lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Casual Approach to Evidence (Multi-Thread ST-4)
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 08-15-2003, 02:39 PM   #1
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Post Casual Approach to Evidence (Multi-Thread ST-4)

This is a Sub-Topic from a Multi-Thread discussion. The Main Thread is located at this link. http://www.lucasforums.com/showthrea...hreadid=109356

Sub-Thread 4 (ST-4) : Casual Approach to Evidence

Evidence is the cornerstone that sets asisde science from any other humna intellectual endeavor, including (to a large extent) philosophy. Given its pivotal role, admissible evidence has to be solid and reliable. If we cite a "fact," we have to be reasonably sure that it indeed corresponds to a verifiable piece of evidence. Hearsay is not admissible.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

The single best example that I can think of that demonstrates this criteria is the so-called "UFOlogy" movement.

UFOlogy is the alleged study of UFOs. Unfortunately, only perhaps a very, very small percent of "ufologists" are actually of a scientific mind when it comes to "studying" the phenomena that surround this field.

Many of the self-proclaimed ufologists are nothing more than lay persons with no scientific background that are making an effort to "investigate" claims of alien craft visiting our fair planet. There are also many who are actually quite deceptive in their efforts and/or motives. The number of hoaxes that are perpetuated in the name of "UFO research" is astounding. Some are obvious, others have explanations of fakery that are much more plausible, given the extent of the evidence available.

I point anyone interested to a site called UFOTheatre, which proclaims itself as a site for the investigation of UFO video evidence. The person who runs this site has a discussion board, posts videos from various sources, etc. In particular, look at the video titled Nfoufo Black UFO (2003) about 1/3 down the page. I warn you, it is rather large, but if you have a decent connection the wait is relatively short.

The problem with this video, is that I saw too many ways it could be faked much more easily than it could be explained that it was an alien craft:

Now, bearing this in mind, I looked at this Video frame-by-frame. What I noticed right away was that the reflection in the "UFO" changed just as it neared the house. If it were "2 miles away" this would not have occurred, however it is possible that another object caused the reflection change.. unfortunately, none is visible in the video.

The second thing I noticed was the line, and though I was looking for it, I was surprised because this is something I would have been very careful to utilize Photoshop's clone tool to remove.

At first, I merely thought it to be an artifact of the video, however, this "artifact disappears behind the "ufo." That is not consistant with digital video artifacts. (I do know a little about video after all it seems).

Here's the images as I've noticed them:




I don't think images are displaying in the Senate, so you might have to click the links, but they are small images.

I emailed both the person that runs UFOTheatre and Jeff Willes, the person who created the video, with my observations. What I got in return is hostility. In fact, UFOTheatre (his screenname on one or more disscussion boards) assailed me with insults, profanity and questioned my sexual orientation enough that even Freud would wonder what he's hiding!

Still, they couldn't satisfy my questions. AND, they both have something else to gain. Money. Good old greenbacks. UFOTheatre sells compact disc compilations of "ufo videos" and Jeff Willes sells him the original videos. It's a scam. Pure and simple. UFOTheatre even sells a program called "the magic 8-ball," which I pointed out after he tried to advertise it under another screen name on another scientific discussion board. I, of course, was assailed again… this time by his alternate screen name.

That last bit is important, because when the evidence of someone who makes a pseudoscientific claim is questioned, it is often defended in such a manner. Profanity, name-calling, questioning the person who questions the evidence, anything that might deflect attention from the original issue: the evidence. It can be seen when a non-believer questions any belief… be it ufo's, religion, esp, or that Madonna isn't getting old.

What are your thoughts? Anyone want to defend UFOTheatre? I must admit, many of the videos on his site are difficult to explain. Yet, the presence of some obvious fakes would seem to invalidate the others. Also, the absence of credible, understandable explanation doesn't mean that the paranormal or supernatural is at work... or aliens from space for that matter.

Anyone want to discuss evidenciary procedure? Evidence used in other areas of pseudoscience?

Also, see a related thread that I started on Fingerprint Evidence.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice

Last edited by SkinWalker; 08-23-2003 at 03:15 AM.
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-15-2003, 09:13 PM   #2
Eldritch
Mmm, Donuts
 
Eldritch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 3,216
What I find even more amazing is that many of these "UFOlogists" are also amateur proctologists... a fact which I plan to proove with a lot of shoddy filmmaking, sketchy eyewitnesses, and the largest silver wok you've ever seen.



Please don't consider this anything but jest. These people at UFOTheatre are, as you so aptly put, nothing but scam artists.

Eldritch is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-16-2003, 07:16 AM   #3
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
(...)questioned my sexual orientation enough that even Freud would wonder what he's hiding!
Well, if he's into that "homo is a bad word" thing, he doesn't sound that scientific to me. "You sound gay so you probably are wrong.". I almost love those.

