NationStates Jolt Archive

Not to interfere with the normal development. Possibly a policy of said Aliens. If they are in fact here watching us.
Why reveal themselves at all then?

Why would there be a conspiracy if they're here observing us in ships capable of remaining completely invisible and travelling without producing any energy signatures?

The problem is that that requires a lot of asteroids coming very near Earth. I think we might have noticed these.
Aye...The idea was more a hypothetical scenario rather than a solution for the UFOS ARE HERE AND THEY'RE INVISIBLE! problem. ;)

Dragontide,

Nanatsu say: "Please stop drinking the bong water."

Sensitive data from a bunch of idiots using a trick of the light and other UFO hoax techniques? If they are ALL bogus, how could there be anything worth hiding?If some reports were say, attempts at US espionage, that would be worth hiding.

This thread is devolving into several people bringing up legitimate questions and you running the gamut of 'maybe this' or 'possibly that' vague responses. Without some evidence of said aliens, without any piece of data on them, they effectively do not exist. So the point in debating, or even shooting the breeze, about them is moot. They have no definition.

Evidence. Do you have any, Dragontide? If not, I'm pretty sure we can take this thread behind the shed and shoot it.

<snip>

Depends on your definition of stealth.

Coasting behind an asteroid or other screen might count as stealth.

Also, from purely theoretical standpoint, it's not impossible to conceive a device which would project the heat that is created non uniformly so that detection from a specific angle is hard/nigh impossible.

Of course that probably still requires handwavium propulsion fo' breaking.

A) Kinda convenient that every asteroid in interstellar space happens to be on an exact collision course with the Earth, so that they can stay hidden behind it all the way.

B) Yep, it's called a radiator. Your minimum area is a 60 degree cone or so.

C) Definitely - to slow yourself down, you need to apply force in front of you. Any plausible engine system will then be incredibly obvious.

If they first arrived up to a couple hundred million years ago. why would they stop coming now? No I cannot explain how they do it. That still does not make it impossible.

But I have explained why they could not do it, by any of the methods you have suggested so far. As a result, we are left with nothing but your say-so against the entirety of modern science.


Everything in the universe cannot be sythesized.

Sure it can. Protons, neutrons, and electrons - with these, you can make any atom. With the right atoms, you can make any compound. Everything in the universe was originally simply a floating soup of protons, neutrons and electrons that came together, and there is nothing preventing a sufficiently advanced civilisation from repeating the process.


So if you have a look around at a Motel 6 then decide to stay at the Hilton, your visit to Motel is erased from the fabric of time?

No. But if I've decided to stay at the Hilton, I'm not going to keep sending hundreds of missions a year to the Motel 6 to see if I want to stay there.


Maybe if your talking about some sort of jump to lightspeed. That would require a lot of energy. A continious thrust over ...a few months, a few years... Voila!

No, that would require a lot of power - to be precise, an infinite amount. Power is the rate of energy transfer. Both methods require exactly the same amount of energy - infinite. This makes both impossible - lightspeed is completely unattainable.


"Earth" science! And your link says this: "This is with current off-the-shelf technology. Presumably future technology would be better."

Future technology, no matter how advanced, cannot overcome the laws of thermodynamics. Just like it can't overcome the laws of relativity. All heat produced on a craft must leave that craft, so stealth is impossible.


An interesting read:
http://www.warpdrivetheory.org/photonwd/photonwarpdrive.html

This is scientific nonsense of the worst order, and has nothing whatsoever to do with reality.

You are confusing masking the output of an interstellar engine with some sort of cloaking devise that would make them invisible to the human eye.

The two are one and the same. Both are impossible, the first one moreso.

If the aliens are using stealth, it could be because our militaries may have limited ability to destroy the aliens or have already shot some of their vehicles down and the fact that we humans also harness stealth technology.

As it stands, we are capable of shooting down other craft in the atmosphere. We cannot do so in space. This would imply, then, that aliens who were using stealth for that purpose would use stealth technology in the atmosphere, not in space. Unfortunately, Dragontide's argument requires them to do the exact reverse.

It was suggested that that in order to achieve lightspeed, a massive burst of energy would be needed that could be detected from far away. If there are other space faring races besides them, such stelth could come in handy in open space. If they hovered over the White House or NYC, that would be "flying around like an idiot"

Any engine is detectable from far away. Space shuttle main engines can be detected from Pluto. Any plausible interstellar drive can be detected from several star systems over, given enough time. Stealthing this is impossible.

No, it doesn't work. Even if you project all your heat in the opposite direction of your heading, it will leave a trail behind, and the earth isn't a static object. Maybe at extreme ranges beyond the solar system where the earths orbital path isn't enough for you to detect the trail as your position changes, but it won't work once you close in.

Actually, you won't leave a trail behind. In space, heat is lost through radiating it away. Your 'trail' will be a slowly spreading cone of infrared photons, which is not visible from any angle except one inside the cone.

Actually, you won't leave a trail behind. In space, heat is lost through radiating it away. Your 'trail' will be a slowly spreading cone of infrared photons, which is not visible from any angle except one inside the cone.

That cone is the trail I was referring to. Also, any reaction based propulsion method aside from light sails would leave behind a plume of energetic exhaust which I am fairly certain could be detectable outside of the cone would it not?

That cone is the trail I was referring to. Also, any reaction based propulsion method aside from light sails would leave behind a plume of energetic exhaust which I am fairly certain could be detectable outside of the cone would it not?

Well, it's not a 'trail' as such, because it's only observable from inside itself. The obvious analogy is with water - a moving boat leaves a wake, but in contrast to space, that wake can be seen from somewhere outside the wake.

Secondly, there are various other options. One could use a mass driver to fire cyrogenically cooled lumps of metal, for example. Still, it is true that nearly all practical drives would emit relatively high temperature exhaust, which would then radiate infrared in all directions.

Sensitive data from a bunch of idiots using a trick of the light and other UFO hoax techniques? If they are ALL bogus, how could there be anything worth hiding?


People's names, rank or position, possible biometric data... place names. Law enforcement agencies responding, names ranks and serial numbers of military personnel involved in dealing with the question. Social security data... ANYTHING of a medical nature.

There's a huge wealth of information that should be redacted out of most sensitive information, if for no other reason that the right to privacy of people uninvolved or only marginally involved.

The sensitive data need not be about the hoaxes themselves.


There are a lot of fake videos. I tend to not trust the ones where the cameraman fails to film the ship flying away. Why stop filming something that is right in front of you? Did they ALL run out of film at the wrong time?

I tend to not trust any of the material I've seen so far, because I have a better than average knoweldge of science, and have yet to see a single thing that can't be BETTER explained by known phenomena, than by 'aliens did it'.

Anyway, people, I think it's time we quit the sadoequinecrophilia*. Every thinking poster and reader here has quite clearly seen Dragontide's points utterly destroyed and shown baseless in every way, his limited scientific knowledge and lacking debate skills hung in the wind for all to see. Unless something drastic changes, there is no honour in continually devastating such an opponent.

*Beating a dead horse.

If some reports were say, attempts at US espionage, that would be worth hiding.

If there were that much espionage via flying aircraft, the skies would be flooded with war.

Anyway, people, I think it's time we quit the sadoequinecrophilia*. Every thinking poster and reader here has quite clearly seen Dragontide's points utterly destroyed and shown baseless in every way, his limited scientific knowledge and lacking debate skills hung in the wind for all to see. Unless something drastic changes, there is no honour in continually devastating such an opponent.

*Beating a dead horse.

I see you have been taking lame lessons from NAS

But I have explained why they could not do it, by any of the methods you have suggested so far. As a result, we are left with nothing but your say-so against the entirety of modern science.

Science and research that has not been around all that long.

Sure it can. Protons, neutrons, and electrons - with these, you can make any atom. With the right atoms, you can make any compound. Everything in the universe was originally simply a floating soup of protons, neutrons and electrons that came together, and there is nothing preventing a sufficiently advanced civilisation from repeating the process.


Crystals? Animal organs? Now who is coming up with tin foil hat science?

People's names, rank or position, possible biometric data... place names.
AND, the reason their names and information are on the paper to begin with.

Could be, who knows?

Which would indicate stelth technology

I think this really sums up your whole attempt at an argument. You have concluded that aliens have visited earth, and are interpreting things to fit that world view.

Crystals? Animal organs? Now who is coming up with tin foil hat science?

What are you talking about?

Are you unaware there is a fairly thriving industry in man-made crystals, now?

AND, the reason their names and information are on the paper to begin with.

You asked for information that would be redacted in the case that the sightings were hoaxes, or less than genuine.

I listed a whole load of reasons why.

If you look at torture memoes - they quite clearly describe the processes that are controversial, so it's not unreasonable to believe that the 'sensitive' information that is redacted isn't about torture. It's hard to imagine what would need hiding MORE than torture, until you realise that personal information is usually with-held. Indeed, we have a whole raft of laws designed to do just that.


You want to believe that the information being redacted is a secret admission that aliens are real.

That desire isn't based on any logic, or anything that might be in those documents - it's based entirely on YOUR pre-supposition that there MUST be aliens, so there MUST be a cover-up. But you pretend that the evidence supports you, even while you're having to turn backflips to try to make it so (aliens that use stealth technology to get here, then fly around where any clown can see them? Aliens that have mastered sublimation of matter to light, but can't mass produce synthetics?). Your whole platform is biased and intellectually dishonest.

If there were that much espionage via flying aircraft, the skies would be flooded with war.Yes, because I said all UFO reports can be attributed to espionage. The fact of the matter is, you see redacted material and assume it must be about aliens without one iota of evidence.

I think this really sums up your whole attempt at an argument. You have concluded that aliens have visited earth, and are interpreting things to fit that world view.That's what it looks like. And no objection can knock his argument down, because he's made up his mind; there's always another cop-out 'maybe this' answer to dodge with, so long as he doesn't have to drop his aliens are among us bit.

For as often as your arguments depend on future breakthroughs of science, Dragontide, it would be nice if you utilized its method.

What are you talking about?

Are you unaware there is a fairly thriving industry in man-made crystals, now?

With the result of relatively little value in metaphysical terms when compared with their natural counterparts.

With the result of relatively little value in metaphysical terms when compared with their natural counterparts.

That seems, at face value, to be nonsensical. I can't even address this, as it is.

What do you think it means? What do you mean by 'little value in metaphysical terms'?

Yes, because I said all UFO reports can be attributed to espionage. The fact of the matter is, you see redacted material and assume it must be about aliens without one iota of evidence.
Without one single incident of the American government accusing another nation of having some sort of unexplained ship. If the UFOs are ours, we would be pwning in Afghanistan. If it were the Russians, comminism would not have fell in Russia.


That seems, at face value, to be nonsensical. I can't even address this, as it is.

What do you think it means? What do you mean by 'little value in metaphysical terms'?

Crystals that has accumulated natural energies over thousands or millions of years. Something an alien race would look for, Would they not?

Without one single incident of the American government accusing another nation of having some sort of unexplained ship. If the UFOs are ours, we would be pwning in Afghanistan. If it were the Russians, comminism would not have fell in Russia.You're ridiculous.

Ok, how bout this, if they are aliens over our skies, and the government is clearly covering them up as you say, then why hasn't the government used the alien tech in the field?

*Awaits DT's next 'maybe this' dodge supported by nothing but his say-so*

Crystals that has accumulated natural energies over thousands or millions of years. Something an alien race would look for, Would they not?

Again, what do you even mean by that?

If you mean Piezoelectricity, it doesn't require thousands or millions of years, it's inherent in a crystal lattice structure under stress - which means a manmade crystal (allowing for flaws) is as servicable as a 'natural' crystal (allowing for flaws).

Crystals that has accumulated natural energies over thousands or millions of years. Something an alien race would look for, Would they not?

What the hell are you going on about? What kind of "natural energies" would crystals accumulate?

Crystals that has accumulated natural energies over thousands or millions of years. Something an alien race would look for, Would they not?WHAT?! I'm sorry I missed that second part of your post.

Source. I can't wait for a source to that bullshit claim.

Crystals that has accumulated natural energies over thousands or millions of years. Something an alien race would look for, Would they not?

Ummm how do you know? Also go look up what the word metephysical means.

Crystals that has accumulated natural energies over thousands or millions of years. Something an alien race would look for, Would they not?

Maybe if they were an alien race with invisible FTL vessels manned by a bunch of businessaliens looking to flog largely worthless crystals to alien chumps.

Genuine Earth crystals! Natural energies accumulated over millions of years! Yours for only 16 quatloos!

I see you have been taking lame lessons from NAS

Heh. Unfortunately, it was also right, which is more than can be said for your arguments.


Science and research that has not been around all that long.

And it's already got us a hell of a lot farther as a technological society than millennia of superstition and ignorance.


Crystals? Animal organs? Now who is coming up with tin foil hat science?

Yes, as it happens, both crystals and animal organs are simply assemblies of protons, neutrons, and electrons. In the case of animal organs, synthesising them from the atomic level is fairly tricky, as they are rather complex arrangments. In the case of crystals, it's freaking trivial - in a world capable of doing nano-scale assembly, diamond will be cheaper than glass.

You're ridiculous.

Ok, how bout this, if they are aliens over our skies, and the government is clearly covering them up as you say, then why hasn't the government used the alien tech in the field?

*Awaits DT's next 'maybe this' dodge supported by nothing but his say-so*

Don't you know? ET invented the Saturn rocket system. Duh.
In the case of crystals, it's freaking trivial - in a world capable of doing nano-scale assembly, diamond will be cheaper than glass.
Anyone who has taken a chemistry class with a lab component has almost certainly grown some crystals. Probably copper sulfate.

Again, what do you even mean by that?

If you mean Piezoelectricity, it doesn't require thousands or millions of years, it's inherent in a crystal lattice structure under stress - which means a manmade crystal (allowing for flaws) is as servicable as a 'natural' crystal (allowing for flaws).

Yes for Piezoelectricity. Is every form of quartz and crystal available on Earth? Not likely.

You're ridiculous.

Ok, how bout this, if they are aliens over our skies, and the government is clearly covering them up as you say, then why hasn't the government used the alien tech in the field?

*Awaits DT's next 'maybe this' dodge supported by nothing but his say-so*

Were you able to solve the Rubik Cube when you first saw one? It took a little while, didnt it? And who knows what is being tossed around in think tanks.

Yes for Piezoelectricity. Is every form of quartz and crystal available on Earth? Not likely.
Do you even know what piezoelectricity is? PROTIP: Naturally occurring crystals don't accumulate it over millions of years.



Were you able to solve the Rubik Cube when you first saw one? It took a little while, didnt it? And who knows what is being tossed around in think tanks.

So 40 years of covering shit up has achieved nothing, and yet the Illuminati(or whoever) keeps it up. Fuck, their motto must be "If at first you don't succeed......".

Were you able to solve the Rubik Cube when you first saw one? It took a little while, didnt it? And who knows what is being tossed around in think tanks.

You're not even making arguments anymore. You're just spewing out retarded nonsense. When you're able to support a claim that aliens exist, come back to us, but until then, you're only embarassing yourself by continuing this assinine "debate".

Were you able to solve the Rubik Cube when you first saw one? It took a little while, didnt it? And who knows what is being tossed around in think tanks.According to you don't they have examples of alien ships from the '40's and '50's locked up. Are you telling me they haven't reverse engineered them in the last 60 years? Haven't gleaned anything from the alien tech?

Oh no, let me guess, they have, but they can't outright use it because then that would prove they were covering up the aliens. No no, first they have to figure it out, and then make it look like it could have fit into the normal progression of human tech.

PROTIP: Naturally occurring crystals don't accumulate it over millions of years.That's the first time I've seen anyone use 'PROTIP,' and I can't stop laughing for some reason.

You're not even making arguments anymore. You're just spewing out retarded nonsense. When you're able to support a claim that aliens exist, come back to us, but until then, you're only embarassing yourself by continuing this assinine "debate".

So if the government sees a UFO or captures a ship, they are suppose to know all the dynamics from day one?]

Seems like if all this tin foil hat science can reproduce any crystal, all the jewlery stores would be out of business

So if the government sees a UFO or captures a ship, they are suppose to know all the dynamics from day one?

That's not what I said, now is it strawman?

That's not what I said, now is it strawman?

Then why am I not making an arguement against the theory that the US government is suppose to know some of the aliens secrets, by watching a video or whatever eveidence they have?

According to you don't they have examples of alien ships from the '40's and '50's locked up.

When did I say that?

Then why am I not making an arguement against the theory that the US government is suppose to know some of the aliens secrets, by watching a video or whatever eveidence they have?You have no argument. You have no data. You have no evidence. And from some of your posts, you have no shame.

Then why am I not making an arguement against the theory that the US government is suppose to know some of the aliens secrets, by watching a video or whatever eveidence they have?

Because you've yet to show that there are even such things as aliens. Perhaps the reason we haven't discovered any alien secrets is because there are no aliens. You've moved on from maintain that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, to this absolutely absurd position that the absence of evidence is actually evidence of existence.

Like I said, embarassing.

Because you've yet to show that there are even such things as aliens. Perhaps the reason we haven't discovered any alien secrets is because there are no aliens. You've moved on from maintain that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, to this absolutely absurd position that the absence of evidence is actually evidence of existence.

IF you trust the government. Like I said. Release the documents. What vital military information could there be on them from the 80s on back?

You have no evidence.

Still the most retarded point (made by many) on this thread. I have no solid eveidence because this is a philosophical debate. If such evidence were out, we would not be having this conversation.

Still the most retarded point (made by many) on this thread. I have no solid eveidence because this is a philosophical debate. If such evidence were out, we would not be having this conversation.

Seriously mate do your self a massive favour. Go and look up the meanings of words before you use them.

People, people, I had hoped to set the proper example of how to respond to Dragontide's delusions, that is, by pointing out what a liar he is with the bare minimum of deconstruction of his already ludicrous claims. Do that enough, and he'll simply stop. He may claim that it is lame, but really, even snark is better than the likes of him deserves.

Still the most retarded point (made by many) on this thread. I have no solid eveidence because this is a philosophical debate. If such evidence were out, we would not be having this conversation.You change gears way too much to be taken seriously. Earlier in the thread you said,

And again the evidence is in the logic.
implying that the evidence of aliens is so stupidly obvious that we must me pants on head retarded to not see it. And now you are claiming there can't be evidence, because it's a philosophical debate.

Basic rundown: You claim there are aliens. When people ask for some evidence, you dodge and call it philosophical. Extraordinary claim, requires extraordinary evidence. Provide some.

What do you think happens in the scientific world? Do you think Einstein could have pitched his Theory without evidence and fended off any demands for evidence by saying, "God you guys are stupid, this is a philosophical debate, if there were evidence we wouldn't be talking right now." No!

You claim aliens. If you want that claim to be taken with a modicum of seriousness, provide some evidence.

<snip>

Seems like if all this tin foil hat science can reproduce any crystal, all the jewlery stores would be out of business

Ignoring your ad hominems, there are two major errors here.

The first is that I have not said we are able to. I have said that it is scientifically possible, and gave the example of a society that is capable of nano-assembly, building things at the atomic level (or as Neal Stephenson put it, compiling matter).

The second is that modern industrial crystals are used for other things. Supermarket checkouts, for example, often have a very thin layer of manmade sapphire over the barcode scanner, to prevent scratches. Industrial diamond cutting saws use artificially grown diamonds. Ironically, they haven't taken off in jewelry precisely because they are too cheap and easy - people don't see much value in them. With time, you will see the value of 'precious' stones change - when everyone can wear diamonds for a fiver, it's the hard-to-synthesise materials which are perceived as higher class.

Edit: also, artificial gemstones are often too perfect. A perfect diamond looks a lot less interesting than a subtly flawed one. This is, again, not a problem to a society which can compile matter, because flaws can be easily built in as desired.

Seriously mate do your self a massive favour. Go and look up the meanings of words before you use them.He's made it this far without doing it, why stop him now.

Seriously mate do your self a massive favour. Go and look up the meanings of words before you use them.

phi·los·o·phy (f-ls-f)
n. pl. phi·los·o·phies

2. Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/philosophy

He's made it this far without doing it, why stop him now.

Freindly advice, I mean I don't know his age,(it seems young) but if he wants to survive here, it's best he learn a lil bit huh.

. With time, you will see the value of 'precious' stones change - when everyone can wear diamonds for a fiver.

Could be but dont hold your breath.

phi·los·o·phy (f-ls-f)
n. pl. phi·los·o·phies

2. Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/philosophy

Well done, now lets see some of this 'Logical Reasoning' from you huh!

Ohh and just for the hell of it, what happens to your stance if we do no cheery pick the definition which most adheres to our mindset, and instead post the whole thing, like this:

1. Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
2. Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.
3. A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.
4. The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.
5. The disciplines presented in university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology.
6. The discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.
7. A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory: an original philosophy of advertising.
8. A system of values by which one lives:

Could be but dont hold your breath.

Congratulations - you completely ignored the parts of my post where I trashed your statements, and pick on something relatively irrelevant.

Well done, now lets see some of this 'Logical Reasoning' from you huh!

1) Thousands of reported sightings
2) Unexplaind cattle mutilations
3) Materials and lifeforms that might only be available in our solar system
4) Blacked out government documents (when the CIA tells the president [Clinton] to go fuck himself, something just aint right)
5) We the human race have traveled in space
6) The need to explore seems to be present in every living creature
7) It only takes iron and ice to sustain micro life that could evolve into anything. (there is a lot of iron and ice in our galaxy....even chunks of iron that are larger that our entire solar system)

Congratulations - you completely ignored the parts of my post where I trashed your statements, and pick on something relatively irrelevant.

Pointing out that some things can be sythasized. and some cannot which covered your entire post.

1) Thousands of reported sightings
2) Unexplaind cattle mutilations
3) Materials and lifeforms that might only be available in our solar system
4) Blacked out government documents (when the CIA tells the president [Clinton] to go fuck himself, something just aint right)
5) We the human race have traveled in space
6) The need to explore seems to be present in every living creature
7) It only takes iron and ice to sustain micro life that could evolve into anything. (there is a lot of iron and ice in our galaxy....even chunks of iron that are larger that our entire solar system)

1. Numerous people seeing things does not make it true. Many people once believed that witches were living among them. Many people did (and some still do) believed that certain races are superior. And none of the sightings have been conclusive, or wholly unexplainable.

2. They have been explained. You ignored the explanation.

3. That might? They flew this far for cows. Man they must be retarded.

4. He wasn't told to "fuck himself," and redaction does not equal alien cover up.

5. Irrelevant.

6. Does that include the need to fly billions of miles to cut up cows? Also irrelevant though. Provide a source that every living thing needs to explore.

7. Evidence of life surviving under those conditions, not life evolving out of those conditions

IF you trust the government. Like I said. Release the documents. What vital military information could there be on them from the 80s on back?

Again, every word you speak is completely irrelevant. Redacted information in documents, or even unreleased documents, are not evidence on the existence of aliens. You can keep cloaking your worthless argument in "philosophical debate" as if anyone other than you is having one, but the FACT remains that you've done absolutely nothing to demonstrate in any way whatsoever that aliens exist.

By the standards you've adopted in this thread, we can argue the existence of absolutely anything, because we can't know for sure that something doesn't exist. I can argue that, 50,000 years ago, the vampire clans of eastern Portugal constructed a solid chocolate parking garage in the shape of Napoleon Bonaparte, and there's nothing anyone can do but accept that it's a possibility, no matter how remote or how unlikely or despite a complete lack of evidence, because, heck, it could have happened.

In fact, I maintain that, 35 years ago, I went back in time and had sex with your mom, fathering you, then changed my DNA with my super secret elf ray gun so that a paternity test wouldn't show me as your dad. It's true, I tell you.

1. Numerous people seeing things does not make it true. But more likely as the numbers grew.

2. They have been explained. You ignored the explanation.
Yes! And Satanic witchdoctors that have never been caught was a pretty far fetched explination.

3. That might? They flew this far for cows. Man they must be retarded.

Cows seem likely because of the many things we use cows for. (milk, leather, beef, sports, religion, etc...)

4. He wasn't told to "fuck himself," and redaction does not equal alien cover up.

Not the exact words but the "fuck youself" meaning was there with all those blacked out documents

5. Irrelevant.

WTF??!! If man had never achieved orbit, you would be using that right now and you know it.

6. Does that include the need to fly billions of miles to cut up cows? Also irrelevant though. Provide a source that every living thing needs to explore. Animals that get trapped in wells. Pets that run away.... Oh come on...you cant be serious.

7. Evidence of life surviving under those conditions, not life evolving out of those conditions

Such eveidence will be a while. Those iron breathing life forms from the Antarctic were just discovered a few weeks ago. But if you chose not to believe in evolution I will not argue with you about it.

But more likely as the numbers grew.No, more people does not equal more probable
Yes! And Satanic witchdoctors that have never been caught was a pretty far fetched explination.Does it get tiring being this extreme? I was referring to the examiners who determined they were caused by a combination of predators and decomposition.
Cows seem likely because of the many things we use cows for. (milk, leather, beef, sports, religion, etc...)And these aliens don't have an equivalent on their world, so they come here for cows? They desperately need our milk, beef, and mythology about cows, but that's all they want? That's your position?
Not the exact words but the "fuck youself" meaning was there with all those blacked out documentsAnd blacked out does not = aliens.
WTF??!! If man had never achieved orbit, you would be using that right now and you know it.No, I wouldn't. Because our progress does not determine their progress. Just because we've been to the moon does not make aliens visiting us any more probable.
Animals that get trapped in wells. Pets that run away.... Oh come on...you cant be serious.Show the connection to exploring. How does a pet running away constitute exploring? And you said all living things have a "need to explore." Show it. This "you can't be serious" business is getting old. Back up your claims.
Such eveidence will be a while. Those iron breathing life forms from the Antarctic were just discovered a few weeks ago. But if you chose not to believe in evolution I will not argue with you about it.You have no idea if that evidence will ever be found. And I never said I didn't believe in evolution. I said, those organisms survived in those conditions, not evolved out of them. If they had evolved out of those conditions, your argument of "there is a lot of iron and ice in the universe" would carry more weight.

Pointing out that some things can be sythasized. and some cannot which covered your entire post.

No it doesn't. Because you're wrong. With sufficiently advanced technology, anything can be synthesised. And can be synthesised so perfectly it is impossible to tell, even at the atomic level, that it was not formed by nature.

We do not have this sort of sufficiently advanced technology. We have the precursors of it, and it is definitely something which is scientifically possible. Certainly, it is on better footing than interstellar travel, which we have no evidence to suggest is practical. As a result, any civilisation advanced enough to travel between the stars would also be able to make anything they needed on their home planet, and so would never need to travel for resources.

No, more people does not equal more probable
Since when? Are witnesses not used in the courts anymore?
Does it get tiring being this extreme? I was referring to the examiners who determined they were caused by a combination of predators and decomposition.
Not all of them. Look at the FBI files.

And these aliens don't have an equivalent on their world, so they come here for cows? They desperately need our milk, beef, and mythology about cows, but that's all they want? That's your position?
As pointed out earlier, maybe they do have cows that they got from us long ago that are now dying so a search for a cure began.

And blacked out does not = aliens.

Clinton asked for info about aliens and UFOs. So now the CIA cant even file stuff in the right place?

No, I wouldn't. Because our progress does not determine their progress. Just because we've been to the moon does not make aliens visiting us any more probable.

From our prospective it does. Space travel used to be concidered impossible

Show the connection to exploring. How does a pet running away constitute exploring? And you said all living things have a "need to explore." Show it. This "you can't be serious" business is getting old. Back up your claims.
You have no idea if that evidence will ever be found. And I never said I didn't believe in evolution. I said, those organisms survived in those conditions, not evolved out of them. If they had evolved out of those conditions, your argument of "there is a lot of iron and ice in the universe" would carry more weight.

I just cant think of any living thing that is not trapped in ice that has not ever evolved in some way.

Why do moths fly into flames? What was it that killed the cat? Why do people go see Tom Cruise movies when he still sucks? CURIOSITY!!!

No it doesn't. Because you're wrong. With sufficiently advanced technology, anything can be synthesised. And can be synthesised so perfectly it is impossible to tell, even at the atomic level, that it was not formed by nature.

We do not have this sort of sufficiently advanced technology. We have the precursors of it, and it is definitely something which is scientifically possible. Certainly, it is on better footing than interstellar travel, which we have no evidence to suggest is practical. As a result, any civilisation advanced enough to travel between the stars would also be able to make anything they needed on their home planet, and so would never need to travel for resources.

So if they can get here, they could also synthasize anything in the universe? Sounds like 2 completly different things to me.

Since you seem to be fine with snipping one bit of a post and objecting to it, I think I will as well.

Why do moths fly into flames?

It's not curiosity (at least, probably not). The main explanation which I know of is that moths navigate using celestial bodies (that is, the moon) as reference points. The moon is the brightest object in the night sky, so when other bright objects appear, they get confused.

Since you seem to be fine with snipping one bit of a post and objecting to it, I think I will as well.



It's not curiosity (at least, probably not). The main explanation which I know of is that moths navigate using celestial bodies (that is, the moon) as reference points. The moon is the brightest object in the night sky, so when other bright objects appear, they get confused.

Snip away. Dont bother me! You have made a point and that's all I ask.

Scratch the moth. How about, why do researchers become researchers?

So if they can get here, they could also synthasize anything in the universe? Sounds like 2 completly different things to me.

Both are reflective of advanced science and technology. Significantly, one is a product of technology only 50-100 years more advanced than our own, at most, while the other is a product of technology which may well be impossible for tens of thousands of years yet. It is incredibly unlikely that a civilisation would achieve interstellar travel, without first (or as a byproduct) developing the ability to assemble matter at the atomic scale.

It is incredibly unlikely that a civilisation would achieve interstellar travel, without first (or as a byproduct) developing the ability to assemble matter at the atomic scale.

Now that makes sense! You are on to something here. But we are still left with (to them) undiscovered materials. They cannot synthasize something that they do not know exists. If many of the UFO sighting are real, then we know they are not plunderers. (or the planet would be stripped) They just need samples to try to synthasize. Same with creatures. They can't clone anything without a host sample.

Now that makes sense! You are on to something here. But we are still left with (to them) undiscovered materials. They cannot synthasize something that they do not know exists. If many of the UFO sighting are real, then we know they are not plunderers. They just need samples to try to synthasize. Same with creatures. They can't clone anything without a host sample.

So, then again we come to why then do they mutilate thousands of cattle to take samples? If they have been able to come to earth from another star systems light years away they should only need one or perhaps two. Hell, we can clone cells from one cow...and we don't need to mutilate them.

So, then again we come to why then do they mutilate thousands of cattle to take samples? If they have been able to come to earth from another star systems light years away they should only need one or perhaps two. Hell, we can clone cells from one cow...and we don't need to mutilate them.

Ahh but what if they come all this way, take only one sample and it ends up being the "Carrot Top" of the bunch. (a sick cow in case you happen to like Carrot Top) And there are a lot of different types of cows. (Holstien, Jersey, Ayrshire, Guersney, etc...)

THIS kind of information should be readily available to the public. (How many differnt kinds were mutilated? How many of each? How many that would have been in a Mexican bull fight?, etc...)

Now that makes sense! You are on to something here. But we are still left with (to them) undiscovered materials. They cannot synthasize something that they do not know exists. If many of the UFO sighting are real, then we know they are not plunderers. (or the planet would be stripped) They just need samples to try to synthasize. Same with creatures. They can't clone anything without a host sample.

Well of course it makes sense - I've only been saying it for the last 10 posts, while you've been straight out denying it every time.

You also completely misunderstand what I'm talking about, but that's unsurprising. With matter compilation, you don't need to think "oh, what shall we copy today". Copying natural materials is generally a silly idea - simple and regular artificial constructions are easier, quicker and generally higher performance. If you need a material for a particular purpose, you can quite literally design it on a computer and make it from scratch. No need to roam the galaxy there.

Even if you were in a "copy everything" mood, it still doesn't explain those lovely cattle mutilations you keep harping on about - if you wanted to clone a cow, you could collect sufficient DNA with a single syringe and 20 seconds*.Your 'arguments' for aliens are still nonsensical, and the natural predation hypothesis both a) accounts for all the evidence, and b) is far simpler.

*Presuming you have cloning technology.

. With matter compilation, you don't need to think "oh, what shall we copy today". Copying natural materials is generally a silly idea - simple and regular artificial constructions are easier, quicker and generally higher performance. If you need a material for a particular purpose, you can quite literally design it on a computer and make it from scratch. No need to roam the galaxy there.
Then a simple quest to see who else has such God like power would be in order. Wouldnt it?

Even if you were in a "copy everything" mood, it still doesn't explain those lovely cattle mutilations you keep harping on about - if you wanted to clone a cow, you could collect sufficient DNA with a single syringe and 20 seconds*.Your 'arguments' for aliens are still nonsensical, and the natural predation hypothesis both a) accounts for all the evidence, and b) is far simpler.

*Presuming you have cloning technology.
Explained in my last post. And if they cant clone, then there is more reason for more cows.

Then a simple quest to see who else has such God like power would be in order. Wouldnt it?

No, because you still haven't demonstrated that interstellar travel is possible, nor that such travel could be carried out without us easily detecting it long before they arrived, objections which have been raised (and dodged) many times in this thread.


Explained in my last post. And if they cant clone, then there is more reason for more cows.

If they can't clone, there's no way they're even close to being able to travel between stars. We can clone.

No, because you still haven't demonstrated that interstellar travel is possible And you cannot prove, beyond a shadow of doubt that it is 100% impossible.

nor that such travel could be carried out without us easily detecting it long before they arrived, objections which have been raised (and dodged) many times in this thread.
Pardon me for not having the key to the golden crapper at the CIA! If they wont make the ufo documents public, stands to reason they would not stand up and say "Hey! We have been lying. You can see the proof tonight in the eastern sky!"


If they can't clone, there's no way they're even close to being able to travel between stars. We can clone.
If they can clone, they need hosts. If they can't they would need constant samples.

One BIG point of mine that has been dodged are What animal can mutilate without spilling blood, remove organs, leaving no foot prints and fool an expert into thinking it was laser surgery? OR How come this entire worldwide gang of blood drinkers and organ eaters with blackhawk helicopters (what the government actually wants us to believe) has not had any members arrested?

And you cannot prove, beyond a shadow of doubt that it is 100% impossible.

We have, at least, shown a number of ways in which it can't happen. Any interstellar travel will have to be below the speed of light, and it would easily be detected. (Curiously, FTL travel would be somewhat undetectable, because the emitted radiation would arrive after the craft. This is irrelevant though, since it's impossible. However, if ships can travel faster than light, it would mess up causality (which is a bad thing) and there would presumably be some way in which information about the ship could be transmitted at the same speed.)

Pardon me for not having the key to the golden crapper at the CIA! If they wont make the ufo documents public, stands to reason they would not stand up and say "Hey! We have been lying. You can see the proof tonight in the eastern sky!"

'Detecting' does not mean that the CIA know. Detecting means everyone who cares to observe knows. Any feasible ship would be constantly radiating heat outwards into space (which, would be a big hint that something was there). Also, it's brakes would be incredibly easy to detect. See earlier notes about the space shuttle's main engine being detectable from the Kuiper belt.

If they can clone, they need hosts. If they can't they would need constant samples.

And hosts would be easy to get if they picked up a few cows, instead of constantly mutilating them.

One BIG point of mine that has been dodged are What animal can mutilate without spilling blood, remove organs, leaving no foot prints and fool an expert into thinking it was laser surgery? OR How come this entire worldwide gang of blood drinkers and organ eaters with blackhawk helicopters (what the government actually wants us to believe) has not had any members arrested?

Just because someone happens not to spot blood doesn't mean that blood is not there. Just because someone happens to think that something looks like laser surgery, doesn't mean that it is laser surgery. Source for 'experts' being tricked please.

And you cannot prove, beyond a shadow of doubt that it is 100% impossible.

Of course not. I also cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is not a small teapot orbiting Saturn. This is why calling on me to prove a negative is worthless, and claims are false until proven true. You have claimed a positive, and not only can you not prove it, but you cannot even explain the myriad ways in which your theory does not fit with the observations.


Pardon me for not having the key to the golden crapper at the CIA! If they wont make the ufo documents public, stands to reason they would not stand up and say "Hey! We have been lying. You can see the proof tonight in the eastern sky!"

You misunderstand. If an interstellar ship entered the solar system, every government, every space agency, every university with an astronomy program, and probably a few committed amateurs would be able to detect it. You cannot cover that up.


If they can clone, they need hosts. If they can't they would need constant samples.

Even if you need hosts, it wouldn't exactly be hard to take a couple cows once, and never need to keep up this endless mutilation thing. It simply doesn't make any sense, from a scientific perspective.


One BIG point of mine that has been dodged are What animal can mutilate without spilling blood, remove organs, leaving no foot prints and fool an expert into thinking it was laser surgery? OR How come this entire worldwide gang of blood drinkers and organ eaters with blackhawk helicopters (what the government actually wants us to believe) has not had any members arrested?

It has been already demonstrated that, on actual expert examination, the injuries have been found perfectly consistent with natural predation. The fact that you are choosing to ignore this without disproving it is irrelevant.

You misunderstand. If an interstellar ship entered the solar system, every government, every space agency, every university with an astronomy program, and probably a few committed amateurs would be able to detect it. You cannot cover that up.

Assuming they require massive amounts of energy. And someone with a telescope would have to get awful lucky. That recent asteroid fly by was discovered only 3 days before it flew by.


It has been already demonstrated that, on actual expert examination, the injuries have been found perfectly consistent with natural predation. .
No it has not.

Just one example that is not in pdf (http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:N1TpP6_IweUJ:foia.fbi.gov/cattle/cattle3.pdf+cattle+mutilations+investigation&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)

Kind of hard to do all that shit in big ass, wide open New Mexico, that many times, and leave no track eveidence.

1) Thousands of reported sightings
2) Unexplaind cattle mutilations
3) Materials and lifeforms that might only be available in our solar system
4) Blacked out government documents (when the CIA tells the president [Clinton] to go fuck himself, something just aint right)
5) We the human race have traveled in space
6) The need to explore seems to be present in every living creature
7) It only takes iron and ice to sustain micro life that could evolve into anything. (there is a lot of iron and ice in our galaxy....even chunks of iron that are larger that our entire solar system)

1)...of objects, not of aliens.
2)...almost all of which are actually easily explained.
3)...there is no evidence our solar system has any unique materials.
4)...blacking out personal details is nothing like telling the President to 'go fuck himself'.
5)...but we haven't managed to make it out of our own system.
6)...is just bullshit.
7)...even if true (which it's not), would not even sustain the most basic plant life.


You are creating a catalog of half-truths and outright bullshit, just to support your PRE-conceptions.

Pointing out that some things can be sythasized. and some cannot which covered your entire post.

You have yet to show anything that can't be synthesized by our OWN (meager) technology.

Much less, things that couldn't be synthesized by a race capable of breaking the light barrier.

But more likely as the numbers grew.


Nope, not even vaguely.

That's the weird thing about evidence - it's quality that matetrs, not quantity.

What you are suggesting is a logical fallacy.


Yes! And Satanic witchdoctors that have never been caught was a pretty far fetched explination.


It also wasn't the explanation that was offered.

One BIG point of mine that has been dodged are What animal can mutilate without spilling blood...

This point hasn't been dodged, at all.

It's intellectually dishonest of you to claim so.

But more likely as the numbers grew.
So if enough people start believing that Elvis is still alive will the IRS start hunting him down for tax dodging?

Assuming they require massive amounts of energy. And someone with a telescope would have to get awful lucky. That recent asteroid fly by was discovered only 3 days before it flew by.

Starships are big and heavy. Hence they require a lot of energy to move. Even a typical chemical rocket is easily detectable as it enters the solar system (given that it will need to be firing to decelerate). Something like an antimatter rocket (only theoretical speculation) will give off a signature that can be instantly detected as artificial from light years away.

An asteroid is not comparable to a starship, for several reasons. The simplest of which is that an asteroid is an inert lump of rock at a few dozen K, while a starship is not - it has engines, life support, radiators, and so on. The one is very hard to see by examining the infrared spectrum, the other is utterly trivial.

We can conclude, therefore, that no alien starship has entered the solar system, or maneuvered inside it. Therefore your comments about cattle mutilations are not only false but irrelevant - it cannot have been aliens, because they cannot have come here to do it. You still have been unable to demonstrate they can, or explain (with plausible scientific backing) why we would not have detected them.

We can conclude, therefore, that no alien starship has entered the solar system, or maneuvered inside it. Therefore your comments about cattle mutilations are not only false but irrelevant - it cannot have been aliens, because they cannot have come here to do it. You still have been unable to demonstrate they can, or explain (with plausible scientific backing) why we would not have detected them.

Obviously if we have never detected alien vessels in the solar system its because the aliens have invented magic and used it to cast a spell of invisibility over their vessels. All the evidence is in the logic!

Starships are big and heavy. Hence they require a lot of energy to move. Even a typical chemical rocket is easily detectable as it enters the solar system (given that it will need to be firing to decelerate). Something like an antimatter rocket (only theoretical speculation) will give off a signature that can be instantly detected as artificial from light years away.

An asteroid is not comparable to a starship, for several reasons. The simplest of which is that an asteroid is an inert lump of rock at a few dozen K, while a starship is not - it has engines, life support, radiators, and so on. The one is very hard to see by examining the infrared spectrum, the other is utterly trivial.

We can conclude, therefore, that no alien starship has entered the solar system, or maneuvered inside it. Therefore your comments about cattle mutilations are not only false but irrelevant - it cannot have been aliens, because they cannot have come here to do it. You still have been unable to demonstrate they can, or explain (with plausible scientific backing) why we would not have detected them.

In the technical sense, based on this, all we can conclude is that no alien starship has entered our solar system, or maneuvered inside it, since we developed the ability to detect such energy signatures in space.

Since when? Are witnesses not used in the courts anymore?And when you serve on a jury, the judge instructs you to basically take what is said by witnesses with a grain of salt. Humans are fallible, they exaggerate, misremember details. I served on a federal case where one of the chief witnesses was a former drug dealer who was testifying against one of her former sources. Clearly, she could have a motive for lying. You must examine each witness and determine how credible they are.

Simply noting that thousands have witnessed UFO's (not aliens, but UFO's) is not enough to say there must be aliens. You need to present the best witnesses, the best evidence to show that aliens are not only plausible, but the best solution. You have done nothing of the sort.


Why do moths fly into flames? What was it that killed the cat? Why do people go see Tom Cruise movies when he still sucks? CURIOSITY!!!The first one is misidentification. The last one is stupidity. Two concepts that are prevalent in this thread.

And when you serve on a jury, the judge instructs you to basically take what is said by witnesses with a grain of salt. Humans are fallible, they exaggerate, misremember details. I served on a federal case where one of the chief witnesses was a former drug dealer who was testifying against one of her former sources. Clearly, she could have a motive for lying. You must examine each witness and determine how credible they are.

Simply noting that thousands have witnessed UFO's (not aliens, but UFO's) is not enough to say there must be aliens. You need to present the best witnesses, the best evidence to show that aliens are not only plausible, but the best solution. You have done nothing of the sort. So they ALL lied then. Mayors. governors, state police, sheriffs and thousands of civilians......How convenient for you

Starships are big and heavy. Hence they require a lot of energy to move. Even a typical chemical rocket is easily detectable as it enters the solar system (given that it will need to be firing to decelerate). Something like an antimatter rocket (only theoretical speculation) will give off a signature that can be instantly detected as artificial from light years away.

Who says they are all big and heavy? Why should I believe you when you wont even acknowledge their existance? Some videos and reported sightings claim a rather small ball of light.

An asteroid is not comparable to a starship, for several reasons. The simplest of which is that an asteroid is an inert lump of rock at a few dozen K, while a starship is not - it has engines, life support, radiators, and so on. The one is very hard to see by examining the infrared spectrum, the other is utterly trivial.

We can conclude, therefore, that no alien starship has entered the solar system, or maneuvered inside it. Therefore your comments about cattle mutilations are not only false but irrelevant - it cannot have been aliens, because they cannot have come here to do it. You still have been unable to demonstrate they can, or explain (with plausible scientific backing) why we would not have detected them.
We can conclude that you do not know what your talking about


Just one example that is not in pdf (http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:N1TpP6_IweUJ:foia.fbi.gov/cattle/cattle3.pdf+cattle+mutilations+investigation&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)

Kind of hard to do all that shit in big ass, wide open New Mexico, that many times, and leave no track eveidence.

Nobody wants to field this one, do they?

So they ALL lied then. Mayors. governors, state police, sheriffs and thousands of civilians......How convenient for you


The irony of the person who constantly argues for a world-spanning conspiracy... making THIS kind of statement? Awesome.

Nobody wants to field this one, do they?

I notice you didn't in any way address the response I made earlier, where I cited a study that ruled that almost every example could easily be explained as natural predatory activity... so, I feel no real pressure to even click your link.

The irony of the person who constantly argues for a world-spanning conspiracy... making THIS kind of statement? Awesome.

Yet you cant explain it, can you? Most of the ones that report sightings do not end up on talk shows or even the news. They dont make any money from it. Just normal people that report what they saw.

So they ALL lied then. Mayors. governors, state police, sheriffs and thousands of civilians......How convenient for youIt would be nice if, for once, you could read the fucking post you were responding to.

I didn't say they all lied. I said you have to consider their credibility. Something you have not done. And that you should present the best, most credible witnesses. Something you have not done. And then you should present your evidence showing why aliens are the most probable and best fitting solution. You have not done this. You haven't done anything at all to back up your claim.

Nobody wants to field this one, do they?I looked it over, but I missed the part about aliens...

I notice you didn't in any way address the response I made earlier, where I cited a study that ruled that almost every example could easily be explained as natural predatory activity... so, I feel no real pressure to even click your link.

Yea the % of unexplained mutilations would be rather low at that. There are a LOT of cows in the world that have a LOT of natural preditors. But no rational explination for the rest.

Yet you cant explain it, can you? Most of the ones that report sightings do not end up on talk shows or even the news. They dont make any money from it. Just normal people that report what they saw.Hallucinations are out of the question? Misidentification is out of the question? Humans are fallible.

Yea the % of unexplained mutilations would be rather low at that. There are a LOT of cows in the world that have a LOT of natural preditors. But no rational explination for the rest.There are, but you'd rather it be aliens, so you see aliens.

There are.

Name them.

Name them.Predators, attention seeking farmers, unknown bovine disease, basic decomposition, hoaxers, desperate medical students.

Each one of those possibilities is more plausible, remarkably so, than your 'aliens traveling untold distances to cut up cows' idea.

Yet you cant explain it, can you? Most of the ones that report sightings do not end up on talk shows or even the news. They dont make any money from it. Just normal people that report what they saw.

Don't see the logical disconnect?

Most of the people who CLAIM to have seen UFO's... are gaining something from their claim, whether it's true or not. They're garnering attention.

In the meantime - you claim that every government, every person in a position to know, every military, every scientist in the field... ALL must be lying to protect a secret.

How is that MORE realistic than random people making random shit up?

Yea the % of unexplained mutilations would be rather low at that. There are a LOT of cows in the world that have a LOT of natural preditors. But no rational explination for the rest.

Rubbish.

There are plenty of explanations for the rest. Simple cruelty is a pretty good one (I recall reading about a man in England who was mutilating horses for no objective reason, just because he liked doing it).

The fact that there is no overarching conspiracy reason that explains ALL of the 'mutilations' is irrelevant. No one says they ALL have to be connected. Indeed, the vast majority are pretty obviously natural predator action, so there's no CALL for one unifying theory.

Rubbish.

There are plenty of explanations for the rest. Simple cruelty is a pretty good one (I recall reading about a man in England who was mutilating horses for no objective reason, just because he liked doing it).

The fact that there is no overarching conspiracy reason that explains ALL of the 'mutilations' is irrelevant. No one says they ALL have to be connected. Indeed, the vast majority are pretty obviously natural predator action, so there's no CALL for one unifying theory.

Predators, attention seeking farmers, unknown bovine disease, basic decomposition, hoaxers, desperate medical students.

People that leave no track evidence each time that even the state police cannot even find? That have baffled law enforcement officers all over the world to the point that NOT ONE SINGLE ARREST HAS BEEN MADE??!!

If it were an unknown disease, decomposition or preditors the reports would say so. And natural preditors leave very easy tracks to follow.

That leaves no track evidence each time that even the state police cannot even find? That have baffled law enforcement officers all over the world to the point that NOT ONE SINGLE ARREST HAS BEEN MADE??!!

If it were an unknown disease, decomposition or preditors the report would say so. And natural preditors leave very easy tracks to follow.Source that there is no evidence.
Source that the law enforcement is baffled.
Source for worldwide.
Source for claim that if it were an unknown disease, decomposition (considering some of the cases from your link note the animals had been dead a few days to a week prior to discovery), or predators, the report would say so.
And source that says tracks can't be covered, or wash away.

People that leave no track evidence each time that even the state police cannot even find? That have baffled law enforcement officers all over the world to the point that NOT ONE SINGLE ARREST HAS BEEN MADE??!!

If it were an unknown disease, decomposition or preditors the reports would say so. And natural preditors leave very easy tracks to follow.

The guy who was eventually arrested in the UK (therefore, making a lie of THAT claim) turned himself in. Thus - he had left no real traceable evidence.

Almost all of the reports DO say 'natural causes', 'natural decomposition', 'natural predator', or something like that.

Id' really like to see you source some of your claims... and I don't mean a blog where someone else makes the same kind of unbased claims you make - I want links to something peer-reviewed, or in other manner verifiable.

The guy who was eventually arrested in the UK (therefore, making a lie of THAT claim) turned himself in. Thus - he had left no real traceable evidence.

Almost all of the reports DO say 'natural causes', 'natural decomposition', 'natural predator', or something like that.

Id' really like to see you source some of your claims... and I don't mean a blog where someone else makes the same kind of unbased claims you make - I want links to something peer-reviewed, or in other manner verifiable.

The UK guy faked crop circles. He killed no cows.

Several pages at http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/ufoanim.htm in pdf form.

Several pages at http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/ufoanim.htm in pdf form.Several? Try over a hundred.

I'm not scouring through over a hundred pages of FBI files for your evidence.

The UK guy faked crop circles. He killed no cows.I don't think he was referencing the two blokes that did the crop circles considering they weren't arrested to my knowledge.

Source that there is no evidence.
Source that the law enforcement is baffled.

"Pursuant to your correspondence, dated July 10, 1978, regarding a requestfrom Mr. Manuel S. Gomez of Dulce, New Mexico, for a government investigateof the mysterious livestock mutilations which have plagued Rio Arriba Countyfor the past two years,"

mys·te·ri·ous (m-stîr-s)
adj.
1. Of, relating to, or being a mystery: mysterious and infinite truths.
2. Simultaneously arousing wonder and inquisitiveness, and eluding explanation or comprehension:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mysterious


Source for worldwide.

Pick up a newspaper from time to time will ya?

Source for claim that if it were an unknown disease, decomposition (considering some of the cases from your link note the animals had been dead a few days to a week prior to discovery), or predators, the report would say so.
Again, the word "mysterious" would not have been used

And source that says tracks can't be covered, or wash away.
I think you watch too many cartoons

"Pursuant to your correspondence, dated July 10, 1978, regarding a requestfrom Mr. Manuel S. Gomez of Dulce, New Mexico, for a government investigateof the mysterious livestock mutilations which have plagued Rio Arriba Countyfor the past two years,"

mys·te·ri·ous (m-stîr-s)
adj.
1. Of, relating to, or being a mystery: mysterious and infinite truths.
2. Simultaneously arousing wonder and inquisitiveness, and eluding explanation or comprehension:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mysterious


Pick up a newspaper from time to time will ya?

Again, the word "mysterious" would not have been used

I think you watch too many cartoonsSo, no direct sources then?

Unknown diseases don't constitute mystery?

So, no direct sources then?

don't constitute mystery? I guess if he cant spell "Unknown diseases" he might report "mystery" I think he would look it up at some point during a two year investigation though.

And from what I saw on the first link of FBI pages, page 6 and 7, natural causes were supported by veterinarians and a doctor who said that the "circumstances wer consistent with natural phenomena."

It'd be nice if your sources didn't contradict you.

I think you watch too many cartoonsSays the guy who is suggesting there is a massive conspiracy covering up aliens visiting us with technology that defies the laws of physics.

Yeah you're right, tracks being washed away or covered is so out there.

I guess if he cant spell "Unknown diseases" he might report "mystery" I think he would look it up at some point during a two year investigation though.

I know I am jumping into the middle of this conversation however the word "mystery" was used a lot during the 70's reporting. As many other vague eye catching words. Would not at all be surprised at all that a 70's era article said "mysterious" instead of unknown disease. It seemed that reporting back then tried to sensationalize headlines to capture readers. Today news is sterile by comparison.

And from what I saw on the first link of FBI pages, page 6 and 7, natural causes were supported by veterinarians and a doctor who said that the "circumstances wer consistent with natural phenomena."

It'd be nice if your sources didn't contradict you.

Like I said. A LOT of cows and a LOT of natural preditors. (which was why I posted an html link with an unexplained case that has sent everyone on this thread running from it like it was a rabid T-Rex on steroids!)
I know I am jumping into the middle of this conversation however the word "mystery" was used a lot during the 70's reporting. As many other vague eye catching words. Would not at all be surprised at all that a 70's era article said "mysterious" instead of unknown disease. It seemed that reporting back then tried to sensationalize headlines to capture readers. Today news is sterile by comparison.

What's wrong with mysterious disease or natural causes? The police DO try to be accurate when writing reports regarding multi-year investigations.

Yeah you're right, tracks being washed away or covered is so out there.

Out in the big ass openess of New Mexico? One or two times maybe, but twenty-three? I think you SERIOUSLY underestimate just what a tracker or bloodhound can do.

Out in the big ass openess of New Mexico? One or two times maybe, but twenty-three? I think you SERIOUSLY underestimate just what a tracker or bloodhound can do.So it's contained to just New Mexico. And there are only 23 cases? Because earlier you said it was worldwide.

What about birds? Is there anything saying that a native bird(s) couldn't have been the cause? Natural predators doesn't mean just land animals. And if it is extra terrestrial, then why is it that the pieces missing are consistent with predators and decomposition?

Or bugs in general. Like I said, from your own source, these things have been laying around for days at a time in some cases, and after rain in others.

Now so this isn't a completely one sided 'debate,' evidence that it was aliens would be nice to see right about now. Considering that's your claim.

Now so this isn't a completely one sided 'debate,' evidence that it was aliens would be nice to see right about now. Considering that's your claim.

After a dozen or so pages of Dragontides lies and obfuscation, do you think he'd actually provide even a shred of evidence since he keeps hiding behind the "philosophy that isn't" excuse?

In the technical sense, based on this, all we can conclude is that no alien starship has entered our solar system, or maneuvered inside it, since we developed the ability to detect such energy signatures in space.

Well, yes,if you want to be precise about it. Fortunately, we've had such ability for rather a while now.


Who says they are all big and heavy? Why should I believe you when you wont even acknowledge their existance? Some videos and reported sightings claim a rather small ball of light.

If you'd care to explain how an interstellar starship, containing powerful engines, many thousands of kmsec of deltaV, large life support systems, massive radiators to dispose of the heat, and many other complex and large scale components, can not be big and heavy, be my guest.

You see, we aren't saying "Well, this reported sighting has these characteristics, thus alien starships must have these characteristics." We're saying "An alien starship, were one to exist, would have to have these characteristics. Claimed sightings do not fit this, so cannot be of alien starships."


We can conclude that you do not know what your talking about


I explained to you, from scientific principles, exactly why an asteroid and a starship were not comparable, and why a starship would be far easier to detect than an asteroid. Would you care to actually show a problem in my argument? I then continued, arguing that, as we have not detected a starship, claiming that starships were coming here and mutilating cattle would be vanishingly unlikely. You did nothing to actually disprove any part of my argument.

After a dozen or so pages of Dragontides lies and obfuscation, do you think he'd actually provide even a shred of evidence since he keeps hiding behind the "philosophy that isn't" excuse?Hope springs eternal. :p

Ok 41 page post, have a bunch of comments in no order.

First of all, humans love to trick and to be tricked and to be fooled into believing fantastical things. They will also go to great lengths to preserve this fiction. This is why the occupation of Magician exists.

Secondly, just because someone is an astronaut doesnt give their word more credibility then anyone else. It was also an astronaut that drove across country in a diaper with duct tape and a kidnapping plot.

Most importantly, the concept that the government could keep anything a secret for 50 years of this importance is comical. The government cant even keep illegal wiretapping a secret let alone aliens. You dont think that the few hundreds of people that would "HAVE" to know, to do research, the guys who sweep the floors of the saucer hangar etc wouldnt have let something slip in the last 60 years or so? No deathbed confessions? No whispering secrets to wives, girlfriends family? Ha! Fat chance.

Ok 41 page post, have a bunch of comments in no order.

First of all, humans love to trick and to be tricked and to be fooled into believing fantastical things. They will also go to great lengths to preserve this fiction. This is why the occupation of Magician exists.

Secondly, just because someone is an astronaut doesnt give their word more credibility then anyone else. It was also an astronaut that drove across country in a diaper with duct tape and a kidnapping plot.

Most importantly, the concept that the government could keep anything a secret for 50 years of this importance is comical. The government cant even keep illegal wiretapping a secret let alone aliens. You dont think that the few hundreds of people that would "HAVE" to know, to do research, the guys who sweep the floors of the saucer hangar etc wouldnt have let something slip in the last 60 years or so? No deathbed confessions? No whispering secrets to wives, girlfriends family? Ha! Fat chance.

But you see, the Government has this memory erasing device that erase the memory of anyone who has been in contact with aliens.

My proof? Well no one have been able to show definite proof of aliens, and therefore the government must have an equipment like that. /irony

But you see, the Government has this memory erasing device that erase the memory of anyone who has been in contact with aliens.

My proof? Well no one have been able to show definite proof of aliens, and therefore the government must have an equipment like that. /irony

Would everyone in this thread take a look at this please?

http://www.ucandaire.org/imaj/hoodly/neuralizer.jpg

Would everyone in this thread take a look at this please?

http://www.ucandaire.org/imaj/hoodly/neuralizer.jpg

Where am I? And who are you?

Where am I? And who are you?

The Technocratic Principality of Non Aligned States, and I am your creditor. You owe me $5,000.

Would everyone in this thread take a look at this please?

http://www.ucandaire.org/imaj/hoodly/neuralizer.jpgIf only that worked...

The Technocratic Principality of Non Aligned States, and I am your creditor. You owe me $5,000.Fuck. I'll have it to you by Thursday, I promise.

The Technocratic Principality of Non Aligned States, and I am your creditor. You owe me $5,000.

I assume you mean Zimbabwean dollars?

The UK guy faked crop circles. He killed no cows.

Several pages at http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/ufoanim.htm in pdf form.

I wasn't talking about crop circles. I specified a guy who mutilated horses... not cows. I've been talking about that same guy for pages, now.

Shows how much attention you pay.

That have baffled law enforcement officers all over the world to the point that NOT ONE SINGLE ARREST HAS BEEN MADE??!!


This happens all the time. All. The. Time. Nobody knows the identity of many serial killers for instance.

This happens all the time. All. The. Time. Nobody knows the identity of many serial killers for instance.

The Zodiac Killer is an alien. :eek:

So it's contained to just New Mexico. And there are only 23 cases? Because earlier you said it was worldwide.

Way to twist the conversation around. We WERE talking about NM at the time, now werent we?

This happens all the time. All. The. Time. Nobody knows the identity of many serial killers for instance.

You would have a point if no serial killer had ever been caught. But quite a few have.

Who says they are all big and heavy? Why should I believe you when you wont even acknowledge their existance? Some videos and reported sightings claim a rather small ball of light.

Explain how a small ball of light can transport the equipment and personnel necessary to perform laser surgery on cows after relocating them.

Explain how a small ball of light can transport the equipment and personnel necessary to perform laser surgery on cows after relocating them.

Just as easily as a blackhawk helicopter could. (what the gov expects us to believe)

Just as easily as a blackhawk helicopter could. (what the gov expects us to believe)That's the worst argument you keep pushing.

A stupid argument made by the government, does not suddenly make your argument more valid!

Way to twist the conversation around. We WERE talking about NM at the time, now werent we?Actually no, according to you a few pages ago:

People that leave no track evidence each time that even the state police cannot even find? That have baffled law enforcement officers all over the world to the point that NOT ONE SINGLE ARREST HAS BEEN MADE??!!

And you ignored my request for worldwide sources. I'm sorry you're spinning this crap idea so quick you can't remember what you typed two pages ago. That's not my concern.

Just as easily as a blackhawk helicopter could.
I don't see how. You see, black hawk helicopters, whether they are S-67s or UH-60s(the latter is what you're probably thinking of) have physical space which can filled with.....anything that fits. A small ball of light is a small ball of light. How could you carry anything in a ball of light?
(what the gov expects us to believe)

The government expects us to believe that people are mutilating cattle with the help of $6 million military aircraft? YOU expect anyone to believe THAT?

http://wonderfactory.org/comics/2008-02-25-probe.gif

I don't see how. You see, black hawk helicopters, whether they are S-67s or UH-60s(the latter is what you're probably thinking of) have physical space which can filled with.....anything that fits. A small ball of light is a small ball of light. How could you carry anything in a ball of light?


The government expects us to believe that people are mutilating cattle with the help of $6 million military aircraft? YOU expect anyone to believe THAT?

Those balls of light like on the Iraq video are not as small as you are portraying them to be.

Hell no! I sure do not believe the helicopter story.

Actually no, according to you a few pages ago:



And you ignored my request for worldwide sources. I'm sorry you're spinning this crap idea so quick you can't remember what you typed two pages ago. That's not my concern.

Global reports are old news:
http://truthseekersmidlands.tripod.com/id34.html
For over thirty years bemused farmers have been finding the mutilated corpses of their livestock. These incidents were first noticed in the United States but have been witnessed all over the world. Nobody knows what is killing these animals but there have been many attempts to explain the phenomenon.

Now how are those folks avoiding trackers, bloodhouds or avoiding detection whist in a Blackhawk?

Those balls of light like on the Iraq video are not as small as you are portraying them to be.
YOU called them small balls of light. YOU portrayed them as small by calling them small balls of light.

Hell no! I sure do not believe the helicopter story.

You misunderstand. Do you seriously expect anyone to believe that the government claims that cattle mutilation was carried out by people in UH-60s, which cost $6 million? Because that sounds like total bullshit to me. If those claims were true, then the government would effectively be saying that it is randomly mutilating cattle. Say what you want about the incompetence and stupidity of politicians, nobody is that fucking stupid.

You misunderstand. Do you seriously expect anyone to believe that the government claims that cattle mutilation was carried out by people in UH-60s, which cost $6 million?

Oh yea!
http://www.crystalinks.com/animal_mutilation.html
There have been reports that with some witnessed cattle mutilations, humans were seen to come in a what appeared as a UFO. When its cockpit lights came on, they revealed helicopter rotors above the craft. It is alleged that these events were done by humans arriving in helicopters which were disguised as flying saucers, as disinformation to distract US public attention from real secret aircraft development.

Like I'm sure they would test a new secret helicopter over a farm at the EXACT same time there were a series of mutilations.

Other links with helicopter fabrication info:
http://paul.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/ufo/to-be-merged/cattle-mutes-alabama

http://www.bibleufo.com/articlecattle.htm

Oh yea!
http://www.crystalinks.com/animal_mutilation.html


Like I'm sure they would test a new secret helicopter over a farm at the EXACT same time there were a series of mutilations.

Other links with helicopter fabrication info:
http://paul.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/ufo/to-be-merged/cattle-mutes-alabama

http://www.bibleufo.com/articlecattle.htm

Argh, my brain. You do realise that none of the people saying that the UFOs looked like black helicopters(which is not the same as a black hawk helicopter, ffs) are representatives of the US government. Let me put this simply, and in bold red letter, just in case.

THE US GOVERNMENT HAS NEVER EVER CLAIMED THAT IT IS MUTILATING CATTLE. SOME CRACKPOT CONSPIRACY THEORISTS DID. HUGE FUCKING DIFFERENCE.

Those balls of light like on the Iraq video are not as small as you are portraying them to be.


Prove it.

Argh, my brain. You do realise that none of the people saying that the UFOs looked like black helicopters(which is not the same as a black hawk helicopter, ffs) are representatives of the US government. Let me put this simply, and in bold red letter, just in case.

THE US GOVERNMENT HAS NEVER EVER CLAIMED THAT IT IS MUTILATING CATTLE. SOME CRACKPOT CONSPIRACY THEORISTS DID. HUGE FUCKING DIFFERENCE.
http://www.unexplainedstuff.com/Invaders-from-Outer-Space/The-UFO-Mystery-Grows-Cattle-mutilations.html

Regardless of a great deal of official skepticism toward the subject of cattle mutilations, it does appear to comprise a genuine mystery. And every time that a mutilated cow is found with its tongue, eyes, ears, anus, udder, and genitalia removed without apparently shedding a drop of blood and without the culprits leaving any tracks whatsoever, aliens, satanic cultists, and crews of unmarked black helicopters are named as the suspects

Prove it.

Watch the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9JkFsTPEPE&feature=related


And why is this even an issue since we are talking about a small, hand held device?
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=bendable-laser-scalpel

http://www.unexplainedstuff.com/Invaders-from-Outer-Space/The-UFO-Mystery-Grows-Cattle-mutilations.html


It's nice to see at long last, Dragontide is actually agreeing with his detractors by providing links to the crackpots they mentioned instead of credible and identifiable government sources. Tune in tomorrow, where he brings us the ravings of a drunk hobo on the invasion of mutant pumpkins led by warlord plumber Mario.

It's nice to see at long last, Dragontide is actually agreeing with his detractors by providing links to the crackpots they mentioned instead of credible and identifiable government sources. Tune in tomorrow, where he brings us the ravings of a drunk hobo on the invasion of mutant pumpkins led by warlord plumber Mario.

Attack the messenger and not the messege! Typical of you NAS! :rolleyes:

Attack the messenger and not the messege! Typical of you NAS! :rolleyes:

He merely pointed out that you don't have credibility, and that one of the reasons is because you cite 'messeges' like that website article.

That article didn't even have sources or works cited or references or anything. It's just a handful of paragraphs written blog-like by anonymous on the internet.

There isn't a message to be had there.

Attack the messenger and not the messege! Typical of you NAS! :rolleyes:

I have it on the highest authority (me) that Dragontide is an escaped lunatic from a high security detainment facility for the mentally deranged. I need no proof because I said it on the internet, like all the other sources he takes as gospel, thereby, it must be true.

Global reports are old news:
http://truthseekersmidlands.tripod.com/id34.html


Now how are those folks avoiding trackers, bloodhouds or avoiding detection whist in a Blackhawk?What's wonderful about the pictures on your source is that they look entirely consistent with decomposition and predators.

And please drop the 'black hawk' business. I refer you to:


Just as easily as a blackhawk helicopter could. (what the gov expects us to believe)
That's the worst argument you keep pushing.

A stupid argument made by the government, does not suddenly make your argument more valid!

Those balls of light like on the Iraq video are not as small as you are portraying them to be.We have no reference as to the size of the objects in the video, just like we have no reference to their speed. Stop pretending you do.

Global reports are old news:
http://truthseekersmidlands.tripod.com/id34.htmlAnd try and aim for a reputable source next time. A biased tripod site doesn't constitute an unbiased news source.

Those balls of light like on the Iraq video are not as small as you are portraying them to be.

Doesn't matter (apologies for the pun). You cannot carry anything in a 'ball of light', no matter if it is 1 millimeter or 1 kilometer in diameter.


Hell no! I sure do not believe the helicopter story.

