A Troubling Observation About UFO Reality

[Creepy Green Light]

Lol, as I just pointed out, that's NOT what it is, in part because it's not the same as the McMinnville object (if a real match existed it would've been found and shown).



The latest, most authoritative research, on KDR's blog, indicates it could NOT be a solid weighty object, because there is no perceptible sagging of the wires just above it.

Just like in the 90's the "experts" said that the corn stalks & wheat in the fields COULD NOT have been created by humans because blah blah blah blah. Meanwhile, that's exactly what it was; humans (with a rope fastened to a piece of wood) lol.

 

[victimized]

Amen to that..

paintings with ufos in the background - Google Search

Information exists in a format of photon interaction. The atmosphere records both sound/voice/image and then feeds back the information.

Occult, ancient science. The old occult practice involved the nuclear of stone also called SION...converting as conversion, transmit as transmission, and fed back attack/awareness caused by changing the natural fused nuclear orbital of stone. The ancient buildings for sciences, the pyramid and temples. Modern day sciences built nuclear fuel power plants.

If you ask yourself a question as to why the modern mind knew why it should build the power plant, is to be advised that it was aware of what it had caused by using pyramids and temples in nuclear sciences.

Nuclear orbitals the same types of UFO signals witnessed in the atmosphere in an artificial caused signal.

Science a real condition that exists in the same atmosphere that all of the Nature and Earth body uses. Although the science is done inside of a machine, the machine created in the atmospheric condition, interacts with the atmospheric condition due to what the machine is formed from....the material of natural Earth stone.

Therefore the atmosphere gains the recording and feedback of the changed nuclear orbital signals as they interact with the atmospheric fed back advice recording into an attack of natural fusion to alter fusion, a conversion of the fusion, the creation of a new artificial product and the burning of the product.

The atmosphere therefore transmits the feed back of the changed nuclear state as imagery/sound recording in fake/artificial imagery.

Then you have the scientific advice of cause and effect.

If you change something natural, then an unnatural effect will be caused.

The atmosphere a body of holiness.....water.....water is used as a state in the interaction to gain a fuel that did not previously exist. The atmospheric mass begins to disappear as it is used in the interactive condition....the gases witnessed burning in the atmospheric UFO manifestation as the lights.

Gas, the body that came from out of stone.

The science, the conversion of a stone product.

The atmosphere demonstrates a loss due to the cause and effect.

The extra effect is the nuclear particle interaction from out of space...a larger nuclear particle than the holy dust of Earth nuclear.

The out of space particle was once neutralized by the cold mass of the atmosphere that has since disappeared into the creation of nuclear fuel. The atmosphere no longer deals with the particle and it then is caused to manifest a body (UFO) due to increased atmospheric carbon content to manifest into an actual metallic orb body that disintegrates differently.

 

[Trajanus]

Just like in the 90's the "experts" said that the corn stalks & wheat in the fields COULD NOT have been created by humans because blah blah blah blah. Meanwhile, that's exactly what it was; humans (with a rope fastened to a piece of wood) lol.

Sure, all those intricate designs, worldwide....And exactly what type of truck mirror did the Trents use, how did they prevent ANY perceptible sagging of the wires above it, HOW did they get a small nearby object to behave like a big distant one, WHAT on earth was their motive (AFAIK they made no $) WHY did NEITHER EVER admit to a hoax, and how could such "mentally challenged" country folk pull it all off so expertly that they fooled experts for decades (lol!!).

 

[Randall]

Sure, all those intricate designs, worldwide....And exactly what type of truck mirror did the Trents use, how did they prevent ANY perceptible sagging of the wires above it, HOW did they get a small nearby object to behave like a big distant one, WHAT on earth was their motive (AFAIK they made no $) WHY did NEITHER EVER admit to a hoax, and how could such "mentally challenged" country folk pull it all off so expertly that they fooled experts for decades (lol!!).

Photos, no matter how good they might seem, don't prove anything other than that a photo of something exists, just like debunking photos doesn't prove alien craft have never been observed by humans here on Earth. So if the whole exercise of such debates is to prove that alien visitation is real, once again all we're doing is spinning our wheels. Depending on what we believe we should be doing one of three things: Write it all off as nonsense, put it on the backburner pending more convincing evidence, or get on with the task of what to do about it.

I keep trying to do the latter because I believe that alien visitation is real, not because of any case in particular ( apart from my own sighting ), but because I just don't believe I'm the only person in the world who's telling the truth about seeing an alien craft, and therefore I also believe there has to be other genuine accounts out there. I mean sure it's possible I'm the only one. But really. How reasonable is that? It's just not. IMO other people must to know too, even if we can't be 100% sure exactly who they are.

So instead of continuing to debate the reality of alien visitation, I tend to ask questions like why can't we have a more as a unified effort among believers? Is there another way to make progress besides trying to convince the skeptics that alien visitation is real? I empathize with @Christopher O'Brien's statement that we need to try something different, and that his suggestions have the potential to change attitudes, and attitude is a powerful thing. But how can we do this cleanly so that the parents of young people who become interested in the field don't need to become concerned about what their kids might be getting into?

