Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Keith10284

J-rod: fact or fiction?

50 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Can't boast about that (the golf part that is, my favorite scotch is Laphroaig) - I wish I could though :P

I cannot boast about my golf, but I like it more than countering Zoser's nonsense. I do not mind a Highland, or the classic Chivas, but I like to keep a bottle of Famous Grouse around. Well priced smooth scotch that one.

Yes, we are :P

Cheers,

Badeskov

I concede :D

tumblr_m6wkqu269Z1qihztbo1_500.gif

Edited by psyche101
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a case of he said, she said & he's making it up as he goes along. I never took what he said seriously, but it still gives a bad name to those who have had experiences & have knowledge, damaging their credibility no end. As previously said, the amount of crap we still have to wade through just gets thicker.

What is concerning is the closer we get to the far shore, the more empty it looks. All that crap was just another obstacle and led nowhere.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With you around? Are you kidding me?

From this sie of the fence belief seems so much easier. One does not have to think, one does not have to accept fact, a believer can just jump on a high horse and pronounce every person and fact wrong with the wave of a hand and "advanced tech". And we can both think of an example or two just like that right here at UM I am sure.

Some believers make the subject nothing more than a stupid joke, but that would be pretty uncommon with skeptics. Skeptics are hated for insisting on accuracy.

lol...thanks mate.

from a psychological point of view....how interesting that both sides envy the other in having an easier task. I guess it depends on what is meant by 'job/task' and what it is we are trying to achieve. In my opinion trying to prove the ETH is far harder as you have little or no backing from science....granted a 'believer' can spout any nonsense they wish but that doesnt mean they are winning the argument, maybe in their own minds but in the wider scope I think the skeptics have the upper hand. Remmeber skeptics can always fall back on the final 'show me the sceintific evidence'!!! game over.

S2F suggested we begin a thread and take opposing sides to see what sort of debate would transpire...would be an interesting experiment.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, we have it so easy - I love my job :P

Cheers,

Badeskov

the moon made in Jupiter.. debunking that must be like selling $100 for $10........ to try and support the theory must be like trying to sell fresh air ::)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the moon made in Jupiter.. debunking that must be like selling $100 for $10........ to try and support the theory must be like trying to sell fresh air : :)

True, but nobody believes him anyway & what government would spend millions, if not billions going to Jupiter to confirm it? :o

I think this is one to discuss with a Jupiterian over a Scotch after dinner :tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but nobody believes him anyway & what government would spend millions, if not billions going to Jupiter to confirm it? :o

I think this is one to discuss with a Jupiterian over a Scotch after dinner :tu:

or maybe discuss over dinner after plenty of scotch :tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

or maybe discuss over dinner after plenty of scotch :tu:

A few glasses of Talisker with a friendly grey & his Pleiadian PA (who happens to be single) would certainly be a night to remember! :tsu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

welcome to UM Keith10284....

Have you seen this video where Captain Bill Uhouse talks quite a bit about the Being they named 'J-rod' ?

Uhouse says he worked on a Flying Disc Simulator for decades based on the Craft said to have come down

in Kingman Arizona in 1953...and that the craft was a more simple design than other ones.

Uhouse comes over as a pretty down to earth character and for the life of me I can't see why he would say all this if it

didn't have a basis in truth...he doesn't come across to me as being a disinfo-spreader.

He starts talking about J-rod at around 9 minutes. And at some point says 'he' was giving advice about engineering and science!

[media=]

[/media]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol...thanks mate.

from a psychological point of view....how interesting that both sides envy the other in having an easier task. I guess it depends on what is meant by 'job/task' and what it is we are trying to achieve. In my opinion trying to prove the ETH is far harder as you have little or no backing from science....granted a 'believer' can spout any nonsense they wish but that doesnt mean they are winning the argument, maybe in their own minds but in the wider scope I think the skeptics have the upper hand. Remmeber skeptics can always fall back on the final 'show me the sceintific evidence'!!! game over.

S2F suggested we begin a thread and take opposing sides to see what sort of debate would transpire...would be an interesting experiment.

Here is where the "two types of believer" come into play. You actually care about walking away from a debate, and knowing you learned something, and holding your head up high, the other type of "believer" already knows it all and has no time for anyone but his own fans. When you tackle a case, one can actually say "wow, that guy is an excellent researcher" but such is pretty rare here, even you must often be embarrassed by the level of silliness proposed by the more credulous here?

Have you proven to yourself that Aliens have visited earth yet though? I always got the impression that you were in pursuit of validity? Plenty of stories abound, but is even one actually something one can put real faith in - as stated above, not like the Roswell numpties, but actually believe a case 100%? I thought you had hopes for Pascagoula providing this sort of grail, but was never sure that you had 100% faith it was entirely validated in the alien version?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the moon made in Jupiter.. debunking that must be like selling $100 for $10........ to try and support the theory must be like trying to sell fresh air : :)

Made in Jupiter? What did I miss?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but nobody believes him anyway & what government would spend millions, if not billions going to Jupiter to confirm it? :o

I think this is one to discuss with a Jupiterian over a Scotch after dinner :tu:

Ya know

You have me wondering, what would that extreme pressure and heat offer a distilling process........ Jupiterian scotch....... mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uhouse says he worked on a Flying Disc Simulator for decades based on the Craft said to have come down

in Kingman Arizona in 1953...and that the craft was a more simple design than other ones.

Uhouse comes over as a pretty down to earth character and for the life of me I can't see why he would say all this if it

didn't have a basis in truth...he doesn't come across to me as being a disinfo-spreader.

Yeah, but you believe anything as long as it is

1 - Controversial

2 - Opposes mainstream, the directness seems proportionate to your support level

3 - If science says it cannot be done

4 - A huge long winded far fetched BS story accompanies the claim.

So for the life of you, is not a huge leap, and the "disinfo spreader" makes you sound about 12, maybe 15 years old. Would you like some illuminati with that disinformation, and how about a nice side helping of Piltdown man as well?

And he claims to have so many downed UFO's that he can afford a comparison? LOL. Yeah, just dropping in backyards all over the place aren't they.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea we got one that crashed into a lake in behind is a few years ago. Not much been done with it though, although one end that still stick up above the water makes a good diving platform.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but you believe anything as long as it is

[snip to remove boring blah blah blah]

:sleepy:

Looks like you have nothing genuinely constructive to add to the topic....as usual... :rolleyes:

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol...thanks mate.

from a psychological point of view....how interesting that both sides envy the other in having an easier task. I guess it depends on what is meant by 'job/task' and what it is we are trying to achieve. In my opinion trying to prove the ETH is far harder as you have little or no backing from science....granted a 'believer' can spout any nonsense they wish but that doesnt mean they are winning the argument, maybe in their own minds but in the wider scope I think the skeptics have the upper hand. Remmeber skeptics can always fall back on the final 'show me the sceintific evidence'!!! game over.

S2F suggested we begin a thread and take opposing sides to see what sort of debate would transpire...would be an interesting experiment.

I certainly don't envy the task of promoting the ETH given the relatively poor quality of evidence in its favor. I understand that there is enough there to form a belief however I wouldn't be able to promote a belief as anything more than a possibility, a suggestion. I certainly couldn't bring myself to try and pass my belief off as fact. And yet that is almost always what we see in regards to the ETH, 'It's true and if you don't believe me you're close minded!' (usually with a heavy handed, though elusive to the claimant, bit of irony).

As far as the demand for scientific evidence goes, I try not to rely on that particular argument too often (it's a bit polarizing and a discussion killer at times) though I think it is the standard by which all evidence and/or 'facts' should be judged.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly don't envy the task of promoting the ETH given the relatively poor quality of evidence in its favor. I understand that there is enough there to form a belief however I wouldn't be able to promote a belief as anything more than a possibility, a suggestion. I certainly couldn't bring myself to try and pass my belief off as fact. And yet that is almost always what we see in regards to the ETH, 'It's true and if you don't believe me you're close minded!' (usually with a heavy handed, though elusive to the claimant, bit of irony).

As far as the demand for scientific evidence goes, I try not to rely on that particular argument too often (it's a bit polarizing and a discussion killer at times) though I think it is the standard by which all evidence and/or 'facts' should be judged.

You try to avoid relying on the demand for scientific evidence. Did I get that? You would rather be a bit polarizing than be scientific? If such a thing is a "discussion killer," what possibly was there to discuss?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You try to avoid relying on the demand for scientific evidence. Did I get that? You would rather be a bit polarizing than be scientific? If such a thing is a "discussion killer," what possibly was there to discuss?

I think there is a lot more to a case that can be uncovered by open discussion as opposed to a 'prove it or get lost' kind of debate. Some of the most informative and thought provoking discussion here at UM were when the people just focused on the details of a case as opposed to the back and forth of 'prove it!' ...'I don't have to, you disprove it!' that we seem to see lately. One example was the Battle of LA case ( In, I believe, the Best Evidence 2 thread) where more information was presented than I thought existed, up to and including technical specs for the spotlight and radar units that were used at the time. It seemed as though everyone was pitching in to see just how much information we could dig up. I learned quite a bit from that discussion and to be honest I enjoy learning something new more than trying to prove someone wrong. That is essentially why I am here, to learn. I have a tendency to forget that on occasion.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to very quickly lose interest in people who have nothing scientific or rational to offer. I even more quickly lose interest in people who post evidence they really should know has been more than adequately refuted ages ago. Such people will always exist, so there is nothing to be gained letting them bother me, nor in wasting my time on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to very quickly lose interest in people who have nothing scientific or rational to offer. I even more quickly lose interest in people who post evidence they really should know has been more than adequately refuted ages ago. Such people will always exist, so there is nothing to be gained letting them bother me, nor in wasting my time on them.

