posted on Oct, 29 2010 @ 08:23 AM
Originally posted by Jay-morris
I guess no one has an answer for the footage i posted
edit on 29-10-2010 by Jay-morris because: (no reason given)
Jay, the game seems to be "But-what-about-THIS-one?", which when you think twice about it, is a dodge to avoid a serious discussion of ANY
particular case where an investigation has developed a potential prosaic explanation. If you don't want to confront inconvenient evidence for one
case -- like the one at the top of this thread -- you merely run away and find another case. And another. And another.
You may not even realize you're playing this game. But it is a very effective reality-avoidance mechanism, conscious or not.
The reason it's unfair is that it actually takes some significant effort to find the context and technical parameters of a video and see what the
illumination conditions and spacecraft activities were at the time. Since youtube provides a plethora of 'NASA UFO videos', usually without even
basic info such as date/time, the amount of research work demanded is staggering.
And here's why i think it's a cheat: the end result at best would be a description of a prosaic cause, that can be as easily flipped off or run away
from, as the last one was... or in this case, the STS-80 report (including testimony from two of the astronauts). If you can just ignore that
research, it's clear to me you'll ignore any similar research on any future 'challenge' you come up with.
Can we stay on theme in this thread?