UFO Abductees Are Not 'All Kooks' (Stephen Hawking)!

That is what Stephen Hawking said shortly before he died. That he didn't believe in UFO phenomenon, because all the so-called 'abductees' were all 'kooks'.

They're not all kooks. I think some of them are quite credible. Take Betty and Barney Hill. They certainly weren't kooks. And they had nothing to gain by telling their story, I may add.

Realize that I am not saying there couldn't still be an additional explanation many times. But don't just reject them all as 'kooks'. It's beneath you, especially if you are a scientist.

And some of the stories have never been explained if I'm not mistaken.

What do the rest of you think?

 

A scientist could listen with patience to a lunatic story - one little aspect of it might
inspirational to a physicist's mathematics . Perhaps this could relate to the nature
of Space .

 

I believe everyone of those individuals that said they were abducted! Hey, weird things happen, and we should pay very close attention to all of these encounters. Every one of them had something very similar happen to them when they were abducted- they saw the same kind of alien beings, they all lost track of time or can’t account for periods of time, and have no clue how they got from point A to point B.
It’s all true and I wish people would take this shit seriously...

 

Maybe Spooks instead of Kooks?

C.I.A. Admits Government Lied About U.F.O. Sightings

 

Betty Hill was a known liar though and also known to make up stories for attention. I think the gripping part of their story is that analysis claim the storied they both produced would have been too difficult and cumbersome for them to work together to collaborate such a story. Their details that match one another's stories come from questions you wouldn't even have thought of to make up an answer for.

 

The thing that's strange to me is how many think Giorgio Tsoukalos (the "It's aliens" guy) is some kind of astronomer or physicist. He's actually a former promoter of IFBB (body building) contests with no professional background in either of those two disiplines.

As for ancient aliens.... I don't buy it at all, but probably not for the same reasons promoted by most others.

 

The worst part would be the anal probe..

 

How long before the elites will stage an alien invasion? They have the equipment to do it, and it'd scare people so bad they'd be willing to sign off on a global government to combat such a terrifying threat.

 

Science is interested in your experience .

 

Everybody knows Georgio isn't anything special, he's also a renown publisher though. In fact, most of the appearances on Ancient Aliens are published authors. There's also military personal, military intelligence, investigative mythologists and phycisists, most notorious, the one and only Michio Kaku who's been on recent series frequently.

I find it comedic the lows people will go to, to find out the most irrelevant pieces of information such as an old job or hobby and use that as any justification to run a show down the drain pipe.

Ancient Aliens has been instrumental in bringing to life the mythology of our ancestors, if nothing more. Ancient Aliens uses mythological references and archaeological evidence to form ideas, theories and conclusions.

Every episode gives the viewer the opportunity to piece together the evidence in their own way. The same narratives used in the show have been going for 13 years. The show doesn't ask you to believe in anything at all, in fact one of the most used narratives is "some ancient alien enthusiests suggest". A suggestion is not solid evidence or grounds for any conclusion. The show only Let's the viewer Form their own thoughts with evidence provided.

 

I think there are too many matching stories...from varying years to varying places to the fact that all kinds/races of people have reported many of the same experiences and/or thoughts. I find that to be extremely credible in itself.

I also find it to be incredibly pompous to think we are the only sentient beings in the universe. Of course people don't say that...but that is most certainly the implied thought when people begin discussing extra terrestrial beings.

I'd bet the farm we are not the only sentient beings, nor are we the smartest.

But what do I know.

 

That's the evolutionist way of thinking though and I mean it makes sense doesn't it? Only an advanced monkey would ever consider that they must be the apex of evolution solely. that's the way monkeys think evidently. Monkey brains come up with monkey conclusions.

 

I don't know why I think this - what I'm going to say...but I've always thought this about extra terrestrials and us humans.

I think the thing that separates us from "them" is our emotion. I think they may strive for dominance and have power-filled desires, perhaps, as that is common in almost all species of animal life...

Humans have emotion that isn't just desire for more whatever, be it money, power, or a combination of the two. We love, we hurt, we care for others (some of us do anyway), we try to help those that are down even if it doesn't benefit us, we love animals and the list could go on and on. Of course there are evil and bad people also - and that may also interest "them". In fact, I'd bet it does...but not as much as philanthropy and similar choices.

 

Even space rockets gets confused as UFO's.

India's heaviest space rocket Bahubali launched recently with a rover, was confused as a UFO in the countries in the south as it took the southern course through the southern hemisphere.

Imo, there is indeed a high possibility statistically speaking for alien life, but these kind of misunderstandings and incorrect interpretations can perhaps end up with people conditioned to mistake the genuine one's or alien spacecraft as false as well, hypothetically speaking.

 

It is a fact of many stories that their elaborate imaginations are a vehicle for transmitting
a simple . inexplicably weird truth . Teleportation is an element common to abductee stories ?
Yes . It's in our sci-fi also . I am certain scientists are investigating space properties with this
in mind .

 

And the problem with that is that I haven't seen any so-called "evidence"....just endless theories.
I recall some weirdo wanting to share his own theories on our origins over 100 years ago, and I hear he lost his case. Not that you would know that the way it's presented these days. It's even taught in public schools as "irrefutable fact" even though it's also still just another theory without any irrefutable evidence.

 

There's plenty of evidence.

First, mythology does have its traits of truth behind it, the term mythology in its original meaning was 'mythos' and mythos were written by scribes that were writing down true historic events, it's only since recent times mythos has been changed to mythology which the definition is now basically make believe and fantasy, but out ancient scribes weren't recording fantasy because that's not what mythos were.

Realistically you shouldn't be reading mythology with a closed mind and look what mythology has actually discovered. Lost cities thought to be myth have been found covered in sand exactly where they were said to be. When historians laughed of the tales of under ocean cities, what did they find? Oceans under the cities.

So I believe "mythology" is the best source we have of actually identifying what our ancients were thinking at the time or what they believe they were looking at. But when the ancients don't understand what they're looking at they come up with fantasy explanations, such as bird men which to me isn't a bird man at all but just a depiction of somebody flying. The ancients didn't know what an aeroplane was or a spaceship, but none the less they were observing people or being flying so the easiest explanation was to draw them with wings, or draw them entering a big bird, because birds fly and so were the beings they observed.

You don't take it all as it's written or described you have really take a step back.

Think about this, there's still indigenous tribes in the Pacific that hold traditions of meeting the gods and they dress up representing American GI uniform and colors. But they were gods, they were just men, Americans that "came down from the heavens in their big metallic birds" so it's easy to appreciate what I'm saying when you just look into that simple fact, that indigenous people with no idea what they're looking at describe them as metallic birds. They weren't birds, they were planes. And they weren't white gods, they were men yet the soldiers taught these guys how to build irrigation, how to farm better and build and that's the traditional ceremonies these people still hold today on a yearly basis.

But it sounds like mythology doesn't it?

But it's not. It really happened. This is the representation of what a culture of people who didn't undersrand what they were looking at when they wrote or spoke about. So it's easily clear just by this alone that it even happens in our century, that the same principal story is repeated, except most others are thousands of years older.

It's actually pretty cool.

 

I think that one should also consider that, if we are to go along with what historians tell us, then religious mythology from our ancients must have been significant enough for them to develop a written language just to record their mythological events, that's how significant they were to people back then. They didn't develop a language or writing to tell a story about every day life, no no, it only came about to detail specifically what they thought they were observing at the very least.

It seemed to be the initial process because it was too significant for oral presentation which much of ancient ancestors used, nope it had to be written, etched in stone, built from stone. Entire cities and nations constructed out of their own mythology and I just don't believe they did all that because they thought they made up a pretty good story they wanted to share, not only that, but cultures all over the world share the same principal stories and they also thought it was significant enough to develop their own language, architecture and art to portray what they believed in.

And not just literature, but a lot more. Architecture was built as an idolisation for who they witnessed. It's still influenced in today's architecture too.