Most definitely Samantha, the rules apply to me as well. Since interpretation is the
factor, my interpretation of Alfred's remarks was such that he implied that I did not
know all the stuff he knew and thus my arguments carried no weight. His implication,
in my interpretation of them, was
Why take anyone's word for what someone else believes when you can read their works
for yourself. In my reading of Vallee he has stated that informants in the French
military admit to engineering at least one abduction for the purposes of studying
psychological phenomena and religious
Well, it certainly is good to have Alfred here. Since he has read and knows about
every aspect of UFOlogy, I strongly encourage all people who doubt the ET hypothesis
of UFO origins to just hang up your hats and drop it in the face of his insurmountable
knowledge on the matter. I know that I
It is perfectly appropriate for someone to bring their qualifications and
experience to the table during a discussion. June and Mr. Webre interpret
Vallee differently. That Mr. Webre knew him and worked with him adds weight
to his interpretation.
"Let us please be civil and as always,
From: "tenebroust" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, it certainly is good to have Alfred here. Since he has read and knows about
every aspect of
UFOlogy, I strongly encourage all people who doubt the ET hypothesis of UFO origins
to just hang up your
hats and drop it in the face of his insurmountable
From: "Samantha L." [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It is perfectly appropriate for someone to bring their qualifications and
experience to the table during a discussion. June and Mr. Webre interpret
Vallee differently. That Mr. Webre knew him and worked with him adds weight
to his interpretation.
Mr.
In a message dated 00-06-03 22:13:57 EDT, you write:
Mr. Webre CLAIMS to have known and 'worked' with Jacques Vallee.
I don't hear Monsieur Vallee weighing in here with his agreement.
I'd like Mr. Webre to tell us which of Monsieur Vallee' books we should look
in to find Monsieur Vallee
In a message dated 00-06-01 23:35:03 EDT, you write:
I agree with Vallee's conclusions in "Messengers of Deception".
Dear June - Oh I guess I better go a read again the book that I AM IN. You
are so stuck in yourself, June, you don;t even notice that Jacques Vallee was
writing about people
Oh June - you know about Vallee. Well, what does the eminent Jacques Vallee
have to say about UFOs? What do you think Jacque thinks about UFOs. Please
enlighten us. Jacques says in interview UFOs might be the manifestation of
Universe mega-intelligence (Gods). That's extraterrestrial, June.
From: "DIG alfred webre" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oh June - you know about Vallee. Well, what does the eminent Jacques
Vallee have to say about UFOs? What do you think Jacque thinks about UFOs.
Please enlighten us. Jacques says in interview UFOs might be the
manifestation of Universe mega-intelligence
On Tue, 30 May 2000, Nurev Ind Research wrote:
DIG alfred webre wrote:
In a message dated 00-05-28 14:15:44 EDT, you write:
No denial going on here. Just a request for the 'evidence' that is
claimed to exist, and which I notice YOU fail to provide, resorting instead
to personal
DIG alfred webre wrote:
In a message dated 00-05-28 14:15:44 EDT, you write:
No denial going on here. Just a request for the 'evidence' that is
claimed to exist, and which I notice YOU fail to provide, resorting instead
to personal attack.
June
June, please read the evidence
[EMAIL PROTECTED],Internet writes:
The hard evidence in these French reports now is formally stated to most
strongly support an extraterrestrial hypothesis.
What hard evidence?
ETs are here and have been
proven so,
How? What's the proof? A French military report!?! That's a report,
From: "DIG alfred webre" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
June, please read the evidence summarized in May 27, 2000 article:
http://www.alienzoo.com/news/u/25280005.cfm
The hard evidence in these French reports now is formally stated to most
strongly support an extraterrestrial hypothesis. ETs are
From: "Andrew Hennessey" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Um... I think some of them are flown by extra-dimensional or
extra-terrestrial life, yes. There is evidence for it.
What 'evidence'?
The best evidence I have ever seen for the existence of non-human life
is the agenda of denial currently
In a message dated 00-05-28 14:15:44 EDT, you write:
No denial going on here. Just a request for the 'evidence' that is
claimed to exist, and which I notice YOU fail to provide, resorting instead
to personal attack.
June
June, please read the evidence summarized in May 27, 2000 article:
In a message dated 5/26/00 6:07:09 PM Central Daylight Time
Samantha, there have been "sightings" of all kinds throughout history,
it is you, and others of similar mindset (those who are inclined to
believe in alien visitation, not that there is anything wrong with that)
who classify
From: "Samantha L." [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Um... I think some of them are flown by extra-dimensional or
extra-terrestrial life, yes. There is evidence for it.
What 'evidence'?
June
A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/"www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion
At 06:32 AM 27, 05, , 2000 -0400, you wrote:
From: "Samantha L." [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Um... I think some of them are flown by extra-dimensional or
extra-terrestrial life, yes. There is evidence for it.
What 'evidence'?
June
The best evidence I have ever seen for the existence of non-human
How's about some new nomenclature to help dissambiguate one's position re
any given Unidentified Flying Object (UFO). I would like to propose the
following for example:
UFOpo (UFO probably ours) A terrestrial craft of type unknown to observer
UFOpa (UFO putative alien) An aerial phenomenon
Tony Dickinson wrote:
How's about some new nomenclature to help dissambiguate one's position re
any given Unidentified Flying Object (UFO). I would like to propose the
following for example:
UFOpo (UFO probably ours) A terrestrial craft of type unknown to observer
UFOpa (UFO putative
21 matches
Mail list logo
