Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by darksidZz, Apr 19, 2016.
A whole bloody litter in fact! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
You entirely missed it .
I think not.
I will come back on it later if I can.
However if you had have dignified the premise as your concept I would have given it some earlier thought.
However I don't get my wisdom from books of fiction.
My experience comes from real life observing real people make real mistakes.
If I want to know how to do something I am not going to take advice from a fictional character.
Maybe the reason I don't buy the UFO stuff on face value is because I have only ever lived in the real world watching humans say and do all sorts of crap for all sorts of strange reasons.
So many humans want attention and will say all sorts of stuff to get it.
Many do stuff for money, even to impress a girl.
They say you learn by your mistakes well I not only had mine to learn by but also a procession of clients and countless recorded cases of law where facts are recorded and judgements that are there for folk to understand where other folk went wrong.
Now that is a cut above what some fictional character offers from the mind of a mere fiction novelist.
A novelist they live by selling fantasy for goodness sake River.
Come on now give me credit for not taking Sherlock seriously.
You want to rely on his method be my guest I will look into it later.
Have you ever talked to a real detective River and asked what said detective thinks about Sherlock Holmes.
I confess I have not but I think I know what they may say.
Tell you what I will do, because I really do enjoy talking to you River, I will think about what Sherlock says and for the sheer fun of it I will see if I can present a refutation of the premise.
Refutation , ahhhh... again you missed the point .
First how long do we make the list of impossible?
Is it relevant to even list the impossible.
What do we have left?
Perhaps a list of countless probabilities so out of that list how do we select anything that can be considered the truth.
Would you care to suggest how using Sherlocks approach we can determine any truth relating to UFOs given that is sortta related to this thread topic.
Perhaps try applying Sherlocks approach to address the op.
And if you are genuine give me more than short answers that convey little about what you mean.
Shortness of answers don't sound wise if they don't convey something which means something.
I type one finger on a smart phone so if you have a key board type a few more words than normal.
Figure it out Alex , your the smart one .
You have to hold back on the compliments River.
I am not too smart I am an old man I have forgotten so much you would not believe.
But I will take it you don't wish to build upon Sherlocks wisdom and fair enough you no doubt now see the flaws in the idea.
Moreover you probably have more important things to do than waste time proving a fictional character is somehow smarter than real people.
Thanks for chatting
Good night , may you dream upon Sherlocks logic .
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
river wallows in mystery, mystique, and evasiveness: He is the champ of oneliners...or should that be chump? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I had a friend who spoke in a similar way convinced that he sounded profound but he was just an idiot.
You could ask him to explain but he would only get worse quoting nonsence making out he was wise but in all the time I knew him the only intelligent thing he really said was "not everyone is like me"... Happy days. Even if you asked him if he would like another beer he would carry on.
I nearly smashed him one day but I got up and simply left without a word.
Now that was wise.
Damn idiot should have smashed him see what profound sounds like with teeth missing.
I don't really want to pile on a particular poster, but I'll address the behavior.
The tactic of sounding pithy and mysterious is a common one that almost all of us engaged in when we were younger.
They're not really convinced themselves; it's a bluff, to try to convince others. It becomes quite transparent when you call the bluff, and there's nothing to back it but more enigmatism.
It's a phase that most people grow of. Once one sees how transparent it is to others, and they're not fooling anyone, they usually drop it.
As a tactic, it's relatively harmless. There are far more odious and damaging behaviors here.
Don't get me wrong I like River.
I was reminded that's all.
And a lot of the time I understand what he means.
I expect he is a busy person and tries to be brief.
Also he probably realises I am an ear bender and does not want to get too deep.
All good my end still celebrating the election result only started with asprin this time before a drink.
My bank book went through the wash so I hope I don't get charged with money laundering.
They don't make em like they used to.
Think of why the US government hides the UFO's in the first place . We all know that they happen and about 10 to 5% never get resolved . and the government does what it can to hush people up . It's sort of a reverse psychology if you will , in the open .
The US hushs up airline pilots , military forces personal , police , citizens ; of any sightings or experiences with UFO's.
This is exactly what was asked in post 1, and shown to be flawed in post 11.
Bringing it up 1100 posts later doesn't change that.
The question of why the government might do something cannot be meaningfully asked until it is granted that the government does it.
In a moment I'm going to start asking 'Why does River eat kittens?' And you'd better have a good reason.
The government does .
Examine Roswell ; classic example .
The papers at the time , say that a flying saucer crashed at the sight .
The day after it was a high tech. ballon.
Well, the article you linked to quite explicitly says otherwise:
"...a United States Air Force balloon, mistaken for a UFO, crashed at a ranch near Roswell..."
"The sequence of events was triggered by the crash of a Project Mogul balloon"
So ... so far, no, it doesn't.
Originally the crash was by a saucer , then it becomes a ballon...
Do you think you could make that glaring mistake of shape ?
And remember it was the RAAF that said it was a saucer , originally .
The article you linked to as evidence for your assertion that the government hides UFOS - says quite explicitly, and multiple times, that a balloon crashed, and that conspiracies did not well up until several decades later, in the 70's.
So, the evidence is that a balloon crashed.
Is it rational to go from a saucer shape to a ballon object ?
If you wish to re-pen arguments about the Roswell case, start a new thread.
But you've nicely disqualified it as any support for this thread.
So, the issue stands: it has yet to be established that the government hides UFOs.
Separate names with a comma.