<snip>

          Wishing you a Yummy Turkey Holocaust,

Holocaust?

      I was spoofing the P.E.T.A. people who referred to  Thanksgiving
as "Turkey Holocaust" -- I'm actually very conservative politically,
although that's not relevant here. Just a joke.

It's pretty obvious to me that we're not going to meet in any kind of
middle here and I won't see a good thread degrade intro a flame war.
I want to respond to a couple things anyway. BTW, Yes. I probably
am Paranoid - but I'm not pathological, just adaptive. <grin>


What WOULD be convincing evidence for you?

You ducked this even though if should be an easy answer.
Trying to answer this has been more convincing to me that
there is some genuine mystery here than any argument made
by mr. Freidman.

No, Sage - you're wrong, UFO's do exist. Otherwise the so-called
studies you reference like Project Bluebook would not have had
anything mundane to ascribe the sightings to. Look, if you and I
see a plane fly overhead and I say to you, "See! It's Superman!"
Well, you're right, it's not evidence of Superman. But (considering
your knowledge,etc.) you may or may not be able to prove that
it's a plane. It might take a co-rroborative(sp?) 3rd witness or even
a radar report or somesuch to convince others of what you saw.
BUT,...we could demonstrate that we saw something -- Therefore
something must've existed.

Granted, illusions and delusions might confound a UFO witness, but
too many potentially good witnesses have seen incredible things to
dismiss all sightings as will-o-the-wisps. So UFO's DO exist, but that
is not an explanation, just a name tag. You still have to explain
them. Wasn't it R. Feynman who used to say how his Dad took him
for a walk and said, "What's that?" Richard answered, "A Robin."
Then his Dad replied, "You've given it a name, now tell me what it 
really is." (Notice something was there that they were looking at).

A few other points; Expect you might be slammed for citing Blue
Book as definitive - it was usually 1 officer, 2 sgts, and a secretary
or two -- at best. OJT in the extreme,huh ? (HHOK).

Also, the refusal of major resources like USAF to lend support does
nothing to validate any conclusion one way or the other. The silence
of the Intelligence community likewise. The "cute" answer would be;
"Silence implies consent."

Regarding the stuff about the archaeologist, I won't pick thru it.
Just say that I think you got the point that the Debunkers of this
earth would never have been so kind as his colleagues nor as willing
to hear him out. Fine show, by the way.

I do want to give thanks for effort and you are 100% dead-on about
the large numbers, yet apparent lack of more "provable" evidence.
WE both have chosen (thankfully) to avoid abductions which make
Flying Saucers look scientific practically. You might enjoy reading
the Jacques Vallee interview posted above; It won't be the proof you'd
require, but is a good read to see someone who avoids the Stanton
Freidman "Nuts and Bolts" mind-set on UFO's.

      Have a nice weekend,

                               Andrew

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
=============================================================