"Skeptical" Has Lost its Meaning

Yet you have offered no counterpoint...rather you have only utilized your own "weasel words."

Bravo OP!



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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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?

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

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.

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.

You've read Richard Dolan's books?

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.

It is clear we are at a standstill. No use attempting to go further.

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?

C'mon man......is that you Dick?

I am the ghost of Donald Keyhoe returned.

;)

We seem to have at least one thing in common:

A sense of humor.

Cheers, my friend.

That's all that matters in the end

Since we're friends now, I will let you in on a little secret. Here's what REALLY happened in 1947:

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?

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.

I will call Friedman and inform him. You call Klass.

I'm on it

Soon as I get my latest sworn statement notarized at mailboxesRus

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

;)

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....

I used to be indecisive.

Now I'm not so sure.