Alien Entity Activity

[ScaRZ]

.....to continue with the last page of the article.

Alien Entity Activity Part Four Infallibles or Fallible Fiends? Cont'd....

viewtopic.php?p=22371#p22371

Next, the interview....

[Mod Edit: removed reposting of material already available in this thread at above linked post]

[murnut]

Good posts...thanks for adding them here

[ryguy]

Yeah - I've been reading every one of them too. I like to try looking for patterns in some of the witness statements and accounts - and overall it's just fascinating stuff. Thanks for posting Scarz.

[ScaRZ]

I'm glad Etherian decided to add some additional material. I ask him if it was alright with me posting it. Since he is now a member at RU hopefully he will add more to it. Really no need me doing it for him.

[skunk]

Thought y'all might appreciate listening to my "other being" account.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4gsf919PAE

I don't know if this would be classified as extraterrestrial considering it happened during meditation though. Extradimensional is probably a more accurate description.

[Chorlton]

Scarz stated:

These reports are verified by competent witnesses, many formerly in the military and contain much more detail as to the craft, the occupants and the mysterious group that reaches these sites to thoroughly examine and acquire data regarding the salvage operations.

Define 'Competent witness' ?
I would classify 'competent witnesses' as being 'equally ignorant' of the natural effects of this earth, or those prepared to equally jump to totally unfounded conclusions over totally natural phen omena that they know nothing about.

People seem to add the words 'Competent Witnesses' as if it is some sort of guarantee that what they saw was real, when, in fact everyone is a competent witness, who simply doesnt realise the forces or natural phenomena behind what they have seen.

[Chorlton]

Thought y'all might appreciate listening to my "other being" account.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4gsf919PAE

I don't know if this would be classified as extraterrestrial considering it happened during meditation though. .

Meditiation or you were high as a kite on dope?

[ScaRZ]

Scarz stated:

These reports are verified by competent witnesses, many formerly in the military and contain much more detail as to the craft, the occupants and the mysterious group that reaches these sites to thoroughly examine and acquire data regarding the salvage operations.

Define 'Competent witness' ?
I would classify 'competent witnesses' as being 'equally ignorant' of the natural effects of this earth, or those prepared to equally jump to totally unfounded conclusions over totally natural phen omena that they know nothing about.

People seem to add the words 'Competent Witnesses' as if it is some sort of guarantee that what they saw was real, when, in fact everyone is a competent witness, who simply doesnt realise the forces or natural phenomena behind what they have seen.

Well Chorlton you will need to get Etherian to answer your question. It's his article not mine,all I did was post it.
You sound like you are already an expert on "Everything" so why ask when you don't need an answer?

I myself have never seen any UFO's or Alien entities,but just because I haven't doesn't mean others haven't. I certainly don't believe everything observed is of an ET,UT,or Alien encounter. I believe some are natural phenomena,man himself,while others are hoaxes. But then there are also some that fit in another area.

[ryguy]

Define 'Competent witness' ?
I would classify 'competent witnesses' as being 'equally ignorant' of the natural effects of this earth, or those prepared to equally jump to totally unfounded conclusions over totally natural phen omena that they know nothing about.

I would classify a competent witness as someone who witnessed something in their line of work or within their realm of expertise that they can say, due to their extensive experience in that particular field, is completely out of the "ordinary" and without explanation.

You have to remember that the factor of "competent witness" isn't a variable used to conclude anything about the cause of the phenomenon. It's a factor that indicates it's not just the made-up (or delusional) story of a loony - but instead an observation by an intelligence professional.

It's an indication that there's truly something awry and the situation deserves closer scientific scrutiny. It's a way to avoid wasting time - only focusing on events witnessed by people who are credible.

-Ryan

[Chorlton]

You sound like you are already an expert on "Everything" so why ask when you don't need an answer.

Sarcasm ? or Bitching? Please explain what you mean by the above or are you just attempting to be spitefull?. Ive been around for 60 years now and done a lot more nosing around than most but Ive never stated or even intimated that I knew everything so I would suggest you apologise for that bit of snide insult, or at least attempt to justify it.

Or does being gods own representative to RU give you some sort of dispensation?

[You Can Call Me Ray]

It's an indication that there's truly something awry and the situation deserves closer scientific scrutiny. It's a way to avoid wasting time - only focusing on events witnessed by people who are credible.

Agreed, but there needs to be the caveat: Just because a loony like Bill Ryan or Kerry Cassidy invokes the "competent witness" branding (for their selfish publicity/marketing purposes), does NOT make that person a "competent witness". In other words, all attempts by the cadre of UFOlogy scam artists to brand their interviewees and sources with "and I have no reason to believe he is not a trustworthy person" are right the eff out!


Ray

[Chorlton]

Define 'Competent witness' ?
I would classify 'competent witnesses' as being 'equally ignorant' of the natural effects of this earth, or those prepared to equally jump to totally unfounded conclusions over totally natural phen omena that they know nothing about.

