Does the Phenomenon deserve study

[mike]

Minot incident is in here at the 16:10 mark

[video=google;-1614846387438905636]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1614846387438905636#[/video]

We are also reminded of Blue Book case# 12548, in which a UFO was sighted on October 24th, 1968 at Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota. Airmen on the ground saw a brightly-lit object hovering above the ground. A B52 was flying in the area and was diverted to investigate. The crew clearly saw a structured craft and they appear on camera to describe their experiences. The co-pilot, an Air Force captain, is certain that what he saw was an alien spacecraft. The navigator picked it up on his radar scope and we are shown photographs of the actual blip as it paced the aircraft. When it vanished from the scope, they turned the aircraft in an attempt to locate the UFO visually.They saw it hovering close to the ground. It was described as at least 200-feet in diameter, hundreds of feet long, glowing yellow, with a metallic cylinder that was attached.

The crew of the B52 and sixteen ground witnesses attested that they saw a UFO that night. Blue Book came to the astonishing conclusion that what they actually saw were nothing more than stars!

http://www.nicap.org/reports/681024minot_hynek.htm

 

[boomerang]

That's the Pat McCaslin I remember--articulate, self-confident and sharp as a tack. He went into teaching after AF retirement and my wife worked with him in Austin for 2 years. I recall his relating how he won the Purple Heart for action in southeast Asia over dinner one evening. He's the real deal. Seeing him unexpectedly on TV was a shocker.

 

[Trajanus]

This is wrong. If you really believe the phenomenon got its start in the 1940's you are far outside the thinking of even the most hardcore ETH supporters.

I didn't say the phenomenon started in the 1940s but just "acted up" or intensified around then, so it finally became generally known.

Right back at you. There is a plethora of evidence that points to not ET. Are you selectively biased against all that evidence?

I'm aware of "high strangeness"; the phenomenon is said not to act the way aliens "should act." But, as has been pointed out many times on another board, the phenomenon obviously represents some kind of advanced intelligence (and in light of physical evidence it couldn't be soley inside our heads). Ergo, "high strangeness" is a problem for any hypothesis. If the phenomenon sometimes acts too strangely to seem ET, it's also too strange to be beings from another dimension--interdimensional travel probably requires at least as high a level of technology (a product of rationality) as interstellar travel. I assume odd behavior is deceptive.

My view is that it is just not possible to pin down what the phenomenon is based on the available evidence. Instead, I propose we look at what effect the phenomenon is having on society. If we can't decide what it is, maybe we can discover what it is doing.

Its effect is obvious--generally, it is making people more receptive to the idea of alien visitors. One thing is for sure, generally at least, and notwithstanding occasional "high strangeness" people are left with the impression of aliens in advanced flying craft.

Those things would not finish the ETH.

Essentially they would demolish it. Look at all the resistance there is to the ETH, even here, without them....

---------- Post added at 11:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:30 AM ----------

Again this sort of response is hilarious, you talk about mork wannabes, then use the G word as if its a proven fact god exists.

God is an imaginary being and people who believe in imaginary beings are delusional

I'll say.

As has been pointed out, when a ground based radar operator gets a radar return, and then a plane is sent up which also gets a return and the pilot then sees a craft, which outruns him, then that is clear evidence there is something there.

Right, something physical, technical and beyond earthly capabilities, which says something about its origins.

There is more evidence for the existance of UFO's then there is for god, yet your views are completely at odds with the evidence.
I think the obvious answer to this is for your God to be real, UFO's cant exist, and thats the basis for your denial of the reality.

That sums it up beautifully.

 

[trainedobserver]

Its effect is obvious--generally, it is making people more receptive to the idea of alien visitors. One thing is for sure, generally at least, and notwithstanding occasional "high strangeness" people are left with the impression of aliens in advanced flying craft.

In my conversations with people who have actually witnessed UFOs or what appeared to be beings in their homes, this is exactly the case. Not only are they receptive they are insistent beyond reason that aliens from another world are responsible.

When pressed for why they would assume that is the case they insist that such human technology does not and could not possibly exist, although they admittedly were not experts in what may exist. No amount of pointing out the general publics ignorance of any number of secret projects and developments which were then revealed at some later time phases them.

The last witness I spoke to about a sighting impressed me so much that my attention has turned more toward that particular phenomena (instant ETH belief) than the bizarre and admittedly otherworldly object they observed.

Granted, some of these objects do appear to be coming from somewhere other than what we think of as normal 21st century human civilization. But beyond that, what can really be said with any certainty?

