Michio on the 5%

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You're being a bit over the top there with the stereotypical nature... of what would be a traditional crackpot vs a skeptic. I have never said to you, it HAS TO BE. I have said ''there is tantalizing evidence which shouldn't be ignored.''

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No you see, this still has wings; it is of traditional convention. I mean a diamond, diamond. Like the diamond UFO of the Pitlochry event.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I agree. You should not ignore any evidence, even if it does not fit your belief that there are extraterrestrials. For example, you should not reject the possibility that a 1950's radar that reports a 7000mph object is likely malfunctioning - even if you desperately want it to be true.

 

It looks like a diamond. You claim it has wings - but diamonds can have wings. From the front it looks like a diamond. From the front a B-2 looks like a diamond.

 

yet we have visual confirmation of incredible speeds, and radar confirmation. I don't see how it is possible it is a malfunction when you have visual confirmation as well.

Clutching to straws much?

 

When someone says diamond, why would you recite that picture? There are groves all over the place, doesn't even resemble a diamond to me.

Look at the diamond on a pack of cards, that's a diamond. If a diamond has wings, then it's shape is not a diamond, is it?

 

Because it's an airplane that looks like a diamond.

Do you mean grooves? You can't see the grooves from far away. At the Miramar airshow a while back a B-2 did a flyby. All you saw was a wedge-shaped line in the sky.

?? You do realize we are talking about what people see from the ground, right? People see profiles, not 3D models, from the ground. If the PROFILE is that of a diamond that's what people will see.

 

Then it isn't a diamond, clearly.

 

That is like me sticking arms on a cube and still calling it a cube. You do have an idea why shapes have specific names right?

 

Nonsense. I doubt there is anyone on the planet and there is certainly no one here who doesn't agree that many unexplained things are in fact unexplained.

 

This is wrong. Please see my thread on standards of evidence for discussion.

 

If you look at it from far enough away, you won't see the arms, you'll just see the cube.

 

Yes I did see it. As I explained,

''To have proof you need evidence. If you have enough evidence then you have proof.''


We have plenty evidence, we don't have the smoking gun proof.

 

yep, that's me. like i said we have data that can't be explained.

 

The evidence has never been so strong as to be likely the ET phenomenon.

If there is a real cover-up (something which many of us don't even question because of the colorful and obvious military history of them doing so) then the truth cannot be hidden forever. Some of us know... we know there is something not quite right in our skies. Some of us have seen it.

 

There is a real cover up by the military and by CIA , NSA etc. From the 1940s

I think it was Rossevelt , who put into law that the government does not have to reveal any information that they consider a National security threat

 

I know, the evidence is overwhelming that there is a cover up. I was just trying to keep my approach objective... but I know the evidence is big in body.

 

Did you know, Kennedy made a secret referral to get as much of the secret information of UFO's made public, only 10 days before his assassination? And we all know that was a cover up.

 

Some might say, the secret is to kill for

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...demanded-UFO-files-10-days-assassination.html

Confirms Wilberts Smith's memo claiming that the UFO subject was classed higher than the H-bomb.