Proof Of UFOs, assessing the authenticity of the Majestic Documents

These are competent men, Generals, Commanders, Scientists, etc., Briefing the President Of the United States. This is a no bullshit situation.

IF they say they are extra-terrestrial entities, I'll accept it at face value, noting that these competent men, well, let's just say I'll assume they are smart enough to offer another explanation.........................


....if there were one.

But, none was offered, was there? No.

Apparently, that concept hadn't occurred to you.

 

And do they explicitly and unconditionally say that? I would have expected that if there was that kind of "smoking gun" in the documents, it would be get a lot of focus and attention from the proponents.

 

So he says ignoring the fact that government funded SETI for decades before reducing its funding.

 

What a stupid thing to say! LOL! The entire basis for SETI is the Drake Equation, which attempts to calculate the number of advanced civilizations IN OUR GALAXY.

 

SETI as it has been is a waste of time. Even in our world, radio is only lasting a little over a century. The age of radio is just a flash in the pan. It would be pure luck to find a civilization using radio even if the galaxy is full of advanced beings.

 

Firstly and as stated previously (1) the Majestic Documents have been thoroughly debunked as fraudulent e.g. proven to be bearing forged signatures or otherwise containing counterfeited documents. And (2) I don't care how 'competent' the purported witnesses are because (yet again) that is just eye witness testimony. Show me physical evidence. If not just .... stop.

As it stands you 'evidence' for extraterrestrial visitations wouldn't win you a case in civil court where the proof is on the balance of probability let alone a criminal court where it's beyond reasonable doubt. In fact if you tendered the 'Majestic Documents' as part of your case you'd probably be arrested and charged with perjury and/or an attempt to pervert the course of justice.

You've been told what it will take to convince skeptics now go away and find it if you can but please stop harping on about this because your not going to convince anyone who isn't already a 'true believer' in UFO conspiracy theories. Which is what they are until such time as scientifically valid evidence is produced. But then 'apparently, that concept hadn't occurred to you'.

 

There's a very good explanation for the green triangle video.

Here's a link to a very good You Tube Channel that goes through all the recent Navy/Air Force UFO videos and provides alternate explanations.



Its quite long (almost 30 minutes) and worth watching in its entirety if you have time. That aside the most likely explanation for the green night vision UFO is explained from 12:28 through to 13:01. FYI the author the clip is a science/general interest topic blogger not a full time UFO debunker. As such his videos cover a wide rage of topics, this being the only one I'm aware of where he delves into the UFO debate so he has no 'skin in the UFO game' one way of the other.

 

You really need to stop making assumptions. You conclusion on the 'court' argument, is false because you have assumed that these documents are the whole of the argument. Most assuredly, they are only the beginning, the totality of the argument will fill many volumes of books.

There will never be 'proof' of aliens. Given your attitude, you will be the last person on earth to learn of their existence, because what you need is never going to happen.

But, there can be a place where a reasonable presumption can be achieved, given the entire body of the kinds of evidence that is available. What you are unaware of is the full scope of that body of evidence. You think all we have are pictures with fuzzy dots on them.

The debunkers have been debunked, each objection and issue raised thoroughly and methodically diffused and the counter arguments are far more compelling. The whole of them have not been debunked.

No one is claiming we have 100% certainty , but the flaw in the debunkers arguments are thoroughly gone over, but, of course, I suspect you won't even consider it, you've seen the debunked articles, and you are satisfied. Being satisfied in the negative comes all to easy for folks like yourself, you make a lot of assumption, you think Ufology is all a bunch of nuts, and that is that. You're not even interested in a place where a reasonable presumption is possible. It's all nothing for folks like yourself, but it's not all or nothing when it comes to the big bang, and other 100% impossible to prove theories. Oh, you think that is a false comparison? Well, all you have on the big bang is a reasonable presumption, but you will allow that for your favorite musings, but not that of one might be the most important story in history.

Forsensics is a science, is it not? Then consider the counter argument. Listen each of the short videos, and read the following papers.
If you can't do that, the fine, we shall agree to disagree.

