From: Kathy Kasten <catraja.nul> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:47:52 +0000 Archived: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:05:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Three Cheers For Uruguay >From: Gildas Bourdais <bourdais.gildas.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:57:37 +0100 >Subject: Re: Three Cheers For Uruguay <snip> >Kathy, >Once more you make a completely wrong statement: many theories >have been discussed by researchers, during more than a half >century. >For my part, I have written several books (not translated in >English, sorry), and articles (some translated, and published), >to try to show that. Really, you have written books but not in English? And, how would I know that or what your theories are? To address my criticism: how about when citing a case, the person who researched it provides the solution along with the documentation. So far, the only person who does this is Bruce Maccabee. His solution provides his reasoning and proof whereof he speaks. I haven't read anything resembling solutions from any one else. Example: cite the case with observations, witness's physical and mental condition - including neurological and psychological workup. Any testing done to replicate the conditions under which event took place. If you have provided solutions to each case, then you know the drill. Or, maybe, for UFO researchers there is no drill. No steps to be followed to provide a satisfactory conclusion to the case. What I am saying is that just listing the case is not enough. Please see medical journals with case workups for examples of how this is done within the medical field. KK 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 | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp