Reply to article by: "rick nielsen" <rnielsen@centurytel.net>
Date written: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:27:42 -0500
MsgID:<tOKdndxNoe4HtzncRVn-1Q@centurytel.net>

Hold on a moment here! Stanton *was* a nuclear physicist years and years ago,
but nowadays he is merely an author of New Age-like books.

In all actuallity his books have nothing to do with New Age books as they
don't require belief and faith, Stanton's books are more factually
described as untested theorising, they can be read and taken as simply a
theory that needs to be tested he puts forth the evidence he finds
convincing and the reader can decide whether he is convinced or not , but as
neither Stanton nor the reader can be transported to the time and space of
the event so the reader cannot observe the phenomenon and as the very nature
of the phenomenon is transient all we have is the testimoney ,Stanton puts
out the testimoney he finds pertinent and the reader can either ,agree ,
disagree ,or say interesting but not enough.

The New Age movement, by definition since it emcompasses anything considered
paranormal, includes UFOs. Stanton asserts without proof, that there is a
conspriracy concerning UFOs, that UFOs are piloted by ETs, and that one crashed
in Roswell in 1947. You can only take his word that this is true because none of
it is testable or provable. But you illustrate again that you cannot tell the
difference between a theory and a storytale.

His former career has
absolutely nothing to do with his current career. In my opinion, I believe he
likes to hide behind the title "Nuclear Physicist", even though nuclear physics
has absolutely nothing to do with UFOs, maybe because it adds respectability to
an otherwise silly belief.

It is the training

How is a nuclear physicist "trained" to investigate paranormal phenomenon?

he brings to the table nothing less, nothing more. adds
nothing to the evidence and likewise subtracts nothing from it , it simply
is., But you illustrate again by your calling his belief silly how you
cannot discern a fact from a opinion.

A fact is something you can demonstrate in an experiment or put in a wheelbarrow
but all Stanton or you have as "evidence" is your big mouths...and your big
mouths are not the same thing as a demonstrable fact.

I mean think about it: if a Rocket Scientist or
Nuclear Physicist says there is a "Cosmic Watergate", then by golly, there
certainly must be a "Cosmic Watergate" because Rocket Scientists or Nuclear
Physicists are so damn intelligent that it is physically impossible that they
could be wrong or could be suckered into a UFO cult!

Again your subjective opinion , I have never heard him imply in any way that
he is omipotent , and anyway as the truth isn't dependant on democracy it
doesn't really matter if 99% of all scientifically trained people don't
think A is possible if A is a factual event then 99% of scientifically
trained people would be as wrong as anyone else that denies the possibility
of A, in fact one cannot say anything is impossible ,without impling that
science "knows everything" and that we have reached the end of learning, all
one can say is that something is impossible at this time and at this level
of understanding.

It isn't a matter of being "possible" but if it has occured as claimed or not.
There is absolutely no evidence that UFOs, as defined by Stanton and most New
Agers like him, exist outside of their imagination.

The Sage

=============================================================
My Home Page      :           http://members.cox.net/the.sage

"The men that American people admire most extravagantly are
most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are
those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken
=============================================================