Comments by "" (@titteryenot4524) on "The Scottish Village That Became UK's Main UFO Hotspot | Paranormal Files | Absolute Documentaries" video.

  1. Was it a Flymo?
    6
  2. Yeah, but our furthest out object, Voyager 1, is ‘only’ currently 14 billion miles away from Earth having been launched in 1977, whereas Proxima Centauri, our nearest star, is 4.22 light years away, or in other words, using current technology, would take us 6,300 years to reach. This sheer scale of the Universe, for me, makes it nigh-on impossible that we have been visited by extraterrestrial beings or crafts. However, given the 200 billion trillion stars in the known Universe, I don’t for one moment, simply on the balance of statistical probability, doubt that they are ‘out there’; just not ‘in here’.
    4
  3. Yeah, but our furthest out object, Voyager 1, is ‘only’ currently 14 billion miles away from Earth having been launched in 1977, whereas Proxima Centauri, our nearest star, is 4.22 light years away, or in other words, using current technology, what would take us 6,300 years to reach. This sheer scale of the Universe, for me, makes it nigh-on impossible that we have been visited by extraterrestrial beings or crafts. However, given the 200 billion trillion stars in the known Universe, I don’t for one moment, simply on the balance of statistical probability, doubt that they are ‘out there’; just not ‘in here’.
    3
  4.  @robinmcara793  Look, man, you wanna know my real stance on all this UFO business? Until the day I get some incontrovertible evidence (vague nebulous lights blinking in a night-sky don’t count) I believe none of it, if ‘believe’ implies ‘visitors from star systems light-years away’. Sorry. Call me rational. Call me evidence-based. Show me a big f*ck-off mothership at 10 paces and I might revise my opinion; but even then I would want more verification than just ocular evidence. As I say, they are (almost undoubtedly) ‘out there’, it’s just that I doubt they are ‘in here’. Now, if you have some evidence hitherto undisclosed that can be peer-reviewed, I’d be interested, but to ask me to believe in ‘alien visitation’ on the current evidence is something I’m not prepared to do. This goes for ghosts and Bigfoot, too, btw. Show me the evidence! I will say this though, and call me irrational and unreasonable if you must, but I do , for some reason, think there is something spooky about certain Crop Circles. Whether it’s alien-based? Well, that’s too much of a leap for me to make.
    2
  5.  @Emiliapocalypse  👽
    2
  6.  @rambo3834  *their
    1
  7.  @rambo3834  Just run it through a spellcheck, buddy. Otherwise, do one.
    1
  8.  @ItsmeBish584  Well, it is a bit, mate. I’m not willing to waste my time on morons who, if they can’t spell the basics, should at least show me the courtesy of running it through a spellchecker. Don’t you have standards?
    1
  9.  @pygiana16  You can pay me later.
    1
  10.  @We_Are_All_Vultures  It’s nothing of the sort. If you can’t be bothered to self-edit your text why should anyone else be bothered to read it? ‘There’? ‘Their’? If this blunder was made by a native English-speaker, then it’s nigh-on unforgivable. It’s lazy and invokes a reluctance to read on in this reader.
    1
  11.  @StyleWithSteez  Lol.
    1
  12.  @StyleWithSteez  I have no idea wtf. ‘venmo’ is, so you may have to enlighten me. Make it interesting.
    1
  13.  @pegc9889  Evidence?
    1
  14.  @pegc9889  Not convinced. Need better evidence.
    1
  15.  @socialmeaslesinpartnership1252  Lol.
    1
  16.  @robinmcara793  Ok, I’ll do that.
    1
  17.  @robinmcara793  Yeah. Just looked at the Pentagon stuff and it’s nothing I haven’t seen hundreds of times previously. There are two key things for me in any footage: 1. Can we trust its provenance? 2. Can we trust it’s ‘real’; that is, showing us what it’s purporting to show us? In the case of the Pentagon stuff, this is inconclusive on both counts. Here’s the deal: that people are seeing and recording seemingly ‘anomalous’ lights/objects in the sky, is incontrovertible. My only and main contention has always been this: are these lights/objects of extraterrestrial origin? My answer is no, based on what I have been shown thus far. The burden of proof is on you to prove to me otherwise. You are claiming these things are of extraterrestrial provenance? I say, prove it. As Carl Sagan said: ‘Outlandish claims require outlandish evidence.’ The evidence you have cited is inconclusive, to say the least. This goes for ghosts, Bigfoot and, yes, God or gods.
    1
  18.  @mrblonde1264  Anti-gravity? Yeah? Point me to the video that shows this right now, or else say no more.
    1
  19.  @mrblonde1264  Drones, ‘hang’ in the air. Helicopters, ‘hang’ in the air. Look, I don’t know how many times I need to repeat this, but here goes anyway: that there are anomalous lights/objects seen and recorded in our skies is incontrovertible. But to then make the outrageous leap and state (with no evidence whatsoever) that these are of extraterrestrial origin is inadmissible. You need to come to me with more than that. Incidentally, you still haven’t pointed me to the ‘anti-gravity’ video … perhaps you could do that for me now. Otherwise, there is nothing more to say, really.
    1
  20.  @mrblonde1264  Look, Mr Blonde (Tarantino was always overrated anyway), don’t come at me with nothing but bluster, and ‘I happen to believe in this and therefore you must believe in this, too’. It doesn’t work like that. Just because I dig chocolate ice cream, I’m not forcing you to dig it, too. It seems like you are ‘forcing’ me to be believe something based on negligible evidence, to say the very least, and I refuse to do so until you can do better. You know what you remind me of? Those fanatical Christians screaming: ‘repent or die!’ I’m here to tell you, some of us have critical faculties that haven’t (yet) atrophied. Here’s what I’m gonna tell you, and you may not like it: you are screaming at me because you, yourself, seriously doubt the ‘truth’ of what you’re bellowing. Can I point you to an apposite quote which sums up this better than I can: You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in. No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow. They know it's going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kinds of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt. Pirsig sums up much of the alien/extraterrestrial believers almost perfectly. In sum, if you really believed all this extraterrestrial visitation stuff you wouldn’t feel the need to force others to believe it also. I don’t work on faith; I work on evidence.
    1
  21.  @robinmcara793  @Mr Blonde Prove it, boys. That’s all I ask. Archimedes, Euclid, Galileo, Newton, Kepler, Copernicus, Faraday, Maxwell, Curie, Darwin, Rutherford, Planck, Mendel, Franklin et al: none of these people asked you to take their proposals at face value; they, to a man and woman, proved the human truth of these proposals, and asked you to ‘peer review’ their work. I have yet to see any proponent of the ‘alien visitation’ theory ask to be peer reviewed. I bet you can guess why.
    1
  22.  @robinmcara793  Well, Robin, just what are you talking about when you say: ‘you assume there (sic) technology is as limited as ours’? Huh?
    1
  23.  @robinmcara793  Yeah, but you said there in the original quote, mate , so please don’t come at me as a grammar bot, when you said ‘there technology’ (sic), and, frankly, you have been making grammatical/spelling blunders throughout this thread. Just for the record, I was bored with you from the beginning.
    1
  24.  @robinmcara793  Btw. it’s got f*ck-all to do with being a teacher. It’s about having standards. Some of us have them. Think on.
    1
  25.  @gordonpeacman2126  Looks like we got ourselves a live one, here.
    1
  26.  @gordonpeacman2126  Aren’t you missing an ‘e’, Gordon?
    1
  27.  @gordonpeacman2126  Ok, Gordy. You keep taking the meds. now.
    1