What a great opportunity for sceptics to use their great gift of pragmatism.
bigfl...@gmail.com
M Purcell
wrote:
An explaination for the confabulation of three guys fond of practical
jokes? Do you buy products based on testimonials?
Giga
<bigfl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e3099aa-fcbc-4c8e...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce9vEGv3sZI&feature=related.
>
> I look foward to your explaination.
>
> BOfL
Very interesting. Supposed to be one of the most well documented UFO-type
events. One thing occured to me. The base deputy commander said he collected
some equipment and men to investigate on the second night the thing was
there. They took a tape recorder and a Gieger counter, they even had some
portable floodlights set up in the woods. Did they just not think to take a
camera? Surely they must have done. So either they took a camera and for
some reason are not letting on about it or they didn't take a camera. In the
first case they are witholding evidence, which is a kind of lying in the
circummstances, in the second there must be a reason why they didn't take a
camera. The only explanation I can think of is that it was a hoax and so
they knew there would be nothing to photograph. Maybe it was a joke that got
out of hand. Or maybe there are some photos somewhere?
tirebiter
wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce9vEGv3sZI&feature=related.
>
> I look foward to your explaination.
>
> BOfL
Scripted TV that is poorly written and badly acted. The question mark
in the the "Strange but True?" show tells all. It gives them latitude
to make up whatever they want.
Reminds me of a godbot on another forum who used the SciFi channel's
"Ghost Hunters" show to "prove" that ghosts exist.
Too funny.
---
a.a. #2273
bigfl...@gmail.com
More than that, I didnt sell them either, when I could have "made a
killing".
I would only recommend a product if i wasnt going to profit from it.
If they were joking, dont you suspect it would have blown back in
their face? Many dont like their beliefs being played with.
BOfL
bigfl...@gmail.com
ho...@yahoo.co> wrote:
> <bigflet...@gmail.com> wrote in message
More fuel for beliefs, one being the belief that they did take a
camera, and the evidence would likely have been 'catagorised'.
If there was photographic evidence, would that be enough to convince
some? I doubt it. They would no more believe the vaidity of a photo
than the reports of these men (and many like them).
BOfL
bigfl...@gmail.com
> On Dec 31, 10:14 am, "bigflet...@gmail.com" <bigflet...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce9vEGv3sZI&feature=related.
>
> > I look foward to your explaination.
>
> > BOfL
>
> Scripted TV that is poorly written and badly acted. The question mark
> in the the "Strange but True?" show tells all. It gives them latitude
> to make up whatever they want.
And to investigate further, the authenticity of the individuals
depicted
>
> Reminds me of a godbot on another forum who used the SciFi channel's
> "Ghost Hunters" show to "prove" that ghosts exist.
Believers will do anything to win over converts. Strength in numbers
and the need for mutual affirmation !
The most ludicrous proposition in existence, is the attempt to link
such phenomena, be it para normal or ufo activity with "god".
If people need evidence, they are 'walking' in it, looking at it, and
from it.
BOfL
Giga
<bigfl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:02f5744b-baeb-4766...@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
=I am pretty convinced there are some kind of weird high-tech things flying
about, possibly ET origin, however...In this case, if it was not a hoax,
they would have taken at least a couple of cameras and probably a cine
camera, 8 or 16mm maybe, and at least a decent SLR. Six hours they are
seeing these things, they would have been able to take hundreds of shots and
loads of film. It would have been very convincing extra evidence and
coroboration. I don't find it credible that some 'agency' managed to hide
the photos and force them all not to even mention them, but allows them to
talk about it and release a tape recording? It doesn't really make any
sense.
bigfl...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
It does if you take into account what powers the authorities have with
their 'official secrets act'.
Stan Deyo was on of the first in modern times, who was a CIA
operative. He wrote Cosmic Conspiracy, and was 'deported to Perth WA,
and told never to return. He is a really 'good bloke',and has since
returned. All of his views and explainations were well 'ahead of their
times' in the 70's, but each one has been continually validated today
(so far).
Added to that, there are many 'whistle blowers', long retired, who
also'come across' as highly credible (a bunch on Operation Camelot)who
speak of such matters, where the authorities seem to be of the belif,
that only 'loonies' will believe them.
BOfL
chazwin
wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce9vEGv3sZI&feature=related.
>
> I look foward to your explaination.
>
> BOfL
It is beyond me what exactly you think is in need of explanation.
Only a complete moron would be convinced by this idiotic bit of fluff.
This is nothing more than a piece of TV fantasy.
chazwin
wrote:
I think you have to ask why they did not bother - or why they forgot,
or why they were to stupid to think that a camera would have been a
good idea.
