You've done plenty already and if you didn't use purposely misleading arguments, people would follow them better! That issue wasn't because I was being deceptive it is because you are.
... No ... anything I have ever said has been within context. If I say alien, which is on rare occasions I do then I will. But you have absolutely no right to rephrase what people say. You can get into trouble for that legally in the real world.
Whatever. How about keeping your word and leaving? You keep dragging this out and there is NO indication that you've convinced anyone of anything. It's like some idiot keeps playing the same old elevator music over and over. People are getting sick of it. So leave already!
Whatever... grump grump grump. When you leaving? Grump. You sound like someone has thrown your rattle out of your play pen.
No matter, the ignore function works just fine. Just tell us how it feels to waste most of your life on something that's going nowhere.
Yes, we are all leaving, eventually, one way or another. Did you actually mean now or some distant time in the future? Of course, every time we hear someone threatening to leave, they often don't. Why is that, you ask? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Ha! That actually made me laugh out loud. I really hope you are a troll, because the alternative at this point is mental illness.
Same reason he keeps responding to origin (or was it Read Only?) despite supposedly having him on ignore!
Yes, and I've decided to prolong your miseries, since you have not shown me the same respect since I have been here. So just remember folks, if I stay here a lot longer than you imagined, you only have yourselves to blame. There are some real psychological lessons to be learned from all this.
Yeah, that feature doesn't work when not logged in. Just a matter of getting used to reminding myself about that... well I have plenty time to get used to it, yes?
You not only rephrased it, but gave it a whole different meaning. You knew fine well what you were doing when you did that. You think that's an acceptable thing, taking lines people have said and then distort it to make it sound like something else? It's my choice whether I openly admit believing in aliens, and trust me, I will on occasions. I don't need to you to rewrite things I have said. Trust me, taking people out of context like that can be serious.
Trapped, you really need to reread the definition of "hearsay" because quantity doesn't change the issue. Oy. What's cringe-worthy about this, Trapped, is that you aren't even a very good crackpot. You need to get a better grasp of your own material so you don't keep Trap-ping yourself up. I'm sure when you first cited the 7000 mph speed claim, you believed that it was coincident with visual sightings because it fit well with your narrative and it never occurred to you to actually make sure it was really coincident. In making that mistake, you inadvertently demonstrate how the alien spacecraft mythology works: it's a narrative, told and retold, that morphs into a compelling story. Logic and evidence are not part of it, only good storytelling. So now again you've invented something that almost certainly doesn't and never has existed: recorded radar evidence. The wiki mentions someone trying to take a picture of a radar screen: if the radar is recorded, that wouldn't be necessary. So there almost certainly was never any recorded radar evidence here. But recorded radar evidence fits with your growing myth, so you've incorporated it. This time it is a mistake for you to make this evidence up without checking. Next time you repeat it it becomes a lie. The alien spacecraft myth relies on the lack of quality evidence for mundane explanations to enable the myth of aliens to fill in the gaps. As others have pointed out, evidence quality has grown substantially in the past 10 years, with still and video cameras everywhere. The result is there are less gaps for the myth to fill and the aliens religion is fading.
What are you talking about? This isn't chinese whispers we are dealing with here, there are corresponding reports from tens and tens of officials involved in the incident. The facts of the case where clear to them then, as it was later for us to hear about. At no time, did they suddenly become incompetent, incapable of getting their stories straight. The claims of radar evidence would have been quashed at first chance if the government could have kept it wraps. But they couldn't... too many people where in on this incident. Which makes ''the hearsay claim'' less and less likely. We must be realistic about this. You can say the radar evidence is lies.... all lies!!!!!!! You can call the people out as liars as well... but it isn't convincing. As a sceptic, you need to have a better ability to construct proper debunking methods, because you are far from convincing.
As for the photographic, video evidence... We've been over this before, there have been plenty over history. There are still video's capturing the phenom today. But not in all cases should people be expected to simply take a video out. Look at the Pheonix Lights, hundreds of people involved in seeing a huge triangle UFO. Even the governor saw it... but what about all the video evidence? Hardly anyone took video evidence.
And there have been plenty cases in which military camera's have taken pictures of UFO's. Astronaut's have taken pictures of UFO's while on test flights and even STS missions. Plenty photographic evidence has went missing assumed cover up and many others confiscated from individuals. When someone mentions the whole photographic red herring to me, I have to explain this all over again.
Trapped Yes, let's take a look at that... "On Monday evening, April 21, mysterious lights were seen over Phoenix, Arizona. At just after eight, hundreds of residents called police and local news media to report four bright red lights hovering silently over the city. They changed shape after a while, moving from a triangular to rectangular configuration, then disappeared one by one. The Air Force had no explanation for the lights, and air traffic controllers said that whatever was causing the lights didn't show up on radar. Theories abounded, with UFOs and aliens of course being very popular. One UFO enthusiast named Jeff Woolwine said that he is certain that the lights are from alien spaceships. The lights remained a mystery and became a national media story. The case took a twist two days later when a local television station aired a startling confession by an anonymous hoaxer: He had created the UFO lights using road flares tied to helium balloons, launching them in one-minute increments. Some people were amused by the hoax, others were angered, and many conspiracy-minded UFO buffs were skeptical of such a mundane explanation. It's true that just because a person has confessed to a hoax doesn't mean the case is solved. After all, people often falsely confess to things they didn't do—including murder (for example, John Mark Carr falsely confessed to killing JonBenet Ramsey in 2006). A confession (especially an anonymous one) by itself is not credible unless corroborated by physical evidence. In this case, however, the evidence is overwhelming that the Phoenix Lights were indeed a hoax. Let's consider the facts. 1) The formation of the lights is consistent with independently moving objects, not fixed lights on an aircraft. They rose into the air together, stayed in more or less the same formation while in the same air currents, then drifted apart as they gained altitude. Also, the mysterious lights drifted toward the east—the same direction as the wind. 2) Air traffic controllers reported that nothing showed up on their radar. If the lights were the only visible part of a metallic spaceship or airplane, they would have been clearly on radar. However, "UFOs" consisting of small balloons, road flares, and some fishing line would be invisible to radar. 3) The way the lights disappeared also supports the hoax theory. They did not zoom away at high speed, as one might expect from an aircraft. Nor did they all suddenly and mysteriously disappear. Instead, eyewitnesses reported that the lights were visible for between 15 and 30 minutes, until they went out one by one. This is exactly the pattern we would expect to see from flares that were lit (and launched) in sequence: they would go up, remain lit for about 20 minutes, then first flare would extinguish. A minute or two later the second would burn out, and so on. 4) One of the hoaxer's neighbors, a Mr. Mailo, actually saw the hoaxer launch the helium balloons and flares. Mailo said the flares were lit about 8 p.m., just before the UFO lights were first sighted. Thus the mysterious Phoenix Lights of 2008 are explained." http://www.livescience.com/2483-mysterious-phoenix-lights-ufo-hoax.html#sthash.PL4pF4Eu.dpuf What those hundreds of people saw was an UNIDENTIFIED FLYING LIGHT FORMATION THAT CHANGED OVER TIME. It was later identified as a simple hoax(road flares and helium balloons floating on the breeze). A similar event a couple of years later turned out to be a group of ultralights flying in formation with road flares on the landing gear(yes, it too was a deliberate hoax). Face it, you are totally unarmed in a battle of wits, you are gullible to the point that someone should look after you at all times and you are so, so very lame in your ability to pull off the "I know more than an oak stump" stuff like this guy... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Give it up, you lose. GrumpyPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
