posted on Jul, 30 2009 @ 06:16 PM
I think this is highly interesting. Admittedly, there are a few reasons why "John Lear" could be legitimately sidelined, in that a lot of the stuff
he documents can be sidelined, although this is true, that can be said for Phil Schneider, whom by the way was murdered (which is what is shown in the
Also it is true to say that the likes of Lazar can be discredited easily, in fact I went for a decade disbelieving lazar's story because it was so
easily debunked by the scientific/socially accepted paradigm of plausability (also known to some as plausable acceptability/deniability) - a chance
based paradigm actually. So far to say that the likelyness for something to be true or not is based on the plausable (and thus supporting)
Well, for people like Phil Schneider, Bob Lazar and John Lear, this has been something as a problem. It seems, a lot of people wanted to 'delete'
any evidence of Lazar's education (i.e notoriety), this actually happened and was documented quite well. There are many other examples where, quite
frankly, people got CAUGHT denying members of faculties whom people still working their had confirmed so.. I believe this was Brian O' Leary or Bill
Holden or Ralph Ring, I can't remember which.
People need to understand something, notoriety & notability are something that is recorded as a matter of public record. When controls exist on public
record (such as wikipedia, government education authorities) at the very least a risk exists for the corruption, or at the very least bias of the
information is not only scientifically verifyable, but this is a matter of common sense and the operation of the human mind, morality, and
exploitation. Nothing any of us should be unfamiliar with, opressed or supressor. So, I'm not sure how people are coming to the conclusion that John
Lear is 'just some unimportant person' - surely this is a cultural determinisation (as someone like mckenna might say?) - actually, no it isn't.
Its an information based one. Notoriety/notability is historical, that is so far to say evidencial and informatical, not cultural. However cultural
changes to proceed these variables.
Just my 2 pence I guess
I've had something happen to me that makes me know not all of these unnotable and ignored 'nuts' are lying - and even if John Lear is lying, which
I actually doubt, (even after hearing what Dan Burisch has to say on the matter)- I actually feel they all confirm my experience, which was close
encounter lasting 30 minutes in a set of extremely amazing circumstances and co-incidences. That is so far to say that, these people are touching on
existiances yet to be acknowledged by a majority, a difficult thing to gain notoriety in such circumstances, don't you think? Well, now we know how
Wilhelm Reich and Tesla might have felt..
I guess, it doesn't how smart you are unless you understand how to exploit.
[edit on 30-7-2009 by 7redorbs]