SETI Ignores the Evidence

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
ogers.com...
|
| Another usenet sociopath of alt.astronomy who may also be suffering from
| a severe case of masochism requests that he be insulted further proving
| how insane the world has become.

Thank you; that's a much more original insult.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org

"Wally Anglesea" wrote in
"Mad Scientist" wrote in message

Do your own research.

BP: Note Mad Scientist. When called to present evidence to back up
his assertions, he backpeddals, or gives you kook sites.
That's why he's a kook.

Often, as in this case, his M.O. is to tell you that it is YOUR
responsibility to do the research which proves HIS position. He is merely
required to advance his conjecture and in "X-Files" fashion tell you that
"the truth is out there" and it is your responsibility to find it for
yourself.

Paul Lawler wrote:

"Wally Anglesea" wrote in

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message


Do your own research.

BP: Note Mad Scientist. When called to present evidence to back up
his assertions, he backpeddals, or gives you kook sites.
That's why he's a kook.


Often, as in this case, his M.O. is to tell you that it is YOUR
responsibility to do the research which proves HIS position.


It is your responsibility to look for evidence, not mine to provide,
especially when the asking is a deceitful ploy meant to waste my time.

I am still waiting for you to provide one single authentic UFO picture
or video, otherwise anything you say about the subject of Ufology is
nothing but quackery and pseudoscience. The same applies to
badastronomy.com and all the astronomy magazines in existence and all
the pronouncements by astronomers on the subject - unless they can show
a real bona fide UFO picture/video or case for the record - they are
nothing but wannabe Ufologists.

He is merely
required to advance his conjecture and in "X-Files" fashion tell you that
"the truth is out there" and it is your responsibility to find it for
yourself.

What a bunch of whine ass babies. Insult me some more, than ask me to
discuss things with you, snicker and laugh, and denounce me some more,
then ask me to provide evidence, then insult me some more, while you all
show again the arrogant SOB's that you all are. Then when I merely
insult you BACK, get denounced for it. What a joke, bunch of whine ass
hypocrites.

--
Usenet is filled with abusive and obsessive-compulsive-sociopathic
personality disorder sufferers which makes it all the more easily
ignored, dismissed and ridiculed.

"BP" wrote in
:

Not only that Wally, he calls everyone else a sociopath. I kind of
find it amusing.

Yes, M.S. has degrees in both psychology and parapsychology and has tested
all of us extensively with his little "psyche" experiments and has been
able to prove conclusively that everyone posting on alt.astronomy (except
himself) is a certified sociopath. He claims that he is here to dialoge
with the "real men" (perhaps he is also a misogynist?) who discuss "real
ideas" but so far he has been unable to come up with a single person who
fits his description of one he deems worthy of an epithet other than
"sociopath."

Mad Scientist wrote in
ogers.com:
Paul Lawler wrote:
"Mad Scientist" wrote in message

Do your own research.

BP: Note Mad Scientist. When called to present evidence to back up
his assertions, he backpeddals, or gives you kook sites.
That's why he's a kook.

Often, as in this case, his M.O. is to tell you that it is YOUR
responsibility to do the research which proves HIS position.

It is your responsibility to look for evidence, not mine to provide,
especially when the asking is a deceitful ploy meant to waste my time.

As I said... and he has just confirmed... he thinks it is our
responsibiltiy to do research to prove his position, since he can't be
bothered.

I am still waiting for you to provide one single authentic UFO picture
or video, otherwise anything you say about the subject of Ufology is
nothing but quackery and pseudoscience. The same applies to
badastronomy.com and all the astronomy magazines in existence and all
the pronouncements by astronomers on the subject - unless they can
show a real bona fide UFO picture/video or case for the record - they
are nothing but wannabe Ufologists.

You know what... you are absolutely correct. I cannot provide ONE SINGLE
authentic UFO picture or video. Therefore I am forced to admit, much as
it pains me, that there is not one single authentic UFO. There, I've
said it. I'm turning in my Ufologist membership card for the 100% money
back, no questions asked guarantee.

Mad Scientist wrote:

Whatever you say coward hiding behind your fake name, while too afraid
to post under your usual name.

Where is the Chez Watt when you really need it? This is priceless!

snip
--
Tom McDonald

"Paul Lawler" wrote in message
. 170.92...
|
| You know what... you are absolutely correct. I cannot provide ONE SINGLE
| authentic UFO picture or video.

I'm not surprised. I've never heard it argued before that in order to hold
a position credibly, one must be able to provide conclusive evidence for the
converse of that position.

[rolls eyes]

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org

BP jumps on the anti-social psychopathological bandwagon. Of all his
posts, I think he contributed even less to scientific discussion of
astronomy than Wally. Maybe he is competing for for the number one
Usenet sociopath spot with him.

BP wrote:

He must have these insults in his cut and paste menu.
BP

"Jay Windley" wrote in message
...

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
. net.cable.rogers.com...
|
| Whatever you say coward hiding behind your fake name

...says the person who posts from a fake address using a pseudonym.

| Sociopaths like you give new meaning to the terms 'mass
| extinction event'.

Hey, no fair! That's the insult you used for me. I demand that you

insult

only me in that fashion.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org





--
Usenet is filled with abusive and obsessive-compulsive-sociopathic
personality disorder sufferers which makes it all the more easily
ignored, dismissed and ridiculed.

More simplistic and peurile mind games. Why don't you trot down to your
local mental institution and plead with them to have your nervous system
checked for chemical imbalance. You may be suffering from a brain
disorder which could bloom into a full scale attack of paranoid
schizophrenia one day, if you aren't careful to have checked now.

BP wrote:

I call you a jerk cause that it what you are...

Really MS you can do better than that. That is strictly 12 year old logic.
Wait that is insulting 12 year olds.

BP

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
ers.com...

No, I call people like you sociopaths because that is what you are.

BP wrote:


Not only that Wally, he calls everyone else a sociopath. I kind of find

it

amusing.

Bohdan P

"Wally Anglesea" wrote in

message

...


"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
.net.cable.rogers.com...


Do your own research.


BP: Note Mad Scientist. When called to present evidence to back up his
assertions, he backpeddals, or gives you kook sites.
That's why he's a kook.





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.








--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl {\f0\fswiss\fcharset0
Arial;}}
{\*\generator Msftedit 5.41.15.1503;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 Usenet
is filled with abusive and obsessive-compulsive-sociopathic personality
disorder sufferers which makes it all the more easily ignored, dismissed
and ridiculed.\par
}

He must have these insults in his cut and paste menu.
BP

"Jay Windley" wrote in message
...

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...
|
| Whatever you say coward hiding behind your fake name

...says the person who posts from a fake address using a pseudonym.

| Sociopaths like you give new meaning to the terms 'mass
| extinction event'.

Hey, no fair! That's the insult you used for me. I demand that you
insult
only me in that fashion.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org