From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:04:29 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:39:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Sparks >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:37:42 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 17:56:12 EST >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:41:06 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>Brad, you said, "out of which maybe the one at Corona is clearly >>>just the moon low on the horizon, and that's about it for the >>>IFO's!" This caught my attention because the object I saw in >>>1997, looked exactly like that - the moon low on the horizon. >>>But it was not the moon and did not behave like it either (there >>>were two other witnesses). Ya just never know what's what and >>>what's not anymore. >>I have little time now to respond to these kinds of posts, but >>will quickly respond to this. >>The Corona sighting was in exactly the same direction as the >>moon, and low on the horizon. You are sidetracking my point. >And you, mine. This thread started with Nuclear - UFO connections and you have sidetracked it onto your moon-like UFO sighting. My point concerned how the agencies involved with the Holloman-Kirtland- Los Alamos bases had very percentages of Unknowns in their worried discussions, with very few if any IFO's (I cited the Corona moon as one of the few). You come back with some absurd plea for nihilism. Now you try to nuance it with alleged "critical thinking" as if I don't have any and you have to rescue me from this terrible lack. When it is in fact my critical thinking and analysis that realized the high percentage of Unknowns in these documents in the first place, since the documents or authors themselves seem to have no awareness of the UFO vs. IFO statistical issue that we today in 2005 are so concerned with. >Brad, I know you are an intelligent man. An intelligent person >never assumes he or she knows it all. If I am wasting your >precious time, feel free to move on to the next discussion. >Right now - hit the "delete" button! I can't hit the "delete" button Amy because this Martian next to me is holding my finger back preventing me from Deleting! How do you know there isn't a Martian stopping me from hitting Delete? You don't. If we took your extremist form of argument every damned thing would be doubted to the point of absurdity without having to have a shred of supporting evidence for the scenario that is implied by the extreme doubt. Or else we are reduced to incoherence in our understanding of history. Just for your FYI, I have been in the forefront of critical analytical thinking about government UFO documents and history for 30+ years, since just such analysis enabled me to get the CIA to fully declassify the Robertson Panel report (I would fill in their deletions till they got to the point of deciding there was no point in withholding any of it). By the way I didn't use FOIA, I used MDR. I followed that up by analyzing 100,000's of pages of government documents and numerous histories and interviewed 100 CIA, AF, NSA and other intelligence officials to critically assess the documents and to use the documents to critically assess the interviewees. If you bothered to read what I've written you would see I apply critical analysis everywhere, but not a nihilism that leaves behind a wake of incoherence. Read my RB-47 report, 31 pages, in The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., which critically analyzes Phil Klass' seemingly very convincing explanation of the case and not just unravels his explanations like some kind of psychosocial exercise in nitpicking but finds dramatic positive support for the case from Klass' work, which he had not seen or expected. Klass discovered that a ground radar site had been detected on the RB-47's ELINT (Electronic Intelligence) detectors and he thought that explained the unidentified radar signals. However I discovered that the UFO radar signal and the Duncanville ADC ground radar signal were _both_ detected at the same time in different (correct) directions, thus actually proving (calibrating) the accuracy of the equipment in real-time. Etc. etc. Again read my 1999 paper on Ruppelt's Coverups and you will see I take apart the tissue of lies that Ruppelt spins in his writings designed to cover up evidences of official coverup. If you do, you will see plain evidence that the AF and CIA and other agencies release info they don't really want to release all the time, for the reasons I already gave (accidents occur all the time, some officials don't understand or care about what other officials want to keep secret, this happens within large bureaucracies as well as between agencies). Now I choose to hit Delete on the rest of your now well-refuted message - and the Martian says OK to do so.
[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp