Science is more about proving that something can not work in the physical world and not about finding the final prove which all of those skeptics are asking for.
50% correct. It is true that no scientist has any delusion of finding any "final" anything. Answers lead to questions lead to answers lead to questions ad nausium. We in science know, respect, and abide by that belief. The 50% that I believe you are incorrect in is your description of how science operates. I'm not quite sure exactly "what" you mean but the general idea seems skewed and awaits further clarification on your part.
You even find very compelling information on UFO's on the CIA website but you proved before
You mean here:?
CIA.GOV; search query = ufo; second query return item "[...]What emerges from this examination is that, while Agency concern over UFOs was substantial until the early 1950s, CIA has since paid only limited and peripheral attention to the phenomena. [...]Like the JFK assassination conspiracy theories, the UFO issue probably will not go away soon, no matter what the Agency does or says. The belief that we are not alone in the universe is too emotionally appealing and the distrust of our government is too pervasive to make the issue amenable to traditional scientific studies of rational explanation and evidence."
I should write a book on this syndrome. Call it "the religion of the internet", this nouveau idea that if its on the net, it's true and it's factual and it's evidence. Suppose the CIA posted Alien Photos and said, factually and clearly: "these are real alien photos". And nothing else. That's it. No new tech. No new announcement, nothing. Just a single photo for 1, 5, 10, 20 years or more. Would you believe them? Is a non-repeatable event enough evidence to solidify or change your beliefs? I dare say not. But let me kick the scenario up a notch based on the religious bent of our audience.
Same situation as above but one minor change. The CIA posts on their website "this is a real alien and he says that all gods are false". Hmmm. Now then, if it's on the CIA website it MUST be true. But I love god. What do you do? I dare say in this case you would consider the new "evidence" not evidence at all, right?
that you are to lazy to search for information fastlane69 .
Interesting assertion. Let's see if it's true however:
Consider that there is mountain of evidence in this post and others that I in fact do more "search for information" than most people here. I put links to my research, references to the people and events, and overall always have some source to back up my opinions with facts. Even if my opinion is ultimately proven wrong, by stating that I am "too lazy to search for information", you, like why_do have taken a fact (information content of my posts) and come up with a wrong subjective interpretation (too lazy to search for information).
This is another clear example of how the facts can be undisputed and there for all to see and yet, if left to subjective interpretation, can be completely misinterpreted and just plain wrong!
Thanks for making my point about how subjective all of these talks are, Subcrea!
So it is possible that everywhere around us are other worlds which sometimes interfere with our world and these beings could come from these places.
That's exactly my stance as well... it is possible...
BUT,
As you point out, they could be inter dimensional travelers, they could be a yet unknown intra-systems species, they could be from this galaxy, the next, or the very end of time. So... how do we tell which is which? How do you use the evidence so far (photos and hearsay) to eliminate one or more of these possibilities? Ask ANY questions about these aliens and apply the same logic: how can I use the evidence at hand to answer that question? If what you CLAIM is evidence truly is, it should help answer more questions than "do they exist?"... a lot more questions! Yet you will find it difficult, if not impossible, to answer even the most basic of questions about these aliens given what you and others consider "evidence".
I would say a lot of the testimony is credible these people are not a part of a believe system
As I've made clear before, I don't dispute the facts (people seeing something), I merely dispute their subjective interpretation (that there is no doubt, they are 100% sure, that they are alien craft).
Lets just image you see in bright daylight clearly a flying disk hovering completely silent in the sky for a few minutes and then take off into what we call “space”, you would say to yourself no a haven't seen this because 50 % of the people think this is not real? It doesn't have to be alien but it could also be one of ours but if we have such technology why are we still use rockets to get into space ?
I will not dispute the fact (that I saw a hovering disk) and I will not forward any subjective interpretation (it was an alien, inter dimensional, government top secret, angelic chariot, etc...).
I will do research and see if I can find an answer -- others that saw it, newspapers, local airports, etc -- but if I can't find an answer, I'm free to believe whatever I want, aren't I?