“Something is seen, but one doesn’t know what.”
Carl Jung, Flying Saucers:A Modern Myth of Thing Seen in the Sky.

 

[PararealitySaint]

God is an imaginary being and people who believe in imaginary beings are delusional

Well this "delusional" being loves his "FAITH", something you and all the other E.T. driven, 50's nostalgic, cone heads seem to have difficulty separating....faith from science and the use of thus to determine a reliability factor in a theory utilized for scientific discovery and not spiritually driven religious belief.

I never said you couldn't have "FAITH" in the existence of Mork, just that you shouldn't act as if its the end all answer to the world's questioning of the phenomena (E.T. all the time), and realize that nearly every example thrown out there as supposed "evidence" by your ilk, are normally panned as nothing more than hyper-inflated radicalized nonsense, instead of a honest interpretation of the data based on an all inclusive more abstract outlook on just what or who is initializing the phenomena in the first place.

As has been pointed out, when a ground based radar operator gets a radar return, and then a plane is sent up which also gets a return and the pilot then sees a craft, which outruns him, then that is clear evidence there is something there.

Yes, something there....Something. Not necessarily Mork from Ork but perhaps a secret govt. test run craft, an anomalous or natural occurrence, or any one of a thousand explanations....and that is the point here. Don't be so damn quick to jump and purport thus as "evidence" in the existence of E.T. as the end all answer.

There is more evidence for the existance of UFO's then there is for god, yet your views are completely at odds with the evidence.
I think the obvious answer to this is for your God to be real, UFO's cant exist, and thats the basis for your denial of the reality.

Wrong once again....God CREATED EVERYTHING, BOTH THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH AND ALL THAT RESIDES IN THUS!!!!!!

Woops...that could mean E.T., E.H.T., Mork, Marvin the Martian, and dare I say it, even you.

Your taking the evidence of modern day witness's and technology based radar data, and trying to fit it into a model cooked up by bronze age tribesmen thousands of years ago, people who would not have been able to accurately describe a TV set or helicopter. But their model of a magic sky creator and demons is the one you embrace as being the correct one ?

LOL! What's the matter here? Are you afraid I could be right that your heavenly bodies of gray matter with their elongated necks, big black eyes, and cute little silver tea cup flying saucers could be nothing more than inter-dimensional demonic infestations looking to make you their bitch? LOL! Honestly, I used the demonic theorem as that and nothing more. A theory....one.....and let me spell this out for you so that we don't have any more questions as to this now.......ONE THAT COULD EASILY FIT IN A THOUSAND OTHER EXPLANATIONS!!!! And this because the evidence is just not viable enough to state it's anything else. PERIOD!!!!

Now If you wish to harp on my religious beliefs as something by which you can prove your nonsensical 50's driven man from space bullshit, you better begin to find another road here...it's getting old and quite frankly, about as boring as your boy Traj-anus. The two of you should seriously think about making a saucer, pointing it at some distant galaxy....and going where now man has gone before.....because both of you can than catch up to your evidence....far far away.

Apply your "scientific investigatory reasoning " to the god myth and the answer as shown above, is that god is imaginary and doesnt exist

Don't worry, I'll tell him for you.

 

[Trajanus]

When pressed for why they would assume that is the case they insist that such human technology does not and could not possibly exist, although they admittedly were not experts in what may exist. No amount of pointing out the general publics ignorance of any number of secret projects and developments which were then revealed at some later time phases them.

"Secret projects and developments" can't explain the UFO phenomenon. Its capabilities were extraordinary from the start yet even after 60 years plus, the "secret technology" hasn't come into general use even in the military. And its not just technology; there have been many reports of highly unusual beings associated with unusual craft.

The last witness I spoke to about a sighting impressed me so much that my attention has turned more toward that particular phenomena (instant ETH belief) than the bizarre and admittedly otherworldly object they observed.

"Admittedly otherwordly" indeed, and bizarre, so the belief is understandable.

Granted, some of these objects do appear to be coming from somewhere other than what we think of as normal 21st century human civilization. But beyond that, what can really be said with any certainty?

Not with certainty perhaps but the ETH is most parsimonious.

 

[mike]

Now If you wish to harp on my religious beliefs as something by which you can prove your nonsensical 50's driven man from space bullshit, you better begin to find another road here...it's getting old and quite frankly, about as boring as your boy Traj-anus. The two of you should seriously think about making a saucer, pointing it at some distant galaxy....and going where now man has gone before.....because both of you can than catch up to your evidence....far far away.

Im not debunking your religious beliefs to prove ET exists, you on the other hand reject the ETH based on your religious delusions.
If you watched that video it makes 10 good points as to why god is an imaginary being, you sound like a child insisting Santa is real, maybe one day you will grow up. On that note using the word Anus in the context you do is also telling in regards to your mental immaturity.

You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions (and ET for that matter), but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.

You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.


You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky

You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.

And thats the bottom line here, like the Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents, you are trying to fit the reality into your Myth.

Again its hilarious that you can so vehemently say ET cant be here, but at the same time subscribe to an obvious fairy tale, with more logical holes in it, than a moon sized chunk of swiss cheese.

Again im not trying to disprove your superstitions beliefs in order to validate the ETH , any more than disproving Santa or the Tooth fairy would validate the ETH, You on the other hand have bound the two together. The ETH cant be true, because the bible says god made man (out of dirt) in his image, if the ETH is true, then they are obviously higher up the ladder than we are, this makes your biblical myth a lie. How could we be gods special little people if the ET's are higher up the ladder more advanced than us ?

The logical answer like in the video posted, is that "god is an imaginary being, and that the ET's have had longer to evolve and make scientific progress"
Angels and demons and gods are imaginary beings, which is why they dont show up on radar.

Thats the difference, your trying to reconcile your imaginary sky man with the observed reality of structured craft well beyond our own technology, im not. i dont need to reconcile a myth with the reality, any more than i need to reconcile Santa with the reality.

 

[PararealitySaint]

Im not debunking your religious beliefs to prove ET exists, you on the other hand reject the ETH based on your religious delusions.
If you watched that video it makes 10 good points as to why god is an imaginary being, you sound like a child insisting Santa is real, maybe one day you will grow up. On that note using the word Anus in the context you do is also telling in regards to your mental immaturity.

LOL! Mike....Calm down. You seem really upset and that isn't good for anyone, even a Junior Space Cadet such as yourself.

God exists Mike....nah nah nah nah nah.....

You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions (and ET for that matter), but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.

Nope. Don't deny anything...Sorry Mikey, wrong guy.

You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.

ROTFLMAO!!!! You're really serious aren't you. Gee...I'm sorry. I thought you were playing around here. Ummmm...Dirt? I really have some trouble understanding the logic of your words. I wasn't made of dirt in any sense....I pray you weren't.

Genesis 1:27

• So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
  Genesis 1:26-28 (in Context) Genesis 1 (Whole Chapter)

Or did you mean:

Genesis 6:7
And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
Genesis 6:6-8 (in Context) Genesis 6 (Whole Chapter)

Sorry, no dirt here.

Oh yes, "evolved from other life forms"....I get this one. Again, I don't think you realize what your saying here. I have no idea if I evolved from other life forms, Dirt, or anything....Now then, I do have "FAITH" that I was made from my Lord and Savior, but again, that's not etched in stone here Micheal...That's something I choose to believe in as a personal religious preference.

But here is the key....I don't need to prove anything....You do.

You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky

Ummmmm...Once again, you seem to be judging someone who you don't know, and doing so without any proper guideline as to the evidence presented....ohhhh wait a second, you're good at that already....ok...

First of all, I don't laugh at people who believe in their "Hindu" beliefs...I pray for them. I pray that Christ will find their hearts one day and they will know true salvation. Secondly, "Greek claims about Gods?????" Correct me if I am wrong here, but are you spewing forth about mythos in the context of ancient pagan legends? I know many Greek peoples in my daily travels and research. I'm sorry to say this Mikey, but 99% of them are Orthodox Catholic and the rest are either agnostic or atheist. Sorry to say this, but none of them believe in Mork from Ork as a viable answer for any anomalous sky observations....or at least they don't believe even if they were E.T.s that they could care less about us or ever visited us in the way both yourself and the other wannabes believe....sorry.

You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.

Little man.....You don't even know me....You're quick to judge that I need to be looking for "loopholes" to know who I am or what I believe in...Woops....not this man of God, once again sorry.

You see I have come to grips with who I am and what I am about. You on the other hand seem to be a little late in this area as you still look to the skies and an intelligence which you can blame for all your mistakes. But don't worry, I'll pray you see the light soon.

And thats the bottom line here, like the Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents, you are trying to fit the reality into your Myth.

Again its hilarious that you can so vehemently say ET cant be here, but at the same time subscribe to an obvious fairy tale, with more logical holes in it, than a moon sized chunk of swiss cheese.

And on and on and on....At least you seem to have a sense of humor..."Hilarity"....good suit.

But wait....Doesn't my fairy tale have like....I don't know, Millions upon Millions of other lovers of moon sized cheeseheads as well believing in the same fairy tale? Hmmmmmm...And how many Special Video Rangers are there out there? You, Traj-anus.......ummmmmm.....you....perhaps a few other space cadets here.

Ok, from here I have to seriously stop it...Other people are reading what you have written here and are seriously laughing at the entire stupidity of both your case, your posture, and I have to move on before they hurt me for wasting any more time with your tirade.

I'll pray for you and sorry if I sounded like a bigot here or in some way made you so obviously upset. I just have such trouble understanding why it is people would rather pray to bug like humanoid looking gray creatures, instead of acknowledging that we don't know what's going on up there or around there, or whatever.... Could be demons you know.

Could be:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Cwxc_zLH560" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" width="480"></iframe>

 

[mike]

Im not upset, and do try and remember insults are the last refuge of the incompetent

According to the Bible, Adam was the first man. His name, which means "man" in Hebrew, is probably derived from the Hebrew word for "earth." The first three chapters of Genesis relate that God created Adam from dust, breathed life into him

The original Hebrew word that is translated as the "dust" that Adam was created from actually means clay, making God the first "potter," as was well-known by the ancients: "Yet, O Lord, Thou art our Father; we are the clay, and Thou art our potter; we are all the work of Thy hand" (Isaiah 64:8 RSV) and "The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life ... I too was formed from a piece of clay." (Job 33:4,6 RSV)

It might help you if you knew the depth of the silly nature of your myth.

According to the myth it took god just 6 days to create the universe

Six days of 24 hours. I believe the Biblical account is intended by God to be taken literally; and I accept scripture as infallible.

Do the following verses refer to a 24 hour day?

Exo 10:13 And Moses stretched forth his rod over the land of Egypt, and the LORD brought an east wind upon the land all that day, and all that night; and when it was morning, the east wind brought the locusts.
Exo 16:23 And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.
Exo 19:16 And it came to pass on the third day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; so that all the people that was in the camp trembled.
Lev 6:20 This is the offering of Aaron and of his sons, which they shall offer unto the LORD in the day when he is anointed; the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a meat offering perpetual, half of it in the morning, and half thereof at night.

Each of these verses, written in the SAME language, using the very SAME HEBREW WORDS AS USED IN GENESIS, by the SAME author, in the SAME part of the Bible as Genesis, leave NO DOUBT as to a 24 hour day...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101201165002AAFVG5Z

Thats whats so hilarious, you subscribe to the idea the whole universe could be created in 6 days, but dismiss the idea that Intelligent life from another planet could be visting this one.

How do re reconcile the myths 6 days to create with the reality ?

The most precise estimate of the universe's age is 13.73±0.12 billion years old, based on observations of the cosmic microwave background radiation.<SUP id=cite_ref-NASA_age_28-0 class=reference>[29]</SUP> Independent estimates (based on measurements such as radioactive dating) agree, although they are less precise, ranging from 11–20 billion years<SUP id=cite_ref-29 class=reference>[30]</SUP> to 13–15 billion years.<SUP id=cite_ref-30 class=reference>[</SUP>

Because god is an imaginary construct, and the myth was written by bronze age tribesmen who didnt know any better.

God gave us something better. In essence, He gave us a “birth certificate.” For example, using my personal birth certificate, I can calculate how old I am at any point. It is similar with the earth. Genesis 1 says that the earth was created on the first day of creation (<CITE class=bibleref>Genesis 1:1–5</CITE>). From there, we can begin calculations of the age of the earth.
Let’s do a rough calculation to show how this works. The age of the earth can be estimated by taking the first 5 days of creation (from earth’s creation to Adam), then following the genealogies from Adam to Abraham in Genesis 5 and 11, then adding in the time from Abraham to today.
Adam was created on Day 6, so there were 5 days before him. If we add up the dates from Adam to Abraham, we get about 2,000 years, using the Masoretic Hebrew text of Genesis 5 and 11.<SUP>3</SUP> Whether Christian or secular, most scholars would agree that Abraham lived about 2,000 B.C. (4,000 years ago).
So a simple calculation is:

5 days
+ ~2000 years
+ ~4000 years
______________
~6000 years​

but thats at odds with the scientific date

the generally accepted age for the Earth and the rest of the solar system is about 4.55 billion years (plus or minus about 1%). This value is derived from several different lines of evidence

Yet another example of where the Myth, doest match the reality, thats how we know its a myth, its not true
The data given to us by science is true, the data taken from the myth is false......