Quote:
What I find even more amazing is that many of these "UFOlogists" are also amateur proctologists... a fact which I plan to proove with a lot of shoddy filmmaking, sketchy eyewitnesses, and the largest silver wok you've ever seen.
Ditto. If NASA or ESA or some other serious, respected organization comes up with evidence, then fine. Otherwise... tsk, tsk, tsk.

Quote:
That last bit is important, because when the evidence of someone who makes a pseudoscientific claim is questioned, it is often defended in such a manner. Profanity, name-calling, questioning the person who questions the evidence, anything that might deflect attention from the original issue: the evidence. It can be seen when a non-believer questions any belief… be it ufo's, religion, esp, or that Madonna isn't getting old.
Ditto again.

If he said something like:

Quote:
Yes, I know some videos are obviously fake, but in the name of science and preserving history I decided to post them all anyway. I agree that one's probably a fake, but you must agree that several of them are still unexplicable.

This site concerns itself with analyzation of all available movies, not just the ones I consider real. There might still be some variable here that makes that line go behind the UFO, and I wanted to make the movie free for others to be the judges.
...then I might have taken him a bit more seriously (though I don't believe in UFOs).

But if he attacks you, you're pretty much sure he's wrong. Common experience when debating someone who's just hopelessy stuck and doesn't want to admit it.

Dagobahn Eagle

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-17-2003, 10:51 AM   #4
Lord Siraious
 
Lord Siraious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Valley of the Jedi (Australia)
Posts: 266
It is a shame that there is more scamers out there than real UFOologist. What am I talking about why do I just stop at UFOology, heck there is alot of scamers throughout the whole scienific community but thats another story .

Back to the topic.....

As most people know scienitific proof is based on the falsification system. Which mean we prove something is correct at the current time by proving that the other options are false. (I stated it right didnt I? its been a while since I had to got back the the basis of scienitific method.)

So if they were real UFOologist and follow science, I assume these {Sarcasm}intelligent people{/Sarcasm} dont, they would have to investigate questions that question the validity of their evidence. As Skinwalker said they failed to do so instead they resorted to something lower than a grade 2 child and started to abuse him. Unfortunately when they did this they destroyed any chance of people and inparticular scientists (I include myself in this group, I'm a student of medical science) taking them seriously, which could mean that IF they had any real evidence it would also be included as trash and ignored.

{I think everything I said has made sence if not I'll edit it }



RPG Stats
Jedi Smuggling Ring - My Store
"A Jedi serves the Force and in doing so must be mindful of the Living Force, Cosmic Force and the Unifying Force or suffer failure they will."

"The Force is the energy that binds the Universe together.
It is everything and everything is it.
It creates and it destroys.
It has no sides and is far beyond such a thing.
It is the Force."

Jedi Master,
Jedi of the Old Code
E-mail Me
Lord Siraious is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 08-18-2003, 03:44 AM   #5
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
In dealing with subjects, such as UFOs, the evidence is typically one of two types: anecdotal or graphic imagery.

The problem with both is that they are easily contrived. It takes a great many corroborating sources to allow either as legitimate evidence. Or it requires a corroborating alternative source of evidence.

Take the video of a subject in a convenience store during the time of a robbery. The video (hypothetical) shows only the subject walking through the store, going off camera, then hurridly running out. If this were the only evidence, a conviction could not be forthcoming. How do we know this video was shot at the correct time or even the correct day? How do we know this is even the suspect on trial (these videos are rarely of any clarity)? How do we know that the store was actually robbed?

Easily answered questions when corroborated by witnesses, fingerprints, clothing matches, video date/time stamps, recovered items, etc. But without any or even all of these, a jury cannot say that the person in the video is our suspect.

In looking at a video and hearing an eyewitness testimony, one has to ask what other evidence is available and is it secured? A grainy photo or even a relatively sharp video of an object that cannot be discerned cannot be said to be anything more than unidentified.

Take the Bigfoot case for instance. Mr. Wallace perpetuated his hoax until the day he died. Only after his death did his family come clean. The famous video of Bigfoot walking from a small clearing into some trees was actually his wife in an ape suit made by the same people who did the original Planet of the Apes!

All that existed was a video and some casts of foot prints. I remember distinctly the hype that occured during the '70s and '80s about how the footprints could not have been faked, since they contained anatomically correct flaws; the many eyewitnesses that came forward to speak of their experiences; the anecdotal claim that there was a distinct odor that accompanied Bigfoot sightings; etc., etc.

Skeptical examination of the evidence was given little attention. Never mind that there was an extremely limited amount of physical evidence, all of which was easily hoaxed. But who would go to such lengths? Mr. Wallace.... for one.

This is an important subject. Evidence is important in other areas of our lives, not just in debunking claims of UFOs, Bigfoot, and the paranormal. We cannot expect people to be truthful when there is a possibility to gain status. There's little harm in 15 minutes of fame at being the "one who saw Bigfoot" or "took a ride in a UFO."

