Any UFO interest?

[nicebloke]

I don't think they need a map.

I believe that some of these beings have been coming here for a very long time. Longer than we can even imagine.

There's a big story behind these vehicles and the CIA, NSA, US Military have a pretty good idea about a lot of it you can count on that.

There may be bases under the sea (mapping machines have captured images of ufos entering the sea - as well as the human reports of ufos entering lakes in Puerto Rico) and in the earth's mountains (captured on video by James Gilliland).

Some of their earlier visits here may have resulted in them being seen as gods or ghosts, why not?

[TallTroll]

A long time ago, I used to hang out at RAF Wattisham (as it was then), and we went off to airshows in a semi-official capacity. One time, at Duxford we met a USAF Captain, who had been stationed at Bentwaters as an A-10 pilot at the time of the Rendlesham Forest Incident.

For those that don't know, Bentwaters was a huge USAF base, and is geographically close to Rendlesham. There is / was a unit at RAF Woodbridge itself, but Bentwaters had a couple of wings sationed there, hence a lot of MPs, who were the ones mostly responsible for policing the incident itself.

He was one of the first officers on site during the alleged landing itself. He didn't get close enough to see anything directly, because the MPs, and mysterious apparent civilians who the MPs called "sir" wouldn't let anyone that close even by that point. He could see a lot of strange lights, and was directed to take his men and set up part of a perimeter a bit further out.

He also had a subsequent visit from some Military Intelligence types, as had all the men he talked to quietly after the fact. For an event that never officially happened, it sure got a lot of actually quite official attention

[dogboy]

The History Channel has a series called something like 'Ancient Aliens' that consistently churns out convincing programming on the subject.  I find it fascinating, as it really tries to make a historical case that many religions mistook aliens for gods and angels and when you interpret history in that light, things do seem to snap into focus.  (Even Noah's Arc was discussed in this manner.)

For example, they show what looks to be a very old map of the known world.  The continents looked out of proportion and out of position slightly, but you could easily recognize it as a map of the world.  They then tell you the date it was made, tell you that they validated that date, and that the map of Antarctica that you see on the map is the actual landmass of that continent, not a map of the ice sheets that cover it, which is all you can still see if you actually go there.  In other words, they basically say there was no way for the cartographer to know what the land actually looked like back then, since it was covered in ice and they didn't have the technology until recently that could see through the ice to accurately determine the shape of the landmass that has been covered in ice since long before man had boats (or even existed, for that matter.)

Granted, it isn't conclusive evidence, like a crashed spaceship, but if it wasn't possible for man to know what that land mass looked like back then, who told them?  How did they know? They have a bunch of things like that that they combine into a convincing argument.  It's definitely not a show about ghosts where they run around in a house with the lights off, get scared, and are sure something is there even though nothing showed up on their tin foil hats.  This isn't really science in this sense, it's more interpretive history but they do make a good case and an entertaining show.

[keano]

Got to say that it is a really fascinating subject. When I was younger I read a couple of pretty out there books called "Prehistoric Germ Warfare" and "Our Mysterious Spaceship Moon" that sparked my interest.

Can anyone recommend any other interesting books in a similar vein?

Given the sheer number of galaxies out there, the probability that the lifeforms on Earth are the only ones in existence in the whole of space doesn't seem to be a rational conclusion in my opinion.

[4Eyes]

'Ancient Aliens'

yeah - I watch that - its pretty good.


I try to keep an open mind on the whole subject.

When I was in my twenties I read every book I could get my hands on, including all the Von Daniken stuff and got very enthusiastic about the whole thing.
Sadly, when I dug deeper, it seem much of the information quoted simply does not stand up to scrutiny - and this tends to mean that 'real' scientists avoid the whole subject, which is a shame.

It seems clear to me that there is LOADS of unexplained events and observations but ZERO conclusive proof that any of it is of alien origin - this means that only logical position for me to take is 'neither believe, nor disbelieve'.

I can come up loads of theories, both with and without alien involvement, that might explain the phenomena, but I can't prove any of them any more than I can disprove other people's theories.

I think part of the problem is that a lot of the 'pro-alien' writers use duff logic in their claims :
* I can present you with observations and phenomena that scientists can't explain
* I can present you with an argument that they are of alien origin that scientists can't disprove
* Therefore my theory is correct
.. whereas, of course, all it means is that have unexplained phenomena, and an unproven theory.

Again, this kind of looney-logic makes 'real' scientists frightened to be associated with the whole subject - sad really, cos there is stuff that needs investigating.

[nicebloke]

Just got Dark Mission by Richard Hoagland. Some amazing Nasa pictures. Really does look like there are ruins of buildings on Mars.

Speaking of Nasa:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuFBUS0kiSA

And  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlLN_Jcg1pc