There are people on this world, in certain positions of influence that do know the truth, the whole truth, because they need to know, and there are others that know less, but at least some of it nonetheless.

But everyone here seems to have at least some opinion on this, be it pro or con, so I'll add my two cents worth, for what it's worth. Opinions are based on knowledge, those whose opinions are con do not have the necessary knowledge, those that are pro, may have seen things on TV, or in books and also have a desire to 'believe' it. Then, there are those that actually do know things, for good or for ill, and perhaps this knowledge was aquired due to being a first hand participant to something where actual facts were available to them, and it will then transpire that a common feature of human psychology shall come into play where there will be those, that do not have the information, will unfortunately scorn those that do, simply because it seems incredulous.

What am I on about? I know about things, I do not simply believe in them. That's all. Saying anything more about this isn't important, I'm simply saying that those that cannot believe do not have the information. I do not attach blame because in their place I would be the same. It's like saying 'do I believe in vampires?' -Probably not, but I do not in truth know, because I don't have any hard information. This is not through blind ignorance and I would not scorn those that do believe, I simply haven't been exposed to the actual truth of the matter one way or the other.

I also know that you wouldn't believe I was telling the truth if I said "I know."

98% of all of it it crap. Most of that is made up, most of the rest is rampant speculation by the uninformed, and some fair part of it is disinformation spread by some of the people who DO know.

But that last 2%...

Despite how I portray myself on Flare I honestly do not believe everything I hear and see regarding Aliens and such. I don't know how many of you saw UFOs:The best evidence ever caught on tape 2 on fox last year. With the exception of the STS videos, everything presented in that special, IMHO, was crap.

If you want to see documentaries about the UFO phenomena, and I mean GOOD documentaries, flip your T.V. on to either the Discovery channel, TLC, or the History channel. They have excellent documentaries on UFOs every now and then. (LOL I made a funny. The History channel's documentaries about Ufos are called Ufos: Now and Then. ) However, please do not take the ones you see on channels like fox too seriously.

[ November 27, 2001: Message edited by: MIB ]

The answer to your second question (no Earth movement) can be answered in one word: "parallax" (no, not the entity that Green Lantern Hal Jordan became). The Earth is larger and farher away, thus its apparent movement would be tiny (and that's assuming that the thrusters were being used to MOVE the shuttle, rather than to steady it or STOP it from moving.

I should also point out that a large # of the 'UFO photos and films' taken in space were taken through the windows of ships.

Windows reflect some light, and images of things inside. The reflections can sometimes look nothing like the objects they are images of. I have seen this phenomena on countless occasions.

[ November 27, 2001: Message edited by: First of Two ]

By: John B. Alexander
11-27-1

In a recent article Seth Shostak drew attention what has become known as the Fermi Paradox. Typically discussants raise the famous off-hand luncheon comment by Enrico Fermi, "Where is everybody?" when dismissing the existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life. The invocation of such a distinguished figure is polemic and used to make the position academically unassailable. In the ranks of scientific loyalists there is a constant refrain pertaining to the existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life. Best phrased by Carl Sagan, known for his "billions and billions" quotation in developing the hypothesis that we share the universe with other forms of intelligence, he added "but there is not one shred of evidence to support it." Really? Actually, the book he co-edited with Thornton Page, UFOS: A Scientific Debate, refutes his own statement. The deductive error is conflation of lack of evidence with proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Edward Condon fostered this misconstruction in his fatally flawed and internally inconsistent report on UFOs. Despite the widely published conclusions, his report too contained substantial evidence supporting the physical existence of these objects. The error is the a priori assumption that UFOs cannot exist therefore no evidence to the contrary will be considered, never mind accepted. Few scientists would allow such faulty logic to prevail in their own field of expertise. Yet, in the emotionally laden field of UFOs, scientists let Condon stand uncorrected and disregarding pertinent facts has become the accepted norm.

The undeniable reality is that there are a substantial number of multi-sensor UFO cases backed by thousands of credible witnesses. In the physical domain there are many photos, videos, radar tracking, satellite sensor reports, landing traces including depressions and anomalous residual radiation, electromagnetic interference, and confirmed physiological effects. Personal observations have been made both day and night, often under excellent visibility with some at close range. Included are reports from multiple independent witnesses to the same event. Psychological testing of some observers has confirmed their mentally competence. Why is none of this considered evidence?

There are over 3000 cases reported by pilots, some of which include interference with flight controls. On numerous occasions air traffic controllers and other radar operators have noted unexplained objects on their scopes. So too have several astronomers and other competent scientists reported their personal observations. Many military officials from several countries have confirmed multi-sensor observations of UFOs. The most senior air defense officers of Russia, Brazil, Belgium and recently a former Chief of Naval Operations in Chile all have stated that UFOs are real. These cases and comments are a miniscule fraction of the total body of evidence.

Of course they do not constitute irrefutable proof. However, to state there is no evidence suggestive of intelligent extraterrestrial life simply belies the facts. Decades in duration and global in nature, there are too many hard sensor data-points and millions of eyewitnesses to ignore. We certainly can debate the significance of specific data and question whether or not it establishes a causal relationship between the observations and extraterrestrial life. However, it is only through ignorance or pomposity that one can say no evidence exists.

The existence of UFOs is NOT evidence of extraterrestrial life.

All the 'existence' of UFOs confirms is that there are, at times, incidents wherein human beings, members of a species not known for the sharpness of their senses, but known for their imagination, see or detect objects that seem to be flying which they cannot conclusively identify.

That's it.