UFO traces in Europe

[The Starman]

I love researching UFOs but I can invest my time better than hand-holding rookies. Time taken to show you this or that is time taken away from me discovering some new info.

I did not force you to participate in this discussion. More or less we talked about my views and you did not even participated with your own opinion, you was affraid even address the questions i asked 3 times . Adults participate with arguments and Counterarguments. If you are willing to make a victim yourself now, that's alright with me. Good luck.

 

[DROBNJAK]

affraid even address the questions

they are silly questions. just a common sense will answer them. If you need that explained, than you need explained how to spread butter on a slice of bread.

anyway I added the answer in the edit of the previous thread. I now feel 'brave'

 

[The Starman]

I added the answer in the edit of the previous thread. I now feel 'brave'

You can edit as you want aftermath. I find it comical.

You sound more and more like somebody who already formed an opinion, so you are proactively ignoring anything that would unbalance it. So, typically human

When you can't debate on facts, you go with personal attack.

 

[DROBNJAK]

You can edit as you want aftermath

I edit as a matter of habit, not to change what I said. Just to find a better way to express myself. On the end of the day English is my second language. As well, I press "Save Changes" so that I don't loose what I wrote. You just cough me in a middle of doing it.

When you can't debate on facts, you go with personal attack.

What personal attack? You said witnesses are OK when its suits your agenda, but they are not OK when they suit my agenda. Is that rational discussion, or even fair one? You are obviously picking cherries to protect your prejudice. And what facts, I gave you the names of all the highly reputable academics in the field of ufology and you just denigrated them by saying they are ignorant? Do you have better academic qualifications than those 5-6 scientists combined?

I've been through this type of discussion 100 times before. I give people facts, that I dug up with painstaking research, than they just ignore them, in the best case, or in the worst case they tell my facts are not facts at all

Essentially an uniformed person always wins, simply by avoiding to do the work. Instead of protecting your ego, why don't you read 20-30 quality books on subject and develop a big picture. Knowledge defeats prejudice.

By the way, did you see UFO yourself?

 

[The Starman]

You can edit as you want aftermath. I find it comical.
I edit as a matter of habit, not to change what I said. Just to find a better way to express myself. On the end of the day English is my second language.

Yes, ofcourse habbit...what else it could be...

What personal attack?

Your are not discussing the topic or questions. Right now you are making statements about my education and my views.

Do you have better academic qualifications than those 5-6 scientists combined?

Is it even possible to have 6 bachelor degrees ?

I've been through this type of discussion 100 times before. I give people facts, that I dug up with painstaking research, than they just ignore them, in the best case, or in the worst case they tell my facts are not facts at all

Demagogy.

Essentially an uniformed person always wins, simply by avoiding to do the work.

Give me an example when "uniformed person always wins".

Why don't you read 20-30 quality books on subject and develop a big picture.

In which subject ?

By the way, did you see UFO yourself?

Yes.

 

[DROBNJAK]

Yes, ofcourse habbit...what else it could be...

He, he, he ... that's personal attack

Is it even possible to have 6 bachelor degrees ?

I once met a guy with 4 degrees, Economics, Electronics and two other I forgot. There was no single muscle in his body, but obviously very interesting guy.

Demagogy.

Finally you admit that you are demagog.

Give me an example when "uniformed person always wins".

Obviously it's you. You read no UFO books. You have no technical papers on UFOs. You refused to accept any info from those 5-6 scientists I listed. You are just avoiding the time investment and want cut & dried answers delivered on plate. I keep repeating, doing UFO research is lots of work. Read 20-30 books, some by those 5-6 scientists. Watch 20-30 documentaries. Take notes, learn physics, only than make your own conclusions.

Yes.

OK. Let it rip. I would like to hear it. All the details at once, no editing .

In which subject ?

You are always asking for obvious answers to be explained to you. Are you from Germany?

 

[The Starman]

You are always asking for obvious answers to be explained to you. Are you from Germany?

Are you willing to go on youtube podcast , to talk about UFO subject and explain your opinion?

 

[DROBNJAK]

I am more of writer type, than conversationalist type. I mean, it takes me few rewrites to express myself properly, here in the forum . I quickly get very confrontational in conversations. Writing enables me to tone myself down.

My research is mostly based on statistics, case correlation and mainstream physics. It would be overly technical for audience. People want fight or flight stories, high drama where lives are in danger etc. But for people who are very technical and know science it would be very interesting.

Plus, the best pieces I am saving for my own YouTube channel, that I'll do one day.

But yeah, tell me about your UFO. I already exausted all publicized cases. Need fresh ones.

 

[The Starman]

I am more of writer type, than conversationalist type. I mean, it takes me few rewrites to express myself properly, here in the forum . I quickly get very confrontational in conversations. Writing enables me to tone myself down.

I see....well this discussion really shows true colours. Especially if you scroll couple paragraphs back.

Plus, the best pieces I am saving for my own YouTube channel, that I'll do one day.

Good luck with that.

But yeah, tell me about your UFO. I already exausted all publicized cases. Need fresh ones.

Maybe i will write about it or mention ir future article.

 

[DROBNJAK]

yeah, your story might be very interesting.

There are quite a lot of people who had seen UFOs and come to this forum to search answers. This is one of better forums for discussing the subject.

Here are some personal testimonies from other people:

@marduk
May "17th listener roundtable"

@Constance
Pentagon UFO Study - Media Monitoring

@Azz7092
Is MUFON database now restricted? - Part 1
Is MUFON database now restricted? - Part 2

@Experience_Her - an abduction story from this forumhttps://www.theparacast.com/forum/members/experience_her.8417/
Want to hear a CRAZY story ? ... Here goes!

As well there is a whole subsection of the The Paracast forum called "Your Personal Experiences Forum"

 

[The Starman]

yeah, your story might be very interesting.

There are quite a lot of people who had seen UFOs and come to this forum to search answers. This is one of better forums for discussing the subject.

Here are some personal testimonies from other people:

@marduk
May "17th listener roundtable"

@Constance
Pentagon UFO Study - Media Monitoring

@Azz7092
Is MUFON database now restricted? - Part 1
Is MUFON database now restricted? - Part 2

As well there is a whole subsection of the The Paracast forum called "Your Personal Experiences Forum"

Thanks for pointing.

 

[DROBNJAK]

Yeah, and than some ppl say that only fools believe in UFOs. Skeptics are such a mediocrities.

I talked with these people, on the forum, and they are completely normal everyday ppl. @marduk is married guy, reasonably knowledgeable about science, very argumentative, @Constance is single mom, has a daughter, @Azz7092 is pro soldier familiar with military tech, he served somewhere abroad. They came completely anonymously to this forum, none of them is here to brag or make money. They are all quite reserved about their story and only told it after being members for very long time.

Cases that are shown in documentaries and newspapers etc. are just a tip of iceberg. UFOs are here, and they are the great opportunity for our science to leapfrog ahead.

 

[The Starman]

Yeah, and than some ppl say that only fools believe in UFOs. Skeptics are such a mediocrities.

Who specifically said that ?

I talked with these people, on the forum, and they are completely normal everyday ppl. @marduk is married guy, reasonably knowledgeable about science, very argumentative, @Constance is single mom, has a daughter, @Azz7092 is pro soldier familiar with military tech, he served somewhere abroad. They came completely anonymously to this forum, none of them is here to brag or make money. They are all quite reserved about their story and only told it after being members for very long time.

What is your point ?

Cases that are shown in documentaries and newspapers etc. are just a tip of iceberg. UFOs are here, and they are the great opportunity for our science to leapfrog ahead.

I did not see any unquestionable evidence of flying saucer, cigar or alien being. Science has nothing to do with ufology until someone uses scientific methodology to confirm these particular subjects do exist.

P.S.
Don't go personal, let's discuss subject not the personality.

 

[DROBNJAK]

Who specifically said that ?

A friend told me that when I told him that UFO research is my hobby. As well, here in UK, UFOs are off limits on BBC. They just don't talk with UFO researchers.

What is your point ?

That these are trustworthy people.

I did not see any unquestionable evidence of flying saucer, cigar or alien being.

That is purely demagogic point and really a big problem. There is plenty of unquestionable evidence. But, but in absence of authority with a stick in a hand, anybody can ask any questions. And they do, they come in droves. More ignorant person is, stronger her or his arguments are. Point in case are people who believe that earth is flat. You bring to them unquestionable argument, but because they are so deeply ignorant they refute unquestionable argument with a harebrained one. Ignorance always wins. It's not unsimilar to the way Brexit was decided, here in UK, or how Trump was elected in US.

Researchers bring out evidence, than that evidence is dismissed. If science is turned into politics, than one can never win, can't he? (don't again ask me to explain this ;-)

... Science has nothing to do with ufology until someone uses scientific methodology to confirm these particular subjects do exist.

Wrong. Science has to go out into field and gets it's answers. As a matter of fact there is a ton of scientific research of UFOs, one just needs to click on my post signature and there is a compilation of technical and scientific papers on UFOs. And not just click, but spend 3 months reading all the papers.

There is a funny anecdote, on Internet, about how it took 65 years to science to discover panda bears. And they were there all the time. In short, all along mid 19th century there were stories coming out of China's Quandong province about black & white bear that was eating bamboo trees. Stories mostly came from peasants who lived there. The most noble and reputable members of French Academy of Science refuted such claims as non-scientific quackery based on accepted wisdom that everybody knows that bears are carnivores, so they don't feed on plants, and that bears can be only black, brown or white, not black & white. Than, towards the end of 19th century, some western geologist went to Quandong province and shot a panda, but he didn't have camera, so he brought back just a story. Black & white bears were still dismissed by 'serious' scientist. Eventually, at a beginning of 20th century, some American expedition went to Quandong and they took a photo of panda. Finally, after 65 years, 'serous' scientist accepted existance of pandas and one was caught and brought to Edingborough zoo, for great Scottish public to enjoy.

What I am trying to say, we now know that pandas were in China all the time. Instead of waiting for pandas to come to scientists, scientists should have gone to pandas and save themselves 65 years. Scientists should pro-actively chase UFOs and than they will get all the evidence they want.

 

[The Starman]

A friend told me that when I told him that UFO research is my hobby. As well, here in UK, UFOs are off limits on BBC. They just don't talk with UFO researchers.

Till this day there are no debates between psychologist and ufologist or vise versa. The same goes for flat earth subject.

That these are trustworthy people.

Trustworthy is about reliability not about written life experience on internet.

That is purely demagogic point and really a big problem. There is plenty of unquestionable evidence. But, but in absence of authority with a stick in a hand, anybody can ask any questions. And they do, they come in droves. More ignorant person is, stronger her or his arguments are. Point in case are people who believe that earth is flat. You bring to them unquestionable argument, but because they are so deeply ignorant they refute unquestionable argument with a harebrained one. Ignorance always wins. It's not unsimilar to the way Brexit was decided, here in UK, or how Trump was elected in US.

Give any example of unquestionable evidence or evidences.

Wrong. Science has to go out into field and gets it's answers. As a matter of fact there is a ton of scientific research of UFOs, one just needs to click on my post signature and there is a compilation of technical and scientific papers on UFOs. And not just click, but spend 3 months reading all the papers.

There is a funny anecdote, on Internet, about how it took 65 years to science to discover panda bears. And they were there all the time. In short, all along mid 19th century there were stories coming out of China's Quandong province about black & white bear that was eating bamboo trees. Stories mostly came from peasants who lived there. The most noble and reputable members of French Academy of Science refuted such claims as non-scientific quackery based on accepted wisdom that everybody knows that bears are carnivores, so they don't feed on plants, and that bears can be only black, brown or white, not black & white. Than, towards the end of 19th century, some western geologist went to Quandong province and shot a panda, but he didn't have camera, so he brought back just a story. Black & white bears were still dismissed by 'serious' scientist. Eventually, at a beginning of 20th century, some American expedition went to Quandong and they took a photo of panda. Finally, after 65 years, 'serous' scientist accepted existance of pandas and one was caught and brought to Edingborough zoo, for great Scottish public to enjoy.

What I am trying to say, we now know that pandas were in China all the time. Instead of waiting for pandas to come to scientists, scientists should have gone to pandas and save themselves 65 years.

Science is not about Pandas. It is about using a scientific methodology for explaining or researching any kind of subject.

 

[DROBNJAK]

Trustworthy is about reliability not about written life experience on internet.

So you are unreliable person, and if you tell me your UFO story I shouldn't believe it? There is no single person on planet earth who is unquestionably 100% trustworthy.

They are trustworthy enough that one can believe them that they seen what they said that they had seen. Which was an UFO.

Science is not about Pandas. It is about using a scientific methodology for explaining or researching any kind of subject.

Well that's as funny as it could be. One can't start research till he gets data. Than one needs to go out and get the data. Why are scientist waiting for others to bring them data?

 

[The Starman]

So you are unreliable person, and if you tell me your UFO story I shouldn't believe it? There is no single person on planet earth who is unquestionably 100% trustworthy.

It's delusional to trust people without any scientific evidence, which you can't figure it out yourself or check. For example, if i say : i do have a family or i'm a teacher in biology class. That is not a trustworthy statement for any research whatsoever (maybe in someone's mind, but not in reality).

They are trustworthy enough that one can believe them that they seen what they said that they had seen. Which was an UFO.

Does woman which states on internet, that she has a baby from alien is trustworthy ?

Well that's as funny as it could be. One can't start research till he gets data. Than one needs to go out and get the data. Why are scientist waiting for others to bring them data?

I'm 27 year old. Finished university, have master in psychology and one of many hobbies till i was 15 year old, is ufology. Have read many books, articles. I know how to research. At the moment im disscussing spesific subject with YOU and if you can't make any argument, clarify view, share opinion, don't throw your personal feelings on me.

Why are scientist waiting for others to bring them data?

Who specifically is/are waiting ?

 

[DROBNJAK]

It's delusional to trust people without any scientific evidence, which you can't figure it out yourself or check.

OK, so you are psychologist. So you want to study human feelings, or whatever, and you get few subjects. Than you ask them few questions and they give you some answers. Now, there is no scientific way to decide how reliable your subjects are. They can be lying to you, just for fun. So psychology wouldn't exist if psychologist didn't trust subjects. Practically you are saying that psychology is delusional as science?

We already talked about this in case of legal evidence. There is no perfect, much less scientific way, to determine if somebody is reliable or not with 100% certainty. I read that even MRI brain scans can be cheated. Trust is overwhelmingly a question of cultural bias. People trust people who are similar to them, or who are in a position of authority. Which is irrational and non-scientific on both accounts.

It seems to me that you are just preparing ground to say that when you say something "that's scientific", but your opponent says something "that's untrustworthy".

Does woman which states on internet, that she has a baby from alien is trustworthy ?

You are just projecting your prejudice. You are a'priori saying UFOs don't exist, so she must be lying.

That's quantum mechanical. She is both trustworthy and un-trustworthy, like Schrodinger's cat. Until we get technology to replay human memories, we have to live with duality. For those like myself, who are certain that UFOs are here, it's reasonable that spaceman are abducting people and using them for experiments. They are so technologically ahead of us that they can go unpunished. Many of abductees had past 5 or more lie detector tests.

Few of abductees are highly trustworthy people. I remember watching documentary about a lady who was a chief surgeon for whole of area of Lapland in Finland. Obviously, journalists confirmed her credentials. She talked how she arranged for herself to be abducted, after her friend described her abduction, because she was interested to see what medical procedures and tools aliens are using.

As a matter of the fact 'the truth' in ufology is very similar as the 'the truth' in psychology. In both cases truth is statistical. One can only say that there is say 20% chance that UFO has landed someplace, same as in psychology you can say that say 60% of consumers prefer choice A over choice B.

As I said, there are tones of links to scientific research on UFOs in a special thread that I created to educate people that many scientists treat UFOs very seriously. Please don't go on and on abut how there is no unquestionable evidence. Go and read the stuff.

It's in hard to read scientific format, but that's how scientists write their stuff. You need to know physics and statistics as well.

Science is not about Pandas.

I was using a metaphor here to illustrate my point. Now you are taking a metaphor literally. Could we stay above the belt, please.

 

[marduk]

It's delusional to trust people without any scientific evidence, which you can't figure it out yourself or check. For example, if i say : i do have a family or i'm a teacher in biology class. That is not a trustworthy statement for any research whatsoever (maybe in someone's mind, but not in reality).

This is a profoundly irrational position to take. I understand it, because I also held it at one time.

The definition of science is:

the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

There's that interesting word sitting right there... observation. Observations are in fact science. It is the start of science, i.e. the scientific method:

a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

You are slightly correct that there hasn't been a lot of systematizing the observation which leads to the rest of the scientific method not being engaged. This is also my point. However, this is far from being universal.

Ray Stanford did this with Project Starlight International. Chris O'brien is starting this with his SLV Sky Camera Project. It is possible.

But to discount observations because they don't fit in with your worldview is the opposite of science. Whatever is happening is likely one of the most important things we will discover in human history. Even if it has nothing to do with aliens.

Because it's either us, or not us, or a combination of the two. And any of those three possibilities will likely change our view of ourselves and our place in the universe - because these experiences are part of the human experience, and always have been.

Think bigger. There are liminal spaces between 'they're all lying' and 'there are objects that I could hit with a rock with aliens in them.'

My experiences are not profound. They are not unique. I have never been given a message or meaning for anything. My background is math and science. These have troubled me since I was a child because I should not have had these experiences, and yet I have. Some have also been shared by trusted people, so I can't just be deluding myself. And yet they are discontinuous with the rest of my reality.

To ignore them because they don't fit with my world view (pretty classical empiricism) would be akin to astronomers ignoring planetary motion centuries ago because the stars aren't supposed to move.

 

[DROBNJAK]

Yoooo @marduk welcome back. Long time no hear. Here is now the chief of UFO self-denying UFO skeptics who actually had seen UFO.

It's these regular people who had seen UFOs, outside of the limelight and with protected privacy, that give me confidence to be even Lauder when I am saying that UFOs are here. Of course, I'll remind you once again to read scientific papers in my signature if you want factual proofs.