Its some kinda conspiracy with da government. Don't eat meat Pies
Full Version: cow mutilations
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Extraterrestrial Life & The UFO Phenomenon
Meat Pies are the by products of cow mutilations. Thats what i think anyway.
Its some kinda conspiracy with da government. Don't eat meat Pies
Its some kinda conspiracy with da government. Don't eat meat Pies
QUOTE(jesspy @ Sep 6 2005, 12:58 PM)
Meat Pies are the by products of cow mutilations. Thats what i think anyway.
Its some kinda conspiracy with da government. Don't eat meat Pies
[right][snapback]829546[/snapback][/right]
Its some kinda conspiracy with da government. Don't eat meat Pies
[right][snapback]829546[/snapback][/right]
Watch "Fire in the Sky", the aliens in this movie are what I think of the ones capable of cow mutililations. Believe it if there was a valid conspiracy, you would be in the "conspiracy" section talking about it. Until then, I think you should keep aliens and the government seperate from each other. If you don't know the difference, don't talk about it.
Da
Yeah, Duhhhh!
QUOTE(PFlack @ Sep 6 2005, 07:52 PM)
QUOTE(jesspy @ Sep 6 2005, 12:58 PM)
Meat Pies are the by products of cow mutilations. Thats what i think anyway.
Its some kinda conspiracy with da government. Don't eat meat Pies
[right][snapback]829546[/snapback][/right]
Its some kinda conspiracy with da government. Don't eat meat Pies
[right][snapback]829546[/snapback][/right]
Watch "Fire in the Sky", the aliens in this movie are what I think of the ones capable of cow mutililations. Believe it if there was a valid conspiracy, you would be in the "conspiracy" section talking about it. Until then, I think you should keep aliens and the government seperate from each other. If you don't know the difference, don't talk about it.
Da
Yeah, Duhhhh!
[right][snapback]830353[/snapback][/right]
The film bears little resemblance on the actual abduction to Travis Walton..? Try reading his book and his own words 'The Walton Experience' and see the difference in the actual account of this abduction..!
cow mutilation is evidence of aliens... it is... and that can't be argued... no secret gov't institution is using lasers to mutilate cows silently overnight... grab a brain
what if the cows are just spontaneously conbusting :\
I don't believe ALL cattle mutilations are evidence of aliens...There are just too many sick individuals who would mutilate anything and find enjoyment. Some have to be done by nut-jobs.
QUOTE(Baldwin @ Sep 7 2005, 12:55 AM)
I don't believe ALL cattle mutilations are evidence of aliens...There are just too many sick individuals who would mutilate anything and find enjoyment. Some have to be done by nut-jobs.
[right][snapback]830776[/snapback][/right]
with or without laser scalpels?
I couldn't help myself. I love this advertisement.
QUOTE(PFlack @ Sep 6 2005, 11:52 AM)
QUOTE(jesspy @ Sep 6 2005, 12:58 PM)
Meat Pies are the by products of cow mutilations. Thats what i think anyway.
Its some kinda conspiracy with da government. Don't eat meat Pies
[right][snapback]829546[/snapback][/right]
Its some kinda conspiracy with da government. Don't eat meat Pies
[right][snapback]829546[/snapback][/right]
Watch "Fire in the Sky", the aliens in this movie are what I think of the ones capable of cow mutililations. Believe it if there was a valid conspiracy, you would be in the "conspiracy" section talking about it. Until then, I think you should keep aliens and the government seperate from each other. If you don't know the difference, don't talk about it.
Da
Yeah, Duhhhh!
[right][snapback]830353[/snapback][/right]
I AGREE. I HAVE ACTUALLY MET THE MAN WHO THE MOVIE "FIRE IN THE SKY" WAS ABOUT. HE'S A GOOD CHRISTIAN MAN. NOTHING IN MY MEETING WITH HIM WOULD LEAD ME TO BELIEVE HE MADE IT UP. BESIDES, ALL OF THE GUYS THAT THE MOVIE WAS ABOUT TOOK POLYGRAPHS AND ALL PASSED WITH FLYING COLORS...
QUOTE
The film bears little resemblance on the actual abduction to Travis Walton..? Try reading his book and his own words 'The Walton Experience' and see the difference in the actual account of this abduction..!
Its called poetic licencing. Movie makers do it all the time to true stories. I thought everyone would know that?
Naturalistic explanations in terms of diseases such as predators (skunks, buzzards, weasels, etc.), insects (such as blowflies), and birds are to no avail, even though the most thorough examination of so-called cattle mutilations concluded there was nothing mysterious that needed explaining.
It is useless to note that insects often devour the vulnerable mucous membranes and the softer parts of dead animals such as the genitalia, instead of trying to burrow through the cowhide.
It is pointless to note that incisions to a carcass by the teeth of predators or scavengers often resemble knife cuts.
It is of no use to point out that there is little or no blood oozing from the wounds because blood settles, the heart does not pump when an animal is dead, and insects devour the blood that does spill out.
For the UFO fanatic it is a giant conspiracy and obvious "proof" of aliens on Earth.
It is useless to note that insects often devour the vulnerable mucous membranes and the softer parts of dead animals such as the genitalia, instead of trying to burrow through the cowhide.
It is pointless to note that incisions to a carcass by the teeth of predators or scavengers often resemble knife cuts.
It is of no use to point out that there is little or no blood oozing from the wounds because blood settles, the heart does not pump when an animal is dead, and insects devour the blood that does spill out.
For the UFO fanatic it is a giant conspiracy and obvious "proof" of aliens on Earth.
QUOTE
It is pointless to note that incisions to a carcass by the teeth of predators or scavengers often resemble knife cuts.
And what about the ones that look as if they have been cut between the cells when examined through a microscope?
QUOTE(odds022 @ Sep 8 2005, 08:30 AM)
QUOTE
It is pointless to note that incisions to a carcass by the teeth of predators or scavengers often resemble knife cuts.
And what about the ones that look as if they have been cut between the cells when examined through a microscope?
[right][snapback]832916[/snapback][/right]
As always,extaordinary claims needs extraordinary evidence.
Link please.
QUOTE(odds022 @ Sep 8 2005, 08:30 AM)
QUOTE
It is pointless to note that incisions to a carcass by the teeth of predators or scavengers often resemble knife cuts.
And what about the ones that look as if they have been cut between the cells when examined through a microscope?
[right][snapback]832916[/snapback][/right]
BUENOS AIRES, Argentina - [Reuters] Recent mutilations of cattle and horses in the Argentine countryside were the work of rodents, scientists said on Monday, not ritualistic slayings by extraterrestrials or vampires as some farmers feared.
Argentina's national food and animal health inspection service Senasa sent its own ``X-Files'' scientists to the remote plains to look into the deaths of farm animals found mutilated and drained of blood.
Frightened farmers claimed to have seen bright lights and UFOs in the area where the deaths occurred. But Senasa officials said the dozens of livestock whose genitals, tongues and other organs appeared to have been removed with surgical precision were victims of rodents, foxes or other animals. Senasa said the farm animals likely died from common infections and wild animals later mutilated the corpses. ``We see these as natural deaths (and) there is clear evidence of the presence of rodents and birds which led us to our conclusions,'' Senasa President Bernardo Cane told reporters.
Side note.
The farmers don`t get compensated financially if the animals die from common infections,but if mutilated the chances for insurance to kick in is higher.
In response to that:
http://www.anw.com/mutilations/GQ.htm
QUOTE
In a surprising move which appears to be a classic case of debunking (disguised by an outward appearance of objectivity, as usual), Gentleman's Quarterly, in the February '97 issue, printed a lengthy article which attempts to portray Linda Moulton Howe as a UFO nut who's merely out to fleece the public, while the poor, strangely mutilated cows (over10,000 of them) are the victims of attack by scavenging birds and insects, of all things.
The author, Jack Hitt, claims to have done more research into the bizarre mutilations more than just about anybody. He claims to have spent much time reading about the subject on the Internet, watching the video documentary by Linda Howe (A Strange Harvest), and even reading her books. On top of all that, Mr. Hitt says he actually visited the site of a mutilated cow and saw the strange wounds with his own eyes.
Yet, in spite of all this in depth exposure to this increasingly puzzling phenomenon, the author of that article concluded that a former FBI agent, Ken Rommel, who had spent some time looking into the mutilations, was on the right track when he concluded that the mutilations were basically caused by scavenging birds, pecking away at the exposed soft tissues (eye, tongue, rectum, etc.). The author seemed to have no quibble with Mr. Rommel's notion that the smoothness of the "incisions" is produced as a result of post mortem gas production in the cattle's bodies, "stretching the tissues." Rommel believes that people who think there are more complex reasons for the cattle mutilations -such as aliens monitoring contaminants and looking at genetic material (as a number of UFO abductees have been told or shown, according to Linda) - are basically people who "lead very dull and boring lives". . . who "get together and lie to one another."
Superficially, that all sounds reasonable enough (as intended, no doubt), but what about the anomalies that were never mentioned in the entire article, such as the heat cauterization of the incisions (amounting to several hundred degrees)? Why leave out the specific points that make theories about scavenging birds clearly ridiculous?
Part of the explanations given in the article is that the cows die of various mundane causes (such as eating poisonous plants) and the the body then lays around for days, giving the birds a chance to feast on "soft tissues."
Does that explain the case at left, from Sterling Colorado in 1976, in which the cow was found within hours of death, still warm to the touch, with some teeth and jaw bone smoothly, removed by unknown means? The eye was removed, too, along with a ring of tissue surrounding the eye - with a smooth round cut, and no blood. The tongue was removed and all that remained was a smooth vertical cut, deep within the throat. Photo by Logan County, Colorado Sheriff Tex Graves.
In the photograph at left, from 1993, taken by Fyffe Alabama Police Officer Ted Oliphant, there is no evidence of scavenging birds, but rather a precise oval incision which removed the udder while leaving the underlying tissues untouched. The entire operation was bloodless.
Both of these photos are from Linda Howe's book, Glimpses of Other Realities, which contains many more details like these which the bird explanation does not fit.
Why did this article in GQ leave out photos of actual mutilations, and instead, began the article with a splashy full page cartoon, showing hypnotized cows being floated up into flying saucers? (See a small portion of it, by Dynamic Duo Studio, at the top of this article.) It's a pretty interesting piece of art, but not as informative as real photos. Do they think that this phenomenon is funny? Or are they hoping people don't take it seriously? Also note that it shows the beams as being green (typical Hollywood notion), while in reality, they are almost always described as being blue.
Lastly, why did Mr. Hitt portray Linda Moulton Howe as a woman who's getting rich off her books and videos (by tabulating the $600,000 in gross revenue she may have generated)? He must have known full well that the books Linda's "getting rich" off of, selling for $39.95, actually cost her $40.00 to print - leaving her with a 5 cent loss for each copy sold (not to mention the cost of doing the research and creating the book in the first place)! I'll bet Mr. Hitt got paid pretty handsomely for the GQ article, though.
The author, Jack Hitt, claims to have done more research into the bizarre mutilations more than just about anybody. He claims to have spent much time reading about the subject on the Internet, watching the video documentary by Linda Howe (A Strange Harvest), and even reading her books. On top of all that, Mr. Hitt says he actually visited the site of a mutilated cow and saw the strange wounds with his own eyes.
