Rather than trolling, why don't you try answering the questions in the OP?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What Shall We Do about Radar-Confirmed UFOs?
- Thread starter Nous
- Start date
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Is there any rational reason to conclude that they are?
The fact that the Belgium UFO exhibited characteristics that cannot be accounted for as either a natural atmospheric phenomenon or human-made object (e.g., noiseless hovering) allows one to deduce that it was of extraterrestrial terrestrial origin.
The Campeche UFOs, however, do not seem to have necessarily exhibited such characteristics (although the video does not show any form of propulsion). The video seems to leave open the possibility that these objects could be some big secret government conspiracy.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
None of this results in a rational conclusion of extraterrestrial origin. Try again.
P1: All UFOs that exhibit characteristics that cannot be accounted for as either human-made objects or natural phenomena are of extraterrestrial origin.
P2: The UFO detected on multiple radars and pursued by F-16s on March 30-31 1900 in Belgium exhibited characteristics that cannot be accounted for as either human-made objects or natural phenomena are of extraterrestrial origin
C: Therefore, the UFO detected on multiple radars and pursued by F-16s on March 30-31 1900 in Belgium was of extraterrestrial origin.
How else can the facts of the Belgium UFO be accounted for? Notice that was my first question on this thread. Now you have yet another opportunity to answer the OP questions that you are afraid to answer.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Sorry, I assumed that when you asked for "rational explanations," it meant that you understood what rational meant. My mistake.
How lame. You should try to learn how to make a deduction. You might be less inclined to troll.
No answer? Is an honest, logical answer too frightening for you?
Obviously the belief that Category D UFOs cannot be of extraterrestrial origin is a very stupid religion. As the OP notes, there are hundreds of well-documented Category D radar/visual cases independently reported and similarly described by highly credible persons (e.g., police officers, military officers, pilots, astronauts, air traffic controllers, various kinds of scientists). In a number of Category D cases in which UFOs came close to the ground or landed, otherwise inexplicable high levels radiation in the soil and/or effects on vegetation have been documented. Quite often in the Category D cases that have involved military installations or pursuing armed aircraft, encounters have been accompanied by interference of electronic systems and communications.
There is nothing more absurd than the idea that, for instance, in the Category D radar/visual cases, the independent reports and similar descriptions are the result of credible witnesses suddenly, inexplicably having the same hallucination that correlated both temporally and spatially with radar malfunctions or false echoes. In contrast, there is nothing at all absurd in the proposition that there exist beings in the universe far more evolved, far more knowledgeable and with more sophisticated technology than humans and who are interested in the activities of a species who is venturing into space, detonating nuclear weapons, etc.
Jean-Jacques Velasco--an engineer who formerly worked on the development of satellites for CNES (France's equivalent of NASA) and, from 1983-2004, director of SERPA, which was the CNES program for the study of UAPs--writes in Kean's UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record:
There is nothing more absurd than the idea that, for instance, in the Category D radar/visual cases, the independent reports and similar descriptions are the result of credible witnesses suddenly, inexplicably having the same hallucination that correlated both temporally and spatially with radar malfunctions or false echoes. In contrast, there is nothing at all absurd in the proposition that there exist beings in the universe far more evolved, far more knowledgeable and with more sophisticated technology than humans and who are interested in the activities of a species who is venturing into space, detonating nuclear weapons, etc.
Jean-Jacques Velasco--an engineer who formerly worked on the development of satellites for CNES (France's equivalent of NASA) and, from 1983-2004, director of SERPA, which was the CNES program for the study of UAPs--writes in Kean's UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record:
All the testimony we retained for the COMETA Report is supported by tangible pieces of evidence: radar echoes, tracks on the ground, photographs, electromagnetic phenomena, and even the modification of the process of photosynthesis in plants. Many accounts given by totally independent witnesses confirm one another. It became clear that at least 5 percent of sightings for which there is solid documentation cannot be attributed to man-made or natural sources. Our experts examined all possible explanations for these cases. We wanted to demonstrate that the UFO phenomenon is real and is not the result of fantasy. I was astonished to discover, and now know for certain, that silent and completely unknown objects sometimes penetrate our airspace with flying capabilities that are impossible to replicate on Earth. And these objects appear to be operated by some kind of intelligence. The COMETA Report shows, in a straightforward manner, that the extraterrestrial hypothesis is the most rational explanation . . .
Couldn't have said it better.
(1) No evidence has been presented on this thread about the piloting of the UFOs. The G forces created by the maneuvers of the UFO tracked on Belgian radar make it seem unlikely that anything resembling biological creatures were inside that UFO.
(2) None of the Category D UFOs have exhibited hostile behavior--though there is every reason to believe that those responsible for such UFOs could have obliterated the planet long ago.
