Leaderboard

Thank you. That is my exact take on it. I'm rather shocked to read the sheer incredulity on this board in reference to UfOs/Aliens. There is far more evidence supporting the concept of intelligently controlled craft visiting this planet than there is for bigfoot imo. The sightings nowadays have become so overt and plentiful that I've literally heard an ABC news anchor suggest we're on the cusp of extraterrestrial contact. Couple that with the countless testimonies of high-ranking retired military personnel detailing their own experiences and I'd be pretty hard pressed to just discount them out of hand. We know they are a real phenomenon, we just don't know what their intentions or origins are. I've not heard anyone suggest the ET theory was dead. And I think it's folly to believe that just because we don't understand the methodology that would allow a craft to traverse the galaxy, that it therefore can't be accomplished. Many things that would have been considered impossible in ages past have become feasible. I'm certain there's far more we don't know than do.

It would be disingenuous not to admit that BF sightings are correlated to an extent with UFO sightings, particularly (though not exclusively) outside the PNW. To what extent these phenomena should be regarded as physically or psychically connected, or if the two should be thought of as separate if consonant phenomena, is difficult to determine. Obviously the UFO (and, generally, paranormal) connection to BF phenomenalism is a significant obstacle to the plausibility of eyewitness accounts, and a partial impediment to the credibility of the physical creature hypothesis as a whole. Yet it does exist. And it could be the case that UFOs are bona fide physical events and there may be some explanation for the correlation with a physical BF. It is not beyond conception that there may be interstellar travelers who are exploiting as-yet-unknown physical laws to visit earth within a reasonable time frame, and if this is occurring, the purpose of these aliens is as opaque as providence itself. As my signature says, once you eliminate the impossible, whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.

Certainly "No-Kill". While I'd like to pretend I understand the argument that is often used, that we need a body on a slab to prove it to science so we can protect them, I find both aspects of that line of thinking to be fake. (1) "I" have no need to prove anything to anyone. Scientific acceptance doesn't change the fact NOW, that they do exist. (2) "They" are doing so well on their own now as it is, that we can't even PROVE they exist, that it's an intellectually faux arguement that we need to protect them. This is an old discussion I'm sure we'll have many more times, long before the creature is ever fully accepted to exist.