Fine. We have already provided (and provided reliable evidence for) a perfectly credible alternative, namely natural predation. As it stands, your only argument for disproving this is "It ain't that. Nuh-uh" an stamping your foot.

Fine. We have already provided (and provided reliable evidence for) a perfectly credible alternative, namely natural predation. As it stands, your only argument for disproving this is "It ain't that. Nuh-uh" an stamping your foot.

Name ONE (1) natural preditor that can elude trackers, bloodhounds, fool an expert into thinking laser surgery had been preformed and does not leave bite marks.

Name ONE (1) natural preditor that can elude trackers, bloodhounds, fool an expert into thinking laser surgery had been preformed and does not leave bite marks.

The laser-eyed, toothless escaping snake of Navarre?

Name ONE (1) natural preditor that can elude trackers, bloodhounds, fool an expert into thinking laser surgery had been preformed and does not leave bite marks.

Provide one reliably certified incident where all of the above occurred in that incident and fulfill each and every specification mentioned. Links to crackpots who put whatever their imagination demands will result in immediate fire ant laced pieing.

Provide one reliably certified incident where all of the above occurred in that incident and fulfill each and every specification mentioned. Links to crackpots who put whatever their imagination demands will result in immediate fire ant laced pieing.

Not the brightest bulb on the chandelier are you? I am the one seeking that information. I provided links. No one can even explain the New Mexico cases. Or what part of "TRACK EVIDENCE: NONE" do you not understand?

Not the brightest bulb on the chandelier are you? I am the one seeking that information. I provided links. No one can even explain the New Mexico cases. Or what part of "TRACK EVIDENCE: NONE" do you not understand?

The links you provided were by crackpots who took 5% fact from FBI reports and built 95% of their assertion out of their behinds and your continued insistence on ignorance proves that you do not seek information, but gratification. You were also warned not to try to bring up the crackpots and the consequences if you did.

http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll269/Mashadarof402/Pieing.jpg

Name ONE (1) natural preditor that can elude trackers, bloodhounds, fool an expert into thinking laser surgery had been preformed and does not leave bite marks.

Provide reliable evidence that this is the case.

Furthermore, its rather cute how you ignore completely the destruction of your hypothesis. Not very useful for a productive debate, but cute nonetheless.

The links you provided were by crackpots who took 5% fact and built 95% of their assertion out of their behinds and your continued insistence on ignorance proves that you do not seek information, but gratification. You were also warned not to try to bring up the crackpots.

http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll269/Mashadarof402/Pieing.jpg

Provide reliable evidence that this is the case.

Furthermore, its rather cute how you ignore completely the destruction of your hypothesis. Not very useful for a productive debate, but cute nonetheless.


Another coward attacked Hickock. (Jack McCall) He too was nothing but a loudmouth.

Are you both claiming that the invesigators and/or reports on This link (http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:N1TpP6_IweUJ:foia.fbi.gov/cattle/cattle3.pdf+cattle+mutilations+investigation&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us) are fake?

Are you both claiming that the invesigators and/or reports on This link (http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:N1TpP6_IweUJ:foia.fbi.gov/cattle/cattle3.pdf+cattle+mutilations+investigation&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us) are fake?

Your link is filled with literal gibberish and is damned near unreadable.

Example:


ORGANS ..TAKEN:ïgTêsCiclêr;3Ariisyrrectum^".also#'tongue and'left ear

Your link is filled with literal gibberish and is damned near unreadable.

Example:

Oh I see. I am wrong because you never got hooked on phonics! Which of these are unclear to you?:
OWNER: . Sara Britt - 33 miles West of Clayton, New MexicoANIMAL DESCRIPTION: Hereford bull. 3 years, 1400-1500 lbs.DATE DIED: 36-48 hours before October 11POSITION FOUND IN: Rifjht sideORGANS TAKENri^Scroturn.-úpéhis," rectumTRACK EVIDENTE: None statedINSPECTOR: Frank Best .

•DATE: October 13, 1975OWNER: Alvin Stocton - Raton, Hew Mexico , . .ANIMAL DESCRIPTION: BullDATE DIED: October 11, 1975 ' ,• POSITION FOUî.'D IN: Right sideORGANS. TAKEN:; ¿Scrotum,-.v testicles, penis-and end of sheath"'.TRACK EVIDENCE: Only those made by Mr. Stocton. Sheriff Grubilnik,•• •" and Ben KootenSfei INSPECTOR: Ben Wooten

'DATE: October 15, 1975OWNER: W. F. Martin - Springer, New MexicoANIMAL DESCRIPTION: Black bull 'DATE DIED: October 15, 1975POSITION FOUND IN: '■ORGANS TAKEN: Rectum, penis, testicles'TRACK EVIDENCE: None statedINSPECTOR: '. Harold Gilbert ' .

DATE: October 18. 1975 ";OWNER: Rock Ranch - Kara Visa., New MexicoANIMAL DESCRIPTION: Black angus cowDATE DIED: Found October 16 - had been dead seven to' eight days priorPOSITION FOUND IN: Laying on back '..-..._ :ORGANS TAKEN: Rectum and vagina-' 'TRACK EVIDENCE: None noted .INSPECTOR: Dwayne Mass.oy ';.;

DATE: November 5, 1975 •' :OWNER:, C. A. Ragland - Tucumcari, New MexicoANIMAL. DESCRIPTION: Heifer calf, 450 lbs. 'DATE DIED: November 5, 1975POSITION FOUND IN: • .ORGANS. TAKEN: . All sex organs, bag'skinned off, flesh gone ••TRACK EVIDENCE: None statedINSPECTOR:. D. F. • Garnett .. '

OWNER: Herman Riley -ANIMAL DESCRIPTION: Black cowDATE DIED: November 11. 1975' POSITION FOUND IN:" Right side .ORGANS TAKEN:¿¿Tongue,".ieyeS(-exposed)TRACK EVIDENCE: NoneINSPECTOR:' Mel Sedillo. Jr.

DATE: November 11. 1975OWNER: Forrest Atchley -ANIMAL DESCRIPTION: 6 to 7 mo. old steer calf, black-mottle faced,still on mother.DATE DIED: November 8 or 9, 1975.POSITION FOUND IN: .TRACK EVIDENCE: None noticedINSPECTOR: Dwayne Kassey

DATE: November 13, 1975OWNER: M & M Feed Lot -ANIMAL DESCRIPTION: Yearling heiferDATE DIED: November- .12, 1975•POSITION FOUND IN: Right side'ORGANS TAKEN: "Udder and sexual organs'TRACK EVIDENCE: NoneINSPECTOR: Bud Kc Adams



With more that have a few mistakes that look there was a slight encryption problem of some sort but quite legible.

And this letter is pretty clear:
The Honorable Harrison Schmitt
U. S. Senator for New Mexico
1251 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D. C. 20510

Dear Senator Schmitt:Pursuant to your correspondence, dated July 10, 1978, regarding a requestfrom Mr. Manuel S. Gomez of Dulce, New Mexico, for a government investigateof the mysterious livestock mutilations which have plagued Rio Arriba Countyfor the past two years, attached hereto kindly find official New Mexico StatePolice Offense/Incident Reports submitted by Officer Gabe Valdez, togetherwith reports from members of the New Mexico Livestock Board, for your informât-and whatever disposition you deem appropriate.Trusting the information is satisfactory, I remainVery truly yours,gationCHTSÍ MARTIN E. VIGIlíT DIRECTOR-New Mexico State Police

Oh I see. I am wrong because not even half of the things I've claimed, like laser surgery or bloodhound use, are mentioned in the report which mentions only cattle mutilation and nothing else that even vaguely matches the things I've claimed that went along with it.

That about sums it up, if you were the slightest bit honest and not the sort to spend the last 30 odd pages with wild speculation and dodging in an attempt to feed your frail delusions.

Oh I see. I am wrong because you never got hooked on phonics! Which of these are unclear to you?:

I don't know about him, but how you'd get the idea of aliens stealing the genitals and rectums of our farm animals is pretty unclear to me.

A) Kinda convenient that every asteroid in interstellar space happens to be on an exact collision course with the Earth, so that they can stay hidden behind it all the way.
Convenient...maybe....Perhaps the asteroid itself is the spaceship driven by mass drivers or perhaps an object accelerated in advance.

Depending on the size of the asteroid, several kilometers of rock is rather good insulator and heating it to detectable, anomalous range (unexplainable by internal processes, solar or radioactive heating, earlier impact heat or some other pre-existing heat) would soak up a a lot of energy even without more or less directed cooling system.

Besides, collision course is hardly a good option for interstellar study & anal probing - Something like para-/hyperbolic trajectory across the far side of the solar system is more in line of what I'm thinking.

Of course, a 10 meter rock and patience could then be used as a disguise for Earthly travel. ;)
B) Yep, it's called a radiator. Your minimum area is a 60 degree cone or so.
By the way, is there some specific physical law that forbids tightbeaming excess heat away?
C) Definitely - to slow yourself down, you need to apply force in front of you. Any plausible engine system will then be incredibly obvious.
Yes, optimally you'd spend around 50%/50% on acceleration/decleration phase in interstellar travel based on propulsion technologies we can concieve.



However, for the sake of argument...

Conceiving a trajectory where you'd never point your engines exactly in the direction of your target doesn't sound impossbile.

OTOH - if you have time - you can do most of the braking after the target: A pattern like 5%-90%-5% acc/coasting/decl would stop the ship at few tenths of LY, ~10-20 kiloAU, on the otherside of the sun when the origin is some of the nearest stars.

Adding more interesting trajectory - basically a spiral one - might move the relative stop point much, much closer.

Actually, you won't leave a trail behind. In space, heat is lost through radiating it away. Your 'trail' will be a slowly spreading cone of infrared photons, which is not visible from any angle except one inside the cone.
Space isn't empty: The propulsion would heat interstellar gas after its wake.

Whether it's detectable is debatable and probably circumstancial.




Of course, this has nothing to do with the topic of UFOs moving around undetectable using telportation, wormholes, dimension or warp drives.

I don't know about him, but how you'd get the idea of aliens stealing the genitals and rectums of our farm animals is pretty unclear to me.

SOMETHING did it. That part is very clear. But how something or someone CAN do that and leave no track evidence is the mystery. There is simply not one single natural preditor on Earth that can do that. When an animal attacks, the bite and claw marks are pretty easy to detect.

I may have overspoke when I used the word "bloodhound" I don't know what the New Mexico state police had back then. But they would be pretty stupid if they never used a tracking dog at some point in time over a 2 year period. But human trackers are pretty hard to fool everytime too.

Clearly the aliens have been visiting us for some time. They've formed themselves into an important political group widely known as 'the Democrats'.

Their aim is to bring down the hegemonic power from within through the spread of cultural degeneration, the destruction of religion, and the encouragement of sexually deviant behaviour. With the world's sole superpower on its knees, we shall be defenceless against brutal anal probing and whatever else aliens do these days.

SOMETHING did it. That part is very clear. But how something or someone CAN do that and leave no track evidence is the mystery. There is simply not one single natural preditor on Earth that can do that. When an animal attacks, the bite and claw marks are pretty easy to detect.
You're being silly.

Bacteria, worms, etc.. can consume flesh an then die from, for example, methane poisoning without leaving any specific marks.


The main reason for the insanity of alien-cattle-mutilation hypothesis is that it doesn't make any F*ING sense at all - There's simply NO PLAUSIBLE motivation behind technologically superior species travelling lightyears only to chop up bovines.

You're being silly.

Bacteria, worms, etc.. can consume flesh an then die from, for example, methane poisoning without leaving any specific marks.


Traces of methane or bacteria can be detected. And there would be some big damm worm holes nearby if they were the cause. (which should give you a good indication as to why the director of the New Mexico State Police chose to use the word "mystery" when describing a two [2] year investigation to U.S. Senator Harrison Schmitt)

SOMETHING did it. That part is very clear. But how something or someone CAN do that and leave no track evidence is the mystery. There is simply not one single natural preditor on Earth that can do that. When an animal attacks, the bite and claw marks are pretty easy to detect.

People used to say the same stuff about crop circles. And you failed to mention the most likely source of this mutilation that could go undetected and unlike any animal. Humans.

Humans do weird stuff to cattle. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090503/ap_on_re_us/us_calf_killed;_ylt=AjEfVc9bt3CTA3FVFJRww1fZn414

Traces of methane or bacteria can be detected.

So can neutrinos, if you have several hundred tons of ultra pure water and a battery of million dollar sensors. Do you know precisely what measures the police did or didn't carry out in the investigation? Whether it was exhaustive or cursory? No? Your report doesn't say? Too bad for you then. Not one of your allegations holds up. Again.

Convenient...maybe....Perhaps the asteroid itself is the spaceship driven by mass drivers or perhaps an object accelerated in advance.

Depending on the size of the asteroid, several kilometers of rock is rather good insulator and heating it to detectable, anomalous range (unexplainable by internal processes, solar or radioactive heating, earlier impact heat or some other pre-existing heat) would soak up a a lot of energy even without more or less directed cooling system.

Granted, for the sake of argument. However, over the course of an interstellar journey, the asteroid, if physically part of the craft or acting as a heat shield, would roughly equalise temperatures - it's absorbing heat emitted, so will radiate it again. By the time you reach the target, this doesn't help much - you're hiding behind a large lump of rock that's radiating rather nicely in infrared.


Besides, collision course is hardly a good option for interstellar study & anal probing - Something like para-/hyperbolic trajectory across the far side of the solar system is more in line of what I'm thinking.


If you want to be able to shield your exhaust and engines, you have to use a collision course - it's the only trajectory which maintains a constant bearing w.r.t the target. Otherwise you need to rotate yourself and your heat shield around, and this requires side-venting exhaust, which will be visible.


Of course, a 10 meter rock and patience could then be used as a disguise for Earthly travel. ;)

By the way, is there some specific physical law that forbids tightbeaming excess heat away?

When you narrow down more than 60 degrees or so, you need to generate more waste heat via heat pumps than you can dispose of in that cone. This requires you to increase the size of your radiators, to the point where they are many times larger than the ship, and then they can simply be seen directly. Basically, it's about the second law of thermodynamics.

Useful links, depending how much time you have to spend reading, are this (http://projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3au.html), this (http://projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3w.html#nostealth), this (although more focused on radiators in combat) (http://projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3y.html#radiators), and this thread on rec.arts.sf (http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.sf.science/browse_frm/thread/32131f6b0b15b863/b9b22d236738682c). (The first three links are from the Atomic Rockets site (http://projectrho.com/rocket/index.html), one of the best resources out there for information about realistic space travel and combat)


Yes, optimally you'd spend around 50%/50% on acceleration/decleration phase in interstellar travel based on propulsion technologies we can concieve.

Based on any propulsion technologies - the brachistochrone* trajectory is the most efficient from a time perspective, as it gives you the maximum average velocity and the minimum distance.

*Accelerate until halfway there, skew flip, decelerate again.


However, for the sake of argument...

Conceiving a trajectory where you'd never point your engines exactly in the direction of your target doesn't sound impossbile.

OTOH - if you have time - you can do most of the braking after the target: A pattern like 5%-90%-5% acc/coasting/decl would stop the ship at few tenths of LY, ~10-20 kiloAU, on the otherside of the sun when the origin is some of the nearest stars.

Adding more interesting trajectory - basically a spiral one - might move the relative stop point much, much closer.

Interesting suggestion. Of course, if you're using something like a Torchship (http://projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3i.html), as you would need to be to make interstellar travel anywhere near practical for speed, we'd be able to detect the energy released in your exhaust when you accelerate from somewhere like Alpha Centauri. And trivially able to detect the waste heat when you decelerate only a few kiloAU away.

The other problem with something like 5%-90%-5% is that you end up spending insane amounts of time in transit, which massively increases the required reliability of your life support systems. Guaranteed for two weeks is one thing, two months is harder, two years harder still, two decades damn near impossible. Thinking about going up to two centuries, two millennia, or even longer raises very very serious issues.


Space isn't empty: The propulsion would heat interstellar gas after its wake.

Whether it's detectable is debatable and probably circumstancial.

More significantly than that - the reaction mass from the propulsion system will be a bright plume in the infrared spectrum, being a lot of very hot gas. Won't last long, but will be insanely noticeable.


Of course, this has nothing to do with the topic of UFOs moving around undetectable using telportation, wormholes, dimension or warp drives.

Well, no, but I stick to science.

People used to say the same stuff about crop circles. And you failed to mention the most likely source of this mutilation that could go undetected and unlike any animal. Humans.

Humans do weird stuff to cattle. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090503/ap_on_re_us/us_calf_killed;_ylt=AjEfVc9bt3CTA3FVFJRww1fZn414

They say he shot it with an arrow and slit it's throat. See how easy it is for investigators to come to that conclusion? Did it say anything about the dummies trying to hide their tracks? No! Because regular old cattle thieves still do exist. (a point that is irrelevent)

See how I handled that everybody? Did I bitch because it's a Yahoo link? No! If my links are bogus then you all should have absolutly no problem in explaining WHY they are bogus instead of the tired old, "Oh that link sux"

Otherwise you need to rotate yourself and your heat shield around, and this requires side-venting exhaust, which will be visible.