Yet, in spite of all this in depth exposure to this increasingly puzzling phenomenon, the author of that article concluded that a former FBI agent, Ken Rommel, who had spent some time looking into the mutilations, was on the right track when he concluded that the mutilations were basically caused by scavenging birds, pecking away at the exposed soft tissues (eye, tongue, rectum, etc.). The author seemed to have no quibble with Mr. Rommel's notion that the smoothness of the "incisions" is produced as a result of post mortem gas production in the cattle's bodies, "stretching the tissues." Rommel believes that people who think there are more complex reasons for the cattle mutilations -such as aliens monitoring contaminants and looking at genetic material (as a number of UFO abductees have been told or shown, according to Linda) - are basically people who "lead very dull and boring lives". . . who "get together and lie to one another."
Superficially, that all sounds reasonable enough (as intended, no doubt), but what about the anomalies that were never mentioned in the entire article, such as the heat cauterization of the incisions (amounting to several hundred degrees)? Why leave out the specific points that make theories about scavenging birds clearly ridiculous?
Part of the explanations given in the article is that the cows die of various mundane causes (such as eating poisonous plants) and the the body then lays around for days, giving the birds a chance to feast on "soft tissues."
Does that explain the case at left, from Sterling Colorado in 1976, in which the cow was found within hours of death, still warm to the touch, with some teeth and jaw bone smoothly, removed by unknown means? The eye was removed, too, along with a ring of tissue surrounding the eye - with a smooth round cut, and no blood. The tongue was removed and all that remained was a smooth vertical cut, deep within the throat. Photo by Logan County, Colorado Sheriff Tex Graves.
In the photograph at left, from 1993, taken by Fyffe Alabama Police Officer Ted Oliphant, there is no evidence of scavenging birds, but rather a precise oval incision which removed the udder while leaving the underlying tissues untouched. The entire operation was bloodless.
Both of these photos are from Linda Howe's book, Glimpses of Other Realities, which contains many more details like these which the bird explanation does not fit.
Why did this article in GQ leave out photos of actual mutilations, and instead, began the article with a splashy full page cartoon, showing hypnotized cows being floated up into flying saucers? (See a small portion of it, by Dynamic Duo Studio, at the top of this article.) It's a pretty interesting piece of art, but not as informative as real photos. Do they think that this phenomenon is funny? Or are they hoping people don't take it seriously? Also note that it shows the beams as being green (typical Hollywood notion), while in reality, they are almost always described as being blue.
Lastly, why did Mr. Hitt portray Linda Moulton Howe as a woman who's getting rich off her books and videos (by tabulating the $600,000 in gross revenue she may have generated)? He must have known full well that the books Linda's "getting rich" off of, selling for $39.95, actually cost her $40.00 to print - leaving her with a 5 cent loss for each copy sold (not to mention the cost of doing the research and creating the book in the first place)! I'll bet Mr. Hitt got paid pretty handsomely for the GQ article, though.
http://www.anw.com/mutilations/GQ.htm
odds, you left this part out, from the same link.
"Also note that it shows the beams as being green (typical Hollywood notion), while in reality, they are almost always described as being blue."
I guess it made your article less credible.
"Also note that it shows the beams as being green (typical Hollywood notion), while in reality, they are almost always described as being blue."
I guess it made your article less credible.
QUOTE(odds022 @ Sep 8 2005, 10:30 AM)
And what about the ones that look as if they have been cut between the cells when examined through a microscope?
[right][snapback]832916[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]832916[/snapback][/right]
Whats so special about that, all cuts are on a cellular level, no matter how blunt the tool used to cut with is.
I liked this part in your article odds 
QUOTE
Rommel believes that people who think there are more complex reasons for the cattle mutilations -such as aliens monitoring contaminants and looking at genetic material (as a number of UFO abductees have been told or shown, according to Linda) - are basically people who "lead very dull and boring lives". . . who "get together and lie to one another."
QUOTE
odds, you left this part out, from the same link.
"Also note that it shows the beams as being green (typical Hollywood notion), while in reality, they are almost always described as being blue."
I guess it made your article less credible.
"Also note that it shows the beams as being green (typical Hollywood notion), while in reality, they are almost always described as being blue."
I guess it made your article less credible.
Buhahahaha! Made my article LESS credible??? READ what it says before posting, they are talking about the drawing used on the article trying to debunk cattle mutilations. They are saying that they showed no pictures but only a drawing trying to make a joke of mutilations. Geez... I love how much research you put into your posts...
Here is the REAL quote:
QUOTE
Why did this article in GQ leave out photos of actual mutilations, and instead, began the article with a splashy full page cartoon, showing hypnotized cows being floated up into flying saucers? (See a small portion of it, by Dynamic Duo Studio, at the top of this article.) It's a pretty interesting piece of art, but not as informative as real photos. Do they think that this phenomenon is funny? Or are they hoping people don't take it seriously? Also note that it shows the beams as being green (typical Hollywood notion), while in reality, they are almost always described as being blue.
QUOTE
I liked this part in your article odds
QUOTE
Rommel believes that people who think there are more complex reasons for the cattle mutilations -such as aliens monitoring contaminants and looking at genetic material (as a number of UFO abductees have been told or shown, according to Linda) - are basically people who "lead very dull and boring lives". . . who "get together and lie to one another."
QUOTE
Rommel believes that people who think there are more complex reasons for the cattle mutilations -such as aliens monitoring contaminants and looking at genetic material (as a number of UFO abductees have been told or shown, according to Linda) - are basically people who "lead very dull and boring lives". . . who "get together and lie to one another."
