From: Kathy Kasten <catraja.nul> Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 19:15:36 +0000 Archived: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:33:00 -0400 Subject: Re: Priests Of High Strangeness - II >From: Gildas Bourdais <bourdais.gildas.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 10:53:22 +0200 >Subject: Re: Priests Of High Strangeness - II >>From: Carol Rainey <csrainey2.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:23:51 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Priests Of High Strangeness - II >>>From: Gildas Bourdais <bourdais.gildas.nul> >>>To: <post.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:27:49 +0200 >>>Subject: Re: Priests Of High Strangeness - II ><snip> >>>I said that my friend Marie-Th=E9r=E8se de Brosses knows >>>Budd Hopkins and Linda Cortile (nor Cortille), because >>>she lived in New York when she studied abductions >>>for her book, and came to know them well. For my part, >>>I don't know Linda but I have met Budd several >>>times, in France, Italy and Brazil, and I regard him highly. >>>And I know several people who know them both and have the same >>>opinion. >>That certainly wraps it up, then. Case proven. >>This is your implied summary of what it takes to do UFO >>abduction research: it's gotta _feel_ good. >Carol >This is not what I wrote. The case is not wrapped up and proven, >either way, itseems to me. >You say it is proven to be false and my opinion is you are >wrong. You see, there is a lot of space between proven right or >proven wrong. Is that too complex for you? ><snip> >>"Why aren't you calling for DNA testing in the Linda Cortile >>case? There are ample opportunities to have done such testing in >>the material objects given by the subject to the researcher. Why >>aren't you asking for blood types of the main characters and a >>cheek swab, at the very least? >>That's just one real-world tool that could be used - that would >>be objective, testable, and capable of being confirmed by other >>researchers. A tool of research that the rest of the world would >>respect. >>Your warm fuzzy feelings are precisely that - your very own. >>They inform no one else but you. >Carol, when you get tired of demolishing your ex-husband, I >suggest that you study your own cases and apply your high >scientific standards to them. >Don't just talk about them. Like Jerry Rubin said, "Do it!" Gildas: I have got to wonder what horse you have in this particular race. Do what? You are the one focused on Hopkins and what you think is the destruction of his _honor_. So, the man made an error; he was manipulated by his desire to help a person. I can't understand why you feel that Rainey is _attacking_ Hopkins. You need to go back and sit quietly while watching the film clip. I saw no attack on Hopkins. As a matter of fact, Hopkins was described as wondering himself about the validity of the case. Time to take a deep breath and use a little critical thinking, don't you think. I am still wondering what your friend Marie has to do with anything. Did you want to brag about knowing her? Fine, but why connect her to Hopkins. The discussion is about Linda - which you now state you do not know. End of discussion. KK Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp