The Proof for ETI

[FNG2k4]

http://www.rootsweb.com/~lkawgw/adamsbridge.html

A couple more images of that bridge. Really neat looking. Seems like they want to build another bridge to Sri Lanka for trade. 1,700,000 years is a long time ago impressive. Infact that kind of age is almost unbelievable.

 

[crazymikey]

The link to the bridge story, I found here: http://www.newscienceparadigms.com/anthro/index.htm

It may not be an alien civilization, it could be a lost technical civilization on our own planet. However, it more likely to be an alien civilzation, than a human civilzation. So many cultures around the world, have myths, of celestial beings, and witnessing wonderous technology. Sometimes one wonders, if it's actual history.

 

[crazymikey]

I'm sorry to hear about your aunt. Cancer is such a nasty thing. I watched my grandmother waste away from some similiar problems.

That is very sad. Yes, this disease called Cancer, is trully a horror. The poor soul was in so much pain, her bones became so weak, they cracked, she could no longer eat or drink. Her insides just eroded away, they suspended her in the ward for a week, and she literally just wasted away in terrible pain. She did not deserve that kind of death, she was a great person, loving, honest, helping everyone, she just did not deserve that. And they say, there is a God. Yeah, whatever.

I stick with my question how long will the peace last. The Aliens dont have to start it. In fact I doubt the aliens would intentionally but a revolution is a possibilty. And an intersteller incidence will probably eventually happen.

There is a possibility for everything. Such an event will probably happen, but if it does happen, we cannot stop it, can we? At least not today. If Aliens are going to wipe us out, then they will, and it is the rule of nature. The dinasours had to be wiped out, for our emergence, and perhaps we have to be wiped out, for the emergence of something better.

I agree, and this is perhaps what they have lined up. The first public contact, maybe just announcing they have detected a civilization. However, it not the disclosure of ETI that is bothering me, its the technologies they have denied us for their own political agenda. Who knows, if we don't disclose them today, it may continue another decade or so.

 

[Lemming3k]

Crazymikey, in the other thread you compared these testimonies to historical ones, historical ones are often being changed/researched as being wrong, any relating to battles have that to back them up, borders changing, archaeoligcal evidence at the site to back it up, loss of lives, if someone testifies a battle happened, and no evidence is found of it, can you be sure it really happened? These people testify aliens have visited, yet have not provided us with evidence of it, i dont deny the possibility of aliens visiting is there, but the evidence is extremely lacking. Also shall i remind you of the pink elephant analogy, if someone testifies they saw one, if 10 people, or 200 people testify they saw one, but provide now evidence, do you believe it? How many people claiming something does it take to make you believe it? Hundreds of people have claimed seeing a 'bigfoot' like creature in california, do you believe them? These testimonies are on the same level as you 'proof' for ET.

 

[crazymikey]

I am sorry Lemming3k, but your reasoning is severely flawed, and just does not function:

- Historical testimony, as in history you read, is subjective to the author. Nonetheless, you have to believe in historical "facts" If I ask you, who invented the light bulb, you should have an answer - Thomas Edison - which is a historical testimony.
Testimony, is an accepted form of proof, and is used as proof in a court of law and in other systems that require proof. Scientific or empirical proof, is not the only form of proof. How can one physically prove a stealth B-52? That does not imply it does not exist. If George Bush Jr just addressed to the nation now that aliens exist, in unison with scientists, congressman and the UN. Should we all just reject them?

Your objections is not to the "proof", but the nature of the proof. You just don't like it, it's simple as that, but your emotional reaction is irrelavant and it does not falsify the proof.

So, rather than denying it, and that is irrational, refute the proof. This entails, refuting, and refuting succesfully, each and every claim made by the 400 witnesses. I am not going to ask you to do that, instead I ask you to refute 40 of the those whom I've already listed.

I am giving you the evidence, so deal with it head-on. There is no such thing as wrong evidence. Later, I am also going to document some more proofs. Although, thus far, no one has been able to refute the proofs I've provided already. Please, don't insult my efforts, in providing you the proofs, and arguments. Deal with it.

Hundreds of people have claimed seeing a 'bigfoot' like creature in california, do you believe them? These testimonies are on the same level as you 'proof' for ET.

This is a fallacious argument; you're comparing two different matters all together. Apples to oranges.

 

[goofyfish]

Historical testimony, as in history you read, is subjective to the author. Nonetheless, you have to believe in historical "facts" If I ask you, who invented the light bulb, you should have an answer - Thomas Edison - which is a historical testimony.

Except of course, your example of historical testimony is wrong. Joseph Swan was the first to both demonstrate and patent the electric light bulb in 1878 - before Edison.

:m: Peace.

 

[crazymikey]

Ah well, pop culture, will say otherwise. In fact any invention we know, may not be the first at all. Such as the telephone was not actually invented by Bell.

 

[goofyfish]

So you would agree that "historical testimony" can not be
deemed as reliable proof of the accuracy of a fact, would you not?

:m: Peace.

 

[mouse]

The link to the bridge story, I found here: http://www.newscienceparadigms.com/anthro/index.htm

It may not be an alien civilization, it could be a lost technical civilization on our own planet. However, it more likely to be an alien civilzation, than a human civilzation.

What makes you so sure it is, for lacking a better term, a "being-made" structure? I'll admit that it has a tempting shape, but that alone is certainly not proof of deliberate design. Look e.g. at this this article of the hindu times.

So many cultures around the world, have myths, of celestial beings, and witnessing wonderous technology. Sometimes one wonders, if it's actual history.

Myths are, of course, not the most reliable and objective source of information. I suppose there are quite a few myths featuring members of the animal kingdom talking much like your average human being but surely we can not expect this to be true.

 

[crazymikey]

However, goofy fish, it is used as evidence for history

Mouse, it is because of the actual description of its construction in the Ramayana, and as you said, its tempting design. As I said, it is not conclusive proof, but it does raise quite a few questions; why mythology, may not all be fiction, is because there has been a lot of documented encounters with civilizations from the stars in so many cultures, and many of the accounts are similar - flying vehicles, wonderous weapons, underwater civilizations, that has been documented as history. It's enough to raise an eye brow, and considering that logic allows, alien civilizations, it is not really that unbelievable that there may have been a colonization of this planet in prehistory.
Of course it is not conclusive evidence, nor am I adovacting that, but it is worthy of investigation.

In Hindu literature, not only is the bridge documented, but also sunken cities, that have also been found today, as well as detailed descriptions of flying craft and very astonishing metaphysicial theories that have applications to the modern age. If they are that cultured, that they can be compared to modern man, one should ask, why would they document such extraordinary events, as part of history.

 

[Lemming3k]

However, goofy fish, it is used as evidence for history

Its used as evidence, and proved wrong. So it is useless as evidence, why wait for something to be proved wrong? Why is it right until proved otherwise, like your testimonies, to you they are right until someone proves them wrong, to me they are wrong until i see conclusive evidence they are right, its a difference of opinion.

Hundreds of people have claimed seeing a 'bigfoot' like creature in california, do you believe them? These testimonies are on the same level as you 'proof' for ET.

This is a fallacious argument; you're comparing two different matters all together. Apples to oranges.

Thats absolute rubbish, there are 400 testimonies you've provided for proof of the existence of ET, therefore if i provided 400 testimonies for proof of the existence of bigfoot you must believe that aswel, or be a hypocrite. I ask again do you believe in bigfoot because there are 400 testimonies for its existence?(these are easily available on the internet if you wish to read them)

Also do you believe in mythical creatures? If you believe this hindu literature because a few parts of it have been proved right, do you believe mythical stories about minotaurs or hydra's because parts of those are based on actual places that exist? The hindu literature proves that they based something on geographical knowledge, same as greek myths, does that mean what they claim is true because they got their geography correct?

 

[crazymikey]

Lemming3k, as you insist you compare apples to oranges. I would like you to show me 400 cases of bigfoot, or indeed the pink elephant, that are from respected scientists, technicians, NSA, CIA, NASA, government officials.

I do not have to argue, that testimony is a valid form of proof. It is a fallacious argument, as I said. It is endorsed by histrorians, and in a court of law. Even scientific evidence is proven to be incorrect frequently, that does not imply, scientific evidence should not be considered as proof. As I said, how do I obtain physical evidence, for the flight of a B52. You are being very irrational in this thinking and it really is rubbish.

I will repeat one more time, there are 400 witnesses, each with their own claim, with supported documents, from the CIA, NSA, NASA, Government, USAF, UN etc Prove them wrong, and prove their motivation to lie, if you can, and if you can't, then you have no case.

As for Hindu literature. You do realise, getting the geography correct of the bridge, would mean human civilization is 1.27 million years old. As I said, there is no conclusive evidence from the bridge, or from myths, I cannot prove that case, but I do think it warrants an investigation. As the logical possibility, of alien civilizations, does actually exist, and thus the possibility of early colonization exists. The early cultures obsession with the astronomy, the common thread, of people from the stars, and different living beings, and the advanced form of spirituality and culture. Further more, documenting this as history. If they are figments of the imagination, then one wonders how they accurately imagine such wonderous technology, like heat-guided missiles, flying crafts(two types: man-made, and ET) cloning, nuclear weapons, space flight. One can only imagine from their observations, and extrapolate from there. Compare early 19th century science fiction, to that of today, yet the technology described in early cultures accords dramatically with modern fiction. Then consider, how the Hindu metaphysical science, accords so well with modern quantum theory, knowing about the quantum vaccuum, the ether, and knowing about the multi-dimensional reality. None of this is conclusive, but it's compelling enough, to warrant further investigation. It could well be, that there really were alien civilizations on this planet in the past, and now are completely forgotten.

 

[Lemming3k]

Your logic is terrible, why would they lie bout aliens therefore it must be true? How about fame, money, the sheer fun of fooling gullible people like you just by using their word as evidence? A government official has no more credibility than anyone else, how many coverups have their been? how many political lies, they all have a superior, a boss, they may not be the source of a coverup but would have to go along with it, why are government officials more trustworthy than anyone else when they are still human and can lie very easily?
If you wish for a bigfoot link with a list of testimonies then here it is http://www.n2.net/prey/bigfoot/sightings.htm
I agree about further invistigation of the hindu text, but i extend that invistigation to all claims about aliens. I would also like to point out in a court of law it is unlikely a testimony alone is enough for a conviction, since anyone and everyone can lie, if 5 people say you shot someone, but a gun is not recovered, no evidence of you being at the scene is recovered etc then there is little to go on other than what a few people say, furthermore 400 people ARE just a few people in the overall scheme of things and many millions dont claim to have seen aliens or worked on projects involving them, you are believing the few over the many. Further investigation is needed to prove them right.
Also i feel i should point out(and repeat a little) that we must disagree, you say they are right until i prove them wrong, i say they are wrong until they are proved right with conclusive evidence other then simple i did this to do with aliens saw this etc, i think aliens are out there(the odds certianly are in favour of it), but havnt landed/made contact(though i can be swayed by the right evidence), i shall enjoy finding it.

 

[crazymikey]

Your logic is terrible

Says who, you? It's not my logic that is terrible, Lemming, it is you, who are not accepting, or further investigating the evidence, I've provided you.

http://www.n2.net/prey/bigfoot/sightings.htm[/url]

Mill Valley, California
March 23, 1976. Police patrolman Dan Murphy and Ed Johnson see a large upright Bigfoot climb an 8 foot wall in Mill Valley. The next day they find a freshly killed deer on the same spot.

You don't get it do you? These are mostly ordinary people, most of which who have claimed to have seen only tracks, and droppings, or seen some creature whizz by their eye. None of it is conclusive.

Mill Valley, California
March 23, 1976. Police patrolman Dan Murphy and Ed Johnson see a large upright Bigfoot climb an 8 foot wall in Mill Valley. The next day they find a freshly killed deer on the same spot.

December, 1963. The Deputy Sheriff from Pinecrest sees hundreds of 15 inch Bigfoot tracks with a 5 foot stride in an alpine meadow 2 miles northwest of Pinecrest and the same distance from Strawberry.

Alternatively, the disclosure project, consists of 400, extraordinary, respected, working in high clearence positions, who claim to have seen UFO's, captured them on radar, dealt with black-projects, been given death-threats, seen aliens, dead and alive, worked on alien technology, seen crashed UFO's etc.

All you are doing, and probably because of your incapacity, is rejecting each and every claim, and then saying, you are looking for evidence? Ha I am sorry but I am very sceptical of that.

My friend, if my logic was "terrible" we would have no history, and no law. All witnesses would be rejected right away, because of their inability to produce physical evidence. Which is what? A snap of a handshake with the perpitrator of the crime ?

All claims are right, untill they are proven wrong(innocent till proven guilty) They are not wrong, untill proven right, that really is the most stupidest thing I've heard recently, aside from PM's posts

Aliens visiting us is not really an extraoridinary claim, as the existence of aliens is ordinary. It's funny, how you actually are willing to accept, aliens exist, but are not willing to accept they have/are visited us. What is so extraordinary about an alien visiting us?

Next post, I am actually going to produce some proof on "physical" evidence.

 

[Lemming3k]

Says who, you? It's not my logic that is terrible, Lemming, it is you, who are not accepting, or further investigating the evidence, I've provided you.

I have read all links and what you have provided, please dont pretend im ignorant of what you've provided i read it, some of it doesnt even mention aliens, and all of it is a claim given by a group of people, people lie, there have been plenty of government coverups and lies to prove the government isnt a lot more trustworthy than anyone else.

You don't get it do you? These are mostly ordinary people, most of which who have claimed to have seen only tracks, and droppings, or seen some creature whizz by their eye. None of it is conclusive.

Yet your claims are conclusive? Two sets of claims, what makes yours better?(and no a government connection is not PROOF of truth), if you insist claims can be true and used as evidence then why are you discounting claims for bigfoot?

Aliens visiting us is not really an extraoridinary claim, as the existence of aliens is ordinary. It's funny, how you actually are willing to accept, aliens exist, but are not willing to accept they have/are visited us. What is so extraordinary about an alien visiting us?

Next post, I am actually going to produce some proof on "physical" evidence.

Im not saying they wont/havnt visited, im saying theres no evidence for it(other than what people say) so im skeptical, i shall enjoy seeing physical evidence as i find that more conclusive, unfortunately over the net things are easy to fake so forgive me if i dont believe until i've seen something in real life that makes me believe. Like i said, a trial based on witness testimony alone doesnt tend to get very far in court, it needs physical evidence to back those testimonies up.

All claims are right, untill they are proven wrong(innocent till proven guilty) They are not wrong, untill proven right

lets look at this another way, if all claims are right until proven wrong, bigfoot exists, elvis is not dead and pigs can fly(they've all been claimed). Also what about the claims the man is guilty? If all claims are right until proven wrong all claims that he is guilty are also right until proved wrong, your logic works both ways.

 

[crazymikey]

Lemming3K:

Why are "my" claims different:

Alternatively, the disclosure project, consists of 400, extraordinary, respected, working in high clearence positions, who claim to have seen UFO's, captured them on radar, dealt with black-projects, been given death-threats, seen aliens, dead and alive, worked on alien technology, seen crashed UFO's etc.

vs

These are mostly ordinary people, most of which who have claimed to have seen only tracks, and droppings, or seen some creature whizz by their eye. None of it is conclusive.

That is why it is different:

Yet your claims are conclusive? Two sets of claims, what makes yours better?(and no a government connection is not PROOF of truth), if you insist claims can be true and used as evidence then why are you discounting claims for bigfoot?

Simple, at least it should be. Because, the claims they have made, is about seeing droppings, and tracks, or something run past their eyes, which does not provide any conclusive evidence of big foot. Now look at above, and see why they are different.

Im not saying they wont/havnt visited, im saying theres no evidence for it(other than what people say) so im skeptical, i shall enjoy seeing physical evidence as i find that more conclusive, unfortunately over the net things are easy to fake so forgive me if i dont believe until i've seen something in real life that makes me believe. Like i said, a trial based on witness testimony alone doesnt tend to get very far in court, it needs physical evidence to back those testimonies up.

Not necessarily. All evidence carries it's own weight. And all types of evidence are not required. All I'm affirming to you, is testimony is a valid form of evidence, and the credibility of the witness carries it's weight too - which is obvious actually.

When you have 400, credible witnesses, making a case. You do not reject their claims, you investigate into them, and attempt to prove them wrong. Which is, what I'm asking you to do. Otherwise just simply admit, that you do not like the evidence, but don't make exuses, that it's not viable evidence, because it is, and recognised.

lets look at this another way, if all claims are right until proven wrong, bigfoot exists, elvis is not dead and pigs can fly(they've all been claimed).

As I said, these claims are inconclusive, and do not carry any weight. Saying you've seen a guy from the back, who is Elvis, and saying, you've worked on UFO's, and have been given death threats, to not reveal it, makes a world of difference.

 

[Persol]

Says who, you? It's not my logic that is terrible, Lemming, it is you, who are not accepting, or further investigating the evidence, I've provided you.
Your logic is terrible, because it is. As for further investigation, I investigated the names you presented already. These were mostly not 'high level' people as you claim, many had a history of making stuff up, and several didn't even want to be associated with the project.

I don't see these 'high level officals' you are talking about. I assume that they are mostly hidden on the 400 person list... which probably won't be disclosed because the claims could actually be investigated. Look at the result people have had debunking the small list already presented. I have no reason to thinki that the 400 person list fares any better.

 

[crazymikey]

You disappoint me Persol. I thought you went off to assasinate the characters of the 40 I enlisted, I see you still have nothing, as usual. Still spewing the same rubbish, "Many have a history of making claims up", "Many do not want to be associated with the project" last time you spoke this hok, I asked you to substantiate it for me, and I see you still have not. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to take you serious, untill you can make a sensible case, rather than this nonsense you are fabricating.

 

[Persol]

And I did substantiate it for you. Would you like me to do it again?
mostly not 'high level' people as you claim
This is obvious from the list. http://www.disclosureproject.org/aboutexecsumm.htm

many had a history of making stuff up
Sgt. Cliff Stone - claimed to have recovered a craft and aliens at Indian Town Gap, Pennsylvania. Also saw crashed saucers at the Pentagon. Also claims to have recovered a B-52 in Vietnam which was 'set down' by a UFO. Funny how one man has had so many encounters with ETs.... and always happens to be in the 'right place'.
Larry Warren(USAF) - Claim debunked at www.ufoworld.co.uk/v14.txt. Claims to have seen a video of the Apollo astronauts on the Moon pointing out artificial alien structures, which the astronauts deny.
Astronaut Gordon Cooper - This one is kind of sad. He has made MANY claims, most of which have been debunked - www.zip.com.au/~psmith/cooper.html
Gene Mallove - cold fusion activist, who repeatedly makes unsupported claims which other scientists can not reproduce
Thomas E. Bearden (US Army) - Makes MANY MANY unsupported claims. The worst of which is probably his MEG 'invention' (http://www.phact.org/e/z/bearden.htm)
Glen Dennis - A 'witness' to alien bodies which has been debunked extensively (http://www.csicop.org/klassfiles/SUN-31.html)
Donna Hare - Claimed to see NASA airbrush over a UFO in a photo. She also saw "trees and their shadows on the ground"... which is impossible from an orbital photo.

several didn't even want to be associated with the project
John Callahan
Edgar Mitchell
Don Phillips
Robert Wood

 

[crazymikey]

Oh boy, ok, one by one:

And I did substantiate it for you. Would you like me to do it again?
mostly not 'high level' people as you claim
This is obvious from the list. http://www.disclosureproject.org/aboutexecsumm.htm

Those are not high-ranking people, you say? Let's see now, NASA, CIA, NSA, USAF, UN(Navy), Astronaughts, scientists. It is astounding, how you can deny their positions. Your credibility is now questionable, itself.

many had a history of making stuff up

Really? Let's see then:

Sgt. Cliff Stone - claimed to have recovered a craft and aliens at Indian Town Gap, Pennsylvania. Also saw crashed saucers at the Pentagon. Also claims to have recovered a B-52 in Vietnam which was 'set down' by a UFO. Funny how one man has had so many encounters with ETs.... and always happens to be in the 'right place'.

So how is this evidence, that he made it up?

Larry Warren(USAF) - Claim debunked at www.ufoworld.co.uk/v14.txt. Claims to have seen a video of the Apollo astronauts on the Moon pointing out artificial alien structures, which the astronauts deny.

The link does not even work.

Astronaut Gordon Cooper - This one is kind of sad. He has made MANY claims, most of which have been debunked -

From the link you posted, the claims was not made by him, but were misrepresented by others, for which he filed a law suit as well. The site's conclusion is the following:

This candor and cooperation has been met with exploitation and misrepresentation from UFO promoters and publicists. From Beckley's "Hangar 18" fantasies to the Columbia Pictures Industries false advertisements to Dr. Hynek's explicit endorsements , Cooper has found himself on the receiving end of frauds and fabrications attached to his name. His usefulness to UFO proponents is based on his honest advocacy of serious UFO research (a desire shared by many serious researchers in the field, including myself) and on the UFO stories associated, not always accurately as we have seen, with his name.

So how does that malign Cooper's character, and his actual claim?

Thomas E. Bearden (US Army) - Makes MANY MANY unsupported claims. The worst of which is probably his MEG 'invention'

He makes a claim of a free energy machine, as usual, there are sceptics, tearing him apart. Much like sceptics have tore angi-gravity machines apart, but now are actually being proven. Now wether his claim is bogus, I would not know, and producing one vague sceptical account, is not going to make much of an argument.

Gene Mallove - cold fusion activist, who repeatedly makes unsupported claims which other scientists can not reproduce

Yet cold fusion research rakes in millions, and some very compelling results are produced:

METHODS CLAIMED TO PRODUCE CANR OR LENR (COLD FUSION)
Note: AE = anomalous energy, NP = nuclear products.

1. Electrolysis of D2O (H2O)-based electrolyte using Pd, Pt, Ti, or Ni cathodes. (This is the orginal Pons-Fleischmann method, which has been replicated hundreds of times to produce claimed AE and NP in every country where the method was used.)

2. Electrolysis of KCL-LiCL-Lid (fused salt) electrolyte using a Pd anode. (Several attempts at duplication have failed.)

3. Electrolysis of various solid compounds in D2o(proton conduction). (This method has been duplicated in the United States, Japan, and France to produce AE.)

4. Gas discharge (low energy ions) using Pd electrodes in D2 (H2). (Variations on this method have reported AE and NP in the United States, Russia, and Japan.)

5. Ion bombardment (high energy ions) of various metals by D+. (Variations on this method have reported NP in Russia and Japan.)

6. Gas reaction (H2) with Ni under special conditons. (Replicated independently several times in Italy to produce NP and AE.)

7. Cavitation reaction involving D2O and various metals using an acoustic field. (This method has been replicated in the United States to produce NP and AE.)

8. Cavition reaction in H2O using microbubble formation. (Several attempts to duplicate variations on the method have failed.)

9. Reaction of finely divided palladium with pressurized deuterium gas. (Variations on this method have produced AP and NP in the United States and Japan.)

10. Plasma discharge under D2O or H2O. (Variations on this method have produced AP and NP in the United States, Italy, and Japan.)

11. Phase change or a chemical reaction, both involving deuterium. (NP production has been reported in the United States and in Russia.)

12. Biological systems. (This method has produced NP in Japan, Russia, and France.)

Independent laboratories have duplicated all of these methods, and the reasons for failure when using commercial palladium metal are now understood. The reason for the failure while using commercial palladium is that the required properties of the palladium are neither uniform, nor easily duplicated. Only rare pieces of palladium, which do not crack when reacted with high concentrations of deuterium, are suitable. Apparently, having very fine particles of a suitable material is another essential condition for this phenomenon to work.

I would like to keep my reservations about the ridicule of these claims of new technology. As I am well aware, how in the past, whenever these claims were made, they were ridiculed then too, and they turned out to have merit. Simply saying, such and such, says it's not possible, does not mean evidence. Scepticism is not evidence.

Donna Hare - Claimed to see NASA airbrush over a UFO in a photo. She also saw "trees and their shadows on the ground"... which is impossible from an orbital photo.

Where is the evidence?

Glen Dennis - A 'witness' to alien bodies which has been debunked extensively (<http://www.csicop.org/klassfiles/SUN-31.html>)

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/klassvufo.htm

Oh please, the opinions of Klass? This guy is a moron. He makes rubbish scepitical arguments, and the doctorine to which csicop subscribes to, makes me sick. They tell people to ridicule people who make extraordinay claims, laugh at them, not even bothering to investigate their claims. They spew rubbish, and often to to pass of their opinions as evidence. How can one forget where Klass wrote a book, UFOs - Identified, which sought to explain many UFO reports in terms of plasma physics, and it was recievely coldly by Plasma physcists. They thinks they know how to use occams razor, when they really don't, and nor is occams razor that popular among people. It is like all the morons have come together, to just "debunk" everything and anything, when none of their explanations are convincing, and they are scientific in any way, they are more like lawyers, dragging in morals and politics of those involved, rather than the actual issue,and have frequently been shamed. I've not read one argument from Klass, that is serious, all I see, is ridicule, verbal abuses, and mocking the issue. If this "organization" cannot be serious, then we won't take them seriously.

I would rather you produce your arguments from more credible sources. A sceptic using a pro- sceptic web site to debunk something he is sceptical of, is like me using a pro-christian web site to debunk atheistic arguments.

Anyway, let's say, I give you the benefit of the doubt, and say 4 of the ones you talked about, cannot be trusted, that leaves more than 36 that are not counted for from the list I gave you. You have not even produced half of these "rebuttals" for these people. Do you expect to make a case for the integrity of DP as a whole, by considering under 5% of the witnesses?

several didn't even want to be associated with the project
several didn't even want to be associated with the project
John Callahan
Edgar Mitchell
Don Phillips
Robert Wood

Where is the evidence?