Ridiculous theories that the author know's is bogus but perpetuates

[Mr. Fibuli]

Yeah, you aren't that special. Either am I or anyone else for that matter. "Special destiny" witnesses/experiencers are almost always suspect IMO as they suggest the likelihood of worthiness issues or other pathological conditions. There are probably exceptions, but they are few and very far between—again, IMO.

Why all the saltiness towards Chris O..
Makes me want to say: 'That's right man. Don't take any guff from these f*****g swine.'

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Why all the saltiness towards Chris O..
Makes me want to say: 'That's right man. Don't take any guff from these f*****g swine.'

I think you misread where my post was coming from. I am agreeing w/ Ufology (Randall) and then pointed out that most claimants of multiple unusual events (IMO "special destiny"-types) may have psychological issues that complicate the scenario. There are exceptions, but they are rare. Creepy, on the other hand is, uhhh creepy, green; not very light and sorta appears to have some kind of agenda he calls "payback" w/ a patriotic twist. Hmmm.

 

[Burnt State]

In general paranormal and Ufological fields have no clearing house or sanctioning body. It was mentioned on the Turn the Tables episode and Redfern on RM recently asked how do you go about policing a field that can't even prove what is being talked about. Trying to find theories to hold onto is difficult with so much infighting, self-destruction and total lack of long term, deep & structured, evolving thought about the phenomenon. Not that there aren't authors and researchers who don't have that kind of solid stance and patience in their work, but they are simply not always at the centre of the popular discussion.

Another way to look at things is to make a very clear divide: those writers who are part of the entertainment and believer clans and those who remain curious & uncertain, and whose probings are based upon those writers and thinkers who were equally solid & inventive in their investigations. If you can favor that kind of separation then you can happily ignore the Greers & Romaneks or Meiers and similar fabulists. Perhaps the inverse of this thread is even more valuable: who are the hardcore Ufological/Paranormal writers & investigators who exist in the solid centre of thinking about the impossibly strange?

 

[Creepy Green Light]

E="Creepy_Green_Light, post: 232013, member: 7575"]I don't know if it's just my nature or if flying in the U.S. Navy as a Combat Aircrewman for 5 years has anything to do with it - but I believe 9/11 was just what we all saw; radical muslims hijacking planes & crashing them into structures. Then many years later, U.S. Navy Seals taking out Bin Laden in Pakistan. Story over - in my eyes.

I did hold a SECRET clearance the entire time I was in the Navy - mostly because I had to know how to load, arm, and fly with a B57 nuclear depth bomb.

Where's Bin Laden's body ?[/QUOTE]
Fish Food.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

I think you misread where my post was coming from. I am agreeing w/ Ufology (Randall) and then pointed out that most claimants of multiple unusual events (IMO "special destiny"-types) may have psychological issues that complicate the scenario. There are exceptions, but they are rare. Creepy, on the other hand is, uhhh creepy, green; not very light and sorta appears to have some kind of agenda he calls "payback" w/ a patriotic twist. Hmmm.

Wait a sec, did I just get mocked? I'm not only creepy and green, but I'm FAT? :0 I know nobody gives a rip, but maybe we can speculate on what my agenda might be. I'm not sure I have one. Actually, I am sure and that's a negative Don't let the graphic of a "Slayer" t-shirt start making you think too hard. If you break it down and decode it I'm pretty sure it's just a Hanes "tagless" tee.

Cheers.

 

[Randall]

I think you misread where my post was coming from. I am agreeing w/ Ufology (Randall) and then pointed out that most claimants of multiple unusual events (IMO "special destiny"-types) may have psychological issues that complicate the scenario. There are exceptions, but they are rare. Creepy, on the other hand is, uhhh creepy, green; not very light and sorta appears to have some kind of agenda he calls "payback" w/ a patriotic twist. Hmmm.

Exactly. Anyone who thinks they're the only one who really saw something, is as bad as those who believe everything, and perhaps the worst are as you suggest, those who promote themselves as being contactees or ambassadors or religious cult leaders, or whatever the case may be.

