reply #42 on: April 05, 2011, 03:18:52 PM »
this isn't so much a movie as it is a conversation between aykroyd and david sereda.


saw this about four years ago on youtube, i think.


in that setting, I thought it was awesome. (i was watching youtube on my TV then)


I figured that the title "unplugged" implied, perhaps among other things, that it was a stripped down production. So I am a little more forgiving. I liked it. He's a good speaker on the subject.

Re: Dan Aykroyd "Unplugged on UFO's"
« Reply #43 on: April 05, 2011, 03:29:52 PM »
I'm still looking forward to seeing the new Ghost Buster's movie!

My best UFO Sighting.
« Reply #44 on: April 07, 2011, 02:08:33 PM »
One thing that really pisses me off is when someone says that have video of a UFO, or a story of a UFO sighting, and it turns out to be some squirely pinpoint of light off in the distance at night.
 
That is nothing.  That Idiot Noory may fall for that crap, but quit wasting my time.
 
My best sighting was in the Phillipines, circa 1983. 
 
It was about 3:30 in the afternoon on a typical (hot!) sunny day.  I was taking a trike back home and we, myself and the trike driver, were cruzing through a residential area in Angeles City.  I think we both must have seen it at the same time, because the trike driver came to a stop as soon as it registered in my mind what I was looking at.
 
We both got off the trike and stood at the side of the road looking at this classic UFO ( grayish, oblong - about 25 feet from end to end and about 6 - 8 feet top to bottom ) slowly spinning unsteadyly directly over a house right accross the street.  We were no more then 30 yards away from it.  It was sitting just above a few palm trees in these people's yard so it couldn't have been more then 75 feet in the air.
 
I remember just looking at it for about a minute thinking to myself, "Am I seeing this?"
 
I looked at the trike driver and he said to me, "What is that thing, Padi?"  Right after he spoke we both turned back to the house and the UFO was gone.  Without a sound.
 
The weird thing is....  about three weeks later that house had burned to the ground killing the family inside.  Mother, father, 2 kids, a housegirl and the dog.
 
 
 
 

Re: My best UFO Sighting.
« Reply #45 on: April 07, 2011, 03:08:30 PM »
holy shit! i intentionally look and have never seen one...

Re: My best UFO Sighting.
« Reply #46 on: April 07, 2011, 04:18:46 PM »
the problem with ufo videos is that commercially available consumer electronics (cameras,phones,camcorders,etc) have really terrible optics.  if the object is farther than 100 yds you may be better off painting something.  on a canvas.  with paint.  to get a really solid photo you would have to have a camera with a really high rez format, an excellent telephoto lens, and something to steady the camera with. video would require same/similar. 

the eye is a really amazing piece of accidental engineering


also ...

http://www.coastgab.com/index.php/topic,192.msg26557.html#msg26557


Phoenix Lights/Giant Triangle UFO Explanation?
« Reply #47 on: July 16, 2011, 12:32:32 PM »
For years the sighting of giant triangles have been one of the most intriguing UFO mysteries. Here is an explanation I have never seen before but that makes a lot of sense. You have to scroll about a third of the way down to the video labeled Naval Ocean Surveillance System.

While I would love for there to be an other worldly source of UFO I have always assumed that the majority of really good sightings were of classified military projects. This one could clearly be taken as a "giant triangle" type UFO.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/07/secret-space-arsenal/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+wired/index+%28Wired:+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29&pid=587&viewall=true

Re: Phoenix Lights/Giant Triangle UFO Explanation?
« Reply #48 on: July 16, 2011, 02:54:19 PM »
that would be a candidate for explaining the triangle sightings.  however, witnesses said that the triangle ufo blacked out the sky. this triangle (in the video on the linked page) does not black out the sky


Re: Phoenix Lights/Giant Triangle UFO Explanation?
« Reply #49 on: July 17, 2011, 04:32:26 AM »
that would be a candidate for explaining the triangle sightings.  however, witnesses said that the triangle ufo blacked out the sky. this triangle (in the video on the linked page) does not black out the sky

I realize that, however eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. Given something that looks plausible, and lacking any pickled in a jar of alcohol aliens, I have to give a lot of leeway between the two.

Larry King UFO show of early 80s
« Reply #50 on: July 18, 2011, 08:09:27 PM »
    There was a Fan-tastic show Larry had on one night which featured a panel of guests including Richard Hall, Bruce MaCabee, and Don Berliner. I have a bit of it on an old cassette tape recorded off an out-of-town radio station; you DXers know what I mean: scratchy, and hard to be more than 5 feet away from the radio without ripping your hair out. IF anybody knows where I could find a copy of this show(or online) I would be most grateful as this was one of the best I've ever heard; riveting was too light to describe its content ! BTW, Larry used to sell his episodes via cassette but dopey me did not buy one at the time :-[...Thanks all.

Re: Larry King UFO show of early 80s
« Reply #51 on: July 18, 2011, 10:51:30 PM »
 
   It was what, like 30 years ago? No matter, it's still more relevant than what Noory gives us today.

   

Re: Larry King UFO show of early 80s
« Reply #52 on: July 19, 2011, 01:03:54 AM »
I remember Larry King had a live TV show special in the 90's out in the Nevada desert near Area 51 with several UFO guests out there including Stanton Friedman.

Re: Phoenix Lights/Giant Triangle UFO Explanation?
« Reply #53 on: July 21, 2011, 06:54:50 PM »
I realize that, however eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. Given something that looks plausible, and lacking any pickled in a jar of alcohol aliens, I have to give a lot of leeway between the two.
true true

Belgian UFO photo hoax
« Reply #54 on: July 27, 2011, 02:23:55 PM »
I have read several news reports over the past few days that the famous photo of a triangular UFO over Belgium in 1989 was in fact hoaxed.  The guy who reported the sighting and picture came out and said he hoaxed it.  That is very interesting since that photo has found its way into many many books, documentaries, etc as evidence of the reality of UFOs and the Belgian flap of 89-90, and was believed to be one of the most authenticated photos of a UFO ever taken.  A lot of UFO "investigators" are wiping egg off their face, or at least they should be. 


UFO cheeto pic
« Reply #55 on: August 08, 2011, 01:33:19 AM »

Re: UFO cheeto pic
« Reply #56 on: August 08, 2011, 06:39:47 AM »
a seriously uninteresting photo.  must've been a slow day at premiere

Re: UFO cheeto pic
« Reply #57 on: August 08, 2011, 12:30:23 PM »
Cheeto Paws are back?

Re: UFO cheeto pic
« Reply #58 on: August 11, 2011, 07:29:01 PM »
Oh Lord, that looks like the thing John Lithgow as Lord John Whorfin / Dr. Emilio Lizardo and was trying was trying to escape earth in on the movie" The Adventures of Buckaroo Bonzi Arcross the 8th Deminsion." I think I'm the only person on the planet that actually liked the movie. I hope it made it back to the 8th deminsion. Maybe John Bigbootie was on board.

Re: UFO cheeto pic
« Reply #59 on: August 11, 2011, 07:33:54 PM »
Oh Lord, that looks like the thing John Lithgow as Lord John Whorfin / Dr. Emilio Lizardo and was trying was trying to escape earth in on the movie" The Adventures of Buckaroo Bonzi Arcross the 8th Deminsion." I think I'm the only person on the planet that actually liked the movie. I hope it made it back to the 8th deminsion. Maybe John Bigbootie was on board.

no matter where you go, there you are.