6b0b48a7
From: phantasypublishing@gmail.com
On Sunday, December 23, 2012 3:42:58 AM UTC-6, Sir Arthur CB Wholeflaffers ASA
wrote:
> Brian Zeiler, You're Doing A Great Service/ UFO Debunkers in Massive
>
> Retreat.
>
>
>
> Brian Zeiler, You're Doing A Great Service/ UFO Debunkers in Retreat.
>
>
>
> Brian, Let me extend a hearty thank-you from myself and from all the
>
> honest
>
> UFO researchers in your efforts to document and illuminate the well
>
> proven facts. The UFO community would also like to extend our
>
> gratitude for the work you have done in bringing new ideas and solid
>
> information to light. We are in your debt. Also, I would like to
>
> encourage you to keep up your investigations, for they are highly
>
> educational and written in a scholarly manner.
>
>
>
> Please don't be put off by those luckless charlatans posing as UFO
>
> debunkers.
>
> At best, we can say these impostors are ignorant dupes and fools,
>
> "useless idiots" if you will, at worst, they are intelligence
>
> community,
>
> low-level assets who can't make it in the real world.
>
> It is a pity they spend so much effort in the distortion and
>
> vandalism of good science. May history view them in higher regard
>
> than I do,
>
> they'll need it.
>
>
>
> From time to time, it is important for all of us to let you know the
>
> outstanding contributions you are making in the field and what a
>
> delight and
>
> inspiration it is to have you around. With your valuable assistance,
>
> I'm sure "our" side will win. The truth always does!
>
>
>
> Again, let me declare your efforts were remarkable in digging up the
>
> Ames and Sandia connections. That was impressive, and, of course,
>
> highly indicative of the lengths 'they' are going to in trying to
>
> control and
>
> cover-up the ET/Alien information. Bravo!
>
>
>
> BRIAN ZEILER RESPONDS:
>
>
>
>
>
> Brian Zeiler wrote on Oct. 19, 1996:
>
> Art Wholeflaffer wrote:
>
>
>
> > Brian, Let me extend a hearty thank-you from myself and from all the
honest
>
> > UFO researchers in your efforts to document and illuminate the well
>
> > proven facts.
>
>
>
> You're welcome, and thank you. And let's also not forget that I am
>
> too prone to
>
> getting suckered into flame wars with the self-styled "skeptics", and
>
> this noise
>
> tends to overshadow the very high quality posts from David Rudiak, J.
>
> Walter,
>
> Bill Peterson, and a few others whose contributions are appreciated.
>
>
>
> > Please don't be put off by those luckless charlatans posing as UFO
debunkers.
>
> > At best, we can say these impostors are ignorant dupes and fools,
>
> > useless "idiots" if you will, at worst, they are intelligence community,
>
> > low-level assets who can't make it in the real world.
>
>
>
> Sadly, the vast majority appear to be all too sincere. Rogers, Fun,
>
> McKnight
>
> (where's he been?), etc., are nothing more than typical dime-a-dozen
>
> skeptics who
>
> lease their opinions from their masters and overlords at CSICOP in a
>
> rather
>
> repugnant display of intellectual incompetence and lack of capacity
>
> for
>
> independent reasoning. Of course, that's due in no small part to the
>
> intellectual prostitution of Menzel and Sagan and other opinion
>
> leaders who duped
>
> generations of scientists into absorbing a culture of UFO ridicule and
>
> rejection
>
> with absolutely no logical basis whatsoever -- nothing but silly
>
> debunkeries that
>
> invariably collapse under scrutiny along with an idiot mantra about
>
> "extraordinariness" which presumes the inductive powers of probability
>
> estimation
>
> in the midst of insufficient data.
>
>
>
> It's absolutely staggering to see scientific leadership deteriorate to
>
> such a
>
> level of stagnancy and ambivalence in research effort, coupled with a
>
> total lack
>
> of exposure to the evidence *and* a blinding, foaming, raging need to
>
> disbelieve
>
> and debunk with the urgent zeal of a fanatical religious nut. That's
>
> the
>
> scientific treatment of the UFO evidence, all spawned by their blind
>
> devotion to
>
> their overlords and masters like Sagan and Menzel. Truly
>
> unbelievable.
>
>
>
> > It is a pity they spend so much effort in the
>
> > distortion and vandalism of good science. May history view
>
> > them in higher regard than I do, they'll need it.
>
>
>
> History will view them as fools -- relentless defenders of dogma,
>
> blind fools who
>
> crippled scientific progress in the name of, ironically, "science",
>
> which they
>
> fallaciously equate with skepticism, their need-to-disbelieve
>
> religion. History
>
> will show that they undermined that which they sought to defend --
>
> good science.
>
>
>
> It's truly sad to see human progress and potential reflected so feebly
>
> and
>
> pathetically in the scientific community's willful blindness to this
>
> discovery,
>
> especially in this age of such revolutionary technological progress.
>
> The failure
>
> of science in this aspect -- arguably the biggest aspect, the greatest
>
> discovery of all time -- will long be remembered as the pox on a
>
> century
>
> otherwise full of conquest and glory, the grandest 100 years of
>
> science that ever
>
> happened.
>
>
>
> The US government will release the goods, but probably not for a long
>
> time. When
>
> they do, the world will instantly view the "UFO skeptics" as a group
>
> of
>
> irrational zealots who, rather unfortunately, happened to be in
>
> positions of
>
> public influence.
>
>
>
> In the meantime, all we can do is observe the UFO skeptics and, with a
>
> necessary
>
> sense of humor that enables us to laugh raucously at their silly
>
> logic, watch
>
> them struggle to deny, disbelieve, and debunk. Hey, that'll be the
>
> three D's of
>
> modern science's treatment of the UFO evidence...
>
>
>
> --
>
> Brian Zeiler
Csidering factual information vrs made up science fiction the problem is
nobody knows what 20 13 is going to hold event wise. Now your predictions
failed in 2012 and so you backpeddel trying to exploit your targeted audiences
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
