Is Dr.Edgar Mitchell a LIAR??

reply to post by Riposte


"I don't WANT them to be believable. I simply look at the facts and make an informed decision. You do not do this. "

I've been reading UFO stories since the early 60s. I've seen many, many of them. I'm also a historian. I know how to analyze verbal evidence. Mitchell just isn't believable.

If you have any hearsay you'd like to present as evidence, that would be fun.

reply to post by Riposte


No. I wouldn't call it a sin. But this thread is about Mitchell and I didn't see you say anything about "tens of thousands of others". What I see is a backtrack.

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
I've been reading UFO stories since the early 60s. I've seen many, many of them. I'm also a historian. I know how to analyze verbal evidence. Mitchell just isn't believable.

If you have any hearsay you'd like to present as evidence, that would be fun.

Why don't you listen to some of the direct eyewitness live testimony of pilots that was recorded while in flight? And perhaps you would enjoy looking at the the radar reports recorded while said UFO encounters took place.

It would be a lot more fun than using hearsay as an excuse to not use your critical thinking skills.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Riposte

 

No. I wouldn't call it a sin. But this thread is about Mitchell and I didn't see you say anything about "tens of thousands of others". What I see is a backtrack.

I already admitted it was a backtrack? So what? There were at least two posts in this thread with dozens of eyewitness testimony.

Originally posted by RiposteWhy don't you listen to some of the direct eyewitness live testimony of pilots that was recorded while in flight? And perhaps you would enjoy looking at the the radar reports recorded while said UFO encounters took place.

It would be a lot more fun than using hearsay as an excuse to not use your critical thinking skills.

You are typical in assuming that anybody who doesn't agree with you hasn't done the work. Why is that?

And an uproarious guffaw over the claim that *I'm* not using my critical thinking skills. Or do we have another "well, my definition is. . ." situation here?

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
You are typical in assuming that anybody who doesn't agree with you hasn't done the work. Why is that?

And an uproarious guffaw over the claim that *I'm* not using my critical thinking skills. Or do we have another "well, my definition is. . ." situation here?

Sorry, I said it was either one or the other. Either you are blind, or haven't done the work. Hopefully it's the latter.

Originally posted by RiposteSorry, I said it was either one or the other. Either you are blind, or haven't done the work. Hopefully it's the latter.

False dichotomy. Just because you say, doesn't mean it true. You're welcome to your opinions, of course.

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
False dichotomy. Just because you say, doesn't mean it true. You're welcome to your opinions, of course.

If you've seen and listened to the best direct evidence for UFOs and believe that it is all lies and hallucinations, you're blind.

If you haven't seen and listened to the best direct evidence for UFOs, you haven't done the work.

A reasonable person can't dismiss the evidence.

Originally posted by RiposteIf you've seen and listened to the best direct evidence for UFOs and believe that it is all lies and hallucinations, you're blind.

If you haven't seen and listened to the best direct evidence for UFOs, you haven't done the work.

A reasonable person can't dismiss the evidence.

Like I said, that's your opinion, and you are SO welcome to it.

A reasonable person must dismiss unreasonable evidence.

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
Like I said, that's your opinion, and you are SO welcome to it.

A reasonable person must dismiss unreasonable evidence.

You can't be reasonable and dismiss evidence simply because it is contains unconventional elements. Or are you going to dismiss in flight recordings of pilots for some other reason?

Originally posted by RiposteYou can't be reasonable and dismiss evidence simply because it is contains unconventional elements. Or are you going to dismiss in flight recordings of pilots for some other reason?

The fact that you like evidence is no measure of its validity. Two pilots, one reports a huge saucer-like shape following his ship. The other just sees the sunset. Is the second one lying?

Originally posted by Gawdzilla

Originally posted by RiposteYou can't be reasonable and dismiss evidence simply because it is contains unconventional elements. Or are you going to dismiss in flight recordings of pilots for some other reason?

The fact that you like evidence is no measure of its validity. Two pilots, one reports a huge saucer-like shape following his ship. The other just sees the sunset. Is the second one lying?

Are you referencing something in particular?

Originally posted by Reevster

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
Lots of talk. No proof. Is that the best you've got?

Lol ...I think the PTB have your paycheck ready for ya Gawdzilla...
I mean you are saying that all these people are lieing?

And then there is this .
A well recorded and little known event in the Western world would be the events of the Utsuro Bune. This is a myth dating from circa 1800 Japan. It states that a USO ( unidentified submerged object) washed up on the shore. The inhabitants of the village witnessed the object on the shore stating that is was spherical with strange writing on it. Out of the capsule came a woman dressed in fine clothing.
www.youtube.com...

I dont think it matters how many witness reports there are , you will never open your mind enough to realize we are not alone.
Its kinda sad really.

I can understand that many sightings have not been thoroughly documented in the past but today in the 21th century equipment like cam-corders, digital cameras and mobile phone cameras are ubiquitos but still there is no hard evidence, why is that ? The above quotes posted by Reever is fantastic though since they originate from very credible people, i like the 2008 speech by Former Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer very much for example. http://(link tracking not allowed)/WBJ5E

Cheers,


[edit on 2009/4/24 by reugen]

Who cares? He walked on the freakin moon. That should give him a bit of leeway when giving his testimonies. I mean, c'mon. The moon. You know, that other circular object in our sky. That thing some of you believe is actually an ET Death Star. If he wants to say aliens are real, hell, more power to him.

Some of you get too angry over comments you hear over the internet by a person you will never meet in your lives.

Dr. Mitchell is a real authentic space veteran, if there is such a classification. If he says UFOs and extra terrestrial life exist and are here on Earth, then only a fool would think otherwise.

Ok, so perhaps the Earth is full of fools. But why do we need to tell everyone UFOs are real? If we know it, and everyone with an IQ over 110 and has looked into the subject himself knows it, then it's only the fools who who are still ignorant of the truth. Simple math proves they are wrong in numbers. Should we care? We cannot think we can force people to believe in UFOs. After all, some people still believe the planet is flat. Even if the government said UFOs are real, alot of people would refuse to accept that and that's a conspiracy even.

PS: Just think about a "Planet-to-Planet Internet" with another alien race? Can you imagine how awesome that will be when it comes?

People, discuss the topic of this thread and not each other!
This is my first and last warning. now back to the topic at hand.

Is Dr.Edgar Mitchell a LIAR??

Thank you.
Moderator