MeanJoe and Wally:
Thank you very much! :o I’m blushin’!
PS - RE the new sig… cool?
Note to self:
Don’t climb into the ring with sdimbert. He’s one of those guys that checks the facts.
– WallyM7
Hey sdimbert,
I stated:
Do you want to show me what part of that is not fact?
The committee did exist. The report was issued. The conclusions of the report are as I stated them.
Care to earn that sig?
And just that quickly the thread devolves.
Not into name-calling or sniping. That’s not a problem.
What always seems to happen in threads like this is that someone makes a claim, someone else challenges it, and everyone starts crying “prove it!”
In the cited thread, KO posted what he considers to be sound evidence and support for his position. The skeptics immediately demand more proof. Around it goes until KO says, in essence, “if y’all are so hot to disprove me, prove that it couldn’t happen.”
As with religious debate, we are left with the believer holding his faith knowing that the skeptics cannot possibly prove a negative.
So, Krispy, we know your position. We also know that most people believe it to be incorrect. Is there anything else you have to add to this discussion?
-andros-
Hey Krispy Original:
Yeah, yeah - you came to the same abrupt end in the thread I quoted earlier. In essence, what you stated means:
A bunch of guys in France that I believe to be correct said that UFO’s are ET in nature."
Great - But then both threads, this and that, moved beyond the scope of that statement and, when your further conclusions (ie that we should share your beliefs in this French statement) were challanged, you beat a hasty retreat to your original statement.
Big whoop. :rolleyes: Clever.
Look - I’ll use small words… logic tells us that it is impossible to prove that a thing does not exist. Therefor, it is up to ET-believers to prove to the skeptics that ET’s do exist - not the other way around.
I’ll repeat what I said before - I want to believe you. That is why I posted the question in the first place and why I continue to put up with your insipid shenanigans.
I…DON’T…BELIEVE…THAT…THE…FRENCH…OFFICIALS…ARE…CORRECT!!!
I would like to see some more, impartial, third-party, primary-source evidence. As andros said, can you add anything else to this discussion?
Note to self:
Don’t climb into the ring with sdimbert. He’s one of those guys that checks the facts.
– WallyM7
Krispy whined:
It’s nice to see that you have advanced to the point where you can replace words in sentences. It would be nicer to see it have some actual meaning – like an association to skeptics ignoring evidence, for example. Oh, wait, that means you’d first have to find legitimate evidence. Whoops. Guess you’re outta luck there, as we’ve seen so many times already.
Alas, I’m afraid I have to report that scientific and skeptical UFO books don’t sell very well as compared to True Believer UFO books… Probably because there are more people like you – willing to believe all sorts of nonsense – than there are people who are striving to fight ignorance. Luckily, those of us fighting ignorance have a home here that is mostly free from people promoting such ignorance. Mostly.
sdimbert said:
Yup! Want the address? It’s only 15 bucks a year or so. BTW, what’s “wacky” about that? I clearly fall into the category you called “level-headed.”
Nice post summarizing KO/C#3’s other thread, BTW. 
KO said:
Oooooh, clever. Ad hominem his handle. That’ll show him exactly who he’s up against!
KO claimed:
Who were they? Name and rank these officials, Krispy. They obviously don’t mind issuing their report to the French government and making it public record, their names and rank ought not to be that hard to provide and verify.
If you could do that you’d give (at least) some evidence to your otherwise groundless claim.
Jai Pey
I’m curious to know what KO and his new buddies think about the new Russian satellite photos of Area 51?
http://cnn.com/2000/TECH/space/04/17/area51.ap/index.html
AND:
http://cnn.com/2000/TECH/space/04/18/area.51.02.ap/index.html
AND:
www.terraserver.com/Area51.asp
If you click on that third link, don’t be surprised if you see an “Error 403” message, that they have had WAY too much traffic. (That’s what that second CNN story is about.)
Of course, the conspiracy mongers will claim Government-paid hackers brought down Terraserver.com to keep people from seeing the photos. 
Sig Alert!
I think we have a misunderstanding.
I’ve claimed only that the French committee existed, that they issued a report, and I’ve stated some of the conclusions that the report contained. Klass seems to agree with this much.
Nowhere in this thread have I suggested that the conclusions of the report are the absolute truth, or even that I subscribe to the conclusions.
I merely have presented some facts as data.
Are some of you trying to say that the committee didn’t exist? Do you question the makeup of the committee? Is it your position that the report was never issued? Do you contend that I’ve lied concerning the conclusions of the committee members?