Woods is a Phd PHYSICIST, he's not a fool. You should, give him the benefit of the doubt Listen to these videos
He presents a compelling case why the documents authenticity is not a settled argument.

https://majesticdocuments.com/documents/document-authentication/authentication-video-interview/


Debunking the debunkers.

https://majesticdocuments.com/pdf/The-New-Debunkers-Rehash-Klass.pdf

The documents have been given a methodically considered authenticity rating, based on forensics. For example, 0-20%, 20-40%, on up to 80-100%.

summary of the authenticity ratings

https://majesticdocuments.com/documents/majestic-documents/authenticity-ratings/

Summary of authenticity arguments

https://majesticdocuments.com/documents/document-authentication/summary-arguments/

Sorry

I'm not here to offer proof, only to point out to you that your reaction is 'kneejerk' and full of assumptions on the forensics of the documents and that a place where a reasonable presumption is possible. In Ufology, that's as good as it gets, just as when one is theorizing the origins of the Universe, a reasonable presumption is as good as it will ever get, as well. You are going to tell me Science is 100% on the origin of the universe? Bullshit. It's a reasonable presumption. Now, your argument is that the basis for the reasonable presumption for the origin of the universe is not comparable to any basis for a reasonable presumption of the concept of alien visitation, well, that's a rather absurd argument. Because, while that might be true, the difference is hardly that significant because there is a place, based on 'science' and 'forensics' and the kinds of evidence that would hold up in court, is there ( you just think it isn't, but that is false ) and so a reasonable presumption based on the body of evidence, as a whole, is possible, and if it is possible, the comparison is, in point of fact, valid, which is that you apply one standard to yourself, but not to another. But, reasonable presumptions are okay for you on your preferred subjects, but not Ufology, no, they are bunch of crazies.

If you have a closed mind, don't read the counter arguments, if you do, read them.

If you are not curious, then ignore this thread and allow others who might be open to the subject consider it and I don't share your assumption that it is not science. Science is a large part of the subject. If you continue to maintain the mindset that the only allowable thing you will consider is having an alien sitting in full view with his spaceship, that is never going to happen because the alien agenda is clandestine in nature and they are far more clever than humans are, which means, that being the case, and apparently that is the case, people such as yourself will be the last persons on earth to realize they are here and they have an agenda that may, or may not coincide with human's best interest. By the time you figure it out, it may be too late.

 

If the foundational documents are hoaxes then your entire argument is undercut from day one. If the trunk is rotten then so is the fruit, its that simple. Furthermore the amount written about a topic has nothing to do with how grounded in science that topic is. Instead the number of books and articles written about something simply reflects how much demand there is in the marketplace for information on that topic. There are lots of books that have been written about vampires, werewolves, Atlantis and Bigfoot. Doesn't make any of them scientifically valid. Same thing for UFOs. The volume of material written about them says nothing about whether they exist or not. It just says how popular the topic is with the general public. And science isn't a popularity contest.

Then so be it. If there's no physical evidence that something exists then the existence or not of that thing remains an open question. Ergo it can only be speculated about.

So, speculate about the possible existence of UFOs (i.e. as alien space ships visiting Earth) all you want. Just don't insist that they do exist because to date, there is no evidence. And this does not means BTW that I don't want UFOs to exist or that I'm intrinsically opposed to the idea. It would be the scientific discovery of the age if the existence of alien visitors was proven as fact. Problem is as of now it hasn't been proven.

Your also wrong abut there never being any evidence, any space ship landing on Earth will leave physical traces of its presence, as would the crew. This is a basic principal of the physical sciences, objects that interact cross contaminate.

 

Why do you wish to discuss the past on a current events forum?

 

SETI has not been a waste of time?? Just knowing no one has found an intelligent signal to date is a huge step forward. Available technology and knowledge at any given time determines what type of research can and will be done. If SETI only looked at biological markers, for example, this does not mandate 'intelligent life'. But radio signals are rooted in intelligent life. I won't be surprised if microbial matter is found everywhere in the Universe, and if we ever make absolute discovery of this on Mars or Venus or wherever, it's no big deal to me! But finding a radio signal that had to be created by intelligent beings...that will be a big damned deal...

