Board Logo
« Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate? »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Aug 18th, 2017, 11:14am


Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

*Totally FREE 24/7 Access *Your Nickname and Avatar *Private Messages

*Join today and be a part of one of the largest UFO sites on the Net.


« Previous Topic | Next Topic »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5  Notify Send Topic Print
 veryhotthread  Author  Topic: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?  (Read 9214 times)
Oldtimer
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 144
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #45 on: Jul 28th, 2014, 6:42pm »

on Jul 28th, 2014, 11:53am, GForce wrote:
Oldtimer, with all due respect because you do bring up some interesting topics the analogy of focusing on the trees and not the forest is impossible. Especially when you have claims such as Obama willing to kill hundreds of millions of Americans. It is such an outrageous claim that it can't be overlooked and it also casts doubt on whatever information that person may say rightfully or wrongly. Credibility is everything!

I can appreciate that you evaluate, study and maybe even vet the reliability of a witness. However for those of us who don't have hours to spend going over material...videos we have to make a quick judgment on a video instead of wasting hours watching something that goes against our beliefs.

As for being spoon fed? I tend to think of it as getting to the crux of the matter. I think the delusion comes within the message. It's hard to overlook and quite honestly shouldn't be overlooked. For me credibility is everything.



Apparently you and others here do not appreciate how an Analyst approaches gathering information. I do have the time, temperament, and ability to do such work. I did postgraduate work in Criminology including crime scene investigation (under those teaching the Houston Police Department), the criminal mind, etc. some of my hobbies are the study of "criminal profiling" and ballistics. While some may just skim the surface of videos or the behavior of others I like to see what lies beneath as what actually motivates their outward behavior and the meaning behind what they are saying or not saying.

I don't just read the covers but read the books, analyze what they say, what they don't say and why they said what they said. People here obviously have zero understanding of tradecraft (https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/Tradecraft%20Primer-apr09.pdf). I doubt most here could catch a cold because they lack even basic understanding of symbolism even when its waved in front of them. How many saw my avatar before one person finally picked up on its meaning and asked about it?

« Last Edit: Jul 28th, 2014, 7:02pm by Oldtimer » User IP Logged

jjflash
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




Homepage PM


Posts: 1476
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #46 on: Jul 28th, 2014, 7:38pm »

on Jul 28th, 2014, 6:42pm, Oldtimer wrote:
I don't just read the covers but read the books, analyze what they say, what they don't say and why they said what they said. People here obviously have zero understanding of tradecraft (https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/Tradecraft%20Primer-apr09.pdf).


I have my doubts as to the extents you have viewed and/or read the materials you are suggesting others read. I also have some doubts about your sincerity of actually expecting those materials to be reviewed, considering that in some cases you have posted hours and hours of video in a single post - on multiple occasions.

Nonetheless, please allow me to direct your attention to page 10 of the linked document, a section titled, 'Quality of Information Check'. It states, in part:

"Weighing the validity of sources is a key
feature of any critical thinking. Moreover,
establishing how much confidence
one puts in analytic judgments should
ultimately rest on how accurate and
reliable the information base is. Hence,
checking the quality of information used
in intelligence analysis is an ongoing,
continuous process. Having multiple
sources on an issue is not a substitute
for having good information that has
been thoroughly examined."

Page 11 continues:

An analyst or a team might begin
a quality of information check by
developing a database in which
information is stored according to source
type and date, with additional notations
indicating strengths or weaknesses in
those sources...

Review systematically all sources for
accuracy.

Identify information sources that appear
most critical or compelling.

..................................................

Do you sincerely expect me and others to interpret that is what you are doing?

Standards of evidence is square one. If we cannot agree on the weight - or lack thereof - that should be assigned to credulous videos as compared to authenticated documents and similar such types of evidence recognized as admissible by the professional research community, we are extremely unlikely to agree on any other points.

By the way, to the best of my knowledge, Blue Beam is only a theory - if not a hoax. I am unaware of any authenticated docs that so much as verify the existence of a project of that name, much less for the purposes that are often dubiously attributed to the alleged operation. If I am incorrect on that point, I would be more than willing to retract my assertion in the face of proper evidence - as recognized by the professional research community.
User IP Logged

The UFO Trail
Oldtimer
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 144
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #47 on: Jul 28th, 2014, 9:00pm »

What I expect of you jjflash is to do your own research on any subject to verify the truthfulness of it. If you are not willing to do that then you are an easily manipulated "sheepeople." If you do not have the time or interest to do that then do not read my posts!

Your Question: Do you sincerely expect me and others to interpret that is what you are doing? Answer: Yes, if you can't, can't keep up, or refuse to do so then you really have no hope of understanding what I am trying to get across to you.

In the sites I linked to Project Blue Beam, there were those that were pro Project Blue Beam and those that held Project Blue Beam to be a Hoax and not to be believed. I guess you did not bother to actually look at the material before doing your normal hatchet job. Unlike you I tried to present both sides of the issue to let people make up their own minds. I do evaluate the accuracy and truthfulness of sources but then I look at the total package not just the cover. I can reject 99% of a source and yet find 1% worthy of further investigation. Using your logic one would find something one finds objectionable and reject all further material. It would be easy to pass classified material past you as you have a consistently closed mind. Since you have no interest in what I say and consistently refuse to actually read all the material I post then it puzzles me how you hope to accurately attack what you refuse to try to understand. I'll try to not post long information in the future so as not to so thoroughly confuse you.

For instance, I was pointing out the existence of Project Blue Bean and that there was controversy about its veracity. I presented sources both pro and con for people to do their on research and make up their own minds about the subject. I was not endorsing the concept only making people aware of it as it was mentioned in the video before. Why is that concept so foreign to you?

Since you have such trouble understanding the consecpts much less actually bothering with the material; why is it feel qualified to judge that which you refuse to even read or review?

« Last Edit: Jul 28th, 2014, 9:01pm by Oldtimer » User IP Logged

GForce
Mod Director
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

You'll never find happiness until you find yourself!


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 6396
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #48 on: Jul 28th, 2014, 9:56pm »

on Jul 28th, 2014, 6:42pm, Oldtimer wrote:
Apparently you and others here do not appreciate how an Analyst approaches gathering information. I do have the time, temperament, and ability to do such work. I did postgraduate work in Criminology including crime scene investigation (under those teaching the Houston Police Department), the criminal mind, etc. some of my hobbies are the study of "criminal profiling" and ballistics. While some may just skim the surface of videos or the behavior of others I like to see what lies beneath as what actually motivates their outward behavior and the meaning behind what they are saying or not saying.

I don't just read the covers but read the books, analyze what they say, what they don't say and why they said what they said. People here obviously have zero understanding of tradecraft (https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/Tradecraft%20Primer-apr09.pdf). I doubt most here could catch a cold because they lack even basic understanding of symbolism even when its waved in front of them. How many saw my avatar before one person finally picked up on its meaning and asked about it?



Hello Oldtimer, I can appreciate the gathering of information and I do respect your temperament. but I simply don't have the time to watch every video posted here. Not enough hours in the day. What I do is read the posts here and when something interests me to the point of wanting to do research I do so. My research seldom takes me to you-tube unless what I'm looking for is 60-70's music.

As for your avatar? It is interesting and I credit Sys_ for asking you about it but in the grand scheme of things I don't pay much attention to them other than if they're interesting or not.
User IP Logged

jjflash
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




Homepage PM


Posts: 1476
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #49 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 08:14am »

on Jul 28th, 2014, 9:00pm, Oldtimer wrote:
What I expect of you jjflash is to do your own research on any subject to verify the truthfulness of it. If you are not willing to do that then you are an easily manipulated "sheepeople." If you do not have the time or interest to do that then do not read my posts!

Your Question: Do you sincerely expect me and others to interpret that is what you are doing? Answer: Yes, if you can't, can't keep up, or refuse to do so then you really have no hope of understanding what I am trying to get across to you.

