UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Jul > Jul 24

Re: Why The Cover-Up?

From: Paul Kimball <TheRobieShark.nul>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 09:40:49 EDT
Archived: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 09:00:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?

>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 16:37:05 -0700
>Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 09:52:50 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?


>>I encourage you to approach such experts - you'll find some at a
>>nearby college/university or museum - and ask if they think
>>there is any compelling evidence for the existence, past or
>>present, of a technologically advanced but hidden race that
>>shares the planet with us.

>These experts are my friends and school classmates and fishing
>buddies and we talk about far out ideas all the time. They agree
>that there isn't any hard accepted evidence of ancient
>civilizations, but there are tantalizing clues, mainly the work
>of Hancock Many stress that so much has been lost to time that
>there's no way to make a real estimate of probability. But if
>you ask them to make a choice between ETH and ancient hominids,
>the hominids win every time. Not a single scientist that I know
>believes that star travel is possible.


I find it all terribly amusing that people who are inclined to
support the ETH are lecturing other people about what science
will and will not accept as a reasonable hypothesis with respect
to UFOs.

Having said that, when you make a statement like "Not a single
scientist that I know believes that star travel is possible",
you just make yourself look foolish. The best spin I can put on
this is that you have a very, very limited range of
acquaintances in the various relevant scientific fields. Or
perhaps you've never met Stan Friedman. He's a scientist
(despite what some of his detractors may say from time to time).
Or Jim McDonald. He was a scientist. A good one.

Perhaps I just know more scientists than you do, but my friends
who are scientists, to a person, don't find the idea of star
travel (someday) to be impossible. Not a one. Indeed, a recent
poll of Canadians found that an overwhelming majority are
convinced that we'll be able to travel to the stars someday,
although probably not in our lifetimes. Presumably more than a
few of the people surveyed had backgrounds in science.

Of course, a number of our government's, including mine,
maintain space programs with the ultimate goal - someday - of
getting us out there.

So, while your statement above may make you feel better, I don't
see how you can possibly back it up. It is simply empty

>I have never secretely or openly compared myself to Galileo. But
>you are correct. Most academics do not accept the idea that
>ancient monotranes pilot UFO. An even greater number reject ETH
>and are in denial about all UFO matters. So where does that
>leave us?

Now, on the other hand, we have you telling us that more
scientists buy into your theory than the prospect of space/star
travel someday. Okay. Name some. Cite some peer-reviewed
academic papers that support your contention. Find me a
Friedman, or McDonald, or even a Hynek, that buys into ancient
monotranes. Just one. I think if you can do that you'll find
that people will be willing to give you a fair shake. But until
you do/can, your proclamations that there is actually more
scientific support and merit for your 'theories' than the ETH is
meaningless. And I say this as someone who is hardly a died-in-
the-wool ETHer, and who keeps an open mind about what UFOs may

Paul Kimball

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ 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