Aliens have programmed Abductees

Re: Belief vs. Disbelief

Originally posted by Jocariah
Whether you look for this or that is your own concern, not mine - I am not here to be believed or disbelieved - I have nothing whatsoever to prove, nor is my intent to convince anyone of anything.

After all, I am what I am
Click to expand...

Then why did you make a thread, its usually a sign of trying to say something or tell someone, if you didnt give a damn you wouldnt have posted, besides once again, you have no documented proof which only leads me to believe institutions for those with mental related problems should have a lot more patients than they do.
 
something else i thought i would point out, the fact hes in medical sales, someone else claiming to be an abductee was a pharmacist, dont remember who, but either way, both have access to drugs, should those be the actual cases
 
Pseudoscience forum

I see from your posts, that you have a propensity for pursuing personal attacks rather than discussing those topics at hand – which of course is your prerogative.

However, in my opinion, it’s a practice more suited to politics than the Pseudoscience forum.
 
JoojooSpaceape, do you have any facts other than fanciful theories of suspicion to discredit him with? As a skeptic, you are bound to the burdon of proof. At most, all you and I can say is that we cannot verify as accurate his statements. That does not mean they are disproven, OR proven however.

On the other hand, I can see where you are comming from: You are thinking in terms of "Consider the source." However, you seem to suggest that any layman who talks of such things is probably lying. If police departments treated everyone that way, they would never solve a case. As such we too cannot afford to stereotype everyone making a claim no matter how bizzar.

You can raise suspicions if you want, but you have no way to susbstantiate them accept for by example of someone who was a hoaxter having ONE thing in common with them. That kind of conspiracy theory thinking is rediculously beneath a skeptics rational mind... isn't it?
 
Re: Belief vs. Disbelief

Originally posted by Jocariah
There are options you know; between ‘belief and disbelief’ that is. No need to force yourself to choose between the two. One may simply choose whether or not to entertain my, or anyone’s ideas for that matter.

After all, ideas may simply be entertained, if they are found interesting, or of interest to one, without being judged as being right or wrong, good or bad, correct or incorrect, etc., etc. One may simply say; “hmmm, that seems interesting to me” or conversely,” I don’t think these ideas are of interest to me”.

Pigeonholing everything one continually comes into contact with into only one of two categories (e.g., belief or disbelief) seems rather restrictive and counter productive to me in the long run. After all, there is an enormity of things we know little if nothing of.
Click to expand...

Because you are trying to fit everything you encounter into either belief or disbelief, you are putting yourself into a position of determining whether what you are seeing at any particular moment or point in time is valid or not – true or false – right or wrong – correct or incorrect, etc., etc.

It is your thought process that limits you.

All information that one encounters cannot be classified in only one of two ways - attempting to make such a determination is pointless - without all of the information in hand, how is it even possible.

To attempt to do so, from my perspective at least, is absurd.
 
Proof

What surprises me the most here, is that nobody has said – “I get it, I, via my thought processes, am continually trying to place everything I encounter into one of only two categories (e.g., belief or disbelief) rather than simply seeing the ideas and information being expressed here as simply that; ‘ideas and information’”.

Trying to prove a person’s validity in these forums is absurd - so too in a physical encounter.

Attempting to do so is simply one’s feeble attempt at trying to ‘fit’ what one is hearing into those two isolated categories (merely by way of determining the validity – in their own mind; by their own yardstick - of the person behind what is being said) – thereby can one avoid the thought process involved in simply looking at the information, which may be outside of one’s area of knowledge – and go about to judge the information, based on whether (in one’s view) the individual behind the information is valid or not. There’s less effort involved in that approach. Hence the cynic discounts all he encounters, and thereby abides ‘happily’ in his or her ignorance.

You see, it really is pointless – you don’t have enough information to even come close.

Ask John Mack, or Bud Hopkins – they have devoted their lives to this topic and still have no definitive answers.

Your ignorance, as you approach this topic, continues to amaze me. You can’t even see that your own thought process is keeping you from a greater understanding in these matters.

.
 
Last edited:
Skeptics & Naysayers

From Webster’s new world dictionary:

Skeptic: a person who habitually doubts, questions, or suspends judgment upon matters generally accepted

Naysayer: one who opposes, refuses, or denies, esp. habitually

..........................

Skeptics - there's nothing wrong with being a skeptic, it’s okay to 'suspend your judgment' on matters, which exceed your ability to collect information on. One can always remain neutral.

Naysayers on the other hand, are locked into a 'click-whirr' mode, habitually firing off the same denials and personal attacks regardless of what they encounter; typically being that which may appear contrary to the norm.
 
Last edited:
Abductees

There is no understanding of these matters that comes from the trying (one does not understand these matters by trying to understand them by way of the intellect) – rather it is programmed into each one of us (i.e., abductees) – each one of us that has been so programmed by our keepers, abductors, grays or helpers, that is; depending on what one might choose to call them.

Nevertheless, we are programmed for such things.

.
 
Find me a documentation of genetics being altered from being abducted, and I will believe you, Now lets say this person just happened to be a slave at a concentration camp which mined uranium, then i would not believe you because of prior possible radiation exposure, Now if you can show me a government documented case, through which nothing was wrong until after the claimed abduction, then sure, why not i will believe you, but you will never find anything like that.
 
Re: Skeptics & Naysayers

Originally posted by Jocariah
From Webster’s new world dictionary:

Skeptic: a person who habitually doubts, questions, or suspends judgment upon matters generally accepted
Click to expand...

since when was this generally accepted?
 
If it is in the Websters dictionary (and they are rather good about defining the english language), then it is most likely an accepted definition. It surprises me you would cast doubt at an academically and almost universally accepted source such as the Websters dictionary in order to refute a point. Then again, maybe I shouldn't be.

On the other hand, I can accept your want for documentation. It was the same question I asked and didn't get the answer I wanted. However, you comming to the conclusion that the claim is false based on a lack of evidence is not scientific. Science cannot disprove a claim unless there is evidence which clearly shows that the statement is false. Science can tell us for example, that the world is not flat because we can refute that statement with photographs of our planet at a distance, as well as ground observations of shadows.

Since you have stated that the evidence required WILL NOT be found, you have stated that there is evidence that his original statement is false. Back it, or give up the point. It is very likely that probably WILL NOT find the evidence, but that is not the same as we simply WILL NOT under any circumstances. You've made a claim and now bear a burdon of proof.
 
Burden of Proof

The burden of proof always falls on the one seeking it – that’s because such proof must by necessity fall within those parameters, regardless of what they may be, established by the one seeking the proof.

It is the one who seeks such proof that defines what is or is not acceptable to them, and them alone.

As the gods of their world, they go about to establish whatever parameters they choose, forcing the world along with everything in it, to prove itself to them, acting as gatekeepers if you will, continually changing and amending their parameters as they please – and of course, reality, logic, or anything else they may choose to overlook, need not be a consideration.

The world is what it is – regardless of whether or not it meets our own or anyone else’s burden of proof.

Cheers


.
 
Last edited:
Jocariah,

I believe you !

I remember before it's all begun knowing that something bad is

going to happend tonight. I remember those 2 grey "Entities".

They looked like 2 oil spills without particular shape. They were

there even before I closed my eyes moving across the ceiling.
 
Actualy the burden of proof falls on the one making the wild claim. Should all of you belive that i have a talking-voodoo-pony-pen-pall in milan who controls the weather, just because I say so? Is it your duty to conduct an exhaustive search of Milan for a talking-voodoo-pony who has been sending things through the mail to the united states in order to try to prove my claim wrong? Of course not, doing things like that takes a hell of a lot of work, and while you are busy with it i can come up with reams of other off the wall assertions to make. The burdern of proof should be on me to prove that what i say is true, otherwise im just a joke or a nusiance to people who want to conduct discussions about topics that can actualy be supported.

You havnt even said what has brought you to belive that abductees are geneticly modified, or that they have special alien handlers.
 
Originally posted by SpyMoose

You havnt even said what has brought you to belive that abductees are geneticly modified, or that they have special alien handlers.
Click to expand...

What's the point of even asking this? When you ask him for proof all he does is say that he's not here to be believed or disbelieved. Ask him then why he is bothering to make a claim at all, then and he completely glazes over.

