Research Discussion: So What Exactly Is A UFO Anyway - Here's What The CIA/NSA/DIA/Northrop And Lockheed Thinks!

So What Exactly Is A UFO Anyway - Here's What The CIA/NSA/DIA/Northrop And Lockheed Thinks!
Posts: 41

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5   Next  (First | Last)

Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A.
2010-02-05 19:30:42 EST
What is a UFO?--The definition!

For confirmed skeptics, UFO sightings are no problem. In their opinion
these can only be the mistaken identification of weather balloons,
helicopters, meteorites, rockets, satellites or planets, etc.
Otherwise, in the skeptics' opinion, UFOs are actually hoaxes invented
by fame-hungry swindlers to acquire prominence. On the other hand,
there is a front of uncritical UFO fans who are frequently victims of
their own wishful thinking, and see in everything a manifestation of
ambassadors from a "cosmic brotherhood," who have come to the earth to
save humanity from destruction.

And then there are a few who deal with the phenomena in a sober and
unprejudiced manner, and because of that are often thrown into the
same pot with members of the superstitious "UFO cults" (by the self-
appointed "popes" of authority). But there are numerous well-
documented cases, confirmed by earnest witnesses, which indicate that,
in fact, something is going on in the sky, which cannot be explained
by conventional means, and behind which more and more recognized
experts see the activity of extraterrestrial intelligence.

Experts define "UFO" as "unidentified flying object" whose appearance,
flying characteristics, general dynamics and luminescent properties
cannot be explained in a conventional manner. The astrophysicist J.
Allen Hynek, who was for years advisor to the U.S. Air Force in the
matter of UFOs, worked out a classification system for UFO sightings,
which covers the entire spectrum of the phenomenon:

1. NL. Nocturnal light. A light that appears during the night.

2. DD. Daylight disc. A disc observed during daylight; mostly disc-
shaped although spheres, cigars and triangles have been described.

3. RV. Radar visual. The sighted objects were also picked up by radar.

4. CE-1. Close encounter of the first kind. A report of a structured
object or craft seen at relatively near distance, approximately four
hundred feet or less.

5. CE-2. Close encounter of the second kind. A report where some
measurable evidence is found at the site of a UFO after it has
departed.

6. CE-3. Close encounter of the third kind. A report including both a
structured craft seen at near distance and also "occupants" of some
kind somehow associated with the craft.

7. CE-4. Close encounter of the fourth kind. Personal contact between
an individual or group is initiated by the "occupants" of the
spacecraft. (After Hynek)

8. CE-5. Close encounter of the fifth kind. Personal contact between
the "occupants" of the craft initiated by an individual or group.

As spaceships of extraterrestrial origin, the UFOs have to cover
distances which are unimaginable for us. This can only be possible
through capabilities in the field of physics and technology that are
beyond our understanding and which still lie in the realm of magic for
us.

But UFOs are not only a challenge for astronomers, physicists and
engineers; they also confound psychologists, sociologists and
anthropologists. The reaction to the sighting of a UFO is, in the
opinion of psychologists, determined by the psychological constitution
of the observer. The sociologist, on the other hand, sees the reaction
to a sighting mainly from the social and cultural background of the
observer. For the anthropologist, there are parallels to myths and
legends from the past, often connected with religion. He wants to
understand the modus operandi of the extraterrestrials and investigate
the public's general reaction to their appearance. Thus, probably one
reason for the cautious approach of the alien visitors is that they
are here on account of scientific curiosity.

An open contact would disturb our society and its dynamics and
influence it to such an extent that the results of the aliens'
observations of it would be contaminated. Our anthropologists also try
to keep to a minimum their influence on a society they wish to
observe. Extraterrestrial intelligences would perhaps, therefore,
prefer to restrict their contacts to individual encounters so as to
camouflage their reconnaissance as far as possible. Perhaps they have
even deliberately staged the meaningless scenarios reported by the so-
called contactees, so that their reports do not find general
acceptance and they are mostly regarded as fools or psychopaths.
Another protective measure would be, apart from this suggested
disinformation, the induction of amnesia in the witnesses, as has been
often described in cases of alleged alien abductions.

