Thread: What does the Alien Presence mean?

Evidence is hard to get if you don't understand the situation.

We can't understand the situation if all we do is ridicule it to non-existence.

Originally Posted by juroara

Evidence is hard to get if you don't understand the situation.

We can't understand the situation if all we do is ridicule it to non-existence.

There's a reason why things like these are ridiculed. There's no evidence to support them, yet people act like they've been fully proven. And any evidence that IS put forward usually turns out to be bullshit or explained by other phenomena.

I mean you fucking mentioned reptilians and humanoids and you're surprised that it gets ridiculed? This ain't no David Icke fanclub.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

There's a reason why things like these are ridiculed. There's no evidence to support them, yet people act like they've been fully proven. And any evidence that IS put forward usually turns out to be bullshit or explained by other phenomena.

I mean you fucking mentioned reptilians and humanoids and you're surprised that it gets ridiculed? This ain't no David Icke fanclub.

What I am trying to illustrate is that currently we can only approach this global phenomenon as you would a crime investigation. The evidence needed for a court and the evidence needed for science are completely different. Testimony matters in court, in science human testimony means nothing.

That's the challenge we have with this phenomenon.

All we have is testimony. What evidence would you like presented that an alien race of superior technology is secretly conducting medical examinations on humans? How do you even begin to prove its happening? Or even, how could you even begin an honest scientific research into this if you ignore the testimony? The testimony is your road map and your only hope of finding evidence.

We HAVE found physical evidence. They come from the victims themselves.

There is also a huge subculture surrounding around this phenomenon, like the conspiracy that evil reptilians are about to take over the world. But that was the other point i was trying to make. A lot of these conspiracies are fueled by two sources of information - mediums who "channel" alien beings and ex-members of the industrial military complex. For reasons I stated above, neither sources of information can be trusted.

When we rely on the testimony of victims a consistent picture emerges. Total strangers knowing little about the abduction experience even describe the same alien medical tools and the same procedure process. This can't be conventionally explained away by hallucination. These testimonies in my opinion would hold up in the court of law.

Actually, they sort of already have. When abduction was still a new word law offices took an honest look at the victims. They treated the case as they would any other. They used the methods at their disposal to find who's lying, who's hoaxing and who's telling the truth. They instructed doctors to examine the victims and this is when high exposure to radiation and other medical anomalies were discovered backing the victims claims. These law offices concluded the victims were telling the truth and that there was no evidence of any kind of insanity.

It was because these law offices, intrusted with determining the validity of claims above all others, concluded that these testimonies were true that higher governmental offices were involved.

It was only after the CIA was involved did the process of ridicule begin. The victims, the law officers, the doctors and everyone else involved was ridiculed. Jobs were threatened.

None of the replies in this thread are shocking. Its the same rhetoric garbage being sputtered since then. Have anyone of you here taken an honest look at the phenomenon or do you just have knee-jerk reactions taught to you by culture?

Originally Posted by juroara

What I am trying to illustrate is that currently we can only approach this global phenomenon as you would a crime investigation. The evidence needed for a court and the evidence needed for science are completely different. Testimony matters in court, in science human testimony means nothing.

That's the challenge we have with this phenomenon.

This isn't a court room. We're not trying to see if somebody is innocent or guilty. We're trying to see if alien civilizations are visiting us and interacting with us in some way. That is an entirely scientific endeavor.

All we have is testimony. What evidence would you like presented that an alien race of superior technology is secretly conducting medical examinations on humans? How do you even begin to prove its happening? Or even, how could you even begin an honest scientific research into this if you ignore the testimony? The testimony is your road map and your only hope of finding evidence.

Testimony can be a reason to start research but it does not count as evidence itself. It rests upon the word of the person giving said testimony with regard to their experiences and, in cases regarding UFO's, imagination. There's a reason why the human senses are supplemented with tools and methods in scientific inquiry: because they are imperfect and subject to bias.

We HAVE found physical evidence. They come from the victims themselves.

You realize hearsay and anecdotes do not count as physical evidence.

There is also a huge subculture surrounding around this phenomenon, like the conspiracy that evil reptilians are about to take over the world. But that was the other point i was trying to make. A lot of these conspiracies are fueled by two sources of information - mediums who "channel" alien beings and ex-members of the industrial military complex. For reasons I stated above, neither sources of information can be trusted.

The reason isn't necessarily because they work for the government or are trying to conceal something. It's because there is no support for the phenomena of "psychic mediums" or "channeling," and again, testimony means little in scientific inquiry.

When we rely on the testimony of victims a consistent picture emerges. Total strangers knowing little about the abduction experience even describe the same alien medical tools and the same procedure process. This can't be conventionally explained away by hallucination. These testimonies in my opinion would hold up in the court of law.

Shared delusions are a thing: Folie à deux - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Codependency - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_hysteria. However, even if it can't be explained by hallucinations, unexplained =/= explained by UFO's.

Actually, they sort of already have. When abduction was still a new word law offices took an honest look at the victims. They treated the case as they would any other. They used the methods at their disposal to find who's lying, who's hoaxing and who's telling the truth. They instructed doctors to examine the victims and this is when high exposure to radiation and other medical anomalies were discovered backing the victims claims. These law offices concluded the victims were telling the truth and that there was no evidence of any kind of insanity.

They don't have to be insane. They don't have to have ANY sort of neurological or psychological issues. They can TRULY believe something happened and come out clean on a test. Our question is whether what they believe actually happened or not.

It was because these law offices, intrusted with determining the validity of claims above all others, concluded that these testimonies were true that higher governmental offices were involved.

Did they say that the testimonies themselves were true (as in, they literally occurred), or that the person giving the testimony wasn't lying?

None of the replies in this thread are shocking. Its the same rhetoric garbage being sputtered since then. Have anyone of you here taken an honest look at the phenomenon or do you just have knee-jerk reactions taught to you by culture?

Personally I've taken an honest look, though not extensive. This isn't rhetoric garbage, it's necessary skepticism in the face of an odd claim about what goes on the world.

I'd wager that "culture" doesn't really teach us to be skeptical of claims about UFO's. Meet any regular person, in the U.S. at least, and they'd probably tell you that they've seen weird things in the sky and that they probably attribute them to UFO's.