But not everybody seeking status to cares about the well-being of others. A look at Enron, WorldCom/MCI, and Montana Power will prove that. A look at government will demonstrate it as well. There are those within our governments (if you think corruption is uniquely American, this Multi-Thread is for you) who will stop at very little to get what they want.

This is an old thread, but it seemed the most appropriate to become home for the side-topic that erupted in the Why Atheism? thread.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice

Last edited by SkinWalker; 01-07-2007 at 11:57 PM.
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-30-2006, 04:57 AM   #6
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrion
Don't you think it's a bit futile to guess endlessly about something you have no chance of figuring out yourself?
Yes, it is futile, Tyrion.
But these philosophical questions are really fascinating and disturbing to me.
Don't the idea of something that always existed and never had a beginning disturb you too?
I want to make existence make logical sense to me, but it don't make any sense at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrion
He meant that he can only assume they do not exist as so far there is no proof they both are real and have affected our life.
Well, I'm going to assume they do exist almost everywhere in the Milky Way, we are just going have to have a match of assumptions.
It is ridiculous to me if the galaxy isn't populated by extraterrestrials.
Windu Chi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-30-2006, 05:04 PM   #7
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Yes, it is futile, Tyrion.
But these philosophical questions are really fascinating and disturbing to me.
Don't the idea of something that always existed and never had a beginning disturb you too?
I want to make existence make logical sense to me, but it don't make any sense at all.
I find most everything interesting. That doesn't mean it's very useful at all. For example, your assumption in this post that the universe always existed is uncalled for. You don't know. It's easy to create problems with things when you make them up based on... what? If you're just doing a logic game, that's okay. But to say that assumption is reasonable is incorrect.


Quote:
Well, I'm going to assume they do exist almost everywhere in the Milky Way, we are just going have to have a match of assumptions.
It is ridiculous to me if the galaxy isn't populated by extraterrestrials.
To assume they exist without any real evidence for them is to be irrational. If that's your thing, well, fine. Considering you seem to think that there is infinite numbers of aliens, at least some of them have GOT to be gunning for us, right?

Whatever - just don't try to get public funding for 'defense against the alien hordes.'


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-30-2006, 05:53 PM   #8
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
I find most everything interesting. That doesn't mean it's very useful at all. For example, your assumption in this post that the universe always existed is uncalled for. You don't know. It's easy to create problems with things when you make them up based on... what? If you're just doing a logic game, that's okay. But to say that assumption is reasonable is incorrect.
Well, the best any of us can do at the moment is to assume, since we can't leave this damn planet and explore the universe to find out any still unknown mysteries that we can't figure out by remaining in only one perspective.
Can't be skeptical of everything, we got use our imagination sometimes.
I'm not no damn computer, I have a imagination.
So, I don't depend on logic only to make my decisions.
So, I'm not going to be close-minded to any ideas, be they ridiculous.
Also, since it maybe the case of possible infinite realities, becacuse of the absurdity of a ultimate beginning to everything any of us can imagine out there, it will be foolhardy to assume that ridiculous ideas are false because we and I mean everybody in our civilization on this planet.
Because we don't observe or find evidence for it here on this planet, which is still again, our only perspective at the moment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
To assume they exist without any real evidence for them is to be irrational. If that's your thing, well, fine.
For you to be skeptical of everything, then that is your thing, Samuel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
Considering you seem to think that there is infinite numbers of aliens
Well, if you talking about existence then, yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
Whatever - just don't try to get public funding for 'defense against the alien hordes.'
You got jokes, huh?
Well, because I believe in aliens I'm crazy?
Then so be it, because I be damn I'm going to believe we are the only ones in this galaxy.
Until, someone go out there and search every nook and cranny of the Milky Way.
Windu Chi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-30-2006, 06:47 PM   #9
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Well, the best any of us can do at the moment is to assume, since we can't leave this damn planet and explore the universe to find out any still unknown mysteries that we can't figure out by remaining in only one perspective.
You can assume things based on evidence that is available to you at the moment. If there's no evidence, then your assumption is just a guess, hardly to be relied on. Why not treat it like that?

Quote:
Also, since it maybe the case of possible infinite realities, becacuse of the absurdity of a ultimate beginning to everything any of us can imagine out there, it will be foolhardy to assume that ridiculous ideas are false because we and I mean everybody in our civilization on this planet.
Because we don't observe or find evidence for it here on this planet, which is still again, our only perspective at the moment.
I will change my perspective when there is reason to. Also, I don't say that your ideas were false (I don't know enough to make that assumption); they are just not based on anything observable. When I see sufficient evidence for (whatever) I will believe that it exists.

Quote:
For you to be skeptical of everything, then that is your thing, Samuel.

