Corso Again - Paging Tom
Howpl
In an old thread, "Tom Ray" wrote the following of Corso's book after
indicating he found the book to be credible:
"This book might have been released as a "cover up" in its own right,
Written in an attempt to minimise "damage" should some embarrasing
"Truths"
be inadvertantly released during the hoopla surrounding the 50th
anniversary of Roswell. By Presenting the APPEARANCE of "coming clean"
about the UFO/Allien situation, People wouls have the tendancy to accept
Corso's story--and not ask any embarassing or sensitive questions about
Tom -
I hear this disinformation stuff all over the place - even from
"believers" inclined not to accept the work of others apparently "on their
side." Help me, please, understand how putting out a book that admits
what you're trying to hide helps hide it. Or is there something worse
than the existence of aliens with bad intentions that the military is
really trying to hide? If so, what? I can understand how the
conspirators, if they exist, might try to discredit the ufology community
by putting out patent nonsense. But if Corso is who he says he is - and
nobody has proven otherwise - what about his book is so awfully wild and
ridiculous that it gives UFO-believers a black eye by association? In
fact, he claims to have glimpsed a dead alien body once and then inherited
a file of "debris" that was back-engineered into more advanced versions of
technologies already being worked on. If anything, the second half of the
book is so sober, one begins to peek ahead for the kinky stuff that sells
books in this genre. Instead, what you get here is a thought-provoking
"confession" by a retired, highly placed military official who, it would
seem, has little to gain and little to lose, by going public with
information that tends to support the ET hypothesis.
auth...@webtv.net
Howpl wrote an excellent explanation of why thinking Corso's book is
some kind of plot or cover up to deceive anyone can't be.
An 82-year-old Pentagon Insider Whistleblower claiming to view an alien
body and handle artifacts from a crashed saucer could have his story
published without mentioning the help to R&D of Fortune 500 contractors.
His reputation and book will be clobbered by the PR departments of
powerful defense contractors plus the usual beatings from our Military
and Intelligence Agencies.
Doc in Phoenix
Howpl
some of these firms to check out Corso's claims. A couple of points about
PR depts. They are staffed in many cases by kids who were born years
after Corso had the files. Whether kids or old-timers, do you really
think they have the time or inclination to investigate whether or not
Corso ever paid a visit to one of their researchers? If they did, are
they likely to find anyone alive who was working then? If they do find
someone, are they likely to be in a position to know? If they are, are
they likely to fess up? If in the most unlikely of circumstances, they
did confess, you know PR's response would still be a chuckle and the
statement "To the best of our knowledge the inventions that helped make
our reputation were designed by human beings we employed." But, of
course, they never did any of this. They went straight to the punchline
without checking at all. And, anyway, Corso took pains not to be noticed.
I assume he is as skilled in surrepticious behavior as his station in the
military requires.
Howard
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Sherilyn
In article <19970811181...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, Howpl
<ho...@aol.com> writes
...
>>His reputation and book will be clobbered by the PR departments of
>>powerful defense contractors plus the usual beatings from our Military
>>and Intelligence Agencies.
>>
> A couple of points about
>PR depts. They are staffed in many cases by kids who were born years
>after Corso had the files. Whether kids or old-timers, do you really
>think they have the time or inclination to investigate whether or not
>Corso ever paid a visit to one of their researchers? If they did, are
>they likely to find anyone alive who was working then? If they do find
>someone, are they likely to be in a position to know? If they are, are
>they likely to fess up?
I think you are working your way up to admitting that Corso has made a
completely unfalsifiable claim based on anecdotal evidence. Thank you
for playing.
--
Sherilyn
Sherilyn
In article <5su579$g2c$1...@newsd-3.alma.webtv.net>, auth...@webtv.net
writes
>SHERILYN ---- you use "unfalsifiable", please define, cite please.
This is a term commonly used in science. A falsifiable claim is one
that can be, at least in principle, proven wrong by observation. For
instance I could say "all bananas are green" and you'd know that you
could be prove this false by producing a banana that wasn't green. This
is falsifiable. Or else I could say "E=MC^2" and you could try to prove
this false by searching for systems in which mass-energy is not
conserved according to this equation.
On the other hand, I could state "some bananas are blue" but you could
not falsify this. No matter how long you searched, you might have
overlooked a blue banana somewhere. So you cannot determine if my
statement is false.
...
>
>Please give the lie or lies, don't use stuff like it can't be true
>because an alien body is viewed or forwarded R&D info is impossible.
I haven't stated that it can't be true, just as I haven't stated that
there are no blue bananas (my reasons for not doing so are set out
above). I have stated three reasons why it will never be taken
seriously (see recent cross-posts to the evolution group, talk.origins,
for scientific reasons why aliens of the kind described are considered
extremely unlikely).
--
Sherilyn