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.

 

Dulce Underground Base Alien War Question

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2007 @ 05:04 PM
link   
I've always felt that the most compelling argument for the existence of the Dulce Base, came from Dr. Paul Bennewitz. That's were the story really began. People tend to discredit his claims, because of the actions of Richard Doty and Bill Moore, both of whom addmitted that they were feeding Dr. Bennewitz disinformation about the Dulce Base. However it is often overlooked that neither Mr. Doty nor Mr. Moore were the first to reveal the existance of the facility to Dr. Bennewitz, but rather simply CONFIRMED what he had already believed to be true through his own active investigation. Whether or not Dr. Bennewitz was getting too close to the truth about a joint E.T./U.S. Gov't installation, or some kind of CIA mind control program, or whatever, he was undoubtedly upearthing SOMETHING, that the intelligence agencies were willing to kill to keep secret.




posted on Mar, 27 2007 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by IronDogg
Cool! Thanks for adding in here John. So you are the one who brought forward all this info to the public originally?

Originally posted by johnlear

Yes.


Mr. Lear admits this.

He is the one who brought this public.

He made the claim, he alone needs to provide the proof.

Many thanks in advance,
Lex



posted on Mar, 27 2007 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by yfxxx
Ok, let's go ...

So far, all this evidence could also be faked.


OK, then no sense it presenting all that.


Therefore the more complex (and therefore difficult to fake for amateurs) a video is, the more compelling it is as evidence. Therefore I exclude printed documents, because these are just too easy to fake.. Sorry, but extraordinary claims require more than "vanilla" evidence.


OK. Then no videos (could be faked by professionals) no printed documents, too easy to fake.


Finally, the best evidence would of course be physical artifacts, like, say, an alien tool. I think we can assume that the aliens brought some of their hardware themselves. A metallurgic lab can quickly prove, if some artifact is of terrestrial origin or not. At least, a piece of metal which could be extraterrestrial takes more means to fake than are available to the general public.


No, no...if I show you an alien tool you'll just say it cold have come from anywhere...not necessarily Dulce.


I agree that such an alien artifact would only be very strong evidence of the presence of extraterrestrials on this planet, but not necessarily at Dulce.


See?


However, if someone proves that the ETs are here, I'll grant you the existence of Dulce for free
.


OK. What will constitute proof that ET's are here? Specifically what evidence would convince you?


So, that's it. Now, Mr. Lear, please show us any evidence as defined above.


Unfortunately there is noting defined above. You have presented too many exclusions.

How about an alien tool that was rectangular with smooth rounded edges about 1 inch wide by 2 inches long and about 1/2" thick? Sapphire in color and so smooth it is slippery and difficult to hold on to. It looks like a large precious stone and would definately rival anything that could be bought at the most prestigious jewelry boutiques on New York's Fifth Avenue. Would you buy this as an alien tool?


But I won't hold my breath ...


I agree. Don't start holding your breath until we agree on what will constitute satisfactory evidence.



posted on Mar, 27 2007 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

Tim, this is the 5th time in 3 days that you have called me a liar. If you are going to keep that up you need to post proof exactly what I lied about.

As of now, your personal conduct is a violation of the T&C of Above Top Secret. Either you post proof that I lied or post an apology. If all you have is an opinion that I lied then you need to make that clear. Thank you in advance for your gentlemanly retraction and future conduct.



U2U from Ghost01

John,

I'm truely disappointed with your reply to my last post on Dulce. Once more you have shown your gift for petty insaults!


Tim, please accept my apologies for my petty insults.


Granted, I know I have problems with spelling, and don't always have a dictonary handy. However, you chose to resort to cheap shots instead of addressing the issue.


Tim, please accept my apologies for criticizing you when you don’t always have a dictionary handy.


I really thought that there was something more to the famous John Lear. I believed you were someone of honor. I think you have now proven to me that you are like many others on this list: You are petty and cheap in your tactics, Love cheap insults, and have no skills for dealing with other people. I tried to start over with you because I really hoped that I could learn something from you being here.


Tim please accept my apologies for my cheap and petty tactics and cheap insults.


I'm sorry to say this so bluntly, but maybe it will open your eyes:
John Lear the legend is amazing, however, John Lear the Person has proven to be the biggest disappointment in my study of avation and Military technology.

I'm truly sorry that I had the misfortune of meeting the man behind the ledgend! :-(

Tim


I’m sorry I disappointed you Tim but as you may know I am not the brightest crayon in the box; I’m extremely lazy; I have a smart mouth; and a real poor friggin’ attitude!



posted on Mar, 27 2007 @ 11:35 PM
link   
John, i am also disappointed in you for not having the answer to every question in the world. I thought you had the answer to world peace and solving world hunger... but then i realized you were just a human, and now i cant help but be disappointed.

[edit on 27-3-2007 by hikix]



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by yfxxx
So far, all this evidence could also be faked.


OK, then no sense it presenting all that.

No, you don't back out with such a cheap excuse! I clearly said that I would accept what I listed as evidence. It might not be 100% irrefutable proof, but it would be a start. So please go on, present said evidence.




Originally posted by yfxxx
Therefore the more complex (and therefore difficult to fake for amateurs) a video is, the more compelling it is as evidence. Therefore I exclude printed documents, because these are just too easy to fake.. Sorry, but extraordinary claims require more than "vanilla" evidence.


OK. Then no videos (could be faked by professionals) no printed documents, too easy to fake.

As for the videos, see above. They would be evidence; the more complex they are, the better are the chances that they might turn out to be proof.


OK. What will constitute proof that ET's are here? Specifically what evidence would convince you?

What?! Can't you read?! I clearly said it: An alien artifact!


Unfortunately there is noting defined above. You have presented too many exclusions.

I gave you enough options for what I'd regard as evidence. The "exclusions" only pre-empted any claims that said evidence will automatically be regarded as 100% proof.


How about an alien tool that was rectangular with smooth rounded edges about 1 inch wide by 2 inches long and about 1/2" thick? Sapphire in color and so smooth it is slippery and difficult to hold on to. It looks like a large precious stone and would definately rival anything that could be bought at the most prestigious jewelry boutiques on New York's Fifth Avenue. Would you buy this as an alien tool?

I don't care at all what it looks or feels like. Have it analyzed by a well-known material research lab. If it didn't originate from the earth, the abundance of isotopes for its constituent elements will be significantly and measurably different from earthly material.


Don't start holding your breath until we agree on what will constitute satisfactory evidence.


I already said so, and said again in this posting. Please start providing compelling evidence, and upon further analysis of this evidence, some of it may turn out to be irrefutable proof.


To be frank: Your reply was a text-book example of open evasion, using rather lame rhetorical tricks. I think I made it unmistakably clear what I would consider as "evidence" for the existence of a secret human/alien base near Dulce, NM. On the other hand, I'm going to regard any further attempts by you to build strawmen or other distractions as strong evidence that you don't have any of the pro-Dulce evidence as requested by me.

Regards
yf



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 04:37 AM
link   
yfxxx

so someone has to take whatever proof they have (lets take an artifact for arguements' sake) and have it tested to prove its presumed origin.

this obviously costs money. are you willing to fund such tests, reports and activity?

lets translate this to a court of law:
you can be concidered the prosecutor working on behalf of the people and the government, and in this case, JL would be the defense, right? He's on the stand, so to speak. You demand proof in an effort to disprove his statement of opinion. thus you demand the defence to prove their innocence (when translating this situation to a court of law).

YOU want to disprove his statement of opinion (only 1 P Tim, really). Thus YOU need to get evidence that his statements are untrue. Not him.

right?



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 05:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by shadow fax
this obviously costs money. are you willing to fund such tests, reports and activity?

No, why should I? It's not me who wants to convince the world of the existence of alien bases on this planet.



YOU want to disprove his statement of opinion (only 1 P Tim, really). Thus YOU need to get evidence that his statements are untrue. Not him.

right?

Wrong!

By definition, I can't "disprove" an opinion. All I'd like to know is whether Mr. Lear's "opinions"(*) have any firm base in reality (other than embellished stories). It appears that the answer is an outright "No".

So far, all proven facts are completely consistent with the "null hypothesis", i.e. that the secret alien/human underground base near Dulce, NM (or anywhere else) does not exist. Mr. Lear can have as many "opinions" as he likes, but if he expects anyone to follow them, he should provide some evidence. Lacking such evidence, anyone who does follow him should be prepared to be regarded as uncritical and gullible.

(*)Despite his "disclaimer" below his posts, Mr. Lear clearly is totally convinced that he knows for a fact, that the "Dulce base" exists. His "disclaimer" is nothing more that a quick escape route to wriggle out of any tight corner he might argue himself in.

Regards
yf



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Tim, this is the 5th time in 3 days that you have called me a liar. If you are going to keep that up you need to post proof exactly what I lied about.


First off, I reposted this because you ignored the whole issue I raised in my last post. I didn't mean you lied today, I meant it in general as I feel you ignored the point of my last post.

You have been building the evidence for the Dulce Base off of the Dulce Papers. Having written the Dulce Papers, you knew that you had written them off of things you had heard. For whatever reason, you seem to have purposly avioded telling everyone that you are the origional souce, but instead claim it's official. On March 26th, you wrote:



I mentioned in another thread, I was the one that published the "Dulce Papers". I made the pen and ink drawings from the originals which were drawn in pen


You have been using the "Dulce Papers" as you official Source. Every time someone has questioned anything you have said about Dulce, you promptly refrence these papers as the proof behind your story.

Either you got your information FROM these papers OR you WROTE them. If you create something, and then use it as a refence Time and Time again to prove your claims, you are lying. What makes it a lie is the fact that you are intentionally hiding the fact that you didn't get your information from the source, but that you are being your own source.

You can't use yourself as proof! Yet, you cosistently do it. What do you call it when someone intentionally Misleads others time, and time again with their words?

I'm sorry if you feel offended, but now you know how I'm feeling. Everytime I try to confront the issue, you seem to change the facts as needed to suit your claims.

I'm Done with this, take it or leave it!

Tim

EDIT: Removed incorrect quote!

[edit on 3/28/2007 by Ghost01]



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 05:56 AM
link   
if you quote me tim, quote the current (ie. correct) text. dont use my words to take a cheap shot at someone.

be creative: grab a dictionary, figure your own jokes out and keep up the correct spelling.




[edit on 28-3-2007 by shadow fax]



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 05:58 AM
link   


How about an alien tool that was rectangular with smooth rounded edges about 1 inch wide by 2 inches long and about 1/2" thick? Sapphire in color and so smooth it is slippery and difficult to hold on to. It looks like a large precious stone and would definately rival anything that could be bought at the most prestigious jewelry boutiques on New York's Fifth Avenue. Would you buy this as an alien tool?


Hi John, I’m interested to know if the above is something you have actually held and if so how was this obtained? also where is it now? I’m sure that an object like this would be just as convincing as any metal tool?




posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by shadow fax
if you quote me timmy, quote the current (ie. correct) text. dont use my words to take a cheap shot at someone.


I didn't mean to misquote you, I got confused and though I was quoting Mr. Lear. The Quote in question has been removed from the post. Sorry!

Tim



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by yfxxx

Originally posted by shadow fax
this obviously costs money. are you willing to fund such tests, reports and activity?

No, why should I? It's not me who wants to convince the world of the existence of alien bases on this planet.


but you are the one that wants to prove something.




Originally posted by shadow fax
YOU want to disprove his statement of opinion (only 1 P Tim, really). Thus YOU need to get evidence that his statements are untrue. Not him.

right?


Wrong!

By definition, I can't "disprove" an opinion.


indeed, so what are you trying to do?



All I'd like to know is whether Mr. Lear's "opinions"(*) have any firm base in reality (other than embellished stories). It appears that the answer is an outright "No".

So far, all proven facts are completely consistent with the "null hypothesis", i.e. that the secret alien/human underground base near Dulce, NM (or anywhere else) does not exist.


yes. what has been, beyond a shadow of a doubt, proven is that if this secret hidden underground base does exist: it is indeed a secret, its most likely underground and its definately very well hidden.

but as long as nobody starts digging, nothing is proven conclusively. The hidden and secret aspect of the alleged base makes it hard to prove its existence.

i have a secret place in my house where i keep some extra cash, im not telling you where that secret hidden place is: does it really exist?


Mr. Lear can have as many "opinions" as he likes, but if he expects anyone to follow them, he should provide some evidence. Lacking such evidence, anyone who does follow him should be prepared to be regarded as uncritical and gullible.


is that your opinion or can you prove that?

If you demand proof, then its only logical that you fund the aquisition of that proof. I can tell BMW inc. that i want one of their top of the line limo's but without paying for it, i wont even get an official picture of it.

or am i lying too now?



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 06:44 AM
link   
for further explanation regarding the futility of yfxxx's and Tim's quest please refer to the idea's of some smart dudes:

en.wikipedia.org...ödinger's_cat
en.wikipedia.org...'s_teapot

enjoy!



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by shadow fax
for further explanation regarding the futility of yfxxx's and Tim's quest please refer to the idea's of some smart dudes:

en.wikipedia.org...ödinger's_cat
en.wikipedia.org...'s_teapot


I fail to see the relivence of you post! My whole point is that John seem to be useing papers that he wrote as evidence to support his claims. I'm not complaining about John's oppinions at all. What I'm saying is that you can't use something you create as proof to back up the validity of what you are saying.

If John just stuck to saying "here is what I think", I see no problem.

Tim



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

How about an alien tool that was rectangular with smooth rounded edges about 1 inch wide by 2 inches long and about 1/2" thick? Sapphire in color and so smooth it is slippery and difficult to hold on to. It looks like a large precious stone and would definately rival anything that could be bought at the most prestigious jewelry boutiques on New York's Fifth Avenue. Would you buy this as an alien tool?



I can have it tested.



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by shadow fax
i have a secret place in my house where i keep some extra cash, im not telling you where that secret hidden place is: does it really exist?

Why not? There is nothing unusual at all about such a hidden place.

What you apparently do not understand is:

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence!

If I say I've seen a deer in the woods near my home, you might believe me at face value, or be content with evidence which shows that there is indeed a wood in the vicinity of my home, where the existence of deer has been documented in the past. There's nothing unusual about my claim.

If, on the other hand, I claim that I've seen a unicorn in the woods, you should ask for much more evidence, simply because the existence of a living unicorn totally contradicts accepted knowledge about this species (i.e., that it's only a fairy tale being). In such a case, you should not be convinced, if my only evidence is my own word and, say, a phony-looking document saying that unicorns had been seen in the woods in 1648.


If you demand proof, then its only logical that you fund the aquisition of that proof.

As I already said, I mainly wanted to know if there exists any compelling evidence for "Dulce". I do not "demand" evidence, let alone proof. If none comes forward, I will simply continue to file the "Dulce" story away as a tall tale.


I can tell BMW inc. that i want one of their top of the line limo's but without paying for it, i wont even get an official picture of it.

False analogy. Everyone knows that BMW makes high-end cars, so the claim that they have "special" models, which are not generally shown to the public, is effectively self-evident. If, on the other hand, someone claimed that they also make interstellar spaceships, I definitely wouldn't even consider believing this until they show at least a good photograph and some technical data.

Regards
yf



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 07:14 AM
link   
i was under the impression that john typed/drew up the documents from other handwritten documents (which were written/drawn by others). Aside from that, the D Papers were not the only sources of information that lay at the base of this story. of course, that is my impression, but the point attested by the two wikipedia links still stands.

granted, the matter discussed in these links are of a high phylosphical level, but they apply nonetheless. perhaps you should read them again?

Maybe i misunderstand, but i thought the question was RE: the existence of the Dulce base, not how believable or true JL's idea's are. Correct?



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by yfxxx
What you apparently do not understand is:

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence!

Regards
yf


hmmm, ever heard of Christianity?



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 07:23 AM
link   
John, I’d be happy to see written testimonials from reputable people provided they are signed and include contact details. Anything and everything can be faked; this does not mean you are absolved of the responsibility to back up your assertions. If you provide a picture for example, while it could be faked, it could also be examined and proven not to be. The best for your argument would be to provide all the evidence you have and let anyone and everyone scrutinise it, if it is good then you will be vindicated. Maybe some people will dismiss it out of hand however others might pick up on it and take it to someone who can verify its authenticity.

Seriously, if you really believe all of this then surely it would be in the best interest of the entire world to let it be known and proven to be the case would it not? This “I don’t want anyone to believe me” line is akin to announcing you have the cure for cancer but not letting anyone have it.

Of course as long as you present these things as fact you actually are asking people to believe you regardless of whether you claim you’re not.



Originally posted by shadow fax
yes. what has been, beyond a shadow of a doubt, proven is that if this secret hidden underground base does exist:

...

but as long as nobody starts digging, nothing is proven conclusively.



Shadow, you’ve contradicted yourself there a bit haven’t you. It’s been proven to exist beyond a shadow of a doubt but at the same time it hasn’t been proven conclusively?

Why do you seem to be so against John providing evidence? Are you saying you’re happy to believe anything he says without evidence? If so why?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join