duplicate deleted

jsbjsb001

Please blow up any of the three videos in your post #121 and look at the lighting and what is lit, the top of "the aliens" skull, and notice there is zero movement of any kind. Compare that to any living thing but especially to any that's attempting to communicate in any way, even dogs and cats when they "vocalize'. Their ears and foreheads move as do ours. Shoulders and other involuntary body language movements would be utterly common for as long as this interrogation seems to last, yet this "creature" is still except for utterly basic motion, like a marionette. Oscar the Grouch emotes more than this thing.

Now look at the mouth. With the exception of a slight upper lip raising motion there is no complex motion, the kind that allows people who know how, to read lips. Then consider why the military or anyone for that matter who commonly in interrogations has bright lights on the face and in the eyes has lighting only from above. I submit it is an attempt to hide detail in shadow.

Then there is the whole odd nature of the interrogation in that this 'creature" is obviously cooperating by answering questions, yet suddenly the interrogators start acting upset and threatening. This is so clearly a fabricated hoax it is ridiculous. Such hoaxes of varying degrees of believability are completely commonplace. Not one of the hundreds has withstood "the light of day" for very long. I'm a bit amazed you still consider this one at all believable.

What is interesting is that people feel compelled to create these sometimes elaborate hoaxes and the ones that do this generally aren't the cynics and skeptics but believers.. and a few who don't care but just want to cash in on those who do. Careful...these are murky waters.

Well enorbet first off, I haven't invested anything in any of the videos in question. Just because I believe the videos could be real, that does not mean that I think they are real. Whether you believe me or not, I'm still 50/50 on it. I actually can't decide one way or the other. Look, would I like to think that they could be real? Yes and No. Yes in the "general sense" in that: it would confirm my thinking that at least ***some*** UFO's are actually ET craft and therefore by extension ET does indeed exist. But no, in that: if those videos are real, for one: I would really feel for (in that case) that poor alien having to go through that sort of treatment. And particularly, it's not a good sign for our future if the nukes are going to be set off and most of us are going to be dead as a result.

Could those videos be nothing short of pure fiction? Yes, of course they could be. That's also an equal possibility as well. I fully accept that and am not kidding myself there either. I should also say that it would totally defeat the point of doing anymore research about the subject itself (not to mention the videos in question), if I had already decided that the videos just must be true/real. So no, my mind is still open to what-ever possibilities there may be.

In relation to the movement of the "alien"; I have indeed watched the videos again (all of them) and to be honest with you, and while there maybe some truth to what you say; I think you're forgetting that we are not talking about something that lives on this planet nor are we talking about something that's if the videos are real, is even of the same species as us nor anything else on this planet. So I'm not sure how you can compare an "alien" from outer space to a species found on this planet. I'm not sure you even can, particularly if "aliens" do not possess the same genetic properties and alike as us humans. In at least one of the videos the so-called "alien" even said "we can no longer breed with your kind" - I'm not saying that proves the videos are real BTW. So I'm not sure that's a fair comparison, trying to compare any living thing found on Earth to an "alien" from another world that we could not know anything about. The saying "trying to compare apples and oranges" springs to mind straight away.

In any case, my mind is still open either way. While I do respect your right to differ and I hold no ill-feeling towards yourself about FWIW, my mind will continue to remain open either way.

Well jsbjsb001 I do respect that your mind is not yet made up on the larger subject of "Are we alone?". I am in the same boat. Given that organic molecules are found essentially everywhere it is quite possible that Life is commonplace. I suspect that it is but just haven't enough to go on to be more than an inclination. It is literally possible that some form of life is on every planet in our system. It is however unlikely that even if that were so that any of them are intelligent in any sense we can understand. In other words it is pretty well certain that if life is on any of the bodies in orbit around our Sun, it is all but certain that none are technological.

Which brings us back to that alien interrogation video. How do you suppose an alien species like this whether they evolve from us or not, is able to build highly advanced and presumably precise technology and then operate it with no prehensile appendages of any reasonable length and facility? I suppose it is vaguely possible that (since we can't see the legs on the little guy) he has prehensile feet with considerable length and sufficient dexterity but the odds against that especially in this case where he is represented as some future evolutionary step from current humans is fraught with problems and inconsistencies. It is extremely uncommon to the point of almost never that evolution of any living thing results in the loss of something adaptable and useful. Long arms with hands on the ends is a HUGE evolutionary advantage. Losing that advantage makes no sense. The point is the odds are heavily stacked against those videos being anything but a hoax before we even get into how remote Time Travel is from Interstellar Travel and it is said he came "thousands of light years" to get here. Even at "Warp Factor 1000" that's years of travel

I was actually referring to the three videos in question when I said "I'm still 50/50 on it", not the larger question of "if we are alone". I'm near certain the answer to that would almost have to be a "no, we are not alone".

