best evidence

Hard to debunk

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

best evidence

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Thu May 18, 2006 7:54 pm

david jacobs, john mack, michael hesseman, tim good, stan friedman, bruce maccabee, mike salla, steve greer, alan hynak, jacques vallee, whit strieber, ed mitchell, artbell, and on and on and on. these are not idiots. dismiss them at your peril.
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg


Postby Shawnna » Fri May 19, 2006 8:22 pm

Wish you would have provided some references or other reasons why you believe dismissing these individuals is at our peril. :roll:

And I am not familiar with all of these names but here's my input:

Stanton Friedman - Per Brad Sparks, Mr. Friedman agreed with Bill Moore that creating fake documents (i.e Majestic 12 Documents) was a good idea and a way to 'open doors'.

The above is from my timeline posted in the Majestic 12 thread on this forum which is produced from data found here:

http://www.roswellfiles.com/FOIA/majestic12.htm

Also - the following is an excerpt from the link provided below. It makes for a very interesting read.

All so-called leaks are intentional misinformation projects designed to promote the alien threat scenario while allowing for complete deniability on the part of government. The antics of Vicki (Cooper) Ecker (CIA), Donald Francis Ecker III (Dupe), William Moore, Jaime Shandera, Stanton T. Friedman, Bruce Maccabee (CIA, ONI), Barry Taff PhD.(Pneuropsychiatric Institute of UCLA worked with recently deceased Dr. Louis Jollyn "Jolly" West), Whitley Strieber, Bud Hopkins (CIA), John Lear (CIA), Linda Moulton Howe Order of the Eastern Star and American Federation of Human Rights (American co-masonry), Art Bell (Freemason), Glen Campbell, George Knapp (Freemason), Colonel Philip Corso (CIA, a monumental liar now Deceased), Richard Hoagland and his Face on Mars, the so-called alien autopsy film, NASA and the Apollo Moon Missions, the so-called Mars Meteorite which was fraudulently promoted as containing fossil evidence of life on Mars, the War Of The Worlds, and many other people and events are projects of this type. Some (very few) of these People are unwitting accomplices in the charade and truly believe in the extraterrestrial threat.


http://www.hourofthetime.com/majestyt.htm
"The only thing we found that makes the emptiness bearable is................... each other."

From the movie "Contact"

Shawnna's Reality
User avatar
Shawnna
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:30 pm

Postby ryguy » Fri May 19, 2006 8:33 pm

Shawnna wrote:Wish you would have provided some references or other reasons why you believe dismissing these individuals is at our peril.


The list is a great starting point for us to decide which ones have provided the "best evidence" and which have provided the "best disinfo".

Stanton Friedman - Per Brad Sparks, Mr. Friedman agreed with Bill Moore that creating fake documents (i.e Majestic 12 Documents) was a good idea and a way to 'open doors'.


I agree on Stanton Friedman and Bill Moore - definitely Bill Moore as I believe he admitted to taking part in the disinfo. I suggest Stanton Friedman tentatively on the "disinfo" list...with a few more examples of fake documents/hoaxes we can probably confirm that.

Having some sort of list of trusted sources would be nice. Although I'm thinking, in the world of ufology, that list will be very very short. lol 8)

-Ry
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: best evidence

Postby Nemo » Tue Jan 19, 2010 7:52 am

I am new to this site. Exposing frauds, hoaxes, misconceptions, deliberate misrepresentations, etc. is very fine, too rare in this subject and completely necessary but does this site also present examples of best cases? I see the former being done here but there are cases that seem to me to be exceptional and imply that there is something real to the UFO phenomenon. These cases should be presented in some prominent way at this site so that they are readily accessible.
Nemo
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:16 pm

Re: best evidence

Postby ryguy » Tue Jan 19, 2010 6:15 pm

Nemo wrote:I am new to this site. Exposing frauds, hoaxes, misconceptions, deliberate misrepresentations, etc. is very fine, too rare in this subject and completely necessary but does this site also present examples of best cases? I see the former being done here but there are cases that seem to me to be exceptional and imply that there is something real to the UFO phenomenon. These cases should be presented in some prominent way at this site so that they are readily accessible.


I agree! If you dig, you'll come across some amazing debates regarding the best cases. The most memorable was a very long and in-depth debate of the famous Socorro case - which, after following this debate, I'm convinced remains one of the most remarkable sightings in the history of Ufology.

Welcome to RU, by the way. Before you get the wrong impression about us - we are certainly very, very busy cleaning the frauds and con-artists out of Ufology (the work that remains is overwhelming!), however, we're certainly not against the reality that UFO sightings take place and people are experiencing real phenomenon that remains unexplained (in many cases). What you'll notice that's a bit different here than other forums that cover this subject matter is that we try to follow the scientific protocol where you assume nothing, and question everything.

This approach leads to a very health collection of the best cases (with all of the bogus stuff filtered out). The only remaining (and sometimes disheartening) problem is that the list of remaining cases is pathetically small. If you know of any that you feel belongs to the pile of cases with the "best evidence" - please throw them out there!

Thanks again for joining us - it's very cool to have you here. :)

-Ryan
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: best evidence

Postby Nemo » Tue Jan 19, 2010 7:52 pm

Ryan,
Where should I look at the site for the best cases? I think that they should be in one place as tentative best cases with possibly links to the discussions of them. As for there being few cases, I think that one excellent case should be enough to establish the reality of the phenomenon.

Off the top of my head I would think that the so called 1) "Cash-Landrum" case is very compelling. Based on their apparent radiation exposure something very real would seem to have happened. I heard one brief blurb on Public Radio in the mid 1990's that the government may have been operating and testing a nuclear powered engine (rocket I suppose) in the atmosphere with serious radiation consequences. NEVER, EVER heard that again. This story was not at all UFO related. Maybe it was "how do we travel in space" related. Even if this is a secret government project it is very relevant. 2) There is a case involving a military bomber in which simultaneous radar, visual, and ground radar evidence was obtained. The UFO exhibited flying characteristics that should not be possible (then or now). The official explanation that it was an airliner doesn't seem to pan out. This plane was a surveillance plane with very advanced equipment. It may have detected some sort of Radar being emitted from the other craft. 3) Supposedly Kelly Johnson and some of his professional associates saw one in the 40's or 50's. They made detailed observations. Performance not possible with our technology. If this happened.....he would know. I mean he really would. 4) The large UFO's that the policemen and others sighted in southern Illinois seems very well documented to me. I would tend to believe that something very real happened and that the performance when accellerating should not be possible. I tend to doubt that mis-identification is likely. 5) The Tehran UFO that was chased by a Phantom jet in the 1970's. 6) I think that the Betty and Barney Hill case is still compelling. 7) The Tinley Park sightings of apparently large triangular craft is interesting. Witnessed and reported by many. If these can be shown by triangulation to have been as large as they were reported to be and if, in fact, they were sighted within days across this country and then one or two days later over Australia, then they could not have been faked (assuming that all of the video's are not part of one video hoax). 8) The Malmstrom base UFO case is interesting. 9) The case where a UFO was supposedly filmed moving around a nuclear missile or it's warhead while moving at hypersonic speed is also interesting. That would depend though on the credibility of the witness since the film is govenment property if ,as in the case of the mysterious "Jaguar Shark", it really exists). 10) The Belgian triangular UFO's.

Even cases with only witness testimony should have some recognition if the observers are credible (astronomers, pilots, scientists, more average citizens* who are credible, etc.).

There are more but this is off the top of my head.

* This is not meant to sound as if Adam West said it.
Last edited by Nemo on Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Nemo
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:16 pm

Re: best evidence

Postby Zep Tepi » Thu Jan 21, 2010 12:18 am

I think I just heard Access Denied's head exploding... ;-)

Edit to add: Welcome to the forum Nemo, good to see you :)
.
Image
User avatar
Zep Tepi
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: best evidence

Postby Nemo » Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:38 am

Thanks, you have an interesting site.
Nemo
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:16 pm

Re: best evidence

Postby Access Denied » Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:45 am

Hey Nemo, welcome to RU! I've really been enjoying reading all your various posts but I haven't had time to respond to any of those I’d like to yet...

As soon I get some time would you be interested in knowing why I don't think any of those cases you listed are the "best evidence" you're looking for?

Anyway, I like the way you think… even if I don't necessarily agree with you on everything. :)

Talk to you later,

Tom
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: best evidence

Postby Nemo » Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:30 pm

Yes, I would, but you would also have to tell me what is the best evidence and why.

Thanks.
Nemo
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:16 pm

Re: best evidence

Postby ryguy » Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:23 pm

Zep Tepi wrote:I think I just heard Access Denied's head exploding... ;-)


LOL...I heard it from here too! You're across the Atlantic, from where I am it sounded like a Sonic Boom.

I'm glad Nemo is here - now I have someone who's closer to my end of the "skeptic" spectrum. ;)

-Ryan
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: best evidence

Postby ryguy » Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:30 pm

Nemo wrote:Even cases with only witness testimony should have some recognition if the observers are credible (astronomers, pilots, scientists, more average citizens* who are credible, etc.).



To your list, I would also add the 1986 JAL Flight 1628 Over Alaska. Even though the FAA buffoon John Callahan stretched the truth (okay, he pretty much lied) about the FAA/CIA meeting at the UFO press conference a couple of years ago - the case itself is very intriguing because we heard from one source (not yet corroborated) that the Air Force "erased" the tapes of the event (radar readings). I asked the source, "intentionally?" He answered, "I didn't say that, I just said they got erased."

Whatever that means - your guess is as good as mine. Anyway - welcome to the shadowlands, where truth and lies mix into some sort of mud-like substance no one can identify. LOL

-Ryan
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: best evidence

Postby Nemo » Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:58 pm

I was going to edit my last post to see if his head actually exploded or if maybe his blood pressure went up a bit. I don't know why it should.

I am interested in "Best Evidence" and don't think that too many of those cases should be required to indicate a real phenomenon which should be seriously investigated. I also think that "Pretty Darned Good" evidence has some standing and should get some recognition. That's probably what you get with something like this, anyway. A personal sighting should rationally be enough to convince an individual but not others, I guess.

Of course, there is also extreme skepticism, as with the ancient Greek philosophers who claimed you could never really know anything. I don't know how those guys ever went outside or crossed the street in good conscience. They knew perfectly well that no chariot was about to run them over, that's why they took the chance.
Nemo
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:16 pm

Re: best evidence

Postby Zep Tepi » Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:45 pm

I have seen a number of things in the sky that I couldn't possibly explain. If I were to describe these sightings to others, they would no doubt be attributed to something "not of this world" or to some super secret government project etc. One of the sightings in particular was quite extraordinary, but I do have a rational explanation for them; My mind/eyes were playing tricks on me.
It's amazing how real these experiences can appear. Ever had a lucid dream? I believe we can also have them while awake... :shock:
.
Image
User avatar
Zep Tepi
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: best evidence

Postby ryguy » Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:56 am

Steve - no one ever saw those things with you, or at the same time you did? I've heard a lot of cases where multiple people experience the same sighting - it's hard (but not impossible) to claim they've had a mutual hallucination of some sort. Then again if they're seeing environmental/atmospheric effects, obviously they'd see the same thing...lol. I've only heard a few of your stories - I'm wondering if there's anything you've held back... :shock:

-Ryan
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Next

Google

Return to Best Evidence

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron