From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 08:22:51 -0600 Archived: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:18:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Did Unknown Intruders Erase ICBM Target Codes? >From: Dave Haith <visions1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <post.nul> >Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 17:49:55 -0000 >Subject: Re: Did Unknown Intruders Erase ICBM Target Codes? >>>From: Kathy Kasten <catraja.nul> >>>To: <post.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 00:38:59 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Did Unknown Intruders Erase ICBM Target Codes? >>>>From: Robert Hastings <ufohastings.nul> >>>>To: <post.nul> >>>>Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 10:43:34 -0500 (EST) >>>>Subject: Did Unknown Intruders Erase ICBM Target Codes? >>>>My latest article is up at The UFO Chronicles: >>>>http://tinyurl.com/7dqy29z >>>>Yet Another Nuclear Missile Launch Officer Talks about UFOs at >>>>F.E. Warren AFB: >>>>Did the Unknown Intruders Erase ICBM Target Codes? >>>><snip> >>>>To summarize, here we have yet another former ICBM launch >>>>officer saying that UFOs have repeatedly monitored and-according >>>>to missile maintenance and targeting personnel-tampered with our >>>>nuclear missiles. ><snip> >>>Robert: >>>I always enjoy reading your reports. You act as a reporter; just >>>reporting the facts and leave analysis up to the reader. >>>So, as a reader of your latest report, I have a question: why >>>the hell would a so-called ET civilization be interested in >>>erasing missile tapes and monitoring maintenance of nuclear >>>missiles? To me doing so reeks of possible enemy combatants >>>spying on our facilities. >>>Yeah, I know foreign technology has been ruled out. The general >>>line is that nobody has technology capable of doing the things >>>to missiles that are being reported. Who is that sure where of >>>they speak? >>>I just have a problem with ET intervention into our missile >>>sites. I am sure you have your reasons for thinking ETs are >>>interested. >>>I guess I need to hear a really sound argument. >>This is the sort of thing that drives me nuts. >>(1) The issue is a UFO report, not speculation about ETs. >>(2) What in the world qualifies you to know what the ETs - you >>know, the ones nobody but you is talking about - would or would >>not do? >>This kind of silliness is one good reason why UFO-related >>discussions so seldom get anywhere. >>What a load of tiresome nonsense. One would like to think we're >>not children here, but sometimes I can't help fearing the worse. >>This is one of those occasions. >I really can't see why such a little thing should drive you nuts[,] >Jerry. >You say the issue is a UFO report, not speculation about ETs. Kathy isn't the worst or most dogmatic offender here, and I didn't mean to come down on her particularly. Sorry if I sounded aggrieved at her personally. My target was a whole lot of lazy thinking by persons who ought to know better, to wit, the drearily familiar debunking plaint "If UFOs were real, they wouldn't [fill in the blank]" - the sort of statement that reflects only the dismisser's lack of knowledge, imagination, or openness. It does not attest to his or her special knowledge of the thoughts and actions of alien intelligences. (I suppose the possibility remains that these individuals are secret contactees, but that's probably not what they mean.) Probably every one of us has his or her opinion of the Greater Meaning of the UFO Phenomenon. We should put that aside, however, when we consider a particular report and its significance. In well-established fields, unlike ufology, there are theories for which a body of strong, generally agreed-upon evidence can reasonably be put to the fore when the judging of new evidence is required. In a field as unformed and uncertain as ufology, that's a bad idea; the data - usually, not always, the testimonies of witnesses - must always be the primary consideration. In any event, I have no problem whatever - and I'm sure I'm far from alone - conjuring up reasons why ETs might act in the manner described in the report Robert Hastings passes on. But my speculations have no more basis in established fact than do Kathy's. The truth of the matter is that we don't' know, and it doesn't help matters to pretend that we do. Meantime, we have a case for which investigation and analysis are necessary, not airy speculation on what hypothetical other-intelligences are or are not capable of or interested or not interested in doing. That's all I meant to say. Not all that controversial. And I apologize to Kathy if I sounded grumpier than I felt. Jerry Clark Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp