From: Kathy Kasten <catraja.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 19:58:12 +0000 Archived: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 07:41:41 -0500 Subject: Re: The Assassination Of Hopkins & Cortile >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 09:40:02 -0600 >Subject: Re: The Assassination Of Hopkins & Cortile >>From: Kathy Kasten <catraja.nul> >>To: <post.nul> >>Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 21:03:43 +0000 >>Subject: Re: The Assassination Of Hopkins & Cortile >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>>To: <post.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 13:16:57 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: The Assassination Of Hopkins & Cortile >>>>From: SMiles Lewis <elfis.nul> >>>>To: post.nul >>>>Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 10:37:41 -0800 (PST) >>>>Subject: Re: The Assassination Of Hopkins & Cortile >>>One of the cited critics, incidentally, tried to have me >>>arrested for something or other. (No officer of the law showed >>>up at my door.) I guess that's one way to "improve" the field: >>>have ufologists with whom we disagree locked behind bars. Can >>>we look forward to more of that? >>>I guess that in 2011 this is what ufology has come to. No wonder >>>we're getting nowhere. How truly, truly sad. >>Good grief, ufology can't have it both ways. >Kathy, I have no doubt that you mean well, which is to say I >have no reason whatever to demonize you as a corrupt, malicious >individual. On the other hand, in your many posts on UpDates, I >see no evidence, I'm sad to say, that you know a whole lot about >this complex field: its history, its body of evidence, its >controversies, its approaches, its literature, its >personalities. Still, God knows you have no shortage of opinions >about just about everything that manages to find its way to this >List. I feel no need to pay a whole lot of attention to them not >because I think you're a bad person; it's just that often you >don't seem to know what you're talking about even while, >inexplicably to me, you betray every evidence of being impressed >with your own iconoclastic genius. >If you really are concerned with the scientific way - the kind >without scare quotes - in a more than rhetorical sense, I would >strongly encourage you to educate yourself and, armed with a >broader range of knowledge, to think harder before putting half- >baked assertions, accusations, and speculations out there with >such dizzying abandon. There are individuals on this List with >whom I have profound differences, but they come by their views >from knowledge, experience, and long reflection. To call upon >the hoariest of clich=E9s, they've paid their dues. Yours looks, >on the other hand, more like a free ride. >Jerry Clark >BTW - To anticipate the inevitable: _of course_ your right to >post here whenever you wish to do so is not the issue. It's the >content of those postings. And if you want to dish it out - and >you do at every opportunity - you're going to have to take it in >return. That, after all, is the scientific way. Thanks, Jerry, but I empowered myself a long time ago and feel free to provide opinions - half-baked in your eyes - any time I feel the spirit. My guess is that you think because I don't quote verse and line of the many, many case reports from tons of books written on the subject, I have no right to my opinion. Gosh, it would become a boring read if I listed all the UFO books I have read, ufologists I have commiserated with - including yourself. The problem for you is that I don't always agree with you. I still think you are lovable, love your writing style and your wit. 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