But at the same time, let's not write off the importance of the UFO experience. While it shouldn't give us God complexes or make us think we're "better" than anyone else, at the same time, it's not a trivial thing. A sizeable cross section of our global civilization now knows alien visitation is real, and we don't need the government, or scientists, or skeptics, or uncle Fritz to tell us it's OK to believe in them. Because of that we share an expanded worldview compared to those who have never had such an experience, and on a personal level, that commonality makes experiencers special to me.

I feel like it should allow us to set aside our relatively mundane differences and focus on something that goes beyond all the daily BS and that maybe we can even make the world a better place because of it. That's why I speak out so passionately against the dissention and exploitation, and defend the field against misrepresentation, and I find it really hard to believe that anyone who has had a genuine UFO experience cannot relate to that. But then again, I suppose actual mental cases aren't excluded from the roster of genuine UFO witnesses either ... LOL.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Things that bother me about 9/11:

3 steel-reinforced concrete buildings come down in the same day, when no other has ever.

Why did Building 7 come down at all? It suffered no impact and a fire in one corner would not cause a total collapse + recordings exist of firemen saying 'They are going to pull it' a fair while before anyone would even guess it would fall down. Those words are demolition-industry speak for a controlled demolition. All the financial records for the missing Trillions Rumsfeld had just announced the day before, were held in Building 7.

When the towers fall, all the concrete and steel just evaporates almost instantaneously allowing near free-fall. Just where, physically, did all those tons of concrete and steel go? That pile of rubble on ground zero isn't nearly enough stuff/mass/volume for 2 whole enormous skyscrapers!
Why is it, around what should be the most watched military HQ in the whole world, was there only ONE piece of CCTV footage of the Pentagon, which shows an object resembling a missile, not a jet aircraft, striking the building. Is anyone trying to say there were no other cameras pointing toward the Pentagon? None? Why is there ZERO footage of the plane heading toward the Pentagon? I mean, this is over D.C, there must have been cameras, traffic cams, cctv - shit even tourist photos or videos but NOTHING?

The supposed aircraft that hit the Pentagon literally disintegrated into dust, despite the fact that huge dense objects such as the engines cannot just disappear? The initial damage to the Pentagon wall, before it came down, was minimal and yet there is no sign of an aircraft?

The odds that an exercise involving Air Traffic Control and radar sites and the alert fighters, just happens to be on the same day, leading to apparent confusion as to whether an unfolding incident was real-world or an exercise?

When a crime happens, you throw absolutely nothing away until you are positive it is not evidence, and yet all recovered steel from the towers was immediately carted off and melted down for scrap? Really? You wouldn't quarantine it all until an investigation has been completed?

 

[DaveM]

Things that bother me about 9/11:

3 steel-reinforced concrete buildings come down in the same day, when no other has ever.

Why did Building 7 come down at all? It suffered no impact and a fire in one corner would not cause a total collapse + recordings exist of firemen saying 'They are going to pull it' a fair while before anyone would even guess it would fall down. Those words are demolition-industry speak for a controlled demolition. All the financial records for the missing Trillions Rumsfeld had just announced the day before, were held in Building 7.

When the towers fall, all the concrete and steel just evaporates almost instantaneously allowing near free-fall. Just where, physically, did all those tons of concrete and steel go? That pile of rubble on ground zero isn't nearly enough stuff/mass/volume for 2 whole enormous skyscrapers!
Why is it, around what should be the most watched military HQ in the whole world, was there only ONE piece of CCTV footage of the Pentagon, which shows an object resembling a missile, not a jet aircraft, striking the building. Is anyone trying to say there were no other cameras pointing toward the Pentagon? None?

The supposed aircraft that hit the Pentagon literally disintegrated into dust, despite the fact that huge dense objects such as the engines cannot just disappear? The initial damage to the Pentagon wall, before it came down, was minimal and yet there is no sign of an aircraft?

The odds that an exercise involving Air Traffic Control and radar sites and the alert fighters, just happens to be on the same day, leading to apparent confusion as to whether an unfolding incident was real-world or an exercise?

When a crime happens, you throw absolutely nothing away until you are positive it is not evidence, and yet all recovered steel from the towers was immediately carted off and melted down for scrap? Really? You wouldn't quarantine it all until an investigation has been completed?

