UK "This Morning," Show Talks About UFO Sightings In England, Feb 9, 2012.

[The One]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-m6JxMHi0BuM/TzSEbtPfPEI/AAAAAAAADJw/GbObXZPy6FQ/s400/UK,+england,+tv,+show,+ufo,+ufos,+orb,+orbs,+alien,+aliens,+ET,+sighting,+sightings,+report,+mj12Scr een+Shot+2012-02-10+at+10.42.39+AM.png

This Morning ITV-1 Air date Feb 9th 2012. Feature on UFOs. Deleted from the normal iPlayer repeat. This section features multiple UFO witness Bridgette Barclay and a hot debate with Gary Heseltine and debunker Professor Chris French.


Also Note, those called debunkers or UFO skeptics are often paid employees of the CIA or NSA. Loads of eyewitness reports include such names as President Carter, President Reagan, and Governor of Arizona Fife Symington, US astronauts Buzz Aldrin, James McDivitt, Gordon Cooper. So with such iconic American heroes standing up and testifying about their UFO sightings...why is there so much disbelief about the existence of aliens? More people believe in god than aliens, yet no one has ever met with god, yet there is more evidence that aliens exist than evidence that god exists. At least aliens are flesh and blood like us. I believe in scientific evidence and eyewitnesses are nice to have.

Fv2AH2zO-D4

[minkton]

ha, that was very interesting. thankyou very much for posting.

[cellardoor]

That was brilliant! LOL

[BlueGem]

that was pretty cool!

I like the attitude the presenters had towards it, they were very willing to understand and seemed genuinely curious.

It's a shame the show only allowed such a small slot for this discussion.

Thanks for posting!

[hectorlca]

Very Interesting!

Just yesterday, in Honduras, a news program at noon had a guest talking about UFO's and sightings and so on. I found it very odd since UFO stuff is usually portrayed as 'wacko' in the Honduran media (or not covered at all). But yesterday's show, even though I only saw the last 5 minutes of it, the anchor was giving the guest his due respect and space to present his ideas.

Just fascinating...what's coming?

[BlueGem]

Just fascinating...what's coming?

What's coming is a big surprise for people who STILL can't entertain the notion of ETs...

Pride comes before a fall :p

[svein magne]

thanks for this post

[pugwash84]

I love This Morning Holly is so pretty, This was very interesting thank you :)

[mahalall]

The perception of Professor Christopher French is supported when you review his pay masters?
http://www.gold.ac.uk/psychology/staff/french/

[Daft Ada]

Excellent, I don't get to watch this program, please please keep an eye on it and post again if he keeps his promise and does another spot on it.

[noprophet]

The perception of Professor Christopher French is supported when you review his pay masters?
http://www.gold.ac.uk/psychology/staff/french/

His main sponsors are the ESRC (http://www.esrc.ac.uk/) and MRC (http://www.mrc.ac.uk/index.htm) as well. If he ever found convincing evidence he would probably lose all his job.


Dr Christopher French, BA PhD CPsychol FBPsS. My current research focuses on two main areas. The first is the psychology of paranormal beliefs and of ostensibly paranormal experiences. Although a large proportion of the population believes in the paranormal, the evidence presented to support paranormal claims is generally not very convincing in scientific terms. It would appear that on most (and perhaps all) occasions when individuals claim to have directly experienced the paranormal, plausible non-paranormal alternative explanations can be found. These alternative accounts often rely on the imperfections in human information-processing studied by cognitive psychologists, such as those related to memory, perception, and judgement. The psychology of deception and self-deception is also of relevance in this area. I often appear on the television and radio offering a sceptical perspective on a variety of paranormal claims.

My second major area of research is the relationship between cognition and emotion, particularly the effects of anxiety on a range of psychological processes including attention, implicit and explicit memory, the interpretation of ambiguous stimuli, and the use of imagery. This research examines the ways in which anxiety can bias information processing, in particular the processing of threat-related stimuli. I have been funded by both the ESRC and the MRC for research in this area.

In total I have authored or co-authored over fifty articles and chapters on these and other topics, and I have co-edited three books.

I am an atheist but am not a member of any humanist or secular group. I am a member of various "sceptical" groups (as well as the SPR!) and so I often come into contact with members of secular groups and find them to be very much on my wavelength.
http://www.eclipse.co.uk/thoughts/guests.htm

[ceetee9]

Although a large proportion of the population believes in the paranormal, the evidence presented to support paranormal claims is generally not very convincing in scientific terms. It would appear that on most (and perhaps all) occasions when individuals claim to have directly experienced the paranormal, plausible non-paranormal alternative explanations can be found. These alternative accounts often rely on the imperfections in human information-processing studied by cognitive psychologists, such as those related to memory, perception, and judgement. The psychology of deception and self-deception is also of relevance in this area.It would appear Dr. French is a bit confused. He states that paranormal claims are "generally" not very convincing. This implies that there are at least "some" claims that are convincing. Then he states that most "(and perhaps all)" cases where people claim to have had a paranormal experience that "plausible, non-paranormal explanations can be found." Well if there are at least some cases that are convincing then how is it that "perhaps all" cases can be explained away with prosaic explanations? And if these "non-paranormal alternative" explanations (that he alleges refute the paranormal explanations) are to be believed then why does he state in his next sentence that "these alternative accounts often rely on the imperfections in human information-processing? Gee, maybe he meant to imply that it was only the "paranormal" explanations that were dubious and that all "non-paranormal" explanations are not. I mean, who are you going to believe a Ph.D. or your lying eyes?

It's laughable when I hear these Ph.D. "experts" pontificate about how unscientific all this paranormal stuff is and then they tout their own unscientific beliefs and explanations to bolster their case. Apparently, if you have a Ph.D. you are immune to "memory, perception, and judgement" errors and deception and self-deception--well, at least you are as long as you're not a Ph.D. who is reporting these "paranormal" experiences. ;)

[Cidersomerset]

Thanks TheOne I almost did not watch this vid on purpose because I knew it would wind me up...........LOL

There is never enough time to discuss these things, as David Icke said on a recent interview I put up..
He was also invited to go on this morning, possibly as part of supernatural week I presume, he asked
the organisers how long was the interview going to be, they told him 10 mins, David replied no thankyou
no point not enough time....

Back to this the photos at the start that viewers sent in were ridiculed by the pratt on the right and no
sencible comments made the three lights could have been three craft or the undercarriage of a TR3b
The interview itself though the abductee witness and the Police detective who I have seen before
were very convincing, they had no chance in the allocated time, though they tried their best especially
the Detective whose point about being able to prove it beyond doubt in a court of law was valid
due to multy winessed officered events....

The token Skeptic always wind me up, why put them on in such a short segment...Uurrrrr !!!
Let them stew in their own pathetic world of negativity.....LOL...Steve

On the positve side,at least there was no Nick Pope, and it may ask a few more to question
the possibilities of UFO's being the real deal,,,

[red_rose]

ha ha that was brilliant!

I was hoping the copper and the professor would start wrestling at the end.

You could tell the copper secretly wanted to punch the skeptic :)

Hopefully it will get the sleepy peeps thinking.

red_rose

[Cidersomerset]

So did I Red Rose ......Severly!!....And Throw him to the floor !! ....roughly Centurian....


Nothing to do with this ,but you reminded me of this
Sketch to cheer myself up.....................That Skekptic
is a Biggus,,,Dickus,,,,imho...LOL..

2K8_jgiNqUc

[red_rose]

haha cidersomerset! He was a biggus dickus.

Hey, maybe that professor was on TV when Elvis famously shot his telly! I know it made me wanna get my catapult out :)

red_rose

[mahalall]

If anyone is inclined to share the half glass filled view with this morning,
http://www.itv.com/contactus/wheretofindus/default.html

ref: Michael Schratt
http://projectcamelotproductions.com/interviews/michael_schratt/michael_schratt.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zaTUlcSGT4

[math330]

Brilliant! Thanks for posting..

[East Sun]

Knowing that a UFO seen anywhere could be only unidentified by the public and be one of "ours" makes it more "fun." Less scary at least.

[muxfolder]

Those debunkers on tv are always like that. Ridiculing witnesses by interrupting, speaking over, telling them they have no evidence whatsoever and last but not least: they know how body language and mind control works. How typical maintstream media debate.