"reputable" science and the feds have united, or so it seems, in a unique combination of 2 forces which historically have polar-opposite views towards the truth.. there is science, which ostensibly searches for the truth and is honor-bound to present it whenever and wherever the truth is found; and there is the govt., one of whose goals appears to be to cover-up or re-write the truth as it sees fit and for whatever period of time suits it..

o.k., and what is their unique common view? that UFOs are "swamp gas".. is this a coincidence? do opposites really attract? think about it.. science has been here since--forever.. science has searched for the truth, verified it, reproduced results to confirm it and published the results for peer review.. and there is uncle fed, a bad liar if ever there was one.. its strange in that science ought not to have any govt. strings attached for any purpose, except when science is needed to develop a weapon.. but now, we have an apparent union between the two to discredit any discussion of UFOs.. is this weird or what? which benefits from this partnership? is it symbiotic or parasitic? has there been a "quid pro quo" exchange? the question is so great, i cant get a handle on it, except to repeat the saying, "if it looks bad, it is bad".. "reputable" science and the feds have expressed the same view about UFOs since the beginning.. i dont know what that means, if anything.. i just believe this is not a coincidence, that there is something more going on than a mere convergence of views that happen to involve UFOs..

__________________
"Everyone has the right to be heard; noone has the right to be taken seriously."

Is it your contention that everything that a government authority says must be false? So that any time a scientist and a government authority agree, the scientist must be lying?

The common viewpoint is that evidence doesn't support that UFOs are alien spacecraft. I see nothing unique in this. There are many technical subjects with a common accepted position based on the evidence (or in this case, lack of supporting evidence for an argument).

We do? What is your evidence? And, by the way, who are "the two"? You've referred to "Uncle Fed," so I'm guessing you are referring to some authority in the U.S. government (as opposed to governments in general). Is this true? Is there any specific authority in the government you are referring to? After all, even the U.S. Federal government is far from monolithic. And who is the other of these two? Particular scientists? Particular types of scientists? Scientists and engineers? Something else?

I don't think it is coincidence either. I think that the evidence doesn't support alien spaceships, just as it doesn't support alien cities on the moon, ESP, dowsing rods, and so forth. Hence the "convergence of views" on subjects that lack evidence.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

What he said.

I am awfully tired of the "the government always lies!" method of argument. No, in fact, it doesn't always lie, and to believe so is either to be obtuse or clinically paranoid. The government in fact tells the truth more often than not, even if you do believe in all sorts of wackaloon conspiracies. The census report is generally accurate, or as accurate as it can be, all things considered. The caloric content of food isn't a lie. I can go on, but the fact is, none of the things I could mention would be thought of as things The Government says--even though they are.

Once again, of course, "UFO" and "alien spacecraft" are not synonymous. Once you have labelled something an alien spacecraft, it's an identified flying object!

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

As a member/employee of "The Government", so am I. Stereotypical ad homs are no way to bolster an argument. In fact, I think the OP is starting with a credibility deficit.

The evil government always lies?

Funny, when perhaps the most evil arm of the government says "We're going to audit your tax returns.", it always turns out that's no lie.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

Did you know, there's a convergence of views that the Earth goes around the Sun? The world's governments, the media, the UN, and almost every scientist agree on it. Years ago, the Catholic Church would excommunicate and even kill those who expressed this view, but lately, they've changed their tune and hopped on the Heliocentrism bandwagon too! Who's next? Who will "they" get to? It could even be... YOU!

__________________
"If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night
Illuminati's Razor-The most complicatedly evil answer is usually the most correct answer. - Fazor
"Every book is a children's book if the kid can read." - Mitch Hedberg
"Distance doesn’t matter much in space, where if you just start a thing off with the right kind of shove, sooner or later it will get where you want it to go." -Frederik Pohl, Mining the Oort

Hardly lately... but I suspect you are being somewhat sarcastic.

CJSF

__________________
Two years ago moved from my town
I was looking up past the city lights
But the city lights got in my way

See the constellation ride across the sky
No cigar, no lady on his arm
Just a guy made of dots and lines

-from "See The Constellation"
by They Might Be Giants

I always find it amusing how conspiracy theorists/UFOlogists love to say the government is lying EXCEPT when it supports their case. For instance, in every document released by the US government to date, there is no mention of a Roswell alien spaceship crash. In fact, several documents point out that the USAF was very interested in recovering a crashed UFO but had been unable to do so. This was when the thought was that UFOs were actual craft of some kind. UFOlogists will state that these are lies being suggested by the document. HOWEVER, these same UFOlogists will quote other sections of the SAME document that suggest the USAF thought UFOs were some sort of craft! As a result, the government lies only when they say something the CT/UFOlogists do not want to hear/read. You have to love the logic involved.

BTW, in 1997 an independent panel of scientists were given a one-sided presentation by UFOlogists concerning their "best evidence" of UFOs being something extraordinary. The panel's conclusions were that none of the events described represented anything unknown to science! This was a panel funded by UFOlogists and spoon fed by UFOlogists. The government was not involved. Apparently, scientists can recognize nonsense without the need of the US government telling them what to think.

And to expound upon the thought; that when the government does lie it's always for some sinister, immoral purpose. Testing a new aircraft? Must be hiding alien technology (instead of just trying to keep the tech out of competing/enemy hands) for example.

__________________
I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.

What gave it away?

__________________
"If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night
Illuminati's Razor-The most complicatedly evil answer is usually the most correct answer. - Fazor
"Every book is a children's book if the kid can read." - Mitch Hedberg
"Distance doesn’t matter much in space, where if you just start a thing off with the right kind of shove, sooner or later it will get where you want it to go." -Frederik Pohl, Mining the Oort

Well, it helps that the government is a monolithic entity that never works at cross purposes with itself and never releases information it doesn't want to be public. Isn't that right Mr. Gonzales, Miss Lewenski, Lt Col. North, Mr. Libby...

__________________
Carl Matherly

Offical Battlestar Galactica Apologist

Named Time Magazine's 2006 "Person of the Year"

Of course, you are pointing out cases which we know about because of the way our government does work. It isn't perfect but there is a certain amount of checks/balances that does expose those that do wrong. Additionally, the press, always in the search for a great story, is very good at exposing these kinds of activities.

On the other hand, UFOlogy wants everyone to believe that this same government, who can't even keep a simple case of the president's sexual behavior quiet, is more than capable of muscling scientists into covering up the greatest event known to mankind - contact with an alien species/UFOs are actually alien spaceships visiting earth.

quote from astrophotographer:
Of course, you are pointing out cases which we know about because of the way our government does work. It isn't perfect but there is a certain amount of checks/balances that does expose those that do wrong. Additionally, the press, always in the search for a great story, is very good at exposing these kinds of activities. "

call me crazy, but you contradicted youself.. you said, these are the cases we know about because the govt. does work.. really? when did any part of our state or federal bureaucracies ever openly admit to wrongdoing BEFORE the press exposed it? then you say, the press is very good at exposing these activities".. yes, and thank god for them! so, who are you supporting, a mythical govt. that, of its own volition, admits to wrongdoing, or the press, which reports it? then, there are the denials, the lies to the media, in govt. hearings, in court..

myself, i do not necessarily believe in aliens, UFOs, abductions, etc. i just whant to know whats going on.. one topic not mentioned here is the paranoia shown by the govt. in handling these reports.. if there's nothing to hide, why is uncle fed so compelled to keep it under wraps? is every witness to a UFO wacko? is every witness out for fame and fortune? is every air-traffic controller out-of-his mind or drunk when reporting a contact moving at speeds several times the speed of sound? it doesn't take much skill to extract comments made by others and quote them as objects of ridicule.. it doesn't take much skill to dismiss a UFO witness as a "nut case".. what does take courage is to suggest an impartial study of the subject, without mcoking it or pre-judging anything..

its probably true that aliens havent visited earth and all UFO reports are mistaken.. does that preclude serious study of UFOs? is the fact that UFO witnesses are usuallu laughed at mean that nothing can be learned from an examination of UFO phenomena? it used to be that anyone who challenged the catholic church was subject to torture and execution.. galileo and copernicus learned this the hard way.. many scoffed at columbus for sailing west to find a new route to asia.. one very intelligent man stated, in the late 19th century that so many products had been recently introduced, no new inventions were needed.. another said that the human body could not sustain riding in a motorized vehicle at greater than 20 MPH; the thrust of moving forward would be too great for anyone to survive..

this UFO thing isnt about whether aliens or spaceships were here or are here.. this is about observing something that is not part of our normal civilization, then pursuing a line of inquiry and determining its true nature and source.. isnt that what science is all about? seeing something, studying it, writing about it and getting confirmation or refutation by others? i am not pro-UFO or pro-alien.. i am pro-asking questions.. when did that become something to joke about? has science, or anyone who prides themselves on being objective, abandoned curiosity and the desire to learn more about that which is certainly beyond the ordinary? are UFOs beyond the ordinary? i think so.. i would like to know more about them.. i am not saying what they are, i am just asking what are they? are you so certain what UFOs really are? it seems anyone with the certain knowledge of UFO identification should be in great demand to give interviews, write books, sign movie contracts.. how can you be so postive of something as to ridicule it, when you actually know so little? how can you summarily dismiss a UFO sighting if you werent there? when people confront something they do not understand, they usually show fear or go into denial.. sometiimes they make jokes to hide their fear.. what phase are you in? are you curious and wish to learn more about observations which appear unearthly and unique to our culture, or are you in fear or denial?

__________________
"Everyone has the right to be heard; noone has the right to be taken seriously."

What are you referring to? What paranoia? Evidence, please!

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

I don't think so. A lot of the reason the press gets these stories is because some politician or, one of his aides, leaks the information out just as something is discovered. Another reason to find the "cosmic watergate" to be ridiculous. I think Churchill stated that the only way to keep a secret between two people is for one of them to be dead (or words to that effect). It is very difficult, if not impossible, for secrets to exist for a significant period of time in Washington.

I don't think every witness to a UFO event is a "nut case". However, I do believe that a great many of such witnesses are mistaken (and the numbers from UFOlogy back this up) about how they report these events. This is why people often mistake Venus, airplane lights, meteors, flares, etc. for a UFO. They are not "nut cases". They just simply made errors in observation. Nobody "laughs" at UFO witnesses except maybe the media, who you seem to present as the best entity to report such events.


How can you trust every UFO sighting when even those investigating such events know that 90-95% can be simply explained? Is it any great leap to suggest that the remaining cases are simple misidentifications that are badly reported and can not be solved or are possible hoaxes? I don't think so unless you can present a case that is worth looking at. Unfortunately, such case presentations usually are missing key elements or are one-sided. You know, I have been in amateur astronomy since the early 70s. I have never seen anything I could not explain (and there were some odd events I had seen) in all the years of observing the night sky. I would love to see a genuine UFO but I am not going to believe every story I hear. If I did that I probably would be broke from buying all those cool deals in the television ads (but wait...there's more!). I am not in fear or denial, I am just a lot more skeptical than some people.

You, me and my 36,000 co-workers with the State of Oregon.

Consipracy folks seem to forget that the local states have Governement's too, that often are at -odds- with the federal government.

For example, remember the movie Second Cival War? Well that was loosely based on a Real Life incident where Idaho called out their National Guard, to stop and turn back a shipment of nuclear waste the feds were sending to INEL. (the movie used imagrants instead of nuke waste though)

They seem to think the federal goverment is this well oiled machine that can act as a unit to supress truths and protect itself. Really? If that was true they would have peiced together the missed clues sitting at various agencies reguarding Sep 11th. If that was the case the border indident in Idaho never would of happened. Can go on and on citing real examples where the Fed Gov messed up because the parts of it -rarely- even talk to each other.

And this is the well oiled machine thats suposedly got scientist one thier side? The very same scientists that when asked to suppress information on global warming, went public? Give me a break. . .

__________________
"There is no problem that cannot be solved by a suitable application of high explosives" - US Army Demolitions School

http://worldsofothersuns.home.comcast.net/

Why have you assumed that UFO witness' are anything other than mistaken? What evidence is there to support the conclusion that what has been witnessed is "unearthly"??

The "you can't handle the truth" argument is laughable.

So what else have ya got??