UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > May > May 1

Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico - King

From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul>
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:47:41 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 09:34:30 -0400
Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico - King

>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 12:38:47 -0400
>Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico

>>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 22:10:49 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico

>>>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 11:13:55 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico


>>>The ease with which the reports coming out of Mexico are
>>>dismissed has more to do with long-held prejudices and imagined
>>>superiority than it has to do with the results of an
>>>investigation or conclusions that are arrived at via scientific
>>>methodology. This most recent post about the 'fleet videos'
>>>being mere balloons is a perfect example.

>>If you are seriously suggesting that compelling evidence for the
>>existence of extra-terrestrial craft in our skies is being
>>"dismissed" because it comes from Mexico, then it is quite
>>clearly you that is the bigot here. I've looked at lots of
>>images, videos, and written reports. Some are very intriguing. I
>>couldn't care less where they come from. My interest is in
>>finding something extraordinary, something for which I have no
>>rational explanation. That's what keeps me looking. Not to prove
>>some personal hypothesis (I don't have one), but to be there
>>when the truth reveals itself..vigilant. If proof came from
>>Mexico, I would be as exhilirated as if it happened on the White
>>House lawn. I believe everyone on this List would agree. The
>>only evidence of a dissenting view from what I've read is coming
>>from your poison pen. And it reads like a whine against an enemy
>>that doesn't exist. Mexico may once have been the Rodney
>>Dangerfield of the West, but the US of A has usurped that title
>>and appears to be intent on holding it for oh, another 3 years
>>or so. On this I do not feel your pain. Mexico being
>>ridiculed... have you read the papers lately? If you're gonna
>>bring it, then bring it. <g>

>>>Nobody has bothered to check I'm sure, but... No 'fleet videos'
>>>were either recorded or submitted for the date mentioned for the
>>>balloon release: April the 7th, when this event took place.

>>>The most recent video and the one closest to the date of the
>>>balloon flight is from, April the 11 th. The video was recorded
>>>at 8:30 in the morning. A Monday morning, with not a single
>>>demonstration happening in the cities of Mexico.

>>Are you basing the date of the video solely on the imprint on
>>the tape? On Robles Gil's testimony? I would think that if
>>someone claimed his video was of a known balloon release, and
>>the best method you have to refute it is to cite the reported
>>date and time of the video, then the object(s) on the video must
>>be very strongly similar to balloons, else you could just point
>>at the video and say, "you call those balloons"? Since the date
>>is not verifiable, either by the videographer's report or the
>>camera itself, this is a non-starter. Balloons unless and until
>>evidence emerges to the contrary.

>>>And by the way, can they explain all of the other videos?

>>I wish someone would point me to "all the other videos". I have
>>located one single very unimpressive video file from Robles Gil.
>>I'd be happy to eat my words if there's any "sauce" in these
>>other videos. My balloon comments were based entirely on the
>>single video file linked in this thread.

>>>It's ridiculous how easily the reports and recordings are
>>>dismissed without the slightest attempt at investigation. In
>>>fact, it's nothing short of insulting. Which is what prompted my
>>>sarcastic missive on the subject.

>>I'm sure that having your videotapes dismissed can be insulting,
>>but you don't have to be from Mexico. Billy Meier, Bob Lazar, Ed
>>Walters... none from Mexico. The evidence is what leads to such
>>dismissal. The video... or what little I have been fortunate
>>enough to see... appears first to be balloons. Unless and until
>>I see or hear evidence that directly refutes this impression, my
>>intellect will not allow my conscience to make the leap that
>>they are anything but. I'm completely open to being refuted, but
>>emotion is not a substitute for evidence.

>>>I have videotaped the exact same objects...


>>If you don't know what is in Robles Gil's video, how can you
>>assert that you have videotaped the "exact same things"?

>>>Talk about having your head buried in the sand! The skies over
>>>Mexico are becoming the center stage of first contact while the
>>>rest of the world dismisses it as misinterpretation of ordinary
>>>birds and balloons and looks the other way.

