In defence of space aliens

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. river

    Messages:
    10,211
    In the video from my post # 907 ; at 25:06 of the interview ;

    Donald Keyhoe does not agree with this Venus , stuff .

    If you care to view this video interview with Mike Wallace and Major Donald Keyhoe .
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,835
    For the sake of completeness (and in case Magical Realist has any lingering doubts), here's some more information on the Martigues UFO.

    The following pages are in French and Spanish, but you can translate them (automatically if you're using Chrome):

    http://www.orandia.com/forum/index.php?mode=thread&id=107014#p107139

    Somebody actually emailed the Patrouille de France, which has a base in Salon de Provence, a little to the north of Martigues. They replied, confirming a squadron training mission on 2 July 2014, which was in preparation for a display. The "UFO" is confirmed to be a squadron of jets.

    The second site gives a complete explanation of what is seen in the video - basically a squadron of jet fighters flying towards the camera (mostly):

    http://www.freewebs.com/bibianabryson/ovnismartiguesanlisis.htm

    This has maps, along with some nice comparison photos of the jet formations and the "UFO". (In France, UFOs are OVNIs.)

    I wouldn't be surprised if Magical Realist claims that the "official story" is just a cover for "real" alien activity, or whatever - if not now, then at some future time when the idea occurs to him.

    What we have seen here is, again, Magical Realist seeing what he wanted to see, until the truth was pointed out to him. In this particular case, the evidence is so overwhelming that even he would have a hard time denying it, which is probably the only reason why he seemed to give up on this one.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,835
    Next dodgy case...

    Why? As far as I can tell it is based on the anecdotal evidence of just two people, with one of them only attesting to beaten-down grass and the other providing the rest of the improbable tale.

    We already know from crop circles that farmers are able to squash down some grass if they want to.

    So, what else is there? Anything?

    All of the video in the video is somebody's imagination of what it might have looked like if the farmer's story happened like he said it did. There's zero value in the video evidence.

    It's typically UFO fodder: a doubtful story told by a witness that we have no reason to trust.

    As for the interview, I have no intention of watching half an hour of the guy retelling the story, especially since I bet Magical Realist hasn't even bothered to watch it through.

    This "encounter" is the usual yawn fest we get from Magical Realist's youtube surfing. If he can produce anything that would tend to lend credence to the story, I'll wait for that before putting in any more effort. After all, I had debunked the last UFO story he posted within about 5 minutes of seeing it, with just some simple web searching that he should have done already if he had been interested in any kind of due diligence on this nonsense. There's no reason to suppose his latest bauble is any better than any of the previous ones.

    The description no doubt matches the farmer's own preconceptions of what flying saucers are supposed to look like. Funny, that.

    Or rather, only crazy in the same way that UFO nuts are all crazy. In other respects, he probably gets by as a normal human being in his everyday life, which wouldn't be unusual for people seeking fame or community in fantastic stories.

    How long after the incident was the interview done? Years later? If so, he's had a long time to think about his story.

    Not so far. Got any credible evidence?

    Are there objects that haunt our skies, which are truly "paranormal" or "out of this world"? If not, what psychology leads so many people to want to believe that aliens are visiting Earth?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Michael 345 Next mythical choc bunnies for mystic who died Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,508

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    It happened twice?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,108
    I debunked that ufo pages ago. So don't start bitching about my gullibility again.
     
  9. Michael 345 Next mythical choc bunnies for mystic who died Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,508
    Would it not be better to debunk your own gullibility BEFORE posting junk?

    That way you can post the junk with text along the lines "Look at the stupid stuff some people put on the net" and laugh with us at the nut cases

    Come over to the light side you will one day

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Yoda speakith the truth

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,108
    No..I'll just debunk it as I study up more on it at my own pace. I'm in no hurry to meet anybody's schedule here. Besides, posting the cases first gives posters here a chance at exercising their own debunking skills, which goin by this thread could sure use alot of improvement.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2018
  11. Michael 345 Next mythical choc bunnies for mystic who died Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,508
    Hint

    No debunking skill required when debunking junk

    You however might brush up on your rebuttal skills

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,267
    Try not being so gullible then.
     
  13. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,132
    You got caught out and are trying to save face. THAT isn't extraordinary.
     
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,835
    No you didn't.

    You said (here) you saw some comments on youtube (which is about as far as your personal "research" ever goes) which suggested the fighter jet explanation, but you said you doubted that explanation. No surprises there! You always doubt that any UFO can be explained by mundane means.

    Then michael and sweetpea posted more evidence which tended to confirm the jet explanation. After that, you didn't credit them, but instead arrogantly claimed that you had debunked your own UFO nonsense.

    As others have pointed out, you should have switched your brain on and checked around a little before posting with wide-eyed credulity about the latest shoddy UFO anecdote you came across on youtube. But that's not how you roll, is it?

    At the very least, alarm bells should have gone off in your head if you considered why nobody in the city seemed particularly bothered by your "UFO", and that nobody thought it interesting enough to put it in the local news. An even bigger red flag is right there in the video you posted. There's a helicopter flying right near the "UFO", apparently completely uninterested in it. The helicopter just keeps on maintaining the same course. Why? Because the pilot obviously knew exactly what he was looking at - a fighter jet squadron in training.

    I think you're the one bitching about being caught with your pants down again. This is becoming a real habit with you.
     
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,835
    How ironic. You've spent most of the thread bitching about how people try to debunk your favorite UFOs, but now you're apparently all in favour of it.

    I can't wait to see you debunk your latest video - just to show us how you exercise your skills and all, you know?
     
  16. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,108
    LOL! Yes I did liar. That was the debunk:

    "I'm reading some Youtube comments in french that are claiming these ufos are the Patrouille de France Alphajets flying in formation. Could be. I doubt though they are doing this unannounced at night over a major city. I guess french people would know about this."

    Then I posted the email from the Patrouille de France themselves saying that was them flying that night in celebration of opening a new school. It's all right there bud. I debunked it. Read em and weep.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2018
    birch likes this.
  17. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,108
    You haven't debunked anything yet in this thread. All you do is bitch and complain about the cases I post, as if that is some sort of debunkery. It isn't. Anybody can whine about a case and ask why this or that didn't happen and where is the documentation. But that proves nothing. All the cases stand except the one I had to debunk for you.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2018
  18. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,108
    What else do you need? You have the eyewitness account, the photos of the swirls in the field, and an actual interview with the witness.

    No it isn't. It is a rendition of what the eyewitness actually reported seeing, much like a crime sketch. It shows what happened and provides clarity on details that we might otherwise miss.

    You should listen to the interview. It goes into great detail about what the farmer experienced and what happened afterwards. But yeah, go ahead and ignore it while claiming to be objectively looking into. We expect nothing more from a biased debunker.

    Oh so because this account is from a History Channel program and on Youtube it means it is fake? And no..you didn't debunk shit. You saw the explanation I gave in my post and pursued it from there. You get credit for nothing here.

    Another lie. If you had watched the interview you would have learned that he didn't even know what a ufo was until his father told him about them being seen all over Canada and the U.S.

    So this farmer kid was actually hoaxing all this just to become famous and make money off it? I haven't heard about this. Perhaps you have evidence for this outlandish claim?

    Who cares? Nobody forgets an encounter like that no matter how long it's been. It tends to stick with you.

    This eyewitness didn't even know about ufos until he had seen one. So your ad hoc psychobabble won't work here.
     
  19. Michael 345 Next mythical choc bunnies for mystic who died Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,508
    I would not call requesting reasonably explanations for incredible claims a whine

    I would whine about ignoring reasonable request a whine which I am doing now. Still waiting on the helicopter / green light event to be reasonably explained

    Proves interest. If you are meaning it does not debunk your claims you are correct as in effect we are asking you to debunk your own claim. But you won't, it seems, do that

    Please apply your debunking skills to past cases

    For future case's debunk before posting

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,835
    Sure I did. Don't you remember how you ran away from the discussion of lens flare? It wasn't that long ago.

    No. I just ask the obvious questions that you ought to, but do not, ask yourself before posting these supposed videos of UFOs, ghosts and the like. It annoys you when what I post threatens to burst your Cozy Bubble of Wide-Eyed Belief. Your posts certainly come across like you're angry at me. Why is that?

    Right. And anybody can crow about how "compelling" they imagine a case is, but that also proves nothing. Agreed?
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2018
  21. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,835
    Well, here are a few suggestions:
    • independent witnesses who actually saw the "saucers".
    • scientific reports of any trace evidence left by the "saucers".
    • photographic or video taken of the actual "saucers" at the time.
    • analysis or other confirmation that any photographic or video is authentic and un-tampered with.
    • background information about the person making the sighting, such as: any previous history of reporting "weird" phenomena, or confirmed interest in such; any relevant discussions he had with other people at the time (i.e. before and soon after the supposed sighting); independent evidence to confirm that the farmer is generally trustworthy; independent evidence to rule out ulterior motives for making up the story, such as financial benefit or 15 minutes of fame.
    • Reports by on-the-spot independent investigators who looked into the details of the "sighting", and the surrounding circumstances, at the time.
    • Details of any similar "sightings" by other people that occurred around the same time.
    • General background of attitudes to UFOs and the like in the particular location at that particular time. For example, was there a "UFO flap" in progress? Were UFOs a regular topic of discussion?
    • A psychological assessment of the witness by professional.
    Some, or all, of those things would be great to have. How many of them have you got? I'm guessing: none.

    In other words, the usual sort of weak and unconvincing evidence. The "swirls", or course, could be just about anything, so the photos are next to useless. That really just leaves the "witness" and the anecdote.

    A "rendition", eh? Hehe.

    So, like totally not a made-up fantasy depicted by some artists who were imagining what the guy might have seen, if he is to be believed. Yeah, sure. It's almost as good as actual footage, this artists' reconstruction of yours. LOL.

    How interesting you say that. I'm not at all surprised.

    What you are telling me is that you're ready to rely on details that some artist has added in from his imagination, which seem to support your idea that this was aliens. You ought to realise that the artists depicting what might have happened aren't actually creating any additional evidence we can rely on to support the original story. But clearly you don't distinguish. Probably you think that if you see a crime-scene reconstruction on America's most wanted, or whatever, you assume what you're looking at actually occurred as depicted, in all the details. Hint: it didn't, and you really ought to know better. The relevant word is "gullible".

    I'm sure he tells a good story, especially if he has had years or decades to work on it. There's no need for me to watch the interview unless you've got some other supporting evidence which makes the story more likely to be credible.

    You need to appreciate that all "reconstructions" you see on the History Channel or youtube are fake. When the History Channel shows the Pilgrims arriving in their ship at Plymouth, there are no extra details there that you can use as historical facts to learn more about that part o history. What you're watching is a fantasy of how things might have looked, if the story that has been told is true. And even if the reconstruction does get some of the historical detail right, it's still useless as a historical record of what happened back then. It might be useful as a record of what the makers of the doco now think about the events, but that's about it.

    And we know this how? Because he said so? And we know he isn't a liar because what? Because he said so? Because his making it all up doesn't fit your preferred fantasy world?

    Maybe. Who knows? Don't pretend you know anything about the guy. All you know of him is what you've seen in your videos.

    What's outlandish about somebody wanting money and/or fame?

    I've tried (and failed) to educate you about memory in the past. Human memory is not a video. It is fallible and malleable. Over time, memories can get embellished, indeed even completely changed in their details. People often "remember" stuff that never actually happened. They confuse one event for another. They insert details (indeed whole episodes) that never happened. They sometimes mistake dreams for actual events.

    Don't bother telling me that I'm wrong and none of this ever happens. Clueless as you are, and desperate as you are to believe any kooky story, I'm quite aware you're willing to deny scientific truths. You're a lost cause.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2018
  22. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,108
    Actually I remember you plastering this thread with sarcastic trollish photos of random things, then goin into a rambling therapy session with Birch about a ouija board, and then disappearing from the forum for several days, after which you suddenly appeared again belligerently making demands of me and insulting me as a gullible fool. That's what I remember.

    LOL! Don't flatter yourself that you're my shining example in any sense here. You're nothing but a crotchety close-minded denialist with a fanatical debunking agenda that resorts to flaming and trolling when he has nothing more to argue. And that's nothing like what I wanna be like.

    You haven't debunked a single case here. Even your pet lens flare theory missed the mark after I showed how distant carlights aren't enough to create lens flares. That means the cases I'm posting must be pretty damn compelling. And indeed all of them stand on their own merits, except for the one I had to debunk for you.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2018
  23. Michael 345 Next mythical choc bunnies for mystic who died Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,508
    Did he report heating the spooky music?

    Oh no he said didn't hear anything

    So the spooky music added for ambience / drama

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page