Although the UFOs quite obviously represent one of the biggest
challenges for science, they are too often only laughed at, or simply
ignored. One reason for that is that the whole spectrum of the UFO
phenomenon is rarely presented in a serious manner and, when UFO
sighting cases are reported in the press, they are usually taken out
of their context.

Johannes von Butler



HVAC
2010-02-06 07:26:29 EST

"Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A." <science@zzz.com> wrote in message
news:852309ae-639e-4a96-a966-748ea242cf1d@l24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> What is a UFO?--The definition!


Request denied.




--
Harlow Victor Allen Campbell
Moderator
alt.alien.research alt.alien.visitors sci.skeptic alt.conspiracy



Benj
2010-02-06 16:00:58 EST
On Feb 5, 7:30 pm, "Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A."
<*.@zzz.com> wrote:
> What is a UFO?--The definition!
>
> For confirmed skeptics, UFO sightings are no problem. In their opinion
> these can only be the mistaken identification of weather balloons,
> helicopters, meteorites, rockets, satellites or planets, etc.
> Otherwise, in the skeptics' opinion, UFOs are actually hoaxes invented
> by fame-hungry swindlers to acquire prominence. On the other hand,
> there is a front of uncritical UFO fans who are frequently victims of
> their own wishful thinking, and see in everything a manifestation of
> ambassadors from a "cosmic brotherhood," who have come to the earth to
> save humanity from destruction.

Absolutely. Both the confirmed skeptics and the uncritical UFO fans
are two sides of the same unthinking "KOOK" coin. Neither are
interested in facts or truth or actual explanations. To either group
it is only a matter of whether you "believe". Hence to them the UFO
phenomena is a religion stripped of science. And they all work hard to
make sure that nobody else ever starts a scientific investigation.

> And then there are a few who deal with the phenomena in a sober and
> unprejudiced manner, and because of that are often thrown into the
> same pot with members of the superstitious "UFO cults" (by the self-
> appointed "popes" of authority). But there are numerous well-
> documented cases, confirmed by earnest witnesses, which indicate that,
> in fact, something is going on in the sky, which cannot be explained
> by conventional means, and behind which more and more recognized
> experts see the activity of extraterrestrial intelligence.

Yes there are a few. A few with open minds, and logic and reason who
yet are not afraid to confront possibilities well beyond that
currently accepted in the popular mind or even in establishment
science. These fall into two groups. There are the official
investigators who have access to all the factual data and evidence
(usually confiscated or deposed from actual witnesses) as well as to
the knowledge of what is fake data. They are usually government
employees or members of the intelligence community. The other are
earnest amateur investigators. They may in fact be professionals of
various types, but are under constant attack and ridicule by the
former group. Their task is made much more difficult since the
intelligence community throws out vast quantities of misinformation
designed to mislead a true investigator as well as personal attacks
designed to discredit them in the eyes of the public. It's a lot like
solving a murder. You can't expect the murderer to be telling you the
truth about what he/she did. Just the opposite. But that is what makes
a who-done-it fun, is it not?

So lets get on the same page.

1. The "U" in UFO stands for "unidentified". To say what they "are" is
pure speculation at this point.

2. UFOs are REAL. They are seen all the time. With a little effort
ANYONE can see them. Anyone who says they are imaginary is a liar.

3. "Explanations" that a pilot was chasing "Venus" are ludicrous and
insulting in the extreme.

4. "Mass hallucination" as far as anyone knows only exists in the
media and official UFO explanations. As far as I know it is not
recognized by psychiatry.

5. Real UFOs are NOT explained. (see 1. above) Note things like signs
of intelligent control (turns, flying in formation) rule out natural
phenomena.

6. Remember the "official" investigators. That means that any really
credible artifacts will be taken never to be seen again. (And of
course the same people will then start demanding for you to show them
the artifacts you used to have as "proof" for them to believe you! )

7. How STOOOPID do you have to be to either believe the likes of
Adamski and his "venusian" aliens OR the likes of HVAC and his
constant ridicule and disruptions? Are you really THAT ignorant that
you can't see through either of these? If you want to test your own
stooopidity, I strongly urge you to read the book "UFO's, JFK, and
Elvis" by Richard Belzer and see just where you stand on the
evolootionary scale.








> Experts define "UFO" as "unidentified flying object" whose appearance,
> flying characteristics, general dynamics and luminescent properties
> cannot be explained in a conventional manner. The astrophysicist J.
> Allen Hynek, who was for years advisor to the U.S. Air Force in the
> matter of UFOs, worked out a classification system for UFO sightings,
> which covers the entire spectrum of the phenomenon:
>
> 1. NL. Nocturnal light. A light that appears during the night.
>
> 2. DD. Daylight disc. A disc observed during daylight; mostly disc-
> shaped although spheres, cigars and triangles have been described.
>
> 3. RV. Radar visual. The sighted objects were also picked up by radar.
>
> 4. CE-1. Close encounter of the first kind. A report of a structured
> object or craft seen at relatively near distance, approximately four
> hundred feet or less.
>
> 5. CE-2. Close encounter of the second kind. A report where some
> measurable evidence is found at the site of a UFO after it has
> departed.
>
> 6. CE-3. Close encounter of the third kind. A report including both a
> structured craft seen at near distance and also "occupants" of some
> kind somehow associated with the craft.
>
> 7. CE-4. Close encounter of the fourth kind. Personal contact between
> an individual or group is initiated by the "occupants" of the
> spacecraft.   (After Hynek)
>
> 8. CE-5. Close encounter of the fifth kind.  Personal contact between
> the "occupants" of the craft  initiated by an individual or group.
>
> As spaceships of extraterrestrial origin, the UFOs have to cover
> distances which are unimaginable for us. This can only be possible
> through capabilities in the field of physics and technology that are
> beyond our understanding and which still lie in the realm of magic for
> us.
>
> But UFOs are not only a challenge for astronomers, physicists and
> engineers; they also confound psychologists, sociologists and
> anthropologists. The reaction to the sighting of a UFO is, in the
> opinion of psychologists, determined by the psychological constitution
> of the observer. The sociologist, on the other hand, sees the reaction
> to a sighting mainly from the social and cultural background of the
> observer. For the anthropologist, there are parallels to myths and
> legends from the past, often connected with religion. He wants to
> understand the modus operandi of the extraterrestrials and investigate
> the public's general reaction to their appearance. Thus, probably one
> reason for the cautious approach of the alien visitors is that they
> are here on account of scientific curiosity.
>
> An open contact would disturb our society and its dynamics and
> influence it to such an extent that the results of the aliens'
> observations of it would be contaminated. Our anthropologists also try
> to keep to a minimum their influence on a society they wish to
> observe. Extraterrestrial intelligences would perhaps, therefore,
> prefer to restrict their contacts to individual encounters so as to
> camouflage their reconnaissance as far as possible. Perhaps they have
> even deliberately staged the meaningless scenarios reported by the so-
> called contactees, so that their reports do not find general
> acceptance and they are mostly regarded as fools or psychopaths.
> Another protective measure would be, apart from this suggested
> disinformation, the induction of amnesia in the witnesses, as has been
> often described in cases of alleged alien abductions.
>
> Although the UFOs quite obviously represent one of the biggest
> challenges for science, they are too often only laughed at, or simply
> ignored. One reason for that is that the whole spectrum of the UFO
> phenomenon is rarely presented in a serious manner and, when UFO
> sighting cases are reported in the press, they are usually taken out
> of their context.
>
> Johannes von Butler


Sir Gilligan Horry
2010-02-07 00:07:22 EST

Well, YouTube and other video hosting sites
are just amazing these days.

The old days were different in
1996 when I was posting around in the
Area 51 Research Center message board !

By the Powers of Friars Balsam !!!



P.S.
I hope America can get back on track
as a good America it was trying to be in the 1950's.
(But a futuristic better country and world
recognizing the really good folks
I have found in YouTube)

I know the couple of bad fronts
that are trying to rip the olde USA apart.

It's all in YouTube and in other areas.

And I'm not joking...

It's all in the hands of the owners of Area 51.



If they went down the wrong path,
or secretly got taken over by
shitty multi-dimensional aliens,
then .........

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF !!!!



QUOTE:
"Most of you ignore that non-human creatures took part in the exercise
of those centralising powers without them being neither suspected nor
accessible to your senses. This is so true that they have almost very
subtly taken control. They do not necessarily stand on your material
plan, and that is precisely what could make them extremely efficient
and frightening in the near future. However, be aware that a large
number of your representatives are fighting this danger ! Be aware
that not all abductions are made against you."


And see this ....

The Mystery of Dr. Lachezar Filipov

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbCnfEof20o


"involves UFO/ET disclosure by a major space scientist"


P.P.S.
Oh, and if anyone attacks my friends or my belongings again !!!

(Yes, had a sneeky attack recently with stuff smashed)

... We will put into place ideas
that we have been working on for years.


______

We are not alone in the Universe
and it's better if Disclosure about that fact
goes very public.

QUOTE:
"The Secrecy is a Danger".

"The Control is a Danger".




_____________________________


=============================



On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 16:30:42 -0800 (PST), "Sir Arthur C.B.E.
Wholeflaffers A.S.A." <science@zzz.com> wrote:

>What is a UFO?--The definition!
>
>For confirmed skeptics, UFO sightings are no problem. In their opinion
>these can only be the mistaken identification of weather balloons,
>helicopters, meteorites, rockets, satellites or planets, etc.
>Otherwise, in the skeptics' opinion, UFOs are actually hoaxes invented
>by fame-hungry swindlers to acquire prominence. On the other hand,
>there is a front of uncritical UFO fans who are frequently victims of
>their own wishful thinking, and see in everything a manifestation of
>ambassadors from a "cosmic brotherhood," who have come to the earth to
>save humanity from destruction.
>
>And then there are a few who deal with the phenomena in a sober and
>unprejudiced manner, and because of that are often thrown into the
>same pot with members of the superstitious "UFO cults" (by the self-
>appointed "popes" of authority). But there are numerous well-
>documented cases, confirmed by earnest witnesses, which indicate that,
>in fact, something is going on in the sky, which cannot be explained
>by conventional means, and behind which more and more recognized
>experts see the activity of extraterrestrial intelligence.
>
>Experts define "UFO" as "unidentified flying object" whose appearance,
>flying characteristics, general dynamics and luminescent properties
>cannot be explained in a conventional manner. The astrophysicist J.
>Allen Hynek, who was for years advisor to the U.S. Air Force in the
>matter of UFOs, worked out a classification system for UFO sightings,
>which covers the entire spectrum of the phenomenon:
>
>1. NL. Nocturnal light. A light that appears during the night.
>
>2. DD. Daylight disc. A disc observed during daylight; mostly disc-
>shaped although spheres, cigars and triangles have been described.
>
>3. RV. Radar visual. The sighted objects were also picked up by radar.
>
>4. CE-1. Close encounter of the first kind. A report of a structured
>object or craft seen at relatively near distance, approximately four
>hundred feet or less.
>
>5. CE-2. Close encounter of the second kind. A report where some
>measurable evidence is found at the site of a UFO after it has
>departed.
>
>6. CE-3. Close encounter of the third kind. A report including both a
>structured craft seen at near distance and also "occupants" of some
>kind somehow associated with the craft.
>
>7. CE-4. Close encounter of the fourth kind. Personal contact between
>an individual or group is initiated by the "occupants" of the
>spacecraft. (After Hynek)
>
>8. CE-5. Close encounter of the fifth kind. Personal contact between
>the "occupants" of the craft initiated by an individual or group.
>
>As spaceships of extraterrestrial origin, the UFOs have to cover
>distances which are unimaginable for us. This can only be possible
>through capabilities in the field of physics and technology that are
>beyond our understanding and which still lie in the realm of magic for
>us.
>
>But UFOs are not only a challenge for astronomers, physicists and
>engineers; they also confound psychologists, sociologists and
>anthropologists. The reaction to the sighting of a UFO is, in the
>opinion of psychologists, determined by the psychological constitution
>of the observer. The sociologist, on the other hand, sees the reaction
>to a sighting mainly from the social and cultural background of the
>observer. For the anthropologist, there are parallels to myths and
>legends from the past, often connected with religion. He wants to
>understand the modus operandi of the extraterrestrials and investigate
>the public's general reaction to their appearance. Thus, probably one
>reason for the cautious approach of the alien visitors is that they
>are here on account of scientific curiosity.
>
>An open contact would disturb our society and its dynamics and
>influence it to such an extent that the results of the aliens'
>observations of it would be contaminated. Our anthropologists also try
>to keep to a minimum their influence on a society they wish to
>observe. Extraterrestrial intelligences would perhaps, therefore,
>prefer to restrict their contacts to individual encounters so as to
>camouflage their reconnaissance as far as possible. Perhaps they have
>even deliberately staged the meaningless scenarios reported by the so-
>called contactees, so that their reports do not find general
>acceptance and they are mostly regarded as fools or psychopaths.
>Another protective measure would be, apart from this suggested
>disinformation, the induction of amnesia in the witnesses, as has been
>often described in cases of alleged alien abductions.
>
>Although the UFOs quite obviously represent one of the biggest
>challenges for science, they are too often only laughed at, or simply
>ignored. One reason for that is that the whole spectrum of the UFO
>phenomenon is rarely presented in a serious manner and, when UFO
>sighting cases are reported in the press, they are usually taken out
>of their context.
>
>Johannes von Butler
>


HVAC
2010-02-07 06:29:51 EST

"Benj" <bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:4ba9f279-9385-4433-be4d-84511bc742e5@r10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
So lets get on the same page.

1. The "U" in UFO stands for "unidentified". To say what they "are" is
pure speculation at this point.



Just as the B in BJ stans for 'Blow'.




2. UFOs are REAL. They are seen all the time. With a little effort
ANYONE can see them. Anyone who says they are imaginary is a liar.



So, when you see a plane you can't identify, that's a ufo?

You're a fucking idiot.

No offense.



3. "Explanations" that a pilot was chasing "Venus" are ludicrous and
insulting in the extreme.



Yet they debunk 90% + of all ufo sightings.




4. "Mass hallucination" as far as anyone knows only exists in the
media and official UFO explanations. As far as I know it is not
recognized by psychiatry.


That's because you're a moron.



5. Real UFOs are NOT explained. (see 1. above) Note things like signs
of intelligent control (turns, flying in formation) rule out natural
phenomena.



So flocks of birds turning in formation is 'un-natural' ?

You're an idiot. (no offense)



6. Remember the "official" investigators. That means that any really
credible artifacts will be taken never to be seen again. (And of
course the same people will then start demanding for you to show them
the artifacts you used to have as "proof" for them to believe you! )



Yet, to date, exactly ZERO artifacts or ANY real evidence has come forth.



7. How STOOOPID do you have to be to either believe the likes of
Adamski and his "venusian" aliens OR the likes of HVAC and his
constant ridicule and disruptions?



It's somewhat of a reach, you snappahead, to call my
good-natured banter a 'disruption'.





Are you really THAT ignorant that
you can't see through either of these? If you want to test your own
stooopidity, I strongly urge you to read the book "UFO's, JFK, and
Elvis" by Richard Belzer and see just where you stand on the
evolootionary scale.



This is the same Richard Belzer the comedian?

And you want US to read what he says about ufos?

I think sucking so much cock has caused your brains
to implode.


No offense of course.





--
"Intelligent Design" Helping Stupid People Feel Smart Since 1987




Benj
2010-02-07 19:08:46 EST
On Feb 7, 6:29 am, "HVAC" <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Snip a buncha amazing name-calling crap which instantly and
irrefutably proved all my assertions that HVAC is nothing but a
disruptive moron.]

> Are you really THAT ignorant that
> you can't see through either of these?  If you want to test your own
> stooopidity, I strongly urge you to read the book "UFO's, JFK, and
> Elvis" by Richard Belzer and see just where you stand on the
> evolootionary scale.

> This is the same Richard Belzer the comedian?
> And you want US to read what he says about ufos?

Yes, as a matter of fact it is! Very funny book! But obviously that
will do you no good as you have never ventured beyond the pictures on
the cover of any book. And you don't have to read the book. We KNOW
where you stand on the evolootionary scale.

> I think sucking so much cock has caused your brains
> to implode.
>
> No offense of course.

The above "banter" being a salient example of what HVAC terms
"scientific debate"!
I rest my case.
Moron-shill.


HVAC
2010-02-08 08:23:44 EST

"Benj" <bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:b6c211b8-daad-44d3-97f9-823a27ae8d77@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 7, 6:29 am, "HVAC" <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Snip a buncha amazing name-calling crap which instantly and
irrefutably proved all my assertions that HVAC is nothing but a
disruptive moron.]


> I think sucking so much cock has caused your brains
> to implode.
>
> No offense of course.

The above "banter" being a salient example of what HVAC terms
"scientific debate"!
I rest my case.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Hey! I said "no offense".

That means that everything I said was done
in a cheerful and delightful way and in no way
was it malicious, you cum guzzling sperm burper.




--
Faith is believing what you know ain't so" -Mark Twain



Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A.
2010-02-08 13:29:15 EST
On Feb 7, 4:08 pm, Benj <bjac...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> On Feb 7, 6:29 am, "HVAC" <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [Snip a buncha amazing name-calling crap which instantly and
> irrefutably proved all my assertions that HVAC is nothing but a
> disruptive moron.]
>
> > Are you really THAT ignorant that
> > you can't see through either of these?  If you want to test your own
> > stooopidity, I strongly urge you to read the book "UFO's, JFK, and
> > Elvis" by Richard Belzer and see just where you stand on the
> > evolootionary scale.
> > This is the same Richard Belzer the comedian?
> > And you want US to read what he says about ufos?
>
> Yes, as a matter of fact it is!  Very funny book! But obviously that
> will do you no good as you have never ventured beyond the pictures on
> the cover of any book. And you don't have to read the book. We KNOW
> where you stand on the evolootionary scale.
>
> > I think sucking so much cock has caused your brains
> > to implode.
>
> > No offense of course.
>
> The above "banter" being a salient example of what HVAC terms
> "scientific debate"!
> I rest my case.
> Moron-shill.

I agree. Debunkers have been so discredited, that they have turned
themselves into a bunch of degenerates who live a sewers and caves.
Of course I did predict this would happen when the UFO cover-up
officially ended, which it has.

The few remaining debunkers will soon be picked up by the garbage
disposal unit and cut into little pieces for fertilizer. At least
they can finally contribute something positive to society.

Sir Å

HVAC
2010-02-08 13:32:21 EST

"Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A." <science@zzz.com> wrote in message
news:5d3f07d8-46f9-476d-b3b1-fba4c70440a5@a17g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
The few remaining debunkers will soon be picked up by the garbage
disposal unit and cut into little pieces for fertilizer. At least
they can finally contribute something positive to society.

Sir \ufffd
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Your drug-addled request is denied.




--
Harlow Victor Allen Campbell
Moderator
alt.alien.research alt.alien.visitors sci.skeptic alt.conspiracy



Benj
2010-02-08 15:30:22 EST
On Feb 8, 8:23 am, "HVAC" <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Benj" <bjac...@iwaynet.net> wrote in message

> The above "banter" being a salient example of what HVAC terms
> "scientific debate"!
> I rest my case.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Hey!  I said "no offense".
>
> That means that everything I said was done
> in a cheerful and delightful way and in no way
> was it malicious, you cum guzzling sperm burper.

Hey asshole surfer, did I say I was offended?
I just pointed out you were worthless!
Just the facts, ma'am.




Page: 1 2 3 4 5   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron