Debunking ET contacts with a conspiracy theory - Page 2

Anders Lindman · 8th December 2012, 06:14 PM

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

I know! I've seen a couple myself! I know there really are Objects Flying but are still Unidentified!

I know. A cloud can be a UFO until it's recognized. The credible witnesses talk about UFOs that are some form of advanced technology though.

There are (at least, I have ruled out extradimensional since I doubt that there are extra dimensions) three possibilities:

1. All UFO sightings can be explained as natural or publicly known things.

2. Some UFOs are extraterrestrial technology.

3. No UFOs are ET technology but some are human black op technology.

There are more combinations possible, but that's a rough outline. I believe #3 is the correct answer (when it comes to UFO sightings made by humans on Earth).

jtcarl · 8th December 2012, 06:49 PM

The people involved in the above-mentioned discussion (Malmstrom AFB, 1967) are not exactly the most credible claimants. I invite you to take a look at the evidence these men have purposely refused to discuss, including numerous interviews with those who experienced these matters first hand.

Simply go the "Reality Uncovered" website, and visit the thread entitled "Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident, March 1967". Go to the most recent posting (by James Carlson » Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:43 pm) and note the references. There is no doubt whatsoever that these UFO claims are a complete fiction, created by the authors to advance claims enabling them to sell their books, lecture on the UFO circuit, and publicize their DVDs.

You'd be doing yourself a favor by examining the evidence presented.

Forgive me for making this a bit difficult. I'm forced into doing this as a result of the URL rules your forum has established, otherwise I'd simply post the references.

Sincerely,
James Carlson

RoboTimbo · 8th December 2012, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

I know. A cloud can be a UFO until it's recognized. The credible witnesses talk about UFOs that are some form of advanced technology though.

So you're back to posting their interpretations rather than simply what they claim to have witnessed?

Quote:

There are (at least, I have ruled out extradimensional since I doubt that there are extra dimensions) three possibilities:

1. All UFO sightings can be explained as natural or publicly known things.

2. Some UFOs are extraterrestrial technology.

3. No UFOs are ET technology but some are human black op technology.

There are more combinations possible, but that's a rough outline. I believe #3 is the correct answer (when it comes to UFO sightings made by humans on Earth).

You need to believe in something. Might as well be nonsense.

RoboTimbo · 8th December 2012, 06:56 PM

Originally Posted by jtcarl

Forgive me for making this a bit difficult. I'm forced into doing this as a result of the URL rules your forum has established, otherwise I'd simply post the references.

Sincerely,
James Carlson

Until you get your 15 posts, you can hash it up like this:

www dot address dot com

or some such so that the forum doesn't recognize it as an address. You're ok in doing so, I've seen the mods make the same suggestion.

Anders Lindman · 8th December 2012, 07:07 PM

Originally Posted by jtcarl

The people involved in the above-mentioned discussion (Malmstrom AFB, 1967) are not exactly the most credible claimants. I invite you to take a look at the evidence these men have purposely refused to discuss, including numerous interviews with those who experienced these matters first hand.

Simply go the "Reality Uncovered" website, and visit the thread entitled "Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident, March 1967". Go to the most recent posting (by James Carlson » Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:43 pm) and note the references. There is no doubt whatsoever that these UFO claims are a complete fiction, created by the authors to advance claims enabling them to sell their books, lecture on the UFO circuit, and publicize their DVDs.

You'd be doing yourself a favor by examining the evidence presented.

Forgive me for making this a bit difficult. I'm forced into doing this as a result of the URL rules your forum has established, otherwise I'd simply post the references.

Sincerely,
James Carlson

Some of the witnesses (in for example the Disclosure Project) may not be credible, yet I believe many of them are, because there is not much to gain personally by telling such stories. Rather the opposite in fact, and people often get ridiculed when they claim to have seen UFOs. So why would all of the professional military, air force, police officer, radar operator etc witnesses make such claims? And it's fairly easy to discredit witnesses by asking them seemingly related (yet in fact unrelated) questions and then debunk those instead of looking at the actual UFO witness accounts directly.

Anders Lindman · 8th December 2012, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

So you're back to posting their interpretations rather than simply what they claim to have witnessed?

UFOs hovering over nuclear missile silos and then flying away at great speed, I would say that's technology and not some cloud or something like that. If you claim ALL of the witnesses are wrong or lying, then that's your belief. It might seem to you that your position then is rational, because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, yet when there are hundreds of not-so-easy-to-dismiss witness accounts of UFOs, then your position actually becomes irrational.

Shiner · 8th December 2012, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by jtcarl

The people involved in the above-mentioned discussion (Malmstrom AFB, 1967) are not exactly the most credible claimants. I invite you to take a look at the evidence these men have purposely refused to discuss, including numerous interviews with those who experienced these matters first hand.

Simply go the "Reality Uncovered" website, and visit the thread entitled "Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident, March 1967". Go to the most recent posting (by James Carlson » Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:43 pm) and note the references. There is no doubt whatsoever that these UFO claims are a complete fiction, created by the authors to advance claims enabling them to sell their books, lecture on the UFO circuit, and publicize their DVDs.

You'd be doing yourself a favor by examining the evidence presented.

Forgive me for making this a bit difficult. I'm forced into doing this as a result of the URL rules your forum has established, otherwise I'd simply post the references.

Sincerely,
James Carlson

http://www.realityuncovered.net/foru...1688&start=645

Sounds convincing.

RoboTimbo · 8th December 2012, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

UFOs hovering over nuclear missile silos and then flying away at great speed, I would say that's technology and not some cloud or something like that. If you claim ALL of the witnesses are wrong or lying, then that's your belief. It might seem to you that your position then is rational, because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, yet when there are hundreds of not-so-easy-to-dismiss witness accounts of UFOs, then your position actually becomes irrational.

If it was a floater, then it only appeared to fly away. You're starting to understand why unfalsifiable anecdotes are worthless. But, it's your world of make-believe, make up anything you want. Since it appears to be a complete fabrication, there isn't much else to say about it.

Anders Lindman · 8th December 2012, 07:49 PM

Hmm... I came to think of that Ray Kurzweil has said that we will reach a technological singularity around the year 2045. And that's with public technology. Richard Dolan has said that the breakaway civilization is at least 30 years ahead of the public society. 2012 + 30 years = 2042. That's close to 2045, AND the shadow society has better scientific knowledge!

So it's fair to estimate that the shadow society already has reached and gone beyond a technological singularity.

That's very exciting. And it means that the shadow society probably has made contact with advanced ET civilizations! Because post-singularity technology is so super powerful that only a peaceful society can use that kind of power without blowing themselves to Kingdom Kong. And an advanced and peaceful society can make real ET contacts.

So if the shadow society is peaceful, then why doesn't it help the public human society where people starve to death etc? Because it's only by now that the shadow society has become peaceful. They have probably done many nasty and illegal things in the past, so they cannot just reveal themselves directly to the public society. Just think of the thousands of lawsuits that would be filed, yikes! And even public demand for punishment.

So it's WE in the public society who have to become peaceful and civilized enough to make real ET contact, because the shadow society is probably already in contact with a lot of space aliens!!!

beachnut · 8th December 2012, 07:51 PM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Not evidence perhaps but there are cases where UFOs have shut down nuclear missiles, and other such events such as:

"UFO Nuclear Disarm: Part 1 -- US Military Nuclear Launch and Storage Facility Officers describe their personal observations and contact with UFOs within their US Military Nuclear Facilities." -- http://www.military.com/video/aircra...1185467183001/

Many with credible witnesses. If we assume the witnesses are telling the truth, was it ET encounters, or were they victims of military black op experiments who controlled both the 'UFOs' and could shut down the nuclear missiles?

What a bunch of nonsense. They are not credible witnesses, but it is funny you make up conspiracy theories about conspiracy theories. Did you do the jet engine part is a car hub cap CT too?

Quote:

people often get ridiculed when they claim to have seen UFOs

Or ignored because they had an illusion, and then persist to claim it was a UFO, and move on to the delusion.

RoboTimbo · 8th December 2012, 08:06 PM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Hmm... I came to think of that Ray Kurzweil has said that we will reach a technological singularity around the year 2045. And that's with public technology. Richard Dolan has said that the breakaway civilization is at least 30 years ahead of the public society. 2012 + 30 years = 2042. That's close to 2045, AND the shadow society has better scientific knowledge!

So it's fair to estimate that the shadow society already has reached and gone beyond a technological singularity.

That's very exciting. And it means that the shadow society probably has made contact with advanced ET civilizations! Because post-singularity technology is so super powerful that only a peaceful society can use that kind of power without blowing themselves to Kingdom Kong. And an advanced and peaceful society can make real ET contacts.

So if the shadow society is peaceful, then why doesn't it help the public human society where people starve to death etc? Because it's only by now that the shadow society has become peaceful. They have probably done many nasty and illegal things in the past, so they cannot just reveal themselves directly to the public society. Just think of the thousands of lawsuits that would be filed, yikes! And even public demand for punishment.

So it's WE in the public society who have to become peaceful and civilized enough to make real ET contact, because the shadow society is probably already in contact with a lot of space aliens!!!

You're just proving that it's unicorns. They are known as peaceful creatures. Why do you ignore the obvious?

LordXenu · 8th December 2012, 08:56 PM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Hmm... I came to think of that Ray Kurzweil has said that we will reach a technological singularity around the year 2045. And that's with public technology. Richard Dolan has said that the breakaway civilization is at least 30 years ahead of the public society. 2012 + 30 years = 2042. That's close to 2045, AND the shadow society has better scientific knowledge!

So it's fair to estimate that the shadow society already has reached and gone beyond a technological singularity.

That's very exciting. And it means that the shadow society probably has made contact with advanced ET civilizations! Because post-singularity technology is so super powerful that only a peaceful society can use that kind of power without blowing themselves to Kingdom Kong. And an advanced and peaceful society can make real ET contacts.

So if the shadow society is peaceful, then why doesn't it help the public human society where people starve to death etc? Because it's only by now that the shadow society has become peaceful. They have probably done many nasty and illegal things in the past, so they cannot just reveal themselves directly to the public society. Just think of the thousands of lawsuits that would be filed, yikes! And even public demand for punishment.

So it's WE in the public society who have to become peaceful and civilized enough to make real ET contact, because the shadow society is probably already in contact with a lot of space aliens!!!

Am I allowed to submit this to the stundie thread?

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 01:08 AM

Originally Posted by beachnut

What a bunch of nonsense. They are not credible witnesses, but it is funny you make up conspiracy theories about conspiracy theories. Did you do the jet engine part is a car hub cap CT too?

Ok, let's say that they are NOT credible witnesses, I don't buy that but for the sake of argument, then why would they all be lying or delusional? What makes you so sure they aren't credible? Do you have any rational argument instead of just handwaving? But let's say you are correct, then my theory still applies!

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 01:09 AM

Originally Posted by LordXenu

Am I allowed to submit this to the stundie thread?

Sure, after you have proved the post incorrect.

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 01:11 AM

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

You're just proving that it's unicorns. They are known as peaceful creatures. Why do you ignore the obvious?

Poor comparison. Find me hundreds of professional witnesses who claim that unicorns are real. Apples and oranges.

BazBear · 9th December 2012, 01:24 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Poor comparison. Find me hundreds of professional witnesses who claim that unicorns are real. Apples and oranges.

What's the pay scale like for a professional witness? I'll bet you didn't know UFO is actually the acronym for Unicorns Flying Over.

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 02:07 AM

Originally Posted by BazBear

What's the pay scale like for a professional witness? I'll bet you didn't know UFO is actually the acronym for Unicorns Flying Over.

You mean the witnesses were bought? Then that's a conspiracy! Then you just proved the title of this thread.

jtcarl · 9th December 2012, 02:24 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

You mean the witnesses were bought? Then that's a conspiracy! Then you just proved the title of this thread.

What witnesses? There are a lot less than you think. The primary witness was Robert Salas, and he's had an enormous payday out of it. In fact, he started a second career on the basis of it, even serving as a paid adviser for the movie "Battle Los Angeles". Check out the Wikipedia article for "Malmstrom AFB" if you want to know the true extent of these alleged "witnesses". The fact is, there's not one eye-witness and those that have come forward to speak of the event in non-eyewitess terms have ALL changed their stories so significantly as to erase their credibility. Plus, the ONLY witnesses who were actually at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967 insist that there was no UFO, so whether you want to discuss credibility or not, the plain fact is that nobody who says there was a UFO at Echo Flight qualifies as a witness on any grounds whatsoever. As for Oscar Flight -- read the Wikipedia entry and then tell me how credible they sound to you.

There are no witnesses. This is a UFO case that was bought and paid for from day one. It established Hastings' career as a UFO reporter, and Salas' career as a UFO pundit, and both men have profited more than enough to justify their dishonesty.

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 02:52 AM

Originally Posted by jtcarl

What witnesses? There are a lot less than you think. The primary witness was Robert Salas, and he's had an enormous payday out of it. In fact, he started a second career on the basis of it, even serving as a paid adviser for the movie "Battle Los Angeles". Check out the Wikipedia article for "Malmstrom AFB" if you want to know the true extent of these alleged "witnesses". The fact is, there's not one eye-witness and those that have come forward to speak of the event in non-eyewitess terms have ALL changed their stories so significantly as to erase their credibility. Plus, the ONLY witnesses who were actually at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967 insist that there was no UFO, so whether you want to discuss credibility or not, the plain fact is that nobody who says there was a UFO at Echo Flight qualifies as a witness on any grounds whatsoever. As for Oscar Flight -- read the Wikipedia entry and then tell me how credible they sound to you.

There are no witnesses. This is a UFO case that was bought and paid for from day one. It established Hastings' career as a UFO reporter, and Salas' career as a UFO pundit, and both men have profited more than enough to justify their dishonesty.

Another possibility is that the witnesses have been mind controlled into believing they saw UFOs. There are several accounts of missing time where people don't know what happened for several hours. That's a sign of trauma-based mind control.

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 03:00 AM

Did black op projects really have real UFOs already in the 60s and perhaps even earlier than that? I admit it could be doubtful. Crafts moving at enormous speeds and making 90 degree turns etc. I do believe some kind of breakaway civilization exists and they would have had pretty advanced technology even back in the 1960s. The question then is how advanced their technology was/is. Another question is how could they have kept their operations secret for so long.

SezMe · 9th December 2012, 03:08 AM

Here, RoboTimbo makes an excellent point:

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

It's interesting that you ask if someone "believes" it rather than asking if they have evidence for it.

and here he displays a level of optimism not seen before:
[quote=RoboTimbo;8829316I think now you understand.[/quote]

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 04:26 AM

I feel confused about the whole UFO thing. That made me frustrated.

Fortunately I came to realize that when it comes to ET contact it's actually not UFOs that are the main issue. A more crucial development is..... artificial intelligence!

It's the intergalactic super AI 'cloud' that we humans need to make contact with, or at least via. And the breakaway civilization no doubt has very advanced information technology! Check this out for example:

"By way of illustration, I will relate something told to me by a scientist formerly with the National Security Agency. During a private conversation, he told me that at least some computers within the NSA were running at a clock speed of 650 MHz during the mid-1960s. Today, of course, that’s well below the speed of an entry-level PC desktop computer. Keep in mind, however, that this speed was not matched by the consumer market until around the year 2000, a difference of 35 years. Indeed, there were no consumer-market computers in 1965!" -- http://www.afterdisclosure.com/2011/04/breakaway.html

And even though the NSA had been secret up till that point it started to become publicly known so even more advanced black op projects than that can have been going on. In short, the breakaway civilization should by now have enormously advanced artificial intelligence.

It's also important to recognize that the progress of information technology follows an exponential curve. This means that even the shadow AI was much less powerful just a few decades ago. And today the shadow AI will be close to, or have gone beyond, a technological singularity.

The shadow AI in turn must connect with the intergalactic super big AI, in order for our human civilization to 'plug in' to the universal 'AI cloud'. A crude analogy would be that personal computers must follow certain protocols in order to be able to connect with the Internet.

Dcdrac · 9th December 2012, 04:48 AM

UFO = Unidentified FLying Object

It does not mean Alien craft from another galaxy or star system

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 05:38 AM

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

UFO = Unidentified FLying Object

It does not mean Alien craft from another galaxy or star system

As I wrote in an earlier post: "A cloud can be a UFO until it's recognized." (Recognized as being a cloud that is.)

RoboTimbo · 9th December 2012, 05:54 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Poor comparison. Find me hundreds of professional witnesses who claim that unicorns are real. Apples and oranges.

No, it's an apt comparison. YOU find ME hundreds of professional witnesses who claim that UFOs are Alien Space Ships.

I think you're continuing to see why I said that unfalsifiable anecdotes are worthless because what we get is someone's interpretation of events, as you've just shown by saying that witnesses interpret UFOs to be Alien Space Ships. Thank you for validating it. Again.

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

As I wrote in an earlier post: "A cloud can be a UFO until it's recognized." (Recognized as being a cloud that is.)

Congratulations, you've said something correct. So when you said that UFOs are real, you meant they were real clouds.

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 06:01 AM

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

No, it's an apt comparison. YOU find ME hundreds of professional witnesses who claim that UFOs are Alien Space Ships.

I think you're continuing to see why I said that unfalsifiable anecdotes are worthless because what we get is someone's interpretation of events, as you've just shown by saying that witnesses interpret UFOs to be Alien Space Ships. Thank you for validating it. Again.

Congratulations, you've said something correct. So when you said that UFOs are real, you meant they were real clouds.

I have basically already given you loads of professional witnesses who claim to have seen UFOs and many who say they believe it's technology not made by humans. Dismissing all those witnesses is not a rational position as I have already pointed out.

And when referring to 'real' UFOs I have said that I mean the use of technology (if I have missed to mention that in some post, you could point it out if you want to so I can edit that post to make it clear).

Dcdrac · 9th December 2012, 06:03 AM

you have given us the usual tut served up about Flying saucers none of what you have posted is novel

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 06:04 AM

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

No, it's an apt comparison.

No it's not. A UFO is an officially claimed reality. It only means unidentified. Unicorns are fantasy figures. Try to get your comparisons in order please. Haha.

Nessie · 9th December 2012, 06:07 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

I have basically already given you loads of professional witnesses who claim to have seen UFOs and many who say they believe it's technology not made by humans. Dismissing all those witnesses is not a rational position as I have already pointed out.

........

Claiming that what they saw is evidence of UFOs which were either black ops missions or ETs without further examination is not rational either.

If they did see black ops as you like to call anything that is secret, so what? Secret stuff goes on when it comes to the military and national security.

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 06:07 AM

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

you have given us the usual tut served up about Flying saucers none of what you have posted is novel

Sigh, the usual "already debunked" claim again. Just because you can show that some witnesses have lied for example, it doesn't mean that all witnesses automatically are debunked.

RoboTimbo · 9th December 2012, 06:08 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

No it's not.

Yes, it is.

Quote:

A UFO is an officially claimed reality.

Ah, you admit that it is only claimed. Good for you. So the comparison still stands.

Quote:

It only means unidentified. Unicorns are fantasy figures. Try to get your comparisons in order please. Haha.

Try to understand the comparison please. Alien Space Ships exist only in science fiction. Again, the comparison is apt. You simply need to try to understand it.

RoboTimbo · 9th December 2012, 06:10 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

I have basically already given you loads of professional witnesses who claim to have seen UFOs and many who say they believe it's technology not made by humans. Dismissing all those witnesses is not a rational position as I have already pointed out.

That isn't what I asked you for. I asked YOU to show ME hundreds of professional witnesses to Alien Space Ships, not UFOs. Try to be rational.

Quote:

And when referring to 'real' UFOs I have said that I mean the use of technology (if I have missed to mention that in some post, you could point it out if you want to so I can edit that post to make it clear).

Oh, you mean airplanes and radio controlled toys and Chinese lanterns then. Yes, those exist. Nobody has ever shown an Alien Space Ship to exist though.

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 06:10 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

Claiming that what they saw is evidence of UFOs which were either black ops missions or ETs without further examination is not rational either.

If they did see black ops as you like to call anything that is secret, so what? Secret stuff goes on when it comes to the military and national security.

The idea is that if some of the UFO sightings actually are advanced technology not known to the public, then that is human black op technology, not extraterrestrial technology. The same with space alien abductions for example. If some abductions actually are real, then the theory is that they all are human black op projects pretending to be space aliens abducting people.

Dcdrac · 9th December 2012, 06:11 AM

Yes the usual debunked statment becasue it has been shown to be bunk over and over again and you are not showing us anything different to all the other bunk that went before

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 06:12 AM

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

That isn't what I asked you for. I asked YOU to show ME hundreds of professional witnesses to Alien Space Ships, not UFOs. Try to be rational.

My claim is that they are NOT alien space ships. If some of the UFOs really are advanced technology not known to the public the theory is that it's human black op technology, not extraterrestrial technology.

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 06:15 AM

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

Yes the usual debunked statment becasue it has been shown to be bunk over and over again and you are not showing us anything different to all the other bunk that went before

I haven't looked much at the debunking of UFOs and ET contacts I admit. And it's not easy to debunk since there are so many witnesses. So in that sense it's not fair to demand a full debunking of possible ET phenomena. My attempt is to debunk the ET contacts as being delusions or human black op projects playing tricks on people and abducting them and so on.

Nessie · 9th December 2012, 06:15 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

The idea is that if some of the UFO sightings actually are advanced technology not known to the public, then that is human black op technology, not extraterrestrial technology. The same with space alien abductions for example. If some abductions actually are real, then the theory is that they all are human black op projects pretending to be space aliens abducting people.

So your hypothesis with no evidence is that instead of aliens, it is black ops pretending to be aliens.

This goes back to a problem you have which we have discussed. Why have black ops left you alone to revel all their secrets?

TheRedWorm · 9th December 2012, 06:16 AM

It's funny, because I saw a UFO the other day. Roughly 150 feet from our back door. The next day I went out to look, and it turns out that not only was it not a UFO, it wasn't even a FO, but a HO (hanging object). The school across the street installed a light, and used it for the first time the other day.

Anders Lindman · 9th December 2012, 06:29 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

So your hypothesis with no evidence is that instead of aliens, it is black ops pretending to be aliens.

This goes back to a problem you have which we have discussed. Why have black ops left you alone to revel all their secrets?

Because I work for them. Muhahaha. :evil laughter: Just kidding. But my intent is peace so I would guess even the breakaway civilization approves of my speculations.

Dcdrac · 9th December 2012, 06:30 AM

and the usual Black Ops twaddle so believed of CT beleivers

8th December 2012, 06:49 PM	#42
jtcarl New Blood Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 24	The people involved in the above-mentioned discussion (Malmstrom AFB, 1967) are not exactly the most credible claimants. I invite you to take a look at the evidence these men have purposely refused to discuss, including numerous interviews with those who experienced these matters first hand. Simply go the "Reality Uncovered" website, and visit the thread entitled "Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident, March 1967". Go to the most recent posting (by James Carlson » Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:43 pm) and note the references. There is no doubt whatsoever that these UFO claims are a complete fiction, created by the authors to advance claims enabling them to sell their books, lecture on the UFO circuit, and publicize their DVDs. You'd be doing yourself a favor by examining the evidence presented. Forgive me for making this a bit difficult. I'm forced into doing this as a result of the URL rules your forum has established, otherwise I'd simply post the references. Sincerely, James Carlson
jtcarl New Blood Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 24

8th December 2012, 07:20 PM	#47
Shiner Motor Mouth Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Up the creek. Posts: 1,030	Originally Posted by jtcarl The people involved in the above-mentioned discussion (Malmstrom AFB, 1967) are not exactly the most credible claimants. I invite you to take a look at the evidence these men have purposely refused to discuss, including numerous interviews with those who experienced these matters first hand. Simply go the "Reality Uncovered" website, and visit the thread entitled "Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident, March 1967". Go to the most recent posting (by James Carlson » Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:43 pm) and note the references. There is no doubt whatsoever that these UFO claims are a complete fiction, created by the authors to advance claims enabling them to sell their books, lecture on the UFO circuit, and publicize their DVDs. You'd be doing yourself a favor by examining the evidence presented. Forgive me for making this a bit difficult. I'm forced into doing this as a result of the URL rules your forum has established, otherwise I'd simply post the references. Sincerely, James Carlson http://www.realityuncovered.net/foru...1688&start=645 Sounds convincing.
	__________________

8th December 2012, 07:41 PM	#48
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,869	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman UFOs hovering over nuclear missile silos and then flying away at great speed, I would say that's technology and not some cloud or something like that. If you claim ALL of the witnesses are wrong or lying, then that's your belief. It might seem to you that your position then is rational, because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, yet when there are hundreds of not-so-easy-to-dismiss witness accounts of UFOs, then your position actually becomes irrational. If it was a floater, then it only appeared to fly away. You're starting to understand why unfalsifiable anecdotes are worthless. But, it's your world of make-believe, make up anything you want. Since it appears to be a complete fabrication, there isn't much else to say about it.
	Last edited by RoboTimbo; 8th December 2012 at 07:42 PM.

8th December 2012, 08:56 PM	#52
LordXenu Critical Thinker Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 327	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Hmm... I came to think of that Ray Kurzweil has said that we will reach a technological singularity around the year 2045. And that's with public technology. Richard Dolan has said that the breakaway civilization is at least 30 years ahead of the public society. 2012 + 30 years = 2042. That's close to 2045, AND the shadow society has better scientific knowledge! So it's fair to estimate that the shadow society already has reached and gone beyond a technological singularity. That's very exciting. And it means that the shadow society probably has made contact with advanced ET civilizations! Because post-singularity technology is so super powerful that only a peaceful society can use that kind of power without blowing themselves to Kingdom Kong. And an advanced and peaceful society can make real ET contacts. So if the shadow society is peaceful, then why doesn't it help the public human society where people starve to death etc? Because it's only by now that the shadow society has become peaceful. They have probably done many nasty and illegal things in the past, so they cannot just reveal themselves directly to the public society. Just think of the thousands of lawsuits that would be filed, yikes! And even public demand for punishment. So it's WE in the public society who have to become peaceful and civilized enough to make real ET contact, because the shadow society is probably already in contact with a lot of space aliens!!! Am I allowed to submit this to the stundie thread?
LordXenu Critical Thinker Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 327

9th December 2012, 01:24 AM	#56
BazBear Teddy Bears do have teeth! Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: In The Woods Behind Your House Posts: 1,613	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Poor comparison. Find me hundreds of professional witnesses who claim that unicorns are real. Apples and oranges. What's the pay scale like for a professional witness? I'll bet you didn't know UFO is actually the acronym for Unicorns Flying Over.
	__________________ I don't see how an article of clothing can be indecent. A person, yes. - Robert A. Heinlein If Christ died for our sins, dare we make his martyrdom meaningless by not committing them? - Jules Feiffer

8th December 2012, 06:14 PM	#41
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by RoboTimbo I know! I've seen a couple myself! I know there really are Objects Flying but are still Unidentified! I know. A cloud can be a UFO until it's recognized. The credible witnesses talk about UFOs that are some form of advanced technology though. There are (at least, I have ruled out extradimensional since I doubt that there are extra dimensions) three possibilities: 1. All UFO sightings can be explained as natural or publicly known things. 2. Some UFOs are extraterrestrial technology. 3. No UFOs are ET technology but some are human black op technology. There are more combinations possible, but that's a rough outline. I believe #3 is the correct answer (when it comes to UFO sightings made by humans on Earth).

