Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here 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)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1998 -> Dec -> Re: Sherman J. Larsen and Ufology

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 19:36:32 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:09:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Sherman J. Larsen and Ufology


>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 00:58:46 -0500
>Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 14:48:28 -0500
>Subject: Re: Sherman J. Larsen and Ufology

Previously, Gary declared:

>In reviewing the body of work I have put on the list over the
>last couple of weeks, and then the body of work posted by my
>critics, I see two things:
>
>1) I have made several substantive points which have not been
>addressed, at all, by those who purport to be criticising me.
>Like Mark Twain's neighbors in Hannibal, they seem to think it's
>sufficient to say, "It's just sin and I'm agin' it!"  This is
>justification enough on their part not to engage in any effort,
>above that of name calling or insults, which would demonstrate
>to any neutral party on this list that I am in error.

Sorry, dude. This is all nonsense.

If asking pertinent questions like "Where's your proof?"
qualifies as critisizing you, then I'm guilty as charged. But,
the fact is that I never called you a name and, having declared
my nuetrality on the subject of Hynek and Larsen and their "true
agenda", I eagerly awaited the proof of your accusations. After
several posts, calling for such proof, you offered nothing other
than more conjecture. For all I know, what you claim about Hynek
and Larsen may be true. But don't kid yourself into believing
that assumptions, no matter how logical they are to you, qualify
as proof to others.

>2) I have to consider why this might be true:
>
>        a) Failure to comprehend due to lack of time, etc.;
>        b) Inability to understand due to, well, let's not go
>           there.

On the contrary; let's go there quickly.

Since you started this thread to push your concepts to the
larger group, it is YOUR responsibility to provide proof if you
want us to believe in those concepts. It is not OUR
responsibility to provide proof counter to your findings. If we
fail to understand, it is because you have failed to provide the
proof that would allow us to understand. Otherwise, anyone with
an unproven concept can claim "proof" based on the notion that
they, alone, believe in those concepts.

>I would summarize the major points of my various messages but
>they are right there in the archive.

>Once again, thanks again for participating.  I continue to await
>the arrival of a significant response to my messages.

For crying out loud, Gary. I think the following response, which
I've posted several times already, is pretty darned significant.
But for the sake of closure, I'll repeat it again and give you
one last time to respond:

You claim that Hynek and Larsen never told anyone, not even
their closest friends, what the "true nature" was regarding
their work. Therefore, how can you possibly know anything for
certain regarding their personal or professional lives without
flat out guessing?

Not only is this question significant to your position, it's
down right reasonable in nature.

>I think you folks are going to really enjoy my book, with
>research backed up as it is by facts, not the propaganda others
>have offered on these subjects.  This is just the tip of the
>iceberg.  Thank you for your attention.

I'm totaly mystified. If you have the facts at your fingertips,
then why hold out? Of course, unlike the members of this list,
the buyers of your book don't get to ask you hard questions
like:

"Where's your proof?"

Significantly yours,
Roger Evans