160 replies to this topic

[cenobite]

quillius, on 21 June 2012 - 03:01 PM, said:

its the way progress is made buddy...maybe not everyone has that same goal in mind.

so this is yours and McG's idea of proof a link to mysterious universe?! seriously, thats proof is it, honestly you guys are laughable

[quillius]

cenobite, on 21 June 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

so this is yours and McG's idea of proof a link to mysterious universe?! seriously, thats proof is it, honestly you guys are laughable

I said 'its the way progress is made' ...how the hell does this equate do any link being proof of a mysterious universe.......this is about the fifth strawman you have built over a couple of threads in under two days...and then have the audacity to call us laughable.....I guess the irony will give some a people a smile (assuming ofcourse you were not being sarcastic...based on the fact you are too intelligent to use the lowest form of wit)

[cenobite]

quillius, on 21 June 2012 - 08:22 PM, said:

I said 'its the way progress is made' ...how the hell does this equate do any link being proof of a mysterious universe.......this is about the fifth strawman you have built over a couple of threads in under two days...and then have the audacity to call us laughable.....I guess the irony will give some a people a smile (assuming ofcourse you were not being sarcastic...based on the fact you are too intelligent to use the lowest form of wit)

dont be obtuse, i quoted this post of yours to be sarcastic, ive never claimed to be intelligent, and yes you are laughable. Im very interested to see some of the other 'proof' that McG has provided, perhaps there is a link to the stan romanek video! and you talk about 'strawman'

[quillius]

cenobite, on 21 June 2012 - 08:31 PM, said:

dont be obtuse, i quoted this post of yours to be sarcastic, ive never claimed to be intelligent, and yes you are laughable. Im very interested to see some of the other 'proof' that McG has provided, perhaps there is a link to the stan romanek video! and you talk about 'strawman'

to be sarcastic? after claiming sarcasm is the lowest form of wit? so you didnt want to address the points I raised?, maybe I shall be clearer.

I said 'its the way progress is made' ...how the hell does this equate do any link being proof of a mysterious universe? please just answer this original question.

oh and yes I apologise you never claimed to be intelligent, simply an assumption on my part seeing as you were able to identify the lowest form of wit so swiftly...(i guess your use and admition of using sarcasm straight after making that comment is further sarcasm)

[cenobite]

quillius, on 21 June 2012 - 08:39 PM, said:

to be sarcastic? after claiming sarcasm is the lowest form of wit? so you didnt want to address the points I raised?, maybe I shall be clearer.

I said 'its the way progress is made' ...how the hell does this equate do any link being proof of a mysterious universe? please just answer this original question.

oh and yes I apologise you never claimed to be intelligent, simply an assumption on my part seeing as you were able to identify the lowest form of wit so swiftly...(i guess your use and admition of using sarcasm straight after making that comment is further sarcasm)

well i did answer your question, i was being sarcastic, is that so hard for you to understand? or are you being deliberately obtuse to cover the fact that you dont want to answer my critism of McG's laughable idea of 'proof'
in all seriousness im quite enjoying joshing with you, whats your poison, xbox or ps3?

[DONTEATUS]

ITs Good to Laugh ! and even better to Laugh alot !

[psyche101]

quillius, on 21 June 2012 - 08:16 AM, said:

this is the way the game should be played........ask nicely and you shall receive, thanks for this Psyche and McG, this proved a point I made on the other thread.

Don't count yourself out mate! Look at the excellent work you have done in so many threads! Your information in the Edgar Mitchell thread killed your own debate, but you presented the truth despite this. How could one not have the utmost respect for such integrity!
Weather I agree with McG or not is superflous to the debate, what matters is information, and I would challenge anyone to show that anybody here has as extensive knowledge of case studies as has been presented by McGuffin. And his personal tales I find rather intriguing as well.

As a hardened skeptic, I have the utmost respect for both of you, and find a valuable and enjoyable exchange of information in every instance that such has happened. What we each think personally matters not I feel, what the evidence can prove does. To have opposing opinions I find makes the subject all the more interesting. A "believer" can see an angle a "skeptic" may miss, and I think mostly because both parties are looking to validate different aspects of a case, in this way, bases are covered more thoroughly. We learn from each other in that respect, and lessons one might never consider from a single point of view.

And you are both top notch fellows to converse with to boot. A polite manner goes an awful long way. Debate is good, Lord knows I don't visit here to talk to myself or just sit around agreeing. Whilst agreement is good, it's all the better when it is earned.

[TheMcGuffin]

psyche101, on 22 June 2012 - 01:51 AM, said:

Don't count yourself out mate! Look at the excellent work you have done in so many threads! Your information in the Edgar Mitchell thread killed your own debate, but you presented the truth despite this. How could one not have the utmost respect for such integrity!
Weather I agree with McG or not is superflous to the debate, what matters is information, and I would challenge anyone to show that anybody here has as extensive knowledge of case studies as has been presented by McGuffin. And his personal tales I find rather intriguing as well.

As a hardened skeptic, I have the utmost respect for both of you, and find a valuable and enjoyable exchange of information in every instance that such has happened. What we each think personally matters not I feel, what the evidence can prove does. To have opposing opinions I find makes the subject all the more interesting. A "believer" can see an angle a "skeptic" may miss, and I think mostly because both parties are looking to validate different aspects of a case, in this way, bases are covered more thoroughly. We learn from each other in that respect, and lessons one might never consider from a single point of view.

And you are both top notch fellows to converse with to boot. A polite manner goes an awful long way. Debate is good, Lord knows I don't visit here to talk to myself or just sit around agreeing. Whilst agreement is good, it's all the better when it is earned.

I thank you for that, Psyche, and for being one of the more courteous ones on your side of the debate, who also takes these things seriously and reads the evidence provided.  That's what I tend to respond to rather than some newbie who just says "rubbish" all the time without being very informed about UFOs or even trying to look through all the old threads.  Most of these things being discussed on here are old news, and it's difficult to think of much to say that is new.

[psyche101]

TheMcGuffin, on 22 June 2012 - 02:06 AM, said:

I thank you for that, Psyche, and for being one of the more courteous ones on your side of the debate, who also takes these things seriously and reads the evidence provided.  That's what I tend to respond to rather than some newbie who just says "rubbish" all the time without being very informed about UFOs or even trying to look through all the old threads.  Most of these things being discussed on here are old news, and it's difficult to think of much to say that is new.

You are most welcome and deserving McGuffin. And I do not blame you for your approach, I am trying to learn to adopt a similar stance myself. It's just not worth the bicker. What you say is completely correct, and this is one of your strong points, I think you might be one of the few that can bring something new to an old table. It's a rare skill and I find it hard to not be impressed by it.
Opinion does not matter, good discussion does. We are bound to have different opinions, that's just human nature and that should make the discussion all the more interesting, and I do find that to be the case with your good self. You are a gentleman, and deserve to be treated as such.
People who do not read your links do themselves a disservice. Believe them or not, they are intriguing mysteries and well worth the read.

[cenobite]

TheMcGuffin, on 22 June 2012 - 02:06 AM, said:

I thank you for that, Psyche, and for being one of the more courteous ones on your side of the debate, who also takes these things seriously and reads the evidence provided.  That's what I tend to respond to rather than some newbie who just says "rubbish" all the time without being very informed about UFOs or even trying to look through all the old threads.  Most of these things being discussed on here are old news, and it's difficult to think of much to say that is new.

