FranklinRoosevelt : Document Released From The Special Committee on ET Science and Technology [1944]

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
I haven't read the entire thread yet, so maybe this has been debunked already, but I felt compelled to chime in and let some of our skeptics know that trying to debunk something like this due to misspellings and grammatical errors is ridiculous. Thomas Jefferson and Albert Einstein both were known to be poor spellers. Grammar is not a marker of intelligence, even though it may seem to be.

People will grasp at anything they can think of to discredit something that doesn't fit into their world view. That isn't Science. It is intellectual laziness.




posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 


Agree.
Also, typewriters didn't have a facility for underlining poor grammer with a red line
. So far the cosmetic issues the debunkers have with the document have been minor.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
I haven't read the entire thread yet, so maybe this has been debunked already, but I felt compelled to chime in and let some of our skeptics know that trying to debunk something like this due to misspellings and grammatical errors is ridiculous. Thomas Jefferson and Albert Einstein both were known to be poor spellers. Grammar is not a marker of intelligence, even though it may seem to be.

People will grasp at anything they can think of to discredit something that doesn't fit into their world view. That isn't Science. It is intellectual laziness.


You claim you haven't read the entire thread and admit you don't know if it has been debunked or not. However, it appears that you may have formed an opinion leaning towards the document's authenticity. Additionally, you accuse people of "grasping at anything" and being "lazy." Lazy would be arriving at an opinion without reading the entire thread. Audacity would then be calling other people lazy. Besides the poor grammar and misspellings, there are additional reasons the document is probably a hoax. For those of us who are familar with classification nomenclature, DOUBLE SECRET does not exist.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvenParanoidsHaveEnemies

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

Originally posted by EvenParanoidsHaveEnemies

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by EvenParanoidsHaveEnemies
 




just commenting on the poor job of debunking and seeming reaching being done here, lackluster to say the least.
checking vasa's links at the mo'

as for the "experts" on the classification screen L
L,
their claims to know ALL the schemata of the classification system are preposterous and insulting to the intelligence.
edit on 3-12-2012 by DerepentLEstranger because: added comment


You are attempting to defend a typeset that did not exist prior to 1987. You are incorrect. That is all.


nope, just pointing out a crappy job of debunking which according to vasa's links was so obviously lifted from the prior threads, so much for scholarship and sources

[emphasis mine]


The type set (or in modern terms "font") on the original document is Times New Roman. Times Roman the predecessor of times new roman was created and patented by linotype in 1943. In 1987 the pattern became available in the United States as "Times New Roman" patented by Monotype. Thus, since the original document is in Times New Roman, it was created in the United States after 1987.



so? the doc is from 44 and would be in Times Roman
according to you monotype changed the name and patented it

doesn't mean it did not exist then [and you say it did, 1 year prior]
in fact your whole post looks like one of those logical fallacies from my college days [25yrs ago]

even down to the prejudged conclusion stated up front.

why not move on to another aspect and DO A BETTER JOB?

rather than repeating from another thread?


Not repeating anything from another thread (because mainly I don't care that much). And times NEW roman had more than a name change. You would know that if you actually had any experience with document authentication - which you clearly don't. Sorry to piss in your wheaties, but this document is a fake. We can take it one step further if you wish. There are offices that I can forward this to have a formal investigation done as you seem to attest that these are indeed true and factual... shall I and we can get an answer from other professionals than myself on the matter?



Are you going to do this? It would seem ridiculous not to use a such a resource that you have made available... ?



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic911
 


At the time, no I hadn't read the entire thread. I wasn't sure how long the thread was so I wanted to offer my opinions on a point I saw brought up over and over in the first couple of pages. Poor grammar. And yes, to debunk a document based on the grammatical errors in the document is absurd. Especially considering the obvious sensitive nature of this document. Roosevelt wouldn't have had his secretary type it up.
I can even get over the stationary issue based on this.

What I cannot get over is the Double Secret classification. I agree this is likely to be a fraudulent document.

So no, I hadn't formed an opinion. I was simply remarking on how some of you debunkers opperate. And yes, it is often lazily.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   
I am having difficulties with this for a number of reasons however the debunkers are their own worst nightmare!

They want proof and give no evidence themselves.

Am I just supposed to take your word that the original is typed in Times Roman. That's a bit of a stretch considering you provide no evidence and the document is in such poor condition that it would be hard to tell.

A great many fonts look similar to each other.

While I have my doubts, the debunkers are using all the same tactics that they always do and that is plenty of assertions and no back up at all. Absolutely typical behaviour. I'm a printer, believe me! Yes right, you could be a plumber!

When the debunkers come in with so much venom it raises my suspicion levels quite dramatically.

P
edit on 3/12/2012 by pheonix358 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by UltraMarine
.
assume its destiny in this matter for the shake of Nation's security in the post - war world and I have given assurances that such will be the case .


i would have to go with hoax on this one. i would think the president of the united states would know how to spell the word "sake" by his 4th term in office.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
I am very certain that FDR did not type his own letters. Since this is supposed to be Double Top Secret I imagine that it would have been typed by someone in the Intelligence Community and it would be understandable.

A little critical thinking please.

P



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 

In your post on the "debunkers" methods, you stated, "They want proof and give no evidence themselves." See, the thing is, those presenting their claims are the ones the bear the burden of proof. That's part of how the scientific method works. So nobody but the OP must supply proof of authenticity. And that proof must be independently verifiable as well. Inferring it's authentic on the basis of belief proves nothing. Linking to a document from an unverified or obscure source is also not evidence of authenticity. If a link to at least 3 reputable sources was presented along with the document, then it would be more believable.

This is how you prove something in the real world....scientifically.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 

Are you saying FDR couldn't or wouldn't type a letter like this himself? Haha. I'm fairly certain Presidents type stuff up all the time. And the more sensitive a subject, the more likely he is to type it himself.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger
 





and it's Times Roman, patented by Linotype in '43
as pointed out in a very confusing post where it's claimed:
to not have existed


I think it's probably Times New Roman, but not willing to declare it to be any particular Roman font with certainty without some closer analysis: that's a large family of similar-looking fonts with an extended lineage going back to, well, Rome, and I'm willing to accept an outside possibility that maybe this particular flavour is actually one that existed in 1944.

That's all irrelevant, however: the cost of creating kerned text in 1944 was prohibitive, and I feel comfortable asserting that it simply would not have occurred in any document of this variety. Similarly, typewriters, as mere mechanical devices, generally have small imperfection in the vertical alignment of their letters, and this document lacks that. On the weight of these two problems, I would assert that no reasonable examiner could conclude this document was created in 1944.




how goes the search for an honest person?


Finally, if ATS is any indication, the search goes poorly indeed. . .

Diogenes
edit on 3-12-2012 by DiogenesTheDog because: I include quotes where I intended to: I'm new to ATS and misunderstood how the function works.
edit on 3-12-2012 by DiogenesTheDog because: Removed typo



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by DiogenesTheDog
 

I can see several vertical alignment errors in the original document. But it's hard to tell if that would be because of the typewriter or something else. It almost looks to me like this document was typed on a crumpled piece of paper.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   
The Majestic 12 documents have long been considered to not be authentic from what I've read..

And to be quite frank, if Roosevelt did say say "non-terrestrial" it would sound more to me that he's saying space based arsenal .. as in an intercontinental ballistic missile.. fire it, leaves the atmosphere, comes back down..

Far more likely



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
I haven't read the entire thread yet, so maybe this has been debunked already, but I felt compelled to chime in and let some of our skeptics know that trying to debunk something like this due to misspellings and grammatical errors is ridiculous. Thomas Jefferson and Albert Einstein both were known to be poor spellers. Grammar is not a marker of intelligence, even though it may seem to be.

People will grasp at anything they can think of to discredit something that doesn't fit into their world view. That isn't Science. It is intellectual laziness.


Also, if it's a typed document, it would have been typed by FDR's secretary, not FDR. He would have just signed it. Definitely need some kind of government record authentication to give this document merit though.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by DiogenesTheDog
 

I can see several vertical alignment errors in the original document. But it's hard to tell if that would be because of the typewriter or something else. It almost looks to me like this document was typed on a crumpled piece of paper.


I had seen a number of in depth analysis over the years and there's numerous problem with them .. incorrect fonts for the date of the documents, incorrect signatures.. people who weren't there at the time certain documents place them there and a host of other things.. it's possible that SOME of the documents are legitimate but it's unlikely.. and it's almost certain that many if not all of them are forgeries.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Krakatoa
 


This is ATS, you want science, go to a science forum.

Scientific methodology has so many holes in it it is like swiss cheese. Under scientific method, it's main claim to fame is that everything must be able to be re-created by any Tom, Dick, Harry or Susan.

The entire field of human abilities that rely on an individual to have an ability therefore can not be scientifically studied.

I had a dog that would go up to the front of the house and wait by the door 5 minutes before I or my Mother arrived home without fail. How did he do this. I don't know but I do Know that science would never investigate because you needed my dog for the experiment and scientific method needs almost every dog to have a similar ability or they are not interested.

Scientific method had lots of flaws.

P



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by pirhanna
 


I disagree rather strongly. I mean, even if we assume that UFOs are truly extra terrestrial vehicles and they are visiting this planet, its highly unlikely, by my estimation, that the President would even be told the truth in the first place...let alone his secretary.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by UltraMarine
 


Double top secret?
.. That'd be cool if it was real, but that right there takes away the validity. How are you sure the document is real?



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by randomname

Originally posted by UltraMarine
.
assume its destiny in this matter for the shake of Nation's security in the post - war world and I have given assurances that such will be the case .


i would have to go with hoax on this one. i would think the president of the united states would know how to spell the word "sake" by his 4th term in office.


I have no opinion whether this is real or not, but I wanted to throw my two cents in on the issue of the misspelled words. Rather than lead me to think this is fake because of misspelled words, it makes me believe more in its authenticity and here's why. Picture Roosevelt himself typing this document and for only a few eyes, so his secretaries won't be typing it, and he won't be having it proofread. Who's to say the president can't hastily type up his own document for a select few to see, make a few type-o's and fail to catch them. This would be why it isn't on White House stationary, and I believe these are probably type-o's rather than misspelled words.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   
As I was not around in 1944 and do not have a clue about what classifications were in 1944 as other people in this thread seem to have. I searched for what they might have been back then, as surely they were not the same as they are now. The search turned up very little usable information.However it did turn up this.link

Now I don't have any idea if this site is reliable or not,but it does say that the classification of double secret is valid.

The original docs do appear to have been typed on a typewriter.The document posted later in the thread appears to have been written on a typewriter which had a clogged "p". The "p" is consitantly clogged in apperance throughout the second doc posted late in the thread by the op. This was common for the machines avalible at the time of these documents.Particularly if the type face was not cleaned.

I have been around since 1954 and I can tell you that things do change and old things become new. Often people disregard things which have changed,and as for secret documents the reason they release them many years later is because they know this. Things change and certian specifics are forgotten or lost. These are not things which will be found on this wonderful, relatively new thing called the internet. People today seem to think that the internet sees all and knows all. It doesn't and it never will. There is a great deal of knowledge which will never be found on this wonderful research tool.Much is hidden from us folks, a great deal more than we will ever know.
edit on 12/3/2012 by lonegurkha because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join