posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 09:55 AM
YAY! Frivolous material!
I present with this post a newer, more crisper aspect of this particular topic...
The actual event, while supposedly "observed" by a Mexican named Bonilla:
1. Was NOT seen by anyone else on the planet BUT Bonilla
2. Wasn't produced for publication a whole TWO YEARS LATER - well after the assumed 'fact' - which even caught ridicule from the actual publication
editor to boot at the time.
3. Was provided to the publication without any proof, with the exception of an image of something that looked like a scribble out of a Norman Rockwell
early draft. Why such an unsupported factoid even was considered as worthy of publishing is a question all to itself.
4. And now, Mexico wants to bring to the world's attention their historical significance and grand inspirational method of doing science by rehashing
this unfounded publication as a bigger, Earth shattering realization that this was... scrambled eggs!
That's right, Mexico wants the rest of the world know that their astronomer witnessed something no one else ever realized or even witnessed... the
near absolute destruction of the human race! What they aren't publishing is the fact that Bonilla had a hankering for Tequilla, and that the cactus
crop that year had a bad bacterial infestation that nearly wiped out the tequilla crop... equating to one bad shot of tequilla!
Forget the worm!
I find it rather hillarious that a perported scientist before the turn of the 21st century managed to get a story based on one photo and a pile of
notes published concerning mysterious objects, that even the publication's editor ridiculed, that today finds itself being published worldwide as
fact because another Mexican astronomer picks up on the story and hypes up the possibilities, making it now a fear mongering possibility, with no
reality backing up it's factuality that only one person on the entire planet, a Mexican, witnessed!
VIVA MEXICO!
........
How do grandios stories of this insignificant magnitude make it to such confusing hieghts?