Anyhow, while I can't claim the videos linked below are real, fake or whatever else, they certainly give some "food for thought". At least one of them I think could well explain why we don't have the ability to "time travel" just yet. But as I was saying before, it does add weight in my mind to the idea of maybe one day sooner than you may think, it could be possible. At least one of those videos is also purportedly from Area 51, and does seem to have at least some common themes with some of the others I've seen (and possibly linked). And they don't appear to be from the same source either.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dy6k27c5tA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQxD1uUEz4Q

FWIW Time Travel is possible now!... that is if what you want to do is equivalent to travel to the Future. All one has to do is travel really fast and under such conditions time passes more slowly so that the effect is that whatever SpaceTime you left has passed more quickly so that for example you are still 18 when all your classmates are 50 or even long dead and gone. This is routinely measured at fairly low velocities like in the International Space Station exactly as predicted by Einstein. What seems completely impossible is traveling BACK in TIME since Time cannot be divorced from SPACE. The fabric we inhabit is called SpaceTime for a reason. In an expanding universe how do you suppose one determines Where/When that was? There are no signposts nor mechanisms to get there/then.

Much of what fuels and even allows speculation on faster than light and time travel is Newtonian Physics which still works perfectly within very near limitations but without Einstein even GPS wouldn't work at all, just as one mundane example. Einstein's Relativity is not at all likely the Whole Truth, at the very least because it can't (yet) reconcile with Quantum Mechanics (the most successful scientific theory to date but nothing within QM holds any ground for FTL or TimeTravel, not even Entanglement. Thus if either is actually physically possible, the estimation of how far off that even could be is by no means a mere guess or overly conservative. It's simply how it really is.

If you'd like some insight into this reality check this out

--- Relativistic Velocity Addition ---

Note: Don't let the math formulae throw you even though that is the most concise and accurate means to understanding. The words will get you close and there's a decent book called
--- Relativity for the Layman --- that you may find quite helpful should you not be schooled in advanced mathematics.

theory

Well Hello there jamison20000e
I'm a little surprised at your lone comment "theory" which I'm guessing that being a single word comment is like many such uses of that word, intended to be an indictment equivalent to "That's just your opinion" often followed by some comment regarding the similarity between opinions and sphincters. On some ultimate scale NOTHING is more solid than theory, at least theories with high probabilities based on objective evidence. Very few things can be said to be 100% certain. For over 120 years now it has been repeatedly shown that it's all about probabilities. I doubt you would take a bet where the odds against you are a million to one (although maybe you engage in Lottery. I can't be certain) it's quite likely you would and do routinely act on odds in the reverse order where a million is in your favor to win and only one chance in a million to lose. Almost everyone who values what is won would take that bet. There are studies of events in Science that have odds of a BILLION to One. Why would anyone not take that bet?

I suppose I should add a question of to what were you referring as "theory"?

Found some interesting videos, and just had to share. Now, these videos actually have someone talking about UFO sightings that not only worked for the UK government, but actually investigated them for the UK government. Nick Pope has also authored classified reports about UFO's, some of which have been declassified now. He makes some very interesting points. There's a whole series of them called "The Basement Office" on YouTube.

Here's Ep.2 (I posted this one because it makes some very good points and deals with some of the best sightings);

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z25N...k&index=6&t=0s

What points do you suppose are good or even different from what it has always been? The bottom line as NGT notes is "As soon as you say 'unidentified' that should be the end of the discussion". The only possible or valid next step is to try to gather evidence to make it "identified". Leaping to a conclusion with no evidence is sheer folly.

It is similar to a news report stating that three gallons of blood went missing from a hospital in (you name a place) and nobody can explain who, how, or why that occurred. Some noted experts assume it must have been a wild party of invisible vampires run amok. Non Sequitur.

Well enorbet, I don't mean any disrespect to your good self, but; if something being "unidentified" meant "end of discussion", then science would never advance and there therefore would be zero point in even trying to find out what the real truth is - let alone conducting scientific experiments.

Right; and one of the points Nick Pope makes is precisely how such things are investigated by government (something he himself HAS done for the UK government once again), which very much involves looking at the evidence, as well as looking at the person(s) reporting UFO sightings. As far as I can see, and assuming you've even watched any of the above mentioned videos (which it doesn't appear you have), then you should note that Nick Pope for one doesn't actually "leap to any conclusions". And in fact, as I've very much pointed out myself in this thread, and as I also do myself, is to keep an open mind.

Which Nick Pope isn't doing, so clearly jumping to such a conclusion would be "Non Sequitur", and nowhere in the above mentioned videos is Nick Pope saying you should be jumping to such conclusions. In fact, he very much encourages you to look at the objective evidence and base your conclusions on that.

Look enorbet, if you would like to keep your mind closed to anything other than what science can currently explain, then you're entitled to do that. This doesn't mean others aren't entitled to keep an open mind instead. It's not up to me to decide what you believe or don't believe, anymore than it's up to me to prove or disprove what Nick Pope or anyone else is saying. So I can only suggest you actually watch said videos and pay close attention to what Nick Pope IS actually saying. In any case; what you're saying does not disapprove that there IS such a phenomena as a UFO phenomena, again, believe what you want - it isn't my concern. Anymore then it's my concern to disprove the moon landings, particularly when I've not seen any evidence that they didn't happen, and therefore it was some kind of hoax.