 

What is not so simple is the part about the 'hoax'. You seem to think it's a settled matter. Far from it. I posted links to quell that notion.

Ahh, the old atlantis, bigfoot, werewolves, vampires and..................aliens! Conflation.

What you are doing is conflating galactic neighbors with mythical creatures. Not the same thing.

So, out of the several million sightings since the dawn of time, you are suggesting that NOT ONE of them is an authentic alien craft?

Out of those millions, let us focus on the very small percentage for which there are no adequate explanation, where the facts of the events are compelling enough that they assert we should keep an open mind about them whereupon , though we can't assert the alien hypothesis, we can't rule it out, either, as it is a plausible explanation on these particular examples, according to scientists who have studied them.

Those are of scientific value, for if that were not true, we would not have scientists inquiring.

The scientists I am thinking of are mainly J. Allen Hynek. There are others, but for now, Hynek,

Would you not agree?

Let me ask you a question? Would you say it is safe to PRESUME a man whom we call 'Jesus ' ( whose original name was Yeshua ) was a real human being who once walked the earth (disregard all the religious stuff, I'm saying, can we presume there was just a man to whom later a myth was ascribed ) ?

Some scientists would say no, but others would say yes.

And for those who would say yes, the reason they would say yes is based on, essentially, the volume of the wake that leads us back to someone, probably a real human. Maybe not a miracle worker, that's mankind's need for religious icons projecting upon a man, but a man, nevertheless, named Yeshua, (transliterated to "Jesus") probably walked the earth, a man who probably spoke in ways that mesmerized people, and people followed him, and the myth was started and was amplified over time. We can presume this based on the size of the wake that echos him through the annals of two thousand years. Some will accept it not as scientific fact,but a reasonable presumption, based on the plethora of historical information.

Similarly, aviators tell us, 'they don't know what is going on, but SOMETHING IS, and whatever it is, NO ONE can explain it. Similarily, there much more than just sightings, there are tons of trace evidence cases, there are many angles this subject is being approached, such that more than just mere blind speculation, but reasonable presumption can be achieve, IF only you would look, but, of course, you won't, because of your assumptions about the caliber of that is available. Sure, much of it is as you believe, but not all of it, and that 'not all of it' is quite a lot which you assume does not exist.

I've given you plenty of sources to demonstrate that there is far more to the subject than mere speculation. It appears you haven't taken any trouble to read my post.

Let's talk about hypnosis. We know that testimony from hypnosis is weak. That being said:

However, what if we were to learn that:

1. We have testimonies from memory recalls from subjects of individuals from all walks of life who claim to have
been abducted by aliens.
2 Over a thousand ( or several hundred )
3. Over 4 decades.
4. The story they tell is basically the same story, the descriptions of the aliens are the same, the procedures
they perform on the individuals are the same, down to trivial details not mentioned in the press, all the same, and remember, this is going back over 4 decades over a thousand subjects, and for many, the subjects testimony has been continuous, that the subjects claim they have been abducted by aliens over the course of their lives, and for many, it is continuing into mid life, whereupon when they reach senior years, it stops. The pattern is the same for every one.
They are pulled from a car, or from their bed, usually at night, usually in an unpopulated area. If there is a sibling, spouse, or relative near, the aliens 'switch them off', all nearby electronics are 'switched off', and the subjects are beamed up to the craft, clandestinely, placed on an operating table of sorts, and the aliens perform some medical procedures, seeming to do with neurological examinations, but every one makes the idendicle claim that:
A. aliens extract sperm from males.
B. Ova from females.
C. The aliens remove the subjects clothing and put them back on when they are done.
D. This examination lasts about 2 hours and the subjects are placed back into their original place they were abducted from. Sometimes the subjects say that aliens put the clothing back on incorrectly, or that the shirt was inside out, or sometimes they claim they were given someone else's clothes, or sometimes they claim they were placed outside of their house, and they were locked out. Anomolies such as this happen, all the time. The aliens are not peefect on minor details. But, the major objectives, neurological exam, semen and ova extraction, all subjects get this, without fail ( if possible ).

