UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Jul > Jul 26

Re: Why The Cover-Up?

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:27:46 -0300
Archived: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:19:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?

>From: Bob Shell <bob.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 09:55:58 -0400
>Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?

>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:00:12 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?


>>I know you and I agree on one important fact. Humans world-wide
>>are being visited, on a daily basis, by UFO and their occupants.
>>These visitations can only be the result of a very short list of
>>causes: our own military, folks from other star systems (ETH),
>>or folks from our own solar system. (I'm ruling out other causes
>>such as angels, daemons, time travelers, interdimentional
>>entities, etc, because I assume you agree with me that these are
>>not serious possibilities) I have ruled out ETH because science
>>says FTL travel is not possible. I have ruled out our own
>>military ( except for the TR 3B, the flying triangle) because
>>the history of UFO goes back thousands of years.

>You are right in that we disagree on some points. I, for one, do not
>rule out "angels, daemons, time travelers, interdimensional entities,
>etc." I think these beings present themselves to humans in the guise
>du jour, and have appeared as angels and demons in times past
>because the humans of the day could believe those explanations.
>Before we got out into our solar system a bit and found out the
>realities, they passed themselves off as visitors from Mars, Venus,
>Saturn, or other planets. Now that we know those explanations are
>bogus, they claim to be from distant stars.

>I don't rule out time travelers because time travel may well be
>possible. I don't think FYL travel is impossible in a non-local
>universe, but it may be difficult or we may just not be
>interesting enough to justify it.

>Lastly, I don't think an earlier technological civilization on
>earth would be monotremes. Monotremes are an evolutionary dead
>end. I think it far more likely that they would be dinosauroids.
>But that is probably a minor point in the theory. A convergently
>evolved humanoid could come from almost any vertebrate origin.

>What I can't figure out is why your theory, mine, or Sanderson's
>original should be so damned frightening to some people.

I donno Bob. I'm not frightened by it. The whole thing sounds a
little absurd and ego-centric to me.

Why should what either of you are proposing be frightening? More
like second grade science fiction and boring. But you can
suggest that myself and others are "frightened" if it makes you
more comfortable as part of you argument.

Where do these "others" live and manufacture, anyway?

I'm thinking of filing a missing persons report for this absent
civilzation. But if anything the theory seems to have some
entertainment value on this List.

Don Ledger

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