Well, if you talking about existence then, yes.
How about this:

If there is an infinite universe, and there are infinite aliens, then there must be aliens who have come here. Do I see any aliens outside? Are there any accurate reports of aliens? No, I don't see them, and there are no accurate reports. So, can you tell me why don't I see any aliens?

(this is called the Fermi Paradox, by the way)

Quote:
You got jokes, huh?
Well, because I believe in aliens I'm crazy?
Then so be it, because I be damn I'm going to believe we are the only ones in this galaxy.
Until, someone go out there and search every nook and cranny of the Milky Way.
I don't think you're crazy. For you to believe that there may be aliens is reasonable. For you to say that there's any reason to base decisions on that right now is not true. I'm not basing my decisions on the existence or non-existance of aliens until they show up. It's the same thing for everything else, including the topic of this thread.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-30-2006, 09:10 PM   #10
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,787
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
So, can you tell me why don't I see any aliens?

Perhaps you're only seeing what they want you to see.......
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-31-2006, 07:36 AM   #11
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Cool Guy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
You can assume things based on evidence that is available to you at the moment. If there's no evidence, then your assumption is just a guess, hardly to be relied on. Why not treat it like that?
I'm not asking my assumption to be relied on, I'm just going to believe this until or if I'm proven wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
I will change my perspective when there is reason to. Also, I don't say that your ideas were false (I don't know enough to make that assumption); they are just not based on anything observable. When I see sufficient evidence for (whatever) I will believe that it exists.
Well, how do you observe infinity, there is no perspective to reach and observe from.
How do you observe infinite evidence?
My argument is, our existence don't make no damn sense; by continuing looking from or continuing trying to look from a infinite perspective.
Every finite creation idea us humans put forward, always have to explain every previous creator of this creator of this ultimate beginning of this finite creation idea, in infinite regression.
The idea something always existed or came from nothing, don't satisfy me, I don't like nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
If there is an infinite universe, and there are infinite aliens, then there must be aliens who have come here. Do I see any aliens outside? Are there any accurate reports of aliens? No, I don't see them, and there are no accurate reports. So, can you tell me why don't I see any aliens?
It may surprise you, but I actually haven't seen no UFOS, even though I'm a UFO nut( I'm not saying you are calling me one, but some people do called me one.)
Or, neither have I been abducted by aliens, but if I were I probably won't be coming back here; the chance to explore the Milky Way(If they don't turn out to be evil, of course) is what I want to do now, but I'm not smart enough yet, or these so called "geniuses" on this planet aren't smart enough or brave enough(stop being close-minded to strange ideas of interstellar travel) to make this dream of mine's, happen right NOW.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
I don't think you're crazy. For you to believe that there may be aliens is reasonable. For you to say that there's any reason to base decisions on that right now is not true. I'm not basing my decisions on the existence or non-existance of aliens until they show up. It's the same thing for everything else, including the topic of this thread.
I wasn't saying you were calling me a nut, Samuel, I was talking in general terms of what some people here think of me.

Last edited by windu6; 12-31-2006 at 09:53 AM.
Windu Chi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-30-2006, 06:05 PM   #12
Samnmax221
I never Kipled
 
Samnmax221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: My hovercraft is full of eels
Posts: 5,784
Current Game: Sex with women
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Oh-boy, this has turned into a pissing contest.
Samnmax221 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-30-2006, 09:41 PM   #13
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Seeing as how this has gone into discussion on aliens I'll add my two cents.

The two big things I point to as evidence that there may be aliens, I've probably raised these before, are things such as the Egyption pyramids and Area 51. To go into detail the pyramids were built really not long after man first evolved on Earth, whichever way you want to go by (Adam & Eve, evolve from apes, ect). Now the story goes that Pharoh had his slaves build the pyramids and statues, however even with technology today we cannot do what the Egyptions did and there is a strong belief that aliens were involved. I'm not saying they were, but the possibility is there. The other strong indicator is Area 51 and all that was involved with it, Roswell, ect. For decades the government had denied the existence of Area 51 despite eyewitness testimonies and many believed this was where aliens were being kept, most likely the ones that had meant to have crashed in Roswell New Mexico. Only recently had it been revealed that Area 51 did exist, I'm not sure if this is the official reason but one of the rumors was that they tested experimental aircraft there. I'm willing to go with this theory (and the crash in Roswell was pilot error as opposed to aliens), especially when considering one important fact. If aliens are so advanced that they can travel lightyears through space they would hardly be captured by such a primitive world.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-30-2006, 09:50 PM   #14
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Well, I wasn't interested in discussion about aliens as much as I was about why you'd believe in them. Anything is possible, I grant you. Aliens could have helped make the pyramids. Or they might not have. Given that it's certainly possible for the pyramids to be constructed without such intervention and the alien possibility has no solid evidence behind it, I wouldn't say that such an event was really all that credible.

Funny how that's pretty much the same argument for the topic of the thread, eh?


