01 Jul 2010, 10:00
01 Jul 2010, 20:45
02 Jul 2010, 01:44
02 Jul 2010, 02:16
Indigo Child wrote:You have proven my point:
You cannot deny the ETH given the data,
so you will deny the data.
02 Jul 2010, 02:27
02 Jul 2010, 03:07
Indigo Child wrote:ETH = Extraterrestrial Hypothesis i.e., UFO's are ET
The first thing
they will do is try out all terrestrial explanations. However, when they fail, the only other explanations
that remain are ET.
Your planet explanation for the Japanese cargo ship UFO case fails. It does not fit the data.
It is you who are not being objective here. While, I will consider terrestrial explanation and
ET explanations and not bat an eye lid, you will only consider terrestrial explanations, even if
they don't work. You are simply unable to consider the ET explanation because it is against your
02 Jul 2010, 04:50
02 Jul 2010, 05:18
Indigo Child wrote:
Please produce evidence of this alleged later testimony that was different, so I can compare and contrast.
As always, so far, the evidence is on my side.
02 Jul 2010, 05:22
02 Jul 2010, 05:24
02 Jul 2010, 05:25
02 Jul 2010, 05:27
Indigo Child wrote:This testimony only shows proof of a cover up by the FAA. Later, an
FAA official spills the beans on this case, and reveals how the FAA covered
It's just like Roswell. First they report flying saucers, then later their reports
change to weather balloons.
It is interesting how you accept testimony when it suits your purposes lol
02 Jul 2010, 05:50
02 Jul 2010, 08:38
Indigo Child wrote:This is a case of testimony vs testimony.
Here read FAA Division Chief John Callahan's testimony:
For 6 years Mr. Callahan was the Division Chief of the Accidents and Investigations Branch of the FAA in Washington DC. In his testimony he tells about a 1986 Japanese Airlines 747 flight that was followed by a UFO for 31 minutes over the Alaskan skies. The UFO also trailed a United Airlines flight until the flight landed. There was visual confirmation as well as air-based and ground-based radar confirmation. This event was significant enough for the then FAA Administrator, Admiral Engen, to hold a briefing the next day where the FBI, CIA, President Reagan’s Scientific Study Team, as well as others attended. Videotape radar evidence, air traffic voice communications and paper reports were compiled and presented. At the conclusion of this meeting, the attending CIA members instructed everyone present that ‘"he meeting never took place" and that "this incident was never recorded." Not realizing that there was additional evidence, they confiscated just the evidence presented, but Mr. Callahan was able to secure videotape and audio evidence of the event.
http://www.ufoevidence.org/Cases/CaseSu ... asp?ID=290
Which is more likely of the two: An experienced pilot and his crew first report seeing 3 giant UFO's chasing them for 30 min, and ground radar also track the object, a few weeks later change their testimony into something entirely different AND a high ranking FAA division chief later comes out with documented, audio and video evidence showing there was a cover up, is lying and has forged everything.
The FAA covered it up
Using Occams razor the least amount of assumptions is required with the latter. So the most likely explanation here is the FAA covered it up.
02 Jul 2010, 20:05