Do your own research.
BP wrote:
Alright, maddie...I'll bite... Who the F is NARCAP.. I've been in aviation
for most of my life and never heard of NARCAP. Plus bring me a pilot that
has seen a UFO, and you'll win the prize. How about this...moron. If a
post falls in an empty ng...is it heard? I worked in intelligence in the AF
and can;'t figure out half of the garbage you are spewing. Is life that
hard?
Twinning was a MAJOR General in 1947.
Not to mention the rest of this offers no proof per se... rather conjecture.
Rather old reading.
BP
In a 1952 classified report for the Air Technical Intelligence Center
(ATIC) at Wright Patterson Air
Force Base, Hynek recommended that the UFO question be given “the status
of a scientific problem,”
freeing the scientists from the restraints of secrecy which confuse the
public. “The number of truly
puzzling incidents is now impressive,” he reported. “The first effort
should be to determine with great
accuracy what the phenomena to be explained really are and to establish
their reality beyond all
question.”16"
"The testimony of Dr. James E. McDonald, senior physicist of the
Institute of Atmospheric Physics and
Professor of Meteorology at the University of Arizona, was the most
extensive. A respected authority
and leader in the field of atmospheric physics, McDonald had authored
highly technical papers for
professional journals. He spent two years examining formerly classified
official file material and radar
tracking data on UFOs; interviewing several hundred witnesses; and
conducting in-depth case
investigations, details of which were provided to the Committee."
"McDonald told the Committee that no other problem within their
jurisdiction compared to this one.
“The scientific community, not only in this country but throughout the
world, has been casually
ignoring as nonsense a matter of extraordinary scientific importance.”
McDonald indicated that he
leaned towards the extraterrestrial hypothesis as an explanation, due to
“a process of elimination of
other alternative hypotheses, not by arguments based on what I could
call ‘irrefutable proof.’” 24"
"Dr. Bernard Haisch, Director of the California Institute for Physics
and Astrophysics and author of
over a hundred published papers, agrees. “I propose that true skepticism
is called for today: neither the
gullible acceptance of true belief nor the closed-minded rejection of
the scoffer masquerading as the
skeptic.” Haisch was the editor of the JSE for twelve years. “Any
scientist who has not read a few
serious books and articles presenting actual UFO evidence should out of
intellectual honesty refrain
from making scientific pronouncements,” he says. “To look at the
evidence and go away unconvinced
is one thing. To not look at the evidence and be convinced against it
nonetheless is another. That is not
science. Do your homework!”84"
--
I really like this last quote where Dr. Bernard Haisch says, "to look at
the evidence and be convinced against it - is not science". Really says
alot about how many 'scientists'only masquerade when in truth they are
nothing but pseudoscientists.
|