Imprimer

Merci de vous connecter ou de vous inscrire.
1 heure 1 jour 1 semaine 1 mois Toujours
Connexion avec identifiant, mot de passe et durée de la session

Loading

[Nemo492]

Le sujet initial a été modifié à la dernière minute,
et réduit à 15 minutes pour laisser place à une collecte humanitaire.
Le sujet prévu :

Abducted by Aliens?!

Aliens!! They're in the news and NASA's looking for them. Is there evidence of their existence? Believers and disbelievers weigh in. Plus, a first-hand account from someone who claims they've been abducted!

Tonight, 9 ET!

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/larry.king.live/index.html

sondage express sur cette page :

Do you think the U.S. is hiding knowledge of aliens?
Yes    56%    
No    44%    
This is not a scientific poll

UFO X-Files Larry King CNN

[dificultnspa]

Sympa le sondage !!!

Ca fait peur 

[hazuka]

le meme sondage en france aurait un ratio beaucoup moins "homogene" je pense

de l ordre 20/80 ou 30/70 (yes/no)

[void]

Sympa le sondage !!!

Ca fait peur 

Ca fait peur parcequ'il "devrait" être à "100% oui" ou "100% non" ?


Do you think the U.S. is hiding knowledge of aliens?
Yes    60%    
No    40%    

(après mon vote)

[dificultnspa]

heraldtribune.com

Coping with abduction coverage


August 19th, 2009 12:08pm
by Billy Cox

If, in times past, De Void had watched the sort of soft chewed cud that ABC “Primetime” served up last night, there might’ve been a small blurb in the obits about a forensics mystery in a south Sarasota apartment, with investigators wondering about a missing head, and how the splattered fragments wound up on the paddlewheel fan above. Fortunately, with an assist from Lao Tzu and controlled breathing techniques, De Void now knows how to avert needless tragedy.

Even as reporter Juju Chang’s package on alien abductions twice plucked “UFO enthusiasts” from the cliche bin, then swerved into a formulaic nonsequitur riff about SETI and radiotelescopes, De Void held the Buddha pose, imagining inhaled oxygen molecules as particles of white cleansing light. Consequently, Chang’s entire feature imploded into a harmless flash of deja vu, no better or worse than all those other canned network takes on abductions over the last 20 years.

No, the hook — in this case, three seconds of video footage of an alleged space alien peeping into the window of controversial alleged abductee Stan Romanek — didn’t merit the hype. And yes, the subsequent pros and cons of the “sleep paralysis” debate was right out of the playbook.

But in the context of De Void’s new-found coping mechanisms, Chang’s conclusion to the hour-long piece — “Psychologists say we will always be intrigued with the possibility of the unknown” — wasn’t lame or insulting at all. It was wise. Because it’s true. We will always be intrigued with the possibility of the unknown.

But if, at some point, any network actually contemplates going off-script with UFOs and wonders about a package that won’t require a massive budget, De Void offers a few suggestions:

Get an interview with John Podesta and ask what he’s done to advance federal transparency on UFOs since Obama came to office. Put a bee in Hillary Clinton’s bonnet by asking about her interest in the Rockefeller Initiative. Ask the military why it can’t produce radar records about the UFO that surged towards President Bush’s Crawford, Tex., ranch in January 2008.

Seriously — it won’t cost a lot of money. And you won’t have any competition.

[Nemo492]

Transcription :

KING: Have you seen this week's "Newsweek?" NASA is looking for aliens. The British government has released more of their previously confidential UFO files. Are we closer than ever to confirming extra- terrestrial life?

Joining us with all the latest news about space is Dr. Seth Shostak. He's a skeptic, a senior astronomer for the SETI Institute, Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence, and author of "Confessions of an Alien Hunter, A Scientists' Search For Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence." In San Francisco, James Fox, film maker, UFO researcher. Before we get through this, we'll be out program. His new documentary, "I Know What I Saw," premiers October 5th on the History Channel. In London, our man, Nick Pope, used to run the British government's UFO project.

All our guests are staying put. We have to take a quick break. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(NEWS BREAK)

KING: We'll start with Dr. Shostak. The organization is SETI, right?

DR. SETH SHOSTAK, SKEPTIC: That's correct.

KING: OK. The new NASA mission, Kepler, is going to apparently maybe find these things. Big story in "Newsweek." What do you make of it?

SHOSTAK: It's one of the more important things that has happened in astronomy for decades, Larry, because it is going to answer one question: how many cousins of Earth are there out there? How many planets are out there in the universe that are something like the Earth.

KING: Do you think they might be inhabitable?

SHOSTAK: You don't know if they're inhabitable. All you know is they are the right size, the right place. They could be inhabitable.

KING: James, do you salute this?

JAMES FOX, FILM MAKER, "I KNOW WHAT I SAW": You know, I do. Sometimes when you look for something, it could be right under your nose.

KING: Meaning?

FOX: I'm not saying that UFOs are of extra-terrestrial origin. But they're certainly, through the process of elimination -- doesn't appear to be -- excuse me, a trustful explanation a lot of times.

KING: Nick Pope, what's the British government saying about this? Does it say that there are -- there are extra-terrestrials?

NICK POPE, UFO RESEARCHER: No. The position of the British government is that it remains open-minded about the possibilities. It looked at the UFO phenomenon for several decades. We found no absolute proof positive of any extra-terrestrial visitation. But we have found consistently over the years some extremely interesting sightings that we couldn't explain in conventional terms. That's why I support any scientific effort to study this.

KING: Why isn't the United States more open about this, like Britain is, at least saying it might be there?

SHOSTAK: At lot of stuff has been released by the Freedom of Information Act. It is also the case that, you know, you have to consider, well, why is it that all the evidence is stacked up by the U.S. government? This is the same government that runs FEMA. They are doing a heck of a job with UFOs. They have been lying administrations sine Roswell. Have they covered it all up? I can hardly believe that the government has that much to say about it.

KING: James, you did the documentary "I Know What I Saw." It premieres October 5th. What do you believe, James?

FOX: I believer that there are structured craft of unknown origin whizzing around in our air space, whose flight characteristics are so beyond anything we've had. This is well documented for the last 60 years. I wanted to say that we managed to obtain an interview that was done in 1979 by Dr. J. Allen Hynek, who investigated UFOs for 22 years for the US Air Force. His job was to give a prosaic explanation when there clearly wasn't some times.

He recanted what he had done for the Air Force, and went on the record before he died, stating that we were most likely being visited, and that, you know, the flight performances of these things were just so far beyond anything that we have. I'm not saying that they're ET. But I'm saying we can no longer deny -- I think once this film comes out, people will really see that the debate will shift from do they exist to who's actually piloting these things.

KING: Nick, you were part of the effort to track UFO sightings. Let's say they're there. What are they doing there? Why do they keep circling? What are they finding? What is it all about?

POPE: I have no idea. I mean, to a certain extent, I mean, one could speculate aimlessly about all of this. We looked at it at the Ministry of Defense purely as a defense of national security issue. And to a lesser extent -- but we do have cases where these things come dangerously close to aircraft -- as a flight safety issue. But I'm not sure we at the ministry really thought that it was going to be profitable to speculate too much, because our unit was a very small one.

There were a lot of people who said, well, you shouldn't be wasting taxpayers' money on this sort of stuff anyway. So we tended to downplay this subject, even ourselves sometimes. But we said, look, if there's something in our air space, we know -- we need to know what it is. And particularly if its flight characteristics suggest some sort of technology, whether that technology is Soviet or whatever -- obviously we're interested in things like aerodynamics and propulsion systems.

KING: James Fox, your new documentary, James, "I Know What I Saw," assembles accounts from various UFO witnesses from around the world. Nick Pope is one of them. Let's take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It glided over my house. And there was absolutely no noise.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We saw what I thought to be kind of a boomerang shape.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know if passengers can see this aircraft.

FIFE SYMINGTON, FORMER GOVERNOR OF ARIZONA: I'm Fife Symington. In 1977, during my second term as governor of Arizona, I saw something that defied logic and challenged my reality.

JIMMY CARTER, FORMER PRESIDENT: I saw one, but I don't know if it just disappeared.

COL. GORDON COOPER, ASTRONAUT: I saw it fly right over and put down over three little gear and landed out on the dry lake bed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: When we come back I'll ask Dr. Shostak what theories he might support to explain all this. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: I'm often asked what I think about this. I don't often give my opinions on this program, but I'm certainly open to this. I'm not going to discount it. Anything's possible. And I think the public wants there to be something there. I don't think the government is afraid we would panic. I don't buy that theory. What theory do you support?

SHOSTAK: I think there's plenty of life in space. One of the things we've learned in the last dozen years, there's probably a trillion planets just in our galaxy. Not all of them are going to be bad. Some of them are going to be good. So I think there's plenty of life out there.

But if you're going to claim there's life here, then where's the evidence we can stack up in the Smithsonian? I don't see it? Where's the evidence that convinces the scientists?

KING: Yes, why, James -- why would they hide it?

FOX: Well, I addressed that issue in the film. I think one of the reasons is apparently we don't necessarily have control of our air space. And no governing body want to admit that. These things apparently fly rings around our fastest jets, and have been doing so in the modern UFO period for over last six decades.

KING: Nick, if they're controlling our air space, to what avail? We seem to fly and land OK.

POP: Well, I certainly wouldn't go so far as to say they control our air space. That said, there have been, as James said, plenty of encounters over the years where both commercial airline pilots and military pilots -- and I've spoken to many of them -- have actually seen these things up close and personal, and where there's corroborating evidence in terms of radar. But I guess what I'd like to see -- it always strikes me, as somebody with 21 years of experience in government, that actually the UFO community and the SETI community are arguably looking for the same thing, but in different places and with different methodologies. I guess I would like them to reach out on each other a little bit.

FOX: Nick, would you do me a favor, please?

KING: Hold on, Jim.

SHOSTAK: Actually, I'm open on that. I almost consider myself a part-time UFO investigator. Larry, every day I get e-mails, phone calls and -- well, telephone calls and e-mails from people who are having difficulty with aliens in their personal life, who have seen things. I can't think of a single example where I thought, this is a hoax. They've seen something. It's worth investigating. The evidence is just not there to convince people.

KING: James, what were you going to say?

FOX: I'd say to Seth, basically, is that the very person whose job it was to debunk UFOs for the UF Air Force for 22 years, Dr. Hynek, did a 180 and basically came out in 1979 and earlier, saying these things clearly did not appear to be of terrestrial origin, just because of the nature of their flight characteristics.

(CROSS TALK)

FOX: I hear you, Seth. I'm not saying that I'm a complete believer myself. But there's a physical phenomenon taking place here, with very unambiguous UFO accounts, radar recordings and photographs, and multi-eyewitness accounts. There has to be some sort of explanation. If it's not us, who is it? It's either someone's been in possession of this technology for over 60 years. And if they have, then they're in possession of revolutionary technology. And if not, then we're being visited.

KING: Nick, do you want to believe?

POPE: Well, like Seth, I'm convinced there must be life out there. And I think it would be one of the most stupendous discoveries of all time. So, yes, I think it would be a very boring and lonely universe if we were the only life. After all, it's one of those great fundamental questions, isn't it, are we alone or not?

KING: So we've been boring him all this time, because we don't know, right, Seth? It's a boring world.

SHOSTAK: But it may change within 10 or 20 years.

KING: Can I --

SHOSTAK: I think we'll have an answer to the question --

KING: James, quickly. POPE: A quick question. Seth, I just want you -- how can you explain what people are seeing, airline pilots, radar operators, military guys? These are unambiguous cases. In some cases they've actually touched these things. What are they, Seth, in your opinion? Have you looked into it? Have you talked to witnesses?

SHOSTAK: Well, I have.

KING: Quickly.

SHOSTAK: But the fact that they're unexplained doesn't mean they're alien visitors. They are simply unexplained. There are a lot of unexplained murderers in Los Angeles, but it doesn't mean that these murders were committed by --

KING: Thank you all very much. We'll hopefully some day have an answer.

[Michel-Vallée]

Merci pour la transcription.

[Argolus]

En tout cas ... il est amusant ... de se dire que de toute façon, la moitié des français ou autre groupe humain, prétendument ouverts ou pas, n'auraient probablement pas voulu mettre un centime de leurs impôts et/ou taxes, dans 99% des inventions et trouvailles qui font la vie de tous les jours, dans leurs aspects positifs je précise ... Si on leur avait demandé avant.

Par le seul l'effet du scepticisme idéologique intemporel, je précise.

Autrement dit la lâcheté ambiante, pour une bonne part, que nous éprouvons tous plus ou moins ...


Ajout :

Évidemment, il semblerait que Fox et Pope aient un cerveau,
Mais que dire d’éventuelles civilisations antérieures à la notre, et/ou au delà de la notre ?
Peut-être né dans un environnement semblable au notre, au tour de soleils plus vieux que le notre, ou ayant existé avant le notre, ayant eu une évolution technique à peu près continue à partir d’un niveau technologique semblable à celui de notre ère industrielle …
Sur des milliers, des millions, des centaines de millions d’années, ne parlons même pas de milliards d’années.

Sans parler de l’hypothèse spirituelle, trop évidente pour bcp trop de gens, au regard des faits … (sans sous-entendu à connotation scientiste …)

(La polarisation spirituel/science n’a de sens que celle que lui donne notre bêtise, peut-être. Une façon infirme de poser le problème.
Bêtise qui ne serait que l’expression de notre structure du moment, un long moment, ok.)

Ça serait hors de notre capacité d’anticipation, très probablement, hors de porté de nos projections anthropocentristes sur le coup, quand bien même ferions nous preuve de la plus rigoureuse logique et prudence et vérification, mêlée d’imagination.

Pourrions nous discriminer un engin (ou un être), technologiquement parlant ou autre, issu de millions d’années (par exemple) d’activités intelligentes et « conscientes » quand bien même proviendrais t-il de notre type de vie, si on suppose bêtement que c’est le seul type envisageable … comme point de départ ?

De la part d’êtres dont les mœurs et l’éthique (faut bien employer des mots) auraient des centaines de milliers de fois changé, évolué. Et si ils existent. Provenant de tout part de l’univers, sil il y a des manières de contourner cette célérité limite de la lumière, leurs activités se seraient de puis loooooongue date; équilibrées, ordonnées, organisées …
Mais à une telle échelle … qu’est-ce que ça voudrait dire …

Sans parler de la nature de notre chère réalité … peut-on parier sur ce qui est déterminer actuellement et ses extrapolations ? qui sont certainement, de fait, à courte vue ? N’est ce pas un cas particulier par rapport à une physique dont nous n’avons pas même encore conscience, par rapport à une autre physique  plus vaste et blah blah blah … comme la physique newtonienne par rapport à ce qui a suivi ?


Pour être abordé, tout cela demande une extrême naïveté, c'est-à-dire une ouverture d’esprit, je dirais, si cette expression n’était pas  10 000 fois galvaudée …


Chais pas ...

[DecemberTen]

Résucitez votre arrière grand-père d'il y a seulement 100 ans, qui cultivait son champ à l'aide d'un cheval ou d'un boeuf et s'éclairait à la bougie, comme le faisaient ses ancêtres il y 1500 ans...

Sans lui indiquer de date, montrez-lui les technologies que nous employons tous les jours dans la vie courante, payez-lui un petit trip en avion en lui disant 'ben tu vois, on va monter dans ce grand tube blanc à ailes, et dans 2h30 on sera en Turquie...", nos connaissances scientifiques, quelques images de nos satellites braqués sur les confins de l'univers, sortez votre GSM et dites-lui "tu vois avec cette petite boîte, je vais parler et voir un ami qui est en Amérique...", sortez votre mp4 de votre poche et expliquez lui que la-dedans, il y a environ 10.000 chansons, des photos, et des films, expliquez-lui que s'il le désire, on peut même recréer son chien qu'il aimait tellement...
Montrez-lui, à cet arrière grand-père, vos enfants qui se servent des ordinateurs pour communiquer, jouer, s'instruire (ou faire des conneries...), faites lui passer un scanner et montrez-lui l'intérieur de son corps.
Bref, vous voyez où je veux en venir...
Maintenant, demandez-lui en quelle année il se trouve...
Il y a fort à parier qu'il vous réponde quelque chose comme "en l'an 5000, mon gars...?..."

J'en ai assez de ce "bat ma culpe" occidental, de ce complexe d'infériorité face à des êtres dont on ne sait rien !
Pourquoi leur modèle de société serait-il celui vers lequel l'homme doit se diriger ??
Je pense au contraire, que l'homme en général, a une faculté d'adaptation qu'il sous-estime, et notre histoire très récente me donne raison.

Personnellement, je ne me sent pas bien dans cette époque.
Quand  je vois toutes ces guerres pour le pouvoir, l'argent, l'énergie, les religions, je trouve effectivement que nous avons des réactions de primates.
Mais en y regardant de plus près, on s'aperçoit que ce n'est pas le peuple qui provoque cet état de fait !
Regardez plus haut (si l'on peut dire), et vous verrez qui provoque et tire parti de tout cela...
L'humain de base, ne demande pas grand chose, être heureux, avoir sa petite famille, qu'on lui foute la paix, bref des choses très simples.
J'ai regardé hier un très bon docu sur la deuxième guerre mondiale, je me disais...
"mais comment !! ces gens si simples qui ne voulaient d'un côté comme de l'autre, que rester avec leur famille, voir leurs amis et cultiver leur champ de patates, se sont-ils laissé embarquer dans une merde pareille sans se révolter ?..., et pour la deuxième fois en 25 ans..."

Oui, parfois, je désespère de voir l'homme simplement dire NON à toute cette m...., mais je continue à espérer...espérer...espérer... sinon, je ne serais plus là.

[Nemo492]

Pour le fun, notez la tête que fait Shostak à 22 secondes
quand Larry King le qualifie d'emblée de "sceptique".

[seunam]

Ah ah ah ! Touché !

[bcd]

On va donc devoir patienter jusqu'au 1er octobre, date de la sortie du film de james fox, pour voir si cela secoue un peu les cocotiers gouvernementaux.

Pour ce qui est de l'interview :

- Larry king, fidèle à lui même, il n'hésite pas à poser les questions qui dérangent.

- Seth Shostak, le sceptique de service, attends de pouvoir consulter des preuves au Smithsonian institute pour pouvoir se prononcer, toutefois il reconnais l'existence de la vie dans l'univers, d'une façon bien étrange d'ailleurs puisque basée uniquement sur une statistique du nombre de planètes, alors que je le rappelle on n'a toujours pas trouvé de planète "habitable" en dehors du système solaire. Il se considère aussi comme un "enquêteur ufologique à mi-temps" (la bonne blague).

- James Fox, selon lui le nombre et la qualité des témoignages et la preuve qu'il se passe quelque chose, il estime aussi que les gouvernements ont peur de reconnaitre qu'ils ne contrôlent pas leurs espaces aériens.

- Nick Pope, tends une petite perche de coopération future à Shostak, toujours très prudent dans ses déclarations, il estime tout de même qu'il y a un nombre suffisant de cas inexpliqués qui nécessitent une recherche scientifique sérieuse.

[Nemo492]

Apparemment tu ne l'as pas lu,
mais je relève pratiquement les mêmes choses
sur la page Ovnis-USA du jour,
concernant les 3 personnages + Larry King..

[bcd]

Apparemment tu ne l'as pas lu,
mais je relève pratiquement les mêmes choses
sur la page Ovnis-USA du jour,
concernant les 3 personnages + Larry King..

Ah oui effectivement
Désolé pour le semi-doublon, du coup je ne pourrais plus répondre avant un jour ou deux, je vais me taper sur les doigts. 

[Nemo492]

Non, ça me confirme que 2 personnes sans se consulter
ont dégagé la même chose de ces 15 minutes.