From: Stanton T. Friedman <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 07:49:34 -0300 Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 21:40:38 -0400 Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs > Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:46:27 -0500 (CDT) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <email@example.com> > From: Dennis Stacy <firstname.lastname@example.org> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs > >From: RobIrving@aol.com > >Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:48:43 EDT > >To: email@example.com > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs > >> From: "Greg Sandow" <firstname.lastname@example.org> > >> To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <email@example.com> > >> Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs > >> Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:31:11 -0400 > <Oh, hell, in my arrogance, snip everybody!> > Let's cut to the chase: Mssrs. Irving, Rimmer, Brookesmith and > other unregenerate-like English types are always asking where, in > essence, are your ten best cases indicative of the ETH. Clark > (Sandow?) and others essentially respond by saying: read the > vast, voluminous literature and surely you will be enlightened > and informed as to your erroneous ways thereby, which is not > necessarily the same thing. > Yes, the British blokes are being both obnoxious and vexing, > aren't they? At the same time, their original question remains > unanswered. So, Jerry and Greg, take but a minute to tell us > which ten cases you would consider most indicative and evidential > of extraterrestrial visitation. That's all; just the ten specific > *cases* that you personally would want to defend in the court of > public (or scientific) opinion. You know, the ones that support > your case. Just ten. > No reference to a body of collective literature allowed. Just ten > cases. Not twenty or thirty, just ten. > Jerry, you've been in the business a lot longer than Greg, so I > would expect you to come up with ten convincing cases suggestive > of the ETH first. Greg, you're next. Ten UFO cases you want to > defend to intellectual death or victory. You're very eloquent > when it comes to theories and generalities, now give us ten > specific cases which you think support an extraterrestrial > interpretation of the UFO phenomenon. > Dennis How about looking at Dr. James E. McDonald's 71 page congressional testimony of July 29, l968, Jim was a professor of Physics at the University of Arizona, and interviewed over 500 witnesses. This paper has 41 separate cases. It is truly amazing how debunkers ignore Jim's work and such other sources as Project Blue Book Special Report 14. Perhaps it is not surprising in view of the basic rule "What the public doesn't know, I am not going to tell them".
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp