202 replies to this topic

[badeskov]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 08:01 PM, said:

Kaku says in this video: "It doesn't fit any profiles of the usual suspects".  He says it is not stars, galaxies, meteors, planets, but that it is about the size of the Rosebowl Stadium.

Then he says again:

"It's not a comet"

"It's not a meteor"

Does he not say these things, or am I just imagining it all?

No, he said that. And did I imagine that you said the following?:

TheMacGuffin, on 07 September 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

...  That's why I posted the video, so Prof. Kaku could tell us that it wasn't a natural object.

Kaku said no such thing. YOU made the extrapolation based on your belief. And that is what is being pointed out.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[TheMacGuffin]

badeskov, on 08 September 2012 - 08:03 PM, said:

I don't really care.

Now that's the only true thing you have said so far.

As for the rest, your opinions are obvious and predictable, just as I always say.

[bmk1245]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 08:01 PM, said:

Kaku says in this video: "It doesn't fit any profiles of the usual suspects".  He says it is not stars, galaxies, meteors, planets, but that it is about the size of the Rosebowl Stadium.

Then he says again:

"It's not a comet"

"It's not a meteor"

Does he not say these things, or am I just imagining it all?

And he goes along asteroid collision. Its a viable hypothesis, having observation/calculation support more than any of your ET anecdotes.

[TheMacGuffin]

badeskov, on 08 September 2012 - 08:03 PM, said:

So? We continuously discover new stuff in space. And he certainly knows that.

Yes, we do, and more than you'll ever admit to.

[Sky Scanner]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 08:05 PM, said:

They didn't make a broadcast telling me that it was an ET, but even these scientists thought it was something very unique--something that they claimed had never been seen before.

Of course I don't believe the usual debunkers and deniers who will never concede anything on any UFO case, nor do I believe their ridiculous assertions that all facts and science are on their side, while anyone who dares to disagree with them is a lunatic or religious fanatic.  Those are just the usual things they pull out of their little debating bag of tricks, but it doesn't make them right.

Never has and never will.

To be fair, you've dodged my question there. I'm not a debunker, i've disagreed with Badeskov and others on here before, we have a difference of opinion in regards to certain aspects of this subject, and that's cool - but what you are accusing him of doesn't stand true, since he is using your words to try and pin down what you said, but what you have said isn't what the video said, you have placed your own interpretation on what was said on the video. That is what he has pointed out, nothing more.

Do you agree that your opinion on this being ET related is guess work at best at the moment?

[badeskov]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 08:07 PM, said:

Now that's the only true thing you have said so far.

As for the rest, your opinions are obvious and predictable, just as I always say.

And your unfounded extrapolations likewise.

Fact: Michiu Kaku said it didn't look like what we typically knew.
Fact: Michiu Kaku offered an explanation
Fact: You disregarded this and extrapolated with no basis in reality,

The above are not opinions, nor did I anywhere offer an opinion on what this was. Dude, you need to get back to reality.

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 08:08 PM, said:

Yes, we do, and more than you'll ever admit to.

Nonsense.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Edited by badeskov, 08 September 2012 - 08:12 PM.

[TheMacGuffin]

bmk1245, on 08 September 2012 - 08:07 PM, said:

And he goes along asteroid collision. Its a viable hypothesis, having observation/calculation support more than any of your ET anecdotes.

He mentioned that as a possibility, rather than answer the question about anything ET flying around up there.  I don't blame him, because once anyone gets out of line are dares to mention that, then he will have the BMK and Badeskov types pouncing all over him--and worse.

No, I can't blame him there, since he knows what you are just as well as I do.

Still, I don't find that my quoting of this video is some kind of "belief" or "theology" or "religious interpretation", even if you would have it so.

[badeskov]

The Sky Scanner, on 08 September 2012 - 08:11 PM, said:

To be fair, you've dodged my question there. I'm not a debunker, i've disagreed with Badeskov and others on here before, we have a difference of opinion in regards to certain aspects of this subject, and that's cool -

<snip>

Agreed! And that is what I really enjoy and what I learn from And most certainly respect

Cheers,
Badeskov

[DONTEATUS]

It must be that the natural reply to all things E.T. and unknown ! WHen are the facts going to out weigh the stories of possibilities ?
Well one things for sure nothing is for sure !

[TheMacGuffin]

The Sky Scanner, on 08 September 2012 - 08:11 PM, said:

To be fair, you've dodged my question there. I'm not a debunker, i've disagreed with Badeskov and others on here before, we have a difference of opinion in regards to certain aspects of this subject, and that's cool - but what you are accusing him of doesn't stand true, since he is using your words to try and pin down what you said, but what you have said isn't what the video said, you have placed your own interpretation on what was said on the video. That is what he has pointed out, nothing more.

Do you agree that your opinion on this being ET related is guess work at best at the moment?

I never dodge any questions on here.  No one can ever say that about me, no matter what other wild charges they fling in my direction.

Of course I think it was something ET.  I always have.  

How many times have I said so on here?  How many times do I have to say it?

If it wasn't ET, then we have been flying around some very advanced spacecraft that no one knows about.  I think both things are going on and have said so a billion times.

Do I believe in the "facts", opinions and interpretations of BMK, Badeskov and the rest when it comes to ETs and UFOs?  Absolutely not, because their views run counter to my own evidence and personal experience.  Naturally I disagree with them that all the "scientific evidence" supports their opinions because I know perfectly well that it does not.

[TheMacGuffin]

For that matter, this is not the only "anomaly" that has been photographed out there--far from it--although I'm sure they will have ready-made "explanations" for everything.  If they don't, they'll quickly make one up.

[TheMacGuffin]

And in fact, the UFOs have been interested in Hubble ever since it was launched, just as they have always been interested in everything else that we do in space.  That's what I really think, and it doesn't bother me in the least to say so openly, Sky Scanner.

They have very likely been hanging around this solar system for a very long time.

[TheMacGuffin]

badeskov, on 08 September 2012 - 08:11 PM, said:

And your unfounded extrapolations likewise.

Fact: Michiu Kaku said it didn't look like what we typically knew.
Fact: Michiu Kaku offered an explanation
Fact: You disregarded this and extrapolated with no basis in reality,

The above are not opinions, nor did I anywhere offer an opinion on what this was. Dude, you need to get back to reality.

No, only the first one is a fact.  He did say that.

The second statement was his opinion.

The third statement is just your opinion of me, which makes a nice propaganda point but has no basis in reality.

[bmk1245]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

He mentioned that as a possibility, rather than answer the question about anything ET flying around up there.[...]

And its viable possibiity as all obseravtions/calculations and as upcomming papers will show

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

[...] I don't blame him, because once anyone gets out of line are dares to mention that, then he will have the BMK and Badeskov types pouncing all over him--and worse.
[...]

And he is smart not to jump in that UFO=ET swamp.

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

[...] Still, I don't find that my quoting of this video is some kind of "belief" or "theology" or "religious interpretation", even if you would have it so.

Seriously? You are the one who turned that video into religion. You were wrong interpreting his words, not skeptics.

[Sky Scanner]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

I never dodge any questions on here.  No one can ever say that about me, no matter what other wild charges they fling in my direction.

Of course I think it was something ET.  I always have.  

How many times have I said so on here?  How many times do I have to say it?

If it wasn't ET, then we have been flying around some very advanced spacecraft that no one knows about.  I think both things are going on and have said so a billion times.

Do I believe in the "facts", opinions and interpretations of BMK, Badeskov and the rest when it comes to ETs and UFOs?  Absolutely not, because their views run counter to my own evidence and personal experience.  Naturally I disagree with them that all the "scientific evidence" supports their opinions because I know perfectly well that it does not.

Again, you're not answering my question. I'm not asking you if you believe in ET, or if ET has visited us, I already know you believe that - i'm not questioning that. I am asking you if you'd concede that with this particular case, with the lack of info available, you are guessing as to it's origin being ET? (as you say others are guessing about asteroids etc)