 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Science Skeptics Forum » UFO Debunkers: A Dangerous "Cult" or Super... |
|
Page 3 of 4 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Andrew W... |
 Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:26 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
HVAC wrote:
[quote]"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4ae93db6$0$16717$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
"If I hear hooves in the night I expect horses and not Zebras"
Now you have made an assumption.
What you don't know is that I have over 100gig of audio and video
interviews of credible witnesses and insiders.
What a waste of hard drive space.
I save that valuable space for important
things..... Like porn.
[/quote]
Typical profane remark by a vacant mind.
[quote]
And yes they have been verified as honest., sane and authentic.
SNIP
- Richard C. Hoagland (former museum space science Curator; a former
NASA Consultant; and, during the historic Apollo Missions to the
Moon, was science advisor to Walter Cronkite and CBS News).
LOL! This is the same Hoagland that claimed that astronauts had to
dodge glass buildings on the moon while landing?
[/quote]
You didn't know that photos were routinely airbrushed of all structures?
[quote]
"honest., sane and authentic"? BWAHAhahahahaha!
[/quote]
Yes that's right.
I can see that you've never even listened to *one* interview of the
verifiably honest, sane and authentic witnesses and insiders.
--
If you are a hard skeptic then you haven't researched or questioned
enough. If you believe something too much then you have the same
problem. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Rex... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:01 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
[quote]
I would like to see hard evidence as much as the next UFO fan- however
given the current state of speculation, UFO phenomena must firmly
remain in the realm of pseudoscience and deeply wishful thinking.
There is no wishful thinking in this field. There is lots of very
interesting data.
Its just that the debunkers are not really interested. They just want
instant satisfaction. They want the evidence to be dropped in their laps
while they sit in their armchairs.
[/quote]
See- you can look at all the grainy photos and interviews of retired
personnel you want and perhaps convince yourself that they are real.
Why isn't this topic being given any credence or investigation by the
mainstream media? Why is it that Nature magazine does not feature any
papers or theses by 'UFOlogists' ?
Or are you going to effectively say that 'everyone who disbelieves in
this is part of the cover-up conspiracy' ?
Again- we have the following:
1) You cannot catch hold of a UFO in broad daylight in view of a million
people (like in the movie 'Independence Day') and make it land in the
middle of a big city so that there is no doubt AT ALL that what they are
seeing is real, exists and of ET origin.
2) You cannot bang on the doors of Area 51(and whatever other such
places are there) and demand to be let in to view whatever was found at
Roswell.
3) ETs are not going to again show up in broad daylight in front of
everyone- they will continue their tactics of flying around at night and
abducting random people in remote areas so that no one will believe
their story.
Given the above- all you have are a bunch of photos and videos of
dubious origin. Face it, they can be doctored and however much you want
to believe, they fail the tests of basic science:
a) Can it be observed/measured precisely and objectively? (No one has
seen one up close, in broad daylight, in the presence of witnesses.UFOs
are not like some exotic insect discovered in a rainforest that you just
go and look in the place you first saw them to see them again)
b) Is the appearance of a UFO predictable by any pattern?(repeatability)
What would help here? As someone else pointed out- any of the following:
a) A crashed UFO, or the remains of one
b) Bodies of the UFO pilots themselves
c) Any other advanced technological artifact that cannot be attributed
to anything made on Earth.
The response to the above will always be that 'these things are there
but being covered up by the Govt.'
So these things are non existent as far as we're concerned because we
can't prove either way whether or not the govt. has them.
So what does it boil down to? Belief. Belief that there is something
being covered up by the government, belief that those photos are real
and so on, and desperate hope that it is so.
Which is again no different from believing that there is a God sitting
above the clouds who will rain fire and brimstone upon you (but it says
so in the Bible!!) for sexual transgressions.
I'm sorry, but UFO fans are totally stuck in the company of Bible
thumpers until either the US government or the ETs themselves break the
shroud of secrecy and come out in the open with whatever is supposedly
being covered up.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
" "
-- Marcel Marceau |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Andrew W... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 6:08 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Rex wrote:
[quote]I would like to see hard evidence as much as the next UFO fan-
however given the current state of speculation, UFO phenomena must
firmly remain in the realm of pseudoscience and deeply wishful
thinking.
There is no wishful thinking in this field. There is lots of very
interesting data.
Its just that the debunkers are not really interested. They just want
instant satisfaction. They want the evidence to be dropped in their
laps while they sit in their armchairs.
See- you can look at all the grainy photos and interviews of retired
personnel you want and perhaps convince yourself that they are real.
Why isn't this topic being given any credence or investigation by the
mainstream media?
[/quote]
I already answered those questions.
[quote]
Why is it that Nature magazine does not feature any
papers or theses by 'UFOlogists' ?
[/quote]
Such magazines used to, but this world has changed a bit since then.
[quote]
Or are you going to effectively say that 'everyone who disbelieves in
this is part of the cover-up conspiracy' ?
[/quote]
No. There are many who are genuinely ignorant.
[quote]
Again- we have the following:
1) You cannot catch hold of a UFO in broad daylight in view of a
million people (like in the movie 'Independence Day') and make it
land in the middle of a big city so that there is no doubt AT ALL
that what they are seeing is real, exists and of ET origin.
[/quote]
The world is not quite ready for that yet.
The religions for a start would go berserk.
However in places like Mexico there are daily sightings of multiple objects
in the sky which are being videoed by many people.
[quote]
2) You cannot bang on the doors of Area 51(and whatever other such
places are there) and demand to be let in to view whatever was found
at Roswell.
[/quote]
That's because its a military facility unfortunately.
We will have to replace our current war minded governments before we can do
that.
[quote]
3) ETs are not going to again show up in broad daylight in front of
everyone- they will continue their tactics of flying around at night
and abducting random people in remote areas so that no one will
believe their story.
[/quote]
You don't know that.
[quote]
Given the above- all you have are a bunch of photos and videos of
dubious origin. Face it, they can be doctored and however much you
want to believe, they fail the tests of basic science:
[/quote]
If you still think that all we have are some photos and videos and we have
no data then you know nothing about this subject.
Do some research and find out what we have.
Listen to the interviews available on many radio sites and find out what
considerable data we've gathered.
Unless of course you're not interested in data but just grabbing glossy
photos that you can ogle at like a kid.
[quote]
a) Can it be observed/measured precisely and objectively?
[/quote]
This is not a biology or chemistry class.
[quote]
(No one has
seen one up close, in broad daylight, in the presence of
witnesses.
[/quote]
Plenty have, but you just haven't heard about them because you're not in the
loop.
[quote]
UFOs are not like some exotic insect discovered in a
rainforest that you just go and look in the place you first saw them
to see them again) b) Is the appearance of a UFO predictable by any
pattern?(repeatability)
[/quote]
No, due to the war, fear and politics of this planet that's still in effect.
We are slowly changing that however.
[quote]
What would help here? As someone else pointed out- any of the
following: a) A crashed UFO, or the remains of one
b) Bodies of the UFO pilots themselves
c) Any other advanced technological artifact that cannot be attributed
to anything made on Earth.
[/quote]
Those have happened, but the military always swoops in to collect them
within a couple of hours.
[quote]
The response to the above will always be that 'these things are there
but being covered up by the Govt.'
[/quote]
We have multiple proof for that.
[quote]
So these things are non existent as far as we're concerned because we
can't prove either way whether or not the govt. has them.
So what does it boil down to? Belief. Belief that there is something
being covered up by the government, belief that those photos are real
and so on, and desperate hope that it is so.
[/quote]
Only you have to resort to belief or disbelief because you've never seen the
enormous amounts of data and evidence.
