Board Logo
« #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Truth »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Aug 17th, 2017, 2:16pm


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 6  ...  99 Notify Send Topic Print
 sticky  Author  Topic: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Truth  (Read 4859 times)
Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #45 on: Nov 23rd, 2008, 12:36pm »

on Nov 22nd, 2008, 2:35pm, Latitude wrote:
Yes but one thing we have learned through not only the drone case but almost all of ufology is that only one side is the safe and provable... and for a good reason. If a photo witness did come forward with beyond a shadow of a doubt proof it would mean the end of the world as we know it. This is why it cannot happen. It will never be allowed. If it did happen by some mistake or freak happenstance (drones?) it would be very possible that history itself would need to be fixed and that is likely what would happen.

I believe this is very true, but for a good reason, anonymity. When you have dangerous information why stick your neck out? How will it profit you?

False. Chad never claimed to have taken the pics in Bakersfield.

False again. There is no proof it does not exist in Capitola.


I believe Teacher’s Pet has addressed these…

on May 10th, 2007, 2:13pm, oljack666 wrote:
PREVIOUS DRONE ACCOUNTS

Chronological Order


Bakersfield California – May 6, 2007 - Chad and multiple witnesses
http://www.ufocasebook.com/strangecraftphotos.html



The location was later given to LMH by Chad as being Bakersfield… you know that Lat. And your debate would be with her… Unless you some how you know Linda is not telling the truth… the burden of “proof” is in your court now.


on Nov 22nd, 2008, 2:35pm, Latitude wrote:
False again. There is no proof it does not exist in Capitola.


Research has shown this type of street light is not used by Capitola… again, the burden of proof is in your “court” to disprove the evidence that has been reported.

on Nov 22nd, 2008, 2:35pm, Latitude wrote:
False again. From the Ty letter:That was before the pics were taken. Then when the 12 pics were taken:

“It might have been moving a little too, but it was hard to tell from our location. For the most part it was stationary.”
“It was moving very slowly as well but not much activity.”


Yes, Ty says it all…

“For the most part it was stationary.”
“It was moving very slowly as well but not much activity.”

To me this suggest (For the most part it was stationary… but not much activity) it did not move very much… and it does not suggest that the Drone charged right at him as suggest by his photos:

User Image

Noticed what happens in LL... and Lat, you are the one to say it came right at him... it would be a frightening experience.
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Latitude
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1024
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #46 on: Nov 23rd, 2008, 1:43pm »

Hi Marvin,

Even though I disagree with your tack of attempting to prove the drone case false I think you are personally a nice guy. Maybe someone I could even call a friend.

The problem with your conclusions are that too much is being read into the evidence that simply is not there. Take the pole for instance. Sure the PI did look for it as did 11A and I. Just because we did not find it does not prove it never existed. We never even looked for the lamp. To assume the lamp is for street lighting is jumping to an unwarranted conclusion.

Ty talks about the movement of the object. He never goes into detail about camera movement or operation. To make conclusions based on our attempts to piece together photos is is only speculation.

Linda never lied. The whole Chad thing is a real gray area with way too much room for interpretation. It may be that Chad, even though he was much maligned, was actually the smartest of the photo witnesses. The most important lesson to come out of the entire drone saga is how would we handle being a photo witness of this type? Put yourself in their shoes. What would you have done differently?


User IP Logged

My Drone Video
Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #47 on: Nov 23rd, 2008, 2:16pm »

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 1:43pm, Latitude wrote:
Hi Marvin,

Linda never lied. The whole Chad thing is a real gray area with way too much room for interpretation. It may be that Chad, even though he was much maligned, was actually the smartest of the photo witnesses. The most important lesson to come out of the entire drone saga is how would we handle being a photo witness of this type? Put yourself in their shoes. What would you have done differently?





I am not sure that I understand the gray area...

But I would either report the incident or not... I would not have just placed it out there and disappear.