I would classify a competent witness as someone who witnessed something in their line of work or within their realm of expertise that they can say, due to their extensive experience in that particular field, is completely out of the "ordinary" and without explanation.

You have to remember that the factor of "competent witness" isn't a variable used to conclude anything about the cause of the phenomenon. It's a factor that indicates it's not just the made-up (or delusional) story of a loony - but instead an observation by an intelligence professional.

It's an indication that there's truly something awry and the situation deserves closer scientific scrutiny. It's a way to avoid wasting time - only focusing on events witnessed by people who are credible.

-Ryan

I understand what many think is a 'Competent Witness' But its a term thats thrown around now as an Insult or a dissmissal to the many many 'normal' people who see something they dont understand.
I would no more believe a Policeman as a 'Competent Witness' than I would believe Fred, The Milkman.
To me, everyone is credible unless proven otherwise. A Policeman, vicar or Postman is just as liable to make up a hoax or missinterpret something as George & Mildred.
Credibility, for me, is more dependant on the description and actions of what someone has seen, than their profession.

[ryguy]

You sound like you are already an expert on "Everything" so why ask when you don't need an answer.

Or does being gods own representative to RU give you some sort of dispensation?

Well - for what it's worth, I agree with Scarz that you often have a knee-jerk debunk attitude to everything, as though you already know something isn't true before you've even taken a good look. In your "60 years" it seems that you believe you've seen everything - hence, Scarz comment about being an expert on everything.

And your response reflects some sort of deep seated grudge that I can't even begin to comprehend at the moment...lol.

-Ry

[ryguy]

I understand what many think is a 'Competent Witness' But its a term thats thrown around now as an Insult or a dissmissal to the many many 'normal' people who see something they dont understand.
I would no more believe a Policeman as a 'Competent Witness' than I would believe Fred, The Milkman.

Yes, but a Milkman may not know what the "normal" status of Route 16 is at 2am on a Thursday morning. Are there usually cars flying along every half hour? Is there usually a lot of air traffic in the sky? etc....

A Policeman who patrols an area brings a lot more insight and expertise than a Milkman who simply doesn't have the experience in that specific field. Again - doesn't mean the story is true, it just means you'll get more valuable information from such a witness.

To me, everyone is credible unless proven otherwise. A Policeman, vicar or Postman is just as liable to make up a hoax or missinterpret something as George & Mildred.

I disagree with the first statement and agree with the second. Not everyone is credible in the same areas of expertise - but yes, hoaxing is an equal opportunity employer. That's why the first order of business should be to verify as much of the background of the person, and the story, as possible first. If there are no tell-tale signs of falsifying information, etc...then you have a very valuable witness to a strange event.

Credibility, for me, is more dependant on the description and actions of what someone has seen, than their profession.

I disagree for the reasons stated above. Not everyone spends every day at a job that naturally gives them the same sort of insight that's required for these situations. I would hope that you would say a plumber is more credible to describe weird noises that you're hearing coming from the drain than say, an electrician or a pizza boy?

-Ryan

[Chorlton]

You sound like you are already an expert on "Everything" so why ask when you don't need an answer.

Or does being gods own representative to RU give you some sort of dispensation?

Well - for what it's worth, I agree with Scarz that you often have a knee-jerk debunk attitude to everything,
as though you already know something isn't true before you've even taken a good look

YOU think its a knee jerk response but you're falling into the same pit as some of the junior jerkoffs at Amkon.
Its called 'Experience', sometimes some things are so damned obvious one doesnt NEED a good look at them because youve already looked at them 100 times previously.
Ever been to a garage and had some old chap point out the fault in the car before some young dickweed has put his computer on it? Is that considered a kneejerk reaction?. Sometimes someone has seen and explained something so many times, it becomes pretty pointless explaining it again and one simply responds as one sees fit at the time. Sometimes, one sees something, where the answer for it is so bloody obvious or has been answered 2000000 times before, it really needs no explanation. As a musician Ive probably had 10X time more free time to look at and explore and examine things than most people.
I suppose if had written innumerable boring books about the subject or made innumerable boring videos and films about the subject I would have gained more respect than for someone to simply ejaculate that I 'knew everything'? could it be that others merelely 'know nothing' or 'know little'.?

. In your "60 years" it seems that you believe you've seen everything -

'Seems'? I would hazard a guess that Ive probably seen, poked, prodded, asked, questioned and looked at a damned sight more things than many here, But I havent seen everything neither have I ever stated that, so thats your personal interpretation, however wrong it may be. But because I dont 'Do' seminars or public appearances or crave attention with crackpot statements in the Newspaper or the media, or publish page after page of dissertations on the subject, does that make me or people similar to me less knowledgeable than those money grabbing bastards that do?

And your response reflects some sort of deep seated grudge that I can't even begin to comprehend at the moment...lol.
-Ry

Thats bloody obvious.