• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

All About UFO's

WillBrink said:
Very interesting discussion with Dr Nolan on his take on the whole Peruvian mummy situation
Click to expand...

Those things were declared a fraud almost two years ago. Why discuss them any further.

www.reuters.com

Scientists assert 'alien mummies' in Peru are really dolls made from Earthly bones

A pair of "alien mummies" that mysteriously turned up at the airport in Peru's capital last October have entirely Earthly origins, according to a scientific analysis revealed on Friday.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
 
sam_adams said:
Those things were declared a fraud almost two years ago. Why discuss them any further.

www.reuters.com

Scientists assert 'alien mummies' in Peru are really dolls made from Earthly bones

A pair of "alien mummies" that mysteriously turned up at the airport in Peru's capital last October have entirely Earthly origins, according to a scientific analysis revealed on Friday.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
Click to expand...
Wrong mummies, and he was the one who did it I recall. They even discuss that in the vid, which you watched?
 
sam_adams said:
They're the same ones. Did you read the article? Did you look at the pictures in the article?
Click to expand...
No, they are not. They mention them in the vid you obviously didn't watch as obvious fakes, then discuss others, some of which are clearly not fakes. What they are requires more testing, which he discusses.
 
WillBrink said:
No, they are not.
Click to expand...

From the vid:

vid.png


From the article:

art1.png


art2.png


From the link in the article:

art3.png


art4.png


Then there's this nonsense from the Daily Fail which has more "alien" mummies than you can shake a stick at:

www.dailymail.co.uk

Hints at origins of 'alien' mummies revealed by genetic testing

Theories range from extraterrestrial origins to an undiscovered human species, though skeptics call it a hoax. The bizarre discovery continues to spark fascination and controversy.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
 
Last edited:
WillBrink said:
I will say anyone takes the time to watch it will see there's far more evidence in favor of high weirdness is happening vs denial and condescension offered by some.
Click to expand...
Only scientific evidence is real according the skeptics and cynics apparently. A lot of things in people's lives don't even have that kind of evidence.

LOL
 
For some undeniable proof is what they want. There isn't any (AFAIC) but for people that are into this most of the 'information' out there is just confirmation about that what they believe already know to be true.
People seek confirmation and hate information that sows doubt even when it is reasonable.
Audio is very similar in this aspect.

Still waiting for an undeniable event covered by global media and/or the big reveal where everything is made public and can be examined by anyone who wants.
 
Audiofire said:
Only scientific evidence is real according the skeptics and cynics apparently. A lot of things in people's lives don't even have that kind of evidence.

LOL
Click to expand...

If you are making a decision, it is usually wise to base it on the best available evidence, or in science parlance following an “evidence based practice”. That works well for personal medical decisions like surgery as well as for sky diving, gambling, and picking out perishable food for dinner. It is not always necessary to stick to the best available evidence, but on balance you have a lower probability of experiencing an unsuccessful outcome.

It also comes in handy when spending money on audio equipment and for avoiding sexually transmitted diseases, not necessarily in that order :).
 
Audiofire said:
Only scientific evidence is real according the skeptics and cynics apparently. A lot of things in people's lives don't even have that kind of evidence.

LOL
Click to expand...
What most interesting is how many a skeptic has spent little to nadda actual time researching the topic only to offer their opinions and positions on the issue with authority.
 
solderdude said:
For some undeniable proof is what they want. There isn't any (AFAIC) but for people that are into this most of the 'information' out there is just confirmation about that what they believe already know to be true.
People seek confirmation and hate information that sows doubt even when it is reasonable.
Audio is very similar in this aspect.

Still waiting for an undeniable event covered by global media and/or the big reveal where everything is made public and can be examined by anyone who wants.
Click to expand...

Baby steps. Let's start with the bipartisan bill Sheehan discusses in vid posted that would potentially expose what's known on our side, an Act may be cited as the “UAP Transparency Act”. H. R. 1187

"To require the release to the public of all documents, reports, and other records relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena, and for other purposes."

 
WillBrink said:
What most interesting is how many a skeptic has spent little to nadda actual time researching the topic only to offer their opinions and positions on the issue with authority.
Click to expand...
You don't know that. Some of them have read and seen everything that's available about the topic for 40+ years.
It is quite possible to truly want to believe and end up not believing at all. It all depends on what your definition/threshold of evidence is I guess.
Once you follow a topic for a very long time, it is hard not to notice repeating patterns by the way... and those patterns haven't been very confidence inspiring to say the least.

As a sidenote, no one here - and that includes you and I - has "researched" the topic. Many of us have read books, testimonies, leaked documents, watched videos, heard podcasts, etc... that makes us infotainment consumers not "researchers". Anyone who says "I have done my research and I believe that..." is automatically irrelevant unless they are an actual researcher in the field and are willing to document their data, methods and results.

But yeah, the good news is that we agree: your critics have not researched the topic. And neither have you.
 
PierreV said:
You don't know that. Some of them have read and seen everything that's available about the topic for 40+ years.
It is quite possible to truly want to believe and end up not believing at all. It all depends on what your definition/threshold of evidence is I guess.
Once you follow a topic for a very long time, it is hard not to notice repeating patterns by the way... and those patterns haven't been very confidence inspiring to say the least.

As a sidenote, no one here - and that includes you and I - has "researched" the topic. Many of us have read books, testimonies, leaked documents, watched videos, heard podcasts, etc... that makes us infotainment consumers not "researchers". Anyone who says "I have done my research and I believe that..." is automatically irrelevant unless they are an actual researcher in the field and are willing to document their data, methods and results.

But yeah, the good news is that we agree: your critics have not researched the topic. And neither have you.
Click to expand...
I guess you're trying to use the literal version of research, when you know exactly what I mean, and it's use in this thread and the context. If I said "investigated" or similar, it changes nothing. If it makes you feel better to think you have made some valid point on my use of the word research, fine by me. Yes, it is very obvious who has taken the time to research the topic by the comments and who has not, which is unrelated to their conclusions or position on the issue.
 
WillBrink said:
I guess you're trying to use the literal version of research, when you know exactly what I mean, and it's use in this thread and the context. If I said "investigated" or similar, it changes nothing. If it makes you feel better to think you have made some valid point on my use of the word research, fine by me. Yes, it is very obvious who has taken the time to research the topic by the comments and who has not, which is unrelated to their conclusions or position on the issue.
Click to expand...

It’s only fairly recently that ‘research’ came to mean ‘I plunged my head into the slop bucket and held my breath for a really long time’ though, which is the not-so-literal way you would be using it there.
 
Last edited:
WillBrink said:
Baby steps. Let's start with the bipartisan bill Sheehan discusses in vid posted that would potentially expose what's known on our side, an Act may be cited as the “UAP Transparency Act”. H. R. 1187

"To require the release to the public of all documents, reports, and other records relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena, and for other purposes."

Click to expand...
One can hope.
I don't have high expectations though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Perceptual Differences Between Sighted and Unsighted Music Listening
2 3
Replies
42
Views
6K
EJ3
E
Earwax
Help ? Deciphering the charts and graphs, db readings and all that falls in between in Amirm`s reviews.
Replies
12
Views
1K
kemmler3D
kemmler3D
C
What Does 120 dB SINAD Really Taste Like?
Replies
18
Views
3K
Thomas Savage
Thomas Savage
E
Why Luxury Goods & Audio are strange bedfellow's
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
8K
EJ3
E
ta240
Adventures in speaker shopping
2
Replies
23
Views
4K
ta240
ta240
Back
Top Bottom