[Don] Schmitt Spins Tall [Roswell] Tales

YAWN! Another day, another silly, biased, trolling thread by "The Shrike".

You seem to have an agenda. It includes knocking down every pro-Roswell belief with your Klass-filled garbage.

Anything authored by Klass belongs in the "hoax" forum.

reply to post by The Shrike


Whilst I disagree entirely with your views you are entitled to continue to try and disprove anything unusual happened at Roswell, I just wish you would actually try and do that instead of quoting others quoting someone else about little white lies on their CV.

Raise some real issues with a point of view of your own and you may get a decent debate.

Don Schmitt was a postman therefore there was no spacecraft crash at Roswell. Nice logic. Kevin Randle was his co-author. Did he also lie about his credentials? If not, then your argument is irrelevant.

Find me someone who has never told a lie.

Let's cut right to the meat of the subject: what's your hang up, Shrike? Why is it that you refuse to accept the possibility that UFOs might belong to extra-terrestrial visitors? I refuse to accept the answer that there isn't any evidence, because there is. Your posts never seem to be dedicated to discounting the evidence, rather, you maliciously attack the people. I don't think I've seen a thread you've made about the subject of ET without seeing you blatantly insult both the believers and those who promote the ET hypothesis. So I ask: why? What is it in you that has such a problem with the ET hypothesis? What about it upsets your vision of reality?

You seem like such a logical guy, but when it comes to confronting the evidence of aliens or anything like that, your logic goes out the window. Who cares if Don Schmitt lied about his profession? Does it discount what the Roswell witnesses said? No. He reported what they said, and their testimonies are documented by several other people, so it's clear he did not make the whole thing up himself. Jesse Marcel, Walter Haut, and many others testified to their dying days that what they saw was true. So why do you stop one point short of a logical conclusion? What's your hang up?

Originally posted by MarrsAttax
Don Schmitt was a postman therefore there was no spacecraft crash at Roswell. Nice logic. Kevin Randle was his co-author. Did he also lie about his credentials? If not, then your argument is irrelevant.

Find me someone who has never told a lie.

Thankfully, once in a while a reply can be replied to. Don Schmitt is a proven liar. A lot of his Roswell stuff was based on lies and misrepresentation. Kevin Randle, allegedly being the smarter of the two, published lies and representations. Nothing that either Randle or Schmitt wrote is based on fact if what they wrote supports a crashed UFO. You have the freedom to accept or reject. If you cared about the truth you'd ignore anything written by anyone trying to convince the public that a UFO crashed near Roswell. It doesn't matter who proves these people are liars.

Originally posted by Damsel
Let's cut right to the meat of the subject: what's your hang up, Shrike? Why is it that you refuse to accept the possibility that UFOs might belong to extra-terrestrial visitors? I refuse to accept the answer that there isn't any evidence, because there is. Your posts never seem to be dedicated to discounting the evidence, rather, you maliciously attack the people. I don't think I've seen a thread you've made about the subject of ET without seeing you blatantly insult both the believers and those who promote the ET hypothesis. So I ask: why? What is it in you that has such a problem with the ET hypothesis? What about it upsets your vision of reality?

You seem like such a logical guy, but when it comes to confronting the evidence of aliens or anything like that, your logic goes out the window. Who cares if Don Schmitt lied about his profession? Does it discount what the Roswell witnesses said? No. He reported what they said, and their testimonies are documented by several other people, so it's clear he did not make the whole thing up himself. Jesse Marcel, Walter Haut, and many others testified to their dying days that what they saw was true. So why do you stop one point short of a logical conclusion? What's your hang up?

Instead of yapping and accomplishing nothing, why don't you post as to where you got the evidence you claim there is. Show me and the world the evidence that extraterrestrials exist and they are here, in UFOs and abducting humans. Show me and world that beings have been discovered outside of the earth.

Logic dictates that if there is no evidence no claims can be made regardless of what is claimed. You can't go into a courtroom and argue your claim and then tell the judge you have no evidence, just beliefs and hearsay. You don't seem to really know what the Roswell witnesses really said because you accept the fantasy presented by popular authors. Go to the original reports where no claim of a real UFO crashing was presented. Stick to historical facts and historical, factual comments not the garbage you prefer. No UFO crashed near Roswell and neither you nor anyone else is going to change history.

But I do appreciate your putting in your 2 cents even if they equal a wooden nickel.

reply to post by The Shrike


You prove my point exactly. You dodge all of my questions, then speak as if you already know everything; as if it's just a matter of convincing everyone else of how right you are. You even end your arrogant comments with another insult. Why? You shouldn't need to resort to these tactics to win an argument if you know you're right.

Who are you really trying to convince?

reply to post by The Shrike


And for exactly the same lack of any reasoning the following is also a worthless, meaningless statement.

If you cared about the truth you'd ignore anything written by anyone trying to convince the public that a UFO didn't crash near Roswell. It doesn't matter who proves these people are liars.

Shrike, your own words from another of your threads just a short while ago -

"Whether you dislike the researchers for whatever reason rocks your boat, it isn't the personality you should question, it should be the results of their research. "

- seems to me you just completely shot down your own thread, and as far as I am concerned any credibility you may have had.

It's funny to me how so much time and energy can be put into digging up such a small fact when also the same time and energy is put into denying and trying to dodge away from the true fact and so much evidence to support it. The ego works in such mischievous ways to call truthful people liars and that is surely why they don't come out, they know the world hates them why would they?

Originally posted by Damsel
reply to post by The Shrike

 

You prove my point exactly. You dodge all of my questions, then speak as if you already know everything; as if it's just a matter of convincing everyone else of how right you are. You even end your arrogant comments with another insult. Why? You shouldn't need to resort to these tactics to win an argument if you know you're right.

Who are you really trying to convince?

"Who are you really trying to convince?" Simple question; I'm trying to "convince" all of the gullible members of this forum who are locked into a distorted sense of history and it's easier for them to be fooled by charlatans such as Don Schmitt and his ilk, rather than develop a questioning mind 'cause if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck. The alleged UFO crash near Roswell is a duck!

I haven't dodged "all" of your questions. You haven't asked me any logical, intelligently phrased questions since if you had I would have answered them. Are your questions about the thread topic?

Don't doubt me about Don Schmitt, read his parner's (Kevin Randle) "press release" disavowing Schmitt.

Originally posted by chunder
Shrike, your own words from another of your threads just a short while ago -

"Whether you dislike the researchers for whatever reason rocks your boat, it isn't the personality you should question, it should be the results of their research. "

- seems to me you just completely shot down your own thread, and as far as I am concerned any credibility you may have had.

Someone already replied with the same comments. A lot of ignorance going around. Read my comments again and pay attention this time. I didn't contradict myself, it just went over your head. Find my reply and try to prove me wrong, again.

Originally posted by greyer
It's funny to me how so much time and energy can be put into digging up such a small fact when also the same time and energy is put into denying and trying to dodge away from the true fact and so much evidence to support it. The ego works in such mischievous ways to call truthful people liars and that is surely why they don't come out, they know the world hates them why would they?

Please repeat that in English and describe how it applies to the thread's topic. Thanks.

Originally posted by The Shrike

Originally posted by chunder
Shrike, your own words from another of your threads just a short while ago -

"Whether you dislike the researchers for whatever reason rocks your boat, it isn't the personality you should question, it should be the results of their research. "

- seems to me you just completely shot down your own thread, and as far as I am concerned any credibility you may have had.

Someone already replied with the same comments. A lot of ignorance going around. Read my comments again and pay attention this time. I didn't contradict myself, it just went over your head. Find my reply and try to prove me wrong, again.

Are you referring to your reply that says "You are wrong. The keywords are "results of their research", not made-up or altered." ?

If so then where in this thread are the results of their research being questioned either by yourself or in the quoted Klass comments ?

As for the tone of your replies carry on, it's your own credibility you reduce (well actually the phrase "reached rock bottom and started digging" comes to mind but that's besides the point).

Originally posted by The Shrike
"Who are you really trying to convince?" Simple question; I'm trying to "convince" all of the gullible members of this forum who are locked into a distorted sense of history and it's easier for them to be fooled by charlatans such as Don Schmitt and his ilk, rather than develop a questioning mind 'cause if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck. The alleged UFO crash near Roswell is a duck!

I haven't dodged "all" of your questions. You haven't asked me any logical, intelligently phrased questions since if you had I would have answered them. Are your questions about the thread topic?

Don't doubt me about Don Schmitt, read his parner's (Kevin Randle) "press release" disavowing Schmitt.

edit on 8-11-2012 by The Shrike because: To correct grammar and add comments.

Do you really think the way to convince people that they're wrong is to hurl insults, call them "ignorant and gullible," call the people they might have trusted "charlatans?" Maybe I'm just giving you too much credit, but I don't believe that.

I have certainly asked you logical and intelligently phrased questions. Either they "went over your head," or else you just blocked them out because they were inconvenient to you. My questions are about you, though it does tie in with the thread topic.

Honestly, I could care less about Don Schmitt. I've never taken his word as gospel. You could prove that Don Schmitt is a well-known con-man (you haven't, incidentally) and it wouldn't matter. You know why? Because Don Schmitt is not the Roswell Incident. The ET hypothesis for the Roswell incident does not require Don Schmitt in any way, shape, or form. It's right there in the Roswell newspaper at the time: "RAAF Captures Flying Saucer On Ranch in Roswell Region"
The major witnesses all say the same things and most of them went to their grave with these testimonies. We also have things like the Ramey Memo and testimonies from people like Dr. Edgar Mitchell about a cover-up still in place today. In addition, none of the explanations from the Air Force hold up in light of the facts.

These are things completely independent of Don Schmitt. I'm sorry, but I fail to see the logic behind the idea that character assassination of Don Schmitt will somehow prove the Roswell Incident was just a weather balloon. Sounds like an ad hominem to me.

Originally posted by The Shrike

Originally posted by greyer
It's funny to me how so much time and energy can be put into digging up such a small fact when also the same time and energy is put into denying and trying to dodge away from the true fact and so much evidence to support it. The ego works in such mischievous ways to call truthful people liars and that is surely why they don't come out, they know the world hates them why would they?

Please repeat that in English and describe how it applies to the thread's topic. Thanks.

It's funny to me how so much time and energy can be put into digging up such a small fact when also the same time and energy is put into denying and trying to dodge away from the true fact and so much evidence to support it. The ego works in such mischievous ways to call truthful people liars and that is surely why they don't come out, they know the world hates them why would they?

You don't desrve the truth.

Originally posted by Damsel

Originally posted by The Shrike
"Who are you really trying to convince?" Simple question; I'm trying to "convince" all of the gullible members of this forum who are locked into a distorted sense of history and it's easier for them to be fooled by charlatans such as Don Schmitt and his ilk, rather than develop a questioning mind 'cause if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck. The alleged UFO crash near Roswell is a duck!

I haven't dodged "all" of your questions. You haven't asked me any logical, intelligently phrased questions since if you had I would have answered them. Are your questions about the thread topic?

Don't doubt me about Don Schmitt, read his parner's (Kevin Randle) "press release" disavowing Schmitt.

edit on 8-11-2012 by The Shrike because: To correct grammar and add comments.

Do you really think the way to convince people that they're wrong is to hurl insults, call them "ignorant and gullible," call the people they might have trusted "charlatans?" Maybe I'm just giving you too much credit, but I don't believe that.

I have certainly asked you logical and intelligently phrased questions. Either they "went over your head," or else you just blocked them out because they were inconvenient to you. My questions are about you, though it does tie in with the thread topic.

Honestly, I could care less about Don Schmitt. I've never taken his word as gospel. You could prove that Don Schmitt is a well-known con-man (you haven't, incidentally) and it wouldn't matter. You know why? Because Don Schmitt is not the Roswell Incident. The ET hypothesis for the Roswell incident does not require Don Schmitt in any way, shape, or form. It's right there in the Roswell newspaper at the time: "RAAF Captures Flying Saucer On Ranch in Roswell Region"
The major witnesses all say the same things and most of them went to their grave with these testimonies. We also have things like the Ramey Memo and testimonies from people like Dr. Edgar Mitchell about a cover-up still in place today. In addition, none of the explanations from the Air Force hold up in light of the facts.

These are things completely independent of Don Schmitt. I'm sorry, but I fail to see the logic behind the idea that character assassination of Don Schmitt will somehow prove the Roswell Incident was just a weather balloon. Sounds like an ad hominem to me.

You said, above: "Maybe I'm just giving you too much credit, but I don't believe that." Giving me credit for what? Why do you doubt yourself? Most of the replies to this thread have come from the ignorant and gullible. They believe fantasies spun by authors such as Don Schmitt. Since he lied about his past, what makes you think that he is going to treat you and other readers to the truth since he knows that he can't write the truth 'cause it wouldn't sell. He spins fantasies and sells 'cause there's a market for lies or distorted history.

You wrote: "I have certainly asked you logical and intelligently phrased questions." Please point to them as I must have missed them. I doubt that anything you say can go over my head. Don't ask me questions about me, discuss the thread's topic. Isn't that why you are here? And if you don't care about Don Schmitt, then yous shouldn't have gotten involved with this thread. Based on your above comments your sense of history is distorted. Case closed.

Originally posted by The Shrike
You wrote: "I have certainly asked you logical and intelligently phrased questions." Please point to them as I must have missed them. I doubt that anything you say can go over my head. Don't ask me questions about me, discuss the thread's topic. Isn't that why you are here? And if you don't care about Don Schmitt, then yous shouldn't have gotten involved with this thread. Based on your above comments your sense of history is distorted. Case closed.

Ha. That's not how that works. If you can attack Don Schmitt's character rather than discussing the actual evidence, then I can ask you questions about your own motives and viewpoints.

But I'll drop my questions now, because I can't suffer through your pompous, self-absorbed, arrogant attitude anymore. You'll never convince anyone with the types of comments you make. In fact, you're far more likely to turn them off to your entire viewpoint, just from the negative association.