Hence your confusion, you believe the false data is correct, so reality looks false because they are mutually exclusive and wont fit

God didnt create man from dust
The earth is not 6000 years old
The great flood could not have happened
Jonah didnt live inside a fish for 3 days.....

The list goes on and on and on and on.........

but it can be reconciled logically if we accept that god is an imaginary construct and the bible is just a collection of silly stories
You want to cling to superstition for your answers... thats your call, just dont expect your delusional opinions to hold much weight to those who prefer science as a means of deducing the truth and reality

 

[Angel of Ioren]

How did this topic turn into a religion thread?

Anyway, you guys need to ask each other this:

Mike, what would ParaRealitySaint have to do to show you that his god exists?

ParaRealitySaint, what would an Ancient Greek or a Hindu have to do to prove to you that their gods exist?

Let's get off this religion bent and get back to determining if the paranormal deserves study.

I think I've said this before, but I do think that the main problem with the paranormal field is that people are set in their ways and they refuse to accept anything but evidence that confirms what they believe. Until they turn around that type of thinking, it'll be stuck in obscurity and superstition.

 

[The Pair of Cats]

I think I've said this before, but I do think that the main problem with the paranormal field is that people are set in their ways and they refuse to accept anything but evidence that confirms what they believe. Until they turn around that type of thinking, it'll be stuck in obscurity and superstition.

Agreed. Although i hope you meant debunkers and true believers alike. Until UFOs rock up to the superbowl and park themselves in the end zone, we will be arguing about the evidence, for and against.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Agreed. Although i hope you meant debunkers and true believers alike. Until UFOs rock up to the superbowl and park themselves in the end zone, we will be arguing about the evidence, for and against.

I don't know what goes through the minds of other people, but most people will not be able to refute something like that. Scientists used to think the Sun revolved around the Earth, but that changed once the proof was there. Unfortunately there are still people that don't believe it.

 

[The Pair of Cats]

I think the majority of the general public believe that the existence of UFOs, aliens, or whatever, is possible and probable. They just don't care to think about it much. There are far more pressing matters in their lives other than arguing the semantics of whether UFOs are inter-dimensional or extra-terrestrial. Is Bob Lazar full of crap or whether the security police at Bentwaters saw a lighthouse, a UFO or a flaming cart of horseshit.

 

[mike]

How did this topic turn into a religion thread?

Anyway, you guys need to ask each other this:

Mike, what would ParaRealitySaint have to do to show you that his god exists?

ParaRealitySaint, what would an Ancient Greek or a Hindu have to do to prove to you that their gods exist?

Let's get off this religion bent and get back to determining if the paranormal deserves study.

I think I've said this before, but I do think that the main problem with the paranormal field is that people are set in their ways and they refuse to accept anything but evidence that confirms what they believe. Until they turn around that type of thinking, it'll be stuck in obscurity and superstition.

The reality is Angelo, its a huge factor in the study of this enigma

As Streiber posted in a recent journal

Why were the records destroyed? Could it be because they represent some sort of epochal failure on the part of the military, perhaps that mankind had a chance at contact, the single greatest event in the history of the planet and the species, and they somehow ruined it? They could have done. At the time of the Roswell Incident, as now, many US Air Force personnel are conservative Christians, and believe that their can be no life in the universe except human beings, angels and demons, and that only demons travel the universe in conveyances. Angels don't need them.

This fiction is taken very seriously, so it could be one of the motivations for coverup. The fear would be that revealing the truth would destroy cherished beliefs.

Read the original source: http://www.unknowncountry.com/journal/proof-coverup-strongest-evidence-yet#ixzz1I8DXi2xZ​

How tragic would that be, our species is contacted by another spacefaring sentient species, and we react in accordance with the bronze age superstitions of our distant ancestors. ie they must be demons........
Surely we can do better than that.
Religion has held our species back on so many levels for so long, look at what happened to Galileo when he tried to refute an aspect of the myth with scientific reality.......
The same thing is happening in Ufology today, the Truth has always challenged their cherished beliefs and for obvious reasons.
Those still mired in the superstitions of the past Dont, indeed Cant "study" the phenomena, because they already have the (false) answers and will cling to them no matter what, just as they did in Galileo's day and example.
These primative superstitions have been used to justify slavery, the subjugation of women and the preservation of ignorance in the face scientific reality.
Im of the firm opinion given its terrible history of ignorance, the phenomena cannot be studied when viewed thru the lens of such supertitions.
It is, i lament very much a part of the discussion. i wish it were not.

How would you feel if our first contact was assasinated by a radical superstitious nut, who thought it was a demon and that killing it would appease his/her imaginary deity.
Would you set foot on a remote island knowing the natives subscribed to an imaginary spirit who dwelled in the local volcano, and who view all outsiders as demons who should be thrown into said volcano ?
Thats the scenario we are dealing with right now on a planetary basis (if streibers quote is correct), and we should be better than this.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

I think the majority of the general public believe that the existence of UFOs, aliens, or whatever, is possible and probable. They just don't care to think about it much. There are far more pressing matters in their lives other than arguing the semantics of whether UFOs are inter-dimensional or extra-terrestrial. Is Bob Lazar full of crap or whether the security police at Bentwaters saw a lighthouse, a UFO or a flaming cart of horseshit.

Absolutely. UFOs rarely come up and when they do I realize that most people know nothing about the topic. At least not enough to make an informed decision as to what they are. Personally, I don't think that they have anything to do with non-human intelligence, but if something compelling ever comes up to show me otherwise, I won't be afraid to admit my current line of thinking is incorrect. This isn't as cut and dry as other things because it can't be tested and isn't falsifiable.

---------- Post added at 08:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:39 PM ----------

The reality is Angelo, its a huge factor in the study of this enigma

As Streiber posted in a recent journal



How tragic would that be, our species is contacted by another spacefaring sentient species, and we react in accordance with the bronze age superstitions of our distant ancestors. ie they must be demons........
Surely we can do better than that.
Religion has held our species back on so many levels for so long, look at what happened to Galileo when he tried to refute an aspect of the myth with scientific reality.......
The same thing is happening in Ufology today, the Truth has always challenged their cherished beliefs and for obvious reasons.
Those still mired in the superstitions of the past Dont, indeed Cant "study" the phenomena, because they already have the (false) answers and will cling to them no matter what, just as they did in Galileo's day and example.
These primative superstitions have been used to justify slavery, the subjugation of women and the preservation of ignorance in the face scientific reality.
Im of the firm opinion given its terrible history of ignorance, the phenomena cannot be studied when viewed thru the lens of such supertitions.
It is, i lament very much a part of the discussion. i wish it were not.

How would you feel if our first contact was assasinated by a radical superstitious nut, who thought it was a demon and that killing it would appease his/her imaginary deity.
Would you set foot on a remote island knowing the natives subscribed to an imaginary spirit who dwelled in the local volcano, and who view all outsiders as demons who should be thrown into said volcano ?
Thats the scenario we are dealing with right now on a planetary basis (if streibers quote is correct), and we should be better than this.

Mike, I agree with you about religion, and it does have something to do with the study of the topic. I just wanted to reign in the back and forth replies you guys were having because they were completely leaving the point of the post.
Let's just say that one's religion can possibly have an effect on one's interpretation of the phenomenon - That's fair, right?

 

[mike]

. Personally, I don't think that they have anything to do with non-human intelligence,

Which begs the question, respectfully.
Would that opinion be related as it is with "the Saints" to your handle ie: Angel of Ioren ?

Is it possible that your pov stems , perhaps unconciously, from your religious programming ?

Regardless of the vatican's recent comments on ET, the majority of christian conservatives hold to the belief as Streiber mentioned that God, angels demons and us are the only sentient creatures in creation.

I have no problems with skeptics who argue on the basis of scientific evidence or lack thereof, my issue is with religious skeptics who argue against the ETH because it conflicts with their programming.

Denying a potential reality in favour of a obvious fairytale (as happened to Galileo), lets us down as a species.

It may even be the very reason we have had no contact thus far

As to the point of the post, the phenomena does deserve study, but meaningful conclusions cannot come from a superstitious pov, anymore than it did in Galileos's day

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Which begs the question, respectfully.
Would that opinion be related as it is with "the Saints" to your handle ie: Angel of Ioren ?

Is it possible that your pov stems , perhaps unconciously, from your religious programming ?

Regardless of the vatican's recent comments on ET, the majority of christian conservatives hold to the belief as Streiber mentioned that God, angels demons and us are the only sentient creatures in creation.

