"The man in the NG documentary was not the same man in the original video." This is called a "recreation." Many documentaries don't use the original participants.
"The man who came to the pub with the video called himself John Whaley not John Wabe." Two very similar names. The man gave his name at the pub and the person receiving the name misheard it or remembered it incorrectly. There is also a chance he didn't want his real name to be used. If you can't ask this person if his name was given incorrectly intentionally or if it was misheard, you can't make up an answer for the question.
"The person responsible for filming the Oliver's Castle footage has disappeared." Disappearing is quite common when people find themselves lacking privacy or being harassed. There are a great number of alien hunters and debunkers who are probably far from subtle and would go to great lengths to talk to someone who allegedly filmed an alien even if he admitted later that it was a hoax. The video refers to other people who have done the same thing. I don't think people know what they're getting into when they start a hoax like this. It can be a pretty serious disruption to their lives if the story goes "viral."
Citing the same phenomenon in two separate videos doesn't really mean much if the process of creating the first hoax can easily be done on a home computer. The original video was analyzed and it was determined "there was field discrepancies on the video suggesting at some point the video had been rendered as an animation sequence." My logical question would be if the original video of this phenomenon was obviously tampered with and fraudulent, how can another person film a second video of a phenomenon that didn't exist in the first place? There are two possible answers. The first and least likely answer would be that the aliens came back and are apparently balls of light themselves or can control balls of light, recreating the original event once again in front of more people with video cameras neatly proving the first video which they probably wouldn't want humans to see is real. OR The second video was created much the same as the first for reasons only the creators can offer. If I can't ask someone why they did something, I won't make up my own answers for it.
Here's the thing - I am not anti-alien. I would be more than happy to discover life on other planets. If aliens exist with an advanced intelligence giving them the capability to visit Earth it would be an amazing discovery. It would be definite proof that we are not alone in the incredible vastness of the universe. Our universe has a billion galaxies with a billion stars in each and many planets around each star. I would rather believe that alien life exists in our universe than believe that out of at least 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the universe our sun is the only one that spawned life and that we are the only living creatures in a virtually endless sea of space. But no matter how much I dislike the thought that our species is the only intelligent species literally in existence I refuse to accept ridiculous claims. I refuse to accept illogical assumptions.
I have watched more ancient and modern alien documentaries than I can remember. But the proof is not there. I'm tired of all this blurry hand held camera footage of balls of light in the sky being "proof" of alien existence when it can be explained in a dozen different sensible ways. I watch footage of a supposed alien craft making a 90 degree turn at mach 2 when the inertia alone would rip the insides literally out of any living creature performing such a maneuver. (And I do mean literally.) You could say that the aliens have technology that dampen the inertia inside the craft but again that's a massive leap. It's an incredible assumption that lends credence to something that is highly improbable rather than apply real logic and say there's probably a more likely answer as to what this phenomenon is.
I'm tired of ancient alien theorists proving the existence of alien visitations by making statements like "There is no way people could have done this." or "There is no way people could have known this." These are not scientific statements. This is not scientific research. Paleontologists wouldn't find a stick with a hole in it beside a 2 million year old skeleton and declare that Homo habilis played the flute. These declarations are not scientific statements. This is what these alien theorists do constantly and it really gets under my skin. It's ok to look at an ancient carving and say wow, that looks like a rocket ship. It's NOT ok to look at this carving and say this is proof the person who carved this saw an actual rocket ship. In fact it's pretty damn far from ok because when you make that leap a thousand times people start to consider this to be mounting evidence where no actual evidence ever existed in the first place. This does more harm than good because if the day real evidence does show up nobody would ever find it in the sea of stupidity and misinformation that preceded it for decades.
I watched one documentary that cited over 50 different kinds of aliens. In a universe where the odds of even one intelligent extraterrestrial species existing within a billion miles of our planet are slim to none this documentary suggests that 50 different species have been to this planet. Do I look at proof of alien existence with pessimism and negativity? Yes, I most certainly do. I don't deny the possibility because it's impossible to prove that anything doesn't exist. I have absolutely no way to prove that unicorns don't exist or even the tooth fairy for that matter but if someone says they saw one I have to be skeptical. It's only sensible to be skeptical because the odds of it being true are phenomenal.
I could go back and watch any real documentary about ancient culture and point out hundreds of things that suggest that intelligent aliens interfered with the natural evolution of this culture. I could simply state that the people of that era had no way to perform tasks or that pretty much anything unusual or unexplainable was proof of alien intervention but I won't because it's not logical and it's not science and people really need to stop doing it. If people are really interested in finding alien life, look to the stars because that's where it will exist. Not flying around in circles in some farmer's wheat field.
