UK Guardian article on Aurora

Hard to debunk

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

UK Guardian article on Aurora

Postby Hidden Hand » Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:53 pm

Is it a bird? Is it a spaceship? No, it's a secret US spy plane · Sightings of flying object over Britain worried MoD · Questions threatened to strain relations with US by James Randerson, science correspondent, Saturday June 24, 2006 - from the British paper The Guardian

It is the stuff of internet conspiracy theorists' dreams. A top secret, hypersonic, cold war spy plane that was allegedly flown by the Americans in UK airspace without the government's permission.
Publicly, the UK government played down newspaper stories about people who reported seeing UFO-like phenomena. But documents released under the Freedom of Information Act suggest the Ministry of Defence took the rumours much more seriously.


and from the end of the article

The section, which discusses other covert US aircraft such as the SR-71 Blackbird, contains two paragraphs and two illustrations which were censored before its freedom of information release last month. Codes next to the removed material indicate that it was excised in the interests of international relations. "Certain viewing angles of these vehicles may be described as saucer-like," the document says.


MOD edit - to make link stand out.
Is this a private fight, or can anyone join in?
User avatar
Hidden Hand
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:46 am


Postby Shawnna » Mon Jul 03, 2006 9:01 pm

deleted
Last edited by Shawnna on Mon Oct 30, 2006 8:50 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Shawnna
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:30 pm

Postby Hidden Hand » Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:30 am

A slightly different take on the same MoD report release:
Conspiracy theorists unmoved by UFO denial By Sven Nordenstam (Reuters), 29 Jun 2006.

David Clarke, a journalist and folklorist who used freedom of information laws to gain access to the report, said UFO believers would not accept any explanation for the phenomenon other than the extraterrestrial one.

"They've got the truth, but it's not what they want to hear," he said, speaking in a cafe near Sheffield Hallam University where he teaches journalism.

"They want to hear 'yes, there are aliens' but, because the report says there is no evidence, it's not good enough," said Clarke


And along the same lines a quote from Nick Pope:

"But I can't win with arguments like that, because whatever I say, they won't believe it."
Is this a private fight, or can anyone join in?
User avatar
Hidden Hand
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:46 am

Postby Almeirhria » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:00 am

The freedom of information act won't get the truth out of them.
They can still choose if or what they disclose.
User avatar
Almeirhria
Member
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 1:39 pm

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:03 pm

Shawnna wrote:Excellent find, HH!

I honestly think that quite a few "UFO sightings" fall into this same category.

In my most humble opinion, of course!

Always,
Shawnna


and ken arnold? was he 'just a nut' or did he see something? certainly not a blackbird. the ufo coverup started that day. quite a few ufo sightings are certainly 'other things.' it's interesting to watch debunkers cast confusion on timelines. the crash dummies of 1951 become the roswell aliens of 1947... and on and on. must be missing time.
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby Hidden Hand » Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:24 pm

cartoonsyndicate wrote:and ken arnold?


Cartoonsyndicate - Are you telling us that:
1) Arnold saw alien spaceships, and
2) There are no other possible explanations for his story, and
3) You are absolutely positive about all this?

I'm just trying to make sure I understand what you are saying.
Is this a private fight, or can anyone join in?
User avatar
Hidden Hand
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:46 am

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:38 pm

i'm saying that ken arnold saw ufos. until they become ifos there is no other true statement. the very concept of the ufo requires new paradigms in understanding. that's what ufology is all about. it's about high strangeness, other possible realities apart from the mundane. it's about don keyhoe and john mack and everyone in between. and in a very important sense it's about resisting the borg.
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby Shawnna » Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:57 pm

deleted
Last edited by Shawnna on Mon Oct 30, 2006 8:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Shawnna
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:30 pm

Postby Shawnna » Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:57 pm

deleted
Last edited by Shawnna on Mon Oct 30, 2006 8:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Shawnna
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:30 pm

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Fri Jul 07, 2006 5:03 pm

yes- unidentified flying objects are precisely what they are. the purpose of ufology is to discover what they are, what is their purpose, who is in them, how do they work and where the hell do they come from. most of them have prosaic explanations. others do not. even project blue book found this to be true in spite of it's obvious prejudices towards the prosaic. it's probably not a bad thing to remind ourselves of our roots as ufologists once in a while. it's the exquisite high strangeness of it all that keeps us committed; it is our very own touchstone to the absurd.

in re-reading this reply i realized that i am assuming that we both consider ourselves ufologists. perhaps i had no basis for that assumption. in any case- i do consider myself to be one and also an advocate for the eth as the best explanation for the phenomenon at this time. i'm beginning to realize that i may be in a minority here on this point and also that it places me in the company of the kooks and loonies out here in toonland. but c'est la vie.

i cut my teeth on the subject as a child in the 50's reading the books of frank edwards and donald keyhoe. i've always inclined towards strangeness in reality. the books of charles hoy fort, immanual velikovsky and wilhelm reich were also great influences on my choice of paradigms.

the strangeness of reality can only be approached through imagination. for me- everything else is just the borg.
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Fri Jul 07, 2006 5:54 pm

Hidden Hand wrote:
cartoonsyndicate wrote:and ken arnold?


Cartoonsyndicate - Are you telling us that:
1) Arnold saw alien spaceships, and
2) There are no other possible explanations for his story, and
3) You are absolutely positive about all this?

I'm just trying to make sure I understand what you are saying.


1. he saw unidentified flying objects that may have been alien craft.
2. there are many other possible explanations
3. i am absolutely positive that they may have been alien craft and that there are many other possible explanations.

understand?
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby Hidden Hand » Fri Jul 07, 2006 6:26 pm

Toon - some of the best posts I've seen you write. Thanks!


FWIW - I cut my teeth on ufos as a child in the '70s.

I do think UFOs and ufology are important - very important - or I wouldn't be here. I just don't think ETH is necessarily the best explanation - I (typically) think the psychosocial hypothesis is the best hypothesis (although I spent most of my life as an ETHer; and still pingpong over to a ultraterrestrial/cryptoterrestrial hypothesis). Don't get me wrong here - I definitely believe these witnesses/contactees/abductees had real experiences {high strangeness}. And as such, I think understanding the UFO phenomena can tell us a lot about our inner universe, probably (IMO) more than the ETH could tell us about the outer universe.


To quote Karl Popper "You may be right and I may be wrong, and with a little effort we may get nearer to the truth."
Is this a private fight, or can anyone join in?
User avatar
Hidden Hand
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:46 am

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Fri Jul 07, 2006 8:06 pm

FWIW - I cut my teeth on ufos as a child in the '70s.

I do think UFOs and ufology are important - very important - or I wouldn't be here. I just don't think ETH is necessarily the best explanation - I (typically) think the psychosocial hypothesis is the best hypothesis (although I spent most of my life as an ETHer; and still pingpong over to a ultraterrestrial/cryptoterrestrial hypothesis). Don't get me wrong here - I definitely believe these witnesses/contactees/abductees had real experiences {high strangeness}. And as such, I think understanding the UFO phenomena can tell us a lot about our inner universe, probably (IMO) more than the ETH could tell us about the outer universe.


while i agree that, 'ufos and ufology are very important,' i would append to that the word "transcendently." in other words that there is nothing more important in human existence. i'm not sure what you mean by 'inner universe.' you're referring, i suspect, to psychology here? i purposely reject such an interpretation for two reasons. first, it is uninteresting; secondly it is an essentially solipsist analysis- which scares me because it makes me god and you a figment. i've devoted a good part of my life to denying, in bad faith perhaps, the reality of solipsism. hahahah. i know you know what i mean.

best
k
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby Hidden Hand » Fri Jul 07, 2006 8:21 pm

I disagree both that it is uninteresting or that it is solipsistic (obviously, or I wouldn't think it was important.)
Is this a private fight, or can anyone join in?
User avatar
Hidden Hand
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:46 am

Postby Hidden Hand » Fri Jul 07, 2006 8:24 pm

Toon -

You have a right to your opinion and to express your opinion (and thanks to RU for providing a forum to do that). I hope you also respect other people's rights to have and express different opinions.

Considering that, claiming that someone with a different opinion is just a 'debunker' (or 'pseudo-skeptic', or 'cointelpro') is inappropriate.



This may come as surprise to you, but I (as a person) am genuinely interested in hearing not just what your (and others') opinions are, but also why you (and others) have come to those conclusions.



{Even though the forum rules state to back up statements with evidence or facts, or else indicate they are opinions, it is my opinion that a reasoned argument in support of one's statements counts as back up just as much as evidence or facts does.}


So don't hold back - explain yourself. Just as an example, you talked about your conclusions on the Truman Signature, and couched it as an opinion - but I'm interested in hearing what led you to that opinion - back yourself up :) That is not only the spirit of RU, but also contributes to more interesting discussion.
Is this a private fight, or can anyone join in?
User avatar
Hidden Hand
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:46 am

Next

Google

Return to Best Evidence

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron