UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2012 > Mar > Mar 5

Re: Let's Crank It Up A Notch - Cox

From: Robert Powell <rpowell.nul>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 07:55:20 -0600
Archived: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:52:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Let's Crank It Up A Notch - Cox


>From: John Harney<magonia.nul>
>To:<post.nul>
>Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 17:32:16 -0000
>Subject: Re: Let's Crank It Up A Notch - Cox

>>From: Gildas Bourdais<bourdais.gildas.nul>
>>To:<post.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 17:03:14 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Let's Crank It Up A Notch - Cox

>>>From: Robert Powell<rpowell.nul>
>>>To: post.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 20:30:56 -0600
>>>Subject: Re: Let's Crank It Up A Notch - Cox

>>>Rather than make an assertion that some book demolishes the
>>>Trans-en-Provence case, perhaps you could give the reasons to
>>>this forum as to why that case is invalid?

>>In a few words, here are the main arguments of the skeptics on
>>Trans-en-Provence:

>>- The  round trace on the ground was made by a truck. The
>>witness Renato Nicolai admited it could have been, although he
>>confirmed at the same time that it was the exact place where he
>>had seen the UFO land in his garden. Nice old man!
>>- About the strange effects on the surrounding plants, measured
>>by professor Bounias : he goofed in his tests, and CNES engineer
>>Velasco doctored the plants in his micro wave oven (a brillant
>>suspicion of Robert Alessandri);

>>- Finally, the obvious conclusion: Nicolai made a joke.
>>Case solved!

>Yes, I couldn't have put it better myself. Unfortunately I
>haven't managed to find a detailed account of Maillot's
>investigation in English on the Web, but the French version is
>available, with diagrams, at:

>http://www.zetetique.org/tep.html

Gildas, yes, I knew you were joking.

I just wanted to see if John Harney could make some arguments by
himself. And apparently, he still cannot.

All he can do is cite a website. Anyone can do that.

Perhaps I could just say, "go read the original scientific
report." Centre National D’Etudes Spatiales. No.16 Technical
Report. Toulouse March 1, 1983. “January 1981 Trace Analysis.”

That is hardly what I would consider making an argument.

What exactly are your main reasons that explain Trans-en-
Provence, John? Can you list them yourself?

I think Jerry Clark's reply to John Harney was probably the most
appropriate:

"There's a pretty serious distinction between 'skeptical' and 'a
skeptic.' All sensible persons are skeptical when need be. It
takes another kind of person - a lock-step ideologue,
specifically - to be 'a skeptic,' through which sensibility
everything must be processed like so much sausage."



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 Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com