I bet ya did, especially seeing that he was one of the people who got shown as wrong.
odds.
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
QUOTE(hazzard @ Sep 8 2005, 01:00 PM)
odds.
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
[right][snapback]833047[/snapback][/right]
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
[right][snapback]833047[/snapback][/right]
maybe the spaceship was dull to look at, but the beams are bright and shiny
QUOTE
odds.
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
Well its a site trying to prove thats whats doing it. Its obviously not a skeptic site, so no not really, lol.
It just goes to show that they didnt do enough research as to what people actually see. But why would they bother doing research, its highly over-rated hey
I especially loved how the "debunking" article left out the burns where the incisions were made so that it would make their theory credible. That always backfires...Edit: By the way, i didnt leave it out in the first place
QUOTE(odds022 @ Sep 8 2005, 01:07 PM)
QUOTE
odds.
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
Well its a site trying to prove thats whats doing it. Its obviously not a skeptic site, so no not really, lol.
It just goes to show that they didnt do enough research as to what people actually see. But why would they bother doing research, its highly over-rated hey
I especially loved how the "debunking" article left out the burns where the incisions were made so that it would make their theory credible. That always backfires...[right][snapback]833055[/snapback][/right]
no I tell you, the beams were bright and shiny thats why no-one bothered to look at the spaceship, it probally looked boring.
but the shiny! no-one can refuse the shiny. probally why the cows died...
and btw, "burns"? well, all you need for that is a red hot knife really.
EDIT
spelling
QUOTE
and btw, "burns"? well, all you need for that is a red how knife really.
Read the articles on it.
QUOTE(Baldwin @ Sep 6 2005, 11:55 PM)
I don't believe ALL cattle mutilations are evidence of aliens...There are just too many sick individuals who would mutilate anything and find enjoyment. Some have to be done by nut-jobs.
[right][snapback]830776[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]830776[/snapback][/right]
You must be one of them since your not using your brain to even think before you type. You may want to actually put some research into this, because alot of people think its totally natural for animals to have this happen to them, but its not.
Also take note that most farm animals are 100% healthy and are checked daily for infections or viruses, how in the hell could an animal have this happen to them in a course of a day without the owner having any clue that the animal was sick?
If you really think its some looped up people doing it, how come they haven't been caught either? Why is there no evidence of footprints, or anything, how do these maniacs get so damn smart all of a sudden.
You know it would take one really damn smart and highly payed Nut job to do this procedure and also to not get caught he would have to be a ninja. For people who think that incisions can be done by bugs and rodents obviously have no train of thought.
Here is some more facts that may help some people understand that in most cases where bones are completly cut and certain organs are completly intact which have by far more nutrients then other parts of the body, obviously aren't just measly insects or cults.
Blood and body fluids are not the only things removed from these bodies, which gives this phenomenon its description as an act of mutilation. Certain organs are surgically removed from their bodies. Autopsy reports show that removal of sexual, digestive tract, and sensory organs are most often the organs of choice. Soft tissue organs, such as the reproductive organs, tongue, eyes, lips, ears, udders, and the rectal area are also occasionally removed. Internal organs, not surgically incised, are often found to have lost all consistency and are described as being in a "mushy" state. Again, there is an unearthly ring to the methods employed. Organ and tissue removal is done with perfect surgical precision. No ripping or tearing is evident as with predator attacks and even scalpels are often eliminated as a tool. The incisions have been done with such fine precision that only a laser could produce such surgical exactitude. Evidence of cauterization, the act of fusing of blood vessels and tissue using heat or chemical methods, enforces this theory. Bones are also clearly sliced with no bone fragments present. Areas of flesh are also severed with high- tech precision
A fact that may help you realize these are not bugs doing it.
-Dr. John Altshuler, a Colorado MD pathologist, has examined over thirty mutilation cases since 1989 and found in skin tissues from the excision lines, lesions consistent with overheated collagen and hemoglobin or with sharp dissection.
-The Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory at Corvallis (Oregon State University) established in a 1991 case that skin sections from a suspect mutilated steer showed lesions consistent with electro-surgical excision.
http://www.nidsci.org/articles/animal1.php
Also read this Pdf file, which shows one of the only living cattle mutilation cases where the ears were removed, and severe upper lip lacerations. I just dont know how anybody can really belive rodents and other insects are the cause of this, especially when this case is a living healthy animal.
Some facts reguarding this case , for people that cant open Pdf files.
-Both ears were missing , giving the impression that they had been cut off.
-No other abnormal changes were observed. According to the veterinarian, the animal's general condition had improved.
- Lab tests concluded no infections, or sickness.
-Several days later her health started to deteriorate, the animal went downhill and stopped eating and drinking shortly afterwords.
Do some actual research and see for yourself that only a mear 10-15% of actual mutilation cases have been called off as natural deaths, there is over another 60,000 and counting to even come to a conclusion that natural causes are whats taking these animals down in such a horrific way.
QUOTE(odds022 @ Sep 8 2005, 12:07 PM)
QUOTE
odds.
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
Well its a site trying to prove thats whats doing it. Its obviously not a skeptic site, so no not really, lol.
It just goes to show that they didnt do enough research as to what people actually see. But why would they bother doing research, its highly over-rated hey
I especially loved how the "debunking" article left out the burns where the incisions were made so that it would make their theory credible. That always backfires...Edit: By the way, i didnt leave it out in the first place
[right][snapback]833055[/snapback][/right]
I think I would recognize a debunking attempt if I'm looking at one,and that`s not it.
Green or blue light..
QUOTE
I think I would recognize a debunking attempt if I'm looking at one,and that`s not it.
Green or blue light..
Green or blue light..
Ummm... The debunking article is not the article i posted, it is the article that the one i posted is talking about... You'd probably realise that if you read it.. Well now i think about it, probably not..
QUOTE
For people who think that incisions can be done by bugs and rodents obviously have no train of thought.
Unfortunetly Blazea, these people dont actually do any research at all, they just come to these forums and troll and make smart a** comments, and TRY to look intelligent..
QUOTE
What I'm laughing at is the fact that the focus is on wether the beam was green or blue,and not on the "spaceship"generating it. Get it?
I think I would recognize a debunking attempt if I'm looking at one,and that`s not it.
Green or blue light..
I think I would recognize a debunking attempt if I'm looking at one,and that`s not it.
Green or blue light..
I think the reason the article suggested it being odd was because that from thousands of ufo sightings alot of people report a blue light shining down, as it would be on say a helicopter. I didn't see this picture myself so i have no idea what the real issue is for the author, but to me it seems that what hes saying is that the guy who wrote the article was trying to make it seem like a joke.
I don't think one measly article can change someones mind though, that is just one example of how the public takes these sightings and throws them in the trash without doing any scientific research.
QUOTE(odds022 @ Sep 8 2005, 01:18 PM)
QUOTE
I think I would recognize a debunking attempt if I'm looking at one,and that`s not it.
Green or blue light..
Green or blue light..
Ummm... The debunking article is not the article i posted, it is the article that the one i posted is talking about... You'd probably realise that if you read it.. Well now i think about it, probably not..
[right][snapback]833124[/snapback][/right]
You posted an article about another article that I think was a half-ass attempt at debunking cow/animal mutilation.
What am I missing here !
QUOTE
What am I missing here !
A brain?
Because if you read back, the original "debunking" attempt was posted by Hazzard, so i posted another article which proves that that article just ignored facts to make their own theory seem plausable. Why if you know anything about it, it isnt. Thats what your missing.And by the way, just because you named yourself "debunker" sure as hell doesnt make you an expert on debunking
QUOTE
What am I missing here !
A brain?
A brain?
I think debunkers problem is he just thinks that everything he belives is right, where as he doesn't even take the 5 extra minutes to read the article beforehand.
QUOTE
I think debunkers problem is he just thinks that everything he belives is right, where as he doesn't even take the 5 extra minutes to read the article beforehand
Yep couldnt agree more Blazea.
QUOTE(Blazea58 @ Sep 8 2005, 03:33 PM)
I think debunkers problem is he just thinks that everything he belives is right, where as he doesn't even take the 5 extra minutes to read the article beforehand.
[right][snapback]833147[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]833147[/snapback][/right]
Unlike you then, who doesnt believe anything written in a book or on a website, you mean.
QUOTE(odds022 @ Sep 8 2005, 01:33 PM)
Because if you read back, the original "debunking" attempt was posted by Hazzard, so i posted another article which proves that that article just ignored facts to make their own theory seem plausable. Why if you know anything about it, it isnt. Thats what your missing.
And by the way, just because you named yourself "debunker" sure as hell doesnt make you an expert on debunking
[right][snapback]833143[/snapback][/right]
And by the way, just because you named yourself "debunker" sure as hell doesnt make you an expert on debunking
[right][snapback]833143[/snapback][/right]
Whats with the attitude!
I dont see you woo woos making a convinsing case with your "iffs" "mabys" and "could".
Ill take mainstream science over your cracpot theorys any day,not as entertaining I suppose,but hell,if I whant science fiction Ill just go to the movies.
Cow mutilations are proof that aliens are here on Earth!
How long does it take for those aliens to figure out cows.....they sure dont seem smarter than us.
QUOTE(DEBUNKER @ Sep 8 2005, 01:43 PM)
QUOTE(odds022 @ Sep 8 2005, 01:33 PM)
Because if you read back, the original "debunking" attempt was posted by Hazzard, so i posted another article which proves that that article just ignored facts to make their own theory seem plausable. Why if you know anything about it, it isnt. Thats what your missing.
And by the way, just because you named yourself "debunker" sure as hell doesnt make you an expert on debunking
[right][snapback]833143[/snapback][/right]
And by the way, just because you named yourself "debunker" sure as hell doesnt make you an expert on debunking
[right][snapback]833143[/snapback][/right]
Whats with the attitude!
I dont see you woo woos making a convinsing case with your "iffs" "mabys" and "could".
Ill take mainstream science over your cracpot theorys any day,not as entertaining I suppose,but hell,if I whant science fiction Ill just go to the movies.
Cow mutilations are proof that aliens are here on Earth!
How long does it take for those aliens to figure out cows.....they sure dont seem smarter than us.
[right][snapback]833162[/snapback][/right]
Umm the mainstream science is all that i have posted moron lol. If you even took the time to read you would come to the realization that not a single one of the things i posted were theories. IF anyone here is using IF's, Maybe, or Could , then im not sure what world your even in. Thats what the world relys on mr.woo woo.
You contradict yourself in your own post hypocrite, you have no solid facts or evidence yourself other then you belive what you do and nothing will change it.
You must not have any idea what your talking about because you do little to no research on either end, you are all about theories , nothing you have said was a real fact other then woo woo , la la la, i dont belive, wtf is new?
You dont even know what science is obviously, and why are you on these forums if you dont belive? you cant seriously tell me your not even the slightest bit open minded? why else would you be here other then to get awnsers to questions you have had your entire life.... Seems to me that you just simply dont want to belive anything and you wont read it because you dont care.
Cows actually have almost the same Dna as humans as well as the same blood type. It is very similar to us. Whatever the animals are being taken for definatly is not just research as parts of the body are removed and disposed of. You can go on about not beliving but that just makes me realize how many people are so narrow minded they will never see the full picture.
And damn learn how to spell it may make you look a tad more educated
QUOTE
Whats with the attitude!
Well, i give what i get, and thats all i have had from you, so yeah..
Especially when you call us "woo woo's", which honestly sounds so sad, it just makes me laugh.
QUOTE
Ill take mainstream science over your cracpot theorys any day,not as entertaining I suppose,but hell,if I whant science fiction Ill just go to the movies.
Well i havent seen a convincing scientific fact put forward by you so far. That whole article you are supporting just left out facts to make its theory sound plausable. Have a read.
QUOTE
How long does it take for those aliens to figure out cows.....they sure dont seem smarter than us.
Again, assumptions on your part. Assumptions as to what they would want cattle for. I highly doubt it would be to "figure" them out. If it were that, why not take the WHOLE cow, not parts of it, then dump its body?
QUOTE
crackpot theorys any day
QUOTE
How long does it take for those aliens to figure out cows.....they sure dont seem smarter than us
Is it just me or do i smell hypocrite lol.
QUOTE(hazzard @ Sep 8 2005, 06:42 AM)
QUOTE(odds022 @ Sep 8 2005, 08:30 AM)
QUOTE
It is pointless to note that incisions to a carcass by the teeth of predators or scavengers often resemble knife cuts.
And what about the ones that look as if they have been cut between the cells when examined through a microscope?
[right][snapback]832916[/snapback][/right]
BUENOS AIRES, Argentina - [Reuters] Recent mutilations of cattle and horses in the Argentine countryside were the work of rodents, scientists said on Monday, not ritualistic slayings by extraterrestrials or vampires as some farmers feared.
Argentina's national food and animal health inspection service Senasa sent its own ``X-Files'' scientists to the remote plains to look into the deaths of farm animals found mutilated and drained of blood.
Frightened farmers claimed to have seen bright lights and UFOs in the area where the deaths occurred. But Senasa officials said the dozens of livestock whose genitals, tongues and other organs appeared to have been removed with surgical precision were victims of rodents, foxes or other animals. Senasa said the farm animals likely died from common infections and wild animals later mutilated the corpses. ``We see these as natural deaths (and) there is clear evidence of the presence of rodents and birds which led us to our conclusions,'' Senasa President Bernardo Cane told reporters.
Side note.
The farmers don`t get compensated financially if the animals die from common infections,but if mutilated the chances for insurance to kick in is higher.
[right][snapback]832957[/snapback][/right]
And do you know what was the official answer of this?
The SENASA said that the cause of this mutilations where the "raton hocicudo" (maybe "bigmouth mouse" in english).
Here is a link of those mutilationes, and a pic of the mouse : http://www.visionovni.com.ar/testigo.htm
The mouse explanation is a shame...
These mutilations where something totally different.
And i guess most of us know who did theses "jobs"...
When push came to shove, and when pressed as to whether there’s real proof of extraterrestrial visitation, the "experts" on this backed off by saying that "well, we don’t know where they come from. But something is definitely going on." 
The latter statement is hardly controversial. The former is merely goofy. If the saucers and mutilators are not from outer space, where, exactly, are they from? Belgium?
The bottom line is that the evidence for extraterrestrial visitors has not convinced many scientists.
Very few academics are writing papers for refereed journals about alien craft or their occupants. Confronted with this, the UFO "experts" usually take refuge in two possible explanations:
1.The material that would be convincing proof has been collected and secreted away by the U.S. government.(Area 51)
2.Scientists have simply refused to look carefully at this phenomenon. In other words, the scientists should blame themselves for the fact that the visitation hypothesis has failed to sway them.(Thinking outside the box)
Not only is this unfair, it’s misguided.
Sure, rather few researchers have themselves gone into the field to sift through the stories, the videos, and the odd photos that comprise the evidence for alien presence. But they don’t have to. This complaint is akin to telling movie critics that films would be better if only they would pitch in and get behind the camera. But critics can compose excellent and accurate evaluations of a movie without being participants in the business of making films.
The burden of proof is on those making the claims, not those who find the data dubious.
If there are investigators who are convinced that craft from other worlds are buzzing ours, then they should present the absolut best evidence they have, and not resort to explanations that appeal to conspiratorial cover-ups or the failure of others to be open to the idea.
And Blazea58,I didn`t know there was a spelling contest,I promise you I will try harder.
The latter statement is hardly controversial. The former is merely goofy. If the saucers and mutilators are not from outer space, where, exactly, are they from? Belgium?
The bottom line is that the evidence for extraterrestrial visitors has not convinced many scientists.
Very few academics are writing papers for refereed journals about alien craft or their occupants. Confronted with this, the UFO "experts" usually take refuge in two possible explanations:
1.The material that would be convincing proof has been collected and secreted away by the U.S. government.(Area 51)
2.Scientists have simply refused to look carefully at this phenomenon. In other words, the scientists should blame themselves for the fact that the visitation hypothesis has failed to sway them.(Thinking outside the box)
Not only is this unfair, it’s misguided.
Sure, rather few researchers have themselves gone into the field to sift through the stories, the videos, and the odd photos that comprise the evidence for alien presence. But they don’t have to. This complaint is akin to telling movie critics that films would be better if only they would pitch in and get behind the camera. But critics can compose excellent and accurate evaluations of a movie without being participants in the business of making films.
The burden of proof is on those making the claims, not those who find the data dubious.
If there are investigators who are convinced that craft from other worlds are buzzing ours, then they should present the absolut best evidence they have, and not resort to explanations that appeal to conspiratorial cover-ups or the failure of others to be open to the idea.
And Blazea58,I didn`t know there was a spelling contest,I promise you I will try harder.
QUOTE
The mouse explanation is a shame...
These mutilations where something totally different.
And i guess most of us know who did theses "jobs"...
[right][snapback]833217[/snapback][/right]
These mutilations where something totally different.
And i guess most of us know who did theses "jobs"...
[right][snapback]833217[/snapback][/right]
Whats funny is how they came to the conclusion. I cant read the actual page, i guess i could translate it, but from what you said they saw birds and rodents around the area so they came to the conclusion it was them. WOw that's amazing research lol.
I really wish i could imagine little tiny animals actually being able to perfectly cut like they are better then medical experts, even though they would be terribly hungry animals just trying to get a bite of something.
Here is some more pictures for skeptics , as well as more information. If you want to atleast take the time to read it and figure out from there what you belive you may have a bit more of an open mind, because there is no way that over 60,000 cases of this is all due to natural causes no matter which way you look at it.
I have also always liked the photo of the deer on the pole which ill include, it could have been a prank, im sure some have seen it before and it is something that baffles you. If you climbed up there goodluck getting 20,000 volts of electricity at you.
http://www.santafeghostandhistorytours.com/cowm.html
Obviously if everything you read you belive, you won't get far. I take educated decisions on what i read, i dont just goto any site, or read any book and decide that's my new belifs. Before 2001 i was pretty much a skeptic myself, but after seeing an object in the sky doing manuvers that can't be done with our technology from my understanding at 10:30 pm at night for an hour with 2 other good friends, i started to be more convinced.
We had thought up everything it could have been from a farming truck, to a helicopter, to even things like a house light etc. But when we started seeing it move around the sky to the point where it was around 150 feet above a water collection resevior it pretty much convinced us that we were seeing something we could not explain. From that point on it was my mission to figure out what happend that night and really take my time reading different peoples experiences. From there on i started having more of an open mind about what i read on the internet, because of what i had seen that night.
That's just a little bit of information about me, i do belive in cattle mutilations more so now that i have actually seen something in the sky that was completly unexplainable, and was for a long enough duration that we ruled out every other possibility.
Great photo there Blazea. True, it could have been a prank, but all i can say is good luck anyone, first of all getting it up there, and second of all not killing themselves in the process. Very interesting.
As for debunkers post, ill go into it more tomorrow as im very tired, but i will say one thing.
I contribute this mostly to the fact that, at the moment the thought of aliens still provokes ridicule from the skeptics and debunkers. And all because it doesnt fit into their view of how the world works.
So if a scientist or academic states that he is going to go research such topics, it is going to cause him to be a laughing stock among his peers. Or as some people put it commit "career suicide". All because people like to call alien and UFO researchers wackos..
And thats what i dont get, most skeptics say "i'd love to find out that aliens exist" but by calling the believers wackos, or "woo woos", you dont think that is going to halt the whole process? How about debating it without using stupid names, then people would feel alot more comfortable in going out and doing some serious research.. Then the chances of getting that evidence would be a hell of alot easier..
As for debunkers post, ill go into it more tomorrow as im very tired, but i will say one thing.
QUOTE
Very few academics are writing papers for refereed journals about alien craft or their occupants. Confronted with this, the UFO "experts" usually take refuge in two possible explanations:
QUOTE
2.Scientists have simply refused to look carefully at this phenomenon. In other words, the scientists should blame themselves for the fact that the visitation hypothesis has failed to sway them.(Thinking outside the box)
I contribute this mostly to the fact that, at the moment the thought of aliens still provokes ridicule from the skeptics and debunkers. And all because it doesnt fit into their view of how the world works.
So if a scientist or academic states that he is going to go research such topics, it is going to cause him to be a laughing stock among his peers. Or as some people put it commit "career suicide". All because people like to call alien and UFO researchers wackos..
And thats what i dont get, most skeptics say "i'd love to find out that aliens exist" but by calling the believers wackos, or "woo woos", you dont think that is going to halt the whole process? How about debating it without using stupid names, then people would feel alot more comfortable in going out and doing some serious research.. Then the chances of getting that evidence would be a hell of alot easier..
While I said I wouldn't get into another debate for the time being, I didn't say I wouldn't say my 2 cents 
Blaze, I got to say as a whole that way a good post
Seeing pics like that make you wonder what is going on up their, Human, animal or other.
Also it sounds interesting what you saw that night, im sure most people in this section have seen strange lights or objects and are just trying to get to the bottom of it.
I've got to agree with that, I've always followed .... Attack the argument, not the person ... when debating.
Blaze, I got to say as a whole that way a good post
Seeing pics like that make you wonder what is going on up their, Human, animal or other.
Also it sounds interesting what you saw that night, im sure most people in this section have seen strange lights or objects and are just trying to get to the bottom of it.
QUOTE
And thats what i dont get, most skeptics say "i'd love to find out that aliens exist" but by calling the believers wackos, or "woo woos", you dont think that is going to halt the whole process? How about debating it without using stupid names, then people would feel alot more comfortable in going out and doing some serious research.. Then the chances of getting that evidence would be a hell of alot easier.
I've got to agree with that, I've always followed .... Attack the argument, not the person ... when debating.
QUOTE
where, exactly, are they from? Belgium?
Do you have any idea how large the universe is? Do you ever ponder how much more there could possibly be outside our solar system? I simply cant see myself thinking that out of the infinite space there is that our planet is the only one with life at all on it , not even a single microbe in the entire universe?
Do you belive in God? Can i call you a woo woo for beliving in something you also dont have solid proof of? Its totally blind faith.
QUOTE
The bottom line is that the evidence for extraterrestrial visitors has not convinced many scientists.
Heard of SETI? That is one of the largest pubically funded programs in search of Extraterrestrial life. This thing is funded by donations and scientists from all over the globe, you cant simply say it hasen't convinced them, because they are doing this on their own free will. There is thousands of privatly funded organizations run by the goverment also which involve alot of scientific research for the same thing.
Generally since 1947 alot of things have changed, people usually aren't seen at the same level anymore when they say they saw something they couldn't explain because it is happening very often.
Debunker, i would love for you to say that the Pheonix lights sighting was also just the flare theory, cause then i would know your mission is to debunk hehehe.
QUOTE
Not only is this unfair, it’s misguided.
And your veiws aren't either of those? Either way you would like to think there is alot of stuff the government has secretly kept on ufos since 1940s, and it was only until project blue book was declassified that the public was more aware that they had more information and put alot more work into finding the truth then the average researcher. They fully documented every single case they went to, they obviously had alot of intrest but why in the hell was it kept away from the public for 30 years(if not more), can you tell me that?
QUOTE
If there are investigators who are convinced that craft from other worlds are buzzing ours, then they should present the absolut best evidence they have, and not resort to explanations that appeal to conspiratorial cover-ups or the failure of others to be open to the idea
whats NASA here for then? nothing i guess yea just take the rovers off mars screw the hole searching for other life because your so positive were all alone, yay for you , to late to even respond to someone so ignorant im sorry i sound rude but i think the way you put things come off a bit worse to people who actually do belive in this type of thing being possible, just like God, belive what you want.
Ok wait i got it, here is all the proof you need. The image has enough proof to convince you. If you need any more i can send it again
QUOTE(Blazea58 @ Sep 8 2005, 05:34 PM)
QUOTE
where, exactly, are they from? Belgium?
Do you have any idea how large the universe is? Do you ever ponder how much more there could possibly be outside our solar system? I simply cant see myself thinking that out of the infinite space there is that our planet is the only one with life at all on it , not even a single microbe in the entire universe?
Do you belive in God? Can i call you a woo woo for beliving in something you also dont have solid proof of? Its totally blind faith.
QUOTE
The bottom line is that the evidence for extraterrestrial visitors has not convinced many scientists.
Heard of SETI? That is one of the largest pubically funded programs in search of Extraterrestrial life. This thing is funded by donations and scientists from all over the globe, you cant simply say it hasen't convinced them, because they are doing this on their own free will. There is thousands of privatly funded organizations run by the goverment also which involve alot of scientific research for the same thing.
Generally since 1947 alot of things have changed, people usually aren't seen at the same level anymore when they say they saw something they couldn't explain because it is happening very often.
Debunker, i would love for you to say that the Pheonix lights sighting was also just the flare theory, cause then i would know your mission is to debunk hehehe.
QUOTE
Not only is this unfair, it’s misguided.
And your veiws aren't either of those? Either way you would like to think there is alot of stuff the government has secretly kept on ufos since 1940s, and it was only until project blue book was declassified that the public was more aware that they had more information and put alot more work into finding the truth then the average researcher. They fully documented every single case they went to, they obviously had alot of intrest but why in the hell was it kept away from the public for 30 years(if not more), can you tell me that?
QUOTE
If there are investigators who are convinced that craft from other worlds are buzzing ours, then they should present the absolut best evidence they have, and not resort to explanations that appeal to conspiratorial cover-ups or the failure of others to be open to the idea
whats NASA here for then? nothing i guess yea just take the rovers off mars screw the hole searching for other life because your so positive were all alone, yay for you , to late to even respond to someone so ignorant im sorry i sound rude but i think the way you put things come off a bit worse to people who actually do belive in this type of thing being possible, just like God, belive what you want.
Ok wait i got it, here is all the proof you need. The image has enough proof to convince you. If you need any more i can send it again
[right][snapback]833518[/snapback][/right]
okay, you gotta get this straight. no-one here is saying alien don't exist. they're saying that its unlikely that they are killing out cows and visiting us.
QUOTE
Do you have any idea how large the universe is?
yes I do, so big that for aliens from other solar systems would have to travel so far to visit our planet they'd have to have very long lives, consisting of them living longer than 5'000 years. which is very unlikely. unless they have light speed, with would require a VAST amount of constant energy to keep up the speed and also to reach that speed.
I believe in aliens, but i don't believe in aliens that are visiting us now.
this isn't star trek, there is no warp 9.
EDIT
spelling, Do'h >_<
Of course, even assuming it was Star Trek, and there was Warp 9....
You have to ask yourself why they'd use such vast amounts of time and energy crossing the Universe to....Chop up some livestock.
Barbecue is great and all, but it seems unlikely to me..
Now's the point where people will trot out the standard "Scientific Research" explanation, but really it doesn't fit all that well, considering most "Mute" cases reported involve only domestic livestock. You would think a broad range of wildlife would have to be on the agenda were that the case, but in the vast majority of accounts, it doesn't..
Nor is it even hinted at or alluded to..
Travelling many light years to sample cows and horses just seems a little far-fetched, doesn't it?
You have to ask yourself why they'd use such vast amounts of time and energy crossing the Universe to....Chop up some livestock.
Barbecue is great and all, but it seems unlikely to me..
Now's the point where people will trot out the standard "Scientific Research" explanation, but really it doesn't fit all that well, considering most "Mute" cases reported involve only domestic livestock. You would think a broad range of wildlife would have to be on the agenda were that the case, but in the vast majority of accounts, it doesn't..
Nor is it even hinted at or alluded to..
Travelling many light years to sample cows and horses just seems a little far-fetched, doesn't it?
no matter what you people say, you can't ignore the evidence that the incisions are in-fact incisions (not animal attacks) and that extreme heat is involved.... well I guess this thread proves me wrong because obviously you CAN!
I think they just want a good cut of beef.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.