[quote]
Which is again no different from believing that there is a God sitting
above the clouds who will rain fire and brimstone upon you (but it
says so in the Bible!!) for sexual transgressions.
I'm sorry, but UFO fans are totally stuck in the company of Bible
thumpers until either the US government or the ETs themselves break
the shroud of secrecy and come out in the open with whatever is
supposedly being covered up.
[/quote]
Let us know when you're ready to come in and start making an effort to study
the data and testimonies instead of just standing outside bitching.
--
If you are a hard skeptic then you haven't researched or questioned
enough. If you believe something too much then you have the same
problem. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A.... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 29, 5:08 pm, "Andrew W" <removethis_ajwer... at (no spam) optushome.com.au>
wrote:
[quote]Rex wrote:
I would like to see hard evidence as much as the next UFO fan-
however given the current state of speculation, UFO phenomena must
firmly remain in the realm of pseudoscience and deeply wishful
thinking.
There is no wishful thinking in this field. There is lots of very
interesting data.
Its just that the debunkers are not really interested. They just want
instant satisfaction. They want the evidence to be dropped in their
laps while they sit in their armchairs.
See- you can look at all the grainy photos and interviews of retired
personnel you want and perhaps convince yourself that they are real.
Why isn't this topic being given any credence or investigation by the
mainstream media?
I already answered those questions.
Why is it that Nature magazine does not feature any
papers or theses by 'UFOlogists' ?
Such magazines used to, but this world has changed a bit since then.
Or are you going to effectively say that 'everyone who disbelieves in
this is part of the cover-up conspiracy' ?
No. There are many who are genuinely ignorant.
Again- we have the following:
1) You cannot catch hold of a UFO in broad daylight in view of a
million people (like in the movie 'Independence Day') and make it
land in the middle of a big city so that there is no doubt AT ALL
that what they are seeing is real, exists and of ET origin.
The world is not quite ready for that yet.
The religions for a start would go berserk.
However in places like Mexico there are daily sightings of multiple objects
in the sky which are being videoed by many people.
2) You cannot bang on the doors of Area 51(and whatever other such
places are there) and demand to be let in to view whatever was found
at Roswell.
That's because its a military facility unfortunately.
We will have to replace our current war minded governments before we can do
that.
3) ETs are not going to again show up in broad daylight in front of
everyone- they will continue their tactics of flying around at night
and abducting random people in remote areas so that no one will
believe their story.
You don't know that.
Given the above- all you have are a bunch of photos and videos of
dubious origin. Face it, they can be doctored and however much you
want to believe, they fail the tests of basic science:
If you still think that all we have are some photos and videos and we have
no data then you know nothing about this subject.
Do some research and find out what we have.
Listen to the interviews available on many radio sites and find out what
considerable data we've gathered.
Unless of course you're not interested in data but just grabbing glossy
photos that you can ogle at like a kid.
a) Can it be observed/measured precisely and objectively?
This is not a biology or chemistry class.
(No one has
seen one up close, in broad daylight, in the presence of
witnesses.
Plenty have, but you just haven't heard about them because you're not in the
loop.
UFOs are not like some exotic insect discovered in a
rainforest that you just go and look in the place you first saw them
to see them again) b) Is the appearance of a UFO predictable by any
pattern?(repeatability)
No, due to the war, fear and politics of this planet that's still in effect.
We are slowly changing that however.
What would help here? As someone else pointed out- any of the
following: a) A crashed UFO, or the remains of one
b) Bodies of the UFO pilots themselves
c) Any other advanced technological artifact that cannot be attributed
to anything made on Earth.
Those have happened, but the military always swoops in to collect them
within a couple of hours.
The response to the above will always be that 'these things are there
but being covered up by the Govt.'
We have multiple proof for that.
So these things are non existent as far as we're concerned because we
can't prove either way whether or not the govt. has them.
So what does it boil down to? Belief. Belief that there is something
being covered up by the government, belief that those photos are real
and so on, and desperate hope that it is so.
Only you have to resort to belief or disbelief because you've never seen the
enormous amounts of data and evidence.
Which is again no different from believing that there is a God sitting
above the clouds who will rain fire and brimstone upon you (but it
says so in the Bible!!) for sexual transgressions.
I'm sorry, but UFO fans are totally stuck in the company of Bible
thumpers until either the US government or the ETs themselves break
the shroud of secrecy and come out in the open with whatever is
supposedly being covered up.
Let us know when you're ready to come in and start making an effort to study
the data and testimonies instead of just standing outside bitching.
--
If you are a hard skeptic then you haven't researched or questioned
enough. If you believe something too much then you have the same
problem.
[/quote]
The main point about debunkers is that they have done absolutely NO
research on the subject, yet they portray themselves as experts. The
only subject debunkers are experts in is the study of shit, -- yes,
THAT shit. Proof: "H" - "Shit is my favorite subject."
O-BORG, - "yes, that's the shit." Hager - "I know all about shit."
It goes on and on.
Sadly, they are NOT experts in dealing with the FACTS regarding ETs
and UFOs. Nor do they plan to be.
Sir ARtiØ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| HVAC... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:33 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4ae9fa75$0$5425$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
[quote]
Now you have made an assumption.
What you don't know is that I have over 100gig of audio and video
interviews of credible witnesses and insiders.
What a waste of hard drive space.
I save that valuable space for important
things..... Like porn.
Typical profane remark by a vacant mind.
[/quote]
Typical lack of humor by a believer.
[quote]LOL! This is the same Hoagland that claimed that astronauts had to
dodge glass buildings on the moon while landing?
You didn't know that photos were routinely airbrushed of all structures?
[/quote]
And civilians studying the moon's features with privately owned
telescopes... Are they part of this evil conspiracy?
Science evolves not by believing.... But by disbelieving.
--
HVA© - Shock Treatment For Believers |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:57 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 12:34 pm, "Andrew W" <removethis_ajwer... at (no spam) optushome.com.au>
wrote:
[quote]HVAC wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwer... at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4ae9fa75$0$5425$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
Now you have made an assumption.
What you don't know is that I have over 100gig of audio and video
interviews of credible witnesses and insiders.
What a waste of hard drive space.
I save that valuable space for important
things..... Like porn.
Typical profane remark by a vacant mind.
Typical lack of humor by a believer.
Oh yes it was very funny.
LOL! This is the same Hoagland that claimed that astronauts had to
dodge glass buildings on the moon while landing?
You didn't know that photos were routinely airbrushed of all
structures?
And civilians studying the moon's features with privately owned
telescopes... Are they part of this evil conspiracy?
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
But what I said has been confirmed by ex-insiders.
Science evolves not by believing.... But by disbelieving.
That's only one part of the picture.
Einstein didn't come up with his theories and formulas by disbelieving. He
used his imagination and open mindedness to the fullest extent.
And they called him a wacko at the time.
Here's one of his quotes you'll probably remember.
Imagination is more important than knowledge.
~ Albert Einstein
--
If you are a hard skeptic then you haven't researched or questioned
enough. If you believe something too much then you have the same
problem.
[/quote]
The brown-nosed clowns and parrot naysayers of Usenet/newsgroups have
zilch worth of imagination. The only incest mutated brains they got
has to use toilet paper and get flushed before they.stink up the
entire place.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Andrew W... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:34 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
HVAC wrote:
[quote]"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4ae9fa75$0$5425$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
Now you have made an assumption.
What you don't know is that I have over 100gig of audio and video
interviews of credible witnesses and insiders.
What a waste of hard drive space.
I save that valuable space for important
things..... Like porn.
Typical profane remark by a vacant mind.
Typical lack of humor by a believer.
[/quote]
Oh yes it was very funny.
[quote]
LOL! This is the same Hoagland that claimed that astronauts had to
dodge glass buildings on the moon while landing?
You didn't know that photos were routinely airbrushed of all
structures?
And civilians studying the moon's features with privately owned
telescopes... Are they part of this evil conspiracy?
[/quote]
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
But what I said has been confirmed by ex-insiders.
[quote]
Science evolves not by believing.... But by disbelieving.
[/quote]
That's only one part of the picture.
Einstein didn't come up with his theories and formulas by disbelieving. He
used his imagination and open mindedness to the fullest extent.
And they called him a wacko at the time.
Here's one of his quotes you'll probably remember.
Imagination is more important than knowledge.
~ Albert Einstein
--
If you are a hard skeptic then you haven't researched or questioned
enough. If you believe something too much then you have the same
problem. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Hatunen... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:35 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:34:19 +1100, "Andrew W"
<removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote:
[quote]HVAC wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4ae9fa75$0$5425$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
Now you have made an assumption.
What you don't know is that I have over 100gig of audio and video
interviews of credible witnesses and insiders.
What a waste of hard drive space.
I save that valuable space for important
things..... Like porn.
Typical profane remark by a vacant mind.
Typical lack of humor by a believer.
Oh yes it was very funny.
LOL! This is the same Hoagland that claimed that astronauts had to
dodge glass buildings on the moon while landing?
You didn't know that photos were routinely airbrushed of all
structures?
And civilians studying the moon's features with privately owned
telescopes... Are they part of this evil conspiracy?
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
But what I said has been confirmed by ex-insiders.
Science evolves not by believing.... But by disbelieving.
That's only one part of the picture.
Einstein didn't come up with his theories and formulas by disbelieving. He
used his imagination and open mindedness to the fullest extent.
And they called him a wacko at the time.
[/quote]
No they didn't. Where did you get that idea?
--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen at (no spam) cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Andrew W... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 3:27 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Hatunen wrote:
[quote]On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:34:19 +1100, "Andrew W"
removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote:
HVAC wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4ae9fa75$0$5425$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
Now you have made an assumption.
What you don't know is that I have over 100gig of audio and video
interviews of credible witnesses and insiders.
What a waste of hard drive space.
I save that valuable space for important
things..... Like porn.
Typical profane remark by a vacant mind.
Typical lack of humor by a believer.
Oh yes it was very funny.
LOL! This is the same Hoagland that claimed that astronauts had
to dodge glass buildings on the moon while landing?
You didn't know that photos were routinely airbrushed of all
structures?
And civilians studying the moon's features with privately owned
telescopes... Are they part of this evil conspiracy?
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
But what I said has been confirmed by ex-insiders.
Science evolves not by believing.... But by disbelieving.
That's only one part of the picture.
Einstein didn't come up with his theories and formulas by
disbelieving. He used his imagination and open mindedness to the
fullest extent.
And they called him a wacko at the time.
No they didn't. Where did you get that idea?
[/quote]
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Einstein+was+ridiculed&meta=&aq=f&oq=
Here's one example.
http://www.bokkilden.no/SamboWeb/produkt.do?produktId=2734854
Omtale
"Einstein's Struggles with Quantum Theory: A Reappraisal by Dipankar Home
and Andrew Whitaker" provides a detailed account of Albert Einstein's
thinking in regard to quantum physics. Until recently, most of Einstein's
views on quantum physics were dismissed and even ridiculed; some critics
even suggested that Einstein was not able to grasp the complexities of the
formalism of quantum theory and subtleties of the standard interpretation of
this theory known as the Copenhagen interpretation put forward by Niels Bohr
and his colleagues.
--
If you are a hard skeptic then you haven't researched or questioned
enough. If you believe something too much then you have the same
problem. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| HVAC... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 3:53 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4aeb4dce$0$17749$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
[quote]LOL! This is the same Hoagland that claimed that astronauts had to
dodge glass buildings on the moon while landing?
You didn't know that photos were routinely airbrushed of all
structures?
And civilians studying the moon's features with privately owned
telescopes... Are they part of this evil conspiracy?
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
But what I said has been confirmed by ex-insiders.
[/quote]
So, not only are you devoid of any humor... Your're also a retard?
Maybe if I explain it as I would to a child.
YOU said the moon pictures had Hoagland's 'glass structures'
airbrushed out. *I* asked if even all the civilians with telescopes
were in on this giant evil airbrushing conspiracy.
Is it clear yet Forest?
"Airbrush is as airbrush does".
[quote]Science evolves not by believing.... But by disbelieving.
That's only one part of the picture.
[/quote]
No. It is THE picture.
Someone postulates a theory and then it's on.
Everyone is invited to tear that theory down.
If it can't stand up to close scrutiny, if it can't be
repeated, it's discarded for something better.
Hoagland's shit is dismissed out of hand because
it can't stand up to even a cursory examination.
Rubes and retards eat it up tho.
[quote]Einstein didn't come up with his theories and formulas by disbelieving. He
used his imagination and open mindedness to the fullest extent.
And they called him a wacko at the time.
[/quote]
Who did? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Andrew W... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 3:56 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
HVAC wrote:
[quote]"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4aeb4dce$0$17749$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
LOL! This is the same Hoagland that claimed that astronauts had
to dodge glass buildings on the moon while landing?
You didn't know that photos were routinely airbrushed of all
structures?
And civilians studying the moon's features with privately owned
telescopes... Are they part of this evil conspiracy?
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
But what I said has been confirmed by ex-insiders.
So, not only are you devoid of any humor... Your're also a retard?
[/quote]
When its time for humour we'll joke the night away.
We're not there yet.
[quote]
Maybe if I explain it as I would to a child.
YOU said the moon pictures had Hoagland's 'glass structures'
airbrushed out. *I* asked if even all the civilians with telescopes
were in on this giant evil airbrushing conspiracy.
Is it clear yet Forest?
"Airbrush is as airbrush does".
[/quote]
Civilians can't see certain parts of the moon which are not visible from
earth, like the side facing away for example, so your comment was kind of
pointless. That's why I couldn't figure out what you were on about.
[quote]
Science evolves not by believing.... But by disbelieving.
That's only one part of the picture.
No. It is THE picture.
[/quote]
Only as far as you hard liners with no imaginations are concerned.
[quote]
Someone postulates a theory and then it's on.
Everyone is invited to tear that theory down.
If it can't stand up to close scrutiny, if it can't be
repeated, it's discarded for something better.
[/quote]
That's theoretical physics science which is very competitive.
This is ufo research which is a very different ballgame.
I can see that you guys are rigid thinkers who don't understand this very
difficult situation because of the nature of our secretive governments and
military and can't figure out why the proofs still aren't being released
after all these years, so you get all bitchy and angry and take it out on
the remaining dedicated researchers who still have the patience to wait for
the current govt. structure to crumble.
[quote]
Hoagland's shit is dismissed out of hand because
it can't stand up to even a cursory examination.
[/quote]
Hoagland isn't perfect, I give you that, but no one is.
But you also have to look at the sheer volume of data from around the world
and not just toss it all out because one or two links in the chain are
fallible.
You guys are bitter and frustrated and it shows by how you treat everyone
who comes into these groups.
--
If you are a hard skeptic then you haven't researched or questioned
enough. If you believe something too much then you have the same
problem. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nightcrawler... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 4:21 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message news:4aeb4dce$0$17749$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
[quote]If you are a hard skeptic then you haven't researched or questioned
enough. If you believe something too much then you have the same
problem.
[/quote]
Skepticism requires equal parts of being able to believe, or to not
believe, in something. Generally, a skeptic is an idiot. Generally,
skeptics want to believe in stupid things.
