UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2001 > Apr > Apr 21

Re: High Silliness On UFO UpDates - Jones

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:31:39 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 10:21:43 -0400
Subject: Re: High Silliness On UFO UpDates - Jones


 >Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 08:08:50 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <shooter@afterimagephoto.tv>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: High Silliness On UFO UpDates

Roger

My tuppence worth.

<snip>

 >True to form, your last paragraph seems to be the defacto answer
 >to any opposition, now. If someone doesn't get in line with the
 >UFO elite, the standard position is that one is "uninformed" and
 >hasn't read the literature or they would quite naturally agree.

 >Is it even remotely possible in your mind that someone has read
 >the literature, done some research and simply doesn't see eye to
 >eye? More to the point, you spent the majority of this post
 >defending someone's right to cite past work if the answer to a
 >given question was gong to be extensive; something that I took
 >no issue with. My beef was abuse of this technique to avoid
 >answering shorter, simpler questions or even flat out refusals
 >to address the issues presented. Your own avoidance in
 >addressing this issue, in this very post, only drives home my
 >point. Thanks for making my job easier.

You are speaking a load of old tosh.

For us standing back can see quite clearly, who is quoting from
knowledge, and who is quoting from ignorance. For example, if
_you_ were quoting from knowledge you _could_ cite particulars
about the case thus _proving_you_ had more than read a summary
of the case in question. It is my opinion that from your posts
you have not cited one detail with regard to any of the cases,
mentioned in previous posts, to substantiate relevant knowledge
of the case to those you are not quite debating with.

I wait to be proved wrong.

So in my not so humble opinion, and not being one of the 'elite'
you scornfully refer to, when they say _read_my_book_ before you
respond, what they are really saying, find some facts, then we
can debate the finer points.

If you are so blinkered that you cannot see that, well all hope
is lost for you, because these guys _have_ done their collective
research so why should they waste their time on someone who will
not do theirs?

 >As far as I'm concerned, your reply has only proved my point the
 >one must agree with the UFO elite or be pegged as one of the
 >"uniformed" that hasn't done enough research to know the error
 >of their ways.

I am neither one of the 'elite', or uniformed, you are clearly
one of the two mentioned groups, unless of course you can
demonstrate knowledge in a clear and concise manner without any
kind of name calling, bitchiness or general bad manners??

 >Typical.

 >(my best Johnny Bravo)
 >Hoo-ha! The wind generated from all this head noddin' is messin'
 >up my hair, momma.

Still watching the Cartoon Network?, well perhaps if you watched
the Discovery Channel you might even have _some_ knowledge!


Have fun.

--

    In an infinite universe, infinitely anything is possible.
                         Sean Jones
               http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/





[ 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