I have no problems with skeptics who argue on the basis of scientific evidence or lack thereof, my issue is with religious skeptics who argue against the ETH because it conflicts with their programming.

Denying a potential reality in favour of a obvious fairytale (as happened to Galileo), lets us down as a species.

It may even be the very reason we have had no contact thus far

As to the point of the post, the phenomena does deserve study, but meaningful conclusions cannot come from a superstitious pov, anymore than it did in Galileos's day

You'll laugh at this. Angel of Ioren is a play on my name which is Angelo Fiorentino and I just think it sounds kind of cool. It has absolutely nothing to do with saints or religion.
I'm not religious at all and I don't believe that there's any sort of god overlooking us. We're just a marble floating in the Universe. There's probably life out there somewhere, maybe even intelligent life. There's no undeniable proof that any intelligent life has come from elsewhere in the universe to visit us. Everything we have is anecdotal or inconclusive. We can only guess.

 

[mike]

Thanks Angelo,
As ive said i have no problems with people debating and debunking the ETH if they do so for the purposes of getting to the truth, its when they do so for the purposes of supporting a myth that i think the input is worthless.
I dont need to debunk god, in order for the ETH to have merit, but there are some who do need to debunk the ETH in order to validate their religious programming.

And again the Galileo example is apt, Galileo was right, but since his theory conflicted with the prevailing Myth of the day, its subscibers had to debunk his hypothesis. they couldnt both be right, if Galileo was right they were wrong and visa versa.
This same dynamic is playing out today with the UFO question.
At least its no longer heresy punishable by death or house arrest to propose a hypothesis that busts the prevailing myth

Galileo was right, Darwin was right.....The Myth is wrong
A topological view of these facts and the history should stand as good reason to exclude it from the debate regarding any hypothesis, including the ETH.

We wouldnt accept that anyone who claimed the invisible pink unicorn was real ,but ET's could not be here as having any merit or value in the study.

"Invisible Pink Unicorns are beings of great spiritual power. We know this because they are capable of being invisible and pink at the same time. Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them." — Steve Eley

Sounds silly doesnt it ?

But as shakespere said "whats in a name", the name/label is irrelevant, its the underlying concept thats relevant.

 

[PararealitySaint]

ParaRealitySaint, what would an Ancient Greek or a Hindu have to do to prove to you that their gods exist?

Angelo,

I can't even begin to explain this completely, but I will attempt to be as direct as I can.

First of all, I have nothing to prove. I have never questioned anyone's religion, no less the Hindu's, Pagans or any.....I explained the difference between faith for the sake of a belief system in a God, and utilizing abstract and divergent evidence for the purposes of stating a wannabe fact that something has to exist because of thus.

It would probably surprise dolts like Mikey if I were to go just a little further into my religious beliefs...and I will this one last time....

I believe the earth is Billions of years old as I am a Literalistic believer as to the Word itself...So sorry, lost on that one as well...with all your math and dedicated BS...lol!

Lastly Angelo, I have grown to respect your moderation and will cease from continuing in this thread based on your advice. I thank you for intervening before Mikey had to be carried off in a stretcher from popping one....

"insults are the last refuge of the incompetent"

LOL! Sonny boy, I have forgotten more than you know.....Woops, how judgmental of me. Sorry, one last time only.


Oh yes and before I forget:

This first:

Quote from Mikey: "The original Hebrew word that is translated as the "dust" that Adam was created from actually means clay, making God the first "potter," as was well-known by the ancients: "Yet, O Lord, Thou art our Father; we are the clay, and Thou art our potter; we are all the work of Thy hand" (Isaiah 64:8 RSV) and "The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life ... I too was formed from a piece of clay." (Job 33:4,6 RSV) "

Mikey, are you that devoid of reality, or do you actually understand the word "metaphor" and its uses?