There is also the business of when World Trade Center 7 fell, between 3 and 4 thousand case records of the Security and Exchange Commission were destroyed. That included cases against Enron and Citigroup being lost. There was also the FBI office that was inside WTC 7. How all so convenient.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

So this is supposed to be the result of a huge jet hitting the Pentagon at 500mph, heavy & dense engines n all! Where did the bloody aircraft go? Please, anyone reading this thread who thinks 9/11 conspiracies are ridiculous - just look at the photo and explain how it is the result of a hideously energetic collision of a large passenger jet?

I look at the 9/11 conspiracy like this: If we can show that any major part of the official story is false, it is then far,far easier to believe that more is likely to be false too.

The Pentagon impact wall is the golden nugget that comfortingly reminds me that I am not a crazy conspiracy nut who'll swallow any old crap. I'm not, and the whole thing stinks to high heaven.
can only imagine that the thought of it being a false flag op is just too painful for many U.S citizens to allow themselves to believe, because otherwise, much that citizens hold dear in their hearts about their great country becomes in danger of falling to pieces, shattering an illusion crafted over a lifetime.

Don't get me wrong, I love the USA and it's people - it literally hurts me to have to believe what I do about 9/11 but even if it was a terrible conspiracy, it only reflects badly on those who knowingly took part, the honour of the average man or woman is undiminished.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Yeah, and what about WTC7 and the 14th floor where the fire supposedly started? The naysayers have yet to explain all the inexplicable elements nor the location of the sensitive offices on that particular floor, i.e., the SEC investigation files, the largest CIA office outside of Langley, the NYC Crisis Command Center, etc Nor the fact that the building fell at free-fall speed perfectly into its own footprint and the collapse was never mentioned in the 911 Report, blah blah blah. The whole scenario should be an insult to YOUR intelligence!

 

[Burnt State]

This is a picture of the devastation of the Pentagon where the plane went in angled and buried itself inside. It's the area to the right of the image that Goggs posted.

 

[Spectre73]

I've always been sceptical about the 9/11 conspiracies but Goggs summary does raise questions.

Burtstate - that picture does show more damage but not as much as I would have thought.

I would expect a plane to disintegrate on impact but was there any engine parts found at the Pentagon?

As for building 7 is it possible the falling twin towers caused such a disturbance in the area it caused the foundations of the building to be compromised and lead to it's collapse???

I'm very much a newbie to the 9/11 conspiracies so be gentle!!!

 

[DaveM]

I've always been sceptical about the 9/11 conspiracies but Goggs summary does raise questions.

Burtstate - that picture does show more damage but not as much as I would have thought.

I would expect a plane to disintegrate on impact but was there any engine parts found at the Pentagon?

As for building 7 is it possible the falling twin towers caused such a disturbance in the area it caused the foundations of the building to be compromised and lead to it's collapse???

I'm very much a newbie to the 9/11 conspiracies so be gentle!!!

As far as WTC7 causing surrounding buildings to fall, the Verizon building was next door to WTC7 and it did not collapse.

 

[SheaOlmsford]

In general paranormal and Ufological fields have no clearing house or sanctioning body. It was mentioned on the Turn the Tables episode and Redfern on RM recently asked how do you go about policing a field that can't even prove what is being talked about. Trying to find theories to hold onto is difficult with so much infighting, self-destruction and total lack of long term, deep & structured, evolving thought about the phenomenon. Not that there aren't authors and researchers who don't have that kind of solid stance and patience in their work, but they are simply not always at the centre of the popular discussion.

Another way to look at things is to make a very clear divide: those writers who are part of the entertainment and believer clans and those who remain curious & uncertain, and whose probings are based upon those writers and thinkers who were equally solid & inventive in their investigations. If you can favor that kind of separation then you can happily ignore the Greers & Romaneks or Meiers and similar fabulists. Perhaps the inverse of this thread is even more valuable: who are the hardcore Ufological/Paranormal writers & investigators who exist in the solid centre of thinking about the impossibly strange?

Every so often someone states the desire for some sort of Board of Inquiry that evaluates ufology related claims, separating the wheat from the chaff. But when this is voiced publicly, it is buried under an avalanche of outrage, with cries of censorship and corruption scaring away anyone from trying to implement such an idea. To me, ufology is a herd of cats. They may hang out together at conferences (as cats would do during feeding time), but otherwise everyone is pretty much a solo entity, each with their own motives and intentions. Who would be qualified to be on such a Board of Inquiry? I am sure anyone mentioned would immediately invoke a fire storm of protest. What possible power would such a board have, since there are no legal penalties available for anyone who writes a fictional account of their contact with Venusian Space Babes with Beehive Hairdos and Go Go Boots! Would such a Board, if given any respect whatsoever in a field full of non-conformist individuals, use as their sign of approval, something like the old Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval? Would this become a much wanted approval to be stamped on the cover of new ufo related books?

In a field where everyone is equal (at least on a legal basis), how do you police the rabble? It just seems to me that there is no one with authority to evaluate anyone else in ufology. We may obviously have our personal favorites, people we deem credible. Yet you would never reach a consensus on this. In the same manner that Christianity has morphed into 40,000 distinct sects over time, won't ufology just continue to do the same thing?

The idea of separating the entertainment industry from the serious research industry in ufology is laudable. Of course, in reality they overlap and the waters are muddied. With the popularity of TV shows about UFOs, we are finding that organizations, like MUFON, which was once a respected serious research industry, has become part of the former entertainment industry.

Forgive this rambling on my part. Perhaps you just witnessed a mini-therapy session with myself, as I tried to come up with a feasible way to give some organization to ufology, to consider how a Board of Inquiry could be established. But with everyone disagreeing over who would have the authority to be on such a Board, much less what possible authority such a Board could have, I just don't see how it could ever materialize.

Perhaps we must just admit that perhaps 95% of ufology is deeply entrenched in the entertainment industry. Perhaps those few individuals who still care enough to actually evaluate the current cases simply need to be OUTSIDE ufology and do their painstaking work quietly and without media coverage.

 

[SheaOlmsford]

I have never stated that "ALIENS/UFOS" are "TRICKSTERS, MANIFESTED ARCHITYPES, PARANORMAL CHAMELEONS." These are only several possibilities that are overlooked by the vast majority of those lazy armchair types who are programmed by their TV/Culture and the occasional book they MAY read from time-to-time. IMO, there are phenomenal events that can't be explained by knee-jerk, simple-minded, mundane, one-dimensional thinking. That's all.

Well, excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me (my verbal Steve Martin impression). I am honored anyone bothered to read my painstakingly put together summary of various obvious alien/ufo theories and some of the most obvious defenders of each theory. I got almost ZILCH response, which goes to show that putting hard work into a post does not equate to getting much of any response. However, thanks for reading it. I tried to remove your name, but the post may be too old because I was not allowed to edit it. I know that any time I get anywhere near Chris O'Brien I better tread extremely carefully with plenty of life insurance. (jesting mode). Now back to my customary lurker mode, where I check in on the forum every couple months or so.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

Saw this headline just now in the news;

Ship with 33 people still missing in Hurricane Joaquin

How long before we see mini doc's on YouTube (or threads) explaining how aliens in their secret underwater base abducted the entire ship w/ crew on board? And they are currently using the crew to create a hybrid army of aliens that can breathe both underwater and on land.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Well, excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me.

No harm/no foul. I just like to make sure that my agnosticism around the subject is properly stated. It's one thing to suggest areas that are overlooked and point out out-of-the-box possibilities, it's another to believe in them. I believe nothing, therefore my correction of your inclusion of my name, etc

 

[Goggs Mackay]

This is a picture of the devastation of the Pentagon where the plane went in angled and buried itself inside. It's the area to the right of the image that Goggs posted.

I think Burnt that the collapse of the building happened a bit afterwards, I may have chosen the wrong picture but pictures exist taken straight after and the damage is nowhere near as much as you'd expect.

 

[DaveM]

What is often overlooked in the aftermath of 9/11 is that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. The others were from Lebanon, Egypt, and the UAE. So who do we decide we will invade and attack? Iraq and to a lesser extent Afghanistan. Huh?

You could say that some government group was waiting for such an attack on American soil to make their move on Iraq. Of course that wealth of oil was just waiting to be taken. The whole business stinks to high heaven and no one behind this plot was ever brought to justice and made to pay for their crimes.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Yes, we sure took that oil, didn't we....