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: moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 1999 20:33:05 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 06 Jul 1999 23:36:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Satanic Abuse


>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
>Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 12:42:59 -0600
>Fwd Date: Tue, 06 Jul 1999 05:22:20 -0400
>Subject: Re: Satanic Abuse

Previously, Sue had written:

>I've been quiet for some time now.  Before the "debate" between
>John Rimmer, John Velez and Roger Evans turns into another name
>calling session on this list, I'd like to try another
>track...one that I just found...one that I need to pass on to
>you all.  It has energized my mind to try to find more answers.

Hi, Sue.

I take exception to your interpretation of my response to Mr.
Valez. I have enough confidence in my own logic and conclusions
that I have never resorted to name calling out of frustration. A
quick run through the archives will bear this out.

Moving on, you wrote:

>Mr. Rimmer and Mr. Evans think Mr. Velez's experiences may be
>valid for John V., but are not for the majority;

Sorry, Sue. I never said any such thing. I merely defended
Leanne's right to ask a reasonable question. I, for one, have
made no conclusions regarding UFO abductions. Mr. Valez's
opinions are just as valid as the next persons. But make no
mistake; without proof, his opinions are not MORE valid simply
because of his "experiences".

>Drop the argument until you've educated
>yourselves on what other people in the scientific community are
>believing.

Why?

>The book I've had my head into is titled, HYPERSPACE by Michio
>Kaku, 1994, Oxford University Press, New York. Got it from the
>library. It's a theoretical physics book written for laypersons,
>with marvelous illustrations explaining the UFO-ET-experiential
>vs. 3-dimensional arguments we all get into on this list (plus a
>whole lot more).

<snip>

>Don't skim the book Mr. Rimmer and Mr. Evans, study it. If
>you're smart, you won't skip the Chapter Notes in the back of
>the book as you read it, either. The proof is there for you Mr.
>Rimmer and Mr. Evans, if you really want it.

I don't mean to be unkind, Sue, because I feel that you are
making a sincere effort to offer something unique to this list.
However, considering your inaccurate portrayal of my response to
Mr. Valez, it's apparent that you "skimmed" my previous post(s)
or you would not have made the mistakes you did. I only hope you
read the aforementioned book better than you read my posts.

Regarding said book; an alternate theory isn't the same as
"proof". In fact, it's not even evidence of the most basic sort.
The irony is that an alternate theory is only possible if
someone asks reasonable (and unreasonable) questions like the
one Leanne put forth.

Take care,

Roger Evans