>  JS> "It speaks to us about Roswell, about Area 51, that there were
 >  JS> aliens recovered and that the President of the United States is
 >  JS> not always informed," Maussan said. "All of this conditions human
 >  JS> beings more and more to believe it is true."
 >    He says that as if it's a good thing, which shows a lack of
 > foresight (or perhaps he's unaware of the problem).
 >    Skeptics have noticed that the aliens people report tend to
 > show surprising similarities with whatever aliens have been big in
 > popular culture lately.
 >    The more documentaries there are about little grey men, the
 > more people see little grey men, and so on.
 >    The more people who have images from popular culture imbedded
 > in their subconscious, the more people are likely to hallucinate
 > seeing aliens like that.
 >    And the more difficult it will be to find any truth that exists
 > in the reports.
 > Paul
Paul, you can try to educate all the UFO believers to your version
of the truth, but it may not work. Where many skeptics consider
some believers to take their UFOs almost religiously, the same can
be said for many skeptics who attempt to debunk everything that
comes along with an almost religious fervor. Some of what you say
is true, but it doesn't apply to everyone who believes UFOs may
have an extraterrestrial origin.
Putting the cultists aside (they represent a very small percentage
of "believers"), I ask you what harm is there in considering some
UFOs as having an alien source? If you are going to try to debunk
every report that hints at aliens, then you too are subject to
the rules of documentation.
Believer: "Some UFOs may be extraterrestrial in origin."
Debunker: "This is most unlikely."
In the above, the debunker is wanting of documentation. The believer
has merely speculated a little. If you remove speculation as a point
of discussion, all UFO echoes would have to shut down. Could this
be what you really want? I don't think so.
Jack
--- FMail 1.22
---------------