213 replies to this topic

[quillius]

Lilly, on 24 April 2012 - 08:33 PM, said:

Fallacious reasoning has no particular side.  

agreed, its just rare to see from someone with a skeptical stance.

Lilly, on 24 April 2012 - 08:33 PM, said:

As to which UFO sighting I find the most compelling, my own. Seeing something with ones own eyes tends to take the #1 position.  

never knew you had a sighting Lilly....theres my 'learn something new' quota achieved for the day

[psyche101]

quillius, on 24 April 2012 - 02:54 PM, said:

Gidday mate, I suppose you would expect me to question how a reasonable suspicion can be reached?




If based on the fact they went to a party then that is not reasonable. If based on drugs and alchohol being (apparently) rife then again this is not reasonable.

reasonable would be to know for a fact that ALL men had either drug/drink issues and that they went to a party......

but we know it wasnt all men, we know the first report came from patrolmen (who were on patrol not at a party)......

what have you concluded to date with reading this case

-lighthouse
-drug and /or alchohol induced hallucinations
-hoax

or any other?



oh and yes its nice to see the other side -spout speculation/belief as fact   

Hi Quillius

I believe it is reasonable suspicion because the men were at a Christmas party and that drugs have been proven to be rife at the base. The object happened to cause confusion at a time when merriment was at it's highest point in the year? Rife means a lot of people, and I think to clear that these men were definitely not under any influence could only be determined by a test. The way I see it it is an equal chance that they may have been under and influence as much as not. Can you prove the men were not under any influence at all? That honestly seems unlikely when interrupted half way through a festive gathering that involves some relaxed behavior.

Edited by psyche101, 26 April 2012 - 02:30 AM.

[psyche101]

quillius, on 25 April 2012 - 11:27 AM, said:

agreed, its just rare to see from someone with a skeptical stance.





never knew you had a sighting Lilly....theres my 'learn something new' quota achieved for the day

But I am not reasoning, I am just agreeing that the possibility exists and that factors are involved that makes the ideal plausible. That is not to say a determination has been made one way or another, but leaving options open until they have been soundly qualified.

[quillius]

psyche101, on 26 April 2012 - 02:26 AM, said:

Hi Quillius

I believe it is reasonable suspicion because the men were at a Christmas party and that drugs have been proven to be rife at the base. The object happened to cause confusion at a time when merriment was at it's highest point in the year? Rife means a lot of people, and I think to clear that these men were definitely not under any influence could only be determined by a test. The way I see it it is an equal chance that they may have been under and influence as much as not. Can you prove the men were not under any influence at all? That honestly seems unlikely when interrupted half way through a festive gathering that involves some relaxed behavior.

Gidday mate,

firstly all the men were not at a party only some (which in itself says quite a bit with regards to it being hallucinations)

Secondly 'proven to be rife'? I assume regular tests of everyone at the base were carried out and that a majority were found to be drug takers, otherwise all I have seen is hearsay that it was rife.

I must also add that for it to be an equal chance then it woudl have to be proven fact that those men at the party were all drug takers, otherwise I am not sure how we can point the speculative finger at them here without no evidence to suggests this.

[psyche101]

quillius, on 26 April 2012 - 08:26 AM, said:

Gidday mate,

firstly all the men were not at a party only some (which in itself says quite a bit with regards to it being hallucinations)

Secondly 'proven to be rife'? I assume regular tests of everyone at the base were carried out and that a majority were found to be drug takers, otherwise all I have seen is hearsay that it was rife.

I must also add that for it to be an equal chance then it woudl have to be proven fact that those men at the party were all drug takers, otherwise I am not sure how we can point the speculative finger at them here without no evidence to suggests this.

Hi Mate

Just quickly before I head of and get the kids fed and off to bed. I have read at least three sources that all stated that drugs at the base were a serious problem, sorry I do not have time for links, the sun is down for the day here now, but I suspect your day is just starting. I am at the pointy end of my day.
I do not believe that an equal chance is proving that the men at the party were partaking in any substances, I believe if we knew that to be the case then the odds I feel would go up as then drugs would be known to be in the room with some of the people. And no, it does not apply to the entire party, but the entire party have some conflicting accounts as well so that seems to fit in. What we do know is that the men were on a base that reportedly had drug issues. Some of the base men were called to the fracas. We are not privy to records that would tell us if any of these men were ever under suspicion, or were caught with drugs. We do know a festive event was on and that it contained alcohol, and that the people involved were interrupted during this festive celebration. As such, I feel it is plausible to consider that drugs or alcohol may have played a part. It is speculation of course, or as I would put it reasonable suspicion, but how does one conform that reasonable suspicion after all this time? One cannot what we need is tests from the time frame to determine yes or no definitively.


Can you put your hand on your heart and swear on your life the not a one of those men was under any sort of influence? I think that is what I am trying to convey.

See ya!

[quillius]

psyche101, on 26 April 2012 - 08:45 AM, said:

Hi Mate

Just quickly before I head of and get the kids fed and off to bed. I have read at least three sources that all stated that drugs at the base were a serious problem, sorry I do not have time for links, the sun is down for the day here now, but I suspect your day is just starting. I am at the pointy end of my day.
I do not believe that an equal chance is proving that the men at the party were partaking in any substances, I believe if we knew that to be the case then the odds I feel would go up as then drugs would be known to be in the room with some of the people. And no, it does not apply to the entire party, but the entire party have some conflicting accounts as well so that seems to fit in. What we do know is that the men were on a base that reportedly had drug issues. Some of the base men were called to the fracas. We are not privy to records that would tell us if any of these men were ever under suspicion, or were caught with drugs. We do know a festive event was on and that it contained alcohol, and that the people involved were interrupted during this festive celebration. As such, I feel it is plausible to consider that drugs or alcohol may have played a part. It is speculation of course, or as I would put it reasonable suspicion, but how does one conform that reasonable suspicion after all this time? One cannot what we need is tests from the time frame to determine yes or no definitively.


Can you put your hand on your heart and swear on your life the not a one of those men was under any sort of influence? I think that is what I am trying to convey.

See ya!

Yes my day is just starting and its off to a terrible start so have limited time myself....constantly having to rectify peopels incompetence.

Anyhow, three sources maybe, but based on what? factual tests of everyone at the base? or hearsay from people at the base? With regards to the equal chance, my point was that they would have to be proven drug abusers historically/ or tests on everyone at the base resulted in 50% being drug abusers..then there is an equal chance.

conflicting reports are always to be expected due to people and perceptions etc. Even a proven real event would have many conflicting testimonies IMO.

I agree its speculation but I do not agree its reasonable suspicion.

ok, no I cannot and would not put my hand on heart to swear that not one of those men was under any sort of influence. Although the scope has increased by using the words 'not one' and 'any sort'

Using a similar approach would you swear on your life that the experience was LIKELY due to drug/alchohol? Or even further back, would you be so trusting of those sources to swear that there really was a drug problem at the base (enough of a problem for it to be considered rife) ?.

see you tomorrow mate.

[psyche101]

quillius, on 26 April 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

Yes my day is just starting and its off to a terrible start so have limited time myself....constantly having to rectify peopels incompetence.

Anyhow, three sources maybe, but based on what? factual tests of everyone at the base? or hearsay from people at the base? With regards to the equal chance, my point was that they would have to be proven drug abusers historically/ or tests on everyone at the base resulted in 50% being drug abusers..then there is an equal chance.

conflicting reports are always to be expected due to people and perceptions etc. Even a proven real event would have many conflicting testimonies IMO.

I agree its speculation but I do not agree its reasonable suspicion.

ok, no I cannot and would not put my hand on heart to swear that not one of those men was under any sort of influence. Although the scope has increased by using the words 'not one' and 'any sort'

Using a similar approach would you swear on your life that the experience was LIKELY due to drug/alchohol? Or even further back, would you be so trusting of those sources to swear that there really was a drug problem at the base (enough of a problem for it to be considered rife) ?.

see you tomorrow mate.

I hear you, my hands are too full of late for similar reasons.

I do not think it is unusual for drugs to be rife in a closed institution. I do not doubt that there would be regular checks on the staff. Larry Warren who was the source of the original News of the World article has written extensively on the subject and is a firm believer in an extraterrestrial explanation he was described by Halt as such:

Quote

HALT: Well, I felt kind of sad when I read the book. It’s sort of Larry Warren’s, how shall I say, his life. A lot of misfortune. I think Larry Warren has either relived a fantasy so many times that he sincerely believes it or he’s been meddled with. By that, I mean hypnosis, drugs or whatever. I think he may have been a lightening rod and drawn a lot of attention and something may have happened to him. I don’t know for a fact. And he’s admitted this to me. He and I have talked a couple of times.

Link

And you have hit the nail square on the head, no I would surely not put my hand on my heart and say that Drugs and or alcohol were definitely influences. But I do not feel one can do the other either. I think that drugs and alcohol are an each way bet at this point in time without personel records, which I am really not sure we would have access to. The references might be to discredit the story, they might be to bring some balance to the story, but I think it could quite possibly be one or the other. We just do not know, and the drug/alcohol references keep rearing their ugly heads from time to time. I do not believe for a second that this is how the British military spend of all of their time, but I also think that many tend to let their hair down at such a festive distraction. They might be military men with hearts of gold and muscles of steel, but at the end of the day, they are still human. I personally very much enjoy a Guinness when time permits.

On another note, I wont say anything just yet, but have a read of this one:

Rendelsham Exposed. Government inside job. No UFO time traveling aliens present.

Quite a tale, I would love to hear what you think of it

Cheers.

Edited by psyche101, 27 April 2012 - 05:49 AM.

[DBunker]

The firs time I came in contact with UFOs/UFOlogy was when I was about 13 years old and read about George Adamski. I must say that I was a  little skeptical to his story and pictures, even back in those days.




http://en.wikipedia..../George_Adamski

Edited by DBunker, 27 April 2012 - 05:53 AM.

[psyche101]

DBunker, on 27 April 2012 - 05:53 AM, said:

The firs time I came in contact with UFOs/UFOlogy was when I was about 13 years old and read about George Adamski. I must say that I was a  little skeptical to his story and pictures, even back in those days.




http://en.wikipedia..../George_Adamski

Personally I was fascinated, believed every word.

Man, was I in for a shock!

But to be fair, I was like ten when I heard about Adamskis claims.

Edited by psyche101, 27 April 2012 - 06:35 AM.

[lost_shaman]

psyche101, on 27 April 2012 - 06:34 AM, said:

Personally I was fascinated, believed every word.

Man, was I in for a shock!

But to be fair, I was like ten when I heard about Adamskis claims.

Hey psyche,

It's interesting to hear peoples early views of the phenomena. Not to get off topic but I suspect that most people who were interested in UFOs and also Aliens visiting Earth at a young age who were 'believers' often maintain some interest in the subject but as 'Skeptics' as adults. For me it's kind of interesting because I never really thought anything about the UFO Phenomena until I was an Adult and had my own high strangness sighting. As a young person I was always interested in Science but never really thought much about UFO's, I was into physics and Light and relativity. When I thought of Aliens, I was thinking about them living on Their planets not visiting ours.

Getting back on Topic, the best cases in the world are those from Hessdalen.

[quillius]

psyche101, on 27 April 2012 - 05:47 AM, said:

I hear you, my hands are too full of late for similar reasons.

I do not think it is unusual for drugs to be rife in a closed institution. I do not doubt that there would be regular checks on the staff. Larry Warren who was the source of the original News of the World article has written extensively on the subject and is a firm believer in an extraterrestrial explanation he was described by Halt as such:



Link

And you have hit the nail square on the head, no I would surely not put my hand on my heart and say that Drugs and or alcohol were definitely influences. But I do not feel one can do the other either. I think that drugs and alcohol are an each way bet at this point in time without personel records, which I am really not sure we would have access to. The references might be to discredit the story, they might be to bring some balance to the story, but I think it could quite possibly be one or the other. We just do not know, and the drug/alcohol references keep rearing their ugly heads from time to time. I do not believe for a second that this is how the British military spend of all of their time, but I also think that many tend to let their hair down at such a festive distraction. They might be military men with hearts of gold and muscles of steel, but at the end of the day, they are still human. I personally very much enjoy a Guinness when time permits.

On another note, I wont say anything just yet, but have a read of this one:

Rendelsham Exposed. Government inside job. No UFO time traveling aliens present.

Quite a tale, I would love to hear what you think of it

Cheers.

Hey Psyche, will have a read tonight/weekend and come back to you...sounds interesting though

I still dont see anything that points to drugs or drink abuse im afraid. Possible, well yes, reasonable suspicion...no, I dont see how we can say this based on 'inconclusive' hearsay stating it was rife at the base and the fact they were at a christmas bash....not enough to form 'reasonable suspicion' IMO.

speak soon.

if you were told that drugs were rife at James Carlsons base, then James says he had seen something, would it be reasonable suspicion to think he was on drugs/drink and hallucinated the experience? possible yes! reasonable suspicion...NO.

[DBunker]

psyche101, on 27 April 2012 - 06:34 AM, said:

Personally I was fascinated, believed every word.

Man, was I in for a shock!

But to be fair, I was like ten when I heard about Adamskis claims.

Oh yes, same here....  I loved the what if, at first.

Wasnt that picture of the classic saucer later identified/debunked as some German gas lamp, or something?

Edited by DBunker, 27 April 2012 - 11:00 AM.

[Hazzard]

DBunker, on 27 April 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

Oh yes, same here....  I loved the what if, at first.

Wasnt that picture of the classic saucer later identified/debunked as some German gas lamp, or something?

You guys are not alone.  I can remember slinging Adamskis fantastic tale as fact, to my friends.  

As for that classic Adamski Photo, the "Venusian Scout Ship",... It turned out to be nothing more than a pressurized-gas lamp sold in the US from the mid 1930s through at least
the early 1940s.


http://xa.yimg.com/k..._Ship_mini2.pdf

[Oppono Astos]

Hazzard, on 27 April 2012 - 11:47 AM, said:

You guys are not alone.  I can remember slinging Adamskis fantastic tale as fact, to my friends.  

As for that classic Adamski Photo, the "Venusian Scout Ship",... It turned out to be nothing more than a pressurized-gas lamp sold in the US from the mid 1930s through at least
the early 1940s.


http://xa.yimg.com/k..._Ship_mini2.pdf

I think we've all been there.  The University of Life certainly changes one's beliefs.

[Hazzard]

Oppono Astos, on 27 April 2012 - 12:05 PM, said:

I think we've all been there.  The University of Life certainly changes one's beliefs.

Thats when there was a DING DONG on the door,... been a "government payed UFO debunker ever sense.