~Experiencers~

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by moementum7, Jan 2, 2009.

  1. moementum7 ~^~You First~^~ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,598
    An interesting documentary type piece on abductees and sightings done involving a highly recognized psychiatrist as well as many other interesting participants including the sighting that involved over 60 school children.

    I know you will like this Electrafixtion.
    1 of 5
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgUaJS-h_rY&feature=related
     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2009
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. electrafixtion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    Thanks a mil! Feedback to follow for certain. I have to express that it REALLY is great that there are extremely intelligent and objective appreciators within this forum concerning UFOs.

    It honestly is extremely sad that there are indeed GREAT minds here that are still dwelling in the caves with respect to their superficial and weightless refutes concerning this phenomenon.

    Thanks again Moementum7, VERY appreciated.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Thank you for recognising my superb intellectual capacity. Your observations are heartwarming and inspiring.
    Yours affectionately,
    Troglodyte O.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    He spells 'recognised' as;

    and that earns him the title 'extremely intelligent' in your eyes?

    No wonder you are easily wowed by UFO 'evidence', of your standards are so low.
     
  8. moementum7 ~^~You First~^~ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,598
    You are pathetic phlog.
    You judge someone's entire intelligence on how they spell a single word...wow.
    Like you have never made a spelling mistake or any deemed as intelligent hasn't at some time done the same...you are so fricking petty boy.
    And what I love even more is after your pathetic character attacks me on a frickin spelling mistake no less, you then go on to make a grammatical/typographical(either way it is an unintelligent execution) error that doesn't even make any sense.
    Do you ever pay attention to what you are attempting to communicate or was it just that in this case you didn't realize there were going to be petty judgements being made on your communication skills?
    Or didn't really think anyone would be petty enough to care?..,if so we got something in common.
    Or maybe you just have better things to do than to obsessively agonize over such petty details...well, apparently you don't...and apparently at that time I did not either.

    "of" your standards are so low.??
    As a person you really are pathetic.
    And I actually thought you were intelligent, and I'm sure you are, in one way or another because I'm not dumb enough to base your entire sense of intelligence on the execution of a single word.(like some pathetic people).

    Now go on and give me another grammar lesson and shoot me down in the attempts to make your own pathetic self feel less pathetic you frickin low life, lol.

    Frickin pathetic.
    Now attempt to make a come back ignoring the entire fact that you not only took a low road in judging someone but also came across as an idiot, or maybe just try and avoid all that together and just attempt to divert attention by attacking my character, maybe by how many times I use the word "pathetic" to describe your pathetic self...I would not be suprised since neither retort appears to be below your standards of character.

    My post is only in response to your pathetic assumption and I would not sink low enough to intiate such pathetic low levels of communication on someone such as you have.

    After you have come across as a pathetic idiot I have to ask(rhetorical) just what your motives were in responding...full of intent to add positive and constructive diologue I'm sure.
    And yes my response is somewhat long only because up until this point I carried some level of respect for you and think/thought you deserved it.

    Believe me, later retorts will not carry the same efforts you intelligent pathetic idiot.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Dang it phlog, you ticked me off with such pathetic evaluation, but I guess thats what happens of my expectations for other members are too high.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2009
  9. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    It was almost certainly a typographical error, not a grammatical error: the 'of' should have been an 'if'.
    It requires only marginal intelligence to determine that.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. moementum7 ~^~You First~^~ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,598
    Thank you Big O for todays lesson.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Much like it only takes marginal intelligence to know what is meant with the typed word "reckonized", even with what I admit was pretty bad spelling on that word, lol.
    However it is entirely a bad attitutude and weak character that comes to the conclusion phlog reacted with.
    Marginal intelligence is all that is needed in most cases, seems marginal good will and respect is what is lacking.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2009
  11. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    My soul aim is to serve.
    No, that is not an error. I have many aims, therefore no sole aim. However, my spiritual goal is, indeed, to be of service.
     
  12. moementum7 ~^~You First~^~ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,598
  13. electrafixtion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    I have a new challenge for you phlogistician. Please read the 2008 book by Stanton Friedman entitled "Flying Saucers and Science". If Friedman does not 100% PROVE that a real portion of the UFO phenomenon does in fact represent extraterrestrial (alien) technology and you can provide a REAL (not character jabs and typical condescending insults) scientific refute, I will promise here and now that I will never post another UFO related post on this forum. Not one from that point out.

    Since I already know that faith does not, and will not ever, enter into this challenge, I feel it's safe to state that after I am done reviewing moementum7's excellent directed gift to us, (these vid documents are RARE - try finding hard copies if you don't believe me) I will be posting my heart out about this incredibly important aspect of the UFO phenomenon.
     
  14. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    You can't prove things in science. That means you have lost the bet from the outset.

    You are the weakest link.

    Goodbye.
     
  15. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    So, I criticise your spelling, which is quite bad, and you go off on a tirade about that, and then try and score points because I make a typo?

    That's hypocrisy. Not that you could spell that.
     
  16. moementum7 ~^~You First~^~ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,598
    Yeah, my bad.
    Like I said, I thought you were worth the time.
    Don't worry, won't happen again

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Wow, that was devastating, lol.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2009
  17. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    If Friedman had a proof, it would be validated by his peers, and thus be accepted, and there would be no debate.

    That hasn't happened, so there is no 'proof', just conjecture. I would love there to be proof, but I have never seen a shred of decent evidence, let alone enough to prove the case. Sorry, but Friedman has clearly failed.
     
  18. electrafixtion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    <loud buzzer> try again please.
     
  19. electrafixtion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    and you Sir, are the Missing Link.
     
  20. moementum7 ~^~You First~^~ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,598
    ^^^lolzzzz^^^
     
  21. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    You clearly don't understand how science deals with evidence to make a hypothesis.

    Friedman should, because he's a scientist, and if he were using a scientific method, anyone should be able to follow his method, gather the same evidence, and reach the same conclusion.

    But that isn't what's happening. He isn't publishing his evidence in scientific journals, he's instead writing pop-science fiction stories, and selling them in books.

    It's quite lucrative no doubt, more so than publishing papers.

    Anyway, I reiterate, if Friedman had proof there would be no debate.
     
  22. electrafixtion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    Ah, but Phlog, if this were indeed true, would successful scientific rebuttal ever exist? If logic were to actually prevail via the argument you are putting forth, all of what are the many revisions to non repeatable science would never have occurred.

    So Darwin was wrong?

    I knew it!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    The problem with an honest consideration of the UFO phenomenon and all relating to it is not one of science, but rather the common pretense of peer society.

    Read the book. It's gotta be online for free somewhere anyway so you won't even have to contribute to Stanton's monetarily monstrous purse to do so.

    He in fact DOES prove it. As much as ANY non repeatable science can be proved. Just because it's not "accepted" does in no way mean it's not been proved. That is unless your willing to leave all proofs of non repeatable science up to the bridge club that is "peer review"

    Remember Columbus? Thank goodness he wasn't into gaging discovery on peer review eh?
     
  23. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    I'm afraid that exactly what it means.

    He might put forward a well thought out argument, but I'll guarantee he has no evidence to support that hypothesis. NOT PROVEN, sorry.
     

Share This Page