UFOs Are Real?!?!?

G-man wrote:

I'm not delicate, I just find it amusing how it does not matter which topic on here but you always seem to go to great lengths...

I'm not delicate, I just find it amusing how it does not matter which topic on here but you always seem to go to great lengths to prove others wrong and how smart you are.

Just going by the amount of people pushing back and not agreeing with you, along with all the thumbs down just proves others are "unamused" as well....

And what does this link you provided have anything to do with UFO'S? I think you have your latest arguments where you got blasted mixed up.... LoL

https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/louisville-postal-inspector-no-packages-o…

I think one of the more hilarious ones was when BMSOB made a post about Sturgis and you turned it into a battle royal over mathematics with TXdirt.
Classic Applman
🤣

APLMAN99 wrote:

I did mix up the link, here’s the correct one. https://www.pnwbeyond.com/underground-hygge-airbnb-hobbit-house-washington-hobbit-inn-orondo-wa/ You should be less delicate. You seem to take anything that may disagree with your...

I did mix up the link, here’s the correct one.

https://www.pnwbeyond.com/underground-hygge-airbnb-hobbit-house-washing…

You should be less delicate. You seem to take anything that may disagree with your posts as a personal attack and feel the need to lash out. And worrying about the number of thumbs up and down points to an unhealthy need to be liked.

Now if we’re done with the personal arrows, can you elaborate on how that tabloid cover proves that Nixon took Gleason to see alien bodies?

G-man wrote:

I'm not delicate, I just find it amusing how it does not matter which topic on here but you always seem to go to great lengths...

I'm not delicate, I just find it amusing how it does not matter which topic on here but you always seem to go to great lengths to prove others wrong and how smart you are.

Just going by the amount of people pushing back and not agreeing with you, along with all the thumbs down just proves others are "unamused" as well....

And what does this link you provided have anything to do with UFO'S? I think you have your latest arguments where you got blasted mixed up.... LoL

https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/louisville-postal-inspector-no-packages-o…

I think one of the more hilarious ones was when BMSOB made a post about Sturgis and you turned it into a battle royal over mathematics with TXdirt.
Classic Applman
🤣

APLMAN99 wrote:

I did mix up the link, here’s the correct one. https://www.pnwbeyond.com/underground-hygge-airbnb-hobbit-house-washington-hobbit-inn-orondo-wa/ You should be less delicate. You seem to take anything that may disagree with your...

I did mix up the link, here’s the correct one.

https://www.pnwbeyond.com/underground-hygge-airbnb-hobbit-house-washing…

You should be less delicate. You seem to take anything that may disagree with your posts as a personal attack and feel the need to lash out. And worrying about the number of thumbs up and down points to an unhealthy need to be liked.

Now if we’re done with the personal arrows, can you elaborate on how that tabloid cover proves that Nixon took Gleason to see alien bodies?

G-man wrote:

And you should be less of an argumentive with EVERY topic dickhead, just saying. :cheer: Nowhere in my original post did I say that "tabloid cover...

And you should be less of an argumentive with EVERY topic dickhead, just saying.

Nowhere in my original post did I say that "tabloid cover proved Nixon took Jackie to go see aliens"

I was just relating a story I saw on the boob tube and found it interesting. Especially how afterwards Jackie had that cool house built.
Damn you are one major buzzkill! 🙄

G-man wrote:

I'm a "snowflake"? Haha, that's good--FATTY! 🤣

XXVoid MainXX wrote:

I think even simple life might be rarer than you think. I also will be very surprised if we find life outside of Earth in this...

I think even simple life might be rarer than you think. I also will be very surprised if we find life outside of Earth in this solar system. The chance that there is life on Venus is very slim despite the recent click bait headlines.

G-man wrote:

I'm a "snowflake"? Haha, that's good--FATTY! 🤣

APLMAN99 wrote:

Definitely a snowflake..... And I am an extreme fatty. Now that we've got that out of the way, any ideas on how Gleason was shown these...

Definitely a snowflake.....

And I am an extreme fatty.

Now that we've got that out of the way, any ideas on how Gleason was shown these alien bodies in 1973 then went back in time to have it influence the house he had built in 1959?

lestat wrote:

What makes me optimistic is that we are finding conditions that could support simple life in a lot of places in our system and a lot...

What makes me optimistic is that we are finding conditions that could support simple life in a lot of places in our system and a lot of planets in the habitable zone of their system . Trappist 1 has three , and we are undoubtably not seeing a huge amount of planets because of the limits of our current detection methods . 4.5 billion years is a long time to not get zapped by something , but simple life happened very quickly . But these are just conditions and we don’t know what exactly was the cause of the initial spark of life . You may be right and the initial spark of life is the great filter , but as far as I know , nothing in the universe comes in ‘ones’ .... other than the Big Bang ... the beginning of the universe and the beginning of life , two unexplainable singularities ? .... now we are getting into olger territory ... 😜

G-man wrote:

I'm a "snowflake"? Haha, that's good--FATTY! 🤣

APLMAN99 wrote:

Definitely a snowflake..... And I am an extreme fatty. Now that we've got that out of the way, any ideas on how Gleason was shown these...

Definitely a snowflake.....

And I am an extreme fatty.

Now that we've got that out of the way, any ideas on how Gleason was shown these alien bodies in 1973 then went back in time to have it influence the house he had built in 1959?

G-man wrote:

Oh just like you posted a link of a shooting and said you got it "mixed up", I got it mixed up as well. BTW nice...

Oh just like you posted a link of a shooting and said you got it "mixed up", I got it mixed up as well.

BTW nice detective work on when the house was built. Hope you feel better about yourself.

But I have asked you this question before and never got an answer.
Why are you on this forum?

We all were originally on here for our love of dirt bikes but it has been proven that you rarely go over to the moto side and I cannot remember when the last time you ever posted a motorcycle related story.

You spend most of your time over trying to correct people and their opinions. You really belong to a DEBATE forum, they would luv you!

lestat wrote:

What makes me optimistic is that we are finding conditions that could support simple life in a lot of places in our system and a lot...

What makes me optimistic is that we are finding conditions that could support simple life in a lot of places in our system and a lot of planets in the habitable zone of their system . Trappist 1 has three , and we are undoubtably not seeing a huge amount of planets because of the limits of our current detection methods . 4.5 billion years is a long time to not get zapped by something , but simple life happened very quickly . But these are just conditions and we don’t know what exactly was the cause of the initial spark of life . You may be right and the initial spark of life is the great filter , but as far as I know , nothing in the universe comes in ‘ones’ .... other than the Big Bang ... the beginning of the universe and the beginning of life , two unexplainable singularities ? .... now we are getting into olger territory ... 😜

APLMAN99 wrote:

I "think" that there is a very good chance that there are other life forms somewhere in the cosmos. I just wonder if we will be...

I "think" that there is a very good chance that there are other life forms somewhere in the cosmos. I just wonder if we will be able to even identify those, because of our definitions, sensory limitations, etc.

lestat wrote:

What makes me optimistic is that we are finding conditions that could support simple life in a lot of places in our system and a lot...

What makes me optimistic is that we are finding conditions that could support simple life in a lot of places in our system and a lot of planets in the habitable zone of their system . Trappist 1 has three , and we are undoubtably not seeing a huge amount of planets because of the limits of our current detection methods . 4.5 billion years is a long time to not get zapped by something , but simple life happened very quickly . But these are just conditions and we don’t know what exactly was the cause of the initial spark of life . You may be right and the initial spark of life is the great filter , but as far as I know , nothing in the universe comes in ‘ones’ .... other than the Big Bang ... the beginning of the universe and the beginning of life , two unexplainable singularities ? .... now we are getting into olger territory ... 😜

APLMAN99 wrote:

I "think" that there is a very good chance that there are other life forms somewhere in the cosmos. I just wonder if we will be...

I "think" that there is a very good chance that there are other life forms somewhere in the cosmos. I just wonder if we will be able to even identify those, because of our definitions, sensory limitations, etc.

lestat wrote:

Not to mention the space and time factors . How long does intelligent life last is another unknown ... looking around today , it might not...

Not to mention the space and time factors . How long does intelligent life last is another unknown ... looking around today , it might not be too damn long at least in our case .Even if the odds of intelligent life existing , is one per galaxy at any given time ... nobody is meeting anybody .

APLMAN99 wrote:

Definitely a snowflake..... And I am an extreme fatty. Now that we've got that out of the way, any ideas on how Gleason was shown these...

Definitely a snowflake.....

And I am an extreme fatty.

Now that we've got that out of the way, any ideas on how Gleason was shown these alien bodies in 1973 then went back in time to have it influence the house he had built in 1959?

G-man wrote:

Oh just like you posted a link of a shooting and said you got it "mixed up", I got it mixed up as well. BTW nice...

Oh just like you posted a link of a shooting and said you got it "mixed up", I got it mixed up as well.

BTW nice detective work on when the house was built. Hope you feel better about yourself.

But I have asked you this question before and never got an answer.
Why are you on this forum?

We all were originally on here for our love of dirt bikes but it has been proven that you rarely go over to the moto side and I cannot remember when the last time you ever posted a motorcycle related story.

You spend most of your time over trying to correct people and their opinions. You really belong to a DEBATE forum, they would luv you!

APLMAN99 wrote:

You appear to be melting pretty bad. What did you mean to post instead of the cover to a tabloid? I posted the same link in...

You appear to be melting pretty bad.

What did you mean to post instead of the cover to a tabloid? I posted the same link in 2 threads because I thought I had copied the Hobbit house link. Obviously it didn't. I did post the correct link when you pointed it out, however.

Again, any time you feel your view is even remotely challenged you go into a rabid defensive mode. You really should ask yourself why. Are you truly that insecure? Really?

