Missing in National Parks :: Is David Paulides involved in the Conspiracy/Cover-up?

a reply to: Phage

I assume . . . you being Phage . . .

that you automatically dismiss reports of . . . say . . .

toddlers winking out--disappearing in broad daylight [a la Star Trek or some such] in full view of their parentS less than 10 feet or so behind them?

a reply to: BO XIAN

I sure don't automatically take them as factual.

Nor do I take tales of alien abduction as such.


*ping* gone? Like a magic trick?

a reply to: Phage

Certainly there is wisdom in avoiding automatically taking them as factual.

Nevertheless . . . when the bar for "proof" is raised unfittingly high . . . a LOT of risk of false negatives unavoidably enters the picture, as you likely well know.

You still seem to favor that likelihood far, far more than the risk of a false positive. Sometimes, that seems VERY arbitrary & irrational, to me.

I think that the abduction picture is more than a little muddy.

However, the survey stuff indicating that as many as 3 million (as a conservative estimate from reasonably solid research survey inferences) . . . seems highly likely to me--regardless of whether the abductions have been done by

1. the critters
2. the oligarchy's military
3. the critters working with the oligarchy's military

I think that the evidence of A VAST AMOUNT and array of such goings on are factually true is just far too inescapable. At this point, denial of such goings on is more laughable than accepting that SOMETHING roughly accurately described in the distilled gestalt of such stories . . . must be true . . . however much of that 'truth' survives eventually in whatever detail.

I really believe that the eventual facts will turn out to be far stranger than even the better informed would guess at present.

And, the super rationalist perspective may well turn out to have been farrrrr too DEVOTED to a virtually religious level addiction in behalf of false negatives.

And, frankly, you appear to be the Pope-of-ATS presiding over the CHURCH OF FALSE NEGATIVES hereon.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BO XIAN

I sure don't automatically take them as factual.

Nor do I take tales of alien abduction as such.


*ping* gone? Like a magic trick?

Gone with no trace and no disturbance.
Here's one from your neck of the woods,from the book:

Jimmy Duffy
Missing: 10/19/73, 2:15 p.m, Little Wenatchee Ridge, Wenatchee Lake, Wenatchee, WA
Age at disappearance: 2
On October 19, 1973, James and Carol Duffy parked their camper and truck in a clear-cut seven miles northeast of Lake Wenatchee in a location known as Little Wenatchee Ridge. While the entire family took a walk around the area of the camper, Little Jimmy Duffy was misbehaving on the hike and Carol Duffy hit her son for not keeping up with the group, per her own statement in sheriff's department reports. The family then headed back to the camper to put the kids down for a nap. Thirty-two-month old Jimmy and eighteen month old Natalie were left in the back of the camper sleeping while James went hunting in the area and Carol took a walk. After fifteen minutes of hunting the nearby clear-cut, James returned to the camper to check on the children and found them still asleep; Carol was still out on her walk but saw James check on the kids. He then circled the clear cut where they were approximately 150 yards from their children, they heard a scream or screech come from the camper. They ran to a spot where they could see the camper and saw the camper door open. The parents ran to their vehicle and found the back door open. Natalie and their two cats were still asleep inside, but Jimmy was nowhere in sight. James immediately checked the Caterpillar tracks beside the clear cut and Carol checked the road. They found nothing. The time at this point was approximately 2:15 pm.


By3:15 p.m. deputies from the Chelan County Sheriff's Office had arrived and already notified SAR personnel. The deputies and forest service employees searched the soft ground near the camper but could not find any prints in the dirt roads that matched the boy's. At 4:20 p.m. James arrived back at the camper from searching and stated that he had not found the boy. At 4:25 p.m deputies re-interviewed Carol and asked her again to explain the circumstances of the disappearance. She did. At 5:00 p.m deputies interviewed James again, and he repeated the circumstances of the boy's disappearance. He stated that the sound he heard coming from the area of the camper could have been something similar to a baby's cry. The following day canines were brought to the location and throughly searched the area. They found nothing. For five days following Jimmy's disappearance, searchers performed a massive grid layout involving more than 150 men, including rescue units, SAR teams, and the sheriff's posse. Helicopters were also brought in to the area to search cliffs and small valleys. The search produced no evidence of Jimmy Duffy's location. At 8:30 p.m on October 24, the lead deputy from Chelan County called James aside. he told James that he didn't believe his story about his son's disappearance and thought the child had never been in the area. He also told James that he thought the child had been accidentally or intentionally killed and disposed of and that his story was a cover up. The deputy then asked him if his wife had a boyfriend to which he replied, "Not that I know of" At 11:30 the following morning, the formal search operations were terminated.


During the extensive follow up conducted by the Chelan County Sheriff's Office, one witness described Jimmy Duffy as "retarded" and with a very frail build. Most of the witnesses stated that they rarely saw the boy outside the Duffy's home. It's obvious from the reports that Chelan County did a very extensive follow up by contacting the Duffy's neighbors, friends, and child protective services. They also attempted to locate evidence of violence against Jimmy, but nothing was found. At one point investigators requested that Carol and James Duffy take a polygraph test. They agreed. Twelve days after their son went missing in the mountains of Washington, James and Carol Duffy were seated in a police interview room taking a polygraph in an effort to clear their names. Polygraph experts from the Seattle Police Dept. were brought in to question the Duffys and administer the polygraph. Both parents took the polygraph simultaneously in different rooms. In a report written by N. Matzke and D. Gillespie of Seattle PD's polygraph unit, they stated the following after interviewing both parents: "Each subject was given a polygraph examination and it is the opinion that Mr. and Mrs. Duffy do not know the whereabouts of their son Jimmy nor did they conspire with each other to cause the disappearance." The passing of the polygraph hopefully focused the Chelan County Sheriff's Office on finding Jimmy rather than building a case against his parents

I got this from SeattleMountainRescue.org:


Link

No tracks, no trace and the parents weren't far when they heard the scream.

Yes, the child could have left and been taken by a person or mountain lion, but, with his father being an experienced search and rescue worker along with the 100+ people that joined the search, they would have found evidence of an attack or something to indicate which way the boy went.

a reply to: BO XIAN
Calling him the Pope might be a bit of a stretch but, in my opinion, it is far better to have an open mind and not discount anything that doesn't conform to your thoughts, just because they don't.

I'm guilty of doing this as well, and I think everyone can admit that there are some weird cases of seemingly improbable (not impossible) magnitude. To discount one persons idea about this, is saying that you know for a fact that that is not true. An idea is an idea and if someone wants to negate it, prove them wrong.

There are so many cases and for some of them to be easily explained, wouldn't surprise me. I would love for someone to come out with a book documenting all the stories and what it actually was.

a reply to: Phage

Well Libel then,Phage it is Libellous to imply David has something to do with the disappearances and deaths.Same dog different leash.

I did of course not make the claim first that something is taking people,Paulides did-but listening to all his talks,i have to agree that it certainly looks that way.It looks like a predatory force is taking some people,and "vetting" them for some unknown qualities and discarding the bodies of those it doesn't need or deem suitable.My own feel of the whole issue,feel free to ridicule me for my opinion on this,you should by now that i don't care

Re the beacon/transponder issue i would reckon it is better to carry that plus a firearm when going into the wilderness than not.Even if you do die from natural causes out there,at least your family will have closure.

a reply to: superman2012

That's not quite what I was talking about.

I'm talking about cases where the toddler is on the trail ahead of the parents. The parents are 8-12 feet behind the toddler. The toddler is in FULL VIEW of the parents--who have their eyes ON the toddler at the moment it happens.

And while in full view of the parents, suddenly the child disappears in thin air--POOF--winks out of this existence, dimension and totally disappears without a trace--very unbelievably and inexplicably--in full view of more than one adult.

Talking 'high strangeness' here.

a reply to: superman2012

I usually have to refresh my memory as I often mix them up.

I just think that far too little respect is demonstrated on both sides . . . for the proper balance between a

TYPE I ERROR RISK (a false positive--something's there, something happened, there IS a relationship between the variables WHEN there isN'T)
VS
A TYPE II ERROR RISK. (a false negative--there's nothing there, nothing happened, there is NOT a relationship between the variables WHEN there IS)

statistics.about.com...

. . .
Type I errors are equivalent to false positives. Let’s go back to the example of a drug being used to treat a disease. If we reject the null hypothesis in this situation, then our claim is that the drug does in fact have some effect on a disease. But if the null hypothesis is true, then in reality the drug does not combat the disease at all. The drug is falsely claimed to have a positive effect on a disease.
. . .
.
Type II errors are equivalent to false negatives. If we think back again to the scenario in which we are testing a drug, what would a type II error look like? A type II error would occur if we accepted that the drug had no effect on a disease, but in reality it did.

There are all manner of biases that set us up to give undue weight to one side or the other.

I think super rationalists like Phage are quite vulnerable to making a TYPE II error--saying nothing is there when there is. I think they tend to flatter themselves about their own logic, reasoning and fact-finding. Though I think Phage does that less than most such folks I know.

The super emotionally needy or believers in some poorly concocted ideology or a twisted version of a reasonable ideology are prone to seeing things that aren't there, never were there and aren't going to be there--a TYPE I error--saying something is there when nothing is there.

And, of course, it's a continuum with many points in between.

I think it's silly to, in the face of 100's of thousands of earnest reports--a sizeable percentage by high quality super rational people--to dismiss it all as swamp gas or whatever other groping explanation.

I think it's just as silly to think that whatever the 'critters' are . . . they are here to give us warm fuzzy hugs and save us from ourselves.

There's soooooooo much disinformation, hoaxed stories, nonsense mixed in quite thoroughly with authentic stuff--it's very hard to sort the fly specks from the pepper.

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: superman2012

That's not quite what I was talking about.

I'm talking about cases where the toddler is on the trail ahead of the parents. The parents are 8-12 feet behind the toddler. The toddler is in FULL VIEW of the parents--who have their eyes ON the toddler at the moment it happens.

And while in full view of the parents, suddenly the child disappears in thin air--POOF--winks out of this existence, dimension and totally disappears without a trace--very unbelievably and inexplicably--in full view of more than one adult.

Talking 'high strangeness' here.

I haven't read a story like that yet. I have read stories where the parents look away for only a second (their words) and the child goes missing, but I haven't read one that says the parents were staring at the child and the child blinked out of existence.

a reply to: superman2012

There aren't many such stories. Probably less than 5.

However, I think they give a clue as to the level of 'high strangeness' involved in the 411 cases.

. . . and maybe a clue to the capabilities of whatever is doing such stuff.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BO XIAN

I sure don't automatically take them as factual.

Nor do I take tales of alien abduction as such.


*ping* gone? Like a magic trick?

When were aliens brought into question?

a reply to: superman2012

Yes, the child could have left and been taken by a person or mountain lion, but, with his father being an experienced search and rescue worker along with the 100+ people that joined the search, they would have found evidence of an attack or something to indicate which way the boy went.

To me the parents are highly suspect in this case. The mother admitted to hitting the kid, she was mad. The father would know how to hamper SAR personnel. It might have been an accident but they feared repercussions. Hard to think about, but seems more plausible.

The story is weird too. Who hunts for only 15 minutes? Who leaves their kids asleep in a place like that? How could she see him after she'd been walking 15 minutes? Sketchy.

Heres a thought, to set the scene yesterday a mother in Victoria was charged with killing her daughter after claiming a man of African descent took the baby while she was out taking the baby for a stroll. The story fell apart and now the mother has been charged.

Kids who are not normal functioning may be seen as a burden to the parents as the above case shows and I find it probable that if the case of the 2 year old going missing is similar its quite possible the parents did kill the child and covered it up. As for others its quite possible people who go missing were in fact murdered by friends or relatives and the Forrest story is easily used to insinuate a bear or mountain lion was involved. The no tracks is because the individual wasn't there in the first place.

Once again solved without the need for the paranormal or esoteric.

a reply to: mazzroth

I kinda think a lot of the cases of missing children are sketchy at best. People would be terrified if they made a mistake, smacked the kid too hard, let them do something stupid and they fell, left them alone and they got in trouble, let them run around off the trail and they were killed. At that point I think a lot of people would be willing to lie so they weren't thrown in jail for neglect. I also wouldn't be surprised if some sick bastards intentionally murdered a kid in a National Park because it's so easy to hide and witnesses are easy to avoid.

Succumbing to the elements happens real fast, especially for a children and the elderly who are apparently the majority of cases.

It's screwed up thinking like that, but I just don't trust people. Parents are capable of committing atrocities, as we've seen time and again.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Other than a high quality PhD in ClinicalPsychology and 30+ years of counseling and teaching?

I highly doubt it reading your posts. I'd hope after even a year of college you wouldn't be typing an ellipsis like. . .and then not leaving a space after...

What in your opinion is the best way to evaluate a person's integrity from facial expressions?

a reply to: IncognitoGhostman

I'd be a little freaked out if I came across stairs in the middle of the forest too...and they had no explanation for being there. Then if I questioned it and was told to stay away...yep, I'd then think it was even weirder.

I hadn't heard of the stairs in the middle of no where before... creepy weird.




leolady

a reply to: leolady

I think those stairs are in England and were an art installation.

ETA - yes, Forest of Dean and they were taken down again presumably because they invite accidents. Some people are liable to walk up them and drown themselves by accident. Sculptures and the stairs.

a reply to: Raxoxane

Well no Rax it isn't libel either. Google is your friend. There are certain legal conditions that must be met for someone to commit either libel or slander. I haven't even remotely come within the same zip code of those conditions. I asked, given the contradiction between DP's stated 'mission' and the manner in which he chooses to disseminate the information AND 'fund' said mission whether it was possible that he might (wittingly or otherwise) be part of the conspiracy. I would need to accuse him outright to meet the legal standards of libel. I have not done that. And none of the DP fan-base has ever answered why this 'mission' is not a 501(c)(3).

a reply to: Domo1

I think your assumptions are flawed, at best, about discerning my flaws from my writing. I've almost always written in rather idiosyncratic ways--particularly when not writing professional docs. I've written on the net since about 1982.

I evaluate integrity from the whole gestalt of my observations and sensings about a person. In terms of facial observations alone, I look most intensely at the eyes. I prefer several photographs that clearly show the eyes in a range of contexts. And, it's not a fool proof art or science.

It's also more an internal distillation of data rather than consciously going through a checklist.

BTW, in general . . . my writing style achieves that which I seek it to achieve. If it offends your sensibilities, please skip over my posts. I'm clearly NOT one size fits all.

In terms of my training, background, most discerning, aware folks see it in a flash. I doubt I could very easily hide it, if I tried.

In David P's case . . . he just comes across abundantly as what he holds himself out to be. If he were guilty of the silly stuff some accuse him of, it would show in a diversity of ways in terms of his character and the tiny bits of data that women's intuition tends to be so good at picking up on and evaluating unconsciously. Is he flawless, of course not. Is he human, of course.

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: superman2012

There aren't many such stories. Probably less than 5.

However, I think they give a clue as to the level of 'high strangeness' involved in the 411 cases.

. . . and maybe a clue to the capabilities of whatever is doing such stuff.

Do you have one as an example?