Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,083 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 293,109
Pageviews Today: 405,648Threads Today: 80Posts Today: 2,019
04:15 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

"Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning

 
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 21572327
United States
08/23/2013 03:33 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
You are carrying on a conversation with someone who was a researcher for years until the fruitcakes started showing up and making UFOs a religion and circus.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I am aware of the differences between objects and so-called aerial phenomena. And you are mistaken. There is loads of valid research. Look into James McDonald, Donald Keyhoe, Edward Ruppelt, etc....look into the history of national security and how it evolved almost solely because of the need for restriction of information regarding UFO's. Enough military and intelligence employees with enough credentials (along with scientists like McDonald) have offered mountains of evidence. I will agree with you on one point: we currently are faced with an almost total lack of legitimate research. But this seems to be the direct result of the military/industrial complex along with debunking programs like the Condon Report.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


[link to en.wikipedia.org]

"This article contains weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed."

""Weasel words" are statements which appear to assert something but subtly imply something different, opposite, or stronger in the way they are made. A common form of weasel wording is through vague attribution, where a statement is dressed with authority with no substantial basis. Phrases such as those above present the appearance of support for statements but can deny the reader the opportunity to assess the source of the viewpoint. They may disguise a biased view. Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed.[6] However, views which are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions if they accurately represent the opinions of the source. Reliable sources may analyze and interpret, but we, as editors, cannot do so ourselves, since that would be original research or would violate the neutral point of view. Equally, editorial irony and damning with faint praise have no place in Wikipedia articles."
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Yet you have offered no counterpoint...rather you have only utilized your own "weasel words."
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45638141
Australia
08/23/2013 03:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Bravo OP!

clappa

5 fucking stars!

I've thought the same thing too about people who call themselves "skeptics", that they are not quite grasping the true sense of the word. You put it better than I ever could.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 03:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
I am afraid that you are not aware of the amount of alphabet agency programs that were going on during the height of UFO manias hey day.

McDonald was an alphabet man and there was indeed a "cover up" but it wasn't of ETs
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 03:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
You are carrying on a conversation with someone who was a researcher for years until the fruitcakes started showing up and making UFOs a religion and circus.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I am aware of the differences between objects and so-called aerial phenomena. And you are mistaken. There is loads of valid research. Look into James McDonald, Donald Keyhoe, Edward Ruppelt, etc....look into the history of national security and how it evolved almost solely because of the need for restriction of information regarding UFO's. Enough military and intelligence employees with enough credentials (along with scientists like McDonald) have offered mountains of evidence. I will agree with you on one point: we currently are faced with an almost total lack of legitimate research. But this seems to be the direct result of the military/industrial complex along with debunking programs like the Condon Report.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


[link to en.wikipedia.org]

"This article contains weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed."

""Weasel words" are statements which appear to assert something but subtly imply something different, opposite, or stronger in the way they are made. A common form of weasel wording is through vague attribution, where a statement is dressed with authority with no substantial basis. Phrases such as those above present the appearance of support for statements but can deny the reader the opportunity to assess the source of the viewpoint. They may disguise a biased view. Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed.[6] However, views which are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions if they accurately represent the opinions of the source. Reliable sources may analyze and interpret, but we, as editors, cannot do so ourselves, since that would be original research or would violate the neutral point of view. Equally, editorial irony and damning with faint praise have no place in Wikipedia articles."
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Yet you have offered no counterpoint...rather you have only utilized your own "weasel words."
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Au contraire

The wiki piece stands on it's own to show that it is you who weasels.

I just filled you in but you are still failing as a skeptic because of your wanting UFOs to be something they aren't or at least attempting to use evidence as fact and proof of something that they are not proof of.

Why is it so important to you?

It doesn't matter to me if they are ETs or they aren't

If they are "real" in that respect great......if they aren't that's fine too.
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 21572327
United States
08/23/2013 03:59 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...


I am aware of the differences between objects and so-called aerial phenomena. And you are mistaken. There is loads of valid research. Look into James McDonald, Donald Keyhoe, Edward Ruppelt, etc....look into the history of national security and how it evolved almost solely because of the need for restriction of information regarding UFO's. Enough military and intelligence employees with enough credentials (along with scientists like McDonald) have offered mountains of evidence. I will agree with you on one point: we currently are faced with an almost total lack of legitimate research. But this seems to be the direct result of the military/industrial complex along with debunking programs like the Condon Report.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


[link to en.wikipedia.org]

"This article contains weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed."

""Weasel words" are statements which appear to assert something but subtly imply something different, opposite, or stronger in the way they are made. A common form of weasel wording is through vague attribution, where a statement is dressed with authority with no substantial basis. Phrases such as those above present the appearance of support for statements but can deny the reader the opportunity to assess the source of the viewpoint. They may disguise a biased view. Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed.[6] However, views which are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions if they accurately represent the opinions of the source. Reliable sources may analyze and interpret, but we, as editors, cannot do so ourselves, since that would be original research or would violate the neutral point of view. Equally, editorial irony and damning with faint praise have no place in Wikipedia articles."
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Yet you have offered no counterpoint...rather you have only utilized your own "weasel words."
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Au contraire

The wiki piece stands on it's own to show that it is you who weasels.

I just filled you in but you are still failing as a skeptic because of your wanting UFOs to be something they aren't or at least attempting to use evidence as fact and proof of something that they are not proof of.

Why is it so important to you?

It doesn't matter to me if they are ETs or they aren't

If they are "real" in that respect great......if they aren't that's fine too.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I have never made the assertion that they were extraterrestrial. What I did say was that it is likely that many UFO's (the more credible accounts) are extraterrestrial in source based on the overwhelming evidence of:

a. Radar and video evidence corresponding to eyewitness testimony (in many cases military) detailing solid objects making what appear to be intelligently controlled maneuvers.

b. Mountains of evidence from investigators (including men like Edward Ruppelt who worked for the Air Force) that point to large scale coverups which include testimony from personnel discussing crashed objects of unknown origin

c. Literally thousands of reports from eye witnesses which detail both solid craft and entities with startling similarities case to case. These are far too often overlooked.

d. Logical evidence...I.e. in a universe this size it is only likely that intelligent life has arisen elsewhere and that (when looked at on a large time scale) is going to be (somewhere) far more advanced than we are and will (at least occasionally) want a look at what's around. It is a probability which will inevitably become a reality.

Are there things (like test craft, Fortean phenomena, and otherwise) that are mistakenly labeled "extraterrestrial?" Yes. But this does not deny that a great deal of what we deal with is, in fact, from another planet.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 04:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...


[link to en.wikipedia.org]

"This article contains weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed."

""Weasel words" are statements which appear to assert something but subtly imply something different, opposite, or stronger in the way they are made. A common form of weasel wording is through vague attribution, where a statement is dressed with authority with no substantial basis. Phrases such as those above present the appearance of support for statements but can deny the reader the opportunity to assess the source of the viewpoint. They may disguise a biased view. Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed.[6] However, views which are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions if they accurately represent the opinions of the source. Reliable sources may analyze and interpret, but we, as editors, cannot do so ourselves, since that would be original research or would violate the neutral point of view. Equally, editorial irony and damning with faint praise have no place in Wikipedia articles."
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Yet you have offered no counterpoint...rather you have only utilized your own "weasel words."
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Au contraire

The wiki piece stands on it's own to show that it is you who weasels.

I just filled you in but you are still failing as a skeptic because of your wanting UFOs to be something they aren't or at least attempting to use evidence as fact and proof of something that they are not proof of.

Why is it so important to you?

It doesn't matter to me if they are ETs or they aren't

If they are "real" in that respect great......if they aren't that's fine too.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I have never made the assertion that they were extraterrestrial. What I did say was that it is likely that many UFO's (the more credible accounts) are extraterrestrial in source based on the overwhelming evidence of:

a. Radar and video evidence corresponding to eyewitness testimony (in many cases military) detailing solid objects making what appear to be intelligently controlled maneuvers.

b. Mountains of evidence from investigators (including men like Edward Ruppelt who worked for the Air Force) that point to large scale coverups which include testimony from personnel discussing crashed objects of unknown origin

c. Literally thousands of reports from eye witnesses which detail both solid craft and entities with startling similarities case to case. These are far too often overlooked.

d. Logical evidence...I.e. in a universe this size it is only likely that intelligent life has arisen elsewhere and that (when looked at on a large time scale) is going to be (somewhere) far more advanced than we are and will (at least occasionally) want a look at what's around. It is a probability which will inevitably become a reality.

Are there things (like test craft, Fortean phenomena, and otherwise) that are mistakenly labeled "extraterrestrial?" Yes. But this does not deny that a great deal of what we deal with is, in fact, from another planet.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)

Your entire post here is weasel

As I have already stated the "radar evidence" is not there.

Ruppelt after his life of UFO research came to the same conclusion that I hold now and never said anything about a coverup in his life.

Eyewitness reports as you state support my post that people are seeing what they really wish were real and always point back to fiction movies.

D is a rather pie in the sky assumption all by itself.

There is a very good chance there is life elsewhere but not looking good for all the added on wishful thinking that goes with that old song
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 04:14 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...


Yet you have offered no counterpoint...rather you have only utilized your own "weasel words."
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Au contraire

The wiki piece stands on it's own to show that it is you who weasels.

I just filled you in but you are still failing as a skeptic because of your wanting UFOs to be something they aren't or at least attempting to use evidence as fact and proof of something that they are not proof of.

Why is it so important to you?

It doesn't matter to me if they are ETs or they aren't

If they are "real" in that respect great......if they aren't that's fine too.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I have never made the assertion that they were extraterrestrial. What I did say was that it is likely that many UFO's (the more credible accounts) are extraterrestrial in source based on the overwhelming evidence of:

a. Radar and video evidence corresponding to eyewitness testimony (in many cases military) detailing solid objects making what appear to be intelligently controlled maneuvers.

b. Mountains of evidence from investigators (including men like Edward Ruppelt who worked for the Air Force) that point to large scale coverups which include testimony from personnel discussing crashed objects of unknown origin

c. Literally thousands of reports from eye witnesses which detail both solid craft and entities with startling similarities case to case. These are far too often overlooked.

d. Logical evidence...I.e. in a universe this size it is only likely that intelligent life has arisen elsewhere and that (when looked at on a large time scale) is going to be (somewhere) far more advanced than we are and will (at least occasionally) want a look at what's around. It is a probability which will inevitably become a reality.

Are there things (like test craft, Fortean phenomena, and otherwise) that are mistakenly labeled "extraterrestrial?" Yes. But this does not deny that a great deal of what we deal with is, in fact, from another planet.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)

Your entire post here is weasel

As I have already stated the "radar evidence" is not there.

Ruppelt after his life of UFO research came to the same conclusion that I hold now and never said anything about a coverup in his life.

Eyewitness reports as you state support my post that people are seeing what they really wish were real and always point back to fiction movies.

D is a rather pie in the sky assumption all by itself.

There is a very good chance there is life elsewhere but not looking good for all the added on wishful thinking that goes with that old song
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


You (yet again) have provided no counterpoint or evidence. You are merely "debunking."
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 04:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...


Au contraire

The wiki piece stands on it's own to show that it is you who weasels.

I just filled you in but you are still failing as a skeptic because of your wanting UFOs to be something they aren't or at least attempting to use evidence as fact and proof of something that they are not proof of.

Why is it so important to you?

It doesn't matter to me if they are ETs or they aren't

If they are "real" in that respect great......if they aren't that's fine too.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I have never made the assertion that they were extraterrestrial. What I did say was that it is likely that many UFO's (the more credible accounts) are extraterrestrial in source based on the overwhelming evidence of:

a. Radar and video evidence corresponding to eyewitness testimony (in many cases military) detailing solid objects making what appear to be intelligently controlled maneuvers.

b. Mountains of evidence from investigators (including men like Edward Ruppelt who worked for the Air Force) that point to large scale coverups which include testimony from personnel discussing crashed objects of unknown origin

c. Literally thousands of reports from eye witnesses which detail both solid craft and entities with startling similarities case to case. These are far too often overlooked.

d. Logical evidence...I.e. in a universe this size it is only likely that intelligent life has arisen elsewhere and that (when looked at on a large time scale) is going to be (somewhere) far more advanced than we are and will (at least occasionally) want a look at what's around. It is a probability which will inevitably become a reality.

Are there things (like test craft, Fortean phenomena, and otherwise) that are mistakenly labeled "extraterrestrial?" Yes. But this does not deny that a great deal of what we deal with is, in fact, from another planet.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)

Your entire post here is weasel

As I have already stated the "radar evidence" is not there.

Ruppelt after his life of UFO research came to the same conclusion that I hold now and never said anything about a coverup in his life.

Eyewitness reports as you state support my post that people are seeing what they really wish were real and always point back to fiction movies.

D is a rather pie in the sky assumption all by itself.

There is a very good chance there is life elsewhere but not looking good for all the added on wishful thinking that goes with that old song
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


You (yet again) have provided no counterpoint or evidence. You are merely "debunking."
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


Nope

I am being skeptical of your premise because your very statement is false and you continue to prove it every time you post.

Your offered evidence is not unbiased fact.....the yotube is a complete fabrication

Have you even read Ruppelts book?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 04:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
BTW Ruppelt was a debunker not unlike myself and that was the reason Keyhoe and he did not get along at all

Keyhoe added more spin and bunkum to the field than anyone else during his hey day

I dare say he was the beginning of the current church of the alien woo woos
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 04:38 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
BTW Ruppelt was a debunker not unlike myself and that was the reason Keyhoe and he did not get along at all

Keyhoe added more spin and bunkum to the field than anyone else during his hey day

I dare say he was the beginning of the current church of the alien woo woos
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Ruppelt was actually gotten to at a certain point and THEN became part of the debunking problem. This is well documented. And yes...I have read his book. Say what you want about aliens and UFO's but the man was definitely onto a serious program for withholding information.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 04:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
BTW Ruppelt was a debunker not unlike myself and that was the reason Keyhoe and he did not get along at all

Keyhoe added more spin and bunkum to the field than anyone else during his hey day

I dare say he was the beginning of the current church of the alien woo woos
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Ruppelt was actually gotten to at a certain point and THEN became part of the debunking problem. This is well documented. And yes...I have read his book. Say what you want about aliens and UFO's but the man was definitely onto a serious program for withholding information.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


He was nothing of the kind.

He viewed the contactee movement the same way I do to this day.

Please show your evidence that he was "gotten to"

He got fed up with bullshit and bunkum being heaped upon evidence just like I did.
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 04:46 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
BTW Ruppelt was a debunker not unlike myself and that was the reason Keyhoe and he did not get along at all

Keyhoe added more spin and bunkum to the field than anyone else during his hey day

I dare say he was the beginning of the current church of the alien woo woos
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Ruppelt was actually gotten to at a certain point and THEN became part of the debunking problem. This is well documented. And yes...I have read his book. Say what you want about aliens and UFO's but the man was definitely onto a serious program for withholding information.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


He was nothing of the kind.

He viewed the contactee movement the same way I do to this day.

Please show your evidence that he was "gotten to"

He got fed up with bullshit and bunkum being heaped upon evidence just like I did.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


You've read Richard Dolan's books?
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 04:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
BTW Ruppelt was a debunker not unlike myself and that was the reason Keyhoe and he did not get along at all

Keyhoe added more spin and bunkum to the field than anyone else during his hey day

I dare say he was the beginning of the current church of the alien woo woos
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


Ruppelt was actually gotten to at a certain point and THEN became part of the debunking problem. This is well documented. And yes...I have read his book. Say what you want about aliens and UFO's but the man was definitely onto a serious program for withholding information.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


He was nothing of the kind.

He viewed the contactee movement the same way I do to this day.

Please show your evidence that he was "gotten to"

He got fed up with bullshit and bunkum being heaped upon evidence just like I did.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


You've read Richard Dolan's books?
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)

I read his first so why would I waste the time reading any more?

He is well known as a bunkum peddling attention whore who profits quite well from his sensationalism.

He uses the classic known BS from such UFO "greats" as Richard Hoagland and Alfred Webre.

He is equally credible with Steven Greer IE not at all.
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 04:58 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
...


Ruppelt was actually gotten to at a certain point and THEN became part of the debunking problem. This is well documented. And yes...I have read his book. Say what you want about aliens and UFO's but the man was definitely onto a serious program for withholding information.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


He was nothing of the kind.

