Visual Proof of Extraterrestrials

Visual proof of intelligent extraterrestrials, NASA videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3BrQGRu5TA&feature=PlayList&p=8FA6C5749FC0A263&index=0

Now just remember, NASA always say it is some kind of debris. This is not possible as that would be extremely dangerous for the astronauts as if such debris was to collide with the shuttle or satellite, the velocity would rip the a huge hole meaning no space flights would be possible with that amount of "debris".

Watch every video and I guarantee you'll think twice about us being the only one's.

 

Meh....

We are all bound to find something we arent supposed to, screw with it, and then get wiped out.

 

Sounds like nukes.

I take it you watched all the videos in that short amount of time.

 

Identification is the process of the identifier collecting accurate visual/audio/measurable information about the subject and then comparing the information with the pool of knowledge he possesses or has access to. If there is a match, the identification is complete. If there isn't, he establishes a new entry in the pool. Take away either the information collected or the pool of knowledge and identification becomes impossible.

What kind of information can we gather from this (or any other 'reliable evidence' for that matter) low quality footage taken at a great distance from the subject? Do we have a similar entry to assume this is a type of that entry?

If you see a bird flying above your house but can't identify it, you still know it's a bird or bat because it bears the characteristics of a bird or bat. If you see a meandering light source in the sky and can't identify it, you know it's an alien lifeform if you know they have such characteristics. Do you know they have such characteristics?

Since the combination of the three elements of fast moving and turning + bright does not match any of the entries in our pool of knowledge, it needs to be created. I'll take a little detour here to emphasise what I mean with this post.

What do we know about the entries about lifeforms on Earth? We know their exact attributes, their behaviour, their relation to other species as well as other lifeforms in their habitat, place in the foodchain, their strong/weak points, their taxonomic data, and so on and so forth. In other words, an immense, almost inexplicable amount of information.

Compared to the above, how much information does this proof of yours, or any other evidence on alien lifeforms, provide? Not nearly enough to create a clearly defined new entry called 'alien lifeform', but one called UFO. Yes, those things might be aliens - but you don't know it for certain. That video isn't a proof of aliens, it's a proof of UFOs.

 

ex·tra·ter·res·tri·al adj.

Originating, located, or occurring outside Earth or its atmosphere: intelligent extraterrestrial life.

n. An extraterrestrial being or life form.

 

Dont worry psi. He already knows that you really do believe the videos as evidence for the aliens you explained in the other thread ;D.

So his point still stands.

 

Still doesn't stop them from being extraterrestrials.

 

I don't think those are extraterrestrials... It's probably just debris from the tether breaking or something else. Not to criticize you, but you can't take everything you see as evidence.

 

Did you even watch all the videos? Those things are always around, their numbers increase during such experiments.

Here is a very good video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCAL8FO5YZg&feature=PlayList&p=8FA6C5749FC0A263&index=4

UFO suspect in shuttle explosion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWwhPNK-Wc4&feature=PlayList&p=8FA6C5749FC0A263&index=6

UFO changes direction, seems intelligent enough to me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4KWorfTaN4&feature=PlayList&p=8FA6C5749FC0A263&index=12

One of my favourites, UFOs make a circular formation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3u-Gs10390&feature=PlayList&p=8FA6C5749FC0A263&index=18

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_lights

 

Amazing, Psionicz, why can't you give us the more believable videos first? Those last few videos were pretty amazing. The last video thought, might not have been a lot of small ones, it might have been one huge ship and those lights we saw are attached to the circular hull of it. That one that curves... ever heard of solar wind?

 

i cant watch the video's here at school, but i can see from the other reactions that you say every UFO is of ET origin, even though there is a big difference between the two, UFO means unindentified flying object, which means that we dont know wtf it is, but not knowing that doesnt make it extraterrestrial in origin


still got to watch the vids though

 

Whatever, I and you have enough intelligence to see those are intelligent.

"UFOs" are a combination of extraterrestrial craft and military high tech.

If anyone does see an extraterrestrial craft I'd advise you not to attempt interactions with any that are metallic. The light ships are all good tho.

If those on a light ship know you're aware of them they will react more. Send thoughts to them and see what happens. Next time it is a clear sky I challenge all of you to observe the stars that seem out of place, too low etc.

 

Too low? Maybe a satellite? Meteor entering the atmosphere? Just because you don't know what it is doesn't automatically make it an alien. As Lenga stated, being a UFO doesn't make it extraterrestrial.

 

UFO != aliens. Remeber this.
Not to say there aren't living beings on other planets, in all lileyhood there are, however just because you see something strange doees not make it alien. Also that picture is far from proof since it is impossible to tell what the hell that was, could have been debris, could have been ionized gas. remember that shiney things look bigger than they are, tethers like those, despite only being a few inches wwide, can often be seen from the ground due to their reflectivity. Dust is highly reflective, a single particle when lit up by a camera flash can appear as a fairly decent sized translucent orb. Outside of the shadows, there is plenty of light in orbit that would produce the same effect from every minute speck.

As for the Phoenix lights, the Government says those were flares, but I know what flares look like and those weren't it, but I don't think we'll ever get the truth out of them. It could be aliens, if could have been a USAF prototype. On a related note, I think Roswell is exactly what the military said, a downed balloon. if the scraps look like aluminum foil and balsa wood, there is a good chance that is what it is.

 

For **** sake- I think you would know what a meteor looks like LOL. Do I have to spell it out 5x for you people? Title of thread says, 'Visual Proof of Extraterrestrials'.

Me saying: "UFOs are a combination of..."

Simply means most of them are that, from what I've experienced and sourced from.

My common sense level is high enough to discern a bird from advanced technology.

Also, satellites do not pulse from blue, red, green, purple. They do not move or react to your thoughts either.

@BoP: If you cannot tell the difference between gas, balloons and advanced technology then I'm gonna evaporate into a Protoss Dark Templar.

 

THat camera footage was rather crappy on the first one. How can you be sure it wasn't dust?

As for advanced technology. the military dables in some pretty advanced stuff. Stuff that changes direction rapidly does seem a bit odd and might be alien, but not everything is.

Also I am still trying to figure out how something that you can't tell what it is is proof. I am not saying aliens don't exist, but I am saying, this stuff is far from proof.

 

Okay, that is acceptable. But dust? LOL seriously.

Whatever logic you want to apply, that inner guidance hints to me this is extraterrestrial.

However, why constantly state the obvious common sense factor that it could be anything. Why not appreciate it and see what it could be.

 

I don't see it as great proof. it just lacked explanation and proper visual clarity. However, I do believe in aliens.

What I prefer is the scientific discoveries and mathematical proportions people are bring up on Mars.

The face on mars resembles a face, yes there is probability it could be a natural formation. But there is I think about a .0000000001% chance nature can form eye sockets, a nose, and a mouth in the perfect spot to resemble a face (note that the face on mars is about the size of a sphinx's head not to mention there is another similar face like formation on Mars). In addition, these faces have a slight trace of eyebrows placed properly over the eyes sockets. For this to happen, wind would have to blow and dirt would have to fall in the perfect spots of these hills for thousands of years to create these strikingly face like characteristics, TWICE. - Info from Dr Tom Van Flandern and other Sources from the past.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkXsQbaDg5g&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo0mSKd9HeM&feature=related

The guy is pretty dull to listen to, but if you have a big interest in Mars, he's the guy to listen to. He adds in more about other sightings on Mars.

 

Please don't keep repeating your most ludicrous line. If I bombard a bird on our porch with thoughts ordering it to fly away, it eventually will. So I'm a telepath now? :wacko: