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 - Evans

From: Roger Evans <shooter@afterimagephoto.tv>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 10:04:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:18:44 -0400
Subject: Re: High Silliness on UFO UpDates - Evans


 >From: Wendy Connors <projectsign@worldnet.att.net>
 >Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 09:53:35 -0600
 >Subject: Re: High Silliness on UFO UpDates
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Roger Evans <shooter@afterimagephoto.tv>
 >>Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:55:43 -0500
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:35:38 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: High Silliness on UFO UpDates

Previously, Wendy wrote:

 >>"Therefore, you don't know squat about me, how much research
 >>I've done or what I think..."

Wendy responded:

 >Sure I do, Roger. I can think. You are a consumate labelist,
 >argue strictly for arguments sake, haven't shared diddly squat
 >of anything important to the field of cryptoaeronautics and hide
 >behind a facade of B.S. in anything you post to the UFO Updates
 >List.

 >List members, I'm sure, know what your research encompasses...
 >which translates to zilch. I think we know all we really want to
 >know about you. The only redeeming value in your'expertise', in
 >the field, is that you are giving the next edition of the DSM-IV
 >a whole new chapter. In 560 posts to UFO UpDates you haven't
 >said a thing worth consideration.

 >If you have anything worthy to contribute to cryptoaeronautics
 >via your "research", you have a weird and skewed way of
 >clarifying your 'expertise'. So, yes, being a thinking
 >person I know a great deal about you.

 >That just about covers what I know of you and your expertise in
 >all matters dealing with exoaeronautics based upon your written
 >record.

Rah! Rah! Sis boom ba! Goooooo Team!

What is interesting, Wendy, is that I asked you to tell me what
my questions were that you took so much offense to. Typical of
the UFO elite, you don't even address the issue and instead try
to demonize me or cast doubt on my research even though, by your
own admission, you haven't read any of it. As such, I find
myself having to use more bandwidth to repeat a simple question
that, true to form, you just don't answer because haven't done
enough of your own research on the topic at hand which, by the
way, isn't _me_ even though you are trying desparately to change
the subject.

Likewise, I am sure that the number of posts a _lot_ of people
make on this list could be significantly reduced if the UFO
elite would just answer questions the first time and not drag
out threads needlessly an effort to shake people like me that
won't let people like you off the hook.

560 posts? With all the dodging going on and the need to repeat
simple questions, I'm surprised it isn't more. Well the number
just went up, again, by one since you refuse to deal with the
issues or answer the questions. But then again, the royalty
don't have to answer any question they don't want to. They're
far too busy demanding that everyone else toe the line and
disprove their positions.

Your attitude only makes my point easier to prove, Wendy. Plus,
if you had read even _half_ of my posts, you'd find that I keep
my area of expertise focused on matters of photography, film and
video as it relates to the UFO phenomenon. However, when the UFO
elite begin to dodge issues or use diversionary tactics, I feel
compelled to point it out, no matter how many times that
happens. If that takes up more posts than you like, then the
solution rests with the UFO elite, not me. If that makes you
uncomfortable, tough luck.

So, again, what were those questions I asked?


Roger Evans





[ 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