I hadn't posted a single insult about you in this thread that I can recall, yet your insecurity just couldn't handle those 2 tabloid covers that I posted to show how silly it is to use that as your "source". That's sad.

Now, can you get back on topic and tell us how this alleged 1973 "incident" led to Gleason having this house built in 1959?

BTW, it didn't take a lot of detective skill to realize that it was bullshit that the alleged "incident" didn't lead Gleason to build that house. If you had anything from the link you posted, it would have been obvious. That's the problem with only reading headlines or seeing what you want to see.....!

Your turn little fella..........

APLMAN99 wrote:

Yep, that’s why I expect that we’ll eventually find sign of “former” life on most of the planets in our solar system that are further from...

Yep, that’s why I expect that we’ll eventually find sign of “former” life on most of the planets in our solar system that are further from the sun. Probably might be a little bit strong, but potentially may work better. At one time, their distance from the sun could very well have been the same as ours for long enough for life to have sprung up and flourished.

APLMAN99 wrote:

Definitely a snowflake..... And I am an extreme fatty. Now that we've got that out of the way, any ideas on how Gleason was shown these...

Definitely a snowflake.....

And I am an extreme fatty.

Now that we've got that out of the way, any ideas on how Gleason was shown these alien bodies in 1973 then went back in time to have it influence the house he had built in 1959?

G-man wrote:

Oh just like you posted a link of a shooting and said you got it "mixed up", I got it mixed up as well. BTW nice...

Oh just like you posted a link of a shooting and said you got it "mixed up", I got it mixed up as well.

BTW nice detective work on when the house was built. Hope you feel better about yourself.

But I have asked you this question before and never got an answer.
Why are you on this forum?

We all were originally on here for our love of dirt bikes but it has been proven that you rarely go over to the moto side and I cannot remember when the last time you ever posted a motorcycle related story.

You spend most of your time over trying to correct people and their opinions. You really belong to a DEBATE forum, they would luv you!

APLMAN99 wrote:

You appear to be melting pretty bad. What did you mean to post instead of the cover to a tabloid? I posted the same link in...

You appear to be melting pretty bad.

What did you mean to post instead of the cover to a tabloid? I posted the same link in 2 threads because I thought I had copied the Hobbit house link. Obviously it didn't. I did post the correct link when you pointed it out, however.

Again, any time you feel your view is even remotely challenged you go into a rabid defensive mode. You really should ask yourself why. Are you truly that insecure? Really?

I hadn't posted a single insult about you in this thread that I can recall, yet your insecurity just couldn't handle those 2 tabloid covers that I posted to show how silly it is to use that as your "source". That's sad.

Now, can you get back on topic and tell us how this alleged 1973 "incident" led to Gleason having this house built in 1959?

BTW, it didn't take a lot of detective skill to realize that it was bullshit that the alleged "incident" didn't lead Gleason to build that house. If you had anything from the link you posted, it would have been obvious. That's the problem with only reading headlines or seeing what you want to see.....!

Your turn little fella..........

GeorgiePorgie wrote:

Apl: https://youtu.be/XV-4etRB0Ms

APLMAN99 wrote:

You definitely make me feel guilty for not paying you rent.........

lestat wrote:

Smart/dumb aliens ... mastered interstellar travel but crashed into Arizona ... seems plausible 🙄 We have only become barely detectable for a hundred years . Our...

Smart/dumb aliens ... mastered interstellar travel but crashed into Arizona ... seems plausible 🙄

We have only become barely detectable for a hundred years . Our detection horizon is very small . If the aliens are here already , then either , they were really really close and detected us , or they just happened to stumble upon us while cruising the universe . In either scenario , their technology has to be incredible ... but yet they can’t seem to hide their ships from our cameras ... and they crashed one of their ships on our planet ... ya ok 🤣🤣👍

MasonMan wrote:

That definition pretty much sums us up. We have put earth made objects on speeding asteroids and Mars but still blow shit up on take off...

That definition pretty much sums us up. We have put earth made objects on speeding asteroids and Mars but still blow shit up on take off and reentry "Smart/dumb"?, "Failure is the birth of invention"

MasonMan wrote:

That definition pretty much sums us up. We have put earth made objects on speeding asteroids and Mars but still blow shit up on take off...

That definition pretty much sums us up. We have put earth made objects on speeding asteroids and Mars but still blow shit up on take off and reentry "Smart/dumb"?, "Failure is the birth of invention"

lestat wrote:

Interstellar travel and sending probes to the next closest planet and nearby asteroids are not even remotely comparable . At the speeds required for living beings...

Interstellar travel and sending probes to the next closest planet and nearby asteroids are not even remotely comparable . At the speeds required for living beings to travel between stars , a bit of dust can take you out . The aliens somehow figured out how to avoid all the perils of interstellar travel .... but Arizona got em . Sorry guys .... I can’t buy that . 🤷🏻‍♂️