Or is it that you simply choose to ignore or refute the findings of the report? If that’s your angle, then OK, I have no problem with that. However, if you question the former, I am sure that you are mistaken.
Hey Krispy,
Yup…
No, you’ve twice-claimed this committee was made of high ranking government and military officials… Care to re-read the board? I call that into question. Right now thats the strength of the claim as a whole, thats the authorities you’re appealing to…
Granted. I’m not asking about truth. Just who are these wonderous high-ranking government and military officials??
No, yes, no, no.
I can’t refute the findings of the report you’ve mentioned twice, re: high ranking government and military officials. Klass’s quote so graciously provided by David B said something much different than “high-ranking government and military officials”, it said:
Now, please, indulge me with names and ranks. If Bourdais can say they’re “qualified”, he must’ve some kind of background record of who and what they are, right? If its public record, what’s the problem? Right now, its about as good as saying “This report has also been given an ‘A-ok’ by former US Astronaut Gordo Cooper, who has entirely nothing to do with anything since his final Gemini mission way back in the 1960’s.”
Whatever happened to Gordon Cooper anyhow? My favorite Mercury-man.
w/ bated breath,
Jai Pey
Somewhere along the line, I heard that “Gordo” Cooper became a Born-Again Christian after his Mercury flight. Whether this was due to the breathtaking view afforded by spaceflight (his character said, “O Lord what a heavenly light!” in the movie The Right Stuff), or whether it was due to the fact that everything failed on his spacecraft and he had to bring it back in through the re-entry corridor without any instruments, I cannot say.
Here’s some of that info jai, from my post in the archived thread link I provided earlier:
There’s a couple of names for you…If you want more, here’s a link that I also provided to an interview with one of the members of the committee and he names some names too…it’s just that my French is poor and I can’t repeat the names as he spoke them…but here’s the link anyway…maybe you can be satisfied to hear the names firsthand…
http://ww2.broadcast.com/artbell/aug99.stm
Click on 8/29/99 and go to the 35:00 spot into the program.
You’ll hear names…
Oh, and here’s a link concerning the report…it names some names too:
http://www.liberation.com/quotidien/debats/juillet99/990721.html
There you go jai…
This French committe, composed of high ranking officials thinks there are aliens among us. Big deal. It has been shown that nobody gives a damn except you, KO. You’re committing a logical fallacy that is only used by inept debaters who have nothing of value to say. You are appealing to authority, and you compound the felony by citing non-authorities to boot.
You have never provided a even a sliver of evidence that could cause one to scratch his head. You keep hammering away at the same old, same old, in the hope that repitition will substitute for truth.
You have shown repeatedly that you believe the universe is ruled by the whims of little green men and have pointedly ignored the laws of physics; probably because you can’t understand them.
And now you take up your cudgel once again, hoping to beat a few new posters into submission with your inane, moronic drivel.
And again, no one is listening, because, as usual, not only do you not have a case, you don’t even know how to present your non-case.
Bah! I grow weary of your babbling.
Krispy:
Please, please, PLEASE, let’s not get into the specifics of the French guys. I don’t want their names, ranks or serial numbers.
Jai, I understand where you’re coming from, but trust me on this. Just go back and read that other post - the Press Release is in French, which Krispy admits he can’t read or speak very well and other posters (the illustrous manhattan among them) who can speak French say that it doesn’t mean what Krispy claims it does.
Back to Krispy:
I reiterate my two driving points:
[list=1]
[li]I am not impressed by nor do I believe the French panel. If you have some other, factual, verifiable, objective, third-party, primary-resource sources, please bring them to light. If not, go away. You’re giving me a headache.[/li][li]The OP asks:[/li][quote]
Do extra-terrestrials visit the Earth, or not?
[/quote]
I’ve already stated why the Con side of this debate can’t provide definite proof - you can’t prove that a thing is not. You can only prove that it is. So? Anyone out there (not ashamed to side with Krispy who wants to convince me? I WANT TO BELIEVE.
DavidB:
ROFLMAO!
Now I am even more sorry about the things I posted about you in the Pit. Not only because you’re on my side now, but because you’re so god-damned funny doing it! 
Note to self:
Don’t climb into the ring with sdimbert. He’s one of those guys that checks the facts.
– WallyM7
Leave it to a newbie to expect that I’ll go away…
OK - I want to add to the Debate and not get this chucked into the pit, but first I’ve got say something. I promise that my intention is not to add flame…
I suppose it might be more precise to say:
“Leave it to a newbie to expect that I’ll add something constructive to a Debate.”
Right?
I mean - Really now - I originally asked this question looking for an honest, thoughtful answer. I got a few, then andros threw in:
You’ve got a reputation here as a blow-hard, add-nothing, often abusive and rarely thoughtful E.T. proponent. I guess that you’re right - only a newbie would expect someone to act reasonable and thoughtfully.
But, now that I’ve been around to block a few times, I can recognize your true colors.
I suppose that it is only my naivete which leads me to do this - I’ll give you one last shot:
**Do you have some consructive addition to this discussion other than…
[list]
[li]That story from France that nobody can verify, or[/li][li]Childish, abusive attacks that belong in the pit (or sandbox)?[/li]
If you do, please post them. If you don’t, please just relax, forget about it, and go find some other thread to bother.
Thank you.
Note to self:
Don’t climb into the ring with sdimbert. He’s one of those guys that checks the facts.
– WallyM7
Sdimbert, forgive my insistence on all this. I’m tryin’ to get to a point.
KO… from the post waaay up:
Soooo… you’re admitting to hearsay once…
Then twice! Which doesn’t help your argument.
I can understand french, I’ll read the links. Art Bell, though… hardly an unbiased reporter, don’t you think?
Sdimbert,
Do they visit, or not? Part of me wants to be the ** I want to believe** too. The other part says “All things being equal…” and arguments to that effect. If we’re barely off the face of the planet ourselves, I have no reason to suspect evolution/whatever is any faster on any other planet than here. Universe’s age is a constant, right?
The only wildcard I can think of is the Earth Mark 2, where the earth’s moon is formed by a cosmic collision w/ another planet, effectively “resetting” the already fertile earth. I’ll try to find a link for this. In any case, this would give Earth a “lag” behind in the evolutionary timeline. Thus, all things aren’t equal, so there could be a race more advanced than us.
But does it prove anything? Not for me. Firsthand reports of sights seen? Nope, not for me either.
Like it or not, the biggest problem those trying to prove existence of alien visitation have is they sound too much like a lobby group. Twisting things to get maximum effect. Case in point… “high ranking government/military” officials. There’s no way for any of us to verify that without spending the cost of a long distance call to find an english speaking frenchman who does know.
Or media-blackouts over here to “cover up” this information. For god’s sake, in an age where you can’t hide anything. If this is published in most national newspapers worldwide except here, we’d have read it off of Yahoo! or where-ever.
I have no doubt that someday we might well meet another group/race of beings from off this planet. Maybe it’ll be here, maybe it’ll be across the galaxy. Claiming bug-eyed gray aliens rule the earth sounds more like paranoid “one trip too many with Lucy in the Sky” to me.
Regards all,
Jai Pey
Jai Pey, you might want to consider the fact that our sun is only about 5 billion yrs old, while the universe is approximately 15 billion yrs old. Granted that you need a few stars to go supernova first to seed the universe with much of the heavier elements needed for life, but it is possible that earth-like planets may have formed billions of years before ours.
Considering the ET question, I see 2 different theories being discussed:
-
Extraterrestrial life exists:
-
ET exists, has visited earth, does so regularly, using spacecraft that violates the known laws of physics, and a massive conspiracy suppresses the evidence.
Simple logic suggests that we should look for evidence supporting #1 before considering #2.
FTR, I didn’t drop KO’s name because I think he’s a blowhard or a psycho. I figured he’d show up because this is a subject he cares about.
I like Krispy a lot. On the whole i don’t find him much more abrasive than, say, andros. Or David. And much, much less so than someone like Cyberian.
But the previous thread about the French panel report was beaten completely into submission. No one was swayed. I’d just like to see something else is all.
-andros-
Just wanted to say that military secrets are not very secret. the levels that operate above the excecutive levels are not a part of the gov. they answer to noone. sure they help out this agency or that agency and the U.S./
my understanding is that these people are privately funded and are worldwide looking out for the intrests of the U.S./
To tracer if you had been in the military you would understand the bond between military men. in the infantry I would have ripped off the enemy’s foot and ate it if it would have helped my men./ some older officer’s saw me as a son i suppose other’s just drunk. for some reason they felt they could talk to me. don’t get me wrong I am aware that much of what was told was indeed hogwash but some most surely was not./
secondly while in the service I personally know people from counter inteligence as well as psy-warfare and some of what they do. I am in no way claiming I know evrything about it but I do know they operate completly unlike the military they are attached to.
one last thing ONLY GOD KNOWS FOR SURE!