Earth Aliens On Earth.com
Resources for those who are stranded here
Earth
Our Bookstore is OPEN
Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced!
Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New
Search... for keyword(s)  

Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1998 -> Dec -> Re: SETI Scientists Petition White House

UFO UpDates Mailing List

Re: SETI Scientists Petition White House

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1998 15:58:15 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1998 23:29:06 -0500
Subject: Re: SETI Scientists Petition White House


>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
>Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 16:07:18 -0500
>Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1998 10:35:24 -0500
>Subject: Re: SETI Scientists Petition White House

Previously, Serge declared:

>Your preconceived ideas about SETI had you called me stupid and
>a couple other names - and with other subscribers too: bad
>education.  This is understandable since you were arguably
>enough ignorant of the facts and since SETI is such a palatable
>NASAian space human adventure - Jesus Christ.  I am thus
>surprised that, confronted with reality, you STILL evidently
>think I am some stupid asshole.

Okay, let's look reality in the face.

I never called you an asshole. But speaking of calling names,
you DID start this whole argument off with the following:

>>Any 30 years $100-million flopped project supported by
>>mainstream science on the hypothesis of extra-terrestrial life
>>must be questioned by people involved in a 50 years $0.00
>>research who came up with evidence - people who are still
>>laughed at by the same SOBs who support the fore-mentioned
>>project.

As I said before, I support ufology and respect the fact that it
has done so much with so little. What I find offensive about the
above statement is your assertion that anyone also daring to
support SETI is an SOB and your broad generalization that all
SETI supporters laugh at the efforts of ufology.

The "bet" I made was poorly worded on my part, I'll give you
that. And, yes, you did win the bet. I can't deny it. But, in
context with the discussion at hand, the much bally-hoo'd list
you provided is hardly proof that the majority of SETI
supporters are as polarized against ufology as you maintain. As
I've stated before, ufology has outspoken leaders with
questionable agendas, as well. I don't think many within the
ranks of ufology would maintain that these "leaders" define how
everyone else thinks.

Speaking of how some people think, your following statement was
conveniently left out of your current reply:

>>I hope SETI keeps on being a flop. Why? Because any success would
>>give the same SOBs more un-earned respectability and more un-earned
>>credibility. The people from SETI are, in my opinion, on the OTHER
>>side of the fence: the side of mainstream science, which has
>>deliberately and malevolently kept ufology in a ghetto.

I'm sorry, but anyone genuinely concerned with making contact that takes
such a petty position _is_ being "stupid" as I said before. After self
editing your own comments, you then pointed out the following list
participants as being supportive of your viewpoint:

>[It] has been, _in_some_way_, recognized for its merits (eh?) and an
>open-minded SETI seriously challenged (among others) by: Doc
>Barry Mauthority@webtv.net>, Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>,
>Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>, Jerome Clark
><jkclark@frontiernet.net>, Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>,
>Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>.

How about it, guys?

Regardless of your own personal views about the effectiveness of
SETI, do any of you REALLY hope SETI fails? Or do we just
casually ignore the above statement because it's embarrassing to
admit that someone within our ranks could be so mean spirited
and petty?

>I am the _only_ ufologist on record with that attitude, and
thus >the _only_ ufologist with that kind of logic.  If I follow
your >logic, then I am responsible for _all_ ufology being
deliberately >and malevolently kept in a ghetto?

Hey, man. It's not _my_ logic. It's _your's_. You're the one
that maintains the few accurately represent the many. If you've
read anything that I've written, you'll find that my view is
just the opposite and always has been. Make up your mind which
rules you want to follow and for whom...

>I am responsible for ufology
>not reaching the promised land? I plead guilty.  The joke is on
>you, Roger, I am _not_ a ufologist.

I'm sure ufologists everywhere are breathing easier.

>Credibility has to do with authenticity, liability and truth.  I
>am afraid SETI has started on the wrong track with their
>attitude towards ufology: hostile, demagogic, refusing to
>recognize 50 years of evidence, side-tracking the people
>involved in the field.

>This is wrong-doing.  We are not talking only of Sons of Bitches
>here but of Standard Organized Bullshit, which is what stupidity
>is all about.

>I hope they choke.

Too, bad.

I was hoping everyone could work together without someone dying.

Later,

Roger Evans

Search for other documents to/from: fsphys | strmnut

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
[ This Month's Index | UFO UpDates Main Index | MUFON Ontario ]

UFO UpDates - Toronto - updates@globalserve.net
Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp - ++ 416-696-0304

A Hand-Operated E-Mail Subscription Service for the Study of UFO Related Phenomena.
To subscribe please send your first and last name to updates@globalserve.net
Message submissions should be sent to the same address.


[ UFO Topics | People | Ufomind What's New | Ufomind Top Level ]

To find this message again in the future...
Link it to the appropriate Ufologist or UFO Topic page.

Archived as a public service by Area 51 Research Center which is not responsible for content.
Software by Glenn Campbell. Technical contact: webmaster@ufomind.com

Financial support for this web server is provided by the Research Center Catalog.