November 4, 2012 — Margie Kay

[Skymon876]

I really like Margie Kay she is very likable and does good field research.

There seems to have been a substantial flap in Missouri.

 

[Apocalypto]

I'm amazed that Chris brought the term "conservative" into the discussion of the "unseen ships" topic. What a joke. Being the first person to bring up the issue, I imagine he's referring (somewhat) to me. The whole topic seemed to bring out the angry side of Chris. Very distasteful.

Having said that, I did use the word "debunk" in my comments around the issue, and perhaps I shouldn't have been so strong on it. Let's just say over time researchers have "deflated" the validity of the arguments.

Maybe that will prevent help Chris from getting angry in future and choking on his food. (While he's chewing and talking and recording the Paracast all at the same time.)

Gee whiz.

 

[DaveM]

I think we can safely rule out that Jesus was a tall red-head with blue eyes...

 

[ottoatom]

That's simply not true, and almost naive in its implications. There's nothing paranormal about electricity, for example, but try bringing back electrical devices to the cave man days and showing it to them. What would they think about the technology?

I agree with what you are saying, but you are missing my point.. Also, what are you suggesting? that we should behave like modern caveman? If we can't understand it than it must be a god? because I'd rather not understand something than deify it. I would rather try to explain something with science instead of accepting it as something paranormal.

My point is that before opening one's mind to "paranormal explanation" one should look and dig within the realm of known science and psychology.. Also, paranormal explanation is kind of an oxymoron don't you think? Something paranormal is something that cannot be explained by nowadays science and I think that if you cannot explain a phenomena with science, than you cannot explain it at all, just theorize or speculate about it. I don't believe science has all the answers, far from it, but I believe that science is the answer. By that I mean science as a method: Observation/Research, hypothesis, prediction, experimentation, conclusion.

My point about the tampering of media recording devices was simply that before assuming that it had been tampered by external and/or unexplainable phenomena, people in charge of the experience and the general public should be more critical about the reality of the tampering and if so, try to understand how it was tampered. If no conclusion can be taken, than ok something strange happened but at least there will be the record of an investigation of that event which will make it a lot more credible for me.

 

[Randall]

I'm amazed that Chris brought the term "conservative" into the discussion of the "unseen ships" topic ...

I think Chris was just sort of getting into the swing of the conversation rather than being analytical. But in the end he's always come across as respecting logic and the best evidence. So he'll probably mull it over and finally realize he was just kinda digging the myth. When you really think about it, normal human sensory perception doesn't work in such a way that it can exclude stimuli in the manner suggested by the story. But that doesn't mean selective exclusion of visual stimuli can't take place. In situations of sensory overload ... e.g. when driving down a densely packed main business corridor, our brain just can't register all the signs and information, so it just focuses in on what's immediately necessary. But that is really an entirely different kind of situation. It's not like there were 400 ships parked out there and they were having trouble picking one out.

 

[Randall]

I really like Margie Kay she is very likable and does good field research. There seems to have been a substantial flap in Missouri.

Oh sure , Margie seems OK ... and she sure was in a flap!