Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
...
Last edited:
And at the time and as I am telling you now, you need to post in your own words as well and use the excerpts to support your argument. At the moment, you are not making any argument at all. All you are doing is posting huge chunks of text and no one knows exactly what it is you wish to discuss. Look at your OP, the second post, post number four and five. In all of those, the only thing that is from you is one line in the OP. All of the rest of it is your pulling large chunks of texts from other websites and posting them and just putting a link.No. You never said I couldn't post excerpts of articles.
That is because it was plagiarism. You were not recognising or posting who or where you got the chunks of text from. Then and now, you are still to ensure that people can recognise that what you are posting are quotes. You are not distinguishing the quoted material from your own. To put it into some perspective, the only reason I knew that that one line in your OP was yours, was because I could not find it in the link you provided. No one can tell what are your words or what you are copying and posting. Understand now?You only whined and bitched that I was posting whole articles, which you accused as plagiarism.
As for what is being discussed, I gave that in the OP.
There are many cases of ufo encounters leaving marked physiological effects on the bodies of the eyewitnesses. Here we begin with a noted case from 1980, the famous Cash-Landrum incident near Dayton Texas:
Your OP has no such thing about it. In the second post, your post consisted solely of a large chunk of quoted text.That's what I'm discussing, accounts of physical effects from ufos.
But you are expected to provide some discussion points. Thus far, you have provided nothing. One line from you and literally 4 posts worth of quoted text that you do not distinguish from your own comments. You have provided nothing at all. It's not a matter of your asking questions. It is a matter of your providing some sort of talking points about what it is you wish to discuss in what you posted. Do you want to discuss what they saw? Because that is what your OP is about. There is more about what they saw than there is about the physical reaction and their subsequent illness. There is nothing at all about how other eyewitnesses not seeing what they saw. Why not? Why did you leave that part out? There is very little about their actual physiological effects.I'm not arguing or asking a question, and there is nothing in the rules saying I have to be arguing or asking questions in a thread.
Well you may be waiting a while. Because no one really knows what it is you wish to discuss. Do you want to discuss what they saw? Or their physiological effects from what they saw? What about the fact that your are posting as though you believe they saw a UFO, since the title of this thread is "physiological effects from UFO's", but you fail to address the fact that Cash and Landrum sued the US Government for $20 million for their injuries. Why would they sue the US Government for their injuries if it was meant to have been UFO's that burnt them and injured them to begin with?At this point no discussions have taken place, as it takes two to have a discussion. I'm still waiting, ok?
Now you are being disingenuous and downright insulting, especially considering everything that happened.But hell, if you wanna go all Kittamaru on my ass and start micromanaging how I post new threads in this deadass forum and whether I'm indenting the articles? lol!, by all means lock the thread then. I'm used to that sort censorship here. Who's the moderator for this forum now anyway? You? James? Nobody?
If you want to use excerpts? That's fine. But don't just post excerpts and nothing else.
not like I'm being interrogated on a witness stand for murder. So go harass someone else. I'm not having it anymore.
So you are not able to answer why you failed to acknowledge that other witnesses did not see what Cash and Landrum saw and why your own link provides that their burns were consistent with chemical burns, because the radiation burns they are likened to happened too quickly to classify as radiation burns?That's all you had to say. Like I said, I don't even read your longass flaming posts anymore.
This is a discussion forum. If you do not expect to have to have some discussion points or point out what it is you wish to discuss in your OP but just want to post articles or stories, then perhaps you should start a blog.They're too OCD for me, and I like to post here as a relaxation, not like I'm being interrogated on a witness stand for murder.
Asking you to abide by this site's posting rules and guidelines and having a basic expectation that someone will have the subject matter to be discussed in the OP is harassment now?So go harass someone else. I'm not having it anymore.
This is a discussion forum. If you do not expect to have to have some discussion points or point out what it is you wish to discuss in your OP but just want to post articles or stories, then perhaps you should start a blog.
Cash presented with fairly bad injuries from whatever it was that flew over them. They believe it was a UFO, yet why sue the US Government for the injuries they suffered by a craft that they (and now you) claim was alien? Can you explain why other witnesses to the 'event' never saw the diamond shaped craft they claim to have seen? Everyone else saw the helicopters, but they did not see the craft Crash and Landrum claim caused their injuries and they flew off surrounded by the helicopters? Why did other witnesses see the helicopters, but not the UFO Cash and Landrum claim they saw and which caused their injuries?
In fact, the car had no external damage either. Remember, your link states that the dash was melting and the heat apparently burnt them. But the car came through unscathed:
MUFON official John Schuessler presented a detailed report on an incident that (allegedly) occurred on the night of Dec. 29, 1980, not far from Houston, Tex., involving Betty Cash, Vicki Landrum and her seven-year-old grandson, Colby. According to Schuessler, the three were driving home around 9 p.m. when they saw a giant diamond-shaped object which descended and hovered over the highway only roughly 150 ft. ahead of their car, belching flames and illuminating the area as if it were daylight. Betty reportedly stopped the car, but instead of remaining inside or turning around and driving away, the three of them got out for a closer look. Betty Cash, who reportedly spent up to 8-10 minutes outside viewing the UFO, even walked toward the fiery object—despite the intense heat the UFO was radiating. When Vicki and Colby decided to get back in the car, Vicki claimed the car’s roof was so hot that it burned her hand. And when Betty finally decided to get back in the car, she said she burned her hand touching the door handle. (But when Schuessler later inspected the car, he was unable to find any damage to the car’s paint finish, external plastic parts or its tires.)
So the heat was bad enough to cause severe burns, but there was no damage to the car at all?
Ah, but is that a proven physiological effect, or is it merely a psychological problem?Physiological effects from ufos.
Clearly one effect of ufos is they can cause some people to lose the ability to think rationally....
How are we supposed to investigate some anecdote that is over 30 years old?If you don't believe their accounts, tell me why? What evidence do you have that it was something different that happened to them? Were they drunk or high? What accounts for this event?