reply to post by Adcra
Thank you for bringing a mature version of what a skeptic should sound like.
As I said before, the other "malevolent" interference is so sad, that the "dude" cannot be taken seriously.
There is a point in asking all the questions, and contrary to what a lot of people could think and without answering for Smokingman, they are easily
answerable by someone with a "genuine" experience.
I put the quotes because, after all, absolutely all experience is PERSONAL... The aim of the scientific process has been, in fact, to try and
eliminate the personal aspects of the verification process, to establish a testable method of arriving to certain foreseen or unknown conclusions,
depending on the hypothesis at hand.
The very good point that Datawraith was developing was that, in spite of the SOURCE or TESTABILITY of the story and information that Smokingman has
been kind and brave enough to share in the forum and way in which he did, there is also a significant component which is WHAT CAN BE LEARNED from the
story, from the possible difficulties ahead, and of ways of interpreting an event that seems dubious at best to most who would read about it.
Again, without speaking for Smokingman, because he can decide on his own what or not to do about HOW he shares his story, I can already tell you that,
for the most part, what you would obtain from the detailed account you invited him to make would be an enhanced, more literary version of the
"story", that would make certain aspects of his individual experience seem even more fantastic...
Someone at the beginning of the discussion already tried to prove that with a little literary flair, one can put together some googable information
and make a story look and sound "real"... And what then?
The point then of sharing this type of story, and in such a venue (it is not called Above Top Secret for banal reasons...) is that the importance lies
not in the actual testability of the story, for then he would have approached others and in a slightly different environment, but how to DEAL with a
seemingly overwhelming experience.
An experience that seems to have so many ingredients that invite others to share, although in admittedly "hard to believe" surroundings, the ever
living drama of humanity's ability to deal with unexplainable phenomena, with crisis management, with the different pro and counter tendencies that
make achievement so easy and so hard at times.
Very little information can pass any type of testability standard in ATS, be it politics, economics, and what have you not.
As a matter of fact, the words "opinion" and "my views" are repeated more in those threads and forums than anywhere else.
Whoever can say that they have a direct peek into a candidate's brain, for example, to make some claims about the virtues or defects of any political
The acceptability and credibility standards are passed not because those discussions have any more testable or solid ground as a context, but because
of the perceived "REALITY" of the point in discussion.
Nobody doubts that there are elections coming, and that there is economic turmoil in the international arena, or that 9-11 happened. These seemingly
incontrovertible facts, seem to give most people the "permission" to be willing to believe more outlandish claims on things about which, by
definition, the general public gets to know very little and always with the sense of being duped.
This story, whether or not Smokingman ever decides to acquiesce to any believability tests, has much to teach all those willing to participate in a
mature and serious discussion on the implications of certain experiences and their content.
This is not my story, but I can assure you that no amount of detail or "proof"would suffice to those who want to NOT believe in something.
Thank you again Data...
Until later, Smokingman...