Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books 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 Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Jul -> Here

From: Tim D. Brigham <TBrigham@ksinc.net>
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 21:14:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1999 07:55:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Satanic Abuse


>>Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 03:38:25 -0400
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Re: Satanic Abuse


>Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 16:39:19 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <magonia@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: Satanic Abuse

<snip>

As I think John Rimmer has requested, in plain old American
(along with about half a dozen others on this list, including
myself), on numerous occasions- give us a case which is an

>>"undeniable experience, (in broad daylight and in the company
>>other witnesses) one that quite literally robs you of any
>>possibility for entertaining a 'alternate explanations.'

Arguments that anyone is attempting to deny the literal reality
of abduction events may have some reasonable basis in some
instances, but other than second, third and foruthhand accounts
tossed out offhandedly, there have been no such verifiable
"undeniable" experiences as the one described above. For many of
us that sit on the fence, thats all we need. we're not asking
for too much, or are we? I'd luv to hear a verifiable story of
such an "undeniable" case witnessed by other parties (and
please, no Linda Napolitiano)- a case which is in no way
nebulous and has no alternative explanation, and involves other
witnesses who can be contacted.

But I won't get my hopes up.

Because I have yet to hear one of these. One that doesn't come
off like a scam of some sort (and I don't think that's asking
for too much). One in which witnesses are not in disagreement on
a huge number of important details. One which anyone could look
at, without bias either way, and find to be an accurate
narrative of an objectively real event.

I don't think this has happened yet, and personally, I don't
think, because of the nature of this phenomenon, that it ever
will.

We've gone back and forth, on this list and in other formats,
about there being no hard investigation/science done to verify
these claims. Without pointing any fingers, as the archive
speaks for itself, it has never accomplished anything other than
turning into a name calling insult bout, fueled by egos, in
which people seek to hold their own belief system above logical
examination or slam others' beliefs, and discuss why such a
thing can't or shouldn't be done. Apparently there is _no_
viable way, according to the attitude of the literalists, for us
to measure the objective nature of this phenomenon, so we should
just get over it I guess.

Until something comes along which causes me to reconsider the
'literal' explanation of abductions (read above), I really don't
care to waste much time going on about it (yes, I said
REconsider, as in, I did not start into this with the idea that
such a theory was necessarily wrong). I for one, plan to spend
more energy trying to objectively measure other possible
explanations. Call it denial of reality or whatever you like. I
call it changing the theory to fit the facts, and IMO, that's
the only way we will prevent this phenomenon from simply
becoming another chapter in a dusty, antique 'history of
mythology' book, which is where it seems to be headed.

Tim


)+(
TBrigham@ksinc.net
http://zap.to/DevilsAdvocate  The Devil's Advocate
http://zap.to/MindPhuck  Operation MindPhuck
"Better to go hungry than to feast on lies."
)+(