Unless you've got some really complicated internal gyroscope system which you bleed kinetic energy from, you're going to need side venting or at least some form of exhaust vectoring in any case? If you want to steer at least.

Unless you've got some really complicated internal gyroscope system which you bleed kinetic energy from, you're going to need side venting or at least some form of exhaust vectoring in any case? If you want to steer at least.

Well, you could use reaction wheels. Then all you have to bleed off is waste heat, which you can dump through your radiators (which, for the sake of that argument, are presumed to confine their emissions to a relatively narrow cone).

Of course, you don't need to steer much at all in an interstellar journey. To see why, just think about it. Let's build a mental model. Say 1AU is 1mm. Then the Sun is a little glowing dot, and the Earth a tiny speck about 1mm away. Pluto orbits from 3-5cm distant, so the whole solar system has a maximum diameter of 10cm on this scale. Picture it floating there over your hand. The next star system - Alpha Centauri - is about 270m away on this scale.

Between there and us, utterly nothing, apart from the very occasional hydrogen atom. No unpredicted forces, no surprises, no nothing. Literally nothing to do but accelerate towards your destination, until you need to begin decelerating again. Hence no need to maneuver - just plug in the numbers to start with, and off you go. For your skew flip in the middle, reaction wheels could work quite well, especially if you had an accelerate - coast - decelerate trajectory.

See how I handled that everybody? Did I bitch because it's a Yahoo link? No! If my links are bogus then you all should have absolutly no problem in explaining WHY they are bogus instead of the tired old, "Oh that link sux"Yes, because we all know you are thwarted by rational arguments. They've worked so well against you in the last 40 pages.

And requesting a link that couldn't have been made by a thirteen year old with a bias isn't bad debating.

They say he shot it with an arrow and slit it's throat. See how easy it is for investigators to come to that conclusion? Did it say anything about the dummies trying to hide their tracks? No! Because regular old cattle thieves still do exist. (a point that is irrelevent)

See how I handled that everybody? Did I bitch because it's a Yahoo link? No! If my links are bogus then you all should have absolutly no problem in explaining WHY they are bogus instead of the tired old, "Oh that link sux"

If you had bitched, it would have been irrelevant - that link was Yahoo hosting an AP story. Quite different to some random schmuck on Geocities.

Well, you could use reaction wheels. Then all you have to bleed off is waste heat, which you can dump through your radiators (which, for the sake of that argument, are presumed to confine their emissions to a relatively narrow cone).

Of course, you don't need to steer much at all in an interstellar journey. To see why, just think about it. Let's build a mental model. Say 1AU is 1mm. Then the Sun is a little glowing dot, and the Earth a tiny speck about 1mm away. Pluto orbits from 3-5cm distant, so the whole solar system has a maximum diameter of 10cm on this scale. Picture it floating there over your hand. The next star system - Alpha Centauri - is about 270m away on this scale.

Between there and us, utterly nothing, apart from the very occasional hydrogen atom. No unpredicted forces, no surprises, no nothing. Literally nothing to do but accelerate towards your destination, until you need to begin decelerating again. Hence no need to maneuver - just plug in the numbers to start with, and off you go. For your skew flip in the middle, reaction wheels could work quite well, especially if you had an accelerate - coast - decelerate trajectory.

I don't know about you, but plotting an interstellar trip with that would take years at the very least with the assumption that there'd be no surprises is a pretty big risk to take. There's always a good chance that between here and there you might run afoul of planetoid bodies that were knocked out of orbit from their primaries and are dark bodies in space.

Reaction wheels might be good for gradual heading changes for redirecting your thrust, but they're pretty slow.

If you had bitched, it would have been irrelevant - that link was Yahoo hosting an AP story. Quite different to some random schmuck on Geocities.

And youll notice in the article, that they took actual pictures of the people involved in the event and police actually located and interviewed them.

When you have taken close up police lineup pictures and have police interviewing the aliens as to their odd love for bovines then ill be a believer. (Bonus points if alien has same mohawk as this retard)

I don't know about you, but plotting an interstellar trip with that would take years at the very least with the assumption that there'd be no surprises is a pretty big risk to take. There's always a good chance that between here and there you might run afoul of planetoid bodies that were knocked out of orbit from their primaries and are dark bodies in space.

Reaction wheels might be good for gradual heading changes for redirecting your thrust, but they're pretty slow.

Not much of a chance - even if your ship is a 100 kilometers long, that's tinier than a dust speck on the interstellar scale. Even if interstellar space was swarming with planets - if there were a hundred Jupiters between the stars for every planet in a solar system - then they would still be separated by over two meters on this scale, and that's putting them roughly on a line.

But yes, you can have thrusters and keep an eye on things nonetheless. Even so, it's not a particularly major concern. And you also have to factor in how fast you can change heading - at high (relativistic) speeds, there's not much you can do even if you do detect a spare planet in your course, unless it's still a hundred gigameters or so away at the very least.

Granted, for the sake of argument. However, over the course of an interstellar journey, the asteroid, if physically part of the craft or acting as a heat shield, would roughly equalise temperatures - it's absorbing heat emitted, so will radiate it again. By the time you reach the target, this doesn't help much - you're hiding behind a large lump of rock that's radiating rather nicely in infrared.

I'm uncertain whether an asteroid would heat up noticably - read: anomalously - from background radiation.

In case the actual spaceship is coasting behind an asteroid the "dark side" of the asteroid could be coated with reflective material preventing the asteroid from heating up as there's no actual heat transfer aside from radiation between the asteroid and the ship.

In case the asteroid itself is the spaceship then there's still a lot of mass to be heated up which can further be more or less directionally cooled.

The rationale I have behind this reasoning is that, for example, Earth, Moon and Mars have various internal processess generate huge amounts of heat but the biggest difference to blackbody temperature is explained by reflected light (Moon) or greenhouse effect (Mars, Earth) rather than internal processes (radioactive decay, tidal heating).

Of course, I'm no expert at heat conductivity or heat generation of asteroids and mass driver engines. :wink:

If you want to be able to shield your exhaust and engines, you have to use a collision course - it's the only trajectory which maintains a constant bearing w.r.t the target. Otherwise you need to rotate yourself and your heat shield around, and this requires side-venting exhaust, which will be visible.
There's a lot of time to turn a ship around'n about and minute mass ejecta is hardly noticeable.

A more acute concern would be disengaging from the asteroid which perhaps could be masked as an impact event under the cover of sun (ie. on the other side of it).

Of course, the travel speed would be limited to - perhaps - a magnitude larger than orbital speed of yer average planet: Several hundred to maybe few thousand km/s meaning transit time in millennia. Whether that's practical or not depends on your species...a sequioia would shake it off, humans probably not quite so. :)

When you narrow down more than 60 degrees or so, you need to generate more waste heat via heat pumps than you can dispose of in that cone. This requires you to increase the size of your radiators, to the point where they are many times larger than the ship, and then they can simply be seen directly. Basically, it's about the second law of thermodynamics.
Dunno, I would be inclined to think that the actual surface area of the radiator vs the heat disspation necessary would render solutions other than a specific space angle.

Though, I most certainly don't know nearly enough about the issue to "know any better", so to speak.
(The first three links are from the Atomic Rockets site (http://projectrho.com/rocket/index.html), one of the best resources out there for information about realistic space travel and combat)
That's a great site, bit slanted towards what we know now perhaps.

Based on any propulsion technologies - the brachistochrone* trajectory is the most efficient from a time perspective, as it gives you the maximum average velocity and the minimum distance.
I don't like the term 'any propulsion technology', that's an overreaching statement.

Consider for example ridiculously huge solar sails as interstellar drive:
- If the star with higher luminosity is the "accelerating drive" then you have to withdraw the sails early so that the weaker star can declerate you in time
- If the star with higher luminosity is the "declerating drive" then you have to close the sails early in order to preserve enough speed to reach the target star

:D

*Accelerate until halfway there, skew flip, decelerate again.
There's a velocity & potential energy (relative to both star and galactic core) difference between stars, which probably impacts the optimal engine use.

Interesting suggestion. Of course, if you're using something like a Torchship (http://projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3i.html), as you would need to be to make interstellar travel anywhere near practical for speed, we'd be able to detect the energy released in your exhaust when you accelerate from somewhere like Alpha Centauri. And trivially able to detect the waste heat when you decelerate only a few kiloAU away.
The drive could very well be better directed with only the excess - waste - heat radiating outwards at a wider angle (angle depending on the cooling systems).

For that matter, I am again inclined to think that at a distance of A. Centauri the star itself would hide practically any known energy propulsion system even if pointed towards us, possibly excluding ridiculously powerful nuclear yield impulse propulsion which might reach 1/100th of the energy output of the star during the "impulse".

I'm also quite uncertain whether even that type of engine - nuclear impulse drive driven by a stream of Tsar Bombas - would be detectable at all from that distance. Probably yes, but few kiloton yields instead? Of course, the closer you get the easier you're detected if you spend trillions of watts fo' breaking...


Perhaps 10-40-50 division (acc/cst/dec) with directed engines and roundabout course?

Thinking about going up to two centuries, two millennia, or even longer raises very very serious issues.
We're probably assuming an advanced civilization here so giving them some leeway in reliability section might not be such a bad idea.

Besides, you only have to look at the pyramids to see how proper engineering can last ;)
More significantly than that - the reaction mass from the propulsion system will be a bright plume in the infrared spectrum, being a lot of very hot gas. Won't last long, but will be insanely noticeable.
What if the engine output is basically (waste heat +) an unidirectional stream of particles - or pellets - accelerated at high efficiency?

I'm uncertain whether an asteroid would heat up noticably - read: anomalously - from background radiation.

In case the actual spaceship is coasting behind an asteroid the "dark side" of the asteroid could be coated with reflective material preventing the asteroid from heating up as there's no actual heat transfer aside from radiation between the asteroid and the ship.

In case the asteroid itself is the spaceship then there's still a lot of mass to be heated up which can further be more or less directionally cooled.

The rationale I have behind this reasoning is that, for example, Earth, Moon and Mars have various internal processess generate huge amounts of heat but the biggest difference to blackbody temperature is explained by reflected light (Moon) or greenhouse effect (Mars, Earth) rather than internal processes (radioactive decay, tidal heating).

Of course, I'm no expert at heat conductivity or heat generation of asteroids and mass driver engines. :wink:

Well argued. I'll grant this, then.


There's a lot of time to turn a ship around'n about and minute mass ejecta is hardly noticeable.

A more acute concern would be disengaging from the asteroid which perhaps could be masked as an impact event under the cover of sun (ie. on the other side of it).

Of course, the travel speed would be limited to - perhaps - a magnitude larger than orbital speed of yer average planet: Several hundred to maybe few thousand km/s meaning transit time in millennia. Whether that's practical or not depends on your species...a sequioia would shake it off, humans probably not quite so. :)

Granting +1 order of magnitude, you're looking at approximately 4500 years transit time to reach here-ish (from AC). That's rather slow.


Dunno, I would be inclined to think that the actual surface area of the radiator vs the heat disspation necessary would render solutions other than a specific space angle.

Though, I most certainly don't know nearly enough about the issue to "know any better", so to speak.


Well, you can radiate at wider angles - for the greatest efficiency, you use 4 radiators in a cross shape, or 3 in a triangle, and cover nearly the whole circle available. For obvious reasons, this is much easier to spot.


That's a great site, bit slanted towards what we know now perhaps.


Well, yes - it accepts science, and looks at what that implies. Really, without starting from a principle like that, there's not much of a useful discussion you can have.


I don't like the term 'any propulsion technology', that's an overreaching statement.

Consider for example ridiculously huge solar sails as interstellar drive:
- If the star with higher luminosity is the "accelerating drive" then you have to withdraw the sails early so that the weaker star can declerate you in time
- If the star with higher luminosity is the "declerating drive" then you have to close the sails early in order to preserve enough speed to reach the target star

:D


Snazzy. Of course, a solar sail is not quite what I was referring to. How about "any drive system based on reaction mass" or something along those lines? So basically, anything which works by shoving something backwards to push you forwards, be that something photons, ions, plasma, or bricks.


There's a velocity & potential energy (relative to both star and galactic core) difference between stars, which probably impacts the optimal engine use.


Intruiging, but minor overall, especially if you're aiming to get up to relativistic speeds to keep travel time down.


The drive could very well be better directed with only the excess - waste - heat radiating outwards at a wider angle (angle depending on the cooling systems).

Not sure I quite understand what this is supposed to imply.


For that matter, I am again inclined to think that at a distance of A. Centauri the star itself would hide practically any known energy propulsion system even if pointed towards us, possibly excluding ridiculously powerful nuclear yield impulse propulsion which might reach 1/100th of the energy output of the star during the "impulse".

I'm also quite uncertain whether even that type of engine - nuclear impulse drive driven by a stream of Tsar Bombas - would be detectable at all from that distance. Probably yes, but few kiloton yields instead? Of course, the closer you get the easier you're detected if you spend trillions of watts fo' breaking...


Well, a fusion drive system (hence "torchship") tops out, from here (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3c2.html#table), at about 500,000 Gigawatts, which is 500TW or, more usefully, 5*10^14 W. That does pale in comparison to a sun-like star, which is around the area of 5*10^25 W. However, distance again comes to the rescue. Working from the trajectory you give in just a moment, and on a scale of 1AU -> 1mm, you'll spend 20-25 meters accelerating. Given that the diameter of a star system on this scale is about 10cm, you're well clear of it and still going for maximum burn.


Perhaps 10-40-50 division (acc/cst/dec) with directed engines and roundabout course?


See previous comments about how far away from your star you'll get before you turn the engines off.

Furthermore, consider how your thrust needs to be directed to decelerate you. Presuming you're traveling towards your target star (which you will be, roughly speaking), you need to accelerate mass forwards to give you backwards acceleration (deceleration). Roundabout doesn't help much when you turn on the big shiny "see me" engines again at 2 light years out, while you've still got to be heading basically straight at the planet.

What might work, as far as this goes, is strapping yourself onto a huge big asteroid, accelerating up just a little bit, and then coasting for the next 2*10^(5 to 6) years. Then you'll be able to use small engines to decelerate yourself on the other side of the target star from the planet, and not be noticed. You'll also spend several tens or hundreds of millennia in transit, so very careful life support is needed.


We're probably assuming an advanced civilization here so giving them some leeway in reliability section might not be such a bad idea.

Besides, you only have to look at the pyramids to see how proper engineering can last ;)

Heh. Yes, but even a bit of leeway is problematic. As it stands, our very best engineering, in space, tops out at about 40 years reliability. Even presuming they're 100 times more effective, they're still just skimming it on a slow interstellar voyage. And our work doesn't have to worry about life support, with all the myriad problems that brings. Go faster, and there are yet more problems available.

The pyramids are all very well, but hunks of brick tend to be tricky to destroy. How long would the pyramids have lasted if they were standing upside-down?


What if the engine output is basically (waste heat +) an unidirectional stream of particles - or pellets - accelerated at high efficiency?

From a fusion drive or nuclear drive of any sort, that unidirectional stream of particles - the reaction mass - will be at several hundred to several thousand K, and radiating appropriately. There aren't many other possible drive systems, save antimatter annihilation and laser-driver solar sails. Antimatter is basically impossible to shield - it'll produce a lovely point source of gamma rays at a very specific frequency, and solar sails are quite a special case (although you'll need to shed a lot of waste heat if they're being driven by a laser, and other problems occur).

[QUOTE=Dragontide;14762970
Watch the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9JkFsTPEPE&feature=related
[/QUOTE]

I already watched the video. Pretty much all of it can be explained by birds and/or US aircraft - neither of which are exactly unexpected in that area.

But your video doesn't speak to 'size' at all - with all the zooming in and out, there is no consistent focus to judge by, and the only 'landmark' features to measure against are foreground - and thus useless.

Not the brightest bulb on the chandelier are you? I am the one seeking that information. I provided links. No one can even explain the New Mexico cases. Or what part of "TRACK EVIDENCE: NONE" do you not understand?

Right. Evidence, none. Thankyou.

That's an end to that.

Oh I see. I am wrong because you never got hooked on phonics! Which of these are unclear to you?:


With more that have a few mistakes that look there was a slight encryption problem of some sort but quite legible.

And this letter is pretty clear:

Do I have to point out to you that no tracks recorded, doesn't mean the area was entirely devoid of predators - it just means that no tracks are recorded.

The wording is ambiguous - unless you've handled those kinds of documents, you might not know whether, for example, 'tracks' in those kinds of reports specifically refers to human interaction.

SOMETHING did it. That part is very clear. But how something or someone CAN do that and leave no track evidence is the mystery. There is simply not one single natural preditor on Earth that can do that. When an animal attacks, the bite and claw marks are pretty easy to detect.


Utter bullshit. You're talking about the softest parts of the external anatomy - and thus, those parts especially favored by bugs. Show me how you'd track that?

Traces of methane or bacteria can be detected.


Are you for real? We're talking about cattle, and you're thinking you'd be able to track methane?

Seriously, sit down and think about that for a second.


And there would be some big damm worm holes nearby if they were the cause.


Worm holes for bacteria, or for methane. What about maggots (which arrive on the corpse in egg form, hatch there, and leave the scene of the crime by air?)


