Robert Hastings has a message for UFO non-believers., page 15

privacy

Pages: << 12 13 14 15 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 68 times

reply posted on 20-3-2010 @ 08:29 AM by karl 12

Originally posted by Kandinsky
I should really go back and edit that over-stretching, exaggerating piece of rhetoric. I'll put it down to a bad case of bed-head and not thinking whilst typing. Cheers for pointing it out. If you hadn't it would remain there as a testament to my loathing of Greer rather than my fairness. I'll leave it hanging there despite it being a scurrilous statement of falsity...I'm not a huge fan of editing out examples of my own stupidity.

Hey Kandinsky, kudos for that post - if only some UFO debunkers out there had half your amount of intellectual honesty then maybe we'd start getting some answers (or at least start asking the right questions) about the UFO subject.

I realise its easy for folks to dismiss Stephen Greer (especialy after his recent shenanigans with the ET photograph) - what's not so easy to dismiss is all the testimony and incidents listed at the DP briefing document.

Cheers.

reply posted on 20-3-2010 @ 09:07 AM by Decoy

Hi all,

Well now I know him, as per his lecture about "Father at Malmstrom AFB". BTW: EBEs screwed up their 'computer memory devices', ie the missile trajectory programing was erased on each missile. Kinda tells me the beams at M are the same as Rendlesham, through simple?, electromagnetic proximity.
The only thing worse than hearing more about Maelstrom, is hearing anything which slightly to heavily hints the name Rswl.

Decoy

reply posted on 20-3-2010 @ 09:08 AM by Exuberant1

reply to post by karl 12

The Disclosure project is bad because it has permanently associated the few credible witnesses with a bunch of nutcases and shills.

I think that this (along with monetary incentive) may have been the primary motive for the famous Press Conference; to get all the good apples in with the rotten and right where everyone could see.

Perhaps it was not so much about lending credibility to the topic as it was an attempt to ruin by association the reputations and credibility of those few credible individuals who found themselves involved with the 'project'.

[edit on 20-3-2010 by Exuberant1]

reply posted on 20-3-2010 @ 09:39 AM by Kandinsky

reply to post by Decoy

Sorry Sir, Bull Pucky. Greer's a devalue anesthesiologist. Steven used his name "md" to provoke people to believe in him and his little alien quests. He was underline: was the big banana.

Now, now Decoy. There's no need for such strong language...lol

Otherwise, I think I agree with you. Greer is a weasel.

reply posted on 20-3-2010 @ 10:20 AM by karl 12

reply to post by Exuberant1

Exuberant1, thanks for the reply -I agree with your comments but I'd say there was more than a few credible witnesses.

Don't realy want to detract from the discussion on this thread but there's another thread here which attempts to discuss the contents of the disclosure project briefing document and witness testimony.

Cheers.

reply posted on 21-3-2010 @ 06:10 PM by karl 12

Lawrence Fawcett makes some very interesting comments about the 1975 overflights in this Paracast interview - he's also uncovered quite a few government documents dealing with the UFO subject.

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 09:38 PM by Robert Hastings

Originally posted by James Carlson
Robert Hastings has presented at least one witness who has claimed an event from the vantage of a military command that has never existed...

I've already asked once, James, but here goes again: Who are you referring to? Which source of mine, by name, and which supposedly non-existent command?

reply posted on 1-4-2010 @ 03:48 PM by James Carlson

reply to post by Robert Hastings

How many times do I have to say this? I will be pleased to discuss your lies and distortions about Malmstrom AFB in March 1967 at any time, but only at www.realityuncovered.net...

I am currently (and metaphorically) eviscerating every witness you've ever discussed regarding these events, and I welcome your weak and mostly irrelevant commentaries -- they represent a nice, light-headed and comedic breath of air that everybody appreciates.

Sincerely,
James Carlson

reply posted on 15-4-2010 @ 03:58 PM by Aquarius1

I am very disappointed that answers from James Carlson are not forthcoming, why can't you answer direct questions