Scammers Inc Busted (AGAIN!) By Reality Uncovered

RainmanTime

Super Moderator
Folks,

Everyone who is regular here knows how much I hate hoaxes and hoaxers, because there is almost ALWAYS a "money & fame" intention behind their shenanigans. Well, one of the truly great research investigators (Steve Broadbent) has just completed writing his most recent expose on a bunch of people who sell UFO stories to "true believers" who have deep enough pockets to fund their activities.

I highly recommend this read as a view inside how UFO scams are created, propagated, and defended even as they are dying from exposure!

http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2009/07/the-bad-shepherd/

RMT
 
Folks,

Everyone who is regular here knows how much I hate hoaxes and hoaxers, because there is almost ALWAYS a "money & fame" intention behind their shenanigans. Well, one of the truly great research investigators (Steve Broadbent) has just completed writing his most recent expose on a bunch of people who sell UFO stories to "true believers" who have deep enough pockets to fund their activities.

I highly recommend this read as a view inside how UFO scams are created, propagated, and defended even as they are dying from exposure!

http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/2009/07/the-bad-shepherd/

Well this should do well to help the goverment cover up. I would be interested in seeing you try to debunk the Nasa videos showing objects coming into, flying, and leaving the earths gravity. One object did a 90 degree turn. Where to you stand on these videos?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All right, lets throw in some videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0jpUPLqLhA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7IzXHsym7k&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b61g1J0wvYk&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0ytgKmhxM&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fhdGMZgusE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_zMaSPPdpQ&feature=related

These are just a few that I found quickly. There is more.
 
You may learn a lot about the Tech of The Visitors Golden Spheres:



ufoj.jpg


Video:
Link to Youtube

None of Your Black projects you work on, compare to this...
 
Your silence on the Nasa UFO videos confirms you can,t debunk them. I would say that you being a government contractor you are bound by law to keep your silence. Does it go something like that?
 
Everyone who is regular here knows how much I hate hoaxes and hoaxers, because there is almost ALWAYS a "money & fame" intention behind their shenanigans

Fight this if you can´t breach your non disclosure agreement contract with the govt...



NASA´s Alien Anomalies Compilation

Quoted:
This compilation includes many of my favorite NASA UFO encounters/sightings that I have archived over the years. All of these examples (with the exception of the second-to-last one) were captured on film by NASA astronauts or Russian Cosmonauts over the past half-century - showing many amazing examples from different eras - Gemini, Apollo, Apollo/Soyuz Test Project, Skylab, STS, the ISS, plus a couple Russian-source additions from their unmanned Zond and Mir Space Station programs as well thrown in to round things out.

The second last example is the only one in the compilation that features footage that was not taken in space and is not official-source (NASA or Soviet/Russian Space Agency). That clip shows an LTP (Lunar Transient Phenomenon) event captured through a camera connected to the eyepiece of a terrestrial-based telescope that luckily was being focused on the Moon at the time. In this case, the LTP manifests as an object transiting across the face of the lunar disc. Many thanks to amateur astronomer Alberto Mayer of Italy for doing a wonderful job of filming this stunning event (and for stacking the footage for us all to see).

While the examples you will see here captured on film can all be "officially" classified as "unidentified" objects, that absolutely does NOT mean that NASA, the DoD, and certain elements within the scientific community worldwide are completely in the dark as to what these things you are seeing are. Make no mistake: The Powers That Be are indeed aware of far more about our mysterious Universe than they are ever willing to admit to us. We, the plebeian masses of this planet, are being held in a state of enforced ignorance, deemed not worthy of knowing the full truth by those who are REALLY "running the show" down here on Earth. As this video shows over and over again however, there are indeed snippets of that amazing truth that have been left scattered about the official government archives over the decades, there for us to find so we may begin to educate ourselves about what is the most monumental coverup in human history - where the only thing more incredible than the lies is the truth!


Enjoy RMT Commander of th e-Dark Forces...
 
Your silence on the Nasa UFO videos confirms you can,t debunk them.

Or.... it could just mean I have not put viewing them on the top of my priority list. I've had the USAF in town all this week, talking about stuff that I can't talk about here. Suffice it to say that my customers come before TTI. And within TTI, my Mod forums take precedence over viewing ewe-toob videos left for me to analyze in this forum. But maybe I will get to them over this weekend, if my GF does not keep me locked in the bedroom!


I would say that you being a government contractor you are bound by law to keep your silence. Does it go something like that?

On some things, yes. On these things, probably not. But give me a chance to look at them and I will tell you what I think. If any of these are the David Serada videos, then those have been debunked many times over. If they are not from Serada, then I will need to view them and then comment.

RMT
 
In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your silence on the Nasa UFO videos confirms you can,t debunk them.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Or.... it could just mean I have not put viewing them on the top of my priority list. I've had the USAF in town all this week, talking about stuff that I can't talk about here. Suffice it to say that my customers come before TTI. And within TTI, my Mod forums take precedence over viewing ewe-toob videos left for me to analyze in this forum. But maybe I will get to them over this weekend, if my GF does not keep me locked in the bedroom!


In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would say that you being a government contractor you are bound by law to keep your silence. Does it go something like that?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



On some things, yes. On these things, probably not. But give me a chance to look at them and I will tell you what I think. If any of these are the David Serada videos, then those have been debunked many times over. If they are not from Serada, then I will need to view them and then comment.

RMT

Well what ever you do don,t keep that girl friend waiting. Maybe after the weekend. I could of found some better videos for you to look at. There is one I have not posted where the UFO comes into earths gravity and does a 90 degree turn. I know that was not a space rock. I will try to find it. We will talk later. Oh, this weekend I am going camping. I am taking my laptop but don,t know if my wireless ISP will work there. And I might get in trouble with my wife and kids if I pull it out but I know later at night around the camp fire while I am siping on a beer I can get too it. Still will have to see about that ISP. I am taking off tomorrow evening after the wife gets off. I camp the rough way. With a tent but I am spoiled and get a electric outlight and plug a airconditioner in and vent it out the door. On the outside I use fans. And I sit in my fold up chair and watch everyone else with their RV's and grills and fancy lights. But, I don,t have to pay for all that so I am happy.
 
We found your New Girlfriend interview, not the Reptilian one, speaking regarding this week-end!

RMT Girlfriend Speak it all!

Recall:

I watched the video. Personally Im not sure RMT could tolerate this specific female for very long. I say that because she is very talkative. Also he is old enough to be her dad. I found her video very amusing. Lots of personality. Note very grown up. Not shy at all. I bet she ask guys out and not the other way around.

Rmt:

I don't know if those are the videos that you were referring to that have already being debunked.
 
Re: Scammers Inc Busted (AGAIN!) By Reality Uncove

Not shy at all. I bet she ask guys out and not the other way around.

Hmmmm. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/devil.gif

Leather and whips? Dominatrix? I'm not sure rainman is into that, but I could be wrong! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/devil.gif
 
Re: Scammers Inc Busted (AGAIN!) By Reality Uncove

That's not a multidimensional Sirian visitor's ship. Mister!

That's a Klingon battle cruiser!

Battle Stations!
 
OK so I looked at all the videos on your list over the weekend. But before I say anything about them, this is a perfect time to review the aspects of science as they pertain to wild claims, and most especially who has the burden to prove such claims:

I would be interested in seeing you try to debunk the Nasa videos showing objects coming into, flying, and leaving the earths gravity. One object did a 90 degree turn. Where to you stand on these videos?

Let us not forget that, if you are claiming these videos show evidence of alien life visiting the earth, then the burden is on YOU to show why no other conclusion is logical. This is the biggest mistake that fringe/conspiracy theorists fall prey to: They are LAZY. You cannot simply throw out videos that you believe look anomalous, and then expect those who spent more time studying science than you to "debunk" your belief. You need to establish your belief as something more than just a belief. So please get on-board with real science and understand that if you are claiming something is so, YOU have a lot of work to do to establish that it cannot be anything else.

Now, as to the videos: At LEAST 5 out of the 6 videos on your list can all be explained by the very nature of the gravity-free (or very low gravity) environment of outer space where there is also no air resistance. In other words, 5 of the 6 videos can be explained by what we know of orbital dynamics and that even includes the one where you say the "object did a 90 degree turn." If you look at that video a bit more closely, you can see that the object that eventually makes a "sharp turn" and heads AWAY from earth is also on a collison course with another object. Look closely and you will see the main object and another point of light converge on the same spot, and THAT is when you see the main point of light move up and away very quickly. This is a very rare moment captured on video to be sure, since it is not often things collide in orbit and a camera is there to catch them. But that is exactly what happened, and the dynamics of the motion post-impact even help validate that this is what happened: You will note that after the collision the object assumes a great deal of the momentum of the object that it struck: THis is why is moves in the other direction and so quickly. I can also predict that the other object had a mass at least twice as large (or was going twice as fast) as the object you see moving towards the earth. The other typical thing you can notice is that there is a net deceleration of the object's velocity right after the impact. Immediately after the impact, the object is moving its fastest, and as it moves away from the earth you can visually see it slow down (decelerate). This is EXACTLY what you would expect by Newton's F=ma as well as his more general equation for the gravitational attraction between two bodies. The gravity of the earth (MUCH larger) is acting to arrest the acceleration of the object caused by the collision.