(which should give you a good indication as to why the director of the New Mexico State Police chose to use the word "mystery" when describing a two [2] year investigation to U.S. Senator Harrison Schmitt)

Yes. He used the word 'mystery' because he didn't know.

They say he shot it with an arrow and slit it's throat. See how easy it is for investigators to come to that conclusion? Did it say anything about the dummies trying to hide their tracks? No! Because regular old cattle thieves still do exist. (a point that is irrelevent)

See how I handled that everybody? Did I bitch because it's a Yahoo link? No! If my links are bogus then you all should have absolutly no problem in explaining WHY they are bogus instead of the tired old, "Oh that link sux"

The Associated Press is official and legitimate. 'Bitching about it' would have made you look a fool.

You haven't presented official, legitimate sources.

http://www.unexplainedstuff.com/Invaders-from-Outer-Space/The-UFO-Mystery-Grows-Cattle-mutilations.html
Did you even read what you quoted? Some website about UFO stories mentioning black helicopters isn't the same as the government claiming that black helicopters are responsible for the cow mutilation phenomena. How can you not understand this?

Are you for real? We're talking about cattle, and you're thinking you'd be able to track methane?

Seriously, sit down and think about that for a second.

I said "detect" methane. Didn't I? Methane can even be detected in other freekin solar systems.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/bigphotos/67447056.html


Worm holes for bacteria, or for methane. What about maggots (which arrive on the corpse in egg form, hatch there, and leave the scene of the crime by air?)
Why cannot they detects what's left over from the eggs?



Yes. He used the word 'mystery' because he didn't know.

Who? He who? He who is the Director on the New Mexico State Police writing to a US Senator!!! 2 years to come with the word "mystery" (well actually "mysterious")

You haven't presented official, legitimate sources.

So debunk them then. I used to have a ball with "global warming is a hoax" junk science. It's fun and easy.

Who? He who? He who is the Director on the New Mexico State Police writing to a US Senator!!! 2 years to come with the word "mystery" (well actually "mysterious")

God forbid he use the word mysterious to describe a situation full of, characterized by, or involving mystery.

I said "detect" methane. Didn't I? Methane can even be detected in other freekin solar systems.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/bigphotos/67447056.html


With what tools? Again you avoid the basic requirement of having the tools to do the job of investigating the incident and pretending that because the tools were not there to do the job of detecting, they don't exist. You don't list what was used. For all you know, they could just have sent a sheriff who looked things over, shrugged and then wrote his report.

Also, you've got gall, demanding that we debunk the claims of crackpots who have no evidence to back their claims and simply make up a lot of bollocks to pad over actual reports (you know, like you) versus credited news agencies who actually backed their stories with pictures, apprehended suspects and actual evidence.

Your argument is a failure. Has been, always will be.

I said "detect" methane. Didn't I? Methane can even be detected in other freekin solar systems.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/bigphotos/67447056.html

As can starships, especially if they're using engines. Why have you continually denied that fact - because it destroys your arguments?

Traces of methane or bacteria can be detected.
FFS, I mentioned methane because it's ALWAYS present in the intestines of ruminants - It was a wild idea, not a real attempt at an explanation

And bacteria...Gee, let me think, cows are FULL of bacteria.

So BOTH would be detected - Finding the correct (deceased/inactive) bacteria and the cause of death would require intensive laboratory work - Which, for some odd reason, seems to be lacking and horribly outdated: What we knew in the 70s doesn't compare to the 00s.

...Hmm, come to think of it, it's more likely that the bacteria would've died because of oxygen poisoning rather than due to methane.
And there would be some big damm worm holes nearby if they were the cause.
Are you for real?

Worms are a delicacy for plenty of animals.

Maggots don't leave holes, they fly away.

Insects can move away after eating what they can

etc...

(which should give you a good indication as to why the director of the New Mexico State Police chose to use the word "mystery" when describing a two [2] year investigation to U.S. Senator Harrison Schmitt)
The report you like to refer to mentions:

Investigation of these strange mutilations have been hampered {by} inability to find laboratories which will perform tests and report accurate findings.


Infact, in that particular series of cases I suspect some sort of failed experiment-(inadverently?)-turned-hoax by monsieur Gomez - Perhaps he thought radioactivity really does make animals grow in vein of Them! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Them!) :tongue:

With what tools? Again you avoid the basic requirement of having the tools to do the job of investigating the incident and pretending that because the tools were not there to do the job of detecting, they don't exist. You don't list what was used. For all you know, they could just have sent a sheriff who looked things over, shrugged and then wrote his report.

Also, you've got gall, demanding that we debunk the claims of crackpots who have no evidence to back their claims and simply make up a lot of bollocks to pad over actual reports (you know, like you) versus credited news agencies who actually backed their stories with pictures, apprehended suspects and actual evidence.

Your argument is a failure. Has been, always will be.

Oh did I forget to mention that if you point has no merit It is impossible to debunk the opposition.

The 70s are not ancient. They did still have crime labs back then.
As can starships, especially if they're using engines. Why have you continually denied that fact - because it destroys your arguments?

Because you base that on what man has invented. Not what a could be developed in such a big wide galaxy as the Milky Way.

I said "detect" methane. Didn't I? Methane can even be detected in other freekin solar systems.


Detecting methane around cattle is like detecting grass around your lawn. Stop wasting my time.


Why cannot they detects what's left over from the eggs?


Where did it say they can't?

By the way, in criminal incidence reporting, 'tracks' is usually a reference to tracks of HUMAN intervention.


Who? He who? He who is the Director on the New Mexico State Police writing to a US Senator!!! 2 years to come with the word "mystery" (well actually "mysterious")

Yes. He didn't know. There's a word you can use that describes that.

So debunk them then. I used to have a ball with "global warming is a hoax" junk science. It's fun and easy.

I don't have to 'debunk' anything that fails to properly source.

If I say that you are a nematode, the onus would be on me to prove it, not you to debunk me.

Because you base that on what man has invented. Not what a could be developed in such a big wide galaxy as the Milky Way.

No, I base that on fundamental scientific laws. The fact that you haven't been able to realise this, despite having it explained to you dozens of times, makes me suspect you are being deliberately ignorant.

By the way, in criminal incidence reporting, 'tracks' is usually a reference to tracks of HUMAN intervention.
Track eveidence refers to ANY leads.

Yes. He didn't know. There's a word you can use that describes that.
And he used it. Rather than say possible wild animals, cults and or any other earthly explination.
No, I base that on fundamental scientific laws.

But you do not know them all. No one on Earth does. Man is still currently debatinig trivial things like is there micro life on Mars.

But you do not know them all. No one on Earth does. Man is still currently debatinig trivial things like is there micro life on Mars.

Whether there is micro-life on Mars is a question for biology, and I am talking about physics, which is the most mature and well-developed of the three hard sciences. Many of our theories in physics are experimentally tested to an accuracy of 1*10^-9 or more, and agree with theoretical predictions up to that level or beyond. As it happens, this includes trivial little things like thermodynamics, which are the relevant aspects for this discussion. You have shown no actual evidence to contradict this, nor (even if you could) do you have a suitable alternate theory which agrees with the current one on all confirmed results. Your position is, in short, scientifically indefensible.

. As it happens, this includes trivial little things like thermodynamics, which are the relevant aspects for this discussion.

Yet the entropy aspect of the second law of thermodynamics is an unresolved issue.

http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3074

http://resources.metapress.com/pdf-preview.axd?code=n66200772l021125&size=largest

So debunk them then. I used to have a ball with "global warming is a hoax" junk science. It's fun and easy.

Debunk the official, legitimate sources you neglected to provide?

Oh did I forget to mention that if my point has no merit It is needless to debunk the opposition.

Fixed for accuracy.


The 70s are not ancient. They did still have crime labs back then.


Which by your own report, mentions they didn't use any. Your wild eyed ravings are still a failure.

Track eveidence refers to ANY leads.


Really? Prove it.

You're long on a whole lot of conspiracy, and short on any actual evidence.

Which by your own report, mentions they didn't use any.

Where in the report does it even give a hint that a crime lab was never used during those 2 years?


Scot: Your just a moron that thinks cops are even dumber than you! If they find a driver's licence, that can be used to track a suspect. If a bullitt is found it can be linked to the gun that fired it. If they find footprints they can follow them. Yet for some idotic reason, you actually think if they found one single clue they would fail to write it on the report? Time and time again? Different investagators?

Where in the report does it even give a hint that a crime lab was never used during those 2 years?


The one you tried to use to fool us with before you came up with the google archived file, which in that one, went on to state that all of the cattle were infected with Black Leg, which is a fatal disease for cattle and sheep that causes extreme swellings. So once again, you fail, once again in properly reading your own sources. Not that I ever expect you to ever properly read them since you only read snippets of what you want to and ignore the rest.

You know, like a Young Earth Creationist or a cultist.

Where in the report does it even give a hint that a crime lab was never used during those 2 years?


That's not how it works.

You have to provide the evidence that something DID happen. It doesn't just get assumed it did unless proved otherwise.


Scot: Your just a moron that thinks cops are even dumber than you!
investagators?

Two flames in one sentence?

You'd be sensible to moderate your tone, because the next time I see you behaving like that, I will be asking moderation for their input.


If they find a driver's licence, that can be used to track a suspect.
investagators?

No driver's licenses were mentioned.


If a bullitt is found it can be linked to the gun that fired it.
investagators?

No bullets were mentioned.


If they find footprints they can follow them.
investagators?

No footprints were mentioned.


Yet for some idotic reason, you actually think if they found one single clue they would fail to write it on the report? Time and time again? Different investagators?

Having worked with law enforcement, i know what sorts of things make it into a report. You've constructed three red herrings in THIS post, and - apart from that, offered NOTHING except hollow rhetoric. And personal insults.

Back something up with hard evidence, or shut up.

The one you tried to use to fool us with before you came up with the google archived file, which went on to state that all of the cattle were infected with Black Leg, which is a fatal disease for cattle and sheep that causes extreme swellings.

WTF are you talking about? Did the reports even mention swelling? No! Just missing body parts.

That's not how it works.

You have to provide the evidence that something DID happen. It doesn't just get assumed it did unless proved otherwise.
When something is unlikely. It is unlikely police would fail to do the simplest tasks of their jobs.

Two flames in one sentence?

You'd be sensible to moderate your tone, because the next time I see you behaving like that, I will be asking moderation for their input.

You bring it on yourself with nonsense trolling.


No driver's licenses were mentioned.

No bullets were mentioned.

No footprints were mentioned.
The word "NONE" was mentioned. Is it because ALL of those cops did not want to or did not know how to do their jobs?

Having worked with law enforcement, i know what sorts of things make it into a report.

Would you ever make the amazing mistakes you seem to claim these investigators did?

When something is unlikely. It is unlikely police would fail to do the simplest tasks of their jobs.


As I said, the burden is on you to provide evidence. Your 'arguments' are just words until you do... and can be cavalierly discarded as such.


You bring it on yourself with nonsense trolling.


'you bring it on yourself' is not an excuse.

I haven't been trolling.


The word "NONE" was mentioned. Is it because ALL of those cops did not want to or did not know how to do their jobs?


More likely, you don't understand what the 'none' response refers to.


Would you ever make the amazing mistakes you seem to claim these investigators did?

I'm not saying these investigators made mistakes. I'm saying you - as a rank amateur - do not understand what they are saying.

You bring it on yourself with nonsense trolling.

That's a non-argument. Flaming is flaming, whether or not you think it's earned.

WTF are you talking about? Did the reports even mention swelling?

The report specifically mentions Black Leg. Black Leg causes swelling. Now be a good cultist and evade the point some more with red herrings and strawmen.

You know...

I'm drunk off my ass right now. I love the concept of aliens.

Dragontide's argument still makes no damn sense.

I'm not saying these investigators made mistakes. I'm saying you - as a rank amateur - do not understand what they are saying.

Ok so then let's say for the sake of arguement that they wrote down what they found on scratch paper or in a little Columbo notebook. If anything tangable had been discoverd by any New Mexico State Police, why were they not mentioned by the director in his letter to a US Senator? The word "mysterious" would not have been used. Would it?

Ok so then let's say for the sake of arguement that they wrote down what they found on scratch paper or in a little Columbo notebook. If anything tangable had been discoverd by any New Mexico State Police, why were they not mentioned by the director in his letter to a US Senator? The word "mysterious" would not have been used. Would it?

If the New Mexico police found maggots on a 7 day carcass, would it be worth mention? No - because you EXPECT to find maggots on a 7 day carcass. Does the fact that it's not mentioned mean that there were no maggots? Does it mean that damage to the flesh couldn't have been inflicted by maggots?

What you need to do is go sit in a 'body garden', and watch a body decompose quickly in heat. Watch which parts get icky first, and which parts are eaten by maggots, which parts are eaten by other critters. One of the first things you'll notice is that really 'squishy' tissue (like eyes, genitals, etc) that is naturally moist and mucusy BEFORE death, degenerates and is targetted extremely quickly.

Now, if the New Mexico investigators found 23 (or whatever) carcasses, and were unsure of the nature of the demise, and were unsure as to the specific nature of post-mortem damage - it's not even aguely unreasonable to assume it might be written off as 'mysterious'.

That doesn't mean it was aliens, goblins, or chupacabra.

The report specifically mentions Black Leg. Black Leg causes swelling. Now be a good cultist and evade the point some more with red herrings and strawmen.

Not one single mention of black leg in this report:
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:N1TpP6_IweUJ:foia.fbi.gov/cattle/cattle3.pdf&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

If the New Mexico police found maggots on a 7 day carcass, would it be worth mention? No - because you EXPECT to find maggots on a 7 day carcass. Does the fact that it's not mentioned mean that there were no maggots? Does it mean that damage to the flesh couldn't have been inflicted by maggots?

What you need to do is go sit in a 'body garden', and watch a body decompose quickly in heat. Watch which parts get icky first, and which parts are eaten by maggots, which parts are eaten by other critters. One of the first things you'll notice is that really 'squishy' tissue (like eyes, genitals, etc) that is naturally moist and mucusy BEFORE death, degenerates and is targetted extremely quickly.

Now, if the New Mexico investigators found 23 (or whatever) carcasses, and were unsure of the nature of the demise, and were unsure as to the specific nature of post-mortem damage - it's not even aguely unreasonable to assume it might be written off as 'mysterious'.

That doesn't mean it was aliens, goblins, or chupacabra.

But then there would be something worth mentioning as to why and how each cow died.

But then there would be something worth mentioning as to why and how each cow died.

Maybe. Ask anyone who has kept a large amount of stock. Even in controlled circumstances, 'spontaneous' deaths can occur. If you've got huge herds, roaming, it's not unlikely you'll have losses.

Cow gets poisoned from eating something toxic... is it worth mentioning? How many of these cattle are full autopsied?

One thing i noticed when I was looking into the cattle mutilation reports years ago is - they almost always occur at great distances from the actual people that raise them.

Scary, right? Very twilight zone?

Sure - but there's a much easier explanation - it's hot and dry, and the water is near the farmer. Wander too far from the herd, and you're dead.

Cause of death? Probably a 'mystery'. Probably not aliens, though.

Not one single mention of black leg in this report:
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:N1TpP6_IweUJ:foia.fbi.gov/cattle/cattle3.pdf&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Because you don't read my dear dummy. Page 21 mentions it quite specifically during the necropsy. But go ahead, pretend it's not there. I wouldn't be surprised to see you stick your head in the sand.

After all. Lies ARE your forte.

Maybe. Ask anyone who has kept a large amount of stock. Even in controlled circumstances, 'spontaneous' deaths can occur. If you've got huge herds, roaming, it's not unlikely you'll have losses.

Cow gets poisoned from eating something toxic... is it worth mentioning? How many of these cattle are full autopsied?

One thing i noticed when I was looking into the cattle mutilation reports years ago is - they almost always occur at great distances from the actual people that raise them.

Scary, right? Very twilight zone?

Sure - but there's a much easier explanation - it's hot and dry, and the water is near the farmer. Wander too far from the herd, and you're dead.

Cause of death? Probably a 'mystery'. Probably not aliens, though.

Since livestock can also carry disease that can kill humans, I think it's safe to assume that necropsies were preformed.

Since livestock can also carry disease that can kill humans, I think it's safe to assume that necropsies were preformed.

"A category of illness in which animals which are under frequent observation die either with no obvious illness or after a period of illness lasting only a few hours. Typical causes are spontaneous internal hemorrhage, trauma causing shock or blood loss, rupture of the gut, cardiac tamponade, trauma to brain or spinal cord at the occipitoatlantal joint, intravenous injection of inappropriate solution or given too rapidly causing cardiac arrest or pulmonary edema, anaphylactic shock.
In large animals, group deaths can be due to electrocution, lightning injury, many poisons especially cyanide, algal fast death factor, so-called Wimmera ryegrass poisoning, fluoroacetate and oleander. Monensin causes acute heart failure in horses. Septicemia due to anthrax, toxemia due to Clostridium perfringens type D and colibacillosis can cause peracute deaths but signs are evident in animals kept under surveillance.
In feedlot cattle, sudden death may occur following the acclimatization phase of feeding and presents as death without premonitory signs of illness or agonal struggling. The cause is unknown. Postmortem examination shows no evidence of the common diseases that cause rapid death in feedlot cattle.
In chickens, a syndrome of sudden death is recognized in broiler chickens, predominantly males. The cause is unknown, but possibly metabolic as it can be induced by lactic acidosis. Called also flipover as most birds are found lying on their back.
Animals that are ‘found dead’ are in a different category to sudden death and have a much wider range of possible causes."