But there is zero evidence to support the reality of the BB Drones... or you would place it here (and not just opinion).
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #48 on: Nov 23rd, 2008, 3:51pm »

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 1:43pm, Latitude wrote:
Linda never lied. The whole Chad thing is a real gray area with way too much room for interpretation.

Hi Lat,

Linda wrote the following in a (now archived) web page on March 21st (2008).

Quote:
Earthfiles • 05/16/2007 — Updated: Odd Aerial “Drones”?
Over Lake Tahoe and Central California

Bakersfield, California, region, May 6, 2007:
But the next day on May 6, 2007, the man calling himself “Chad” took several clear, digital camera images of a dragonfly-shaped drone\ that was more complicated than the Lake Tahoe craft. Numbers, letters and symbols can be seen extending along the tail. I have corresponded several times with Chad and know his full name.

And your fellow DRT member and the person whom visited and documented the REAL Chad location with you wrote the following on September 18th (2008).

User Image

So what’s the gray area?

Seems as if Chad is a pathological liar who tricked Linda as I feel it’s highly unlikely that Chad gave Linda his real name when he obviously lied to her repeatedly about his location….

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 1:43pm, Latitude wrote:
The problem with your conclusions are that too much is being read into the evidence that simply is not there.

So relying JUST on the evidence what makes you believe Chad didn’t lie abut everything?

Cheers.
User IP Logged

Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies,
Tongue-tied & twisted, just an earth-bound misfit.
elevenaugust
Senior Member
ImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

APPONO ASTOS


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 286
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #49 on: Nov 23rd, 2008, 4:05pm »

Hi DrDil,

It seems like that you forgot to quote my full post on OMF, so just to be fair....

User Image
« Last Edit: Nov 23rd, 2008, 4:05pm by elevenaugust » User IP Logged

IPACO, the new tool for photo and video analysis is on-line ! www.ipaco.fr
DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #50 on: Nov 23rd, 2008, 4:40pm »

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 4:05pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Hi DrDil,

It seems like that you forgot to quote my full post on OMF, so just to be fair....

User Image

Heh, heh, Hi 11!! grin

So you are talking to me then?! wink

I didn't really forget as such, it's really because it's no more than supposition, conjecture and opinion which I have and can indeed proffer more than enough of myself!! So rather than excuse and explain away possible discrepancies I try to stick with the KNOWN facts, besides which the ONLY reference I was making was in reply to what was KNOWN about LMH and Chad’s location.

Not what we can guess, hypothesise, fantasise etc.

But seeing as you’re answering for Lat and relying entirely on what is KNOWN then allow me to address you with the same question.

What gray area?

(And of course just in case you’d forgot, my last sentence was as follows):

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 3:51pm, DrDil wrote:
So relying JUST on the evidence what makes you believe Chad didn’t lie abut everything?

It’s genuinely good to see you posting again and I hope you’re well.

Cheers. smiley
User IP Logged

Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies,
Tongue-tied & twisted, just an earth-bound misfit.
TeachersPet
Guest
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #51 on: Nov 23rd, 2008, 4:46pm »

Hmm you are not 100 percent sure, but based on the context of everything, we can be reasonably sure he did give anything but the truth.. The evidence is already there
to expect 100 percent ABSOLUTE certainty is unreasonable , because some have kept some of the infromation to yourselves, not just Linda.
Whats worse than witnesses not being forthcoming is researchers/investigators not being forthcoming with what they have in their possession or being misleading with descriptions of of the actual event site, to literally point away from the site, such as the Restaurant.

To not release the content of the cam witnes boyfriend stating she lied..yet walters email they did,

or the role of Tom Vance, who did the PI work for them..
and later is found to be an old friend/acquaintence of one of the PI..when the PI was working as a cop..and he in hauling service..

shows them being highly selective..not open ..and dishonest
Its not only worse, and biased, its irresponsible and unethical and makes you liars too.

