home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ Hidden Truth / Hidden Truth.iso / data / newspostings / reports / 401-500 / 438 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1996-06-19  |  3.0 KB
  1. Path: news.demon.co.uk!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.mathworks.com!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!news.abs.net!cs.umd.edu!info.usuhs.mil!usuhsb.usuhs.mil!FANTEGROSSI
  2. From: usuhsb.usuhs.mil!fantegrossi (BILL F)
  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 19:54:35 GMT
  6. Organization: USUHS
  7. Lines: 41
  8. Message-ID: <009A4180.13EF24E0@usuhsb.usuhs.mil>
  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> <31C845B4.6AE2@students.wisc.edu>
  10. Reply-To: fantegrossi@usuhsb.usuhs.mil
  11. NNTP-Posting-Host: usuhsb.usuhs.mil
  12. Xref: news.demon.co.uk alt.alien.visitors:88475 alt.paranet.ufo:53847 alt.alien.research:26221 alt.ufo.reports:9513 alt.paranet.abduct:5895 sci.skeptic:72783 alt.paranet.science:3219
  13.  
  14. In article <31C845B4.6AE2@students.wisc.edu>, Brian Zeiler <bdzeiler@students.wisc.edu> writes:
  15. >Michael Edelman wrote:
  16. >> 
  17. >> Brian Zeiler (bdzeiler@students.wisc.edu) wrote: 
  18. >> So the famous Mg fragments *aren't* proof of alien visitation after all?
  19. >
  20. >No, just very good evidence.
  21.  
  22. Evidence that something anomalous did indeed occur.  You've got testimony 
  23. backed up by lab reports from 2 governments that the metal recovered at Ubatuba
  24. was beyond the capability of just about everybody on the planet at the time.
  25. The only people capable of synthesizing it wqere given a sample for analysis
  26. and concluded that it wasn't their handiwork.
  27.  
  28. So figure it out Mike.  The way I see it you've got 2 options.
  29. It either didn't come from this planet or it didn't come from that time.
  30. Any other logical possibilities (please no more "piece of ICBM" junk . . .)?
  31.  
  32. >> And nothing really crashed at Roswell?
  33. >
  34. >Yes, but it's not "physical proof" unless it's publicly available.  
  35.  
  36. I don't think there's a person on this group that would make the claim that
  37. "nothing really crashed at Roswell."  The 2 camps seem to be arguing over 
  38. whether it was Mogul or ET, and as recent posts on the subject have illustrated
  39. there's NO MORE *DOCUMENTED* EVIDENCE for the one than the other.  So we're
  40. left with lots of circumstance and implications, but something definitely
  41. went down.
  42.  
  43. Again, you can take the Mogul hypothesis to heart if that really answers all
  44. your questions, but I need a lot more than they're offering to be convinced.
  45. The testimony of first-hand witnesses, contradictory statements from the
  46. government, internal inconsistencies of behavior from the military, documents
  47. referencing material too similar to that alledgedly recovered at Roswell, etc
  48. poses too many problems for a cheap revamped weather balloon excuse.  
  49.  
  50. Can you REALLY reconcile all these problems without violating Occam's Razor?
  51.  
  52.                             your pal,
  53.                             --bill f.
  54.  
  55.