>>>How sad. What a commentary on us.

>>Considering that Yturria makes much of the fact that the
>>object(s) are unknown (whether mundane OR ET), you seem to have
>>quite a different view. On what is this anomalous mindset based?
>>And we're obviously not looking the other way... we're just
>>waiting for something to see. The video I have seen which was
>>the basis for this thread are something less.

>>>The UFO occupants must think we're _all_ mentally challenged!

>>At the very least, any visiting aliens observing us scrambling
>>the gunships and putting the POTUS in a bunker for a cloud
>>probably looked pretty lame, too. Or was it a cloud... hmmm. <g>

>It never makes much sense to try to conduct a conversation or
>discussion with someone who is as obviously 'upset' by a subject
>as you are about UFOs. You seem to have taken my comments and
>observations 'personally'. As if they had been directed to you
>and you alone.

>For example, you write:

>"If you are seriously suggesting that compelling evidence for
>the existence of extra-terrestrial craft in our skies is being
>'dismissed' because it comes from Mexico, then it is quite
>clearly you that is the bigot here. I've looked at lots of
>images, videos, and written reports."

>I find it curious and even a little amusing that out of the many
>individuals who subscribe to this List and all those who read
>the posts, you seem to be the only one who reacted as if the
>content of my message was directed at you personally. Besides, I
>do not engage in the kind of self-loathing required to be
>prejudiced against one's own people, race or nationality.

>Why does all this upset you so, Kyle? Have you ever
>witnessed/seen a UFO? What is your stake in all this that you
>are so easily upset and obviously bothered by comments such as
>mine? Let me assure you, I didn't have _you_ in mind when I
>wrote them. Even though, I seem to have struck a nerve.

>Take it easy Kyle. Life is too short to allow comments such as
>mine upset your apple cart as it apparently has. I'm as entitled
>to my opinions and to express them as you are yours. You don't
>see me blowing-up over some remark or observation that you've
>made. Actually, when I see your name in the header of a post, I
>usually just trash it unread. If my opinions and comments upset
>you as much as you have demonstrated here in this response to my
>post, then I suggest you do the same with my posts when you see
>them. I'm going to save my energy for people who may wish to
>discuss this situation. I have no time or patience for the
>insecure ones who show up to a discussion _aggressively_ looking
>for a fight. I'm not desperate to prove anything to anybody,
>as you, so transparently, do.

>I wish you Peace - Because Life is too short for anything else!

Hi John,

I cannot find any reference in my post that would indicate that
I am angry. While it certainly annoys me when someone accuses
others of being dismissive of someone's assertions because of
their nationality, it does not anger me in the slightest.

What is clear from your reply is that you would choose to create
intent in my post and thereby duck answering the questions I
asked. A brief review of the post I was replying to reveals that
the anger is yours...at not being taken seriously. I would agree
that you are not taken seriously, but not because of your
nationality. This was my very simple point.

The rest of my post was a number of questions...not sarcastic,
but honest questions. I assumed that you had seen other video of
these "flotillas". Whether I was mistaken or not is now
irrelevant since my questions are cast aside in the glare of
your imagined rancor on my part. You really think I took your
post as being directed at me personally? I may be paranoid, but
I'm not that paranoid. I just wanted some answers. Of course,
It'd be a miracle if you actually read this post, since two in a
row would tend to discount your comment about typically deleting
my posts. My loss.

As you have provided no evidence to support your views, and in
light of Yturria's reasoned assertion that the objects remain a
complete enigma, I choose to disagree with your assessment of
American's reaction to UFO reports from Mexico, and of your
thinly veiled assertion that anyone who doesn't take them
seriously will be missing out on something big.

I would honestly like to see more video of these objects, since
that is apparently all we will have to work with in attempting
to determine what they are. I still think balloons are the
simplest answer until something more compelling comes along.
UFOs from outer space is a ways away, in my opinion.



[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com