One of the other videos shows a satellite being released from the space shuttle cargo bay. The person who made the video seems to think all he needs to do to present his "evidence" is to circle a bunch of small dots of light and his case for "aliens in UFOs" is done. Not a chance. Notice that every single one of those dots of light is exhibiting uniform motion AWAY from the shuttle bay. These are most likely small bits of dust and debris that are floating out of the shuttle bay. And YES even small bits of dust will get lit-up not only because of the sun's radiance but also because of the velocity these bits of dust are traveling (at least 11,000 Kilometers/hour which is orbital velocity!). While they try to keep the shuttle as clean as possible when mating it and loading-up the crew and payload, the fact is there are still MILLIONS of little dust specs and other small objects that float around once they get to zero gravity. And given that the space shuttle is receding from an object it is releasing from its cargo bay (it does not "shoot them out" with a rocket...rather, it releases them and then changes the motion of the shuttle to move away from it) then it only makes sense that all those little pieces of debris and dust will move away from the shuttle as well (in UNIFORM MOTION!)

So there... I have "debunked" at least two SPECIFIC cases from your 6 videos above. Some of the other ones are so silly (and NOT evidence of intelligent life) that they do not even deserve mention. But let's remember that if you (or the maker of this video) is making a claim that this is evidence of aliens, you and they have a LOT further to go. Please do not forget that a "real scientist" will always TRY to falsify their theories/claims when they make them. They don't throw out questionable evidence (which can be explained by other, more mundane effects) and then lazily wait for someone to debunk them. They do enough up-front science to SHOW they have considered the mundane and ruled it out (with the science and math quoted to show they considered it and why they rejected it).

RMT
 
Let us not forget that, if you are claiming these videos show evidence of alien life visiting the earth, then the burden is on YOU to show why no other conclusion is logical. This is the biggest mistake that fringe/conspiracy theorists fall prey to: They are LAZY. You cannot simply throw out videos that you believe look anomalous, and then expect those who spent more time studying science than you to "debunk" your belief. You need to establish your belief as something more than just a belief. So please get on-board with real science and understand that if you are claiming something is so, YOU have a lot of work to do to establish that it cannot be anything else.

Now, as to the videos: At LEAST 5 out of the 6 videos on your list can all be explained by the very nature of the gravity-free (or very low gravity) environment of outer space where there is also no air resistance. In other words, 5 of the 6 videos can be explained by what we know of orbital dynamics and that even includes the one where you say the "object did a 90 degree turn." If you look at that video a bit more closely, you can see that the object that eventually makes a "sharp turn" and heads AWAY from earth is also on a collison course with another object. Look closely and you will see the main object and another point of light converge on the same spot, and THAT is when you see the main point of light move up and away very quickly. This is a very rare moment captured on video to be sure, since it is not often things collide in orbit and a camera is there to catch them. But that is exactly what happened, and the dynamics of the motion post-impact even help validate that this is what happened: You will note that after the collision the object assumes a great deal of the momentum of the object that it struck: THis is why is moves in the other direction and so quickly. I can also predict that the other object had a mass at least twice as large (or was going twice as fast) as the object you see moving towards the earth. The other typical thing you can notice is that there is a net deceleration of the object's velocity right after the impact. Immediately after the impact, the object is moving its fastest, and as it moves away from the earth you can visually see it slow down (decelerate). This is EXACTLY what you would expect by Newton's F=ma as well as his more general equation for the gravitational attraction between two bodies. The gravity of the earth (MUCH larger) is acting to arrest the acceleration of the object caused by the collision.

One of the other videos shows a satellite being released from the space shuttle cargo bay. The person who made the video seems to think all he needs to do to present his "evidence" is to circle a bunch of small dots of light and his case for "aliens in UFOs" is done. Not a chance. Notice that every single one of those dots of light is exhibiting uniform motion AWAY from the shuttle bay. These are most likely small bits of dust and debris that are floating out of the shuttle bay. And YES even small bits of dust will get lit-up not only because of the sun's radiance but also because of the velocity these bits of dust are traveling (at least 11,000 Kilometers/hour which is orbital velocity!). While they try to keep the shuttle as clean as possible when mating it and loading-up the crew and payload, the fact is there are still MILLIONS of little dust specs and other small objects that float around once they get to zero gravity. And given that the space shuttle is receding from an object it is releasing from its cargo bay (it does not "shoot them out" with a rocket...rather, it releases them and then changes the motion of the shuttle to move away from it) then it only makes sense that all those little pieces of debris and dust will move away from the shuttle as well (in UNIFORM MOTION!)