Eat your heart out VWM!
"The man who came to the pub with the video called himself John Whaley not John Wabe." Two very similar names. The man gave his name at the pub and the person receiving the name misheard it or remembered it incorrectly. There is also a chance he didn't want his real name to be used. If you can't ask this person if his name was given incorrectly intentionally or if it was misheard, you can't make up an answer for the question.
"The person responsible for filming the Oliver's Castle footage has disappeared." Disappearing is quite common when people find themselves lacking privacy or being harassed. There are a great number of alien hunters and debunkers who are probably far from subtle and would go to great lengths to talk to someone who allegedly filmed an alien even if he admitted later that it was a hoax. The video refers to other people who have done the same thing. I don't think people know what they're getting into when they start a hoax like this. It can be a pretty serious disruption to their lives if the story goes "viral."
Citing the same phenomenon in two separate videos doesn't really mean much if the process of creating the first hoax can easily be done on a home computer. The original video was analyzed and it was determined "there was field discrepancies on the video suggesting at some point the video had been rendered as an animation sequence." My logical question would be if the original video of this phenomenon was obviously tampered with and fraudulent, how can another person film a second video of a phenomenon that didn't exist in the first place? There are two possible answers. The first and least likely answer would be that the aliens came back and are apparently balls of light themselves or can control balls of light, recreating the original event once again in front of more people with video cameras neatly proving the first video which they probably wouldn't want humans to see is real. OR The second video was created much the same as the first for reasons only the creators can offer. If I can't ask someone why they did something, I won't make up my own answers for it.
Here's the thing - I am not anti-alien. I would be more than happy to discover life on other planets. If aliens exist with an advanced intelligence giving them the capability to visit Earth it would be an amazing discovery. It would be definite proof that we are not alone in the incredible vastness of the universe. Our universe has a billion galaxies with a billion stars in each and many planets around each star. I would rather believe that alien life exists in our universe than believe that out of at least 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the universe our sun is the only one that spawned life and that we are the only living creatures in a virtually endless sea of space. But no matter how much I dislike the thought that our species is the only intelligent species literally in existence I refuse to accept ridiculous claims. I refuse to accept illogical assumptions.
I have watched more ancient and modern alien documentaries than I can remember. But the proof is not there. I'm tired of all this blurry hand held camera footage of balls of light in the sky being "proof" of alien existence when it can be explained in a dozen different sensible ways. I watch footage of a supposed alien craft making a 90 degree turn at mach 2 when the inertia alone would rip the insides literally out of any living creature performing such a maneuver. (And I do mean literally.) You could say that the aliens have technology that dampen the inertia inside the craft but again that's a massive leap. It's an incredible assumption that lends credence to something that is highly improbable rather than apply real logic and say there's probably a more likely answer as to what this phenomenon is.
I'm tired of ancient alien theorists proving the existence of alien visitations by making statements like "There is no way people could have done this." or "There is no way people could have known this." These are not scientific statements. This is not scientific research. Paleontologists wouldn't find a stick with a hole in it beside a 2 million year old skeleton and declare that Homo habilis played the flute. These declarations are not scientific statements. This is what these alien theorists do constantly and it really gets under my skin. It's ok to look at an ancient carving and say wow, that looks like a rocket ship. It's NOT ok to look at this carving and say this is proof the person who carved this saw an actual rocket ship. In fact it's pretty damn far from ok because when you make that leap a thousand times people start to consider this to be mounting evidence where no actual evidence ever existed in the first place. This does more harm than good because if the day real evidence does show up nobody would ever find it in the sea of stupidity and misinformation that preceded it for decades.
I watched one documentary that cited over 50 different kinds of aliens. In a universe where the odds of even one intelligent extraterrestrial species existing within a billion miles of our planet are slim to none this documentary suggests that 50 different species have been to this planet. Do I look at proof of alien existence with pessimism and negativity? Yes, I most certainly do. I don't deny the possibility because it's impossible to prove that anything doesn't exist. I have absolutely no way to prove that unicorns don't exist or even the tooth fairy for that matter but if someone says they saw one I have to be skeptical. It's only sensible to be skeptical because the odds of it being true are phenomenal.
I could go back and watch any real documentary about ancient culture and point out hundreds of things that suggest that intelligent aliens interfered with the natural evolution of this culture. I could simply state that the people of that era had no way to perform tasks or that pretty much anything unusual or unexplainable was proof of alien intervention but I won't because it's not logical and it's not science and people really need to stop doing it. If people are really interested in finding alien life, look to the stars because that's where it will exist. Not flying around in circles in some farmer's wheat field.
Eat your heart out VWM!