Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,327 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 269,632
Pageviews Today: 359,436Threads Today: 105Posts Today: 1,620
03:04 AM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPORT COPYRIGHT VIOLATION IN REPLY
Message Subject "Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning
Poster Handle Anonymous Coward
Post Content
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.
 
Please verify you're human:




Reason for copyright violation:







GLP