Space.com has an article which is supposed to show Ten Alien Encounters Debunked

There's a few problems, however, in that they conveniently ignore specific details that make their own debunking humorous. I will go over a few of them:

10: Aliens Helped Build The Pyramids
They hardly touched the subject here. First off they leave out the convenient fact that as of today we could not replicate the building of the pyramids, period. Granted, that doesn't prove aliens did it, but their argument is of a general consensus which doesn't take certain things into detail. There are many things in Egypt which we cannot duplicate today, let alone fully understand how they accomplished the feat. For instance: Imagine carving a room into a gigantic solid rock. Now imagine doing so while getting perfectly flat and perpendicular walls, that he finest instruments determine are perfect. Imagine doing so though a relatively small outside opening as a starting point. I think something such as that would be impossible with the tools of today, so imagine doing it in the stone age... Oh, also keep in mind that the Egyptians never documented how they built the pyramids in the first place...

9: Cattle Mutilations
Their explanation is pretty much without basis. We're not talking about cows that are chewed up here, we are talking about wounds that are made that immediately corterize (almost no blood spillage what-so ever). I don't care which way you cut it, a tooth or claw cannot do this no matter what you do with it, let alone no matter what an animal does with it. Also its commonly seen that the cuts are perfect, something only a professional surgeon would be capable of. Also there are reports of the even occurring in a matter of a few minutes before farmers return to find the mutilation, so whatever it was supposedly eating it ate specific organs of the cow, left all the meat intact, then left after eating those organs, all in a very short time. Finally, and MOST IMPORTANT is the fact that once a mutilated cow is found, for some reason scavengers NEVER try eating the remains. They fully AVOID the animal and it decomposes as opposed to being eaten... So somehow the scavengers that ate very specific organs but left the mean intact also made every other scavenger not want to eat any of the remaining meat.

8: Area 51
Welp, apparently the article has debuked this because they determined Area 51 is and only is a dumping ground for toxic military waste. Oh wait, they didn't determine this to be true, they are simply putting an assumption forward as a possible explanation. So how does a possible alternate explanation debunk another one???

7: Crop Circles
Well, they just may be right on this one to a degree. But there have been a few things to happen in some crop circles that can't be explained by the common hoaxer. Namely: Why in the world after some crop circles after they are "planted" there by humans does the area year after year refuse to grow new crops. There are pictures of some spots where crop circles has formed many years later, and that are has no crops in it. Apparently some how bending a stalk of a crop can somehow effect the soil for years on end...

6: Face on Mars
First off it's interesting to point out that NASA stated after the face was first spotted that they had another picture of the area under different lighting and it looked nothing like a face. They later admitted this little revelation was false, they had no such picture. Later on they got another picture of the face and showed it and it looked like a series of shallow mounds. Interestingly enough, later pictures showed that this photo had been rotated and distorted because the hills were fairly large. Current pictures seems to show some ordinary hills, but only if you're not open minded. Richard Hoagland gave a revelation about the Mars face that he determined before any high resolution photos were taken. This being that after using an advanced algorithm on the original photo, he determined the other half of the face looked not actually like the other half of the head, but rather the head of a lion. This is fully documented before we got any better pictures of the face, as Hoagland gave a presentation to the UN on a prior date than any high resolution images were released. So if you take the current high resolution photo, divide each side in half (the face half & the lion half), then dub them together, you get what looks arguably like a face & what arguably looks like a lion. Further-more what I find MOST interesting is that NASA has never released the images in FULL resolution to the public. There is full documentation of the resolution capabilities of the cameras (it's not secret), an yet the photos that NASA gives us have been reduced in size, and they will NOT give the full resolution photos over. Why would NASA decide the public isn't privy to those photos, do they perhaps show something more??? Another thing this article doesn't address is the 5 sided pyramid near the face. This supposed hill is completely symmetrical, and we know it is both above and below ground based off of a temperature photo. It's probably the most amazingly completely symmetrical natural occurrence in the solar system, assuming of course is it natural... Keep in mind at the same time I've talked about these things of just how old that "hill" would be. So if it is in fact some artificial object, it would be greatly exposed and eroded (as the article states about it being a hill)...

5: Alien Autopsy Film
Yep, they nailed this one. Just an interesting side note (not that it means anything), the perpetrators of the hoax stated someone had the actual video but it had deteriorated when they went to buy it so they simply tried to re-make it. I don't buy that myself, but thought I'd throw it out there.

4: UFOs/Flying Saucers
Welp, they are somewhat right on this one, but also somewhat wrong. Flying Saucers did exist in one form by the time Kenneth Arnold's mis-translation was used. The Nazi's had been trying to develop flying disc type crafts. We have documents today as well as photos of those objects being created & tested. And just because a mis-quote became folklore doesn't mean that the folklore could not in fact have been true in other contexts. An interesting side note, the craft in the Roswell crash (which they address in a later number) was supposedly in fact shaped more like Kenneth Arnold's sighting based off of accounts that have come forward, as opposed to the traditional flying saucer.

3: Alien Implants
They should refer to the work of Dr. Roger Lear. Dr. Lear has removed several supposed alien implants. While none of them were micro chips, one interesting thing to note is that they all are remarkably the same. They appear to be some kind of rock-like material covered in a bio membrane of some kind. They have been removed from all parts of the body. The items seem to be coated in some type of resin-like casting and has magnetic properties. I personally could understand the article explanation if this had been in one or two of the cases, but being that each case seems to show this exact combination of materials seems to indicate either there is some kind of common object that all these people are stepping on or bumping against without realizing it, or there is more going on here than just random objects being lodged in their bodies. On a side note, Dr. Leir's office is actually in a neighboring city of mine, not that this really means anything...

2: Alien Abductions
Careless psychologists are to blame apparently. So every case of an alien abduction experience was apparently surfaced by a careless psychologist. We must have a plethora of careless psychologists out there then, as there would have to be in order to account for ALL these experiences by all these people from all over the world...

1: Roswell Crash
Welp, this is the hardest for me to swallow. If you look at the record for all that happened immediately after Roswell, it's quite a ruckus for a weather balloon, or mogul balloons as is the current story. Last time I checked, it would be pretty hard to cover a field a mile wide with anything the size of a weather balloon or even a "train" of mogul balloons. And the fact that alien stories came out years later is a convenient thing for this article to quote, all be it incorrect, as its the only way they can explain this. The current explanation is these were crash test dummies the military started using a few years after the date of the Roswell crash, and all the witnesses to the crash apparently got their dates mixed up. Never mind the things such as the request for children's coffins. Or the nurses who described strange bodies, then up and left with no warning, then seemingly all died in a plane crash mysteriously a few years later. Then finally a member of one of the most experienced military units in the country not recognizing ANY kind of a balloon, let alone a weather or mogul balloons... Keep in mind even if you're talking mogul, you are still talking about balloons & foil as the bulk of the material. There is also apparently a calculation out there that shows the Roswell crash was "Flight 4" of mogul, and proves this "Flight 4" would positively end up at the Roswell crash site. This has apparently been debunked, as it includes a calculation of the following: 100/12 = 350
If in fact the math did use this equation, I think I would have to lean in the direction of believing this trajectory could have never taken "Flight 4" to the crash site, pretty much eliminating it in my book...


At any rate, I tend to see this pattern a lot. Take a few sparse snipits of information, then discount them (without doing so very scientifically) and call the case closed. If you can fully explain or discredit ALL known facts, you should at the very least take the time to point out the possible flaws in the explanation, otherwise it looks like you are purposely under-informing to get your point across...