 

[Trajanus]

Photos, no matter how good they might seem, don't prove anything other than that a photo of something exists,

Something technological yet unlike anything manufactured here on Earth.

just like debunking photos doesn't prove alien craft have never been observed by humans here on Earth.

Well, if they have been, so many times, there should be at least a few undebunked photos.

So instead of continuing to debate the reality of alien visitation, I tend to ask questions like why can't we have a more as a unified effort among believers? Is there another way to make progress besides trying to convince the skeptics that alien visitation is real? I empathize with @Christopher O'Brien's statement that we need to try something different, and that his suggestions have the potential to change attitudes, and attitude is a powerful thing. But how can we do this cleanly so that the parents of young people who become interested in the field don't need to become concerned about what their kids might be getting into?

What do you suggest?

 

[Jeff Davis]

Photos, no matter how good they might seem, don't prove anything other than that a photo of something exists, just like debunking photos doesn't prove alien craft have never been observed by humans here on Earth. So if the whole exercise of such debates is to prove that alien visitation is real, once again all we're doing is spinning our wheels. Depending on what we believe we should be doing one of three things: Write it all off as nonsense, put it on the backburner pending more convincing evidence, or get on with the task of what to do about it.

I keep trying to do the latter because I believe that alien visitation is real, not because of any case in particular ( apart from my own sighting ), but because I just don't believe I'm the only person in the world who's telling the truth about seeing an alien craft, and therefore I also believe there has to be other genuine accounts out there. I mean sure it's possible I'm the only one. But really. How reasonable is that? It's just not. IMO other people must to know too, even if we can't be 100% sure exactly who they are.

So instead of continuing to debate the reality of alien visitation, I tend to ask questions like why can't we have a more as a unified effort among believers? Is there another way to make progress besides trying to convince the skeptics that alien visitation is real? I empathize with @Christopher O'Brien's statement that we need to try something different, and that his suggestions have the potential to change attitudes, and attitude is a powerful thing. But how can we do this cleanly so that the parents of young people who become interested in the field don't need to become concerned about what their kids might be getting into?

Yes Sir, I think Consciousness studies are one such way.

 

[Randall]

Something technological yet unlike anything manufactured here on Earth.

If interstellar travel assumes that a species has survived their technological adolescence, I wonder if they all go through a selfie phase?

Well, if they have been, so many times, there should be at least a few undebunked photos.

As you know, the genuine good ones are the ones they take and never give back ( except for Stanford's mystery photos that is ) .

What do you suggest?

You mean besides winning the lottery and retiring to a tropical health resort where the most stressful thing is contemplating which server from the juice bar is cuter ?

 

[Goggs Mackay]

The McMinnville picture is fascinating but cannot function as any kind of real evidence, and maybe even that is Randall's point in his blog post. We'd need more pictures from independent witnesses for these pictures to warrant the claims that have been made about them. This pattern of consistently leaving only suspect evidence means either the UFOs somehow know when it is safe to appear and when it is not (it is a part of the phenomenon), or that the alleged pattern of the UFO experience is imaginary (there are no real UFOs).

Without claiming the following to be definitely factual, I like when Stan Friedman tells of when he asks a lecture audience to raise hands to the question of having seen something approaching a 'UFO'. Then he asks how many reported it? About 1/10. So just using this as a rough example, how many of those sightings were captured on camera? How many of those pics were any good? And how many will have been publicly disseminated?

All I'm saying is that there are no doubt many more sightings and photos out there than known ones, which at least increases the chances of some being 'real' surely?

And of course, taking photos of objects in the sky is very difficult when stationary, never mind moving fast. If a weird object only appears for a short time, not too close and is moving, there is no mystery why there aren't many great photos. I would also say personally that there are some I find compelling and it takes only one.....

 

[technomage]

Also, I think there are good ones out there but how do you find them in the thousands and thousands that have conventional explanations or are fakes?

 

[victimized]

Why is it that the UFO witness increased with the increased building of nuclear fuel power plants, the mining and removal of the nuclear product and the collider experiments?

Why is it that previously the UFO condition rarely existed, but provides evidence that it has occurred before due to occultism?

Why is it that the biblical data relative to many studies and inferred prophetic calculated cause and effect of black body Earth irradiation stated that 2012 was End of Time? When the time spoken about in the bible was Sun Time?

Why is the nuclear related to Sun Time and a changing atmosphere, if the atmospheric condition itself was known to have been changed by the UFO condition or nuclear condition?

Why is it that the value of Christ was 1000, and returning of the Heavenly spirit a prediction of 1000 and 1000 and 12? 12, the value of light time and a newly healed atmospheric body after it was advised that the heavens had been changed by occult practices?

