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.

 

Roswell Proof: Where is it?

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied


My assertion is this confirms the conclusion of the SECRET Twining letter that states there was no physical evidence availible to prove their existence.



No it really does not confirm that conclusion, as Hal9000 pointed out the Twining Letter Sept. 23, 1947 was written in response to Schulgen's request to Twining for information.

Schulgen and Lt. Col. Garrett had been looking at UFO reports they felt were of high value. Garrett wrote a report based on those reports that Schulgen forwarded to Twining. Twining gave the report to Col. Howard McCoy and the review of that report is what originated as Twining's Sept. 23 , 1947 Letter back to Schulgen, that affirmed Garrett's report.



Compare Garrett's July 30, 1947 report to Twining's Sept. 23 , 1947 Letter.



Garrett's July 30, 1947 report


From detailed study of reports selected for their impression of veracity and reliability, several conclusions have been formed:

(a) This “flying saucer” situation is not all imaginary or seeing too much in some natural phenomenon. Something is really flying around.

(b) Lack of topside inquiries, when compared to the prompt and demanding inquiries that have originated topside upon former events, give more than ordinary weight to the possibility that this is a domestic project, about which the President, etc. know.

(c) Whatever the objects are, this much can be said of their physical appearance:

1. The surface of these objects is metallic, indicating a metallic skin, at least.

2. When a trail is observed, it is lightly colored, a Blue-Brown haze, that is similar to a rocket engine’s exhaust. Contrary to a rocket of the solid type, one observation indicates that the fuel may be throttled which would indicate a liquid rocket engine.

3. As to shape, all observations state that the object is circular or at least elliptical, flat on the bottom and slightly domed on the top. The size estimates place it somewhere near the size of a C-54 or a Constellation.

4. Some reports describe two tabs, located at the rear and symmetrical about the axis of flight motion.

5. Flights have been reported, from three to nine of them, flying good formation on each other, with speeds always above 300 knots.

6. The discs oscillate laterally while flying along, which could be snaking.



Garrett as early as July 30, 1947 seemed to sense something was not quite right as evidenced by his conclusion that "Lack of topside inquiries, when compared to the prompt and demanding inquiries that have originated topside upon former events, give more than ordinary weight to the possibility that this is a domestic project, about which the President, etc. know.



Another important piece of information here is that in July 1947 Schulgen requested the help of the F.B.I. That is where we get the "Memorandum to Ladd" in which Hoover in his own handwriting say's he is willing to go along if the F.B.I.will get access to any future "disk" recoveries.

That shows that Hoover was concerned about not having had access to at least one "Disk" recovered that he knew about.

Dr. Michael Swords writes,...

www.ufoscience.org...

But in the summer of 1947 the formal operation called Project Sign was not yet in existence. Reports of flying disks were coming from everywhere, but the investigation of these reports was disorganized. The Pentagon, through Schulgen, responded first as the natural focal point. AFOIR-CO was given the initial responsibility in the person of Lt. Colonel Garrett. He, Taylor, and Schulgen began to try to get their bases to investigate notable cases and forward the reports. They also enlisted the FBI, who assigned Special Agent S. W. Reynolds as the liaison. They began working furiously on this throughout July, involving Wright-Patterson now and then by direct communication with McCoy.

As July wore on into August, Garrett, Schulgen, and Reynolds became confused by a lack of interest and pressure emanating from the high echelons of the Pentagon. The previous year they had gone through an investigative furor about a subject that they considered to be similar to the flying discs, when hundreds of “ghost rocket” reports came out of Sweden and other European countries. In 1946, the top brass had exerted continuous pressure to find an answer, but now it had gone completely quiet. This puzzling void has been termed “the silence from topside.” It was very peculiar to Garrett and the FBI. Their mutual suspicion was that the very highest officials knew what this phenomenon was already.



If there had been a "disk" recovery in July the F.B.I. was left out , and the Twining Letter reviewing Garrett's report certainly would not have volunteered that information knowing it was being shared with the F.B.I.









[edit on 21-7-2006 by lost_shaman]




posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 01:25 AM
link   
"BRIG.-GENERAL ARTHUR EXON
BRIG. GENERAL STEVEN LOVEKIN
DR. ROBERT SARBACHER
JUNE CRAIN " ==skyeagle409

Interesting stories and some even sound familiar. This is also an example of hear-say.
Just because you have typed it here with credible names and positions adds nothing.
What is your source that it can be looked at and evaluated for credibility ?
If you are using the Disclosure Project, there are some serious credibility issues
there already. We need to know that.

WALTER HAUT

I have a different question here. Walter Haut gave many different and conflicting
testimonies during his life. If this is the testimony version you attribute to him,
why and how do you discard his other testimonies ? What filter did you use ?

Walter Haut variable testimony discussion

www.virtuallystrange.net...



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightwing
"BRIG.-GENERAL ARTHUR EXON
BRIG. GENERAL STEVEN LOVEKIN
DR. ROBERT SARBACHER
JUNE CRAIN " ==skyeagle409

Interesting stories and some even sound familiar. This is also an example of hear-say.
Just because you have typed it here with credible names and positions adds nothing.
What is your source that it can be looked at and evaluated for credibility ?
If you are using the Disclosure Project, there are some serious credibility issues
there already. We need to know that.

WALTER HAUT

I have a different question here. Walter Haut gave many different and conflicting
testimonies during his life. If this is the testimony version you attribute to him,
why and how do you discard his other testimonies ? What filter did you use ?

Walter Haut variable testimony discussion

www.virtuallystrange.net...


Let's take another look at Lt. Haut.

____________________________________________________________________


AFFIDAVIT

My name is Walter Haut.
My address is: [-------BLACKED OUT-------]

I am retired.

In July 1947, I was stationed at the Roswell Army Air base, serving as the base Public Information Officer. At approximately 9:30 AM on July 8, I received a call from Col. William Blanchard, the base commander, who said he had in his possession a flying saucer or parts thereof. He said it came from a ranch northwest of Roswell, and that the base Intelligence Officer, Major Jesse Marcel, was going to fly the material to Fort Worth.

Col. Blanchard told me to write a news release about the operation and to deliver it to both newspapers and the two radio stations in Roswell. He felt that he wanted the local media to have the first opportunity to have the story. I went first to KGFL, then to KSWS, then to the *Daily Record* and finally to the *Morning Dispatch*.
The next day, I read in the newspaper that General Roger Ramey in Fort Worth has said the object was a weather balloon.

I believe Col. Blanchard saw the material, because he sounded positive about what the material was. There is no chance that he would have mistaken it for a weather balloon. Neither is there any chance that Major Marcel would have been mistaken.

In 1980, Jesse Marcel told me that the material photographed in Gen. Ramey's office was not the material he had recovered.

I am convinced that the material recovered was some type of craft from outer space.

I have not been paid nor given anything of value to make this statement, and it is the truth to the best of my recollection.

/s/ Walter G. Haut
Signature witnessed by: 5-14-93 Max Littell. /s/ (Date)
____________________________________________________________________

Lt. Haut stated that, " There is no chance that he would have mistaken it for a weather balloon. Neither is there any chance that Major Marcel would have been mistaken. "

I concur and in 1994, the Air Force confirmed Lt. Haut's assessment by admitting that no weather balloon was involved in the Roswell incident.




[edit on 22-7-2006 by skyeagle409]



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightwing
"BRIG.-GENERAL ARTHUR EXON
BRIG. GENERAL STEVEN LOVEKIN
DR. ROBERT SARBACHER
JUNE CRAIN " ==skyeagle409


Interesting stories and some even sound familiar. This is also an example of hear-say.


Hearsay? I don't think so! After all, we can track military actions during and after the Roswell incident to make a determination that what took place at Roswell involved no typical weather balloon nor that of any experimental balloon for that matter. After all, it wouldn't have taken cargo flights to fly the crash remains to Wright-Patterson AFB to ascertain that they were typical balloons--weather or those of Project Mogul.



Just because you have typed it here with credible names and positions adds nothing.


It does if you follow the facts where they lead! I have already uncovered unrefuted evidence that no balloon of any kind was ever involved in the Roswell incident so now, we must take another look at the Air Force's first news story, the recovery of a downed flying disk.


What is your source that it can be looked at and evaluated for credibility?


Source? Funny as it may seem, the Air Force but I must add, New York University as well.


If you are using the Disclosure Project, there are some serious credibility issues there already. We need to know that.


No, I am not using the Disclosure Project as indicated from my sources above but I find it interesting that you brought up the Disclosure Project because I am very familiar with some of those case files there were presented there and can confirm that they took place as reported so in that regards those cases that I am referring to have no credibility problems. I can use official Air Force and other government documents to prove the incidents happened as reported.




[edit on 22-7-2006 by skyeagle409]



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Interesting story.



LIFE MAGAZINE, April 7, 1952
HAVE WE VISITORS FROM SPACE?


INCIDENT 3.

"On April 24,1949 at 10:20 a.m., a group of five technicians under the general supervision of J. Gordon Vaeth, an aeronautical engineer employed by the Office of Naval Research, were preparing to launch a Skyhook balloon near Arrey, N. Mex. A small balloon was sent up first to check the weather. Charles B. Moore Jr., an aerologist of General Mills Inc. (pioneers in cosmic ray research) was tracking the weather balloon through a theodolite -- a 25-power telescopic instrument, which gives degrees of azimuth and elevation (horizontal and vertical position) for any object it is sighted on. At 10:30 a.m. Moore leaned back from the theodolite to glance at the balloon with his naked eye. Suddenly he saw a whitish elliptical object, apparently much higher than the balloon, and moving, in the opposite direction."

"At once he picked the object up in his theodolite at 45 degrees of elevation and 210 degrees of azimuth, and tracked it east at the phenomenal rate of 5 d of azimuth-change per second as it dropped swiftly to an elevation of 25 d. The Object appeared to be an ellipsoid roughly two and a half times as long as it was wide. Suddenly it swung abruptly upward and rushed out of sight in a few seconds. Moore had tracked it for about 60 seconds altogether. The other members of his crew confirmed his report. No sound was heard, no vapor trail was seen. The object, according to rough estimations by Moore and his colleagues, was about 56 miles above the earth, 100 feet long and was traveling at seven miles per second."


[Note: This is the same Charles B. Moore who is now debunking the Roswell UFO crash object of June/July 1947 as nothing more than one of his secret Mogul balloons that he helped launch.]



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 10:47 AM
link   
quote]Originally posted by Access Denied


No offense but when are you people going to wake up and finally admit you've been had? There is an OVERWHELMING amount of SOLID evidence to support the MOGUL explanation.

The is false! The Air Force made up that story and knew its Mogul balloon story was false as well.

I’ve obtained documents proving that Mogul balloon train # 4 never flew and that flight was cancelled due to clouds on June 4, 1947 and that is why there are no flight data records for Mogul balloon #4 and why there are none to be found on the Air Force’s website concerning its Roswell report either.

Mogul balloon trains were not classified and were occasionally recovered by civilians. Reward tags, questionnaires, and other I.D. tags and labels were attached to Mogul balloon trains for anyone who recovered a downed Mogul balloon train.

Rancher, Sid West recovered a Mogul balloon train so where’s the cover story? A policeman in Flat Bush, New Jersey recovered another Mogul balloon train as the local citizens watched so where’s the cover story for that recovery? Another Mogul balloon train was vandalized because it was left sitting next to a roadway. Where’s the cover story for that recovery?

In fact, where’s the cover story for this downed balloon train that was recovered by Ben Thompson of Haskell, N. J., and Fred Hammond of Sussex, N. J? Please note in the photo that the downed balloon train does not resemble anything like a ‘flying saucer.’


roswellproof.homestead.com...



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied
And you may also wish to consider the 'memories" of the B-29 pilots of the 509th...


Kent also spent some time talking to the still living crews of the 509th and asked many about the Roswell Incident. He talked to 15 B-29 pilots and 2 B-29 navigators and this is what he was able to determine:




AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT SMITH


1) My name is Robert E. Smith
(
(4) In July 1947, I was stationed at the Roswell Army Air Field as a member of the 1st Air Transport Unit. I worked in the cargo outfit with C-54s. My involvement in the Roswell incident was to help load crates of debris on to the aircraft.

roswellproof.homestead.com...




AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT SHIRKEY

(1) My name is Robert Shirkey

((7) Several days later, a B-25 was scheduled to take something to Ft. Worth. This was the second flight during this period: the third was a B-29 piloted by Oliver W. "Pappy" Henderson directly to Wright-Patterson.

roswellproof.homestead.com...



5.6 Robert Porter

[M/Sgt Robert Porter was a B-29 flight engineer with the
830th Bomb Squadron.

We flew these pieces. [Some officers in the crew] told us
it was parts of a flying saucer.


Of course, the Air Force wouldn't have spent thousands of dollars to fly a typical non-classified Mogul balloon train to Wright-Patterson AFB to ascertain what it was.



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied
[
Have you even bothered to read through this entire thread? The Air Force didn't make up what the first hand witnesses (those who are still credible) describe. Debris from a crashed MOGUL balloon train is the only thing that fits their descriptions and the photos.


I have and once again, there are no Mogul balloon flight data records for balloon train # 4 because that balloon flight was cancelled and that according to Project Mogul flight data records, which is why you will find no flight data records for that object and proof that balloon train # 4 took off on June 4, 1947. Consider that a done-deal and I will reiterate that the Air Force made up its story and Project Mogul flight data records are that proof that balloon train # 4 was not responsible for the Roswell incident.


You can choose to believe otherwise if you wish.


It is not matter of what I believe, the issue is what the Project Mogul flight data records show and they show that Mogul balloon train # 4 never flew.




[edit on 22-7-2006 by skyeagle409]



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 11:38 AM
link   
quote]Originally posted by Access Denied

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
You may wish to consider the words of Jesse Marcel Jr. recently

And you may wish to consider the fact that his "memories" were "recalled" under hypnosis in 1980.

And you may also wish to consider his "memories" conflict with Irving Newton's....

Kent Jeffrey’s "Red Herring"


Kent Jeffrey focused mainly on Jesse Marcel Jr. and Irving Newton. Both are known to have handled the debris but did they handle the same debris? Jesse never recalls seeing any of the special tape with purple figures on it. His recollections are that the figures were painted or embossed on. Jeffrey explains how he resolved this inconsistency:



Speaking of Kent Jerffery!

"Then, just this last spring, he changed his mind. He decided that the Roswell crash was the result of a Project Mogul Balloon. It was, to his mind, a case closed.

"In fact, Marcel himself has been quoted by a disinterested third party. Reporter Johnny Mann accompanied Marcel to Roswell in 1980 to interview him about the UFO crash. Mann found the picture of Marcel posed by the weather balloon and told him, "Jess, I gotta tell you. This look According to Mann, Marcel said, "That's not the stuff I found on the ranch." In other words, the only ones to report that Marcel was photographed with the "real" debris was Moore and Shandera."

Kevin Randle


www.kochkyborg.de...




[edit on 22-7-2006 by skyeagle409]



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied

Please stop posting the same material that we've already covered over and over again. Thank you.


Well, you keep ignoring the facts, so next time, I will challenge you to post the flight data records for Project Mogul balloon train # 4, which was similar to Project Mogul balloon train # 2.

www.csicop.org...

If you are unable to provide the flight data records for Project Mogul balloon # 4 then I will consider that as proof that Project Mogul balloon train # 4 was not responsible for the Roswell incident.



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied

Smith may have flown to Kirtland but not in 1947. A C-54 could not land at Kirtland during this time period because the runway was too small! This in itself makes Smith’s story extremely questionable and, more than likely, memories from some other event.


Check again!

____________________________________________________________________

Kirtland AFB

On Aug. 1, 1943, the Army Air Force established a new 4-Engine Training School at Kirtland AFB. The school opened August 3, at the GI Opera House on "West Kirtland." Instructors trained new pilots to transition to 4-engine B-24 bombers. Officer students attended a nine-week course to qualify them to the aircraft commanders. Soon after the school opened, 10 B-24 "Liberators" landed on the Kirtland AFB runway.

C-54

www.warbirdalley.com...

B-24

www.wpafb.af.mil...

__________________________________________________________________



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied
[Please do your homework first (that means researching to find out if there's any opposing viewpoints or facts) before trotting out yet another same old tired so-called witness.

Thank you.


I do my homework and do so with backing documents and other reliable sources. That is how I was able to ascertain that no balloon of any kind was responsible for the Roswell incident.



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied

I never said those orders were unclassified. The point I was trying to make is they fully acknowledged it and made no effort to conceal the fact they wanted to get their hands on a UFO. If they had a found a UFO in Roswell why would they cover it up?


Your not really serious are you?

The Cold War was in full Blossum at this time, even MOGUL Balloons were attempting to listen for Soviet Nuclear Tests!

During the War , FOGO Balloons and Enemy Air Craft were recovered in Secret. And the Military recovered Enemy Air Craft without paper trails.

Vandenberg had sent Doolittle to Europe in '46 to investigate the "Ghost Rockets" and even today we still don't know what it was he found or reported back to Vandenberg!

As soon as Ken Arnold's sighting made headlines , a week before the Roswell events , Gen Ramey and his Intel Chief Col. Kalberer quote "Poohed" the Disk's in the Papers. With Col. Kalberer citing Orson Well's radio broadcast and the panic it created and attempted to sooth the public's fears that "we're not being invaded by little platter-like planes from Mars."

roswellproof.homestead.com...



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied

Right but what you failed to point out (a deliberate omission on your part?) about this "important" piece of information is what else it says...


I didn't fail to point out or deliberately omit anything , Hoover agreed to cooperate with Schuilgen. And Hoover was concerned about being shut out of future "disk" recoveries. That was my point and its in Hoover's Hand writing.



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied
Please read the following information about the many problems with his and the other stories and then come back and tell us how YOU propose to resolve all these inconsistencies...

Loading Freight


This is a really interesting story. I like the idea of a top-secret convoy of trucks with flashing lights/sirens though. There is nothing like drawing attention to a top-secret convoy. He adds that security personnel were setup to prevent interference from outside. Smith rattles off the names of the crew for the aircraft, including Henderson, but for some reason does not mention the name of the mysterious sergeant, who showed him the materials from the spaceship. One must wonder, who this person is. Certainly, his picture would have been in the RAAF yearbook and Smith could identify him.

However, Smith was not actually at the crash site. This is also contradicting Frank Kaufmann’s statements that they used a heavy-duty vacuum cleaner to suck up all the little parts and pieces. Whatever Smith adds to the tale is more confusing that confirming. His story contradicts that provided by others and the lack of a name for the mystery sergeant makes it even more unbelievable. Smith may have flown to Kirtland but not in 1947. A C-54 could not land at Kirtland during this time period because the runway was too small! This in itself makes Smith’s story extremely questionable and, more than likely, memories from some other event. Perhaps Smith is recalling shipment of some atomic weapons. The security would be warranted and could explain the descriptions of "investigators".

This is yet another example of something that sounds good on the surface but really starts to fall apart under serious scrunity... it just doesn't add up!



First thing right off the bat , Printy say's Smith contradicts Frank Kaufmann ! It's been known for a fact since Kaufmann died that he had nothing to do with Roswell.

Smith contradict's Frank Kaufmann , Go Figure!



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied
I never said those orders were unclassified. The point I was trying to make is they fully acknowledged it and made no effort to conceal the fact they wanted to get their hands on a UFO. If they had a found a UFO in Roswell why would they cover it up? It makes no sense in the context of the official policy in place at the time.

Let’s say they did recover a UFO at Roswell. Don’t you think this policy would change? At first maybe it would reported to the public, because that would be a great discovery. But then reality would set in and the story would later be retracted and replaced with a cover story because of national security reasons. Sound familiar?

Sure they wanted people to report any sightings. Like a volunteer costal watch during wartime, the residents give the military that many more eyes looking to the skies. But that doesn’t mean the recovery of a UFO would not be classified. I just don’t think this proves Roswell didn’t happen.


Originally posted by Access Denied

Originally posted by Hal9000
If something were recovered at Roswell then I would think they would continue to recover as many as possible. Maybe the order to shoot them down was in response to what was found at Roswell? Just throwing out that possibility.

I doubt it… it was more likely in response to the number of credible sightings coming in at the time… many from their own.

Even more probable was because these sightings of UFO’s were violating our airspace, and the order to shoot them down was SOP for any craft that wasn’t ours. My point was though, even if a crash was recovered, you would continue to try to get your hands on more, wouldn’t you?


Originally posted by Access Denied

Originally posted by Hal9000
These documents you’re referring to, give more support to your point, but it should be pointed out that they are related.

The first of these memos were the Schulgen Memo, and then the Twining Memo was written in response. Then the Walker Memo was a response to the Twining Memo.

Right but considering the position these people were in and the fact none of them up and down the chain knew anything about a recovery is what’s significant.

I wasn’t denying that, just pointing it out to other readers.



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman

[As soon as Ken Arnold's sighting made headlines , a week before the Roswell events , Gen Ramey and his Intel Chief Col. Kalberer quote "Poohed" the Disk's in the Papers. With Col. Kalberer citing Orson Well's radio broadcast and the panic it created and attempted to sooth the public's fears that "we're not being invaded by little platter-like planes from Mars."
roswellproof.homestead.com...


I want to mention that General Ramey was also present at the press conference in July 1952 when the Air Force dismissed the UFOs over Washington D.C. as nothing more than mirages caused by temperature despite the fact that ATC personnel, commercial and military pilots denied that temperature inversion was responsible for those UFOs.

In 1969, from the Air Force's own scientific study report, it admitted that inversions could not have been responsible for UFO events such as those that took place over Washington D.C. in 1952.

*****************************************************************

"Quantitative Aspects of Mirages"

According to a 1969 study by the Air Force Environmental Technical Applications Center, the conditions needed to produce the UFO-like effects attributed to inversions cannot exist in the Earth's atmosphere.

Menkello, F.V., "Quantitative Aspects of Mirages," USAF Environmental Technical Applications Center, 1969.




[edit on 22-7-2006 by skyeagle409]



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied

Originally posted by lost_shaman

However, Smith was not actually at the crash site. This is also contradicting Frank Kaufmann’s statements that they used a heavy-duty vacuum cleaner to suck up all the little parts and pieces. Whatever Smith adds to the tale is more confusing that confirming. His story contradicts that provided by others and the lack of a name for the mystery sergeant makes it even more unbelievable.

Smith contradict's Frank Kaufmann , Go Figure!

Too funny. I think Printy probably put that in there to illustrate the "quality" of the second hand witness testimony and remind us that at one time Kaufmann was used by the great Roswell authors/researchers to prop up the case.

For those who don’t know what we’re talking about…

Frank Kaufmann (aka Steve McKenzie) Exposed!


Tim Prinity is not credible considering that I caught him "red-handed" distorting the facts on UFOs and the Roswell incident.



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 09:04 PM
link   
"Tim Prinity is not credible considering that I caught him "red-handed" distorting the facts on UFOs and the Roswell incident." == skyeagle

Unlikely. Here is how you do it for everyone to see. You have already shown me, in this forum, that you have a problem with facts.

"Actually, I don't have an "ax to grind" but I am here to put forth UFO reality for what it is." == skyeagle

Translation:
Your conclusion is pre-ordained, nothing counter to your conclusion can fit, you use anything you can
find without references to support YOUR conclusion. You deny it in the same sentence you acknowledge it.
This is not a bad thing as long as you can recognize what you are doing and correct it. Since you probably
cannot see this, I will show you how it is detected. I take a very simple thing which can be factualized,
dangle it for you, you jump on it, I show you how it is a FACT in the fullest sense of the word, and still
you CANNOT accept it. Until you can learn to accept what facts are out there, just like other ufologists,
you are helping perpetuate the myths.

Example:

"If Mack (correct spelling) went to the base" == nightwing

(Fact is dangled)

"Correction, it is not spelled "Mack" he was referred to as "Mac." I had it right the first time." == skyeagle

(Fact is taken and hook is in)

"Wanna see a picture of his Gravestone, skyeagle ? This is a fact. Tangible, it exists, you can photo it etc...
Its a "data" point. Mack, not Mac. Sorry to dissappoint." == nightwing

(Fact is proven)


"We can go here to see "Mac" as well." == skyeagle

(Fact is ignored.)

UFOLOGIST AT WORK, ignore the facts, full steam ahead, course set for the Twilight Zone.
Da da Da da.....da da da da......

Skyeagle409, You are giving me a lot of data to help demonstrate retrospective falsification. May I use
your posts freely ?



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightwing
"Tim Prinity is not credible considering that I caught him "red-handed" distorting the facts on UFOs and the Roswell incident." == skyeagle


Unlikely. Here is how you do it for everyone to see. You have already shown me, in this forum, that you have a problem with facts.


On the contrary, I am right on the mark. Go to his website and see what he claims was responsible for the Roswell incident.

I rest my case.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join