Of that we can also be reasonably sure.
To dispell mistrust you must be transparent..
open let the chips fall where they may.
That was not done.why?
because ..
If it had then we can be perhaps even closer to that one hundred percent certainty of hoax, perhaps even 110 % wink

we like to make excuses for witnesses, pure speculation., he scared, flipped images, normal, tampering, normal and explainable..thats not speculation..thats fabrication!










« Last Edit: Nov 23rd, 2008, 5:07pm by TeachersPet » User IP Logged

Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #52 on: Nov 23rd, 2008, 7:10pm »

on Nov 22nd, 2008, 10:34am, Marvin wrote:
Truth is a funny thing. What one culture holds to be true, maybe discarded by another culture as erroneous. Individual people and believes are not much different and can vary due to personal experience and the like.

What I am interested in, is fact and object evidence. They are the foundations of “Western thought” when describing the concept of truth.

This maybe an insight into the divisions you are seeing when “camps” are seeking the “truth.”



Personally, I think we need to move beyond this blame game. It is a side track to the “truth.”

We have enough objective evidence and investigation to draw a conclusion. More anonymous photos, more anonymous explanations by phone, email or on a forum has not and will not add credence to the Drone case. The only missing piece to the evidence “story” is a witness.

You cannot take photographs and a story to court, you need a “body” or person. Without the person (in this case, the witnesses)… you don’t have a case. One can debate fake photos all day long as being real... to the uninformed, it is just an endless debate that has tempting arguments on both sides. But without the person who took the photos, in today’s world of CGI and Photoshop, the photos alone are meaningless.

Since we do not have any of the myriad of witnesses, all we can do is to check the stories against the photos… which have been done. What do we discover? Deception.

Chad claimed he took his photos in Bakersfield… as supported by the DRT, the photos were actual taken near San Jose (near the Big Basin area). That is deception.

Raj claimed to have taken his photos in Capitola… but the street light in one of the photos does not exist in Capitola. Hmmm, another deception.

Ty claims the Drone he and his bicycle friends watched (and photographed) just basically hovered in one spot, even as he took photos. But on examination of the photos, there is a point where the Drone appears to quickly approach him (it did not just stay on one spot). How could he not remember that? More deception? The list goes on and on.

With the lack of history for the line of custody of all photos, Photoshop tags, evidence of tampering and CGI… How does one sustain the “truth” and veracity of the Big Basin Drone as the only solution in the face of the known facts and evidence?

It would seem to me, the burden of proof solely falls on anyone claiming reality in this case... but without a witness, LOL.


Peace




I still stand on the facts and evidence, which are foundation of my above statements.

I am still waiting (and have been for many months now) for any objective evidence of this being a real event. Any objective evidence that demonstrates any fault with the evidence pointing toward hoax.

Let me say the Chad debate can rage on only if you give the benefit of the doubt to “Chad” about his “Bakersfield” statement… but the bottom line in that conversation between Linda and Chad, Linda came out with the belief the photos were taken in Bakersfield (I assume she did her jobs asking the right questions). Since Chad was not clear about the situation (or at least in your mind... and how would you really know how to apply any benefit of the doubt to Chad?), it does not change the fact that it is deception… you say it is innocent and explain it away… but the fact remains, it is a clear and deliberate case of deception to move the location of the photos to Bakersfield. Chad has had plenty of time to rectify that statement or misunderstanding. Yet the location still stands in the record… so I will make it easy and spell it out… DECEPTION.

To date, all we have seen is take my word for it, and it is all things can be true type argument for any reality in the BB Drone case. But all we really need, is simple objective evidence. And the evidence we have in each case point to deception.

Without the witnesses, you have no case for reality (even if nothing were found wrong with the photos).

A photo can not be a plaintiff, a photo can not give testimony as to the intent of the photographer (although, the drone photos do testify as to being fake), and a photo can not be cross examined or questioned. We need the witness for that… and in today’s world of Photoshop and CGI, a photo can not stand on its own accord... especially in any extraordinary case such as the Drones.


Still waiting for evidence,

Marvin
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #53 on: Nov 25th, 2008, 07:08am »

As a follow up on the Chad debate, let’s listen to Chad’s own words:

“Thank you so much for posting my photos! I hope someone can help identify this… First of all, I see this thing VERY often. Since it first appeared, I have probably seen this thing maybe 8 different times since the first appearance. My friend and I went out the next day after I first saw it to get the photos, but it was not there. Then we tried again the next day, and we found it within like 30 minutes and followed it for a while. Most of the time I see it out of windows in my house, in the distance, but I would say almost half of the hikes I have gone on in my area, I have seen it very close. It is very easy to photograph and many neighbors aside from my friend have also seen it."


"Most of the time I see it out of windows in my house..."

With Chad’s explanation of Bakersfield to Linda, how can this not be deception (especially if you assume he lives in Bakersfield and visited the Big Basin area)? If he wanted anonymity, he would have just continued to refuse to say where the photos were taken… or where he lived.

Either way one argues this, Chad lives where the photos were taken and did not tell the truth about Bakersfield… or Chad lives in Bakersfield and was visiting where he took the photos… his story does work out as being truthful.

By his own words, he lives where he took the photos… and we know that ain’t Bakersfield.
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Latitude
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1024
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #54 on: Nov 25th, 2008, 10:13am »

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 3:51pm, DrDil wrote:
So what’s the gray area?

The gray area is Chad never claimed to live in Bakersfield or have taken the pictures in Bakersfield. All he said was "I am about 10 miles outside of Bakersfield". Who knows if this was correct strictly speaking. Evasive? Yes, no doubt about it because he knew darn well what Linda was asking. A liar? Maybe.

Quote:
Seems as if Chad is a pathological liar who tricked Linda as I feel it’s highly unlikely that Chad gave Linda his real name when he obviously lied to her repeatedly about his location….

Probably true. You need to understand and get into the mind of Chad and people like him. How many UFO sightings a made each year where witnesses simply blow it off? What purpose did Chad have for coming forward? He never sought to be a UFO witness. That much is sure.

Quote:
So relying JUST on the evidence what makes you believe Chad didn’t lie abut everything?

We have absolutely no proof that he did lie about everything. My guess is he either lied or was deliberately evasive about anything that could identify him or his location. That seems totally understandable to me. We still have high quality pics taken on private property that have stood up to scrutiny. Identifying the locations only strengthened their legitimacy.

The main thing that the debunkers always try to avoid is that the Chad episode is obviously linked to the rest of the drone case with multiple witnesses and multiple high rez and up close pictures. With good supporting reports a from all the witnesses and even a witness signing up at OMF and answering questions, all the emails behind the scenes and even a supposed government employee explaining the entire thing, it's very hard to discount. To deny all of it is simply closed minded.

User IP Logged

My Drone Video
TeachersPet
Guest
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #55 on: Nov 25th, 2008, 12:43pm »

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 7:10pm, Marvin wrote:
I still stand on the facts and evidence, which are foundation of my above statements.

I am still waiting (and have been for many months now) for any objective evidence of this being a real event. Any objective evidence that demonstrates any fault with the evidence pointing toward hoax.

Let me say the Chad debate can rage on only if you give the benefit of the doubt to “Chad” about his “Bakersfield” statement… but the bottom line in that conversation between Linda and Chad, Linda came out with the belief the photos were taken in Bakersfield (I assume she did her jobs asking the right questions). Since Chad was not clear about the situation (or at least in your mind... and how would you really know how to apply any benefit of the doubt to Chad?), it does not change the fact that it is deception… you say it is innocent and explain it away… but the fact remains, it is a clear and deliberate case of deception to move the location of the photos to Bakersfield. Chad has had plenty of time to rectify that statement or misunderstanding. Yet the location still stands in the record… so I will make it easy and spell it out… DECEPTION.

To date, all we have seen is take my word for it, and it is all things can be true type argument for any reality in the BB Drone case. But all we really need, is simple objective evidence. And the evidence we have in each case point to deception.

Without the witnesses, you have no case for reality (even if nothing were found wrong with the photos).

A photo can not be a plaintiff, a photo can not give testimony as to the intent of the photographer (although, the drone photos do testify as to being fake), and a photo can not be cross examined or questioned. We need the witness for that… and in today’s world of Photoshop and CGI, a photo can not stand on its own accord... especially in any extraordinary case such as the Drones.


Still waiting for evidence,

Marvin


Outstanding, simply outstanding..
and by all means please do not hold your breath waiting for their proof either or your lungs will burst.

The Following is an ARC ALERT, you remember, those horrible people with the closed minds and in a virtual state denial, the exiled debunkers, (which by the way you were unceremoniously inducted into some time ago smiley) Well continuing to believe in those archaic and outmoded conceps of truth, honesty, and transparency, we continue the tradtion of ...
just "Lettin it all hang out"..
an alert at ATS for upcoming program .
enjoy !
Posted by Klatu..
RC MUST WATCH ALERT:
GREAT UFO ANALYSIS PROGRAM with a hidden DRONE SURPRISE
___________________________________________________

ARC members, I just now finished watching the 2 a.m. Pacific Time feed of the "Mass Sightings in Mexico" episode of UFO'S OVER EARTH on the Discovery Channel and was shocked.

During the first 2 to 4 minutes of the program it was announced that the drone photos - which they showed on screen and while being analyzed by MUFON researchers - were a "hoax" and had been "proved to be a hoax on the Internet." Other drone photo details were depicted with a brief commentary as to some of the features that made them not real photographs.

James Carrion and a crew of MUFON investigators and independent experts then conduct three professional onsite UFO investigations that put any similar efforts and wannabe UFO investigation programs to shame. Also a neat surprise ending experiment you don't want to miss.

If anyone has DVR'd this program or know if it's online elsewhere please let us know.


UFO's Over Earth - Mass Sightings in Mexico
Nov 24, 10:00 pm/Nov 25, 2:00 am
(60 minutes) TV-14

MUFON struggles to separate fact from fiction as they travel to three cities in Mexico. Analysis of UFO photos and videos brings them face-to-face with potential fraud, half-truths and cover-ups.

Source: dsc.discovery.com...
« Last Edit: Nov 25th, 2008, 12:52pm by TeachersPet » User IP Logged

DrStern
Guest
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #56 on: Nov 25th, 2008, 1:16pm »

Quote:
Still waiting for evidence,

Marvin


Yes, Marvin...I'm sure we all are..

I would like to "zoom out" a bit, and see what will happen if real true evidence is presented to the public here, to the readers of UFO Casebook, and elsewhere:

On one hand we want it to be true, because we see it as a great breakthru in Ufology, and some sort of satisfaction, saying "we were right the whole time".

On the other hand, we would be scared, as it really sinks in that extraterrestrials really are present here at Our Planet...(we heard astronauts saying so, but nah..)

When true evidence of extraterrestrial interference of Our Planet is implemented as something we have to deal with in real life, a giant snowball effect of the psyke is unleashed, once it becomes known to the masses.

It will change all, and the view of Our World will never be the same. It will change our consciousness.

Inside our consciousness we are not prepared for something like this, and it will take some time to consume.

So, is it better to "leave things as they were" or venture into a very unknown world, opening our eyes for things we never even knew could happen?

Maybe a new and more reliable sighting of "The Dragonfly Drone" will make a change. Or maybe not.

I sure hope we will be able to "handle the truth" when it comes.....if it comes.

Cheers,

DrStern
« Last Edit: Nov 26th, 2008, 03:59am by DrStern » User IP Logged

TeachersPet
Guest
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #57 on: Nov 25th, 2008, 1:22pm »

While we all sing and holding hands singing "Come by here Lord and My genes..they needs a changin again...."
here is that working link to that discovery channel, in the ARC alert.
http://dsc.discovery.com/space/ufos-over-earth/
« Last Edit: Nov 25th, 2008, 1:26pm by TeachersPet » User IP Logged

Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #58 on: Nov 25th, 2008, 1:50pm »

on Nov 25th, 2008, 10:13am, Latitude wrote:
The gray area is Chad never claimed to live in Bakersfield or have taken the pictures in Bakersfield. All he said was "I am about 10 miles outside of Bakersfield". Who knows if this was correct strictly speaking. Evasive? Yes, no doubt about it because he knew darn well what Linda was asking. A liar? Maybe.


Probably true. You need to understand and get into the mind of Chad and people like him. How many UFO sightings a made each year where witnesses simply blow it off? What purpose did Chad have for coming forward? He never sought to be a UFO witness. That much is sure.


We have absolutely no proof that he did lie about everything. My guess is he either lied or was deliberately evasive about anything that could identify him or his location. That seems totally understandable to me. We still have high quality pics taken on private property that have stood up to scrutiny. Identifying the locations only strengthened their legitimacy.

The main thing that the debunkers always try to avoid is that the Chad episode is obviously linked to the rest of the drone case with multiple witnesses and multiple high rez and up close pictures. With good supporting reports a from all the witnesses and even a witness signing up at OMF and answering questions, all the emails behind the scenes and even a supposed government employee explaining the entire thing, it's very hard to discount. To deny all of it is simply closed minded.




Lat… “throw us a bone” here.


Quote:
We have absolutely no proof that he did lie about everything. My guess is…


While you are absolutely correct, we do not know if Chad is being untruthful about everything… we do know that he is being untruthful. The question is why? Since Chad could have avoided being untruthful, but choose not to, what other things is Chad being untruthful about? There is a thing call “reasonable doubt.” With all of the deception, it is my opinion that we have “reasonable doubt” to disbelieve anything we have been told (without any objective evidence to back it up). Clearly, there is wishful thinking, and people helping folks like Chad to “fill in the blanks” and to “connect the dots” are not supplying evidence.

Reasonable people should be asking, why does someone need to “fill in the blanks” and to “connect the dots” for Chad or any of the other “witnesses?”

So instead of turning Chad’s story into someone else’s words… why don’t we simple product the evidence to back up Chad’s story?

Unfortunately, the answer has been very simple… no one has been able to do it. There are flaws and issues that cannot be over come by “what ifs,” “fill in the blanks” and “connect the dots.” It is a house of cards that can only stand if someone is seriously trying to prop it up.

Guessing is not evidence.

And let us take a close look at:

Quote:
The main thing that the debunkers always try to avoid is that the Chad episode is obviously linked to the rest of the drone case with multiple witnesses and multiple high rez and up close pictures. With good supporting reports a from all the witnesses and even a witness signing up at OMF and answering questions, all the emails behind the scenes and even a supposed government employee explaining the entire thing, it's very hard to discount. To deny all of it is simply closed minded.


I do not avoid the issue of multiple witnesses. I say, show me one of the 40 plus people that are claimed to be a witness. No one has been able to find one of the people in over a year. These people are hidden better than Sarah Palin during the last campaign and can keep a secret better than the Obama transition team.

Any anonymous person (government or otherwise) can sign up for emails and forums (have a web site)… you do not know who you are communicating with (and so much for the fear for not being anonymous). rolleyes

The photos have been demonstrated to be fakes, but you can keep hope alive.

To deny that it can be a hoax or disinformation is more than just being helpful to keeping the myth alive, isn’t it?

So, instead of wasting time with these silly debates... should someone be busy digging up proof?
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #59 on: Nov 25th, 2008, 1:59pm »

on Nov 25th, 2008, 1:22pm, TeachersPet wrote:
While we all sing and holding hands singing "Come by here Lord and My genes..they needs a changin again...."
here is that working link to that discovery channel, in the ARC alert.
http://dsc.discovery.com/space/ufos-over-earth/



Looks like I have missed the Mexico one.

ARC Research Consultant – it looks like I live in infamy. wink
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6  ...  99 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