An amateur Astronomers view on UFOs

Agentscott · Joined: 08 Feb 2011 Posts: 1042 Location: Essex

I'm glad you like it DB.
You know about my sightings, I put a detailed discription up of the light sequence including pictures and went on to discribe the rectangle shaped glowin craft that droped out of my sight I could see prominant black ouline in 3 sections.

I beleive if you start doubting your own eyes when you see something, then thats when you will really be losing it.
If you see something and question if you've seen it then thats odd to say the least.
Don't deny, get out there, see and accept. Go and look at a plane in the sky, we can tell they are up there by looking, same as we can with UFO's and my sighting were at a close proximity.

I don't doubt cactus will be having a re-think of his openess now, thats expected but very sad.
I do hope that he does go on to see something and then realise, Tech or ET.

D B Sweeney · Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 9:59 pm Post subject:

So basically you're saying that you never doubt what you see or remember?. I think you should read these:

http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/eyewitnessmemory.html

http://www.skepdic.com/retfalse.html

In order to fully understand the underlying reasons why the vast majority of UFO sightings are highly subjective a study of the constructive nature of human perception is necessary.

The fact that many UFO witnesses are trained pilots, radar operators, or other professionals, and that they are not crazy, drunk, or on drugs leads UFO proponents to conclude that they must have seen just what they say they saw. This conclusion is, in fact, fundamentally wrong. The great failure of the pro-UFO movement has been the unwillingness to accept the fact that human perception and memory are not only unreliable under a variety of conditions (and these conditions are exactly those under which most UFOs are reported) but that perception and memory are also constructive. That is, perception is a function not only of actual sensory stimulus that is picked up by the eye or the ear but also a function of what we know and believe about the world, even if that knowledge and belief are wrong. The constructive nature of perception is greatest when the actual sensory input is weak, unclear, or ambiguous - just the type of sensory input present in most UFO sightings. Memory, too, is constructive. Experiments (...) show clearly that what we remember about an incident can actually be changed after the fact. When this happens, the witness truthfully testifies to remembering something that never happened.
Terence Hines
Source: http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1231.htm

DB

thecactus · Joined: 07 Mar 2011 Posts: 3197 Location: Northern Ireland

Yes agentscott will believe anything without question - btw agentscott - db is a hybrid grey/human alien woman - and I am a 99 year old transforming reptilian.

DB - all that doesn't account for the first witness in the diclosure projects testimony:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vyVe-6YdUk&feature=channel_video_title

D B Sweeney · Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:27 am Post subject:

thecactus · Joined: 07 Mar 2011 Posts: 3197 Location: Northern Ireland

No the first witness - John Callahan - FAA Head of Accidents and Investigations (15 minutes in)

D B Sweeney · Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:42 am Post subject:

thecactus · Joined: 07 Mar 2011 Posts: 3197 Location: Northern Ireland

It won't be solid proof for you (obviously Laughing

) but these points don't apply to him:

The fact that many UFO witnesses are trained pilots, radar operators, or other professionals, and that they are not crazy, drunk, or on drugs leads UFO proponents to conclude that they must have seen just what they say they saw. This conclusion is, in fact, fundamentally wrong. The great failure of the pro-UFO movement has been the unwillingness to accept the fact that human perception and memory are not only unreliable under a variety of conditions (and these conditions are exactly those under which most UFOs are reported) but that perception and memory are also constructive. That is, perception is a function not only of actual sensory stimulus that is picked up by the eye or the ear but also a function of what we know and believe about the world, even if that knowledge and belief are wrong. The constructive nature of perception is greatest when the actual sensory input is weak, unclear, or ambiguous - just the type of sensory input present in most UFO sightings. Memory, too, is constructive. Experiments (...) show clearly that what we remember about an incident can actually be changed after the fact. When this happens, the witness truthfully testifies to remembering something that never happened.

Wink

thecactus · Joined: 07 Mar 2011 Posts: 3197 Location: Northern Ireland

As for steven greer - one thing I am sure about is his intelligence - the man is highly intelligent and a master speaker. Some say he is now saying what people want to hear about Illuminati etc... also others claim he is just using this subject to make money. All I know is that he was an emergency room doctor and he quit that to do this.

The above points could all be true, apart from the government doing all the abductions, but it is a stretch to believe everything he says.

D B Sweeney · Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:57 am Post subject:

but it is a stretch to believe everything he says.

Quite right Cactus. Anyone who subscribes to the Reptilian agenda destroys or at least contaminates their credibility IMO.

DB

thecactus · Joined: 07 Mar 2011 Posts: 3197 Location: Northern Ireland

Yeah thats what a lot of them are saying on the UFO forum too.

I'm not sure about him Confused

D B Sweeney · Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:08 pm Post subject:

thecactus · Joined: 07 Mar 2011 Posts: 3197 Location: Northern Ireland

So what did you think of John Callahan?

D B Sweeney · Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:24 pm Post subject:

thecactus · Joined: 07 Mar 2011 Posts: 3197 Location: Northern Ireland

D B Sweeney · Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:31 pm Post subject:

I've not got around to watching that yet.

DB