So there... I have "debunked" at least two SPECIFIC cases from your 6 videos above. Some of the other ones are so silly (and NOT evidence of intelligent life) that they do not even deserve mention. But let's remember that if you (or the maker of this video) is making a claim that this is evidence of aliens, you and they have a LOT further to go. Please do not forget that a "real scientist" will always TRY to falsify their theories/claims when they make them. They don't throw out questionable evidence (which can be explained by other, more mundane effects) and then lazily wait for someone to debunk them. They do enough up-front science to SHOW they have considered the mundane and ruled it out (with the science and math quoted to show they considered it and why they rejected it).

Next time I see a UFO do a 90 degree turn I will be sure and look for what hit it. The dust thing makes since from a science point of view. As usual your right on target with your academic analysis.

In science it is up to who ever wants to do the work for approving or disproving something. There is no law that proof be on the observer or claiment as you call it. There is a difference between observation and making an obervation known and making a claim. Many scientist have studied in the past what other people have observed. They did not call that person and say hey prove it. Proof is really up to who ever wants to do the work and they can go for debunking too. The guys that did the first cold fusion experiments could not prove their work but that never stopped the cold fusion experiment boom that resulted from their observations as a case in point. I do appreciate you taking the time to answer my challenge to debunk the videos. Your input on the matter was very informative and will cause me to think twice next time I view a nasa video.
 
There is no law that proof be on the observer or claiment as you call it.

There is no "law", this is true. But it is most definitely the accepted practice in the scientific community that if you are going to state something that you believe is true, especially if it has not been validated by anyone prior to you, then you do have the burden of "showing your work." In fact, that is what the peer review process for technical papers is all about. And if you do ever intend to write and submit a paper for a technical journal you had better keep this in the forefront of your mind. Because it is not merely submitting the paper and receiving comments from professionals in the field, but more importantly is how well you address those comments and if you can show the relevant scientific background to properly respond to the comments.

I know you may believe you have responded to, or addressed, some of the technical comments I have given you here on many topics. But do not think that because I may have not continued to hound you that you actually answered the mail. In fact, in quite a few cases I simply "gave up" because I could see you did not have the depth of knowledge in a specific area to even comprehend what I was saying. That is not a judgment of you, it simply means we are on two different levels of detailed, technical understanding. You will be in the same (if not worse) position if you ever try to submit a paper on time traveling to a scientific, peer-reviewed journal. In short, you should really bone-up on advanced physics and math before you submit a paper. It will be one of the hardest (cerebral) things you ever do in your life.

RMT
 
There is no "law", this is true. But it is most definitely the accepted practice in the scientific community that if you are going to state something that you believe is true, especially if it has not been validated by anyone prior to you, then you do have the burden of "showing your work." In fact, that is what the peer review process for technical papers is all about. And if you do ever intend to write and submit a paper for a technical journal you had better keep this in the forefront of your mind. Because it is not merely submitting the paper and receiving comments from professionals in the field, but more importantly is how well you address those comments and if you can show the relevant scientific background to properly respond to the comments.

I know you may believe you have responded to, or addressed, some of the technical comments I have given you here on many topics. But do not think that because I may have not continued to hound you that you actually answered the mail. In fact, in quite a few cases I simply "gave up" because I could see you did not have the depth of knowledge in a specific area to even comprehend what I was saying. That is not a judgment of you, it simply means we are on two different levels of detailed, technical understanding. You will be in the same (if not worse) position if you ever try to submit a paper on time traveling to a scientific, peer-reviewed journal. In short, you should really bone-up on advanced physics and math before you submit a paper. It will be one of the hardest (cerebral) things you ever do in your life.

I see eye to eye and agree with what you just said. Truthfully I may not have the depth of knowledge to get on your level. I did write a paper once to the new york journal of mathematics once about what I called my numerical system. It was rejected. And that was the first time. The second time after I rewrote it the professor was online and I got a response within 5 minutes again rejecting it. If I went ahead with it sure I would have a long hard road. As for learning I do have all I need now to go down that road. I spent months downloading all that stuff.
 
Back
Top