UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

Did you not go to the link , read the article , James ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

James can't read articles on his own any more. He has to threaten me alone with infractions to make me explain them to him, which I will never do. I don't kiss ass or comply with his made up rules. The articles I choose always explain themselves.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I find it compelling that mention is made of - carrying a six-pack of beers –“which we didn’t consume"

DOH - self evident - you were carrying them

More strange details on previous released UFO details
OR
new strange details on UFO sightings not previously released

I, Michael345, solemnly, do hereby state I will not mock the efforts of those who wish to post compelling evidence on the existence of UFOs (dead easy because at least some UFOs exist - but some UFOs are misnamed)
Further I will not nit pick over words which have no nits worthy of not picking over

I will examine the evidence such as it is presented and give my assessment as to its compellability

Let all with compelling evidence step forward

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You can start with the 15 odd compelling accounts of ufos I have posted and posted about in this thread already.

 

There is no effort at all except a , click .

I know I've been at the link .

 

James , James , James .... how Mature of you .

What is is the problem ?

 

I'm not telling you how to post, I'm describing how you post.

 

For when you return

I'm sure i have seen some of them

I surely have seen the green helicopter one, and still waiting on a response

Please

• pick a NEW example out of many many thousands available
• explain - in your own words - why this one is compelling
• a compelling what?
• and not mudane

I have always said UFOs exist, that is those items spotted IN THE SKY for which no explanation is available

So where is the debate? unless claims are made (or a explanation given) as to what they are

I should add EVIDENCE would be required to back up explanations

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I believe that the problem is that MR is just posting links with no comment. That was pretty clearly stated.

 

This be one them there dis cussing for rums. I all for rum.

 

No...I've posted enough evidence in this thread to support the existence of ufos. If you want to refute my claim that ufos are real, you'll have to provide your own evidence or arguments why they don't exist. I won't hold my breath though..

 

James R notified me that I was banned for three days for "inappropriate language," Here's the post he is referring to:

"James can't read articles on his own any more. He has to threaten me alone with infractions to make me explain them to him, which I will never do. I don't kiss ass or comply with his made up rules. The articles I choose always explain themselves."

I guess saying "kiss ass" now is a bannable offense. lol! At this point it's obvious James is just making up excuses to keep me from posting compelling evidence. I guess I should take it as flattery that I'm making my case very well here. Strange that the mere existence of ufos should cause such emotional overreactions in supposedly intelligent people. They're just flying saucers. Geeze! What's the big deal?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I don't think anyone doubts the existence of UFOs

I don't. You are hardly the only person giving out information about UFOs

Problem - no evidence exists to identify UFOs as anything else but UFOs

Speculation by the bucket loads, along with crapola by the truck load as to some exotic explanation

Not even a grain sized piece of evidence

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Soooo they are NOT UFOs????

When did this breakthrough occur?

Are they busy with the white out on the blue book? Hundreds of workers whiting out UFO - typing in flying saucers

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Except I didn't copy and paste an article this time. I merely provided a link. Are we not supposed to post links too now?

 

You're the problem.

James is forcing me to post thoughts about an article or video that I don't have for that article or video. Questions and suspicions only he has like the credentials of the author and his sources and other details that are of only his concern. I'm not going to do that. I have no problem with the articles and videos I post here and refuse to play skeptic when clearly I'm not skeptical about the article. If that accrues me more infractions so be it. I'm the pro here for this topic, not the con. I'm not about to post some pretentious analysis of my articles just to please a moderator too lazy to do his own research and to satisfy his own questions about it.