reply to post by CHRLZ
You know, there's an old saying that goes something like.
"Only the truly ignorant, would claim to ever give an unbiased and balanced view". it was probably Voltaire, or someone of his ilk, who said that.
The fact that you choose to change my words to suit your own bias says more about your "balanced view" of life than I ever need to.
I could also point out that people who annotate their posts with endless.
are often people who are absolute cards in their own mind. I don't
pretend to be balanced, unlike some, who falsely, endlessly claim that's exactly what they are on this forum. In my experience and note I say my
experience, weird stuff happens, everyday, all day and we only see a tiny tip of the iceberg of that weird berg. In fact, I'd go further, I suspect
it is that very same weird stuff, that binds our particular reality together and is the source of every single "spiritual" philosophy. I make no
bones about that, I wear my freak flag with pride I don;t feel the need to hide behind "balance" simply because, I've met about 3 people in my
whole lifetime I could, in any way shape or form, describe as such.
Again, you totally fail understand my point, not a problem, I don't expect everyone to work on my level and my level, is not the bench mark for truth
or balance. It's an individual's take of the world they perceive exists. my world begins and ends with "I think", many on here, including you it
would seem, world begins and ends with the premise "I know". That's fair enough, doesn't worry me at all however, if you are going to try and
analyse my posts, at least do me the service of actually understanding them.
See, to me, to even mention tenure on this site, immediately suggests the idea of "pecking orders and ownership of views that have a right to be
expressed". Me, I couldn't give a rat's arse how long someone has been a member if they make salient points or, their posts are just damn well
researched and as it happens, I'm almost an "old timer" in these parts.
As you seem so goal orientated rather than interested in research for research's sake, that does rather beg the question. If you are so sure of your
bias then, why not put your hand in your pocket and pay for an independent analysis of the photo? Given there's a huge rump on here who already know
"it's mundane" maybe you could have a whip round and do it and we can all discuss the results? Or, could it be many, simply love the sound of their
own voice (sic) and really only post on this thread and many others like it, as part of a slightly sad group that hands out stars to each other
without even reading a post as "That poster is on message"?
Personally, I have no truck with either of the entrenched views that seem to use the star system as some sort of contest and a validation of their
agenda. In fact, I have often given stars to posts by people I disagree with on just about every fundamental about the whole of Ufology however, in
my book, if it's a good post it deserves a star. Damn, how utterly balanced of me, I really must quit that.
Again, let me make plain, my key point and only point really was, to mention that. This thread, having failed to nail the culprit in the photo after
68 pages, has now, to all intents, descended into the "power politics of the school yard" where two groups snipe at each other and the posts become
little more than the actions of apes beating their chests in an attempt to show superiority. Meanwhile, there's another bunch of kids who all think,
it's a "bit silly", waiting patiently for someone to solve the riddle and give their reasoning and evidence to breathe life back into the subject.
Finally, my apologies for not using the word you wish to hear, "paranormal" only, I tend to steer away from such pejorative terms. An ostrich
wandering in front of camera on a Crete cliff top is both anomalous and mundane at the same time. That's why I used the term anomalous in the first
place. Then again it might well be you don't really have much experience of this sort of study, so it's perfectly understandable that, you have no
real grasp of the subtle differentials of terminology, those more experienced, prefer to use.
possibility that we will NEVER know what that indistinguishable blob is? 
