PDA

View Full Version : Extra Terrestrail Life



rogerday
2004-Mar-07, 02:03 AM
Greetings

I have been researching UFO's / ET's and would like to inform of Disclosureproject.

Campaign for Disclosure Witnesses Panel

National Press Club Washington, DC


Originally Broadcast Live on Wednesday, May 9, 2001

On Wednesday, May 9th, over twenty military, intelligence, government, corporate and scientific witnesses came forward at the National Press Club in Washington, DC to establish the reality of UFOs or extraterrestrial vehicles, extraterrestrial life forms, and resulting advanced energy and propulsion technologies. The weight of this first-hand testimony, along with supporting government documentation and other evidence, will establish without any doubt the reality of these phenomena, according to Dr. Steven M. Greer, director of the Disclosure Project which hosted the event.

to view the event go to http://www.disclosureproject.org/npcwebcast.htm


Roger Day

E.T.A

Manchurian Taikonaut
2004-Mar-07, 09:15 PM
Is this meant to be evidence for alien or something?

damienpaul
2004-Mar-08, 08:35 AM
I so want to believe in aliens visitations to earth, but alas, i am skeptical....

I'd have to wait until joe alien lands his intergalactic behind on my couch and says g'day, hi or even zerblatt...whatever...

However, if they touch my pepsi, it'll mean war!

Faulkner
2004-Mar-08, 11:32 AM
Rogerday, I simply can't be bothered downloading a 70MB (let alone 220MB!!!) movie file.

How about giving us a rundown on the results of this press conference?

Is the CIA communicating with ETs? Or are they in fact BUILDING the bloody UFOs?? Or is the CIA actually an extra-terrestrial organization???

Was Bob Lazar in attendance???

HA HA HA!!!!

damienpaul
2004-Mar-08, 12:58 PM
Is the CIA communicating with ETs? Or are they in fact BUILDING the bloody UFOs?? Or is the CIA actually an extra-terrestrial organization???

I'd be inclined to say all three, but the building of the UFO's are shared with McDonalds - McUFO's


Was Bob Lazar in attendance???

Who the blazing Zues' boxer shorts is Bob Lazar?

Give me evidence? Gimme gimme gimme

Mettalica1
2004-Mar-31, 08:17 PM
I beleive that there is life beside us but that is very interesting :o

Nick4
2004-Apr-07, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by rogerday@Mar 7 2004, 02:03 AM
Greetings

I have been researching UFO's / ET's and would like to inform of Disclosureproject.

Campaign for Disclosure Witnesses Panel

National Press Club Washington, DC


Originally Broadcast Live on Wednesday, May 9, 2001

On Wednesday, May 9th, over twenty military, intelligence, government, corporate and scientific witnesses came forward at the National Press Club in Washington, DC to establish the reality of UFOs or extraterrestrial vehicles, extraterrestrial life forms, and resulting advanced energy and propulsion technologies. The weight of this first-hand testimony, along with supporting government documentation and other evidence, will establish without any doubt the reality of these phenomena, according to Dr. Steven M. Greer, director of the Disclosure Project which hosted the event.

to view the event go to http://www.disclosureproject.org/npcwebcast.htm


Roger Day

E.T.A
Thats interesting do you do that for a living, it sounds like a cool job i have a question for you have you ever personoly seen an alien or a flying saucer? If not do you belive in alians?

Sp1ke
2004-Apr-08, 12:38 AM
It would be great if aliens were buzzing around the solar system. It would be a mind-blowing idea if we *knew* there were other intelligent beings out there.

_But_ I can't believe aliens would sneak around abducting individuals in deserted areas and lurking just out of shot so that we could take blurred photos of them. And if they're an advanced race, how can our generally incompetent governments manage to hide them so well?

GOURDHEAD
2004-Apr-08, 01:28 PM
I believe sentient life capable of a least our level of technological development exists in many locations in the Milky Way galaxy; none of them, other than we, are here nor have they been; and we are not aware of having received their electromagnetic signals.

It is natural for planets to form around stars.

Elements and compounds necessary for carbon based life have been
observed throughout the MW.

It is as natural for these elements, where conditions permit, to start and
evolve life in such places as it is here.

Evolution will strongly bias life's development toward consciousness and
technology development as naturally as water running downhill.

For now non-carbon based life is not considered to be likely.

The fact that we exist "prooves" that the right elements have the right affinities for each other to support both the pre-biological and biological phases of evolution to produce critters capable of technology development.

Sp1ke
2004-Apr-08, 01:42 PM
Gourdhead, How do you account for us not having heard from these other races?

Do you think they would only use electromagnetic emissions for a short time so they either haven't started yet or they finished and we missed it?

Or do none of them use detectable radiation for communication?

Faulkner
2004-Apr-08, 01:51 PM
Originally posted by Sp1ke@Apr 8 2004, 12:38 AM
It would be great if aliens were buzzing around the solar system. It would be a mind-blowing idea if we *knew* there were other intelligent beings out there.

_But_ I can't believe aliens would sneak around abducting individuals in deserted areas and lurking just out of shot so that we could take blurred photos of them. And if they're an advanced race, how can our generally incompetent governments manage to hide them so well?
Well...I dunno...

But I DO know that the "physics" we're teaching in high schools today is more than a hundred years old (incl. quantum physics!!!).

"Stealth" technology was kept under wraps for decades. The SR-71 spy-plane was unheard of 'til a decade or 2 after it was invented.

Atom bombs...radar...etc etc...

The government, however inept it is at managing people, seem to do a good job at keeping military secrets.

I half-agree about your statement about UFOs, Sp1ke. All we tend to see are silly "fuzzy" photos! But if I saw a full-fledged FLYING F###**G SAUCER in the sky, and I didn't have my camera on me, well then I'd just be another fruitloop crackpot attention-grubbing schizo, wouldn't I?

But I wouldn't care. I'd know I was right, even if every single other human being on the planet told me otherwise! :P

We simply don't know what's out there, what may have visited the Earth in the past, or what may be surreptitiously visiting us now. Maybe nothing, maybe something. We don't know. To take a side here amounts to religious faith.

GOURDHEAD
2004-Apr-09, 02:00 PM
Gourdhead, How do you account for us not having heard from these other races?

Obviously I don't know. Some reasons may be:

The MW is not old enough for enough techies to have developed near enough to us.

Their signals are not strong enough for us to detect or they are modulated in ways we have not thought of detecting.


Their history has taught them to be very very cautious about kicking over their version of Pandora's Box.

I believe that those who achieve interstellar travel are very hard to totally wipe out; either intentionally or unintentionally as will we be.

Many of them inaccurately assessed the benevolence of the universe and are no longer around.

There is a pressing urgency for us to continuously accelerate our technological development to ever increasing levels of galactic environment management. The Incas and the Aztecs allowed themselves to be diverted into cultural activities that led to their demise and we seem to be unwittingly following their example (i.e., the energy devoted to sports, rock concerts, churchism, templeism, mosqueism, etc.,).

The hazardness of our position in the universe is not unlike that of barnacles on the side of a ship that tides rub incessantly against the pier to which it is moored.

Sp1ke
2004-Apr-10, 01:07 AM
How about we made spaceflight mandatory for everybody? :)

I think once you've been in space and seen how precarious life on earth is, compared with the vastness of space, it should give you a better perspective on how we should treat our home world. I get a similar feeling looking at the stars on a dark and clear night. I can't imagine anyone could view the earth from space without it making a huge impression on them.

GOURDHEAD
2004-Apr-10, 11:45 AM
The real purpose for developing interstellar travel should be our survival not the endowment of the earth or any part thereof with more holy reverence. Having thus spoken it is still of high urgency to maintain the "health" of th e earth.

Nick4
2004-Apr-10, 02:20 PM
Originally posted by Sp1ke@Apr 10 2004, 01:07 AM
How about we made spaceflight mandatory for everybody? :)

I think once you've been in space and seen how precarious life on earth is, compared with the vastness of space, it should give you a better perspective on how we should treat our home world. I get a similar feeling looking at the stars on a dark and clear night. I can't imagine anyone could view the earth from space without it making a huge impression on them.
I agree with you i think if every one went into space and seen our planet earth they would take it more sereously and keep it clean B) . Good statment. B)

KeiZka
2004-Apr-10, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by GOURDHEAD@Apr 10 2004, 11:45 AM
The real purpose for developing interstellar travel should be our survival not the endowment of the earth or any part thereof with more holy reverence. Having thus spoken it is still of high urgency to maintain the "health" of th e earth.
agreed on gourdhead, surviving is most important part. It is sadly true, that comets and such things are always there, so humankind needs a b-plan. We can't simply stay here forever, because a ) we run out of minerals b ) we need ultimately more living space c ) before mentioned comets, asteroids etc. d ) if we're still alive when sun starts it's "bad" phase, we're toast. no reminder whatsoever of us left to other races to recognise

Nick4
2004-Apr-11, 03:19 PM
I heard about this one story on the history chanal about ufo's thay sade that thay have had many sightings around military bases like the one story about a sighting over a top secret military base they sent up 4 or 5 F-16 fighter jets to take it down cuz they dident know what it was so they went up and started chasing this craft and it ceped dodging the jets it could go faster that the jets and stop incredably fast like on a dime after going about 2-3 times the speed of sound. This was one of the first shows ive seen about ufo's and it has helped me belive in them i think that we are not alowne in our unevers thare is others. ;)

Sp1ke
2004-Apr-13, 08:59 AM
The real purpose for developing interstellar travel should be our survival*

Is survival really the only thing we should aim for? What about quality of life? Or intellectual and moral improvement?

I think it is short sighted just to develop interstellar travel so that we've got somewhere to go when we've used up everything close by. But, with my realistic head on, I guess the need for survival can justify a budget for space exploration when higher aims can't. Doesn't mean the latter can't be included in the plans though.

om@umr.edu
2004-Apr-13, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by Sp1ke@Apr 13 2004, 08:59 AM
Is survival really the only thing we should aim for? What about quality of life? Or intellectual and moral improvement?

I think it is short sighted just to develop interstellar travel so that we've got somewhere to go when we've used up everything close by. But, with my realistic head on, I guess the need for survival can justify a budget for space exploration when higher aims can't. Doesn't mean the latter can't be included in the plans though.
Amen, Sp1ke. :D

The drive for survival is self-centered.

Self-centeredness may not be the path to a happy, fulfilling life.

E.g., see the prayer of St. Francis of Assisi.

With kind regards,

Oliver :D
http://www.umr.edu/~om

KeiZka
2004-Apr-13, 02:54 PM
I agree: i'm bit unenthusiastic about thing on earth. With things going like this, we'll end up drowning in our garbage (unless we start dumping them on Moon :lol:) as Western countries produce, don't remember how much, but much garbage per individual. If AND when 3rd world countries acquire same standard of living as countries in west (aka 1st world countries), the amount of daily garbage will be huge. Since when have all humans in one nation cared for nature? Never, or at least it seems so. Ecologist, even though they're usually minority of people in nation, get sometimes some good done.

About that survival part: first survival, then quality of life and intellectualism. I've set survival on highest priority when speaking of space exploration in my mind.

Cheers all, KeiZka (aka KeZi)

GOURDHEAD
2004-Apr-13, 10:30 PM
The drive for survival is self-centered.

Self-centeredness may not be the path to a happy, fulfilling life.

E.g., see the prayer of St. Francis of Assisi.

Well put! Survival comes in several flavors. The one I advocate is not at odds with St. Francis nor with the Sermon on the Mount. Physical survival is the base of pyramid and a very essential element in its realization. The system that allows us to travel to other stellar systems also allows us to deposit garbage of all sorts into the sun for its complete recycling and/or supplies the energy to recycle it and all environmental hazards here on earth and raises our subsistence level sufficiently to be a catalyst for loving our neighbor as ourselves!!! Indeed, we can love ourselves and our neighbors in ever more fullfiling ways.

damienpaul
2004-Apr-14, 06:22 PM
Are you referring to Maslow's Heirachy of Needs, Gourdhead? as yes, I can see where you and Dr. M are coming from. The feeling of not being alone may be good for our self-actualisation (the top of Maslow's pyramid).

Prime
2004-Apr-14, 09:20 PM
This weekend;

http://www.paradigmclock.com/X-Conference/.../conference.htm (http://www.paradigmclock.com/X-Conference/conference.htm)

Prime

GOURDHEAD
2004-Apr-14, 09:44 PM
The feeling of not being alone may be good for our self-actualisation (the top of Maslow's pyramid).

I'm not sure that "feeling we're not alone" should have any bearing on our self actualization. Even if it does, we must overcome such illness. The point I'm trying to make is that physical survival is basic to the higher aspects of survival and to "having life fully". ;)

spacedust
2004-Apr-16, 04:42 PM
I doubt that we will ever find humanoid type life within our own little planetary solar system but the universe is so infinitely large that I cannot imagine that there is NOT intelligent life SOMEwhere out there in the gazillions of other galaxies. I just dont think that we will ever develop the technology to be able to send travelers to these other galaxies - certainly not in our own lifetimes, anyway, and probably never. I have always been intrigued by the thought of alien life and also by the thought of ghosts and the paranormal in general. (Hmmmm...having lumped the three of those together...) But I've also said that I would be less frightened to meet an alien who is "just" from another planet than a ghost, who is a "dead" person. Thinking further about it, I dont know though- the intelligence and potential capabilities of an alien able to visit our planet may far outweigh the fright caused by a mere dead spirit. Ruminations, anyone?

Sp1ke
2004-Apr-16, 05:07 PM
I think the main difference between alien life and ghosts is that life has evolved on earth therefore there is a good reason to assume it could also evolve on another planet under the same conditions. Whereas as far as I know there is no concrete evidence of life after death and no good scientific theories as to how ghosts could exist.

Personally, I'm wildly optimistic and would love to meet an alien. This being on the assumption that they would be equally pleased to meet us, and not simply ravenous alien carnivores, intent on eating our internal organs. :D

spacedust
2004-Apr-16, 07:41 PM
Spike,
Good point. But surely there are as many claims of ghost sightings as there are of alien sightings. Anyone here have their own story about seeing an alien or a UFO? What about a ghost? If so, I think it would be interesting to hear.

Sp1ke
2004-Apr-17, 01:35 AM
If you're talking about sightings of aliens and ghosts, then I'm equally skeptical about both. But if you're talking about the justification for believing that aliens exist somewhere in the universe vs. believing that ghosts exist on earth, then I'd favour the former.

The problem that always baffles me about ghosts is that they can walk around so they must weigh a normal amount (you can't walk if you're weightless). But if they can walk through walls then why don't they fall through the floor?

:huh: :D

r53lang
2004-Apr-20, 08:03 AM
You're right - belief in there being beings visiting is IS quasi religious.

I go for the "show me" viewpoint. Let's see that damn alien, and not as defined by the INS. There's no doubt in my mind as to the inevitability of life, however cosmic distances and lightspeed doom us to perpetual alienation.


Fuzzy pix of semi identifiable ET's are about the same thing as sasquatch proof - great if you believe, otherwise pretty sketchy. Let's introduce habeus corpus to the issue - wonder if that could be used as a legal technique to end the ** about Roswell, etc. If interstellar vehicles ever show up here, no doubt we'd all get a view of them.

No - let me see your alien on the Today Show. Then I buy it

gooodcop
2004-Apr-20, 09:37 AM
I have a comment on UFOs.

I saw one over 10 years ago. My cousin with 2 friends, saw 3 in formation. Same place, over NYC and upper NY. My cousin, is an official MENSA member. My brother and a friend, saw one in NYC as well, in daytime. SO did a lot of people the day he saw his (see the same one at the same time). NYC is a big city full of people, nothing is seen by one person only.

Cousin's dad in law was a retired Navy bigwhig. He was not interested in hearing about it. He didnt show the least surprise, disbelief, or interest.

Stupid as it sounds, I called one of those numbers provided on the "mysteries" shows asking for calls from people who had seen one, and this is what happened:
They wanted to know WHEN I saw it. (a few years before). They hung up. I called back, and got someone answering saying "acme trucking". I inferred from that, that it was a govt number, & they only wanted calls about ones NOW PRESENT, to catch them. Didnt care a hoot about evidence they exist -- because, they already know that.

We figured out:
The reason for stigmatizing people who see them (and yes, they do stop on a dime, can change direction in an instant, and travel in all ways, not horizontal)...is that they are spy craft. Perhaps, a nuclear powered, silent hovercraft. Designed to fly UNDER radar, and avoid tall buildings when needed. So...we shut the people up from talking about the spycraft, by stigmatizing them, although thousands of people have seen them (my husband saw one as well years ago different part of the country). They also make no noise at all, mine was seen at night, and I thought for a moment it was a helicopter, because it was like a light. My cousin saw his during the day so cant say about the light. However, helicopters cannot fly like this thing flew. When you take a flashlight in the dark and swing it rapidly (like a sparkler on the fourth of july in a circle?) back and forth, thats how this thing moved. It went between 2 points left right, as fast as you can imagine, like a trail of light, then stopped, then went up real fast vertically and again stopped, and took off so fast I couldnt tell which way it had left.

The reason why UFO is so absurd a term to me, is : if it flies, and people have seen it, WHY does it have to be assumed from "outer space"?? DUHHHH, we have flying machines now, remember?

Sp1ke
2004-Apr-20, 10:23 AM
stop on a dime, can change direction in an instant, and travel in all ways, not horizontal

If this is the case and it is a real flying machine, it can't be anything terrestrial. The occupants would be squished to jelly if an aircraft "stopped on a dime". I can't believe we have invented inertia-less drives yet. ;)

Therefore these sort of UFOs have to be from a much more advanced alien race. But why would they bother spying on us? They should be better at it, so we wouldn't see them. If they've got inertialess drive, why not cloaking devices too? Why don't they just land somewhere public, like in the middle of the pitch during the Superbowl, and then we could start talking to them properly.

Personally, I think a simpler explanation is that strange lights that move in apparently unexplainable ways are more likely due to natural or mon-made phenomena. There are meteors, searchlights reflected from clouds, iridium flares and man-made satellites. I believe Venus is often reported as a UFO.

gooodcop
2004-Apr-20, 10:25 PM
Hi
I dont remember hearing the daytime ones Im referring to having lights. When I saw one, it had lights at night, one light. Like a helicopter.

What if they are reflective like a mirror or something? That would make them harder to see in daytime, they would blend in more. It would also make city lights reflect off them. ?? If you saw one, you'd be figuring like me, thats the difference. To not see one, you dont go that far in your thinking, its still at a speculative point to you, but firsthand is quite different. The question for me is gone now, I know they exist and I am certain there has to be a logical explanation. Its been a few years since I talked to my cousin, and Im not about to call him just to ask that, but dont fighter jets stop and hover to land on planes? You see how fast the fastmovers go, right? (We have them take off nearby and boy do they go fast).....

The distance that Im talking about when I say a trail of light, measured with my hand infront of face (not literally), would have been maybe 6" back and forth left to right....and then a hand's height straight up. Im not talking one mile left and right, so that changes physics a bit compared to a fast mover that goes 2 miles in a few seconds. Perhaps the speed looks faster in that kind of optical illusion. When it took off, if it were reflective, that might explain why I had no clue which way it went, it seemed to just vanish.

There has to be a rational explanation to how speed and stopping on a dime can happen. If we cant make this craft, that doesnt mean another country didnt. What if you changed the interior to some kind of cushioning semi solid, like surrounding (Im gonna use food here)...a piece of broccoli in bags of cushioning jelly of some sort...wouldnt that solid surrounding you (like a package thats been styrofoamed) change the properties of being squished like a jelly? Im sure there is some physics way for this to be a manmade craft. I realize youre meaning internally our flesh would keep going and organs would break, so there has to be a middle ground because I kid you not, I saw one and so did 3 people I know now. And I may have been alone, but they were not. :)

gooodcop
2004-Apr-21, 01:38 AM
Hey :)
Theres only one way to see if a gel would do the trick....why dont we find out?

If we had a catapult type device, that you could safely strap a chicken or duck (EGG) in, (wow that was a funny typo, strap a duck in, oops!), and say we used a fertilized egg to determine cellular yolk damage....and affixed this egg so that there was no "give" and it was firmly strapped in with its solid protective shell, just to shake it similarly at high speed...if we catapulted but didnt release the egg, and stopped on a dime fast, would the yolk "squish like jelly" from the inertia, or would that egg still hatch when it incubated it and be ok? Because of the surrounding equal-mas gel of the white of that egg cushioning it?

:)
Talk is cheap when you can test the answer. And rather than say what's not, which is easy, its harder to say 'what is'. 'What's not' always looks good when there's no "what is". And human basic nature wants to believe the best for itself...like blinders...that's natural. World was flat, sun hasnt supernova'd already, we're all hunky dory best case scenario?...etc. This requires tossing what you know like calculus, to see it. Too many incorrect basic trees blocking the forest view that are arbitrary and man-made, and physics is always an observation science, not consistent.

gooodcop
2004-Apr-21, 02:02 AM
PS

ANNNND, we have to eliminate the "bounce" factor, when that catapult stops on a dime - hitting a counter or table is NOT how it is to stop without a solid blocking you in the air = slow motion photography to make sure that catapult doesnt bounce back as if it were striking anything. One smooth motion.

Sp1ke
2004-Apr-21, 11:17 AM
The reason I'm dubious about the motion you describe being from a human-developed object is that the pilots of modern jet planes are already close to the limits of what is possible in terms of G-forces. I've seen them flying aerobatics and there's no way they could be described as stopping on a dime if you watch them from any distance away.

It's possible to calculate the G-forces on a body given the starting speed, finishing speed and distance for the deceleration. Without doing the maths, my feeling is that any survivable deceleration would be visible i.e. you'd see the object slow down, rather than stopping instantly. It would be interesting to see how far you'd have to allow to slow down from Mach 1 in order to keep the G-forces reasonable.

I think one explanation is that these are un-manned objects. But then another thought - why do they have lights on? If they are secret weapons or experimental craft, wouldn't they be better hidden if they didn't have lights? And I think a reflective surface would increase visibility, not reduce it.

I can't really argue about what you saw or what the cause could be. But I think if someone has developed a plane that has the manoeuverability that you describe, it would be in great demand from all the major powers in the world. There must be easier ways of spying, such as hi-res imaging from low earth orbit. That's already possible and virtually undetectable, compared with trying to spy from fast-moving, visible aircraft.

gooodcop
2004-Apr-21, 06:01 PM
HI
It appears to me in retrospect that perhaps they were testing how to fly. Or training how to fly it and maneuver it.

G force and mach I refer to a speed you have to travel pretty far to achieve. Flight pilots are getting up to Mach I, and dealing with the strain of remaining in that G force as they achieve the speed. Why couldnt these "UFO"s doing maneuvers that I saw, not normally be in any rush to do Mach I, i.e. if it was just the distance I showed you, more of a stop and go back and forth for a short distance, survive that brief G force as opposed to assuming they travel at Mach I regularly?

Reflectivity during a daytime sky would reflect the sky on the aircraft. It would be like having a mirrored sphere, sans sun reflection of course, blending right in like a chameleon in the sky, mirroring clouds, blue, etc -- harder to see. Reflectivity at night would be by chance , when passing over lit cities, etc. Or, on full moon nights etc.

:) Youre a very good writer in the english skills dept. Spike.

Sp1ke
2004-Apr-23, 11:24 PM
:D Thanks for the compliment. :D

A couple of thoughts:

Fighter pilots regularly travel at Mach 2 or faster these days. This doesn't create any G forces because they aren't accelerating. The tricky bit is manoeuvering. Acceleration and deceleration increase the G forces and the quicker you do it, the bigger the effect. So stopping and reversing direction will have much more effect than a banked turn.

It's strange that UFO reports often talk about this stop/start, rapid movement which is completely different to how normal planes move. It's not a useful way to move unless you're in combat, racing, trying to escape (or training for one of these). I'd certainly not like to be a passenger in a craft that was leaping about the sky (It's more comfortable being driven by a chauffeur than a rally driver :) )

Reflections only work if everything's the same colour all round. If you imagine you're standing on the ground looking at a mirror in the sky, you'll see a reflection of the ground and that will stand out from the sky around the mirror. And the other way round, if you're in the sky and looking at a mirror on the ground, it will show the sky and again stand out from the ground around it. That's why fish are usually silvered on the bottom so they blend with the sky and dark on the top so they blend with the ocean depths.

What you really want for invisibility is something that bends light around the aircraft. Like if you had fibre optic cables all round the body so that from any direction, all you would see is an image of whatever's on the other side of the craft.