Well you are making a couple of assumptions about me there
without being very informed about UFOs or even trying to look through all the old threads
how do you know this? do you know me? you are wrong on both counts
and whats with the newbie thing? because you have been on this site longer than me you know better? 1 post or 10,000 posts does not give you the right to dismiss my opinion, sorry but that attitude just makes you sound like a grumpy old man!
The reason your posts irked me so are your claims like 'nothing is easier to prove' or that things have been proven a million times over, this is simply not true, these things have not been proven, such statements weaken your argument and make you appear arrogant. Eyewitness statements are not proof enough, I need a lot more proof than someones word....'i did not have sexual relations with that woman' springs to mind!
I respect your dedication and knowledge on the subject but this does not mean your interpretation is always correct. Be you a skeptic or believer to research something you must be subjective, i would much prefer to read a post and actually not be able to tell if the poster was a believer or a skeptic, just to see the facts laid out subjectively and logically, i am always suspicious of people who all too quickly dismiss 'earthly' explantions in favour of the fantastic.
I have been interested in ufo's for a long time, since i saw close encounters back in '77 in fact, i have many books on the subject and was a subscriber to ufo magazine till it ceased publication in the uk, for a time in the early 90's i had a semi regular correspondance with nick pope while he still worked on the 'ufo desk' for the MOD, so you see i am somewhat informed on the subject of ufo's but i do not profess to be an expert.
In june of 1988 i was 14 years old, i lived in a village called ashperton in herefordshire, at around 10.30pm on the 20th i was awoken by my mum who had been looking out of her bedroom window, she had seen a bright light travelling(horizontally right to left) quickly across the sky then stop suddenly, it then travelled vertically straight up, it was still in this position when she called me. I had a telescope and binoculars, when viewed through these the object appeared like a solid bright white light, there was very little flicker nor a change of colour, which suggested to me that the object was in our atmosphere, (our house faced west and we estimated that the object was over the village of colwall on the side of the malvern hills about 10 miles from us) whilst looking at the object i saw it drop suddenly and then blink out, then after about 10 seconds it blinked back on and shot up again to the postion i had first seen it, it then changed colour from solid white to orange like fire and back again after about 20/30 seconds (it continued to change colour like this for the duration of the sighting though there was no pattern to it, sometimes it was white for 5 mins or so before changing to orange but it never stayed orange for long) Our next door neighbour at the time was a policeman, he was also an amateur astrologer, my mum phoned him and he came over with his star charts, he used my telescope as his was set up looking east from his house and he agreed that it appeared to be in our atmosphere, also the stars in the area of the object were too faint to be seen by the naked eye. our neighbour phoned in to the local police station (he was not on duty obviously) and two of his colleagues came out to our house they observed the object - although it stayed stationary while they were there, they made some calls to the RAF and civilian air authorities and both denied any activity in the area. we were all asked if we wanted to officially report a ufo, being a 14yr old boy i was bang up for it, but all the adults did not want to, in all the object was visible for around an hour and a half before blinking out not to return. To this day i have no idea what we saw, at the time i did believe it was extraterrestrial but as i have gotten older and wiser i no longer believe this, what it was i do not know, BUT i do not think it was alien nor part of a conspiracy. would be interested to hear any (sensible) ideas

[booNyzarC]

quillius, on 21 June 2012 - 08:16 AM, said:

this is the way the game should be played........ask nicely and you shall receive, thanks for this Psyche and McG, this proved a point I made on the other thread.

TheMcGuffin, on 21 June 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

That's exactly right.

psyche101, on 22 June 2012 - 01:51 AM, said:

Don't count yourself out mate! Look at the excellent work you have done in so many threads! Your information in the Edgar Mitchell thread killed your own debate, but you presented the truth despite this. How could one not have the utmost respect for such integrity!
Weather I agree with McG or not is superflous to the debate, what matters is information, and I would challenge anyone to show that anybody here has as extensive knowledge of case studies as has been presented by McGuffin. And his personal tales I find rather intriguing as well.

As a hardened skeptic, I have the utmost respect for both of you, and find a valuable and enjoyable exchange of information in every instance that such has happened. What we each think personally matters not I feel, what the evidence can prove does. To have opposing opinions I find makes the subject all the more interesting. A "believer" can see an angle a "skeptic" may miss, and I think mostly because both parties are looking to validate different aspects of a case, in this way, bases are covered more thoroughly. We learn from each other in that respect, and lessons one might never consider from a single point of view.

And you are both top notch fellows to converse with to boot. A polite manner goes an awful long way. Debate is good, Lord knows I don't visit here to talk to myself or just sit around agreeing. Whilst agreement is good, it's all the better when it is earned.

I couldn't agree more.