103 replies to this topic

[Timonthy]

I'm drunk and Australian and I know that there is no merit in lie detector results.

Sorry for echoing earlier posts but I felt this was an important development in the search for anti-bullsh!t.

[DONTEATUS]

We better ck you out then ! THe Lies never end on this topic !

[GlenndL]

best way i can think to test the software is to take 911 recordings and assert the technology to it. in a 911 call u have actual recorded voice and then u have the report from when police and rescue were dispatched. if the true ones come out true and the false ones come out false then u can assume that its spot on.

[Rye17]

FAIL!!

[.Hollow.]

this should be done with every little thing. even if they arent accurate if the person truely believes it. the odds are against it doing that with the more people they test. so i say, TEST EVERY LAST THING!!!

[Lilly]

The bottom line is, and I think someone already pointed this out, lie detectors can only pick up on what a person believes is truthful. So, if someone sincerely believes something is true, then the detector is going to show them as telling the truth. Also, people who are psychopathic do not exhibit any physical changes/emotions when lying, so the lie detector would show them as being truthful when they're actually lying. It's simply not a cut and dried scenario when using lie detectors.

[Saitung]

DONTEATUS, on 17 December 2011 - 10:13 PM, said:

A Alien landing in the Front Lawn of the White house with all the press present would still be an issue of opinion ! Someone would still say it was faked or Swamp gas !

YOU are so right Donteatus:
In the case of Marcel, I have touted that we have to look at what he did moments after the alleged incident. And his actions are in direct line with what someone of his position, intelligence and sociological standing would have had him do, tell his family first. You see, I submitted this to Stanton Freidman years ago that the major’s first actions were in line with what his military career and family life afforded him in the case of finding something incredible. Any psychologist worth their accreditations, understands the need for a person, especially a father of a healthy household to secure his position in said household. In other words, he knew from his military experience and training that two things were going to happen:
1. This thing would go on display around the world and never be touched by human hands again other than those of specialized museum or military personnel.
2. It would be secreted away by the military never to be seen or heard about again.
As father in my own household making sure my family, those closest to me in the world knew what I saw and believed in me would have been the most important duty. No matter what the rest of the world thought, as long as those he had to wake up with every day knew the truth. Major Marcel was a member of the most Top Secrete, elite Military base on American soil KNEW what he saw was not of this earth. I once held a Secret Military clearance, this man was NOT Stupid. Here is what we have to understand in dealing with the military and in specific, this case. It is not that there is no proof; it is that we have NO access to the proof. If I shot someone in the leg with a laser pistol back in 1947, and then had the ability to create a place that doesn’t exist officially and lock it away. No one could prove the pistol exists, because they would not have access to it. Neutrinos only exist because huge facilities are used to reveal them, at one time they too were the stuff of a scientists’ dreams.

[psyche101]

Saitung, on 19 December 2011 - 12:09 AM, said:

YOU are so right Donteatus:
In the case of Marcel, I have touted that we have to look at what he did moments after the alleged incident. And his actions are in direct line with what someone of his position, intelligence and sociological standing would have had him do, tell his family first. You see, I submitted this to Stanton Freidman years ago that the major’s first actions were in line with what his military career and family life afforded him in the case of finding something incredible. Any psychologist worth their accreditations, understands the need for a person, especially a father of a healthy household to secure his position in said household. In other words, he knew from his military experience and training that two things were going to happen:
1. This thing would go on display around the world and never be touched by human hands again other than those of specialized museum or military personnel.
2. It would be secreted away by the military never to be seen or heard about again.
As father in my own household making sure my family, those closest to me in the world knew what I saw and believed in me would have been the most important duty. No matter what the rest of the world thought, as long as those he had to wake up with every day knew the truth. Major Marcel was a member of the most Top Secrete, elite Military base on American soil KNEW what he saw was not of this earth. I once held a Secret Military clearance, this man was NOT Stupid. Here is what we have to understand in dealing with the military and in specific, this case. It is not that there is no proof; it is that we have NO access to the proof. If I shot someone in the leg with a laser pistol back in 1947, and then had the ability to create a place that doesn’t exist officially and lock it away. No one could prove the pistol exists, because they would not have access to it. Neutrinos only exist because huge facilities are used to reveal them, at one time they too were the stuff of a scientists’ dreams.

And yet he would go to his deathbed arguing with his son over the physical description of said debris. Sounds like it didn't have the impact one would imagine when coming face to face with alien technology.

[psyche101]

So how many people who say this was not an alien craft was this tech used on, and what are those results?

Or did we avoid that to ruin the surprise?

Bragalia is well known for clutching at Roswell straws. This is feelgood news, not news news.

Edited by psyche101, 19 December 2011 - 03:25 AM.