When evidence suggest that people cannot live after you chop their
heads off, one does not continue to chop heads off in the hope of
finding a person that somehow survives the act of beheading.
Imagination has limits within reality. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Hatunen... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 5:29 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:27:41 +1100, "Andrew W"
<removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote:
[quote]Hatunen wrote:
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:34:19 +1100, "Andrew W"
removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote:
That's only one part of the picture.
Einstein didn't come up with his theories and formulas by
disbelieving. He used his imagination and open mindedness to the
fullest extent.
And they called him a wacko at the time.
No they didn't. Where did you get that idea?
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Einstein+was+ridiculed&meta=&aq=f&oq=
[/quote]
That list isn't very impressive. You've got an Onion article, fr
pete's sake. One on hie political views, which many people
disagreed with. There's one abouyt his being ridiculed by his
grade school teachers, which is more of a myth. Another site is
about Kuhn and says "Instead, Einstein was largely ridiculed for
suggesting the notion that characteristics like mass might not be
constant"; certainly a lot of people had trouble with it at
first, but anyone who understood the specail theory wouldn't have
ridiculed him.
Nothing there implies "wacko". In fact, it would be nice if you
could quote a few contemporaries ridiculing Einstein (I'm sure
the Joe Sixpacks of the day had some things to say about such
outlandish concepts)
I beleive Einstein got ridiculed by the Nazis, who called scuh
things "Jewish science"; if that's what you meant I'll plead to
it.
[quote]Here's one example.
http://www.bokkilden.no/SamboWeb/produkt.do?produktId=2734854
Omtale
"Einstein's Struggles with Quantum Theory: A Reappraisal by Dipankar Home
and Andrew Whitaker" provides a detailed account of Albert Einstein's
thinking in regard to quantum physics. Until recently, most of Einstein's
views on quantum physics were dismissed and even ridiculed; some critics
even suggested that Einstein was not able to grasp the complexities of the
formalism of quantum theory and subtleties of the standard interpretation of
this theory known as the Copenhagen interpretation put forward by Niels Bohr
and his colleagues.
[/quote]
I guess we need to define the phrase "at the time". It's well
known that Eisntein had problems with quantum theory, and he may
have been ridiculed for not being up to speed, but the term I'm
addressing is "wacko".
You should read the whole squib at Omtale (click les mer)
--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen at (no spam) cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| HVAC... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 7:53 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4aeb610b$0$6091$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
[quote]
Maybe if I explain it as I would to a child.
YOU said the moon pictures had Hoagland's 'glass structures'
airbrushed out. *I* asked if even all the civilians with telescopes
were in on this giant evil airbrushing conspiracy.
Is it clear yet Forest?
"Airbrush is as airbrush does".
Civilians can't see certain parts of the moon which are not visible from
earth, like the side facing away for example, so your comment was kind of
pointless. That's why I couldn't figure out what you were on about.
[/quote]
Andy, I am having a tough time believing that you're THAT stupid.
Hoagland claimed (and YOU back him up) that astronauts had to dodge
glass structures on the moon while landing. Did they land on the darkside?
This is the problem with you kooks. When you try to pin them down
they start (ahem) *acting* stupid. Why don't you just admit that Hoagland
is a fucking liar and be done with it?
[quote]Someone postulates a theory and then it's on.
Everyone is invited to tear that theory down.
If it can't stand up to close scrutiny, if it can't be
repeated, it's discarded for something better.
That's theoretical physics science which is very competitive.
This is ufo research which is a very different ballgame.
[/quote]
Of COURSE it is...That's because it's a religion, not science.
[quote]I can see that you guys are rigid thinkers who don't understand this very
difficult situation because of the nature of our secretive governments and
military and can't figure out why the proofs still aren't being released
after all these years, so you get all bitchy and angry and take it out on
the remaining dedicated researchers who still have the patience to wait
for the current govt. structure to crumble.
[/quote]
LOL!
[quote]Hoagland's shit is dismissed out of hand because
it can't stand up to even a cursory examination.
Hoagland isn't perfect, I give you that, but no one is.
[/quote]
Then why won't you just admit that he's a cocksucking liar?
It's got nothing to do with being perfect.
It's got EVERYTHING to do with lying.
[quote]But you also have to look at the sheer volume of data from around the
world and not just toss it all out because one or two links in the chain
are fallible.
You guys are bitter and frustrated and it shows by how you treat everyone
who comes into these groups.
[/quote]
I calls em like I sees em. Some people hate me for it.
Like I care?
--
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many
people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Andrew W... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 7:34 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
HVAC wrote:
[quote]"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner at (no spam) optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4aeb610b$0$6091$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
"Airbrush is as airbrush does".
Civilians can't see certain parts of the moon which are not visible
from earth, like the side facing away for example, so your comment
was kind of pointless. That's why I couldn't figure out what you
were on about.
Andy, I am having a tough time believing that you're THAT stupid.
Hoagland claimed (and YOU back him up) that astronauts had to dodge
glass structures on the moon while landing. Did they land on the
darkside?
[/quote]
The only thing I specifically backed up was the fact that *all* structures
were routinely airbrushed out, not necessarily glass ones and not
necessarily on the near side.
I was unable to find any reports or articles where Hoagland says that
"astronauts had to dodge glass structures on the moon while landing". It was
most likely just a throw away line in an interview or something.
In fact if there are glass structures on the moon, which I don't know that
there are, then they probably wouldn't be seen by private telescopes
especially if they were rounded.
The structures I mainly referred to were the ones photographed on the far
side by the Luna obiter.
http://www.ufocasebook.com/moonstructures.html
I think that your intent here seems to be just to try to pin things on
people for sole purpose of ridicule. F.Y.I. this is not a humour group. But
I guess you've got nothing better to do with your life.
[quote]
Someone postulates a theory and then it's on.
Everyone is invited to tear that theory down.
If it can't stand up to close scrutiny, if it can't be
repeated, it's discarded for something better.
That's theoretical physics science which is very competitive.
This is ufo research which is a very different ballgame.
Of COURSE it is...That's because it's a religion, not science.
[/quote]
Lol.
That's your opinion.
Its not exactly a science in itself, its more like an ongoing investigation,
but it has elements of science like advanced technologies, propulsion, space
travel, life on other planets, etc.
Religion is when a group of people believe things based on nothing but old
stories and legends.
[quote]
I can see that you guys are rigid thinkers who don't understand this
very difficult situation because of the nature of our secretive
governments and military and can't figure out why the proofs still
aren't being released after all these years, so you get all bitchy
and angry and take it out on the remaining dedicated researchers who
still have the patience to wait for the current govt. structure to
crumble.
LOL!
[/quote]
You don't believe that our governments and especially our military are
secretive?
[quote]
Hoagland's shit is dismissed out of hand because
it can't stand up to even a cursory examination.
Hoagland isn't perfect, I give you that, but no one is.
Then why won't you just admit that he's a cocksucking liar?
[/quote]
That's going a bit far. He's very passionate. That trait always has some
good and bad sides.
[quote]
It's got nothing to do with being perfect.
It's got EVERYTHING to do with lying.
[/quote]
Lying is when you know something's definitely not true.
[quote]
But you also have to look at the sheer volume of data from around the
world and not just toss it all out because one or two links in the
chain are fallible.
You guys are bitter and frustrated and it shows by how you treat
everyone who comes into these groups.
I calls em like I sees em. Some people hate me for it.
Like I care?
[/quote]
Do you see everything that goes on in this world and beyond?
Then its only your opinions.
--
If you are a hard skeptic then you haven't researched or questioned
enough. If you believe something too much then you have the same
problem. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:21 pm
|
|