Jocariah is nothing but another troll and attention whore, he's not here to talk to anyone, he's here to talk to himself and feel a little special when people get upset by what he says.

His case has no merit at all, saying that he's not here to give it merit means nothing at all, except that perhaps he's against thinking or analyzing (and with good reason, I know if I were making such shoddy and silly claims that I'd prefer people not think about what I have to say). All of this to the end of trying to make himself feel superior.

"I was genetically modified by aliens to be made better than normal people!" he shouts as he hugs himself in a dark room.

"Oh yeah? How when where and why did they do that, and where's the evidence, sparky?" we ask.

"You're just a bunch of nay Sayers, you're not supposed to think about my claims like that!" he contests.

"Oh yeah? Why's that, and how would you have us think of them?" we respond.

"Um. . . could you maybe just sort of agree with me in a sort of quiet and dignified manner as if I've just said something intellectual and we are all really smart and enlightened people-I through the aliens, and you through agreeing with me?" He cries in a defeated and whiny voice.

"No" we respond quite simply.
 
Last edited:
SpyMoose stop your BS!

What we are talking about here is much more serious then your

invalid voodoo exmaple . People reporting about UFO phenomena

non stop. Infact , 100s of cases reported daily about the UFO

phenomena. So you don't tell us it is all just product of our

imagination . Do not tell us because there is no smoke without

fire. Just remember this rule as simple as that .
 
Prophet, what he is talking about is exactly the same thing. You are making a big mental leap if you want to tie in UFOs to anything that Jocharia has said. There is nothing in any of his claims that has any substance at all. It may as well be a voodoo-pony-pen pal in Milan for all the evidence he's given of anything he's said.

As far as we know now, from everything that Jocariah has said we can infer that there is no phenomena. It's as if I were to claim that I murdered senator Philbert Perkins and buried him by a pond in the sahara. If one takes a close enough look he will realize that there is no senator Philbert Perkins, and as such no murder, nor does the pond of which I speak even exist!

“They have been genetically manipulated!” he crys enthusiastically.

“Really? Cool, what’s the effect, and where can we see the difference?” we question.

“Oh um. . . the genetic evidence is buried with Senator Philbert Perkins Near this one pond.” He mumbles almost as if to himself.
 
Hello SpyMoose

From my perspective, my claim, as you choose to call it, is not wild – it is simply the circumstances I have found, and continue to find myself in.

You assume, and wrongly, that I want you to believe me – I don’t. Believe or not as you choose. I have no vested interest whatsoever in what you, or anyone for that matter, believes or disbelieves. You also have the option of course of remaining neutral, or being skeptical, and not passing judgment on this or any matter you might wish to entertain.

Proof is for courtrooms (beyond a reasonable doubt) and scientific experiments (independently verifiable). People are what they are.

RE: “You haven’t even said what has brought you to believe that abductees are genetically modified, or that they have special alien handlers.” – well, for one thing, no one has asked me.

Cheers
 
Re: Hello SpyMoose

Originally posted by Jocariah
You assume, and wrongly, that I want you to believe me – I don’t. Believe or not as you choose. I have no vested interest whatsoever in what you, or anyone for that matter, believes or disbelieves. You also have the option of course of remaining neutral, or being skeptical, and not passing judgment on this or any matter you might wish to entertain.
Click to expand...

Translation: don't think about or analize my claims.

You realize that if we are to follow your advice then you may as well be belching and the noises you are making would be just as valid as your claims?

Originally posted by Jocariah
People are what they are.
Click to expand...

And what you say you are is not what you are. Your words have given us no reason to think that what you are is any different from what anyone else is, you understand this, don't you? It's not beyond your "intellectual ceiling" is it?

Originally posted by Jocariah
RE: “You haven’t even said what has brought you to believe that abductees are genetically modified, or that they have special alien handlers.” – well, for one thing, no one has asked me.
Click to expand...


Go back and read through the thread, Jocariah, I have already asked you several times how it is you can tell they've been genetically modified, and what these alterations are. Don’t glaze over on the facts now, we’ve got you in the spot light and it’s not going to work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top