It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why Hasn't Anyone Debunked James Gilliland?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:49 PM

Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
I know there are large chunks of ATS that value your opinion, and biedny's very highly; but you are way too negatively biased for me.....

I think you mean critical in thinking. One cant be "negatively biased" when I've spoken very publicly both in print and radio for many years about my own experiences.

Again, don't want to believe. Desire to know.

I do have to roll out (late already), have a good weekend all.

[edit on 3-10-2008 by jritzmann]

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:58 PM

Originally posted by jritzmann

Well that wouldn't make much sense since they aren't UO shots. So, is this basically trying to prove you were there? I don't see the point in verifying the existence of trees and mountains. You claimed you'd "been there", and that implied some knowledge gained from that trip. Since the subject here is visual data...what was your point. I guess there was none other then some sort of one-up thing. I dunno, I'm at a loss there.

The pictures of the trees are verification that I was there. Sorry if that finds you at a loss.

Uh, all I did was ask. Excuse me for asking if you had footage and if you could verify it. You brought up being there, not me.

You asked me to provide you with logbooks and footage of Gilliland UFO's that I shot myself. I told you i didnt shoot anything. I just said I was there. Please take notes next time.

This has really all stemmed from your maligning comment that us ATS experts don't do our "homework". Yet you hold no knowledge on which to base your statement, nor the most basic information about it.

Again incorrect. I simply stated that I didn't feel you did enough homework on this case. Not ALL ATS experts. BIG difference.

These are really poor stances to take in defense of *anything*, and again are part of why we're in the crap we are with UFO studies.

Facts and truth need not be defended.

[edit on 3-10-2008 by NightVision]

posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 12:52 AM
Good grief!! Total bunk!! Let's stick to what is PROVABLE! If it were true there would be some great footage from some great cameras.

Such a grand thing this grand no one thinks to bring anything more high-tech than handheld camcorders.

There is no such thing as aliens until it is proven. Anybody ever hear of a little something called the scientific method?

Garbage like this gives a bad name to the entire subject of UFO's. I believe there is a possibility of aliens out there...and I want it to be real. But that doesn't make it so. And this is certainly NOT real. Before anyone asks how I know....the answer is simple. Because NO ONE has EVER shown ANY solid proof. Same as believing in god, I'd like it to be real but you gotta show me goods.

People who want to believe so badly that they accept this as truth and proof.....are exactly the same type of people that say their proof in god is their faith. A BS argument at best. This is another example of man needing to believe in SOMETHING in order to try and make sense of what we don't understand.

new topics
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in