Wacky idea about aliens & "dark matter".

[voggmo]

1 persons view of several who analyzed it. Nice try though.

I must say I see no point in snarkacious argumentation. Get the dvd-s, estimate for yourself after weighing it all up what time it is with that particular piece of evidence.

The trajectory in it's outro is dead straight, wiping out all hope & theory it was a piece of ice or junk blown about by the shuttle's propulsion.

 

[scotthm]

I must say I see no point in snarkacious argumentation.

Well, there is none.

Get the dvd-s...

Um, no. I'm not going to finance these dubious theories.

---------------

 

[voggmo]

This below was also from the link, again nice try.


The air glow is a region above the Earth's surface that ends at an elevation of about sixty miles.

http://www.nicap.org/muj_kasher_sts48.htm

 

[voggmo]

By refusing to seriously analyze the data by refusing to spend a tiny amount of money on a dvd, you forfeit ANY legitimacy as a researcher or conscientious objector.



since the main object clearly accelerated and moved above the Earth's airglow in the videotape. Thus, it would have been an intelligently directed craft that was above the atmosphere; that is, it would have been a spacecraft.
Also, the glowing objects clearly cannot be meteors, satellites, or space junk, since none of these can change direction.


http://www.nicap.org/muj_kasher_sts48.htm

 

[scotthm]

By refusing to seriously analyze the data by refusing to spend a tiny amount of money on a dvd, you forfeit ANY legitimacy as a researcher or conscientious objector.

OK. If I have to finance your pet project to be taken seriously then feel free to dismiss my skepticism.

---------------

 

[voggmo]

Whether you take me seriously is of no consequence. It is the fact of your refusal to partake of, or give consideration to the scientific analysis of the subject that establishes you have no eductaed, hence intelligent position or point of view on the subject.

 

[voggmo]

& negative emotional, ( non scientific ), reactions to said subject are not only entirely illogical, but they also create & provide no progress whatsoever. Throwing stones at it because, ( for whatever reason ), one doesn't like it offers no measurable gain for either you or I, & at the end of the day does not change the subject or the scientific analysis results of it in any way shape or form.

The real question is why you're so frightened of it.

 

[scotthm]

It is the fact of your refusal to partake of, or give consideration to the scientific analysis of the subject that establishes you have no eductaed, hence intelligent position or point of view on the subject.

On the contrary, I believe my failure to get suckered into the cult of UFOlogy is a sign of intelligence.

The real question is why you're so frightened of it.

A better question is why do you care that I don't swallow your UFO line?

When you have something really convincing to talk about let me know.

---------------

 

[voggmo]

Ignoring science is not a sign of intelligence.

As I stated above, whether you take myself seriously is of no consequence. I have made no attempt to get you to swallow any line, only to partake of science & then reach your own conclusion. Your decision to ignore science & instead pitch negative & incorrect emotional inuendo is of no conseqence or intellectual value.

 

[TerriO]

Each response was given at a different time, & as well had different material.

Doesn't matter.

And deliberately flouting it after having it pointed out to you isn't going to help your case.

Warned for spamming. Comments to PM.

 

[Nedersong]

Well, that's a pretty wild theory. A Dyson sphere that's the edge of the universe that expands into infinity and beyond.

 

[voggmo]

No deliberate flouting,( 2 posts together is not multiple posting), but thanks for the incorrect inference & incorrect enforcement of rules.

Scott, I belong to no UFO cult, therefore have no membership to sell. Really have no idea what you mean there. I do know you don't like the subject, that being the case, why bother with it? If it is of no real interest?

 

[scotthm]

Scott, ...I do know you don't like the subject, that being the case, why bother with it? If it is of no real interest?

My skepticism that UFOs are alien spacecraft doesn't prevent the UFO phenomenon from interesting me.

---------------

 

[voggmo]

Weird. You thumb your nose at evidence & a scientists view of said evidence,( & even refuse to weigh in said evidence), & then take potshots at the person providing it & the subject in general, & then say you find it interesting? Very odd to say the least. I don't recall ever calling any of my college professors cult people that taught subjects I was interested in. & I don't have any memory of others behaving in a negative way towards subjects they find interesting either. Very weird approach to take towards a subject one finds of interest.

 

[TerriO]

No deliberate flouting,( 2 posts together is not multiple posting), but thanks for the incorrect inference & incorrect enforcement of rules.

First off, what part of "Comments to PM" wasn't clear?

Second, there were three posts in a row from you shortly after your "explanation".

So, you were cautioned about making three posts in a row, and then proceeded to offer a less-than-believable explanation, and then go and post three replies in a row again.

That's what earned you your infraction.

I highly advise learning to do multiple quotes and condense your replies, because I have a distinct feeling this isn't the last time you'll be dancing this tango with the staff.

Thus ends the discussion of this infraction in the thread. Voggmo, comments to PM if you wish to continue presenting a case for reversing the infraction. Even though Bonz said it was the right decision, I'm willing to listen to all sides of the issue.

 

[voggmo]

Learn to count, all the above postage is 2 in a row, not 3. Wake up. & I did PM you.

 

[voggmo]

Your infraction is located in the PM.

 

[scotthm]

You thumb your nose at evidence

No, I just don't assume that the most improbable explanation is the correct explanation.

& a scientists view of said evidence

Your evidence didn't look conclusive enough for me to be all that interested in the theories of other people making their own guesses. It was certainly interesting video, but I refuse to conclude that it shows alien spacecraft just because I can't offer an alternative explanation that's 100% conclusive. It's good enough that I can conceive of an alternate explanation that's massively more likely than alien visitation.

& then take potshots at the person providing it & the subject in general, & then say you find it interesting? Very odd to say the least. ...Very weird approach to take towards a subject one finds of interest.

I'm sorry if you feel I've been taking potshots at you; that wasn't my intention.

---------------

 

[The Borg Queen]

Why does it have to be aliens? It could be human time-travelers. You know, from the future.

 

[TerriO]

Learn to count, all the above postage is 2 in a row, not 3. Wake up. & I did PM you.

Not before you took it to MA, which as you were reminded is against the rules.

And you have a PM or two in response.

And this really ends your derailing of this thread, voggmo. If you have anything further to discuss on the subject of this infraction, you know where my PM inbox is. Please do not disrupt the thread further.