Quoted from "Veterinary Dictionary".

Educate yourself.

Sudden death (especially of large herd animals) is not that rare, and can happen with or without 'diagnosable' evidence.

You know...

I'm drunk off my ass right now. I love the concept of aliens.

Dragontide's argument still makes no damn sense.

You'd need quite a cocktail of drugs to see the world as he does.

Because you don't read my dear dummy. Page 21 mentions it quite specifically during the necropsy. But go ahead, pretend it's not there. I wouldn't be surprised to see you stick your head in the sand.

Ok I see it now. But now the LA report comes into question. Only a couple of them are listed as yearlings. Black Leg affects young cows. 90% of all the unexplained US mutilated cattle are 4-5 years old.
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Cattle+Mutilations

You'd need quite a cocktail of drugs to see the world as he does.

Drugs are no solution boy! Do you want to be stupid your whole life?

Ok I see it now. But now the LA report comes into question. Only a couple of them are listed as yearlings. Black Leg affects young cows. 90% of all the unexplained US mutilated cattle are 4-5 years old.
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Cattle+Mutilations


The 90% claim is attributed to one Dr Howard Burghess who is a family physician in East Lansing, Michigan. For obvious reasons, this claim has no more credibility than an electrical engineer has on denying global warming.

Furthermore, that claim was attributed third hand by a book titled Alien contact: top-secret UFO files revealed, clearly an agenda driven claim.

Once again, you fail to read your sources, and your argument falls flat on its face.

Because you don't read my dear dummy. Page 21 mentions it quite specifically during the necropsy. But go ahead, pretend it's not there. I wouldn't be surprised to see you stick your head in the sand.

After all. Lies ARE your forte.

Hahaha, oh wow. Seriously DT, are you just googling 'cattle mutilation' and posting random web pages whenever you're asked for evidence and never actually reading them?

Yet the entropy aspect of the second law of thermodynamics is an unresolved issue.

http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3074

http://resources.metapress.com/pdf-preview.axd?code=n66200772l021125&size=largest

Firstly, the relevant part is black-body radiation, not entropy.

Secondly, where entropy is a factor in this discussion, it is in areas easily scientifically testable and quite clearly experimentally proven: if something heats up, it has to radiate the heat away; you can't pump heat from A to B with 100% efficiency, so you'll get waste heat from using heat pumps; and so on. These are conclusions we have drawn from doing laboratory experiments, and any alternate theory would have to also explain these results. Unfortunately, it is precisely these results which trash your argument.

Thirdly, your 'sources' are in no way proper and valid science, leaving my original accusation - that your position is scientifically indefensible - quite valid.

The ball is in your court again sir.

The 90% claim is attributed to one Dr Howard Burghess who is a family physician in East Lansing, Michigan. For obvious reasons, this claim has no more credibility than an electrical engineer has on denying global warming.

Furthermore, that claim was attributed third hand by a book titled Alien contact: top-secret UFO files revealed, clearly an agenda driven claim.

Once again, you fail to read your sources, and your argument falls flat on its face.

It's a simple task of determining the age of cattle. How hard could it be?



where entropy is a factor in this discussion, it is in areas easily scientifically testable and quite clearly experimentally proven: if something heats up, it has to radiate the heat away.
In engines man has invented. Who is to say the heat could not be continiously recycled, rather than expelled?

In engines man has invented. Who is to say the heat could not be continiously recycled, rather than expelled?

No system has 100% efficiency, and would you care to give a method for doing this?

No system has 100% efficiency, and would you care to give a method for doing this?

The method is what we are trying to figure out. Even if 100% is impossible, what about 99.99999999999999 (or so) %? Could that be detectable?

In engines man has invented. Who is to say the heat could not be continiously recycled, rather than expelled?


I know the answer to this one. Is it Mr Physics?:D

It's a simple task of determining the age of cattle. How hard could it be?

How old am I? Do you know? No you don't. Why? The simplest answer being that you've never actually seen me to make that estimate.

It would be impossible for a doctor in East Lansing to be on site of every reported cattle mutilation across America and Mexico in who knows how many years to verify, much less credibly, make that 90% claim even if he was fucking Superman. If he even said that at all, since it's likely this author is likely a liar like so many conspiracy theorists. Add this to the fact that if reported, it's the police who would have made the investigations and reports, and only these various police departments would have all the necessary data, and not all of them would be open to public record.

If this is how you approach any form of logical thought, it's likely your educational grades are as big a failure as your argument.

In engines man has invented. Who is to say the heat could not be continiously recycled, rather than expelled?

The three laws of thermodynamics:

1. You can't win, you can only break even.
2. You can only break even at absolute zero.
3. You can never reach absolute zero.

Every experiment we have ever performed has confirmed these three laws hold. Every possible drive system, life support system, power system, and starship is subject to these three laws. They also ensure that, no matter what, your interstellar starship will be producing waste heat, and that it will be radiating this in the infrared spectrum. No matter your drive system, it will be producing waste heat, and worse than that, it will be releasing massive amounts of energy - it has to, in order to give you the K.E. needed to move fast. This will be visible.

There are no two ways about it - your starship will be visible, and from a very long way off.

How old am I? Do you know? No you don't. Why? The simplest answer being that you've never actually seen me to make that estimate.

It would be impossible for a doctor in East Lansing to be on site of every reported cattle mutilation across America and Mexico in who knows how many years to verify, much less credibly, make that 90% claim even if he was fucking Superman. If he even said that at all, since it's likely this author is likely a liar like so many conspiracy theorists. Add this to the fact that if reported, it's the police who would have made the investigations and reports, and only these various police departments would have all the necessary data, and not all of them would be open to public record.


First off: The mutilated cattle that died from a natural preditor would not need to be part of his report. And if someone is conducting an investigation, closed records CAN be made available to them. Do you have any proof he is a conspiracy theorists?

The three laws of thermodynamics:

1. You can't win, you can only break even.
2. You can only break even at absolute zero.
3. You can never reach absolute zero.

Every experiment we have ever performed has confirmed these three laws hold. Every possible drive system, life support system, power system, and starship is subject to these three laws. They also ensure that, no matter what, your interstellar starship will be producing waste heat, and that it will be radiating this in the infrared spectrum. No matter your drive system, it will be producing waste heat, and worse than that, it will be releasing massive amounts of energy - it has to, in order to give you the K.E. needed to move fast. This will be visible.

There are no two ways about it - your starship will be visible, and from a very long way off.

Obviously aliens use their super powers to make the fundamental properties of the universe go away. Duh.

Do you have any proof he is a conspiracy theorists?

To apply your standards to this, do you have any proof he's not? Surely you can't deny that it's possible he's a conspiracy theorist? And someone on the internet said he is. Therefore it must be so!

To apply your standards to this, do you have any proof he's not? Surely you can't deny that it's possible he's a conspiracy theorist? And someone on the internet said he is. Therefore it must be so!

Can you provide a link to that?:D

First off: The mutilated cattle that died from a natural preditor would not need to be part of his report. And if someone is conducting an investigation, closed records CAN be made available to them. Do you have any proof he is a conspiracy theorists?I direct you to the bolded part of this post:

The 90% claim is attributed to one Dr Howard Burghess who is a family physician in East Lansing, Michigan. For obvious reasons, this claim has no more credibility than an electrical engineer has on denying global warming.

Furthermore, that claim was attributed third hand by a book titled "Alien contact: top-secret UFO files revealed", clearly an agenda driven claim.

Once again, you fail to read your sources, and your argument falls flat on its face.
Gives reason to doubt the source, no? A bit biased.

Scot: Your just a moron that thinks cops are even dumber than you!

Now children, this is what we call flaming. It leaves a mark on your permanent record and if this behaviour is persistent results in a visit from the DEATReaper.

Drugs are no solution boy! Do you want to be stupid your whole life?

Another example of what not to post.

Warned for flaming.

First off: The mutilated cattle that died from a natural preditor would not need to be part of his report.


It's not even a report. There was no report from this doctor. Only a claim from a book written by a conspiracy theorist that the doctor said 90%. And even if there was a report, a single family MD based in East Lansing would not be able to compile the report by himself as I've pointed out. You're just adding things that don't exist in a desperate attempt to bolster your sad position, the province of liars and braggarts.


And if someone is conducting an investigation, closed records CAN be made available to them.

There is no evidence anyone made an investigation to arrive at the 90% figure. Only a claim of 90%.



Do you have any proof he is a conspiracy theorists?

What part of "Alien contact: top-secret UFO files revealed" as the book that claimed the 90% figure does not sound like the a conspiracy theorist?

Or maybe you just didn't want to read your sources again. Its right there at the bottom of the page.

Chronic lying or the early onset of dementia. I'll let you decide which one you've got. There's no other choice.

What part of "Alien contact: top-secret UFO files revealed" as the book that claimed the 90% figure does not sound like the a conspiracy theorist?

Not since the Freedom of Information Act came into play.

Another example of what not to post.

Warned for flaming.

Drug use requires tough love.

Drug use requires tough love.

Meh! All depends what you mean by the word drugs?

Meh! All depends what you mean by the word drugs?
Whatever "quite a cocktail of drugs" would be comprised of. It sounded to me like Getbrett is tampering around with things that are best left alone. Then used his chemical experamintation results as a flame, rather than try to join in on the debate.

Reality is for people that cant handle drugs.

Whatever "quite a cocktail of drugs" would be comprised of. It sounded to me like Getbrett is tampering around with things that are best left alone. Then used his chemical experamintation results as a flame, rather than try to join in on the debate.

Well that phrase could mean anything. If 'Drug' is defined as a substance you put into your body to effect a change. Then haveing a good meal is a 'cocktail of drugs', is it not?

Well that phrase could mean anything. If 'Drug' is defined as a substance you put into your body to effect a change. Then haveing a good meal is a 'cocktail of drugs', is it not?

I might have missed it but will look for just that on the menu the next time I'm at Zaxby"s
:D

Drug use requires tough love.

So does moderation. Kindly don't find out how far you need to take it to find out how tough the love can be. I'd miss ya.

Not since the Freedom of Information Act came into play.

Then you'll prove that the writer isn't a conspiracy theorist then won't you? After all, I'm certain you'd agree that "Global Warming: A liberal Hoax" is very indicative of an agenda driven title. So I say this writer is a conspiracy theorist, and because this is the internet, it's absolutely true until proven otherwise. You know, like how you've been arguing all this while. I just won't go that extra mile and sink to the level of dodging and lying that you do.

Then you'll prove that the writer isn't a conspiracy theorist then won't you? After all, I'm certain you'd agree that "Global Warming: A liberal Hoax" is very indicative of an agenda driven title. So I say this writer is a conspiracy theorist, and because this is the internet, it's absolutely true until proven otherwise. You know, like how you've been arguing all this while. I just won't go that extra mile and sink to the level of dodging and lying that you do.

Excuse me but YOU are the one that is calling him a conspiracy theorist. You base that on the opinion of yours that it must be true because he has researched something the FBI has investigated. But I will not ask you for a link that has the official list of the world's conspiracy theorist. But if you ever get a chance, it would be a hoot to know what commitee comprised the list.

Excuse me but YOU are the one that is calling him a conspiracy theorist.

Excuse me, but YOU are the one that has yet to provide ANY real evidence of... well, anything.

Excuse me but YOU are the one that is calling him a conspiracy theorist. You base that on the opinion of yours that it must be true because he has researched something the FBI has investigated.

YOU are the one who makes lies about lack of evidence in the sources that you cite when they are there, claim UFO's when people already prove that it cannot be, make false claims about how physics does not allow for black holes to move, declare investigations made when none were done at all, all of it called on and you have the gall to to try and make up even more lies about what I've said?

You are a liar and a fraud. Go talk to Nigerian fraudsters, I'm sure they'd welcome you as a brother.

YOU are the one who makes lies about lack of evidence in the sources that you cite when they are there, claim UFO's when people already prove that it cannot be, make false claims about how physics does not allow for black holes to move, declare investigations made when none were done at all, all of it called on and you have the gall to to try and make up even more lies about what I've said?

You are a liar and a fraud. Go talk to Nigerian fraudsters, I'm sure they'd welcome you as a brother.

Way to bring up every debate on this thread in order to wiggle your way out of your nonsense comment.

Excuse me, but YOU are the one that has yet to provide ANY real evidence of... well, anything.

Just dozens of links including FBI files that you chose to ignore. That's YOUR problem.

Just dozens of links including FBI files that you chose to ignore. That's YOUR problem.None of which said much of anything. Said nothing on their methods, their thoroughness, nada. It's hard to discuss something that doesn't offer much in the way of details. If you'd like to provide a detailed link that shows the methods, the testing, the ideas that were thrown around and why they were determined plausible or not, I'd be happy to read it. If you'd like to throw out a source that doesn't contradict your own argument when read through, I'd like to read that as well.

Also, based on how many times you brought it up, it seems your argument hinges on the word mysterious. This guy said mysterious, over and over again, two years with the cases and it is mysterious. It must be aliens.

The funny thing is, if the available evidence was so completely unique and unearthly, I think he would have described it as a little more than simply 'mysterious.'

Way to bring up every debate on this thread where I yapped absolute nonsense, won't admit that I did, and decry the same techniques used against me.

Fixed for accuracy. You have no evidence, no proof. Every single link you brought up that were done by credible people had at best, only 5% of what you claimed it said. You made up the 95% out of thin air, claimed it was true, and then ignored it when it was pointed it out. Just like you tried claiming that the report you linked never mentioned the Black Leg disease at all.

You can squirm all you want, but you're still a liar and a fraud. You wouldn't know honesty if it pissed in your eye.

Still nothing but unmoderated slander with no tangable debate against me. Now I am absolutly convinced of UFOs.

Still nothing but slander with no tangable debate against me. Now I am absolutly convinced of UFOs.

Firstly, if someone contradicting you on the internet is enough to convince you of something, I question the methods by which you evaluate evidence.

Secondly, NAS is simply using your own debate tactics against you.

Thirdly, you still haven't addressed this post (I quote it below to make it clear), which rather destroys several important parts of your arguments.

The three laws of thermodynamics:

1. You can't win, you can only break even.
2. You can only break even at absolute zero.
3. You can never reach absolute zero.

Every experiment we have ever performed has confirmed these three laws hold. Every possible drive system, life support system, power system, and starship is subject to these three laws. They also ensure that, no matter what, your interstellar starship will be producing waste heat, and that it will be radiating this in the infrared spectrum. No matter your drive system, it will be producing waste heat, and worse than that, it will be releasing massive amounts of energy - it has to, in order to give you the K.E. needed to move fast. This will be visible.

There are no two ways about it - your starship will be visible, and from a very long way off.

Still got no useful scientific answer?

Still nothing but unmoderated slander with no tangable debate against me. Now I am absolutly convinced of UFOs.

Slander must be untruthful. Nothing untruthful has been said about you. If you are not pleased with the reputation you have earned yourself in this thread, take steps to modify your behaviour so that the things being said about you are untruthful.

You have still yet to provide a single shred of actual evidence to support a single thing you've said in this thread. All you have provided is heresay and supposition, and all your blathering about "philosophical" debate will not change the fact that there is literally no reason to believe in aliens based on the nonsense you have provided here.

Firstly, if someone contradicting you on the internet is enough to convince you of something, I question the methods by which you evaluate evidence.

Secondly, NAS is simply using your own debate tactics against you.

Thirdly, you still haven't addressed this post (I quote it below to make it clear), which rather destroys several important parts of your arguments.



Still got no useful scientific answer?

I grant you that using any form of propulsion than man uses, detection would be likely. But you have ingored what is possible if their technology is millions of years beyond what we have achieved. Is dimentional travel 100% impossible? Gravitational slingshotting? Has every possible test been done with matter-antimatter? No! You seem to think they must have thrusters and man already unlocked the secrets of the universe.

You have still yet to provide a single shred of actual evidence to support a single thing you've said in this thread.

Then it should be no problem for you to show where the FBI and New Mexico State Police are lying or where they are in error.

I grant you that using any form of propulsion than man uses, detection would be likely. But you have ingored what is possible if their technology is millions of years beyond what we have achieved. Is dimentional travel 100% impossible? Gravitational slingshotting? Has every possible test been done with matter-antimatter? No! You seem to think they must have thrusters and man already unlocked the secrets of the universe.

You do have a small point a small one. Unless though some far advanced alien speices can actualy change the laws of phyiscs (and I belive Mr Scott says ye canna do it) then really you have not a leg to stand on.

You do have a small point a small one. Unless though some far advanced alien speices can actualy change the laws of phyiscs (and I belive Mr Scott says ye canna do it) then really you have not a leg to stand on.

And do you have 100% proof than man has mastered 100% of all physics laws?