Signals from ET?

[John Kierein]

This was sent to me by email from Filipenko and this web site given:

http://www.belarus.net/discovery/filipenko/fil2.htm

[nyceddie]

This was sent to me by email from Filipenko and this web site given:

http://www.belarus.net/discovery/filipenko/fil2.htm

While I accept the reality of UFOs, I do not accept any signals from ETs (IF they exist) reaching us or aimed at us. This is not a simple, one answer, topic. [-X

[Ut]

You accept the reality of UFOs, but remain uncertain about ET?...

[nyceddie]

You accept the reality of UFOs, but remain uncertain about ET?...

el: "That is correct. You see, all of the "evidence" for the reality of UFOs has been accumulated here on Earth, not in outer space with the exception of the Moon. If we had videos of UFOs arriving on Earth or on the Moon from outer space or definitely from a planet or body, then we could say with certainty ET. We are constantly alarmed by astronomers of near flybys of space roamers, although they're always at ridiculously far distance but the point is they can be seen and tracked. At no time have I become aware of the same with a craft, with the exception, again, of the so-called UFOs seen on the solar disk using special equipment I can't name right now. So, UFOs are being seen all over the planet and recorded by people using consumer and professional equipment. But I have yet to see the same thing dealing with ETs. The stuff that's been shown allegedly of aliens has always turned out to be of extremely poor quality or an out and out hoax. And some of the people shown associated with aliens can seem to be pretty emotional but when it comes time for the alien to make its appearance, it's more of a joke. And, remember, if there were Martians and they found our spacecraft on their planet'ts surface they wouldn't find a pilot although they would consider that there was someone operating the craft even from a distance but such a concept couldn't be proved without the actual occupants. We can't prove ET although we have "craft" that must be operated by someone or something somewhere. We'll just have to wait. I cannot believe until I have evidence. We can talk about it all we want but that's all we can do."

[snowcelt]

You accept the reality of UFOs, but remain uncertain about ET?...

el: "That is correct. You see, all of the "evidence" for the reality of UFOs has been accumulated here on Earth, not in outer space with the exception of the Moon. If we had videos of UFOs arriving on Earth or on the Moon from outer space or definitely from a planet or body, then we could say with certainty ET. We are constantly alarmed by astronomers of near flybys of space roamers, although they're always at ridiculously far distance but the point is they can be seen and tracked. At no time have I become aware of the same with a craft, with the exception, again, of the so-called UFOs seen on the solar disk using special equipment I can't name right now. So, UFOs are being seen all over the planet and recorded by people using consumer and professional equipment. But I have yet to see the same thing dealing with ETs. The stuff that's been shown allegedly of aliens has always turned out to be of extremely poor quality or an out and out hoax. And some of the people shown associated with aliens can seem to be pretty emotional but when it comes time for the alien to make its appearance, it's more of a joke. And, remember, if there were Martians and they found our spacecraft on their planet'ts surface they wouldn't find a pilot although they would consider that there was someone operating the craft even from a distance but such a concept couldn't be proved without the actual occupants. We can't prove ET although we have "craft" that must be operated by someone or something somewhere. We'll just have to wait. I cannot believe until I have evidence. We can talk about it all we want but that's all we can do."

I do not want to seem like I am persecuting you nyceddie, but I seem to be compelled to. Your above paragraph is so ambiguous that I find it hard to find a place to start.

Why would you delineate between ET and UFO? You make a stab at this, but your argument is so convoluted that I can not make heads or tails of it.

Why can you not name this special equipment?

If there are UFOs, why should there not be ETs? If there are Martians, and they find Opportunity (one of the remotes we are using on Mars presently) in their back yard. Why would the Martian think anything else but that there are others about then themselves? Let us say that all the Martians have seen is the orbiters we have sent, which are circling Mars, does a Martian conclude that this means there is no ET? I do not get your argument.

Yours, Rod.

[Candy]

We have proof of UFO's? :-k

We have proof of UFO's? :-k

That's what I'm thinking, Candy...I've not seen any, have you?? :-? :-? :-?

[Candy]

We have proof of UFO's? :-k

That's what I'm thinking, Candy...I've not seen any, have you?? :-? :-? :-? Nope. :D

[soupdragon2]

EU proponents have long postulated that the Aurora Borealis phenomenon is probably indicative of electrical interactions between planets, aka Plasma Cosmology. In this respect they may have an extra-terrestial origin.

I don't know about UFOs et al.

[Bozola]

Do a search on Google for "decoding of 'The Stormer Effect'". That bloody thing is rampant.

I decoded that message by substituting the number for the ordinal roman letter. If you care to notice the message is in archaic Finnish. The translation is as follows:

Finnish: oidhmhljiehgf lnnlh leh lhennolgeemhhhmijgnfie i
English: Bases Your All Belong(to) us

[russ_watters]

We have proof of UFO's? :-k

That's what I'm thinking, Candy...I've not seen any, have you?? :-? :-? :-? Careful, guys - "UFO" stands for "Unidentified Flying Object" and doesn't necessarily imply ET. The pro-flying saucer crowd likes to play word games, saying they aren't necessarily advocating the existence of flying saucers when they talk about UFOs, when really, they are.

But obviously, people sometimes see things in the sky that they can't identify: UFOs.

We have proof of UFO's? :-k

That's what I'm thinking, Candy...I've not seen any, have you?? :-? :-? :-? Careful, guys - "UFO" stands for "Unidentified Flying Object" and doesn't necessarily imply ET. The pro-flying saucer crowd likes to play word games, saying they aren't necessarily advocating the existence of flying saucers when they talk about UFOs, when really, they are.

But obviously, people sometimes see things in the sky that they can't identify: UFOs.

Point taken. I'm suitably chastized!! :^o :^o :^o

[Van Rijn]

Oh, well. The whole thing has gotten completely out of hand. In common use, UFO usually means "flying saucer" these days. A few years ago a local radio station was running a poll. The question was: "Do you believe in UFOs?" - just the one question.

I was annoyed - I would think the answer would be about 100% for "yes." Obviously there are UFOs. Clearly, they meant "flying saucer" and they stated it as a question of belief, instead of a question of evidence. I probably would have asked a multiple choice question, perhaps something like:

Do you think some UFOs are alien spacecraft?

(A) yes (b) likely (c) unlikely (d) no

Anyway, when I mentioned the silly question to a few friends, I just got a blank look. *sigh*

[Candy]

Do you think some UFOs are alien spacecraft?

(A) yes (b) likely (c) unlikely (d) no

Anyway, when I mentioned the silly question to a few friends, I just got a blank look. *sigh*
I will select D.

Was the blank look something like this? >>> :o

[mickal555]

like this :-s

Do you think some UFOs are alien spacecraft?

(A) yes (b) likely (c) unlikely (d) no

Anyway, when I mentioned the silly question to a few friends, I just got a blank look. *sigh*

I'd go for e: Are faeries pink or blue? 8-[ 8-[ 8-[ 8-[

[krbrown]

Is it possible that, thousands of years ago aliens came, took off a load of humans who became part of their society and are now in their millions somewhere else in the Universe?
If so then would it not make sense to send some of these people back to Earth in the ET UFOs to study this planet, to walk amongst the population?
They've probably even got their own website. :o :o 8-[

[01101001]

They've probably even got their own website. :o :o 8-[
Maybe we^H^Hthey post here!

[Ari Jokimaki]

I decoded that message by substituting the number for the ordinal roman letter. If you care to notice the message is in archaic Finnish. The translation is as follows:

Finnish: oidhmhljiehgf lnnlh leh lhennolgeemhhhmijgnfie i
English: Bases Your All Belong(to) us

That must be really archaic Finnish, because there's not even a slightest trace of modern Finnish. :wink:

[R.A.F.]

As far as the UFO vs. Flying Saucer
question...

A long time ago, the flying saucer
"community" co-opted the term "UFO" to describe alien space visitors in an attempt to appear more reasonable. I say that if someone is talking about alien visitors, they are not talking about UFO's, because for one thing...they have identified them...they are talking about flying saucers.

[Bozola]

I decoded that message by substituting the number for the ordinal roman letter. If you care to notice the message is in archaic Finnish. The translation is as follows:

Finnish: oidhmhljiehgf lnnlh leh lhennolgeemhhhmijgnfie i
English: Bases Your All Belong(to) us

That must be really archaic Finnish, because there's not even a slightest trace of modern Finnish. :wink:

Undoubtably due to relativistic time dialation of the signal as it reflected off the Tunguska UFO's quantum blackhole as it sat on the eyebrows of Cydonian Martian Face long after it exploded on Earth before it traveled back in time to exchange the real Edward Teller infant with an alien imposter so thathumans will kill themselves off with hydrogen bombs.

[Chip]

...I decoded that message by substituting the number for the ordinal roman letter. If you care to notice the message is in archaic Finnish...

Not sure, but isn't there are part in there about the aliens coming to Earth to obtain "Kalekukko" (a Finnish fish pie) which is worth billions on their home world? :wink:

[Bozola]

...I decoded that message by substituting the number for the ordinal roman letter. If you care to notice the message is in archaic Finnish...

Not sure, but isn't there are part in there about the aliens coming to Earth to obtain "Kalekukko" (a Finnish fish pie) which is worth billions on their home world? :wink:

Ummm...that's not anything like surströmming (Swedish sour herring)? If it is...oh those poor, poor aliens...

[SSJPabs]

Do a search on Google for "decoding of 'The Stormer Effect'". That bloody thing is rampant.

I decoded that message by substituting the number for the ordinal roman letter. If you care to notice the message is in archaic Finnish. The translation is as follows:

Finnish: oidhmhljiehgf lnnlh leh lhennolgeemhhhmijgnfie i
English: Bases Your All Belong(to) usOh my God! We're being invaded by CATS!!!!!

[Argos]

From the link on the OP:

The author of this work offers the following decoding: let the numbers in the series be replaced for chemical symbols of elements with corresponding nuclear charges:

Why should one assume the "numbers" stand for chemical elements?

[N C More]

Why should one assume the "numbers" stand for chemical elements?

I suspect it's just a wild guess...So, if one does plug in chemical elements in lieu of numbers what does it form? Not that this would prove anything, I'm just curious! :D

[trob]

I decoded that message by substituting the number for the ordinal roman letter. If you care to notice the message is in archaic Finnish. The translation is as follows:

Finnish: oidhmhljiehgf lnnlh leh lhennolgeemhhhmijgnfie i
English: Bases Your All Belong(to) us

That must be really archaic Finnish, because there's not even a slightest trace of modern Finnish. :wink:

It can't be Finnish. Ive heard that aliens hate reindeer - maybe its Welsh? However, I see no triple L's there :wink:

trob

[gzhpcu]

As I have stated elsewhere the best evidence for extraterrestial intelligence is that they have not tried to contact us... :)

[rockmysoul67]

( Okay, let's see how my english is ... ;) )

As pointed out already, the "Do you believe in UFOs?" is a wrong question, because UFO means Unidentified Flying Object. (Yes, there are, there is no doubt.)

But "Do you believe in flying saucers?" is also the wrong question, because a flying saucer is an alien space craft in the shape (of the underside) of a saucer. A lot of alien space crafts have been described with different forms. (No, they don't have really have to be a proof for intellligence from outer space, but the witness or his listeners may believe it.)

Asking "Do you believe in ET?" is the right way to pop the question.
All people know about the movie ET and if someone asks if you believe in him, it means this: "Do you believe in extraterrestrial space crafts visiting or flying by the earth, in the past or in present day?". But that correct question is so boring, that you ask about ET. ;)

[Nicolas]

Finnish: oidhmhljiehgf lnnlh leh lhennolgeemhhhmijgnfie i
English: Bases Your All Belong(to) us

This is so wrong!!!

the correct translation is:

Bases You're All Belong(to) us

:wink: :D (nono, not referring to some banned poster :))

[Fram]

Are you now disputing the correct translation of something that is, originally, aa wrong translation #-o ? :lol:

[Bozola]

Finnish: oidhmhljiehgf lnnlh leh lhennolgeemhhhmijgnfie i
English: Bases Your All Belong(to) us

This is so wrong!!!

the correct translation is:

Bases You're All Belong(to) us

:wink: :D (nono, not referring to some banned poster :))

"You're" is a contraction of (pronoun) You and the second person singular indicative of "be". It is used with the infinitive of a verb to denote future action or intention.

"lnnlh" definitely translates into the possesive adjective form of "you".

[Nicolas]

What I learned was that when it was a woo-woo claim, you should always use "you're" no matter which context. (did I read too much Computertech?) :D :D :D