I agree with you when the rally of 'OMG! It was aliens!' is at the forefront of discussion. When we look past that to attempt to gather as much information as possible to offer a credible explanation (whatever that may be) for an event is when things get interesting for me. Unfortunately not many cases lend themselves well to such endeavors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to very quickly lose interest in people who have nothing scientific or rational to offer. I even more quickly lose interest in people who post evidence they really should know has been more than adequately refuted ages ago. Such people will always exist, so there is nothing to be gained letting them bother me, nor in wasting my time on them.

never forget that there's always new people drawn into "unexplained" topics. I roll my eyes also when i read the 600th "did roswell really happen?"-thread, but then i remember i heard about the topic 20 years ago. Some people maybe just read about it yesterday for the first time and didn't have a chance to get a bit deeper in it yet.... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

never forget that there's always new people drawn into "unexplained" topics. I roll my eyes also when i read the 600th "did roswell really happen?"-thread, but then i remember i heard about the topic 20 years ago. Some people maybe just read about it yesterday for the first time and didn't have a chance to get a bit deeper in it yet.... ;)

Very good point I myself had herd of the happenings of Roswell 15+ years back but I myself have only really looked into it in the last 2 years or so I’m sure there is plenty I don’t know that is out there about it but it is the same for many topics.

You will always have the 3 main groups of people you will comment on them the ones who say its true it happened and you'll never convince them otherwise, the ones who say its crap nothing happened and you'll never convince them either, and then you have the objective people who don’t really know either way but want to find out.

I myself fall into the third I would like to say "yes these things happened and here is the proof" but doing so in next to imposable so I say "I think in some cases its true but I could be wrong" I myself have seen all sorts of things and I have posed on here about things I have seen or know about but I haven’t got solid proof of anything yet that cant be questioned, but I do think that people should be open minded to the possibility of E.T's and other weird thing on this planet the human race seems to have a nasty habit of thinking that we know all there is to know about what lives on this planet and refuses to accept that /maybe/ just maybe there are still things on this planet we don’t know live here.

(Sorry if I got off topic)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Sorry if I got off topic)

nevermind...."off topic" can become "new topic".... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe fully & wholeheartedly that there are extraterrestrials walking among us & trawling our skies regularly,

.

welcome to UM Keith10284....

Have you seen this video where Captain Bill Uhouse talks quite a bit about the Being they named 'J-rod' ?

Uhouse says he worked on a Flying Disc Simulator for decades based on the Craft said to have come down

in Kingman Arizona in 1953...and that the craft was a more simple design than other ones.

Uhouse comes over as a pretty down to earth character and for the life of me I can't see why he would say all this if it

didn't have a basis in truth...he doesn't come across to me as being a disinfo-spreader.

He starts talking about J-rod at around 9 minutes. And at some point says 'he' was giving advice about engineering and science!

[media=]

[/media]

Keith...in view of what you said in your opening post ...and the fact that you took the trouble to start this thread..

you don't seem at all interested in the Bill Uhouse testimony that I posted...

bit of an unexplained mystery that.... ^_^

(or not)

;)

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith...in view of what you said in your opening post ...and the fact that you took the trouble to start this thread..

you don't seem at all interested in the Bill Uhouse testimony that I posted...

bit of an unexplained mystery that.... ^_^

(or not)

;)

.

Actually I did watch that video and I found it quite insightful. I only took so long to reply as my internet went awry and I've been quite busy, too. Thanks for sharing that with me, sorry I didn't reply sooner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is where the "two types of believer" come into play. You actually care about walking away from a debate, and knowing you learned something, and holding your head up high, the other type of "believer" already knows it all and has no time for anyone but his own fans. When you tackle a case, one can actually say "wow, that guy is an excellent researcher" but such is pretty rare here, even you must often be embarrassed by the level of silliness proposed by the more credulous here?

Have you proven to yourself that Aliens have visited earth yet though? I always got the impression that you were in pursuit of validity? Plenty of stories abound, but is even one actually something one can put real faith in - as stated above, not like the Roswell numpties, but actually believe a case 100%? I thought you had hopes for Pascagoula providing this sort of grail, but was never sure that you had 100% faith it was entirely validated in the alien version?

you are correct mate, I havent yet and still am in pursuit of the validity. Cases like Pascagoula help me to keep going but no I cannot be 100% sure it was ET at all. Especially as I havent yet been able to discard 'plasma'....

as for the level of silliness of some claims...yes they do annoy me somewhat but I try and avoid those threads for sanitys sake.

Made in Jupiter? What did I miss?

from the OP:

They met this former CIA pilot who had allegedly encountered aliens but he had some pretty insane theories, (one claiming the moon was made inside Jupiter! :o) but one of his statements got me interested.

:cry::no:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.