In her book, UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record, Kean makes documents some of the UFO encounters that have threatened aircraft safety (which is ample reason for the government to be interested in UFOs) but, at the same time, haven't been aggressive toward humans:
The Belgian UFOs did not appear to create any kind of safety hazard for aircraft in flight, as far as we know, and General De Brouwer made it clear that the objects displayed no threatening behavior. Yet, as I stated in the second point to be considered in the Introduction, this is not always the case. Some of our most compelling reports on UFO encounters have been provided by Air Force and commercial pilots, and sometimes aviation safety is compromised.
Shortly after publishing my first story about the COMETA Report in the Boston Globe, I became interested in the question of UFOs and aviation safety. [. . .] Much to my amazement, I quickly discovered that a ninety-page report dealing with this very question had just been released by the world's most qualified researcher of pilot encounters with UFOs. [. . .] "Aviation Safety in America--A Previously Neglected Factor" by Dr. Richard Haines, a retired senior research scientist from NASA Ames Research Center and former chief of NASA's Space Human Factors Branch, was a mind-boggling study, with more than fifty pages of case summaries involving pilots and their crews, [l] That "neglected factor," of course, referred to unidentified aerial phenomena, or UAP. [2]
The report featured over one hundred cases of pilot encounters with a variety of these UAP, including fifty-six near misses, all affecting the safety of aircraft. Most cases involved multiple witnesses, and many were backed by ground radio communications and radar corroboration. Experienced pilots presented accounts of objects, ranging from silver discs to green fireballs, flying loops around passenger aircraft, pacing alongside despite pilots' evasive attempts, or flooding cockpits with blinding light. Dr. Haines documented cases of electromagnetic effects on aircraft navigation and operating systems linked to nearby UFOs, or a pilot's sudden dive to avoid a collision. He wrote that a crew's ability to perform its duties safely is disrupted when crew members are faced with "extremely bizarre, unexpected and prolonged luminous and/or solid phenomena cavorting near their aircraft." The danger posed by the phenomenon in flight lies more with the human response to it than from the actions of the UAP itself, because the objects do not appear to be aggressive or hostile, and seem to be able to avoid collisions by executing last-minute high-speed turns in a flash.
Shortly after publishing my first story about the COMETA Report in the Boston Globe, I became interested in the question of UFOs and aviation safety. [. . .] Much to my amazement, I quickly discovered that a ninety-page report dealing with this very question had just been released by the world's most qualified researcher of pilot encounters with UFOs. [. . .] "Aviation Safety in America--A Previously Neglected Factor" by Dr. Richard Haines, a retired senior research scientist from NASA Ames Research Center and former chief of NASA's Space Human Factors Branch, was a mind-boggling study, with more than fifty pages of case summaries involving pilots and their crews, [l] That "neglected factor," of course, referred to unidentified aerial phenomena, or UAP. [2]
The report featured over one hundred cases of pilot encounters with a variety of these UAP, including fifty-six near misses, all affecting the safety of aircraft. Most cases involved multiple witnesses, and many were backed by ground radio communications and radar corroboration. Experienced pilots presented accounts of objects, ranging from silver discs to green fireballs, flying loops around passenger aircraft, pacing alongside despite pilots' evasive attempts, or flooding cockpits with blinding light. Dr. Haines documented cases of electromagnetic effects on aircraft navigation and operating systems linked to nearby UFOs, or a pilot's sudden dive to avoid a collision. He wrote that a crew's ability to perform its duties safely is disrupted when crew members are faced with "extremely bizarre, unexpected and prolonged luminous and/or solid phenomena cavorting near their aircraft." The danger posed by the phenomenon in flight lies more with the human response to it than from the actions of the UAP itself, because the objects do not appear to be aggressive or hostile, and seem to be able to avoid collisions by executing last-minute high-speed turns in a flash.
In any case, the beings responsible for the UFOs that have visited earth are obviously rather more advanced in their technology and presumably in their social order and evolution. Perhaps they understand and feel unthreatened by the paranoia of stupid animals such as humans.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
They're here to inspire crappy movies and TV shows.
Mission accomplished.
Mission accomplished.
Shad
Veteran Member
Quick research shows many of the sources have been shown to be hoaxes or false reports due to people's own ignorance.
You're still trolling because you couldn't account for any of the facts but have a religion about UFOs?
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Not even close. Although, it explains a lot that this is your interpretation of events.
Then what is the reason for your trolling? You haven't be able to account for the documented facts of the incidents noted on this thread.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
I'm an agent of the Greys. I've been hired to misdirect and discredit those trying to bring the Truth to light.
Do you expect anyone to believe that your trolling here has some intelligent motive behind it?
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
I expect them to believe that my posts have as intelligent of a motive behind them as any other part of this thread.
You're afraid of the topic and the facts presented here; that's why you feel the need to troll. Smart people know why anonymous posters online troll. Your trolling is no different.