It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Scdfa
a reply to: ZetaRediculian
If there are 1000 people that live in a high rise apartment building and 2% of that is 20, I really don't know how else to interpret that.
So are you now suggesting the aliens take two percent of the population that live in each high rise apartment building?
That would be quite an outlandish claim, would it not?
Incorrect, a course in statistics would be beneficial.
Nothing you say can justify the claim that most abductees are taken from high rise apartments in New York City.
You have nothing to support your claim.
What I am really suggesting is that the Roper pole is ridiculous as are the "researchers" that support it (Hopkins and Jacobs). It's really hard to take the pole seriously.
originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: tanka418
Yes, I don't disagree with the logic but the question was where did the statements in question come from. The only abduction stats I know are from the roper pole. This was something that the popular abduction researchers promoted as evidence of a rampant epidemic of alien abduction. So I don't know if the statements originated from Jacobs and Hopkins but it seems like something they would say. Where I am going is, for the purpose of the discussion, that we can accept the popular statistics and the assumptions or move on with new ones and get better stats. Personally, I would be happy to drop kick Roper, Hopkins and especially Jocobs.
originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: tanka418
Sure. I have been looking for the distribution numbers but its been difficult between working and looking up stats on abductions. Plus I'm on a cell. If you google"roper poll abductions" you should get a lot of hits.
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...
I was unable t find one that links to Roper, only to a third party. Thus no reliable dataset...especially in view of the fact that Roper's search engine couldn't find any reference.
originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Scdfa
I wouldn't know, but I will take your word for that
Oh come on now. Its right there in front of you.
originally posted by: Scdfa
originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Scdfa
I wouldn't know, but I will take your word for that
Oh come on now. Its right there in front of you.
Yes, well, you have to be careful when you type "It's hard to take the 'pole' seriously".
Homophones. Dangerous in the wrong hands.
Hard to take seriously, indeed.
But I see that you still don't have any evidence to support your theory that aliens abductees are selected according to population density.
originally posted by: draknoir2
originally posted by: Scdfa
originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Scdfa
I wouldn't know, but I will take your word for that
Oh come on now. Its right there in front of you.
Yes, well, you have to be careful when you type "It's hard to take the 'pole' seriously".
Homophones. Dangerous in the wrong hands.
Hard to take seriously, indeed.
But I see that you still don't have any evidence to support your theory that aliens abductees are selected according to population density.
What are you, twelve?
I chuckled too.
But I see that you still don't have any evidence to support your theory that aliens abductees are selected according to population density. I don't expect you to find any, either
originally posted by: draknoir2
originally posted by: Scdfa
originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Scdfa
I wouldn't know, but I will take your word for that
Oh come on now. Its right there in front of you.
Yes, well, you have to be careful when you type "It's hard to take the 'pole' seriously".
Homophones. Dangerous in the wrong hands.
Hard to take seriously, indeed.
But I see that you still don't have any evidence to support your theory that aliens abductees are selected according to population density.
What are you, twelve?
I chuckled too.
originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Scdfa
But I see that you still don't have any evidence to support your theory that aliens abductees are selected according to population density. I don't expect you to find any, either
No but you are providing evidence that you hallucinate. If you really think I said that then it could explain some of your other claims. I'm not kidding.
But what I think you are saying is that people that live in cites are not part of the population. I honestly don't know how else to explain your thinking. 2% percent of the population means just that. nothing else. It doesn't mean 2% of whatever confirms your beliefs. is it sinking in yet?
And I am not saying this. This is what Jacobs and Hopkins are saying. It would seem obvious to me if Jacobs was giving the pole to someone that there would be a location on the survey. The fact that you cant find this information anywhere might tell you something. What it tells me is that the information wasn't shared. probably because you couldn't make any such determinations. I am sure that If you could, you would get your hands on Jacob's pole but its nowhere to be found.
So the conclusions from the pole are 2% of the population.
I'm sorry, I must be misunderstanding you.
If the Roper poll determined that two percent of the American population has been abducted, I feel that could well be the case.
Well, maybe you should discuss that with him?
My point of disagreement was with Harte, who stated:The majority of abductions are from large cities, and the majority of those are from high rise apartments in New York City.
I was only trying to understand where that statement may have come from. That was my guess and the math seems to work. Harte can speak for himself.
I took issue with that, and it seemed to me you were defending that statement. If you say you do not support that position, I believe you.
As I say, Linda Cortille Napolitano is the only case I know of where someone was abducted from a Manhattan high-rise. This fascinating case was investigated by the great Budd Hopkins, in his book "Witnessed", It also involved a UN dignitary, a powerful read.
originally posted by: TrueMessiah
Boy has this thread degenerated.
This thread needs to be closed.
Somebody start a new thread, put up another Tyson vid for us to deconstruct or something.
originally posted by: Scdfa
originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Scdfa
But I see that you still don't have any evidence to support your theory that aliens abductees are selected according to population density. I don't expect you to find any, either
No but you are providing evidence that you hallucinate. If you really think I said that then it could explain some of your other claims. I'm not kidding.
But what I think you are saying is that people that live in cites are not part of the population. I honestly don't know how else to explain your thinking. 2% percent of the population means just that. nothing else. It doesn't mean 2% of whatever confirms your beliefs. is it sinking in yet?
And I am not saying this. This is what Jacobs and Hopkins are saying. It would seem obvious to me if Jacobs was giving the pole to someone that there would be a location on the survey. The fact that you cant find this information anywhere might tell you something. What it tells me is that the information wasn't shared. probably because you couldn't make any such determinations. I am sure that If you could, you would get your hands on Jacob's pole but its nowhere to be found.
So the conclusions from the pole are 2% of the population.
As I say, Linda Cortille Napolitano is the only case I know of where someone was abducted from a Manhattan high-rise. This fascinating case was investigated by the great Budd Hopkins, in his book "Witnessed", It also involved a UN dignitary, a powerful read.
In the end, the situation is one of belief. Did alien beings make a statement by abducting a woman in the centre of New York, at the same time they abducted the Secretary General, only to have the incident erased from the memory, only to be recovered under hypnosis, and relying on the skills of Hopkins – which are not very impressive – to piece them together? Or did someone manipulate Hopkins into making the proper connections, tying a mundane case of one of his abductees into a phenomenal event. This would not merely have been the first witnessed UFO abductions of this type (the Travis Walton case and others are of a different nature, in which an incident occurs and immediately, there are or are not eyewitnesses. In the case of Linda, the testimony was 15 months apart and apparently independently made); it had the Secretary General of the United States as the witness. In the knowledge of the lengths that the CIA went to to discredit Boutros-Ghali, knowing Richard and Dan were more than likely CIA agents, is it perhaps more likely they tried to put pressure on de Cuellar? Even though Hopkins apparently tried to make him talk, behind the scenes surely someone could “threaten” de Cuellar that his name would be ousted in major publications unless he did “this” or “that”? Perhaps the entire story was even payback for a decision de Cuellar had previously made, in which he managed to upset certain people… But most likely, he never upset any Grey alien…
It was hard to watch these things happen to a man who had devoted over six years of his life primarily to this single UFO abduction case. But Budd never once backed down or gave an inch of credence to the “debunkers’” attack on the case. (In our house, the words “debunkers” and “skeptics” were used very much in the way that devout Christians use the words “unbelievers” and “the unsaved.”) He continued to tout the major significance of the case long after he knew that Linda had lied to him on multiple occasions. ...