| Subject: Re: A Definition of UFO Skeptic |
| From: John Griffin |
| Date: 02/01/2005, 14:07 |
| Newsgroups: alt.paranormal,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.alien.research,alt.alien.visitors |
"AssTelescope" <jasd@aaaa> wrote:
****Don't panic...I moved your remarks to the logical place below****
(Let me know if you want me to explain how to do that.)
"Michael Davis" <mdavis19@ix.netcom.com> wrote
researcher wrote:
A Definition of "UFO Skeptic"
Someone that is fundamentally in denial and has a mind closed like a
steel
trap.
Alternate definition:
Someone that is being used by the Government or other special
interest group
to deliberately lie about UFOs or make up fake UFO stories to help
cover up
the truth.
Any Comments on this?
Yes, my comment is that you are delusional.
The true definition of a UFO skeptic is merly someone who listens to
all the baseless ravings flowing out of the UFO cult and then asks
"what evidence do you have to back up any of that?" Then when no real
evidence is presented, the skeptic quite correctly writes off the
ravings as the utter BS they are. HTH.
I see that you call yourself "researcher." Please show us your
"research," or be written off as just another UFO BS artist. Thanks
in advance.
Of course there's evidence, weather you seek it is a different story.
I don't care if it's raining, snowing, cloudy or sunny. The only weather I
hate is wind. I've looked for evidence that UFOs are "alien" in all kinds
of weather, and there just fucking isn't any. There's lots of stuff that
ignorant gulls call evidence, but that's mostly because they're too slow to
understand the more rational explanations for whatever they're yapping
about. I'm not kidding about looking for that evidence. I really want to
be the first person to ever make contact with an alien.
Crop circles to me are the best indication of visitations. No one on
earth can dispute the fact that crop circles are not being created by
humans.
That one puts you in the lead in the Dumbest Remark of the Year
competition, but it's early.
They appear all over the world in all different types of
crops, different seasons and different weather.
Yes. Whereever there are humans and fermented fluids, you get crop circles
sooner or later.
To say that a group of
VERY talented individuals are travelling the world to make these is
absurd
No one has said that, but it wouldn't be absurd. People do weirder shit all
the time. However, it has been pointed out that ordinary people all over
the world make crop circles. I've done it myself.
No one would travel 25,000 miles around Earth making crop circles, so it
has to be some jokers who travel 25,000,000,000,000 miles to do it. That's
typical crop-circle-jerk thinking.
and not only that, be able to fool very skilled scientists over
a period of 40 years as well.
I believed you. I wanted to know more. I searched the web for pages with
"very skilled scientists" and "crop circle." Imagine my disappointment and
surprise --nothing! Not one mention.
However, I did find the source of your confusion. This excerpt is what did
it to you:
" Combine that with cutting edge research and a team of very skilled
scientists and we will soon be able to make a mark in the field."
Oh ho! Highly skilled scientists trying to make a mark in a field! Yes!
I don't know how you figured that to be forty years old, but I'm pretty
sure you believe the reason they haven't made a mark in the field is that
it can only be done by imaginary critters who are remarkably stupid.
I hate to tell you this, but they didn't mean to say "...make a circle in
the crop." It wasn't that kind of field, and it wasn't that kind of mark.
No "very skilled scientists" have been fooled by the crop circle
pranksters. Things like crop circles usually yield a pretty good crop of
parascientists. That probably contributed to your confusion, too, but you
had to make up the "highly skilled" bit.
Not to mention countless witnesses time
and time again that say the same thing, 'balls of light'.
"Countless witnesses"! WHOA! That's pretty fuckin' exciting. Eyewitness
testimony is always the least reliable of evidence, and the mass hysteria
evidence you refer to is the least of it.
I'm sure there are many fakes in the mix but it doesn't dismiss the
whole thing outright, there is something very strange going on.
There sure as hell is, and I'm replying to some of it at this very moment.