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-07-2007, 08:53 PM   #15
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Actually there is considerably more evidence to the existence of UFOs than there is of Bigfoot, for example docuemented reports of strange aircraft. Secret experimental aircraft? I'd buy that, but how come none of our fighters in the past fifty or sixty years have remained the same and never taken such a shape, even VYOL aircraft such as the Harrier and Osprey?

I refuse to let go of the possibility that in the universe, which is far too vast in scope for us to explore, we are it. That there is no intelligent life out there. Truth be told we could use it soon if it exists as we are quickly running out of it here.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-08-2007, 12:08 AM   #16
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Okay. I've split some posts from the Why Atheism? and moved them here. Please be civil and stay on the new topic.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-08-2007, 12:59 AM   #17
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
The strongest evidence, as I've pointed out, is the photos of what appear to be alien spacefraft (I'll stick with the term UFOs because they are Unidentified Flying Objects) and wonders such as the Egyption pyramids. Sure, the photos may be of experimental aircraft at the time, the interesting thing is, and this doesn't prove there are alien UFOs, that no aircraft that has been developed looks anything like in the photographs. To be fair though in World War Two the Nazis were developing a stealth plane, or bomber, cannot remember which, the Ho IX, and only in the past fifteen years have we seen something similar is in the F-117 stealth bomber. With the pyramids I understand that even today we do not have the technology and know how to do them, and the thinking is that they couldn't pull it off themselves. Of course this doesn't prove the existence of aliens, the people who built St Basil's Catedral were blinded so they could never duplicate their efforts, but this is what people are saying.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-08-2007, 01:14 AM   #18
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
The strongest evidence, as I've pointed out, is the photos of what appear to be alien spacefraft (I'll stick with the term UFOs because they are Unidentified Flying Objects)
Photos? There've been numerous photos of alleged alien spacecraft, but none have been validated and many if not most have been shown to be complete hoaxes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
and wonders such as the Egyption pyramids.
There are many wonderful things about the ancient Egyptian culture, but as an archaeologist, I can assure you there's nothing evident of space aliens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
With the pyramids I understand that even today we do not have the technology and know how to do them, and the thinking is that they couldn't pull it off themselves.
That's not the thinking of anyone educated on the subject. It is, however, the thinking of many significance-junkies and mystery-mongers. We have a very good understanding of how the pyramids were built as well as when and by whom. The pyramids and other material remains of ancient Egypt are well worth studying and have many mysteries, but none of them relate to space aliens.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-08-2007, 01:29 AM   #19
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Just out of curiosity, the tools that were left behind and what is taken to be the actual methods used, they're pretty much how they're portrayed in film and fiction? I'd say they'd have to be so that their portrayal of ancient Egypt is accurate.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-09-2007, 01:33 PM   #20
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Believing that nothing is impossible and refusing to accept that some things are simply highly improbable are separate modalities of thought. One is reasonable (generally speaking), the other is irrational and credulous.

What you deem "a trap" is a logical analogy, which Samuel Dravis has presented for discussion. You clearly reject his analogy and refuse to discuss it. Yes, it is "a trap." That's the point. To corner you into using logic and reason rather than the unreasoned and credulous belief of space aliens.

My question again: what is the most compelling evidence for space aliens visiting our world?

My warning again: avoid the consistent use of profanity, even with the asterisk. I dislike editing posts as above and find it far more easy to click the delete button. The latter option is unfair to you, but the expletives in your post are unfair to the rest of us who prefer not to wade through them.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-09-2007, 02:15 PM   #21
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker

My warning again: avoid the consistent use of profanity, even with the asterisk. I dislike editing posts as above and find it far more easy to click the delete button. The latter option is unfair to you, but the expletives in your post are unfair to the rest of us who prefer not to wade through them.
As many people I see curse on this forum with asterisks, you target me, I see what is going here.
Delete edit I don't care.
Windu Chi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-09-2007, 02:18 PM   #22
ET Warrior
PhD in horribleness
 
ET Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Evil League of Evil
Posts: 9,405
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran 
The Senate Chambers is not the same as the rest of LucasForums. If you are attentive, I think you would find very little use of profanity in the vast majority of Senate Chambers posts, and if there IS profanity, it is used in moderation, not in every sentence.



ET Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-09-2007, 02:29 PM   #23
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
In addition to what ET has said above, I also notice that others heed casual warnings to curb this. I've given you several, very friendly and casual warnings about it. You've ignored them.

Finally, this will be the last off-topic post about it here. If you have any further questions or meta-discussion PM me, ET, and admin or start a thread in the Site Feedback subforum.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-11-2007, 08:44 AM   #24
ewok mercenary
 
ewok mercenary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northampton, UK
Posts: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
The burden of proof is not on me. This is a debate forum not a proof forum.
Windu, you're laughing at people for being duped by 'government lies', yet you haven't presented one shred of evidence to support your claims. Nobody is asking for definitive proof that aliens landed as Roswell. Indeed, there is rarely such thing as definitive proof. However, if you want people to take you seriously, you at least need to provide some form of logical reasoning for believing what you do. If you don't have any, how can you expect people to debate with you?


ewok mercenary is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-11-2007, 12:45 PM   #25
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by ewok mercenary
Windu, you're laughing at people for being duped by 'government lies', yet you haven't presented one shred of evidence to support your claims. Nobody is asking for definitive proof that aliens landed as Roswell. Indeed, there is rarely such thing as definitive proof. However, if you want people to take you seriously, you at least need to provide some form of logical reasoning for believing what you do. If you don't have any, how can you expect people to debate with you?
Skeptics won't trust any evidence, so I don't give a damn about it.
But there is evidence that the government of the U.S.A is lying; watch the UFO files on the History Channel, the episode is called, UFOs and the White House.

If you don't want to look at that program.
Then this what happen:

Grant Cameron, a Presidential Researcher ask Dick Cheney a question:
Cheney's appearance on the Washington D.C. Public Radio Station WAMU on April 11, 2001 on the Diana Rehm show. Dick Cheney spoke from the White House.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant Cameron
There is a vicious rumor circulating in the UFO community that you've been read into the UFO program. So my question to you is, in any of your government jobs, have you ever been briefed on the subject of UFOs, and if you have, when was it and what were you told?
This is what Dick Cheney said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Cheney
Well, if I had been briefed on it, I'm sure it was probably classified and I couldn't talk about it
Now, the skeptics argument is, oh that's not a shred of evidence, then I say then the hell with it.
Like I said, skeptics isn't going to trust any evidence.
The opinions that skeptics have of UFO believers is that I and them is believing a delusion and we believe they are living a lie, with their trust in government.
So, it is just going to have to be a impasse.
Skeptics is not going to believe any evidence and UFO believers is not going to believe any of the government's and military explanations.
So, it is just going to stay this way.
Time will tell who's right.

Last edited by windu6; 01-11-2007 at 02:00 PM.
Windu Chi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-11-2007, 01:12 PM   #26
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Skeptics won't trust any evidence, so I don't give a damn about it.
Which, again, shows that you don't understand the first real thing about skepticism. Skeptics must accept evidence that is testable and verifiable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
But there is evidence that the government of the U.S.A is lying; watch the UFO files on the History Channel, the episode is called, UFOs and the White House.
You keep telling us to watch a television program that is designed to appeal to popular audiences and obtain ratings, make money for producers, etc. A few out-of-context quotes by politicians, anecdotes to which there is no verification or testing available, is hardly any sort of evidence. One of our politicians thinks god speaks to him. Others believe astrology has something that can truly be said about how to live their lives. Being a politician does not make an anecdote "evidence" nor does being on television constitute "evidence."

We're asking for real evidence. Either you have it or you don't. Obviously its the latter.

The real subject of this thread, however, isn't whether or not windu6 is correct in his beliefs of space aliens but, rather, the ways in which relatively smart people allow themselves to be duped in to believing weird things. That process is aided by a credulous nature combined with the desire to believe in one or more specific fantastical ideas as well as being biased in skepticism.

That's right. Windu6 and many others who are openly critical of skeptics are, themselves, skeptical. Only they apply their skepticism with bias. If an idea or notion is counter to their beliefs, they're automatically skeptical of it. If the idea or notion supports their beliefs, they accept it blindly. Take the contrary skeptical ideas windu6 has mentioned above in the same post: he is skeptical of anything the government says, unless it supports his claim (Dick Cheney's commnet?). He's skeptical of academia and rational responses, but supportive of lore and myth that supports him (Roswell & the so-called 'Philadelphia Experiment').

Why doesn't the believer apply skepticism or even lack of skepticism uniformly? The answer is that the original notion or idea is what is already true in the mind of the believer. The only thing left is to find supporting data to be able to say "see, that's what I'm talking about." Conversely, the believer must reject any data that is not supportive and even counter to the original idea or notion.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-11-2007, 03:33 PM   #27
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
To demand an answer to something like whether or not Atheists think they have the right to persecute, or to demand evidence of a furry monster, is what SkinWalker calls a strawman. From my experience one way it's wrong in the way McCarthism was wrong, the Salem witch trials were wrong, ect in that in those denials of guilt became admissions and only confessions were accepted. Same here, you put forward your case and it's rejected. SW could probably explain it better than me.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-11-2007, 03:42 PM   #28
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
To demand an answer to something like whether or not Atheists think they have the right to persecute, or to demand evidence of a furry monster, is what SkinWalker calls a strawman. From my experience one way it's wrong in the way McCarthism was wrong, the Salem witch trials were wrong, ect in that in those denials of guilt became admissions and only confessions were accepted. Same here, you put forward your case and it's rejected. SW could probably explain it better than me.
I'm not sure how my post applies in your statement. I simply require evidence to believe in something. When windu says "aliens have been to roswell" then I expect him to show me that they have. Otherwise he's simply someone with a belief that's not founded in anything discernable.

If someone asked me for proof that my monster is real, I wouldn't be able to give it to them. Why not? Because the monster disappears when it's looked for. Ah hah.

When windu says the aliens were there, he's not able to show any evidence for it. Why not? The evidence disappears when it's looked for. Ah.

What's the difference? What's the difference between those suggestions and nothing being at roswell? What's the actual difference between that view and the fact that my monster doesn't exist?

There is no effective difference. Thus, Occam's Razor:

There is no reason to believe that aliens were at Roswell.
Aliens were not at Roswell.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-11-2007, 03:45 PM   #29
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
I'm not sure if you misread what I said, but I was referring to this bit in particular, 'What if I said I require you to disprove the furry monster? That's rediculous, and it's rediculous because it can't be done.' You are so right in saying that, and for someone to demand to disprove it is unfair.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-11-2007, 03:49 PM   #30
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
I'm not sure if you misread what I said, but I was referring to this bit in particular, 'What if I said I require you to disprove the furry monster? That's rediculous, and it's rediculous because it can't be done.' You are so right in saying that, and for someone to demand to disprove it is unfair.
Oh, okay. Sorry for jumping on you like that.

But yeah, I don't require absolute proof of anything. I just need some reason to believe - I don't want to be so openminded my brains fall out. I can't prove that something is impossible, or that something is true in an absolute sense. The only thing I can do is show that's it's more likely/unlikely than another explanation. Whether I like it or not, the answer I get is as accurate as I can make it, and I'll accept anyone's help in making it even better - which is why I like talking here in the Senate.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein

Last edited by Samuel Dravis; 01-11-2007 at 04:01 PM.
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-11-2007, 05:03 PM   #31
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,912
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheney
Well, if I had been briefed on it, I'm sure it was probably classified and I couldn't talk about it
Actually, this sounds like a tongue-in-cheek answer by Cheney--he has a very dry sense of humor.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.

Jae Onasi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-12-2007, 12:51 AM   #32
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Of course it's a fallacy to believe every conspiracy theory in the book. I'm quite happy to accept that was where experimental aircraft were stored, but still I wonder if maybe there was something there. Was there ever a reason for the government saying 'Area 51 does not exist and if you're smart you'll stop asking questions'? Doesn't really matter, it's not something I'll lose sleep over. I'd be interested if there was an answer though.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-12-2007, 01:21 AM   #33
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
Of course it's a fallacy to believe every conspiracy theory in the book. I'm quite happy to accept that was where experimental aircraft were stored, but still I wonder if maybe there was something there. Was there ever a reason for the government saying 'Area 51 does not exist and if you're smart you'll stop asking questions'? Doesn't really matter, it's not something I'll lose sleep over. I'd be interested if there was an answer though.
You could read the wiki entry. It's pretty interesting, particularly the bit about testing the U-2 there. I lurves the U-2; it's an awesome plane.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-12-2007, 01:43 AM   #34
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
You could read the wiki entry. It's pretty interesting, particularly the bit about testing the U-2 there. I lurves the U-2; it's an awesome plane.
That U-2 is a piece of junk, the F-117 stealth fighter they made there is a piece of junk; it only have a speed of around 600mph, also it is no fighter, it has no guns for defense and it only can carry two bombs, no air to air missiles.
Windu Chi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-12-2007, 04:58 PM   #35
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
You could read the wiki entry. It's pretty interesting, particularly the bit about testing the U-2 there. I lurves the U-2; it's an awesome plane.
Yes, U2 is great, but I've always been partial to the B-52s. Every time Love Shack hit the radio...

I'm up to discussing fighter planes in another thread, the Black Bird projects were ace, but back on topic. Looking at Groom Lake with the possible exception of the large perimiter deterrence (warning signs and such) there really isn't anything out of the ordinary from other military bases. Deadly force would be autherised on dangerous trespassers from Fort Hood to Camp David, it should be anyway. Area 51 though has that mystique about it, no doubt spurred on by the media and it's representation as having ties to Roswel and aliens in fiction. It's interesting how they raised most of the secrets there were moved and they keep the secrecy to misdirect attention. If that is true it's a great idea, something I'd be proud to think of myself were I involved at all. But the question I am wondering is who played the Rodian in that alien interview?
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-12-2007, 01:46 AM   #36
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Lets stay on topic. Start a new thread if you want to debate aeronautical superiority of this plane or that.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-12-2007, 02:46 AM   #37
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,787
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
As I understand it, much of the southwestern US is actually owned by the US government and there are many military bases throughout. Even if you rely on such sources as the history channel, military channel, etc.., it becomes obvious that a lot of classified activities are going on out there. Given that the Roswell incident took place in the early stages of the cold war, it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to conclude that a great deal of classified aerial activity was going on in this region. It would make a lot of sense, from a national security pov, to a) keep such activities top secret and b) misdirect, probably with stories of UFOs, people away from the goings on at these bases. Afterall, it becomes quite easy to marginalize people who claim that UFOs are secretly kept hidden away somewhere, but who can't produce a piece of tangible evidence to prove their case. The whole UFO scenario then becomes an effective mask behind which the govenrment could continue with such projects as the SR71, U2, B2, etc... in relative secrecy. Increasingly sophisticated satellite tech does make this a bit more difficult, but not impossible.
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-12-2007, 05:55 PM   #38
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
As I understand it, much of the southwestern US is actually owned by the US government and there are many military bases throughout. Even if you rely on such sources as the history channel, military channel, etc.., it becomes obvious that a lot of classified activities are going on out there. Given that the Roswell incident took place in the early stages of the cold war, it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to conclude that a great deal of classified aerial activity was going on in this region. It would make a lot of sense, from a national security pov, to a) keep such activities top secret and b) misdirect, probably with stories of UFOs, people away from the goings on at these bases.
Maybe they, the air force are building starfighters; small UFOs and the Navy might be building starships; the gigantic UFOs airline pilots reports.
That could be another possibility to explain all the secrecy.
Or, they could be building high power particle beam weapons and high energy plasma weapons, or cold plasma physics application to cloaking jet fighters.
Future weaponry can also explain what the hell is going on there.
I will pick both of these as explanations.
Or, what else the hell could they be hiding there?

After the speeds of SR-71 planes, flying multiple times faster than mach 3: 2,224.36471mph will be more effective higher above the atmosphere or in space; higher attitude less dense air, less drag, lower the temperatures experience by air friction in low air density. Or more effective in space with lower g forces; safer negative g forces cause by climbing and maneuvering, operating in space far from Earth lessen the possibility of grayout and have safer positive g forces that is cause by a plane diving, operating in space will of course lessen the possibility of redout. Also operation in space will lower the possibility of dying if far from gravitational influences of Earth and the Moon, lower the possibility of pilots dying or the aircraft or spacecraft itself being destroyed from the very high deadly g forces experience with extreme sharp turns in the process of maneuvering at speeds many multiple times higher than mach 3.

Unless they got some sort of antigravitational technology that will have inertia dampers in the aircraft cockpits that will negate pilots from experiencing g forces when maneuvering and allow the secret aircraft or spacecraft to ride a gravitational wave for attitude control and manevering action, but why would they threaten to kill people for coming in Area 51 for that?

Anitgravity will solve a lot of problems; lessen the rocket fuel mass for interplanetary travel ; negate gravity or counter it, don't have to have hundred thousands of pounds of rocket fuel of chemical reaction mass as the mass of the cargo goes up, for the potential energy needed to convert in kinetic energy of motion of thrust velocity to reach Earth's gravitational field escape velocity of 6.96mi/s aprox. for interplanetary travel.

Also going that fast, 25,053.7mph aprox.(mach 33.79 aprox.) or the hypersonic regime, the lower specific heat capacities of surface material will cause for most aircraft moving at those speeds through the atmosphere to burn up due to atmospheric friction that will ionzie the atmosphere gases to a couple 1000 F* plasma temperatures, if maintain at those hypersonic velocities in the confines atmosphere for long periods of time.

Also with antigravity technology, commercial jet aircraft airline planes can fly to space at lower velocities like their 300-600mph velocity ranges and also escape the Earth gravitational field, since gravity is negated or cancel completely, of course if these airplanes are refitted with rocket engines or maybe more powerful thrust ion engines or engines that don't need to breathe in air for operation, also other technical details for successful space operation for commercial jet aircraft.
This antigravity technology will allow easy access to space for civilians.

Or, aerospace engineers can use the force of gravity itself for spacecraft propulsion, with antigravity technology that will lower the dependency on very large amount of rocket fuel payloads for interplanetary travel or cancel that dependency completely.
And with antigravity technology we would probably finally make interstellar travel possible and open the Milky Way galaxy up for exploration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Afterall, it becomes quite easy to marginalize people who claim that UFOs are secretly kept hidden away somewhere, but who can't produce a piece of tangible evidence to prove their case. The whole UFO scenario then becomes an effective mask behind which the govenrment could continue with such projects as the SR71, U2, B2, etc... in relative secrecy. Increasingly sophisticated satellite tech does make this a bit more difficult, but not impossible.
How would you explain all these thousands of people who claim they have been abducted by aliens other then the skeptics explanation; they are crazy, nut cases, delusional; it is in their minds?
Would you say the government is behind alien abductions,
and behind cattle mutilations?

Last edited by windu6; 01-14-2007 at 08:26 AM.
Windu Chi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > Casual Approach to Evidence (Multi-Thread ST-4)

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:50 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.