This particular incident has been shown to have been of terrestrial origin.  I would not be so vain, though, to make the statement that nothing of extra-terrestrial origin has ever been by earth, never, ever, never.  I'm just not qualified to make that statement and neither is ANYBODY else. 

There are those who will claim every light and every unknown (and many known) incidents are proof positive that "they're heeerrrreeee"  They aren't really qualified, either, as they mostly are worried about book sales.

There are those who would probably deny it if the UFO were seen filling up at the local Chevron station (is that still on the homepage?)

Then there are a diminishing group of normal people who employ the powers of true skepticisim and let evidence guide them in EITHER direction.

Edit: yep it's still there, although apparently no longer on the "homepage"  Exxon, not Chevron, sorry!

Learjet said:

There's a brightish comet in the NE morning skies also. http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/06/09/newfound-comet-mcnaught-visible-early-morning-skies/

Time to go shopping for Nikes?

Learjet said:

It takes a rare individual to do that though. Human nature the way it is likes to take sides, ie either one is a believer or not. Even if we start out impartial, the tendency is to eventually lean one way or the other depending how each of us interpret whatever evidence is at hand.

I'm not sure if it's too rare an individual, although from much of what I've seen lately, perhaps it does.  One must remember to consider the individual cases rather than the broad topic.  Even if, for example, we were someday presented with incontrovertible evidence (at least incontroverible to rational folks who are willing to consider all possibilities) that a ghost DID exist, such evidence would still have to be shown to prove the next incident.  Just because a ghost was proven, it would not mean that every bump in the night now could be attributed to ghosts.

I think many people are confusing messenger with topic, too.  We've seen some suspicious "evidence" and wild claims not just from GH, but from pretty much every one of these TV shows.  These shows, however, are not the be all and end all of this type of thing.  We've seen some pretty outrageous shows on UFOs and Aliens, too, but that does not mean that just because these shows have some pretty wild ideas and claims that every instance of a sighting is to be immediately dismissed because the dismisser has already come to his conclusion.  The "historian" at Waverly who said there was no way she could be convinced the place was not haunted is but one side of the problem…the other side is the person who says there is no way he could be convinced the place IS haunted (insert alien/UFO parallel as well)

This site is a place that should foster that "right amount" of open-mindedness to consider all possibilities based on the evidence.  Unfortunately I think too much has concentrated on the shows that deliver a portion of that "evidence" and there has become a jaded/cynical angle taken that seems to supercede the skeptical angle in many cases. 

And I can see how cynicism could take sway when dealing with certain shows.  Hopefully we can keep it from clouding judgement in the overall picture, though.