SkepticOverlord, I do not want this post to come across as a flame. It is not intended as such, and I hope you will appreciate my intention to
"speak" for something that I truly believe in.
First, in order to appease my disappointment, you linked me to a thread of about 14 postings where one person said, "Good job for locking that one
SO." The overwhelming response on THIS thread is "why?" There are more people asking about why it's locked than there are patting you on the
back for doing it. It is standard around here that postings on one primary topic are limited to one thread. It never got out of hand. It was very
simply pro-AB or anti-AB. Many other threads on this board are locked because they are "similar" in nature to others. i.e., Dulce Documents,
Denver Airport, Abu Ghraib prison abuse, and many more. If they seem to be along the same topic, shut it down and reference the original. Now we are
shutting down the original and referencing a new one? If someone doesn't want to read 43 pages, then they simply don't need to read 43 pages. There
is enough to read elsewhere on this board. But don't change your standards because of one UNFOUNDED and UNSUBSTANTIATED "hoax" posting.
And about that posting....
On that other thread, Satariel posted the nature of the hoax. He referenced the "proof" of the hoax as the following: "So, here goes. BLIND
SKIES is the proof - totally made it up on the spot, because it sounded good." ... "I googled it myself, and was surprised that the first hit
actually had to do with asteroids. I laughed a little, but then included that part about COINCIDENCE as a result of my google experience. I picked it
out of the blue, people, and it "hit" when searched on!" ....... "When I ´quoted´ AB and said LOOK TO THE SKIES and INVESTIGATE FOR YOURSELF, I
fully expected you to do web searches on BLIND SKIES, and quickly learn that it probably doesn´t exist, never has, never will."
Actually, per Google, "Blind Skies" doesn't reference anything about asteroids. The words "blind" and "skies" searched separately does in fact
reference asteroids though. And the reference is actually quite relevant, "Asteroid Buzzes Earth, Highlighting Cosmic Blind Spot .... The space rock
approached Earth in the glare of the Sun, a blind spot that made it impossible to see during the day or night from any terrestrial vantage point. The
event illustrates the potential of a surprise hit by an asteroid, astronomers said. .... A recent plea by scientists to the Australian government to
fund a search of the southern skies fell on unsympathetic ears, however. Australian science minister Peter McGauran said he was not convinced the
threat of impact was real enough to warrant spending government money." Ummm, that does seem pretty relevant to this conversation I think.
Here is the link...
www.space.com...
AB could have called it COSMIC BUZZES, BLIND EM7, or various other combinations to have Google tab it as the first headline. That spells out more to
me than hoax. If anything, it shows that the hoaxer is full of BS and WRONG! Google those and see what happens. It could have been damn clever of
AB to link that article.
But because someone announces "Hoax Here!", you automatically lock the thread? I just debunked the debunker, and the moderators here are "Deny-ing
Intelligence". I'm not arguing this point expecting you to unlock the original, delete this thread, or start a new forum. My point is that you are
arguing for your moniker "Deny Ignorance" as defense in your locking of the post. When in fact it is pure ignorance (meant as lack of knowledge,
not lack of your brainpower) to even think of locking that thread for ONE post.
And Muaddib????......
You asked me "What else do you want to know?". Well I want to know the truth. The only way that we will discover the truth is through discussion.
The only way that we will have a discussion is if the threads are not locked. This board exists for us, thanks to the moderators. I fully respect
their role and will say that they do a damn good job of keeping this place clean and respectable. I will also say that they are wrong on this one.
They are quelling one of the best threads that this board has ever seen. Like I said, if someone doesn't want to read 43 pages, well then... DON'T
READ IT! What else can we do? You can start this thread all over again, and it will not be long until this one is up to 43 pages. That's why this
is a discussion board.
