Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Edgar Mitchell says a lot.......


  • Please log in to reply
248 replies to this topic

#241    conspiracy buff

conspiracy buff

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 158 posts
  • Joined:05 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 April 2013 - 05:22 PM

View Postseeder, on 14 April 2013 - 02:17 AM, said:

well Conspiracy Buff, you certainly deserve your forum name!

Glad to see the fan club grows :D  

Quote

I've been snorkeling in the Atlantic ocean, does that qualify me as a marine biologist?

Very shrewd how you did that!!  Seriously, congrats :clap: I think I have made my point in this topic; whether you believe in a UF0 cover up and all of that, there is a lot of highly circumstantial evidence to support this theory.  The more one looks into the official status-quo about alien life and the facts surrounding known incidents that cannot be explained away, the more you see there is more to the story than the official version given to the public.  If you disagree, fine.  It's hard to ignore the obvious but some people would rather do that than to admit more is going on.  And just FYI, just because you snorkeled does not make you an expert in marine biology, although that's a funny deflection.  The fact is that Edgar Mitchell and Gordon Cooper have both went on record as saying they believe in ET life and one must assume they have been witness to things to convince them of that.  As have Jesse Marcel, J. Allen Hynek, Philip Corso, and countless others.  As I've previously stated, one or two people claiming this may be coincidental and qualified as crazy people telling outrageous stories.  Over the last 40-50 years alone there has been a wealth of material on the topic and to ignore all of that is crazy.  Again, dealing with mindsets that oppose is a tricky topic.  People on this forum may consider me a crazy conspiracy theorist and I consider people who ignore the obvious crazy.  I guess at this point it is beating a dead horse here and we must agree to disagree.

There is a grain of truth in every conspiracy known to man, you just have to be intelligent enough to find it.

#242    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,808 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 14 April 2013 - 05:43 PM

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

...The fact is that Edgar Mitchell and Gordon Cooper have both went on record as saying they believe in ET life and one must assume they have been witness to things to convince them of that.  ...

To assume that, you must assume that Mitchell, who denies it, is lying. So he's telling the truth about lying?

Another explanation is that your going-in assumption is unjustified.

Cooper claims to have been a witness on two occasions. But what about all the other witnesses who were present on both occasions who unanimously dispute Cooper's narrative? Are they sub-human liars, or has Cooper embellished and exaggerated his tale over the years to please his audiences? Nah, jet pilots would NEVER do that, you assume?


#243    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,808 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 14 April 2013 - 05:45 PM

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

...Over the last 40-50 years alone there has been a wealth of material on the topic and to ignore all of that is crazy.  Again, dealing with mindsets that oppose is a tricky topic.  People on this forum may consider me a crazy conspiracy theorist and I consider people who ignore the obvious crazy.  I guess at this point it is beating a dead horse here and we must agree to disagree.

That's your excuse, I guess, for deliberately ignoring ALL the investigations into Cooper's stories. ALL that evidence -- you want to not see it, to not know about it, to close your eyes and mind to it. Isn't that a classic example of belief-based imagination-driven fantasy?


#244    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,808 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 14 April 2013 - 05:48 PM

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Let me clarify my meaning here; These guys were all more qualified to speak on this topic than your average joe.  Edgar Mitchell & Gordon Cooper went into space, meaning they had a pretty good feel for whether or not life "out there" is possible.  Both claimed to either have second-hand knowledge or direct knowledge in reguards to alien life and whether the US Government and NASA were covering it up.  ...

i've only been looking into these stories about forty years, somehow I hacven't gotten to the point where Mitchell and/or cooper claim NASA is covering up UFO information.

Please provide me the links to their words where they make this suggestion.

Otherwise, please consider the possibility that YOU are imagining things, maybe to make yourself feel smarter, or whatever, I don't know. But you have made a claim of fact here that I think you have not a shred of proof for.

Please show me where my assessment is wrong.


#245    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,808 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 14 April 2013 - 05:50 PM

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

I could do like you, go quote by quote and try to reason.  Clearly, this whole thing has sunken into childlike bashing over simple differences of opinions and opposing mindsets.  I will not get into that, because it is a waste of time and not worth the effort you are clearly exerting to try and disprove my viewpoint[which shows your utter lack of respect for opposing views]. ...

Please, do try to quote evidence, and try to reason. We can differ over interpretation, and levels of credibility, but we should be able to agree on what is documented fact. And you have made assertions that I see no evidence for, regarding Mitchell and Cooper accusations of NASA coverups. Can you address this question, or admit you misspoke?


#246    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,172 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 14 April 2013 - 08:45 PM

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Let me clarify my meaning here; These guys were all more qualified to speak on this topic than your average joe.


Care to expand on that? So if I dip my my toes in the water here at the beach, I am also better qualified to express myself on the topic of life in the sea than, say, somebody working with it on a daily basis?

Quote

Edgar Mitchell & Gordon Cooper went into space, meaning they had a pretty good feel for whether or not life "out there" is possible.


Why do you think so? Were any of them astro-biologists? Pray tell how they were more qualified. Or physics, perhaps?

Quote

Both claimed to either have second-hand knowledge or direct knowledge in reguards to alien life and whether the US Government and NASA were covering it up.


No they didn't. But feel free to substantiate that rather grandiose claim.

Quote

Jesse Marcel and Philip Corso were both inside the military and were privy to things most people will never know about officially.


And you know this how?

Quote

You also have indirect and independent verification of a cover-up scenario.


Really? The military covers up a lot of things, but please do expand on where they are covering something up in relation to ET.

Quote

The "majestic 12" documents claim to be a direct link to people involved with a UFO cover story.  I realize that skeptics will have a field day with that last statement because the documents are highly controversial and in dispute as not authentic.


In dispute? I think that is a gross understatement. All indications point towards they are made up and to even suggest otherwise is ludicrous.

Quote

Even so, it is entirely plausible that there is a group of people who control a cover-up if one believes that it is a distinct possibility.

Very implausible given the scope of such an undertaking.

Quote

Regular civilians making extraordinary UFO claims is one thing.  Having all these highly ranked and respected people coming forward to share their knowledge is quite the other.

But they don't have any knowledge, all we have seen is hearsay and BS.

Quote

It is highly disrespectful to these courageous individuals who risked their careers and personal lives by coming forward to let the public know.


Utter nonsense. What is highly disrespectful, however, is how ET visitation believers latch onto such people and ascribe to them stories and allegations that are simply untrue, because of willful ignorance and a need to prop up arguments that has to basis in reality to begin with. That I find disrespectful.

Quote

Of course, these days respect is a rare thing that most people do not have a concept of and definitely will not show.

On that we agree, but probably not towards those you intended.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#247    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,518 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 14 April 2013 - 11:38 PM

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

I could do like you, go quote by quote and try to reason.  

Please do, that is not only the point of a discussion forum, but courtesy. There used to be a rule specific to this part of the forum that said links are to be provided for supporting viewpoints, but I am not sure of that is still in force, or if it still applies.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

Clearly, this whole thing has sunken into childlike bashing over simple differences of opinions and opposing mindsets.  

Is that what you call losing a debate? At least you do not color letters to illustrate profanity and smatter smileys throughout your posting. That is something I suppose.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

I will not get into that, because it is a waste of time and not worth the effort you are clearly exerting to try and disprove my viewpoint[which shows your utter lack of respect for opposing views].  

Nonsense, you are making claims that are not only unsupported, but make no sense. What of my viewpoint? Is it to be simply dismissed because you are passionate about your own?

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

There have been numerous books written on this topic and I did refer to those as well, to which you glazed over in mistaking and twisting my meaning from earlier posts.  

And I responded to them in full, showing the title to be accurate, Philip Corso knows about the day after, nothing about the event itself. And his claims about the day after are pretty darn shaky at that. I am not the one who has shown his claims to be highly embellished, and I gave you the research of a UFOlogist, as well as a skeptical response for a balanced reply. To be frank, I had expected more of a conversation from you, but all you seem to be capable of is complaining that you lose debates, and it has really taken little effort to expose these fraudulent claims. That alone ought to be something you are interested in discussing, but you appear to be more interested in protecting the faith.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

Did I give links?  

Nope. Had you done so, you might have some sort of fallback position, at the moment you just look like a sore loser. Surely you are capable of supporting your claims? They had to convince you I take it? Or did they?

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

Why bother?  

Because it is courteous to do so in a discussion forum, and it supports your claims at least to the point whereby a person can understand where you are coming from. You have also complained about manners, but show little courtesy yourself. Your claims have been shown to be embellished or simply  incorrect, yet you cannot acknowledge such, yet expect others to do so to these very claims based upon the very flimsy evidence. I have given you links to show you why I feel The Roswell Incident is not a UFO crash, not a balloon incident, but an Intel Op, with Lost Shamans Hypothesis, and asked you for your opinion. Where are your manners? I also asked you if you could attempt to falsify the hypothesis, as I have been unable to do so, and felt a set of eyes with a completely different  viewpoint might be worthwhile, but it would seem you refuse to accept any possibility apart from those that you have already chosen as answers. And yet you claim to be open minded?

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

Most of the stuff I'm referring to is public knowledge and can be researched and looked up via search engines.  You can also look up documentaries on the topic as it relates to my prior point about the UFO cover-up.  

And as I have not only shown, but backed up with links, the stuff of headlines is embellished, and that is to be expected as reporters have to put food on the table. Lets be honest, which headline will sell newspapers?

1 - Police Officer Reports Unidentified Light In Sky to Aviation authorities.

or

2 - POLICE OFFICER SEES ALIEN SPACESHIP!!!

If it meant putting food on the table, how would you write the headline? Can't really blame them can we? But it does not mean we have to turn a blind eye to the bleeding obvious either.

You also avoided my question about documentary definition. I think we both know why, dont we? They are not documentaries at all, are they?


View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

It all ends up being a matter of opinion which cannot be refuted since everyone has their own views and belief systems based on what everyone perceives as evidence[whether it is actual proof or simply circumstantial, to which I alluded to earlier and even said plenty of times].  I'm not gonna spend time arguing like a 5 year old because I simply do not agree with your particular point-of-view.

You can have opinion, but you are telling me that FACT Ed Mitchell knows ET is here. That is not fact, not by a country mile Mr. Buff. If you are happy to say "Yes, I turn a blind eye to the evidence, because I want to believe", then that is fine. People all over the world believe in various forms of some mythical cloud land we go to when we die. And I do not care if that is what you want, but if you tell me that we have people with actual knowledge about ET, then I want to know, and if you are telling me a c*** n bull story about aliens like the media does, I will point out that is is not valid information. Why you have a problem with that I do not know. You should be pleased if anything to know what information can be counted upon, and what you cannot count on. Skeptics do most of your job fo you, but you only see your goal getting further away, and that is because you are looking at this all wrong. You do not start with Aliens and work back form there, that is why the current ETH continually fails those who wield it. Aliens have to earn that pace, it should not be a default position.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

And FYI, when you said I was being "clever" in correcting Oberg's grammar error, I was being SARCASTIC.  How sad indeed.  Let me explain one final thing in reguards to your numerous requests for "proof"; I do not post here to change anyone's mind on these unexplained mysteries.  I am simply stating that from what I have seen and read about, that it seems very likely IN MY OWN VIEW that there is a conspiracy.  

That distinction does not appear to assist your case from my viewpoint?

So this is the reality of the situation, you have a belief, based on hearsay. If that is what floats you boat, more power to you, I personally require more substance, and feel correcting erroneous information should not be a problem for you.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

The mere fact that Edgar Mitchell, Philip Corso, Jesse Marcell, Gordon Cooper, and many others are of that same viewpoint is very telling.  

But they are not are they? You are broad brushing the very same opinion most of us seem to share, and that is life exists "out there" the question of ET visitation is in Coopers claims something he has witnessed, in Mitchell's claims something he has not witnessed, but believes in, and Corso claims to have inside knowledge, and access to otherworldly technology, so they all have different reasons for their beliefs. That is not the same viewpoint, it is the same conclusion from personal viewpoints, and one which is very common.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 12 April 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

I am a realist and I post here for fun and not to be contrary or spend all day giving links to please someone else by trying to change opinions.  It's that simple.  If you choose to quote this and complain about or belittle that, then it shows a certain level of immaturity and the inability to accept differing viewpoints.

How on earth are you a realist when you will only consider viewing half of the information - that would be that which allows your predetermined conclusion to flourish? I have asked for your opinion on several inconsistencies with regards to those that you consider "rock solid cases" to no avail.  You put your head under the covers and shout go away, at least that is all I have seen from you? Are you capable of more than this?
I really do not see how you are a realist at all. You put forth some extraordinary notions, and expect them to be considered fact based only upon that they seem to impress you quite a bit. If you post for fun, yet again, I ask for your opinion of the alternates I have offered, such as Lost Shamans Hypothesis, no matter your conviction, if here for "fun" surely acknowledging a sound alternative is reasonably benign and would enjoy a discussion showing the best and worst these claims have to offer? Unless you have something to hide, such as an agenda?

As far as immaturity goes, I do feel that the way you lazily avoid any rebuttal, and only post whinges is a prime example of exactly that. If you had any substance to your claims, you would have more to present than weak complaints and zealous claims.

Edited by psyche101, 14 April 2013 - 11:52 PM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#248    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,518 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 15 April 2013 - 12:48 AM

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Let me clarify my meaning here;

I appreciate that you use the word "MY" here, as that is indeed much of this conflict. This is what you think these men said, based upon media interpretations, and by no fault of your own, or so I shall give the benefit of the doubt until shown otherwise, have an erroneous impression of the actual situation.
My only wonder is why you refuse to entertain the very fact that this conversation had more than one direction.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

These guys were all more qualified to speak on this topic than your average joe.  Edgar Mitchell & Gordon Cooper went into space, meaning they had a pretty good feel for whether or not life "out there" is possible.  

This is what happened to Ed Mitchell to influence his view of life in space, and to be frank, I honestly think I have experienced the very same with a good Dobsonian.

LINK - Samadhi From Space – Edgar Mitchell’s Epiphany

Considering that Dr Mitchell is a tad eccentric already, as displayed with the Mind experiments (link - Dr Mitchell's ESP experiments) on the way to the moon, do you really find this a surprise?

I see you dropped McDivitt? good to see you can acknowledge when a clam is wrong, even if you do not have the courtesy to say so. That shows promise.

And how does space help Coops? His first claim was from Germany, 1951 was it not? That is not space, not by a long shot! And then there is this? - LINK Cooper denied reports he had seen a UFO during his Mercury flight

How do these guys have a batter feel than the people I mentioned, such as Sagan, Drake, Dr. Morrison, Professor Hawking? Considering what these men do, they seem to be far, far more qualified, yet hold some very different views to those two astronauts.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Both claimed to either have second-hand knowledge or direct knowledge in reguards to alien life and whether the US Government and NASA were covering it up.  

That's another broad brush to make your statement look better than it is. Dr MItchell specifically states he has no first hand knowledge and in his book leap of faith, Cooper says neither he nor other astronauts saw UFOs in outer space. In fact Cooper claims to have chased, and seen saucers, but not aliens, he said he sent photos to officials that "disappeared", like gee, not heard that one before Coops :rolleyes: And  In the late 1970s, Cooper unsuccessfully tried to launch a research company devoted to free worldwide energy transmission, apparently using Nikola Tesla's discoveries, as well as to advanced medical devices and other projects. His partner in this venture, Valerie Ransone (who in the late 1970's was travelling through the USA trying to raise money for a project to usher in the new age of space brothers, Atlantis etc.), claims to receive scientifically useful telepathic transmissions from extraterrestrial sources.
I'll give him this much, his claims do not leave much out. Bigfoot is about the only anomaly missing here.

Which one of these is stating NASA is part of the cover up?

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Jesse Marcel and Philip Corso were both inside the military and were privy to things most people will never know about officially.  

BS, you are making that up to, why would they be in on things most pople would not know about 60 years later?

Why do other professionals, dispute their claims?

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

You also have indirect and independent verification of a cover-up scenario.  

Not at all, we have a nasty unfounded rumour, nothing more.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

The "majestic 12" documents claim to be a direct link to people involved with a UFO cover story.  I realize that skeptics will have a field day with that last statement because the documents are highly controversial and in dispute as not authentic.  Even so, it is entirely plausible that there is a group of people who control a cover-up if one believes that it is a distinct possibility.

Because a set of bogus documents exists that say what you want them to, you feel this is somehow proof that such a real organisation exists??

I beg you pardon? Could I ask you to extrapolate? Seriously, this should be interesting to say the least.

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Regular civilians making extraordinary UFO claims is one thing.  Having all these highly ranked and respected people coming forward to share their knowledge is quite the other.  

I dispute that. We do not have the large amount of people you claim we do, we have a few people in highly controversial position., who seem to want to write themselves into history, even if as a fabricator of evidence. I guess at least they will be remembered for a long time no matter what? I specifically pointed out many flaws in Hauts silly claim, who seems to have been in a strange position to begin with. LINK -


In the August/September 1992 issue of Air & Space/Smithsonian Magazine, Frank Kuznik wrote:


"Before my trip to Wright-Patterson, I tracked down Walter Haut, the retired base public information officer who wrote the infamous press release, and asked him if he ever actually saw the wreckage. 'No, and I feel like an idiot every time somebody asks me that,' he said ruefully. 'I got a call from the base commander, who basically dictated what was in the press release.' "



Also noted in the KTVU story (April 23, 1997) is the fact that Walter Haut, former press officer for the 509th Bomb Wing at Roswell AAF who issued the famous July 8, 1947 press release claiming recovery of a flying disc, now says he had learned a few days after the announcement that "it was a screw up." Though widely quoted in recent years as believing an unusual craft had been recovered, the FOX news story showed Haut saying he thinks it was just a balloon.

Haut was one of the original founders of the International UFO Museum in Roswell, New Mexico, but has now cut all ties with the museum. Current museum director Deon Crosby told CNI News that Haut has referred to the UFO claims as "just a bunch of hooey."


LINK


But what does Jesse Marcel say about this??


"In the meantime, we had an eager-beaver public relations officer -- he found out about it-- he calls the AP [Associated Press] about it. Then that's when it really hit the fan -- I don't mind using that expression."
He thinks Haut put it all together, Haut cannot remember, and changed his story from seeing nothing, to describing a craft, that is to small to cross space. When do we start making sense at Roswell?


View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

It is highly disrespectful to these courageous individuals who risked their careers and personal lives by coming forward to let the public know.  

It might help if they made an ounce of sense and did not contradict each other don't you think? Have you ever considered this might well be the onset of dementia, and that showcasing their final scramble of thoughts might be somewhat disrespectful as well, and possibly much more so, as you send them to death as some sort of nutter and overshadowing the great accomplishments they did have? Was Haut a military man, or that UFO guy? What is he known widely for?

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 01:42 AM, said:

Of course, these days respect is a rare thing that most people do not have a concept of and definitely will not show.

It would appear it is relative to?

I noticed you have not had the respect to answer one question, but place yourself on some pedestal where you "announce" your judgment from proclaiming the actions and thoughts of others. Ya know, in my book, the above line makes you a hypocrite. Could be just me, but I really do not think so. You do not seem to have an awful lot of maturity, have you been pursing this phenomena for long? You seem to be profoundly incorrect with all of your assertions placed forth to date.

Edited by psyche101, 15 April 2013 - 12:52 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#249    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,518 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 15 April 2013 - 12:57 AM

View Postconspiracy buff, on 14 April 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

Glad to see the fan club grows :D  



Very shrewd how you did that!!  Seriously, congrats :clap: I think I have made my point in this topic; whether you believe in a UF0 cover up and all of that, there is a lot of highly circumstantial evidence to support this theory.  The more one looks into the official status-quo about alien life and the facts surrounding known incidents that cannot be explained away, the more you see there is more to the story than the official version given to the public.  If you disagree, fine.  It's hard to ignore the obvious but some people would rather do that than to admit more is going on.  And just FYI, just because you snorkeled does not make you an expert in marine biology, although that's a funny deflection.  The fact is that Edgar Mitchell and Gordon Cooper have both went on record as saying they believe in ET life and one must assume they have been witness to things to convince them of that.  As have Jesse Marcel, J. Allen Hynek, Philip Corso, and countless others.  As I've previously stated, one or two people claiming this may be coincidental and qualified as crazy people telling outrageous stories.  Over the last 40-50 years alone there has been a wealth of material on the topic and to ignore all of that is crazy.  Again, dealing with mindsets that oppose is a tricky topic.  People on this forum may consider me a crazy conspiracy theorist and I consider people who ignore the obvious crazy.  I guess at this point it is beating a dead horse here and we must agree to disagree.


Fan Club, LOL, how about the presented facts that refute your rather wild claim? Do you honestly think that has nothing to do with this situation?

I believe in ET too, I just think the stories about ET being here are pretty silly for the larger part, and completely unsupported as a whole.

If the last 40-50 years have imparted a wealth of knowledge, can you explain why this forum exists, and why you cannot produce actual proof, just hearsay?

I do not think you are a crazy conspiracy theorist, they make even less sense, I think you are very uninformed, and refuse to let your preferred conclusion go. Facts are something you would rather avoid when a good tabloid is handy. I think you like exciting news. You would not be alone, but for sure, your reality comes from Sci Fi Pop Culture. Rather than run the path beat by the Sagans the Drakes and the Hawking's, you choose the path set out by the Friedmans, the Lazar's and the Rudiak's. That is your choice, because you made a poor one, do not expect others to make the same mistake, or get upset when they refuse to follow you into that pit. If you feel it has anything to offer, at all, then speak up, show us what has you convinced, because for the life of me, I cannot see what you find attractive about that tripe. Not to mention it seems rather dated.

Edited by psyche101, 15 April 2013 - 01:02 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users