Anybody else watching the UFO stuff on The History Channel?

[PCIntern]

Really interesting stuff...this Wright-Patterson AFB business with Goldwater was amazing...General Curtis LeMay (for those who aren't old enough to remember, he was the guy who wanted to bomb Russia preemptively) blew up at Goldwater because the Senator wanted to visit the Top Secret rooms.

[Archae]

1. UFO stuff on the History channel is shit.

Oh, there might be a fact or two in there, but otherwise they regurgitate long-discredited stories, wild theories and simply lie.

UFO stuff on the History channel is only filler.

[PCIntern]

4. Yes but they have 'clews' to the truth...

The Goldwater Story is one...

My mother and brother encountered a UFO with 10 other schoolchildren in 1948 and I grew up with the detailed story of the fifteen minutes of awe and fear. One thing my mother of blessed memory NEVER did, was lie.

I am often amazed that MSM even mentions some of the more subtle aspects of the UFOlogy.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

6. I saw a UFO along with 6 of my neighbors. It isn't bullshit. I don't know if it was

one of ours or what, but it wasn't something that you would see every day. Meanwhile, I live in a former hotspot for UFOs which has been documented and Never discredited.

[Ghost in the Machine]

14. but the deniers will blather on in their foaming mouth fashion, telling you how

everything has been discredited/debunked. Funny thing is, NONE of these foaming mouthed blatherers will supply a link or anything to back up their assertions. Their own *word* is the gospel to them...

As far as I'm concerned, those who have never had an experience/encounter need to just stfu and not tell those of us who *have* had experiences/encounters what we did or didn't see...


Flame away, deniers and untruthers... :eyes:

[qazplm]

15. duplicate deleted

delete

[qazplm]

16. wow..ease up on the eggnog there brother

1. I dont think folks deny there are unidentified objects in the night sky. Doesn't mean they are aliens of course

2. Extraordinarily claims require extraordinary evidence. You dont get to say, I saw aliens, prove me wrong, you have to say, I saw aliens and here is my proof, and that proof has to be extraordinary because the claim is extraordinary. And you'd have to prove or at least explain how:

a. aliens that apparently have mastered the vast distances of space and likely FTL travel are absolutely unable to be seen by radar and humans when our own planes can do both
b. aliens who abduct humans somehow cannot keep them from waking up on the mothership to see what is going on or otherwise wipe their memory when we can do both ourselves
c. aliens need to do more than simply retrieve some DNA and do experiments on their own to their hearts content (surely simple and basic cloning is not out of their reach so why all the abductions in the first place?)

I have no doubt aliens exist. I have a strong doubt they come here on a regular basis in big shiny spaceships that show up on radar.

[Ghost in the Machine]

18. I don't drink and don't appreciate you implying that I do..

1. I dont think folks deny there are unidentified objects in the night sky. Doesn't mean they are aliens of course

True.. and it doesn't mean they're NOT aliens, either. Unidentified means just that: unidentified.. one just needs to keep an open, objective mind about the subject.



2. Extraordinarily claims require extraordinary evidence. You dont get to say, I saw aliens, prove me wrong, you have to say, I saw aliens and here is my proof, and that proof has to be extraordinary because the claim is extraordinary. And you'd have to prove or at least explain how:

See, there's where you're wrong... I don't have to *prove* anything to anyone because, quite frankly, I don't really give a rats ass who believes me and who doesn't. I've never asked anyone to prove me wrong. Your belief or disbelief has no bearing on my life, nor will it reinforce, or change, what I believe.



a. aliens that apparently have mastered the vast distances of space and likely FTL travel are absolutely unable to be seen by radar and humans when our own planes can do both

HUH? *humans* are the ones reporting sightings.. would you like to try that again? Maybe you meant "unable to (NOT) be seen "? Maybe they don't care if they're seen? Maybe they reveal themselves on purpose? Did anyone ever explain what was seen over O'Hare earlier this year? What about the mass sighting in Texas?



b. aliens who abduct humans somehow cannot keep them from waking up on the mothership to see what is going on or otherwise wipe their memory when we can do both ourselves

Ummmm... okkk... just to throw some pretzel logic back at you... who says *every* abductee wakes up and remembers? How would the ones who never woke up know if they had been abducted in their sleep or not? Have you ever woke up sore or tired and not known *why* you were sore or tired? :evilgrin:



c. aliens need to do more than simply retrieve some DNA and do experiments on their own to their hearts content (surely simple and basic cloning is not out of their reach so why all the abductions in the first place?)