Here, so I don't seem so stupid after all:

<table><tbody><tr><th>METAPHOR </th> <th>
</th><th> PARALLEL </th> </tr> <tr> <td>
</td><td>
</td><td>
</td></tr> <tr> <td style=""> A Potter is an artificer, an artizan or workman, one skilful to work in earth, or to form and make pots, and other vessels of clay.</td> <td>
</td><td> God is the Maker of all men and things that ever were, or shall be.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> A Potter prepares his clay or matter first, of which he intends to make his vessels; and when he hath made it fit, and ready for the wheel, he goes to work.</td> <td>
</td><td style=""> God created or prepared the earth, the clay, before he formed man, and out of it was he made: “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, “Genesis 2:7</td> </tr> <tr> <td> A Potter projects before-hand, what kind of vessel he will make of such clay; he hath the form and fashion of it in his mind, before he goes to work; nay, (and it may be) makes known what a vessel he will make.</td> <td>
</td><td> “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.” Acts 15:18 He contrived in his eternal counsel, what a kind of creature he would make man; nay, at the time of his formation, he declared what a rare vessel he should be: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” Genesis 1:26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
</td></tr><tr><td>A Potter makes vessels of divers sorts and sizes, and for several uses; some are for more honourable and noble services than others.</td> <td>
</td><td style=""> God makes vessels of divers sorts and sizes; all men are not of the like stature and beauty in their first formation; neither are they so, as they are made or formed anew in Christ Jesus; for some vessels are designed by the great Potter to contain the golden oil, and soul-enriching treasure, for the emptying of them unto others.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> A Potter takes great care of the vessels he hath made, and bestowed his labour and pains upon, that they may not be broken; for they are brittle ware, and he is greatly offended with such as strive to dash them to pieces.</td> <td>
</td><td style=""> God takes great care of those pots or vessels he hath made, nay, twice made, or formed for himself: he gives a charge concerning them, and rebukes kings for their sakes; “Saying, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm.” 1 Chronicles 16:22 The devil and wicked men shall one day go to wreck, for that violence offered to those curious vessels that God hath prepared to glory: “But he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.”Galatians 5:10</td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table><tbody><tr> <th> METAPHOR </th> <th>
</th><th> DISPARITY </th> </tr> <tr> <td>
</td><td>
</td><td>
</td></tr> <tr> <td> A Potter hath not his skill in making vessels from himself, but is taught by some other man.</td> <td>
</td><td> God hath his wisdom of, and from himself.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> A Potter many times wants skill in framing of some curious vessels, and not only so, but care; and by this means the vessel is marred, and spoiled in his hand.</td> <td>
</td><td> God is infinite in wisdom, loveth all things he goes about, and his care is accordingly; a God that is never unmindful of the work of his hands; so that if any vessel is broken, the fault is not in him, but either in themselves, or some cursed enemy.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> A Potter makes not all the vessels which are upon the wheel for his own use and profit, but for the use of others.</td> <td>
</td><td> God makes all things for himself, “The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.” Proverbs 16:4</td> </tr> <tr> <td> A Potter cannot make vessels, unless he hath clay or matter to make them with, or to work upon.</td> <td>
</td><td style=""> God first made the clay, he created the dust of the earth, and then out of it made or framed man.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> A Potter makes vessels that are very defective, as they first come off the wheel.</td> <td>
</td><td style=""> God never made or framed any vessel, but as it came out of his hand it was well done, without fault or blemish: “And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.” Genesis 1:31
</td></tr></tbody></table>
So in conclusion Mikey:

1. Is God the Potter, and man the clay? This may teach men to lie low before the God of heaven and earth; what is the clay in the Potter’s hand?
2. We may infer from hence, that man is not made for himself, but for some particular use.
3. And since the glory of God was the principal thing he designed, in making and forming of us; let us see we do not rise up against him in a sinful way, to his dishonour.
4. You may know from hence how frail and brittle man is, sooner broken than a Potter’s vessel.

A literalistic look at symbolism isn't too hard to do, even for Martians...yes?

 

[mike]

Angelo,

I can't even begin to explain this completely, but I will attempt to be as direct as I can.

First of all, I have nothing to prove. I have never questioned anyone's religion, no less the Hindu's, Pagans or any.....I explained the difference between faith for the sake of a belief system in a God, and utilizing abstract and divergent evidence for the purposes of stating a wannabe fact that something has to exist because of thus.

It would probably surprise dolts like Mikey if I were to go just a little further into my religious beliefs...and I will this one last time....

I believe the earth is Billions of years old as I am a Literalistic believer as to the Word itself...So sorry, lost on that one as well...with all your math and dedicated BS...lol!

Lastly Angelo, I have grown to respect your moderation and will cease from continuing in this thread based on your advice. I thank you for intervening before Mikey had to be carried off in a stretcher from popping one....

"insults are the last refuge of the incompetent"

LOL! Sonny boy, I have forgotten more than you know.....Woops, how judgmental of me. Sorry, one last time only.

More insults ?

Ah well clearly in a battle of wits, im dealing with an unarmed man.