On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 04:43:10 GMT, Sir Artio <nospam@newsranger.com>
wrote:

In article <pt6qrvkskb5mpp4e0rfcj763ha3s8vpkl4@4ax.com>, David Patrick says...

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 05:14:15 GMT, Sir Arthur <nospam@newsranger.com>
wrote:

Of course, you can still produce any piece of your own UFO research
any time you want.

Patty, perhaps you are snorting too much snuff,
if you read the title of this continuing post, you would
see that I have PROVED that you (and many other debunkers)
are "victims" of extraterrestrial visitations.  

Your main problem is your demonstrated lack of understanding of the
word 'proved'. 

Wrong-wrong-wrong, like everything else the debunkers write.
Proof is the abundance or preponderance of evidence.

Mostly correct, but that is exactly my point. You never provide any
evidence of your own and you seem to think that anonymous third hand
accounts are all the evidence that is needed.

And evidence is something that debunkers hate,
and ignore.  But the debunkers time is out and the
public is just saying NO to debunkers and YES
to honest researchers!!!

So which single case do you think provides the best evidence of
extra-terrestial contact then, Flaffer?

You won't answer that either? What sort of honest researcher won't
share information? Answer - a dishonset one.

Now move along here Patty, and take the rest of your
Cult of Useful Idiots with you.  

These are free and democratic newsgroups, you can't ban anyone, no
matter how much you want to.

Unleash your imaginary general as you have been threatening to for
years. Go on, you fraud, i dare you.


David Patrick