In the sites I linked to Project Blue Beam, there were those that were pro Project Blue Beam and those that held Project Blue Beam to be a Hoax and not to be believed. I guess you did not bother to actually look at the material before doing your normal hatchet job. Unlike you I tried to present both sides of the issue to let people make up their own minds. I do evaluate the accuracy and truthfulness of sources but then I look at the total package not just the cover. I can reject 99% of a source and yet find 1% worthy of further investigation. Using your logic one would find something one finds objectionable and reject all further material. It would be easy to pass classified material past you as you have a consistently closed mind. Since you have no interest in what I say and consistently refuse to actually read all the material I post then it puzzles me how you hope to accurately attack what you refuse to try to understand. I'll try to not post long information in the future so as not to so thoroughly confuse you.

For instance, I was pointing out the existence of Project Blue Bean and that there was controversy about its veracity. I presented sources both pro and con for people to do their on research and make up their own minds about the subject. I was not endorsing the concept only making people aware of it as it was mentioned in the video before. Why is that concept so foreign to you?

Since you have such trouble understanding the consecpts much less actually bothering with the material; why is it feel qualified to judge that which you refuse to even read or review?



I'd like to express my perspective of what is taking place here, please, along with a brief explanation of why it is detrimental.

You posted a link to a declassified CIA manual containing instructions on intelligence analysis. You implied others should read it and follow the protocol contained therein.

I quoted procedures from the manual that you clearly do not follow.

I stated that I doubt you read the manual before suggesting others do so. I continue to suspect that the case, or, at the least, I question why you suggest others follow protocol that you do not.

A primary problem in failing to adhere to protocol as established by the professional research community (and as outlined in the very manual you suggested be consulted as a standard) is that discussion participants cite increasingly substandard sources in order to try to validate what are actually personal perspectives and most certainly not established facts. The discussion then often quickly spirals into personal attacks and counterproductive dialog because the beliefs are being misrepresented as facts and subsequently passionately argued. Arguments frequently escalate to rather unbecoming tactics for a simple reason: they cannot be supported otherwise.

In order to conduct healthy and functional debate, participants must conform to standards of evidence and recognition of the differences between opinions and facts. Failure to do so results in wastes of time and attention due to efforts to disguise beliefs as facts. That is why the standards of evidence exist in the first place.
User IP Logged

The UFO Trail
Oldtimer
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 144
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #50 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 10:00am »

JJFlash again, you fail to listen.

The posts I have made were never presented as facts or true but were presented as thought provokers in this field. Again as I have repeatedly stated to you; you would have known this IF you would have bother to read and view the material.

If I had claimed all I presented as the unassailable truth then your criticism would be valid however I have not. Instead, I have presented a method for people to examine subjects to determine the facts for themselves such as the videos and site links I post. Rather than being able to recognize that you choose again and again to make personal attacks against me. I have not sought out you to attack you with things I have found out negative about you on the Internet.

You have sought to twist everything I have said and posted since I have come here but the fault is within you not me.

You show your own inability and unwillingness to even listen to what I am saying such as why I post and how I wish others to approach what I post. You cling to your biased pre-conceived ideas of what I must mean and how in your mind I should do things. You are the one who introduces the personal attacks because I do not follow your pre-conceived ideas of how things should be done then cry foul when I point that out about you.

You accuse me of not following the analytical method I mention to people when I clearly stated it was to be used by others to evaluate anything anyone tells them including me; a point you repeatedly IGNORE in your quest to attack me personally.

For some reason you are incapable of comprehending that someone can offer controversial material for others to evaluate for themselves and allow them to come to their own conclusions. They don't have to be told what it means, guided, nudged or shoved, toward how they are to interpret it. They are capable by using simple analytical methods that I referenced to come to their own valid opinions not influenced by people like YOU or me. I question why YOU find such a concept so threatening that you continually find it necessary to ignore what I say,and the material I post in order to increasingly attack me?

You continue to say I am presenting things as fact when anyone reading my posts clearly can understand I tell them not to but examine them for themselves for truthfulness. That can only be a deliberate act. The question is why?

The question also is why moderation allows you to continually do this unchallenged by them.
« Last Edit: Jul 29th, 2014, 10:19am by Oldtimer » User IP Logged

GForce
Mod Director
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

You'll never find happiness until you find yourself!


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 6396
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #51 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 10:51am »

on Jul 29th, 2014, 10:00am, Oldtimer wrote:
The question also is why moderation allows you to continually do this unchallenged by them.




Hi Oldtimer, when we mods take action it's usually via pm however in the case of JJFlash and his posts I only read his thoughts and questions. I don't see them as condescending, they IMO express only his thoughts.

JJ, like yourself does a lot of research and has a keen interest in the field. I think (based by his posts) he wishes to do nothing more than engage you in debate.

If you feel otherwise or have issues with something someone posts feel free to PM me and we can discuss it. As far as warnings or actions taken we keep that in house. I hope this helps to guide you in how we operate the forum.

As a moderator I cannot or will not try to suppress someone's thoughts. I will squash personal attacks. As I said before your posts are thought provoking but you also have to understand at times people will question what you say. Look at the challenge as a chance to extend the debate and not as an attack. I don't think that's an unreasonable request. I have and will deal with anyone who PERSONALLY attacks you. Hope this helps! Dan

User IP Logged

ZETAR
Mod Director
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

GREAT SPIRITS ALWAYS ENCOUNTER THE MOST VIOLENT OPPOSITION FROM MEDIOCRE MINDS E=MC2


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 8138
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #52 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 2:12pm »

OFTEN TIMES WHEN AN IMPASSE IS REACHED WITH AN INDIVIDUAL(S)...THE CIVIL APPROACH IS TO ~ AGREE TO DISAGREE AND VENTURE FORWARD...IMH...MOD/MEMBER...OPINION...

SHALOM...Z
User IP Logged

GREAT SPIRITS ALWAYS ENCOUNTER THE MOST VIOLENT OPPOSITION FROM MEDIOCRE MINDS E=MC2
Oldtimer
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 144
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #53 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 4:08pm »

Look he does not ask for a debate he refuses to even read or look at the material and then accuses me of doing things that I cover in the material.

For Example I posted both material and videos on Project Blue Beam as material I knew to be controversial as it had been refered to in a previas video. In the material I offered for people's consideration in Project Blue Beam of NASA- http://new-world-order-plan.org/nwo-plans/project-blue-beam/ the very opening statement is "Note: Of all theories, this theory is the most scientific, but also most questionable theory in our opinion. But be free to decide yourself." I have stated repeatedly do not take anything anyone tells you as fact including myself but do your own research to determine the truthfulness in anything. Most of jjflash's objections to my posts are answered in my posts but since he refuses to actually read them he would never know that and it becomes tedious answering his false accusations when he would know better if he would only read the material. If he spent as much time actually reading what I post as he does trying to trap me we would not have a fraction of the posted disagreements. Yet jjflash refuses to take that and continues to accuse me of stating false facts which I have not due to me not posting them as established facts by me or anyone else. The posts state them as theories if you bother to read the posts!

I tried in my own way to show people principles of analytical examination and the man accuses me of violating them when I never offered anything as verified truth by me but simply examples of what some find as both truth and falsehood to allow the readers to use their own minds to establish for themselves what they believe but that is not acceptable to jjflash for some reason. So I do not see him as someone wishing to debate but as someone who does not wish me to challenge others to use their own minds to establish the facts for themselves outside my, his or anyone else's influence. I would have been happy to discuss the merits of differing theories as I surly do not have all the answers with him but that has not been his purpose from day one. He does not like the questions I ask or that I may get others thinking in those directions.

He sees that as dangerous and I do not. We are diametrically opposed and I will agree not to post on a thread started by him; if he will agree to not post on those started by me. Fair enough moderation?
« Last Edit: Jul 29th, 2014, 4:21pm by Oldtimer » User IP Logged

Oldtimer
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 144
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #54 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 4:30pm »

I am a Moderator on a Military Forum myself and have been there the longest. Being we cover the Middle East, Ukraine, and the world for that matter we are quite busy ourselves right now. I have only had time to answer this one thread of attack because of it.
User IP Logged

GForce
Mod Director
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

You'll never find happiness until you find yourself!


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 6396
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #55 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 6:54pm »

on Jul 29th, 2014, 4:08pm, Oldtimer wrote:
Look he does not ask for a debate he refuses to even read or look at the material and then accuses me of doing things that I cover in the material.

For Example I posted both material and videos on Project Blue Beam as material I knew to be controversial as it had been refered to in a previas video. In the material I offered for people's consideration in Project Blue Beam of NASA- http://new-world-order-plan.org/nwo-plans/project-blue-beam/ the very opening statement is "Note: Of all theories, this theory is the most scientific, but also most questionable theory in our opinion. But be free to decide yourself." I have stated repeatedly do not take anything anyone tells you as fact including myself but do your own research to determine the truthfulness in anything.

Most of jjflash's objections to my posts are answered in my posts but since he refuses to actually read them he would never know that and it becomes tedious answering his false accusations when he would know better if he would only read the material. If he spent as much time actually reading what I post as he does trying to trap me we would not have a fraction of the posted disagreements. Yet jjflash refuses to take that and continues to accuse me of stating false facts which I have not due to me not posting them as established facts by me or anyone else. The posts state them as theories if you bother to read the posts!


He sees that as dangerous and I do not. We are diametrically opposed and I will agree not to post on a thread started by him; if he will agree to not post on those started by me. Fair enough moderation?


Hello Oldtimer, I will concur that you often state to make up your own mind on a particular post. I am also glad that you highlighted with color that these are theories. Maybe that will resonate with those members with questions.

As for keeping anyone from posting on one of your threads I cannot do that as this is an open forum. That's up to you and JJ whether you post on each others threads. I will watch the posts on your threads to see if any break forum rules.

User IP Logged

Oldtimer
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 144
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #56 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 8:14pm »

on Jul 29th, 2014, 6:54pm, GForce wrote:
Hello Oldtimer, I will concur that you often state to make up your own mind on a particular post. I am also glad that you highlighted with color that these are theories. Maybe that will resonate with those members with questions.

As for keeping anyone from posting on one of your threads I cannot do that as this is an open forum. That's up to you and JJ whether you post on each others threads. I will watch the posts on your threads to see if any break forum rules.



So then, am I free to openly attack him as freely as he has attacked me with factually false accusations about statements he has never made just as he has me? Apparently that is allowed here.

User IP Logged

GForce
Mod Director
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

You'll never find happiness until you find yourself!


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 6396
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #57 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 9:34pm »

on Jul 29th, 2014, 8:14pm, Oldtimer wrote:
So then, am I free to openly attack him as freely as he has attacked me with factually false accusations about statements he has never made just as he has me? Apparently that is allowed here.



I will ask one of my fellow mods to read the 4 pages of this thread and to see where JJFlash is out of line. The only thing I see is that he questions the manual and if you're following the protocol you suggest of others. To be perfectly honest I don't see what you do but I will ask others to view the thread.
User IP Logged

jjflash
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




Homepage PM


Posts: 1476
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #58 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 10:13pm »

I opted to pretty much let this go without further comments, GForce, for several reasons. Suffice it to say, however, that I generally share your assessments of my posts.
User IP Logged

The UFO Trail
Oldtimer
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 144
xx Re: Obama Appoints UFO Disclosure Advocate?
« Reply #59 on: Jul 29th, 2014, 10:31pm »

on Jul 29th, 2014, 10:13pm, jjflash wrote:
I opted to pretty much let this go without further comments, GForce, for several reasons. Suffice it to say, however, that I generally share your assessments of my posts.



And yet you just have to stick your nose under the tent yet again. Perhaps it is best I just don't post here again which is after all what jjflash wants.

Trying to reason with some here reminds me of Mattew 7:6 the New International Version says it this way:

"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.

Goodbye.
« Last Edit: Jul 29th, 2014, 11:16pm by Oldtimer » User IP Logged

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5  Notify Send Topic Print
« Previous Topic | Next Topic »

Become a member of the UFO Casebook Forum today and join our more than 19,000 members.

Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

Donate $6.99 for 50,000 Ad-Free Pageviews!

| |

This forum powered for FREE by Conforums ©
Sign up for your own Free Message Board today!
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Conforums Support | Parental Controls