8th December 2012, 06:54 PM	#43
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,869	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman I know. A cloud can be a UFO until it's recognized. The credible witnesses talk about UFOs that are some form of advanced technology though. So you're back to posting their interpretations rather than simply what they claim to have witnessed? Quote: There are (at least, I have ruled out extradimensional since I doubt that there are extra dimensions) three possibilities: 1. All UFO sightings can be explained as natural or publicly known things. 2. Some UFOs are extraterrestrial technology. 3. No UFOs are ET technology but some are human black op technology. There are more combinations possible, but that's a rough outline. I believe #3 is the correct answer (when it comes to UFO sightings made by humans on Earth). You need to believe in something. Might as well be nonsense.

8th December 2012, 06:56 PM	#44
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,869	Originally Posted by jtcarl Forgive me for making this a bit difficult. I'm forced into doing this as a result of the URL rules your forum has established, otherwise I'd simply post the references. Sincerely, James Carlson Until you get your 15 posts, you can hash it up like this: www dot address dot com or some such so that the forum doesn't recognize it as an address. You're ok in doing so, I've seen the mods make the same suggestion.

8th December 2012, 07:07 PM	#45
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by jtcarl The people involved in the above-mentioned discussion (Malmstrom AFB, 1967) are not exactly the most credible claimants. I invite you to take a look at the evidence these men have purposely refused to discuss, including numerous interviews with those who experienced these matters first hand. Simply go the "Reality Uncovered" website, and visit the thread entitled "Malmstrom AFB Missile/UFO Incident, March 1967". Go to the most recent posting (by James Carlson » Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:43 pm) and note the references. There is no doubt whatsoever that these UFO claims are a complete fiction, created by the authors to advance claims enabling them to sell their books, lecture on the UFO circuit, and publicize their DVDs. You'd be doing yourself a favor by examining the evidence presented. Forgive me for making this a bit difficult. I'm forced into doing this as a result of the URL rules your forum has established, otherwise I'd simply post the references. Sincerely, James Carlson Some of the witnesses (in for example the Disclosure Project) may not be credible, yet I believe many of them are, because there is not much to gain personally by telling such stories. Rather the opposite in fact, and people often get ridiculed when they claim to have seen UFOs. So why would all of the professional military, air force, police officer, radar operator etc witnesses make such claims? And it's fairly easy to discredit witnesses by asking them seemingly related (yet in fact unrelated) questions and then debunk those instead of looking at the actual UFO witness accounts directly.

8th December 2012, 07:13 PM	#46
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by RoboTimbo So you're back to posting their interpretations rather than simply what they claim to have witnessed? UFOs hovering over nuclear missile silos and then flying away at great speed, I would say that's technology and not some cloud or something like that. If you claim ALL of the witnesses are wrong or lying, then that's your belief. It might seem to you that your position then is rational, because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, yet when there are hundreds of not-so-easy-to-dismiss witness accounts of UFOs, then your position actually becomes irrational.

8th December 2012, 07:49 PM	#49
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Hmm... I came to think of that Ray Kurzweil has said that we will reach a technological singularity around the year 2045. And that's with public technology. Richard Dolan has said that the breakaway civilization is at least 30 years ahead of the public society. 2012 + 30 years = 2042. That's close to 2045, AND the shadow society has better scientific knowledge! So it's fair to estimate that the shadow society already has reached and gone beyond a technological singularity. That's very exciting. And it means that the shadow society probably has made contact with advanced ET civilizations! Because post-singularity technology is so super powerful that only a peaceful society can use that kind of power without blowing themselves to Kingdom Kong. And an advanced and peaceful society can make real ET contacts. So if the shadow society is peaceful, then why doesn't it help the public human society where people starve to death etc? Because it's only by now that the shadow society has become peaceful. They have probably done many nasty and illegal things in the past, so they cannot just reveal themselves directly to the public society. Just think of the thousands of lawsuits that would be filed, yikes! And even public demand for punishment. So it's WE in the public society who have to become peaceful and civilized enough to make real ET contact, because the shadow society is probably already in contact with a lot of space aliens!!!

8th December 2012, 07:51 PM	#50
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,905	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Not evidence perhaps but there are cases where UFOs have shut down nuclear missiles, and other such events such as: "UFO Nuclear Disarm: Part 1 -- US Military Nuclear Launch and Storage Facility Officers describe their personal observations and contact with UFOs within their US Military Nuclear Facilities." -- http://www.military.com/video/aircra...1185467183001/ Many with credible witnesses. If we assume the witnesses are telling the truth, was it ET encounters, or were they victims of military black op experiments who controlled both the 'UFOs' and could shut down the nuclear missiles? What a bunch of nonsense. They are not credible witnesses, but it is funny you make up conspiracy theories about conspiracy theories. Did you do the jet engine part is a car hub cap CT too? Quote: people often get ridiculed when they claim to have seen UFOs Or ignored because they had an illusion, and then persist to claim it was a UFO, and move on to the delusion.

8th December 2012, 08:06 PM	#51
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,869	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Hmm... I came to think of that Ray Kurzweil has said that we will reach a technological singularity around the year 2045. And that's with public technology. Richard Dolan has said that the breakaway civilization is at least 30 years ahead of the public society. 2012 + 30 years = 2042. That's close to 2045, AND the shadow society has better scientific knowledge! So it's fair to estimate that the shadow society already has reached and gone beyond a technological singularity. That's very exciting. And it means that the shadow society probably has made contact with advanced ET civilizations! Because post-singularity technology is so super powerful that only a peaceful society can use that kind of power without blowing themselves to Kingdom Kong. And an advanced and peaceful society can make real ET contacts. So if the shadow society is peaceful, then why doesn't it help the public human society where people starve to death etc? Because it's only by now that the shadow society has become peaceful. They have probably done many nasty and illegal things in the past, so they cannot just reveal themselves directly to the public society. Just think of the thousands of lawsuits that would be filed, yikes! And even public demand for punishment. So it's WE in the public society who have to become peaceful and civilized enough to make real ET contact, because the shadow society is probably already in contact with a lot of space aliens!!! You're just proving that it's unicorns. They are known as peaceful creatures. Why do you ignore the obvious?

