posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 04:31 AM
Originally posted by intrptr
Also "naive" to just believe a second hand story you think?
Sucker born every minute.
Naive, no, trusting yes..
Logic says that the only things that know for sure if this is true are Sam the hippy, the other person in the story (won't say his racial origin in
case the mad woman goes off
) and the alleged ball / probe (it was classed as intelligent so I will class it as such). One or all could be totally
fictitious, we as readers have no clue.
Herein lies the problem with any story..
To doubt them all would be stupid as would be to trust them all so we have to use our own choices on this and his was to trust it while you and me
would be sceptical based on zero provability but it does not mean its untrue.
This brings me to the rather annoying and stupid 'pics or it didn't happen' phrase, it really grinds my gears to quote Family Guy. People provide
'pics' all the time and are still not believed and rightly so with today's uber simple to use technology to alter / create photographs and video.
Therefore it should be changed to 'pics or it might not have happened' or 'pics, what's the point'.
I also don't agree with people who point out stereo types in other peoples posts while using one in their as to disprove the others story. The fact
the man is / was a hippy in no way means his mind was impaired by drugs etc, he could just agree with parts of the so called hippy lifestyle, I prefer
to think of it as doing your own thing and cannot be stereo typed.
As for the story itself, its a nice story, I have no reason to disbelieve the story nor do I have a reason to completely believe it but I'm not going
to attack the person for it.
People come on here to tell true stories, to tell deliberate lies or to relate stories from others, we as readers have to decide who is doing what and
even then we may be wrong.
edit on 18-2-2013 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)