[psyche101]

bison, on 17 December 2011 - 03:41 PM, said:

Just two points, here:  First, ,Jesse Marcel's testimony involved specifics about various sorts of the wreckage, which he says he handled. His testimony passes as true via this new technology. If this occurred  because Marcel falsely believed what he said, he would, it seems, have had to have been subject to some very elaborate hallucinations, which are quite rare. Have we any evidence to suggest that he was subject to such hallucinations?   Second, In case anyone was wondering, the Stevens Institute of Technology is a real and respected university. It has a couple of Nobel prize winners to its credit.

Perhaps this can put to rest the I Beams / Square beams issue. Marcel Snr and Marcel Jnr never agreed on this aspect of debris. Are they both telling the truth? Both handled said debris. What we do have to also consider is Marcels intelligence background, and if he would carry a cover up to the grave, which I feel is a distinct possibility in that I feel he knew this was an Intelligence operation, not an alien landing, and took that secret to his grave.

[psyche101]

MrObvious, on 17 December 2011 - 05:34 PM, said:

Let's all remember that Maj. Marcel was in charge at the site and was in charge of USA and Pacific testing at the time of the incident.  This is a high post and he isn't just some "average joe" off the streets, he is highly credable witness and at the time of his testimony he had never seen any material of this world like what he saw at the wreckage.

Ever heard of a fellow called Irving Newton?


While I was examining the debris, Major Marcel was picking up pieces of the target sticks and trying to convince me that some notations on the sticks were alien writings.  There were figures on the sticks lavender or pink in color, appeared to be weather faded markings with no rhyme or reason.  He did not convince me these were alien writings.

LINK

Edited by psyche101, 19 December 2011 - 03:33 AM.

[psyche101]

DONTEATUS, on 17 December 2011 - 10:13 PM, said:

A Alien landing in the Front Lawn of the White house with all the press present would still be an issue of opinion ! Someone would still say it was faked or Swamp gas !

I disagree. It is why the creationist argument on the fossil record does not work. I can pick up a fossil and donk someone who objects on the head with it, and say "that did not hurt, it does not exist remember?"

[psyche101]

Lilly, on 18 December 2011 - 05:51 PM, said:

The bottom line is, and I think someone already pointed this out, lie detectors can only pick up on what a person believes is truthful. So, if someone sincerely believes something is true, then the detector is going to show them as telling the truth. Also, people who are psychopathic do not exhibit any physical changes/emotions when lying, so the lie detector would show them as being truthful when they're actually lying. It's simply not a cut and dried scenario when using lie detectors.

And that be the bottom line. This information is no more "proof" than Astronaut Mitchell's opinion. He believes that others believe, but when one gets down to the nitty gritty, his proof leaves one wanting. And I have to say, wondering.

[Dom3434]

If beings from another planet came her, they would have to have coem from our solar system. I personaly believe that it is the us military testing out highly advanced "at the time" technology and with the failed attempt that nowone believed it was a weather balloon, therefore used what the public's conclusion of it being a alien crash site would be the perfect diversion to drag the eye of the public away from what realy was going on.

[Synergy]

DBunker, on 17 December 2011 - 03:21 PM, said:

Who knows what really happened at Roswell that night back in the days. I hear lots of stories of conflicting nature. One crash sight, two crash sites, I have even heard of five sites. Aliens big, small, grey.....?


Who knows anymore?

The testimony has actually been pretty consistent with only a few exceptions. Individuals like Sheridan Cavitt, Bessie Brazel, Frank Kaufman, Phillip Corso and a couple others are the only ones that really differ. Their testimony is tossed out NOT because they contradict the foundation of reports, but mainly because they conflict with actual documented facts.

Cavitt, for example, the officer that went out to the debris field with Marcel, was once quoted often by debunkers and referenced in the governments Roswell Report: Case Closed. The problem was that Cavitt originally claimed he wasn't even in Roswell at the time. Documents proved otherwise. He then insisted he might have been in Roswell but he didn't go out to the debris field. And then it was that he went out to the debris field, but Marcel wasn't with him, and that he found a couple feet of debris from a weather balloon. The debris, he claimed, would fit comfortably in the trunk of a car. Well, if that was true, Mogul wouldn't fit his description, only the original cover story would (which is all he was aware of at the time of that statement).

Bessie Brazel is another example of invalid testimony. She claimed nobody came out to the field, certainly didn't stay the night, and that her father and her identified it as a balloon right away. It's likely she was confusing a different event for the Roswell incident, as Brazel frequently found and returned downed weather balloons.

According to Carey and Schmitt, there are over 600 witnesses that have come forward now. Most of them, however, are not first hand. Testimony will never prove anything, especially when it's less than first hand, but there is no chance at all that it was Mogul. I covered why in detail a few years back here: http://www.unexplain...1