9th December 2012, 01:08 AM	#53
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by beachnut What a bunch of nonsense. They are not credible witnesses, but it is funny you make up conspiracy theories about conspiracy theories. Did you do the jet engine part is a car hub cap CT too? Ok, let's say that they are NOT credible witnesses, I don't buy that but for the sake of argument, then why would they all be lying or delusional? What makes you so sure they aren't credible? Do you have any rational argument instead of just handwaving? But let's say you are correct, then my theory still applies!

9th December 2012, 01:09 AM	#54
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by LordXenu Am I allowed to submit this to the stundie thread? Sure, after you have proved the post incorrect.

9th December 2012, 01:11 AM	#55
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by RoboTimbo You're just proving that it's unicorns. They are known as peaceful creatures. Why do you ignore the obvious? Poor comparison. Find me hundreds of professional witnesses who claim that unicorns are real. Apples and oranges.

9th December 2012, 02:07 AM	#57
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by BazBear What's the pay scale like for a professional witness? I'll bet you didn't know UFO is actually the acronym for Unicorns Flying Over. You mean the witnesses were bought? Then that's a conspiracy! Then you just proved the title of this thread.

9th December 2012, 02:24 AM	#58
jtcarl New Blood Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 24	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman You mean the witnesses were bought? Then that's a conspiracy! Then you just proved the title of this thread. What witnesses? There are a lot less than you think. The primary witness was Robert Salas, and he's had an enormous payday out of it. In fact, he started a second career on the basis of it, even serving as a paid adviser for the movie "Battle Los Angeles". Check out the Wikipedia article for "Malmstrom AFB" if you want to know the true extent of these alleged "witnesses". The fact is, there's not one eye-witness and those that have come forward to speak of the event in non-eyewitess terms have ALL changed their stories so significantly as to erase their credibility. Plus, the ONLY witnesses who were actually at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967 insist that there was no UFO, so whether you want to discuss credibility or not, the plain fact is that nobody who says there was a UFO at Echo Flight qualifies as a witness on any grounds whatsoever. As for Oscar Flight -- read the Wikipedia entry and then tell me how credible they sound to you. There are no witnesses. This is a UFO case that was bought and paid for from day one. It established Hastings' career as a UFO reporter, and Salas' career as a UFO pundit, and both men have profited more than enough to justify their dishonesty.
jtcarl New Blood Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 24	Last edited by jtcarl; 9th December 2012 at 02:27 AM.

9th December 2012, 02:52 AM	#59
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by jtcarl What witnesses? There are a lot less than you think. The primary witness was Robert Salas, and he's had an enormous payday out of it. In fact, he started a second career on the basis of it, even serving as a paid adviser for the movie "Battle Los Angeles". Check out the Wikipedia article for "Malmstrom AFB" if you want to know the true extent of these alleged "witnesses". The fact is, there's not one eye-witness and those that have come forward to speak of the event in non-eyewitess terms have ALL changed their stories so significantly as to erase their credibility. Plus, the ONLY witnesses who were actually at Echo Flight on March 16, 1967 insist that there was no UFO, so whether you want to discuss credibility or not, the plain fact is that nobody who says there was a UFO at Echo Flight qualifies as a witness on any grounds whatsoever. As for Oscar Flight -- read the Wikipedia entry and then tell me how credible they sound to you. There are no witnesses. This is a UFO case that was bought and paid for from day one. It established Hastings' career as a UFO reporter, and Salas' career as a UFO pundit, and both men have profited more than enough to justify their dishonesty. Another possibility is that the witnesses have been mind controlled into believing they saw UFOs. There are several accounts of missing time where people don't know what happened for several hours. That's a sign of trauma-based mind control.

9th December 2012, 03:00 AM	#60
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Did black op projects really have real UFOs already in the 60s and perhaps even earlier than that? I admit it could be doubtful. Crafts moving at enormous speeds and making 90 degree turns etc. I do believe some kind of breakaway civilization exists and they would have had pretty advanced technology even back in the 1960s. The question then is how advanced their technology was/is. Another question is how could they have kept their operations secret for so long.

9th December 2012, 03:08 AM	#61
SezMe post-pre-born Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 16,369	Here, RoboTimbo makes an excellent point: Originally Posted by RoboTimbo It's interesting that you ask if someone "believes" it rather than asking if they have evidence for it. and here he displays a level of optimism not seen before: [quote=RoboTimbo;8829316I think now you understand.[/quote]

9th December 2012, 04:26 AM	#62
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	I feel confused about the whole UFO thing. That made me frustrated. Fortunately I came to realize that when it comes to ET contact it's actually not UFOs that are the main issue. A more crucial development is..... artificial intelligence! It's the intergalactic super AI 'cloud' that we humans need to make contact with, or at least via. And the breakaway civilization no doubt has very advanced information technology! Check this out for example: "By way of illustration, I will relate something told to me by a scientist formerly with the National Security Agency. During a private conversation, he told me that at least some computers within the NSA were running at a clock speed of 650 MHz during the mid-1960s. Today, of course, that’s well below the speed of an entry-level PC desktop computer. Keep in mind, however, that this speed was not matched by the consumer market until around the year 2000, a difference of 35 years. Indeed, there were no consumer-market computers in 1965!" -- http://www.afterdisclosure.com/2011/04/breakaway.html And even though the NSA had been secret up till that point it started to become publicly known so even more advanced black op projects than that can have been going on. In short, the breakaway civilization should by now have enormously advanced artificial intelligence. It's also important to recognize that the progress of information technology follows an exponential curve. This means that even the shadow AI was much less powerful just a few decades ago. And today the shadow AI will be close to, or have gone beyond, a technological singularity. The shadow AI in turn must connect with the intergalactic super big AI, in order for our human civilization to 'plug in' to the universal 'AI cloud'. A crude analogy would be that personal computers must follow certain protocols in order to be able to connect with the Internet.

9th December 2012, 04:48 AM	#63
Dcdrac Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,678	UFO = Unidentified FLying Object It does not mean Alien craft from another galaxy or star system
Dcdrac Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,678

9th December 2012, 05:38 AM	#64
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Dcdrac UFO = Unidentified FLying Object It does not mean Alien craft from another galaxy or star system As I wrote in an earlier post: "A cloud can be a UFO until it's recognized." (Recognized as being a cloud that is.)

9th December 2012, 05:54 AM	#65
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,869	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Poor comparison. Find me hundreds of professional witnesses who claim that unicorns are real. Apples and oranges. No, it's an apt comparison. YOU find ME hundreds of professional witnesses who claim that UFOs are Alien Space Ships. I think you're continuing to see why I said that unfalsifiable anecdotes are worthless because what we get is someone's interpretation of events, as you've just shown by saying that witnesses interpret UFOs to be Alien Space Ships. Thank you for validating it. Again. Originally Posted by Anders Lindman As I wrote in an earlier post: "A cloud can be a UFO until it's recognized." (Recognized as being a cloud that is.) Congratulations, you've said something correct. So when you said that UFOs are real, you meant they were real clouds.

9th December 2012, 06:01 AM	#66
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by RoboTimbo No, it's an apt comparison. YOU find ME hundreds of professional witnesses who claim that UFOs are Alien Space Ships. I think you're continuing to see why I said that unfalsifiable anecdotes are worthless because what we get is someone's interpretation of events, as you've just shown by saying that witnesses interpret UFOs to be Alien Space Ships. Thank you for validating it. Again. Congratulations, you've said something correct. So when you said that UFOs are real, you meant they were real clouds. I have basically already given you loads of professional witnesses who claim to have seen UFOs and many who say they believe it's technology not made by humans. Dismissing all those witnesses is not a rational position as I have already pointed out. And when referring to 'real' UFOs I have said that I mean the use of technology (if I have missed to mention that in some post, you could point it out if you want to so I can edit that post to make it clear).

9th December 2012, 06:03 AM	#67
Dcdrac Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,678	you have given us the usual tut served up about Flying saucers none of what you have posted is novel
Dcdrac Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,678

9th December 2012, 06:04 AM	#68
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by RoboTimbo No, it's an apt comparison. No it's not. A UFO is an officially claimed reality. It only means unidentified. Unicorns are fantasy figures. Try to get your comparisons in order please. Haha.

9th December 2012, 06:07 AM	#69
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,804	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman I have basically already given you loads of professional witnesses who claim to have seen UFOs and many who say they believe it's technology not made by humans. Dismissing all those witnesses is not a rational position as I have already pointed out. ........ Claiming that what they saw is evidence of UFOs which were either black ops missions or ETs without further examination is not rational either. If they did see black ops as you like to call anything that is secret, so what? Secret stuff goes on when it comes to the military and national security.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

9th December 2012, 06:07 AM	#70
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Dcdrac you have given us the usual tut served up about Flying saucers none of what you have posted is novel Sigh, the usual "already debunked" claim again. Just because you can show that some witnesses have lied for example, it doesn't mean that all witnesses automatically are debunked.

9th December 2012, 06:08 AM	#71
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,869	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman No it's not. Yes, it is. Quote: A UFO is an officially claimed reality. Ah, you admit that it is only claimed. Good for you. So the comparison still stands. Quote: It only means unidentified. Unicorns are fantasy figures. Try to get your comparisons in order please. Haha. Try to understand the comparison please. Alien Space Ships exist only in science fiction. Again, the comparison is apt. You simply need to try to understand it.

9th December 2012, 06:10 AM	#72
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,869	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman I have basically already given you loads of professional witnesses who claim to have seen UFOs and many who say they believe it's technology not made by humans. Dismissing all those witnesses is not a rational position as I have already pointed out. That isn't what I asked you for. I asked YOU to show ME hundreds of professional witnesses to Alien Space Ships, not UFOs. Try to be rational. Quote: And when referring to 'real' UFOs I have said that I mean the use of technology (if I have missed to mention that in some post, you could point it out if you want to so I can edit that post to make it clear). Oh, you mean airplanes and radio controlled toys and Chinese lanterns then. Yes, those exist. Nobody has ever shown an Alien Space Ship to exist though.

9th December 2012, 06:10 AM	#73
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Nessie Claiming that what they saw is evidence of UFOs which were either black ops missions or ETs without further examination is not rational either. If they did see black ops as you like to call anything that is secret, so what? Secret stuff goes on when it comes to the military and national security. The idea is that if some of the UFO sightings actually are advanced technology not known to the public, then that is human black op technology, not extraterrestrial technology. The same with space alien abductions for example. If some abductions actually are real, then the theory is that they all are human black op projects pretending to be space aliens abducting people.

9th December 2012, 06:11 AM	#74
Dcdrac Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,678	Yes the usual debunked statment becasue it has been shown to be bunk over and over again and you are not showing us anything different to all the other bunk that went before
Dcdrac Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,678

9th December 2012, 06:12 AM	#75
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by RoboTimbo That isn't what I asked you for. I asked YOU to show ME hundreds of professional witnesses to Alien Space Ships, not UFOs. Try to be rational. My claim is that they are NOT alien space ships. If some of the UFOs really are advanced technology not known to the public the theory is that it's human black op technology, not extraterrestrial technology.