| |
| UFOS: Eye Witness Account |  work of literature you will undoubtedly find they only deal in uncertainties with this subject. I guarantee you will never find another book, that approaches this subject matter with any sense of sobriety. Indeed any alternative work that seeks to stipulate Ufo phenomenon will only ever tell you stories of peoples' encounters, as you have just read, or some way-out theory with absolutely no tangible evidence or ability to measure their theory. Quiet simply, and I know this sounds disingenuous, but those that write for Ufo magazines, books or make videos do not have enough scientific background to fully comprehend the intricacies which surround such a complex and delicate debate.
The reason we have to say this, and it is a shame, is without a scientific ability to understand the delicacy of physics, Ufo activity is not only unlikely, but impossible.
To even broach this subject you have to satisfy not only people whom may seek inspiration in their quest for knowledge, but also a very sceptical scientific world. At that point you have to produce some very astounding work, which, unfortunately most ufologist are simply incapable of achieving. And that is not me being arrogant, it is a fact. When we talk openly about any event in life, we have to support that belief with hard evidence. Could you imagine walking into a court of law, and the only evidence against you is another person standing up and shouting: "It was 'im, Governor, I bleedin' saw 'im do it!" You would not expect a guilty verdict to be passed at that juncture.
What you would expect is evidence to be presented, forensically where possible. You would expect the prosecution to show tangible proof to your guilt, and not simply deal in hearsay. And when we discuss Ufo activity, science expects the very same courtesy to be extended in their general direction.
What most ufologist fail to understand are them very well thought out laws of Special Relativity. These elementary laws are not an ambiguous statement designed to deceive or mislead, they are indeed standardized fundamentals established with years of experimentation.
To fully digest the complexity that surrounds this belief, we will now show simply why science remains hostile to any individuals' account, including the one I just gave. And just before we do, let me just defend the scientific community in their appraisal and state these are not bigoted people just out to spoil other peoples' beliefs.
They are not low intelligent zealots as some ufo writers have tried to paint them. They are in fact a very dedicated bunch of academics whom seek the truth the same as everyone else, only they refuse to allow any room for massaging the truth. To them everything they understand becomes a black and white process, some might even view it as a photographic negative, and although ufologist writers might assume this sanitizes and polarizes the debate somewhat, it is necessary in establishing the real truth which surrounds such intricate argument.
To do this we will take a hypothetical situation. You come to me and declare that last night you witnessed a UFO: An extraterrestrial craft of unbelievable magnitude.
You were walking home alone along a dark country lane, when suddenly through the trees you saw a shimmer of different coloured lights. There was red and blue lights flickering away, which kept a relative parity with your advance.
When you stopped and investigated further, a huge shape loomed over the trees. Gradually its dimensions built, until suddenly there it was above you, a large metallic object, its peripheral body gilded in an array of multicoloured lights. It stopped dead, just hanging motionless in the sky directly above your head, one large mass of solid metal about the size of a double decker bus.
An incandescent blue envelopes the underside of the vehicle and a pink probe light comes out to scan you. Uninterested in any further exploration of your person, it silently slips away, climbs cautiously into the black night sky, its bulk still apparent, then vanishes. Just a ripple of blue light pools majestically on the distant horizon, and you yourself are left dumbfounded. You then explain to me in graphic detail what happened. Your eyes are wide, your voice inflamed and your hands animated. If I was a scientist, should I believe you? The chances are not. It is not particularly because science likes to deride people, but they have these set of
Newton 2 Newton 3 Newton 4 Newton 5 Newton 6 Newton 7
|
|
| |
|
» 
