|
From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 08:52:15 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:56:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Defending The Indefensible - Clark >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 02:01:03 EDT >Subject: Defending The Indefensible [was: MUFON On Kinross & F-89 'Find'] >>From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 08:45:00 -0500 >>Subject: Re: MUFON On Kinross & F-89 'Find' >>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 15:22:52 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: MUFON On Kinross & F-89 'Find' >I probably wouldn't say that certain things are "indefensible" >because I have heard people go through the motions of defending >topics that are obviously warmed over bat guano.... >Personally I await the next swindle to come along. I may be >wrong, but it will probably be in the summer or fall months. >Somebody will unload some incredible story, which naturally >can't be verified. The story tellers credentials likely will not >be able to be verified. The story will go all over UFO talk >radio and the Internet. Any problems with proof will be blown >off with the thought that the story was so important that >personality A, or talk show host B had to unload it without >checking or investigating anything. Thus the circle of lies and >deceit in ufology is complete. Well and truly stated, Robert. I have this mental image of a bunch of children in chronic, frantic pursuit of the latest shiny new toy. Jerry Clark
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp