Believers? What do you think alien spacecraft are here?

[Gawdzilla]

Just wondering, because I see frequent references to "UFOs" where it's clear that the person is saying "alien spacecraft", unrestrained by the "U". So, why do you believe?

[A.DIM]

What's the conspiracy here, that references to "UFOs" are secretly intended to mean "ET craft?"

[Gawdzilla]

What's the conspiracy here, that references to "UFOs" are secretly intended to mean "ET craft?"

Many people claim that the UFOs are actually alien spacecraft, but they "weasel" around that claim. I see it constantly. It's like they have an agreement to not sound like total berks by saying "UFO" when they mean "alien spacecraft". OR the idea sounds so absurd, even to them, that they choke on it. So, have they clubbed together to reach this agreement?

[gzhpcu]

Actually I think that the press is partially to blame for this. It started with the 1947 Kenneth Arnold sighting, and the coining of the term "flying saucer". This later became replaced by "ufo", but the implication remained: extraterrestrial spacecraft. The man in the street today immediately makes this association.

[Van Rijn]

Just wondering, because I see frequent references to "UFOs" where it's clear that the person is saying "alien spacecraft", unrestrained by the "U". So, why do you believe?

This probably isn't the best place to ask that. Most folks on this board are pretty careful about the distinction between "UFO" and "space aliens."

[Van Rijn]

Many people claim that the UFOs are actually alien spacecraft, but they "weasel" around that claim. I see it constantly. It's like they have an agreement to not sound like total berks by saying "UFO" when they mean "alien spacecraft". OR the idea sounds so absurd, even to them, that they choke on it. So, have they clubbed together to reach this agreement?

It's just a term that entered popular culture decades ago. Even back in 1970 there was a TV series called "UFO" that was about invading space aliens.

[eburacum45]

Smart UFO investigators these days use the term UAP, unidentified aerial phenomena. That is because many of the sightings are caused by distant celestial objects or optical phenomena, neither of which can in any sense of the word be described as 'flying'.

[A.DIM]

This probably isn't the best place to ask that. Most folks on this board are pretty careful about the distinction between "UFO" and "space aliens."

Indeed.

[astrophotographer]

Smart UFO investigators these days use the term UAP, unidentified aerial phenomena. That is because many of the sightings are caused by distant celestial objects or optical phenomena, neither of which can in any sense of the word be described as 'flying'.

Yeah but UFO organizations continue to peddle that the most likely solution is alien spaceships. However, they won't exactly say this. The Fund for UFO research site states the following:

While physical proof of the extraterrestrial origin of UFOs is not in the hands of civilian investigators, there is a growing mass of evidence that points to the distinct possibility that some UFOs represent the presence, near the Earth, of a non-human intelligence.

Other terms I have seen are "structured craft operating under intelligent control" or "unidentified aerial vehicle". These are all buzz words in UFOlogy to point directly towards the ETH. These are the same organizations that declare the Roswell incident was due to a crash of a "UFO" with aliens aboard.

[Gawdzilla]

Yeah but UFO organizations continue to peddle that the most likely solution is alien spaceships. However, they won't exactly say this. The Fund for UFO research site states the following:

While physical proof of the extraterrestrial origin of UFOs is not in the hands of civilian investigators, there is a growing mass of evidence that points to the distinct possibility that some UFOs represent the presence, near the Earth, of a non-human intelligence.

Other terms I have seen are "structured craft operating under intelligent control" or "unidentified aerial vehicle". These are all buzz words in UFOlogy to point directly towards the ETH. These are the same organizations that declare the Roswell incident was due to a crash of a "UFO" with aliens aboard.

Again, that's the "'conspiracy" to avoid looking like fruitcakes. "Some places" on the internet don't even allow discussion of the use of alternative words, the whole topic is taboo.

[jpappl]

Again, that's the "'conspiracy" to avoid looking like fruitcakes. "Some places" on the internet don't even allow discussion of the use of alternative words, the whole topic is taboo.

So would you say that someone who believes there is intelligent life in the cosmos a fruitcake ?

[AGN Fuel]

So would you say that someone who believes there is intelligent life in the cosmos a fruitcake ?

There's a fair distance between allowing for the possibility of intelligent life elsewhere in the cosmos, and believing that it's zapping around the US hinterland, making pretty patterns in wheat fields, eviscerating cattle and probing anything else that moves.

[jpappl]

There's a fair distance between allowing for the possibility of intelligent life elsewhere in the cosmos, and believing that it's zapping around the US hinterland, making pretty patterns in wheat fields, eviscerating cattle and probing anything else that moves.

Oh, I agree with that statement.

But the possibility does exist. It is more likely, with our current understanding of things, that we would see an unmanned probe. But then again, who knows what the ecounter will be like if it ever happens. They could be a million years beyond us.

The point being that to equate someone, anyone just on that basis of being a wack job is wrong.

Also, if you search there is no shortage of crazy sites promoting all sorts of crazy ideas and would surely welcome any who want to join them.

But I don't equate the idea or concept of being visited whether in the past or future the same as do fairies exist ? for example.

[Gillianren]

But I don't equate the idea or concept of being visited whether in the past or future the same as do fairies exist ? for example.

There's about equal evidence, and some things that were claimed as evidence for the latter are now claimed as evidence for the former. So, yeah, it's about the same thing. (Well--I hold out the theoretical possibility for the future. I do believe that far more likely than fairies. However, "far more likely" is not the same as "probable.")

[jpappl]

Well--I hold out the theoretical possibility for the future. I do believe that far more likely than fairies. However, "far more likely" is not the same as "probable.")

I agree.

I also think that if we do, it may not happen for 500 years because it just happens that way.

The other possibility is that we find them first. Who knows.

But considering the sheer numbers involved I think if we are at this stage in our evolution and they (who managed to succeed as a species) are a million years beyond us it's pretty hard to imagine what they might be.

[Gawdzilla]

So would you say that someone who believes there is intelligent life in the cosmos a fruitcake ?

If they are, I must be one. Rather, I hope there is intelligent life in the cosmos, on the off chance they could show us what that would look like.

[jpappl]

If they are, I must be one. Rather, I hope there is intelligent life in the cosmos, on the off chance they could show us what that would look like.

LOL, good one. Take care.

[gzhpcu]

Up until now, there have been no believers to answer the OP's question... Just a bit of singing to the choir...

[Gawdzilla]

Up until now, there have been no believers to answer the OP's question... Just a bit of singing to the choir...

Yeah, they tend to avoid the question. (All part of the conspiracy, of course. )

[Donnie B.]

To be fair, the thread title as written is thoroughly confusing. I assume the first word is meant to be "why" rather than "what", but it took me a few moments of head-scratching to figure that out.

[Gawdzilla]

To be fair, the thread title as written is thoroughly confusing. I assume the first word is meant to be "why" rather than "what", but it took me a few moments of head-scratching to figure that out.

That's teach to you let me start threads.