http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread563949/pg3#pid14128327
So we have around 3-5k physical trace evidence reports, a
lot (if not a vast majority) of which has been investigated by CPTR & Ted.
Now, we already have one 'event' - the Flatwoods monster - which supposedly had
hard evidence of metal & liquid at the site removed.
So statistically, Ted should have also come across some other form of more substantial hard evidence (like the Flatwoods event) by now. I mean, lets look
at it from from this angle: are we honestly saying that 1 in 3.5 thousand cases
of UFO landings result in hard (and I mean something other than scorched soil
or slight changes in chemical composition) evidence; it just so happened that
the said hard evidence was 'taken' and not returned?Come on, really? Do you
think that it's just a little too convenient?
If we are talking extraterrestrial craft, and mean spaceships, regardless of
what propulsion they would use (even those potentially outside of our current
understanding of physics, thermodynamics and with a chemical make up not even
necessarily on our version of the periodic table), surely we should have more?
I mean much more. I mean proof. Actual proof that we are being visited by
something we cannot explain. You cannot have 3.5k events of something touching
something (craft + ground in this case) else without more evidence than is
currently offered as a physical trace. Look at modern forensics for example: we
are mere scientifically backward humans by comparison to a race who can build a
spaceship & fly it here and yet can we find microscopic traces of blood on
clothing, skin under fingernails, DNA(!!!!!) contamination at crime scenes. And
yet, in 3.5k alleged landings there is nothing more than dehydrated soil,
slight variations in EXISTING chemical composition and nothing really more of any
substance (excuse the pun)
And almost 60 years later and we actually don't have anything. Anything
validated by several respected laboratories. Anything which can now be taken in
to any modern University and tested by even their lowly science department.
They're not spooks! They don't work for the Government and have a protocol
which tells them to send all hard evidence to a secret agency with no questions
asked.
I do honestly believe that we are not alone. I also believe there is a very
slight chance we have been 'visited', it would stand to reason. We ARE
interesting. We ARE one of a kind in the solar system. So I'm not a debunker.
But look at the trace evidence. Whilst some of it is unusual, almost* all of it
IS explainable with current science. Almost all of it IS composed from our
current periodic table. *Sure I said 'almost' as nothing is definitive and, in
my heart of hearts, I hope I'm not right!
I credit the work being done by Ted but you have to put it into perspective. We
have no evidence as a result of the physical trace research.