Patterson-Gimlin Posted Wednesday at 08:56 PM Posted Wednesday at 08:56 PM (edited) The paranormal woo aspect is quite disappointing. It is my opinion that these are excuses for no proof of the creatures existence. Better time could be spent procuring a body on a slab instead of being explained by Science fiction. This only makes the case that the creatures probably don't exist in any form. Ufos by definition are certainly real. Are they manned by extraterrestrials,probably not. Edited Wednesday at 08:58 PM by Patterson-Gimlin 1 1
norseman Posted Wednesday at 10:15 PM Admin Posted Wednesday at 10:15 PM 1 hour ago, TD-40 said: They only go home once a year. While here they have to live and deal with the natural elements. Hence you get footprints, nests, food selection, etc. And they use portals, not crafts. There. See how easy this is? Yes. But that still doesn’t explain why one isn’t stuffed in a museum. One year is plenty of time for a specimen to be collected by science. 1
MIB Posted 8 minutes ago Moderator Posted 8 minutes ago On 12/3/2025 at 12:56 PM, Patterson-Gimlin said: The paranormal woo aspect is quite disappointing. It is my opinion that these are excuses for no proof of the creatures existence. Better time could be spent procuring a body on a slab instead of being explained by Science fiction. This only makes the case that the creatures probably don't exist in any form. Ufos by definition are certainly real. Are they manned by extraterrestrials,probably not. I wouldn't quite put it that way though I can see how someone else might. I think people are just too "danged" sure of themselves, too sure of their infallibility, too sure a mere (monkey, primitive human, near human .. pick one) can't outsmart them. That leads to believing either bigfoot a) doesn't exist or b) must be "magical". For people who have seen enough, non-existence isn't an option. When confronted with what is left, a binary choice between accepting their own limitations or leaping to "magic", their feeble egos choose "magic" as the explanation. I don't happen to fall into that trap. That said, there are a few repeating occurrences ... in other words, good probability there is something real ... which are either beyond current science -or- there's a bit of trickery in play so that we fail to use the correct piece of current science when trying to understand / study / identify it. I think both of those are a cool challenge to try to get to the bottom of and I accept in advance that I may fail to do so. Doesn't make them magic though. (I think your assessment of UFOs, overall, is a very sensible place to start.) MIB
Recommended Posts