Contestant #3 asked:
Well, good thing my boss is out of town, so I have the time to do this. 
(Some of these are not really questions, per se, but they are statements about a lack of evidence on your part that you should have (IMO) responded to if you honestly wanted to try to make your case. Most of these also leave out all your straw-man arguments that, even though several people corrected you each time, you never retracted.)
DSC: “Hard evidence will make your argument. Claims of “conspiracy” will not suffice.”
DB: “I love the way you take a claim made by either Bell or one of his on-air nuts and transform it into fact.”
DB: “Of course, you ignored the main thrust of the message, namely that you took a claim made by either Bell or one of his on-air nuts and transformed it into fact. You also ignored DSC’s point about evidence instead of conspiracy and just called him a snob.”
DB: “And you STILL didn’t answer his statement about claims of conspiracy.”
DB: “Requesting evidence is not a flame. Pointing out flaws in your argument is not a flame. As for “turnabout,” I don’t know what you think you’re turning about, but so far I’ve only seen you turn your back on requests for evidence to back up your claims.”
ed: “We are simply stating that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Why should we believe that there is any evidence of extraterrestrial contact? The burden of proof is on you, my friend. We are simply following the rules of critical thinking by eliminating the most complex and unlikely explanation to a situation.”
DB: “I happen to doubt that Earth is the only place intelligent life has evolved, but that doesn’t mean I think they’re flying around Earth with their lights on while our government hides information with a massive conspiracy. While I know we aren’t going to change your mind on other issues, I hope you at least see the difference here.”
pld: “And as far as “Meanwhile, no base or airport has come forward to identify the five planes that traveled over Arizona seen by so many people, including Mitch Stanley and his powerful telescope” goes, that must mean they’re Alien Spacecraft, huh?”
pld: "So maybe, as a True Believer™, you can answer a few questions for me:
- Where do these alien spacecraft come from (the name of the star system will be satisfactory)?
- How is it that, against all odds, these aliens evolved into bipedal, bilaterally-symmetrical humanoids with human-like sense organs?
- Why can’t we intercept any of their radio traffic, either local or interstellar?
- How have they learned to defy the laws of inertia and momentum when flying their spacecraft within Earth’s atmosphere?
- What’s with all the sexual experimentation?"
ed: “The real question of any conspiracy is motive. What use would the Big Ol’ Scary Government have to lie to us about space aliens? What is the angle, so to speak?”
ed: "So what it comes down to is this: Do you have any evidence of Alien contact on earth? Considering the amount of surveillence equipment this country dedicates to tracking aircraft, wouldn’t evidence of extraterrestrial contact come in the form of recorded data, as opposed to hokey stories and conjectures? If we apply the rule of Occam’s razor and eliminate the unnecessary speculation about UFO’s, what are we left with? What can you infer from a bright flashing light in the sky that indicates that it is from another planet? Because it looks like something out of “Close Encounters?” "
DB: “But that doesn’t mean that all claims of conspiracy have merit. Each has to be evaluated on its own claims, and, frankly, the UFO claims just don’t stand up to scrutiny.”
PB: “It amazes me that the government has the ability to secretly plot with extraterrestrials, brainwash the entire human race, mutilate cattle, abduct Whitney Streiber and others, and keep a lid on the whole JFK-Illuminati- UN-mind-control-AIDS-manufacturing deal, and yet they can’t shut up Art Bell!!!”
ed: “Who said anything about not allowing people to speak?”
pld: “Yeah, because certainly it wasn’t dangerous when people believed in irrational stuff like witches, huh?”
DB: “Whenever one of us actually asks you a question or requests evidence or anything, you ignore it in favor of your own meaningless straw men. Why are you so afraid to actually address what we have said?”
PB: “Do you really think that a person as uncritical as Bell should be dealing with these types of topics?”
There ya go. Have at it.
“It’s a very dangerous thing to believe in nonsense.” – James Randi