He viewed the contactee movement the same way I do to this day.

Please show your evidence that he was "gotten to"

He got fed up with bullshit and bunkum being heaped upon evidence just like I did.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


You've read Richard Dolan's books?
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)

I read his first so why would I waste the time reading any more?

He is well known as a bunkum peddling attention whore who profits quite well from his sensationalism.

He uses the classic known BS from such UFO "greats" as Richard Hoagland and Alfred Webre.

He is equally credible with Steven Greer IE not at all.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


It is clear we are at a standstill. No use attempting to go further.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 05:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Here is why

"For instance, my treatment of several controversial cases: MJ-12, Gulf Breeze, and Bob Lazar"

All three have been thoroughly debunked and all three were and are buried in bunkum.

Are you Dolan?

Or his neighbor?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 05:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
C'mon man......is that you Dick?
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 06:00 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
C'mon man......is that you Dick?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I am the ghost of Donald Keyhoe returned.

;)
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 06:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
captain
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 06:47 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
captain
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


We seem to have at least one thing in common:

A sense of humor.

Cheers, my friend.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 06:48 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
That's all that matters in the end
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 06:51 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Since we're friends now, I will let you in on a little secret. Here's what REALLY happened in 1947:


- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 06:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Since we're friends now, I will let you in on a little secret. Here's what REALLY happened in 1947:


 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


5a
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 06:55 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Now we just have to tell everyone to get the fuck out of our secret base...and then our MJ 12 deception thread will be complete. Do you think the GLP'ers fell for it?
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45621326
United States
08/23/2013 06:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
I had Dan Burrisch convinced that alien bodies all autopsied them selves.

Told him it was built into their DNA so that there would be a failure record.
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 07:01 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
I had Dan Burrisch convinced that alien bodies all autopsied them selves.

Told him it was built into their DNA so that there would be a failure record.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I will call Friedman and inform him. You call Klass.
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45647665
United States
08/23/2013 07:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
I had Dan Burrisch convinced that alien bodies all autopsied them selves.

Told him it was built into their DNA so that there would be a failure record.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I will call Friedman and inform him. You call Klass.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


I'm on it

Soon as I get my latest sworn statement notarized at mailboxesRus

hiding2
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 07:09 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
I had Dan Burrisch convinced that alien bodies all autopsied them selves.

Told him it was built into their DNA so that there would be a failure record.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45621326


I will call Friedman and inform him. You call Klass.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)


I'm on it

Soon as I get my latest sworn statement notarized at mailboxesRus

hiding2
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45647665


Bet ya "1,000 bucks" the UFO's intervene.

;)
- The Prince who was a Thousand
Soma/Comatose
Nope.

User ID: 32963937
United States
08/23/2013 07:27 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retract their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)




Ummmm....


I dunno, I'm kinda skeptical about this thread....


hmmmmm67
I have so much debt, I can start a government.
Kai (VALIS) (OP)
DON'T PANIC

User ID: 25570375
United States
08/23/2013 08:16 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
The term "skeptic" refers to someone who continuously questions the nature of reality and the validity of suppositions put forth by, not just authorities, but anyone making claims as to the "inherent" nature of things. Somewhere along the way, the word's definition seems to have changed to mean: referring to a person or party who accepts "established" facts in the face of questions. This is literally the opposite of being skeptical. It is not skepticism that leads one to doubt the reality of a UFO sighting based on the fact that the United States Air Force explains it away by claiming the witnesses viewed LUU2 illumination flares. It is skepticism that leads one to question why said flares did not descend as flares should. It is skepticism that leads one to ask the question, "Why did the Air Force state that they had no idea what was going on and then retract their statement the following day?" It is skepticism that brings one's attention to the multiple radar confirmations of what appears to be an enormous craft in the air where the "flares" were spotted. It is the true skeptic who wonders why no one has paid attention to the blatant lapses in logic on the part of the explainer. We (the so-called "conspiracy theorists) are the true skeptics.
 Quoting: Kai (VALIS)




Ummmm....


I dunno, I'm kinda skeptical about this thread....


hmmmmm67
 Quoting: Soma/Comatose


I used to be indecisive.

Now I'm not so sure.
- The Prince who was a Thousand

News








Proud Member Of The Angry Mob