I can get even deeper than that, but I'll stop here. I have also been told by someone who was told by someone else that they saw a flying saucer in a hangar. I have read accounts by former intelligence persons who admitted that their job was to invent mundane explanations for sightings and/or discredit the person making the sighting, in spite of the fact that they knew the sightings were for real. Going deeper, my Dad was also a spy for the DIA which I later learned was tasked with investigating UFO reports, and, in spite of his obvious emotional reaction at the time of the sighting we shared, later denied that he ever saw anything at all. Since he worked on Nike Hercules surface to air missile systems and I have a degree in physics, I feel qualified to say that it was not one of the mundane objects so often touted by skeptics. I have kept up with UFOs of the alien flying saucer variety since the 1960s, thousands of reputable people have seen and sometimes interacted with them, and I have seen one myself with my Dad. May I suggest you get there first? Or James Morcan will pip you to the post come Underground Knowledge Series Book Number 37.
Jim - you make a damn good point that there isn't a book (to my knowledge) specifically on Black Knight.
So I'm on the fence before doing more research. The photos aren't disputed, but some simply claim that it's the casing of a space module/similar - I find it remarkable that NASA have no absolute clear facts about what it is. However (and I need to research the topic more) the one thing that strikes me odd (amongst others)is that it was supposedly debunked in the 1960s - much in the same way that Roswell was said to just be a weather balloon- only for photos to emerge of the satellite in the late nineties. I'm no expert on the Black Knight, and having had a look through that and other sceptic arguments, I can see that there's plenty of room for doubt. Lisa, thanks for posting that link to the debunked article, and one should always maintain a healthy dose of scepticism. With all that said, I know virtually nothing about this whole black knight thingy apart from reading a few snippets here and there - so possibly in this instance Harry Whitewolf is just off his rocker and is too open minded!!! (sorry Harry, maybe it's time you and I join the skeptics society together? Maybe they have something the equivalent of AA meetings in which we could stand up before a group and say "Hello, my name is _ and I am a conspiracy addict."). So while skeptics do often serve a good function in a society full of internet rumors and the like, I just do not believe that skeptics hold the copyright on logical thinking or reason as they heavily imply.Due to their sometimes rigid beliefs and the raft of preconceptions that naturally stem from such belief structures, skeptics are capable of being remarkably irrational and illogical at times. And I found the skeptics summaries to be almost devoid of logic, especially regarding 9/11. It's the other end of the spectrum from those who have "blind faith" and never question whether the foundations of their religion or cult are fact or fiction.Īlso I've read skeptics reports on events like 9/11, Diana's and JFK's deaths (which polls in mainstream media have revealed over 50% of the public do not believe the govt's official explanations for) trying to debunk alternative explanations of these events. I've known people in the international skeptics society or whatever it's called and they have to be the most closed minded people I've ever met! They just parrot the establishment on everything and never even question a thing or have a unique thought. Skepticism is a fantastic asset to have, however I believe it needs to be combined conversely with an extremely open mind to be an integrated thinker.
That part of me is not able to accept this notion." Lisa wrote: "But I have this whisper in my head that reminds me to be logical and realistic.
0 kommentar(er)
