From: James Horak <jchorak7441.nul>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 07:44:37 -0700 (PDT)
Archived: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:17:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Abduction Monitoring Project PDF File


>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 08:46:25 -0400
>Subject: Re: Abduction Monitoring Project PDF File

>I believe that as noted by Rob, the task of finding someone to
>analyze the data has been somewhat daunting. Finding someone
>independent of the UFO field was one of the primary goals, so
>that this data could be better accepted by scientists who are
>not part of that community. Pure analysis is irrelevant of the
>subject matter, so I'm not sure why someone needs to "educate"
>the person doing that analysis.

>Steve

Well, Steve, had you not noticed all these 50 or so years and an
inconceivable number of denials later, we are (whether we like
it or not) working for ourselves. No one from the outside is
_not_ tainted by blinding incredulity _or_, I imagine, they
would already have their shirtsleeves rolled up and be with us
in this adventure, the greatest pursuit of truth and revelation
of this and _any_ time. And that goes as much for statisticians as
anyone.

Ufologists either acquire the tools needed or they don't. Were
the dead-weight scientific community ever going to be of
benefit, that would have already happened.

You see, Steve, they have to depend on the status quo for a meal
ticket and the status quo does not want us to advance any
further than our own stalmates with those among us who continue
circular arguments like this.

Besides, in the final analysis, when you obtain enough clarity
with the truth most of us already share in the presence of a UFO
reality, it's a damn sight easier to convince others.


JCH




Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast

See:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/subscribers/