posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 05:24 PM
Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
That's a fair point but even if just one of the cases that Haines has covered have elements that are unexplainable (and with the number of cases he
has covered, I would say there is), then surely it does prove there are things going on the sky which have no rational explanation :up
Thanks, Z - I think you've got the problem absolutely upside-down. "Unexplainable elements" will always naturally occur in any report collection even
IF based entirely on prosaic stimuli. The time-tested classic human perceptual/interpretive/mnemonic algorithms guaranty this. Space/missile event
cases [a subet of all cases] demonstrate this clearly.
The issue is -- if SOME prosaic-caused reports are nevertheless passed by the filter [and again -- I can prove they have been], how is there any
guaranty that OTHERS have not passed, and reasonably, how MANY others could be tolerated before the data base becomes toxic?
edit on 25-4-2013
by JimOberg because: typos