Why were the Holy Wars fought if not to save life on Earth, and religion merely an occult practice and taught belief?

Why did the occult practice continue (conversion nuclear sciences), if not for the fact that the occultists, the elite won?

Why would the UFO condition recur and the unholy spirit manifestations appear (manifestation/de-manifestation) if not relative to the occult practices...the conversion of nuclear light?

 

[marduk]

Also, I think there are good ones out there but how do you find them in the thousands and thousands that have conventional explanations or are fakes?

I don't think you do.

I think you go get the data yourself. Like Chris does.

Hell, I threw a nest cam up in my back yard. Never know what it will catch.

What's his name from MUFON had a point. Arguing over old data and cases is pointless.

 

[technomage]

I don't think you do.

I think you go get the data yourself. Like Chris does.

Hell, I threw a nest cam up in my back yard. Never know what it will catch.

What's his name from MUFON had a point. Arguing over old data and cases is pointless.

I agree entirely.

 

[Trajanus]

I think you go get the data yourself.
What's his name from MUFON had a point. Arguing over old data and cases is pointless.

The problem is, the phenomenon tends to be secretive and avoids letting us have good data. I doubt new photos will be better--if as good--as old ones like McMinnville. Also, no matter how good the data may be, regardless of age, there will always be skeptics who won't accept it.

 

[technomage]

The problem is, the phenomenon tends to be secretive and avoids letting us have good data. I doubt new photos will be better--if as good--as old ones like McMinnville. Also, no matter how good the data may be, regardless of age, there will always be skeptics who won't accept it.

There are debunkers that won't accept anything because they have an agenda, but true skeptics, like many good UFO researchers should accept good data, which would include more than just photographs. We need more projects like Chris's SLV project. I remember reading in Report on the Unidentified Flying Objects how they set up some sort of data collection project, but they didn't have the funding to continue with it or make it really work. Since then, I think the government or outsourced groups in private companies have set up SLV type projects already and have a lot more data. Whether they know what it means, I don't know...

 

[marduk]

The problem is, the phenomenon tends to be secretive and avoids letting us have good data. I doubt new photos will be better--if as good--as old ones like McMinnville. Also, no matter how good the data may be, regardless of age, there will always be skeptics who won't accept it.

Who cares?

Data is data. Once you get it, you seek to improve how you get it and get new insights.

Just like I'm not interested in trying to get Trump to understand feminism, I'm not interested in changing skeptic's minds.

 

[Trajanus]

Just like I'm not interested in trying to get Trump to understand feminism, I'm not interested in changing skeptic's minds.

Sure like Planck once said, a new ideas don't win out by convincing opponents and getting them to see the light. A new, receptive generation just replaces them. But the worst problem isn't hard core skeptics. It's the phenomenon's secretiveness and capriciousness, enhanced by its capabilities. It evidently doesn't want us to be sure it's here.

 

[marduk]

Sure like Planck once said, a new ideas don't win out by convincing opponents and getting them to see the light. A new, receptive generation just replaces them. But the worst problem isn't hard core skeptics. It's the phenomenon's secretiveness and capriciousness, enhanced by its capabilities. It evidently doesn't want us to be sure it's here.

Oh, you could create a whole laundry list with problems with this area.

Having the pleidian light and love nonsense tolerated is one of them.

Dealing with human egos and human stories instead of data is another.

Obsessing about the past cases which we will never answer is probably the biggest.

There is no surprise to me why the young are abandoning interest here. It's because there is literally nothing of interest being presented by the vast majority. The world has moved on. This area can move with it, or be abandoned.

 

[Trajanus]

Obsessing about the past cases which we will never answer is probably the biggest.

We can't solve any case, new or old, definitively because of the way the phenomenon operates. But you can't say for sure old cases will never have an answer. Many people presume the government has some of the answers and are trying to get them released. I've long doubted the government will reveal much anytime soon. But it's at least as naive, and probably more so, to think advanced ETs will do so either, even inadvertently.

 

[marduk]

We can't solve any case, new or old, definitively because of the way the phenomenon operates. But you can't say for sure old cases will never have an answer. Many people presume the government has some of the answers and are trying to get them released. I've long doubted the government will reveal much anytime soon. But it's at least as naive, and probably more so, to think advanced ETs will do so either, even inadvertently.

My position is essentially that it's just pissing in the wind.

Even if you learn something new, all you'll create is another endless debate about nothing.

MJ-12 anyone?

 

[Trajanus]

My position is essentially that it's just pissing in the wind.

Even if you learn something new, all you'll create is another endless debate about nothing.

MJ-12 anyone?

Lol, those who've read Randle's latest writings can discern frustration about Roswell. The case has been mucked up by many phony stories and claims. Same true of UFOlogy in general. But I've never despaired of this field. I strongly suspect even some of the nonsense has a redeeming feature--often it seems a kind of indirect confirmation of the phenomenon. Remember what T. Good once said.