It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
For one thing, it is flying (the object, not the underwear), and I don t see any flying going on here.
If anyone's undies have the ability of flying, they would be yours, @Thunderfinger. ;-)
No, the term UFO merely refers to something that is unidentified and flying in the sky. It doesn't mean from that rather loose definition that we can then jump immediately to it being some kind of alien spacecraft. There are plenty of other more rational explanations that we could exhaust first before even considering alien craft.
It is a superhero thing.
agreed and I will say I am a skeptical believer about ghost monsters and things that go bump in the night 99% is garbage and honestly I don't want to deal with the 1% that is real.
I wish more skeptics would come to the table and actually you know investigate instead of saying its all BS taking the scientific approach would be really nice.
Sure, I enjoy speculating about UFOs visiting us. I'm convinced we are not alone in the universe, there's bound to be other civilisations too, so if any such civilisation can overcome the overwhelming distance barrier, hell yeah let's talk about that! I enjoy that very much.
Ghosts, on the other hand, is where I draw the line. That's just bollocks, make-believe, kiddy stuff. I'm well aware of America's obsession with ghosts and other forms of superstition, but since I have zero belief in a "crossing over" to an afterlife, in a hell or purgatory or whatever, ghosts are for me only fun in the context of a horror flick.
Science has no definition for ghosts. It isn't interested in ghosts. A scientific approach to ghosts is impossible because one can neither observe nor gather data nor subject anything ghost-related to experimentation. Hence... no "science of ghosts". Many have tried, none have ever returned anything useful, substantial or even remotely presentable as some kind of evidence of even the flimsiest hints of a realm of spirits, ghosts, poltergeist, demons, ... There's nothing we can even start our research with. Not even a definition that allows for testable hypotheses. So a scientific approach is out of the question because we are talking about figments of our imagination and little else.
I'm not saying I don't like talking about ghosts but only in the context of fiction, of good horror flicks. But I know Americans believe in ghosts (Republicans more than Democrats). Then again, Americans also believe in vampires, at least according to this source:
https://today.yougov.com/topics/lifestyle/articles-reports/2019/10/21/paranormal-beliefs-ghosts-demons-poll
I think we can safely say that this is a tragic leftover from the old times...
So far I've never seen any evidence that Ghosts are real and exist. The same with Aliens. I belive in Occam's razor, which states, the simplest explanation to a subject is almost always the correct answer.
I agree, @Thunderpussy.
The difference, as I see it, is that aliens are just another form of life, possibly another biology in a possibly different environment, technologically advanced or not. We can make predictions, we can develop models and we can even measure the odds, albeit with low accuracy.
But we've got nothing on ghosts, nothing at all, except stories and "personal experiences" by narrators, some of whom have the best intentions and absolutely believe that they saw or heard "strange things" (even if there usually is a very good and simple explanation), some of whom are ridiculously unreliable, some of whom are just charlatans and frauds. Otherwise, nothing. No weird "force fields", no strange displacements, ... nothing measurable, reproducible, tangible. So, again, it's fun to talk about ghosts--heck, there's a whole session on ghosts in my horror films seminar at school--but not as a serious, real-life thing.
Exactly, and the same could be said of ghosts and other paranormal phenomena. There's never been a time in history when taking photos is so easy and cameras are so easily available in the form of smartphones. So one would think that the amount of good photos of UFOs and ghosts would only increase. I'm not sure that that has really happened to any credible extent.
Completely agreed.
I am not going to be dragged into the ghost debate because then we go into religion and then we are at each others throats and its all well you get the idea but what I will say is this
My issue is there are so many good or at least passable hoaxes that any real footage of what goes bump in the night gets lost in the deluge of fake and misidentification. And for people who are skeptical believer like myself ( I wont just believe i any old thing) its hard to deal with.
I'm sure Ed Wood has made such a film at some point. ;-)
omg this is such a brilliant idea why hasn't
Event Horizon never mind
Event Horizon is a pretty scary film and one I've always enjoyed. Great plot too. I wish a sequel had been made. Weren't they planning something along that line, btw?
You would think I would be more offended at you calling religion fiction but in reality the fact you think Event Horizons is scary is far more offensive lmao
(I kid I kid I have a far thicker skin on both counts)
No, I agree. I speak from experience when I say that the Religion Thread was a very bad idea on my part. Yes, there are certainly plenty of fakes and hoaxes of ghosts and indeed UFOs as well, going right back to the beginnings of photographs and film. Photographic images and film have always been subject to manipulation, now more than ever with Photoshop and other such editing software readily available to anyone who wants to use it. Such democratisation of the availability and use of photo and film and editing techniques (once exclusively the preserve of the Hollywood basement) can only have led to the proliferation of fakes and hoaxes and so it has proven. Faking UFO photos and footage is nothing new either of course as the faked work of the discredited ufologist George Adamski shows:
https://www.history.com/news/george-adamski-ufo-alien-photos
Personally I think such fakes and hoaxes do nothing but discredit genuine photos and footage. Of course perhaps the motive in the case of Adamski was financial. It helped him sell his books and articles and stir up a mass hype at the time but at what ultimate cost to ufology? It's sad that people have to stoop to this level of manufactured sensationalism to write about their topic and sell good copy. If you have to resort to faking photographs, footage or first hand accounts to argue your case then you've already lost the argument.
Yes, I've learned that to my cost. Still, we live and learn. Thankfully the policy here is that those topics are to be avoided and I'm in full agreement with it having witnessed what happens when they are allowed to roam free. I'm sure there are plenty of forums out there that deal with those topics exclusively if people feel the need to engage in them.
Unless a mod wants to lecture people and brag about his own opinion. Then it s fine.
Ha ha! How did you guess?
I don't "brag about" my opinion, though. I have my views and I will defend them with arguments. As a mod, I'm sure I can still do that.