Could be that aliens created us and they're still checking out their creation. They keep checking DNA to see if all the old DNA from their failed experiment at crossbreeding/hybridization (cave men) is gone yet.



I have no doubt aliens exist. I have a strong doubt they come here on a regular basis in big shiny spaceships that show up on radar.


Define "regular basis" please... thanks

:hi: Merry merry & Happy happy

Ghost

[qazplm]

20. wow

1. No one does not. An open mind does not mean that you believe anything until you have evidence that says no for sure. That's an empty mind. An open mind means you doubt everything until you have enough evidence to push you one way or the other. Therefore, one should doubt the existence of UFOs as aliens until evidence actually surfaces to push one in that direction. Your requirement that one prove a negative is the same as folks who try to say prove God doesn't exist

2. If you want to engage in the market of ideas then yes you do need to prove to folks that your idea is true. Otherwise you are just talking to hear yourself talk OR preaching to a very small choir. If the latter is enough, that's fine, but then dont come on a public discussion forum and get upset because someone disagrees with you. Take it to a closed forum where everyone agrees with you. In other words, dont come on the court and start shooting the ball but tell everyone else that wants to play that they can only play if you are the only one who gets to shoot.

3. I meant unable to not be seen yes, I think you knew what I meant. IF they wanted to be seen, they could do a much better job of that too. How do I explain this or that sighting? I dont. I wasnt there. But much like I wouldnt say lighting was thrown down by the Gods if I didnt understand the physics behind it, I also dont leap to its aliens, just because I cant understand it. I instead say, its unexplained, and then attempt to find an explanation for which there is hard, verifiable and hard to refut evidence.

4. Who's to say? Well considering we dont get such reports from folks who DONT wake up or otherwise experience something, I'd say your debate gun is shooting blanks. But if your basic response is but what about all those folks who COULD be being abducted who dont know about it?!! Yes, you got me. I too could be an alien abductee but just too hard a sleeper to know it.

5. Could be that the Giant Spaghetti Monster is behind it all. Could be that it's really humans from the future. Could be that its really elven magic. I mean heck if we are going to throw out things based on nothing more than "could be," I'd like to play too. Got any evidence that we are not the product of random evolution? I do have to say I am impressed that you are willing to throw out an entire body of science merely to get at the idea of could be for aliens.

6. Heck, you go ahead and define it. I'm fairly comfortable that any time period you want to list, the odds are high against alien visitation. Impossible? Nope, just about nothing is impossible. But that aint the standard for logical or scientific thought.

[Ghost in the Machine]

22. Yeah, "wow" is right...

1. No one does not. An open mind does not mean that you believe anything until you have evidence that says no for sure. That's an empty mind. An open mind means you doubt everything until you have enough evidence to push you one way or the other. Therefore, one should doubt the existence of UFOs as aliens until evidence actually surfaces to push one in that direction. Your requirement that one prove a negative is the same as folks who try to say prove God doesn't exist

You have a very bad misconception about what an open mind is, for starters. Seriously. An open mind does does NOT mean that "you doubt everything until you have enough evidence to push you one way or the other", it means exactly what it says... you keep your mind OPEN to any and all *possibilities*, until those possibilities are ruled out. Furthermore, I haven't asked *anyone* to prove a negative. Is english your second language, or did you just not understand what "I don't give a rat's ass what you, or anyone else, believes or disbelieves" meant?


2. If you want to engage in the market of ideas then yes you do need to prove to folks that your idea is true. Otherwise you are just talking to hear yourself talk OR preaching to a very small choir. If the latter is enough, that's fine, but then dont come on a public discussion forum and get upset because someone disagrees with you. Take it to a closed forum where everyone agrees with you. In other words, dont come on the court and start shooting the ball but tell everyone else that wants to play that they can only play if you are the only one who gets to shoot.

Once again, I'm not trying to "market" anything. Your belief or disbelief is meaningless to me. In other words, I don't *care* if you believe or not, nor am I trying to convince you or make you change your views. And please understand that *you* don't tell *me* where to post, what to post, or anything else for that matter.



3. I meant unable to not be seen yes, I think you knew what I meant. IF they wanted to be seen, they could do a much better job of that too. How do I explain this or that sighting? I dont. I wasnt there. But much like I wouldnt say lighting was thrown down by the Gods if I didnt understand the physics behind it, I also dont leap to its aliens, just because I cant understand it. I instead say, its unexplained, and then attempt to find an explanation for which there is hard, verifiable and hard to refut evidence.

Now you're starting to understand a little bit about what an open mind is...