The whole thing is a fucking joke - and you are the but of the joke.
chazwin
>
> I look foward to your explaination.
>
> BOfL
It is beyond me what exactly you think is in need of explanation.
Zinnic
wrote:
What do you mean by views that "were well ahead of their times"? I
guess all sceptics will have to play 'catch up' when each explanation
is finally validated. Snicker!
> Added to that, there are many 'whistle blowers', long retired, who
> also'come across' as highly credible (a bunch on Operation Camelot)who
> speak of such matters, where the authorities seem to be of the belif,
> that only 'loonies' will believe them.
Spoken like a true believer. Grow up!
Giga
<bigfl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d89e7884-8d5c-4cd6...@o28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
=I looked at a transcript of the tape and nowhere do they even mention
cameras or 'get a shot of that' or such like?
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/halttape.htm
Tape
http://www.crowdedskies.com/rendlesham/The%20HALT%20tape.mp3
Bret Cahill
Like the silly video, he's pulling your leg.
Even the AGW conspiracy theorists have better actors, or rather, they
actually believe their nonsense.
Bret Cahill
Bret Cahill
>
> > I look foward to your explaination.
>
> > BOfL
>
> Scripted TV that is poorly written and badly acted.
Deliberately so. It was supposed to be a fun parody but half the
posters here are so dumb they _still_ believe it.
People _that_ dumb should not be allowed to vote.
Bret Cahill
Bret Cahill
>
> > I look foward to your explaination.
>
> > BOfL
>
> It is beyond me what exactly you think is in need of explanation.
> Only a complete moron would be convinced by this idiotic bit of fluff.
> This is nothing more than a piece of TV fantasy.
Yet most of the AGW conspiracy theorists believe it.
Bret Cahill
tirebiter
wrote:
> On Jan 1, 2:19 am, tirebiter <dontspamme...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 31, 10:14 am, "bigflet...@gmail.com" <bigflet...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce9vEGv3sZI&feature=related.
>
> > > I look foward to your explaination.
>
> > > BOfL
>
> > Scripted TV that is poorly written and badly acted. The question mark
> > in the the "Strange but True?" show tells all. It gives them latitude
> > to make up whatever they want.
>
> And to investigate further, the authenticity of the individuals
> depicted
>
>
Extremely unlikely. Once this show was completed, the crew would have
been obligated by contract to turn their attention to the next week's
show. I wonder if any of them felt this hoax was worth trying to mine
for any viewer interest later in any follow up. The clip seemed to be
from an early-80s era show. I've never heard of this alleged UFO
sighting before, and seems to not have been believable enough to be
newsworthy for the MSM.
I hold ET aliens in the same class as solid proof of religious
beliefs, if there is any verifiable confirmation, it will be on the 6
o'clock news.
---
a.a. #2273
Free Lunch
<BretC...@aol.com> wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Jan 3, 5:12�am, Zinnic <zeenr...@gate.net> wrote:
>> On Jan 3, 6:10�am, "bigflet...@gmail.com" <bigflet...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
...
>> > It does if you take into account what powers the authorities have with
>> > their 'official secrets act'.
>> > Stan Deyo was on of the first in modern times, who was a CIA
>> > operative. He wrote Cosmic Conspiracy, and was 'deported to Perth WA,
>> > and told never to return. He is a really 'good bloke',and has since
>> > returned. All of his views and explainations were well 'ahead of their
>> > times' in the 70's, but each one has been continually validated today
>> > (so far).
>>
>> What do you mean by views that "were well ahead of their times"? I
>> guess all sceptics will have to play 'catch up' when each explanation
>> is finally validated. Snicker!
>>
>> > Added to that, there are many 'whistle blowers', long retired, who
>> > also'come across' as highly credible (a bunch on Operation Camelot)who
>> > speak of such matters, where the authorities seem to be of the belif,
>> > that only 'loonies' will believe them.
>>
>> Spoken like a true believer. Grow up!
>
>Like the silly video, he's pulling your leg.
>
>Even the AGW conspiracy theorists have better actors, or rather, they
>actually believe their nonsense.
I doubt it. I think they're like the lead character in _Thank You for
Smoking_, just spreading confusion and misleading people because it is
in their economic self-interest.
Christopher A. Lee
Hey, I've met people who thought Dick Dietrich's Night Stand was real.
>Bret Cahill
>
Michael Price
And Bret makes stuff up again. Did you check out my response to
your new idiotic question? It took about 20 seconds for me to
disprove
it.