If these individuals, under hypnosis, reveal these memories, without variance, over decades, even before 'Communion" was published, before the Barney and Betty Hill event was published, wouldn't that pique your curiosity?

If we assert that people are making stuff up under hypnosis, wouldn't it follow that the stories would vary wildly? But, in fact, the vast majority of them do not. What accounts for the fact that the stories do not change? Does not that fact have some scientific value of any kind whatsoever?

I would ask you to read the works of Dr David Jacobs "Walking Among Us" and "The Threat" and anything by John Mack ( the PHD Psychiatrist who hypnotised a bunch of subjects and couldn't find any pathology in his subjects )

These are serious men. If you are a scientist noting that this could be the story of the century, how could you not be curious?

You automatically kneejerk and assume their work is bogus? You haven't even looked. You make assumptions, and in so doing, you are limiting yourself.

 

Look I've set my parameters for dealing with you on this in stone. It's quite simple. Physical proof, not eye witness testimony, not hypnotically recovered memories (a technique which has been totally discredited in court BTW) not stories about about alien abductions. Cold hard forensic evidence. And until such times as that evidence is produced books about alien abductions and UFO's have as much scientific credence as ones about bigfoot, ghosts and vampires.

So if you want to allege aliens are going around extracting sperm from human beings fine, that's all it is - an allegation. Just like all the other things they are allegedly doing.

Come back to me when you have proof alien sperm has been is deposited into a human being and we'll talk. That would be evidence of alien visitation. Because so far nothing else you've talked about has been.

 

It's interesting that some people believe UFO's that cannot be explained must be ET's. Normally when something cannot be explained, in this case in a scientific fashion, it is dismissed. I'm guessing scientists overwhelmingly would enjoy the hard discovery of ET's, but I doubt any of them are going to give any credence to anecdotal stories as proof of their existence...

 

I would not agree.

Hypotheses have to be able to be proven false.

None of these claims you make above can be proven false.

So, they are not hypotheses.

Well, this certainly isn't true.

The Navy videos that have been released do have explanations. These explanations do not impute what the pilots have said - nobody is calling them liars.

BUT, the idea that they are showing something of alien or supernatural origin just isn't the case.

But, you keep denying that.

Why?

[...][/QUOTE]

 

This is the Science Forum. We discuss science and the principles of science and that might include discussing levels of funding by government or private entities in furtherance of science.

Glad we got that straightened out. Hope you didn't hurt yourself flouncing around.

 

Monash I have been interested in ufos and the paranormal for many years but I do hear you loud and clear and would expect nothing else from you or anyone else other than what you said-provide objective methodology and evidence otherwise the theories being expounde can and do become subject to scams, manipulation, delusions, illusions, distortions, projections, inaccuracies or just abject meaninglessness, etc.

Myself, I would argue that theories that speculate on being able to "shrink space" between one site or another to enable travelling vast differences will one day be proven.

My fascination with alternative possibilities comes from fractal theory and Mandelbrot's equation Zn+1 = Zn2 + C which for me provides a reason to believe where we are at now in science or thought is not even a glimpse of where we truly are in a larger scheme of a never ending scheme of many things.

So me, I just can't accept theories that close down possibilities too quickly. I do on the other hand appreciate however your demand for proof. Of course.

However may I remind all scientists lol, being the modest person I am that the visions of say Einstein surely started by a creative impulse and not a rational thought.

To be even more specific my point is that a mindset which holds that we are either solely a creative person or an analytical person could limit thought.

An innovative scientist must embrace both creative and analytical skills and let his or her visions come to them before they necessarily go on to prove them or equate them.

Surely Einsten and Mandelbrot and so many others have proven that.

 

OK.

And, what do you see as having been "closed down" too early?

 

The unidentified part of UFO means they are mysterious phenomena. We have no explanation for them. However, we can be pretty positive that they have nothing to do with extra terrestrial visitors. The distances are simply way way way too great.