4. Who's to say? Well considering we dont get such reports from folks who DONT wake up or otherwise experience something, I'd say your debate gun is shooting blanks. But if your basic response is but what about all those folks who COULD be being abducted who dont know about it?!! Yes, you got me. I too could be an alien abductee but just too hard a sleeper to know it.

Ok then.. you understand the point I was making, right? The point was that not *all* abductees have woken up during an abduction. To say that would be like saying "well, my dad woke up from the anesthesia during surgery, so that means that *everyone* wakes up during surgery".


5. Could be that the Giant Spaghetti Monster is behind it all. Could be that it's really humans from the future. Could be that its really elven magic. I mean heck if we are going to throw out things based on nothing more than "could be," I'd like to play too. Got any evidence that we are not the product of random evolution? I do have to say I am impressed that you are willing to throw out an entire body of science merely to get at the idea of could be for aliens.

How hard does the hypocrisy hit you? You chastise me, falsely claiming I asked you to prove a negative, then *you* turn around and ask "Got any evidence that we are not the product of random evolution?" :rofl: Actually, I personally believe that evolution happens, but that there was also some intelligent design to go along with the evolution. That's why scientists can't find the mising link.. there isn't one...


6. Heck, you go ahead and define it. I'm fairly comfortable that any time period you want to list, the odds are high against alien visitation. Impossible? Nope, just about nothing is impossible. But that aint the standard for logical or scientific thought.

No, you go ahead and define it, it was your assertion. What is a regular basis? 10 sightings per year? 20? 2? Once per year? What constitutes a "regular basis" to you?

[qazplm]

23. here's a clue for you

dont post your thoughts on a message board if you not only dont give a rats ass what anyone thinks but apparently want anyone to challenge you on what you post.

You are a prime example of a mind being so open that it's empty.

Starting to understand what an open mind is? I think you need to look again, because that has nothing to do with having an open mind as you want to define it trust me.

Understand your point? Wow, no I was mocking the sheer ludicrousness of your point. That this was not readily apparent to you really suggests how far out your thought process is.

Asking if you have any evidence to rebut an established theory is not "proving a negative"
The entire point of the scientific method is that something is falsifiable. But I'm clearly wasting my time quite frankly, as well mining a dry well.

[Ghost in the Machine]

24. Sorry, I don't take clues from the clueless...

If you ever pull your head out of your ass, please feel free to engage me again. Until then, it might be best for you to just keep your ignorance under wraps, instead of displaying it for everyone to see. As for thought processes.. well.. your posts show you don't have a grip on that, either... I'd put my thoughts and mind up against your empty rhetoric any day, my friend... go back to the clue factory and get your money back because you got ripped off...


Thanks,

Ghost

[qazplm]

25. lol

Apropos nickname...no substance and doesn't exist.

[tabasco]

2. The dumbing down of America.

The History Channel is complicit.

[ogneopasno]

12. That is so very, very true. Their WWII stuff, their stock in trade, is absolute garbage.

Their video doesn't match what they're talking about (footage from Russia under a voiceover about "meanwhile in France..." and so on) and their facts go down very easily for a certain type of intellectual curiosity.

[Codeine]

3. Why is this ignorant shit on the History Channel?

They need to change their name to the Discredited Conspiracy Theory and Cryptozoological Nonsense Channel.

[qazplm]

5. eh it's mindless fun

i watch it knowing full well its crap on a stick.

[Cush]

7. wrong post

[Cush]

8. well there is more to History than dates, wars, politics, inventions, civilizations, etc

[Mudoria]

9. I've never understood why anyone

would think another intelligent species would want to visit us. One look and they would hit warp speed to get away from the biggest madhouse in the galaxy.

[Champion Jack]

10. Unless they're in on the joke...

[hlthe2b]

13. Even intelligent beings get lost once in a while...

:evilgrin:

[Kansas Wyatt]

11. They are all re-runs.

The Goldwater one has been on several times before.

I always watch them and find them interesting. I am not arrogant enough to think and say that there is no way in Hell that UFOs are only a hoax and cannot be real. Gee, with that type of thinking, the world would still be flat, the earth would be the center of the universe, the sun would rotate around the earth, modern technology is just witchcraft, etc. etc.

However, all the alien abduction stuff is very far fetched, especially when they start in on the probing. A simple DNA swab would tell them all they wanted to know about us.

[MichaelHarris]

17. I'm more of a fan of the

Chupacabra, they'll mess you up man.

[Kingofalldems]

19. Have they told the Jackie Gleason/Nixon

UFO story?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. I was going to, but Elvis sent a message through my toaster that it was a hoax.

Because the UFO's shown in those grainy films didn't, in any way, resemble the one's he drives to his gigs where they're always spotted.