Mysterious signals from 1000 light years away

Paul Lawler wrote:

You are really 'out there', if you think there is *NO* evidence for
ET.


I need a lawyer,
One who specializes
In healthcare malpractice.
*calling on a high authority now*
I've been WRONGED.
On no account
Take this as metaphor
Or symbol.

_______
Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
A
HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo"http://journal
s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo/A

October 1, 2004

Paul Lawler wrote:

Don't you think
it likely that intelligent ET life would be apt to take a form a bit more
tangible than photons?

And what particular evidence do you have for that probability? All this
matter and energy and structure came from nowherewhen.

That particular anthropomorphism speaks volumes on your intelligence.

Prepare for greatness, Paul, you have a wonderful future ahead of you
in the field of major scientific discoveries in nature and major
scientific breakthroughs of understanding of the universe.

And despite your sarcasm, there's still no empirical evidence of anything
other than probability. Sorry, no Nobel for you.

No great discoveries and insights for you, that is fairly 'obvious'.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

there
is a deadline to destiny.

okay, as usual i missed my deadline;
but i have ADD.
what's next?
now what?

_______
Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
A
HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo"http://journal
s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo/A

Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote in
:

October 1, 2004

Paul Lawler wrote:

Don't you think
it likely that intelligent ET life would be apt to take a form a bit
more tangible than photons?

And what particular evidence do you have for that probability? All
this matter and energy and structure came from nowherewhen.

That particular anthropomorphism speaks volumes on your intelligence.

Thanks for the ad hominem attacks... now show us the bodies (or spacecraft,
either will do).

Prepare for greatness, Paul, you have a wonderful future ahead of
you in the field of major scientific discoveries in nature and
major scientific breakthroughs of understanding of the universe.

And despite your sarcasm, there's still no empirical evidence of
anything other than probability. Sorry, no Nobel for you.

No great discoveries and insights for you, that is fairly 'obvious'.

If it's as "ovious" as the existence of intelligent ETs then I'm not
worried.

entary (Brilliant One) wrote in message ...
Paul Lawler wrote:

You are really 'out there', if you think there is *NO* evidence for
ET.


I need a lawyer,
One who specializes
In healthcare malpractice.
*calling on a high authority now*
I've been WRONGED.
On no account
Take this as metaphor
Or symbol.

_______
Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
A
HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo"http://journal
s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo/A


Contact a legal referral service.

Maybe you can get a class action going.

Make those doctors PAY for what they've done to you!

Double-A

October 2, 2004

Paul Lawler wrote:

Thanks for the ad hominem attacks... now show us the bodies (or spacecraft,
either will do).

By analogy, your claim of supreme ignorance, also implies that there is also
*NO* evidence of (or for, it doesn't matter) Earthlike planets, so you sit back
and *DEMAND* that we show you these non-existant Earthlike planets, thus
conveniently exempting yourself from the work of actually designing and
building the instruments necessary to detect these non-existant Earthlike
planets, which we surely know must actually exist by the billions, from the
totality of scientific evidence.

Your particular perversion of scientific methods appears to be widespread in
the scientific community, but since you are not part of that community, it
surely isn't your problem.

You are a idjit, troll.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

Contact a legal referral service.

Maybe you can get a class action going.

Make those doctors PAY for what they've done to you!

Double-A

Yes m'am.
Thank you for your wise counsel.
I respect your opinion, as you know, and always do.


_______
Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
A
HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo"http://journal
s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo/A

Paul Lawler wrote:
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote in
:

No great discoveries and insights for you, that is fairly 'obvious'.

If it's as "ovious" as the existence of intelligent ETs then I'm not
worried.

Thomas seems to work from belief systems while claiming science.

No worries mate, Dan.

--
http://lakeweb.net
http://ReserveAnalyst.com
No EXTRA stuff for email.

Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
October 2, 2004

Paul Lawler wrote:


Thanks for the ad hominem attacks... now show us the bodies (or spacecraft,
either will do).


By analogy, your claim of supreme ignorance, also implies that there is also
*NO* evidence of (or for, it doesn't matter) Earthlike planets...

See Thomas,
You can change the premise from, 'likely there are planets', to 'there
are planets', but it doesn't wash.

And, so what if there are other civilizations out there. If they follow
the same vector of mankind's propensity, they will be extinct long
before this 'contact' will have meaning.


Thomas Lee Elifritz

Best, Dan.

--
http://lakeweb.net
http://ReserveAnalyst.com
No EXTRA stuff for email.

Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote in
:

October 2, 2004

Paul Lawler wrote:

Thanks for the ad hominem attacks... now show us the bodies (or
spacecraft, either will do).

By analogy, your claim of supreme ignorance, also implies that there
is also *NO* evidence of (or for, it doesn't matter) Earthlike
planets, so you sit back and *DEMAND* that we show you these
non-existant Earthlike planets, thus conveniently exempting yourself
from the work of actually designing and building the instruments
necessary to detect these non-existant Earthlike planets, which we
surely know must actually exist by the billions, from the totality of
scientific evidence.

No, that is a ridiculous analogy, since I made no such claims whatsoever.

Your particular perversion of scientific methods appears to be
widespread in the scientific community, but since you are not part of
that community, it surely isn't your problem.

You are a idjit, troll.

Again with the ad hominem... instead of evidence.