home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ Hidden Truth / Hidden Truth.iso / data / newspostings / reports / 401-500 / 415 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1996-06-19  |  2.0 KB
  1. Path: news.demon.co.uk!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!news.doit.wisc.edu!news
  2. From: Brian Zeiler <bdzeiler@students.wisc.edu>
  3. Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.alien.research,alt.ufo.reports,alt.paranet.abduct,sci.skeptic,alt.paranet.science
  4. Subject: Re: Are all UFO debunkers rabid crackpots?
  5. Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 11:23:48 -0700
  6. Organization: University of Wisconsin
  7. Lines: 28
  8. Message-ID: <31C845B4.6AE2@students.wisc.edu>
  9. References: <31C5A845.1319@compuserve.com> <4q4dll$rlk@cwis-20.wayne.edu> <31C5DC53.14D0@students.wisc.edu> <4q527r$g3b@cwis-20.wayne.edu> <31C63394.7AB6@students.wisc.edu> <Dt89DA.EJA@eskimo.com> <31C79A13.3389@students.wisc.edu> <4q8u0n$joo@cwis-20.wayne.edu>
  10. NNTP-Posting-Host: f180-141.net.wisc.edu
  11. Mime-Version: 1.0
  12. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
  13. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
  14. X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)
  15. Xref: news.demon.co.uk alt.alien.visitors:88400 alt.paranet.ufo:53784 alt.alien.research:26180 alt.ufo.reports:9488 alt.paranet.abduct:5879 sci.skeptic:72663 alt.paranet.science:3205
  16.  
  17. Michael Edelman wrote:
  18. > 
  19. > Brian Zeiler (bdzeiler@students.wisc.edu) wrote:
  20. > 
  21. > : However, I'm not convinced that this syllogism is well-substantiated.
  22. > : How can you expect physical proof as a direct, established consequence of
  23. > : alien visitation?  Do you think aliens would say "Gee, those humans need
  24. > : physical proof.  Maybe we should drop a few of our lighters, cocktail
  25. > : napkins, dead colleagues, and saucer propulsion drives onto the White
  26. > : House Lawn so they have physical proof of our visits."  Get real.
  27. > 
  28. > So the famous Mg fragments *aren't* proof of alien visitation after all?
  29.  
  30. No, just very good evidence.
  31.  
  32. > 
  33. > And nothing really crashed at Roswell?
  34.  
  35. Yes, but it's not "physical proof" unless it's publicly available.  
  36. Skeptics' brains short-circuit when they have to deal with circumstantial 
  37. evidence and logical inference.
  38.  
  39. > Hmm.
  40.  
  41. Whatever...
  42.  
  43. -- 
  44. Brian Zeiler
  45.