The "Carlos Swett affair"

[chessmanskeptic]

Originally posted by latinijral


Latinijral , what do you "think" about this?

Well Carlos, about your question I am sure that all this members of the forum are almost only fans of James Randi.
They are not really skeptics, as we inicially thought.
They are only a bunch of believers and liars. Even Randi`s voice (Bid Lack ) is full of contradictions.....poor skeptic.


Carlos, do you remember "Beavis and Butthead" at msn skeptics forum???

I can say that latinjral, you are a troll. I am not the biggest fan of Randi's, yet, he has done alot of debunking of complete kooks out there. This thread has long since gone past stale. Now that I think about it, what law school did you go to latinjral?!?

Originally posted by chessmanskeptic


I am not the biggest fan of Randi's, yet, he has done alot of debunking of complete kooks out there.


Carlos, confirmed, they are only fans.

Debunking???
But he is in silence, only his speaker Bid Lack writes here.

[chessmanskeptic]

Originally posted by latinijral



Carlos, confirmed, they are only fans.

Debunking???
But he is in silence, only his speaker Bid Lack writes here.

You are a complete asswipe. James Randi is not a liar. In fact, I have a video that shows more of a paranormal event than Carlos's Video, no it is not 9/11, yet it is very fun to look at! I dare you to come onto paltalk right now and try to duke it out on Hal you little f*ck. You apparantely are not a "lawyer" considering the reply I got from you. Good day latinjral!

Originally posted by chessmanskeptic

I can say that latinjral, you are a troll. I am not the biggest fan of Randi's, yet, he has done alot of debunking of complete kooks out there. This thread has long since gone past stale. Now that I think about it, what law school did you go to latinjral?!?

Debunking of charlatans and idiots,

Randi's clock is ticking again.

Thanks,

S&S

[rwald]

Latin, you know the funniest thing? Carlos has been going out of his way to say that digital videos mean nothing, obviously with the hope of invalidating Blue Monk's videos. And yet you continue to post your digital videos, as if they prove something. Latin, answer this: If Blue Monk's digital videos prove nothing, than why do yours?

[De_Bunk]

S&S...

Yes... i totally and utterly, 100% believe that fuzzy, could be absolutley anything video,shot from half a mile away shows a genuine paranormal event...and is conclusive proof that the paranormal exists....

Just because im a old insane alcoholic...doesnt mean to say your not one as well...

I was so shocked..that i have now become a "Born again Christian"....All thanks to you...

Bless you...and may God help you in your quest...

(Sorry everyone else...Im just a bit bored...)

Originally posted by chessmanskeptic


James Randi is not a liar.


Are you sure?

[rwald]

I say this with complete certainty: I would sooner believe Randi than either Latin or Carlos. And yes, I am sure of that.

[Supercharts]

If I were a mod I'd move this to the Paranormal forum. Or I'd hunt down the participants like wild pigs and shoot them. But Hey, that's me. :(

Originally posted by De_Bunk
S&S...

Yes... i totally and utterly, 100% believe that fuzzy, could be absolutley anything video,shot from half a mile away shows a genuine paranormal event...and is conclusive proof that the paranormal exists....

Just because im a old insane alcoholic...doesnt mean to say your not one as well...

I was so shocked..that i have now become a "Born again Christian"....All thanks to you...

Bless you...and may God help you in your quest...

(Sorry everyone else...Im just a bit bored...)

Hi DeBunk:

Do you remember this? iF you don't, it doesn't matter.All boards need persons like you. You are just the exception or do you have the same regrets like the others?

Originally posted by De-Bunk 09/15/02

.." You have got to be one of the biggest, delusional jackasses i have ever read...

You are truly insane....and your father won the award for being Spanish "Idiot F*ckwit" of the year...and it looks like you're trying to win this year..in his honour....

I reckon it was a rocket fired from an F18 to bring down the plane...but the F18 pilot hesitated...and only fired when it was inevitable that the plane was going to impact the Tower...

Yeh...

Thats what it was...."

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

And do you remember my answer to you? You even used my quote in your sig for a while. Is also quoted in another reply you made.

Originally posted De-Bunk 09/16/02

A fine example of S&S humour....

S&S quote:
"The only thing your father won in his life was your mother. You
are the result of that.
Sorry for your mother, she lost twice."


Oh how i laughed....

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


Now is my time to laugh on you all.


Thanks,
S&S

Originally posted by Supercharts
If I were a mod I'd move this to the Paranormal forum. Or I'd hunt down the participants like wild pigs and shoot them. But Hey, that's me. :(


Your replies are now satisfied chicken m..f. LOSERS.

Thanks,
S&s

[Supercharts]

Originally posted by S&S



Your replies are now satisfied chicken m..f. LOSERS.

Thanks,
S&s

Your words are like arrows piercing my heart. * Be thankful I need not treat you like a wild pig.



[* Not, not really. I just always wanted to say that to someone ]:D

[Skeptoid]

Originally posted by S&S



Your replies are now satisfied chicken m..f. LOSERS.

Thanks,
S&s
This from a "man of honor" who p*ssed and moaned that all he got was insults, that he preferred frontal debates? Look at yourself Carlos, no one on this board has done more to to bring dishonor to you and your name than you yourself.

It's over, Carlos. You gave it the good fight but your evidence was lacking. Some day maybe, I hope, you'll regret every moment you spent here when you could have been hugging your kids. Life is too short to devote so much time to a futile effort. Give it up.


Edited to add quotation marks.

[De_Bunk]

S&S...

No i didnt post those things...I dont know what you mean...

I never posted those words..

No sir not me...

I looked at the video and now believe you....Yes, that unrecognisible shape is conclusive proof of the paranormal and now...after thousands of years, this Earth now has proof absolute of the afterlife...

Now go get the proof that i posted those things....and be quick...

(Sorry again guys...Still bored)

Originally posted by De_Bunk
S&S...

No i didnt post those things...I dont know what you mean...

I never posted those words..

No sir not me...

I looked at the video and now believe you....Yes, that unrecognisible shape is conclusive proof of the paranormal and now...after thousands of years, this Earth now has proof absolute of the afterlife...

Now go get the proof that i posted those things....and be quick...

(Sorry again guys...Still bored)

Hi De-bunk:

Don't worry , you are just another representation of the members of this forum: liers and chickens.
Now you can be satisfied with the attitude of your boss Bidlack (Randi's voice- Randi's Pope) , just fear of the truth.

Do you remember this? iF you don't, it doesn't matter.All boards need persons like you. You are just the exception or do you have the same regrets like the others?

Originally posted by De-Bunk 09/15/02

.." You have got to be one of the biggest, delusional jackasses i have ever read...

You are truly insane....and your father won the award for being Spanish "Idiot F*ckwit" of the year...and it looks like you're trying to win this year..in his honour....

I reckon it was a rocket fired from an F18 to bring down the plane...but the F18 pilot hesitated...and only fired when it was inevitable that the plane was going to impact the Tower...

Yeh...

Thats what it was...."

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

And do you remember my answer to you? You even used my quote in your sig for a while. Is also quoted in another reply you made.

Originally posted De-Bunk 09/16/02

A fine example of S&S humour....

S&S quote:
"The only thing your father won in his life was your mother. You
are the result of that.
Sorry for your mother, she lost twice."


Oh how i laughed....

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


Now is my time to laugh on you all. Losers


Thanks,
S&S

Originally posted by Supercharts


Your words are like arrows piercing my heart. * Be thankful I need not treat you like a wild pig.



[* Not, not really. I just always wanted to say that to someone ]:D


SUPERS**T:

A wild pig is always better than you wild man.

"Yo no estoy de acuerdo con lo que usted dice,
pero me pelearía para que usted pueda decirlo" VOLTAIRE

If you need help just use a virtual tranlator ,internet wild guy.

Or ask or cry again to Bidlack, Harter or Randi.


Thanks,

S&S

Originally posted by Skeptoid

This from a "man of honor" who p*ssed and moaned that all he got was insults, that he preferred frontal debates? Look at yourself Carlos, no one on this board has done more to to bring dishonor to you and your name than you yourself.

It's over, Carlos. You gave it the good fight but your evidence was lacking. Some day maybe, I hope, you'll regret every moment you spent here when you could have been hugging your kids. Life is too short to devote so much time to a futile effort. Give it up.


Edited to add quotation marks.


Skeptoid:

Only losers like YOU ALL (including Bidlack) give up.

Why are you so afraid? Digitized beleivers. LOSERS


Thanks,

S&S

[hal bidlack]

um, not quite sure why the dust up. I simply moved this from banter to the challenge forum. After all, this is about a challenge, I think...? Or at least it was at one point.

Originally posted by bidlack
um, not quite sure why the dust up. I simply moved this from banter to the challenge forum. After all, this is about a challenge, I think...? Or at least it was at one point.

Dr.

You are just afraid. Just because I said and proved you want to lock the thread.
Now you want to hide it.
Your action was just dishonest , you are just afraid of the VIEWS this thread has, and happy about the poor position your fans and beleivers members have.


"Yo no estoy de acuerdo con lo que usted dice,
pero me pelearía para que usted pueda decirlo" VOLTAIRE

Besides Dr. Bidlack you are just Randi's voice (Randi's Pope).

He is still on silence


Thanks,
S&S

[Aoidoi]

Originally posted by bidlack
um, not quite sure why the dust up. I simply moved this from banter to the challenge forum. After all, this is about a challenge, I think...? Or at least it was at one point. I dunno, but S&S is now proceeding to spam every thread in Banter about it. I don't particularly care one way or the other about his thread being moved, I decided about page 2 that he's not worth the time to bother with, but if he's going to throw a childish fit about it I suppose you can move it back for him. Or ban him. Or spank him.

Whatever, he's now made my small ignore list.

[Thanz]

Mr. Swett -

Thank you for removing my quote from your signature. I see that your friend, latinijral, has now put it into his signature. How very mature of your friend.

latinijral, I must insist that you remove my quote from your signature, as I no longer believe that the investigation done by Mr. Harter was dodgy.

Mr. Swett, I am disappointed that you have descended into name calling. You do not explain why anyone here is a loser for believing the evidence of Blue Monk over yourself.

You have claimed that Blue Monk's video that he posted was tricked, but do not say how or in what way it was tricked, and you do not post your version of the clip to show what you asy are the true events. Why should I believe you instead of Blue Monk?

You still have not explained why no other camera has the object on tape. What was wrong with the other cameras, or what was special about the one camera that has it on tape?

All that you have done is repeatedly tell us that you sent an application to the JREF. That, by itself, does not prove anything. Blue Monk has posted actual evidence in this forum, while you have posted none. Is there any reason to believe you rather than Blue Monk? Please give me just one reason.

Originally posted by Aoidoi
I dunno, but S&S is now proceeding to spam every thread in Banter about it. I don't particularly care one way or the other about his thread being moved, I decided about page 2 that he's not worth the time to bother with, but if he's going to throw a childish fit about it I suppose you can move it back for him. Or ban him. Or spank him.

Whatever, he's now made my small ignore list.

Aoidoi:

Spamming what?

I am just giving MY OPINION WITH REASONS the same way this thread was removed.

BAN me or SPANK me? Why don't you better debate with arguments? Or just ignore the HOLE thread.

Thanks,

S&S

Originally posted by Thanz
Mr. Swett -

Thank you for removing my quote from your signature. I see that your friend, latinijral, has now put it into his signature. How very mature of your friend.

latinijral, I must insist that you remove my quote from your signature, as I no longer believe that the investigation done by Mr. Harter was dodgy.

Mr. Swett, I am disappointed that you have descended into name calling. You do not explain why anyone here is a loser for believing the evidence of Blue Monk over yourself.

You have claimed that Blue Monk's video that he posted was tricked, but do not say how or in what way it was tricked, and you do not post your version of the clip to show what you asy are the true events. Why should I believe you instead of Blue Monk?
.

Hi Thanz:

I removed your quote from my signature because I am friendly enough and I know that quote was doing some kind of trauma to you.

Yes Latin is just another friend and in MY way to see life is that all humans are my friends, some will agree with me in some points, some will disagreee with me in another points, but friendship still there.

When people see an attitude to silence this thread first, locked then and finally removed it to a section that has no readers (not like the banter) is easy to understand the position of THE LOSERS.

I just constantly said this: I made an application to the jREF, I received a poor answer (with lies and or mistakes) of Andrew Harter based on a dodgy method of looking and studying a video on an unknown link of internet. Is so simple. The other point is that I am not the author of this thread, is about an affair with my name on it, I came in later and asking Linda if I can defend my position, (check page 1)

Blue Monk's digitized version is HIS version. You and everyone hare is FREE to beleive in HIS digitized version.
I am just another type of skeptic.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.

Besides I like all your favorite rock songs. You don't need to call me Mr. Swett , just call me Carlos if you want. I am just 48 years young.

[rikzilla]

Carlos,

I posted to this thread last month seeking to determine how it could have garnered so many responses. Within 3 posts I was able to determine that like a broken record you merely repeat your silly claims no matter what evidence, or alternative explanation you get.


You and your sock puppet Latin deserve no further attention.

-z

Originally posted by bidlack
um, not quite sure why the dust up. I simply moved this from banter to the challenge forum. After all, this is about a challenge, I think...? Or at least it was at one point.

Simply.....yes It is simply....Why?

Because the majority of the people that visit Randi`s forum prefer the Banter.
Because this thread is the most view of the Banter.
Because this thread shows the contradictions and lies of Randi and his fans.
Because you are worry.


If It is simply, why don`t you send back this thread to the Banter??

Remember that nobody put a gun on the head of the visitor of the Banter and everybody is free to choose his favorite thread.

Originally posted by latinijral


Simply.....yes It is simply....Why?

Because the majority of the people that visit Randi`s forum prefer the Banter.
Because this thread is the most view of the Banter.
Because this thread shows the contradictions and lies of Randi and his fans.
Because you are worry.


If It is simply, why don`t you send back this thread to the Banter??

Remember that nobody put a gun on the head of the visitor of the Banter and everybody is free to choose his favorite thread.


Are you thinking your answers?
or you are very worry?

I am sure of this: Not only the members of the forum deserves respects, but also the guests of this JREF forum.

This "particular" thread with my name on it is really long enough.

There had been 1277 replies , 16941 viewsand 32 pages.

I didn't count the members that wrote here but are really a big number also, some others members I saw them just "reading "the thread at the "who's on line".
But there are also a LOT of views from GUESTS.

I must say now I really apreciate all your replies and views. I also have to deal with your "adjectives" but is a good experience for all of us.

I respect all of you visitors and members in your thoughts about this thread and my person.

I am also sure that what I claimed and replied in this thread is true. I am not changing my position and you know all about it.

You all are free to continue posting here at this thread your opinions and I will analize if that merits an answer from me.

I just want some peace now.
I give my excuses to all the persons or members to whom I attacked in some offensive terms. This go to the administrators too.

Life is beatiful.

Thanks,
S&S

[De_Bunk]

No...you are insane...a fool that has tried to bait this board with total garbage

You think there is something paranormal in the video you have...

Well your a gullible delusional imbecile

Peace my a**..you obnoxious little sh*t...

You and you kook friend Latinijral have made this bed...

You had ample opportunity to end this ridiculous and juvenile claim...but you didnt...

Live your life as the insane fool you are...surrounded by your blurry videos and tin foil hat on....

No peace for you.....

You want peace..you change your name and then come back...

You want peace...you admit to being a total insane joker...an idiot...someone suffering from a mental illness...a total liar...

Anyone of those will suffice...before you will have any kind of respect from me...

You brought all this on yourself...live with the consequences...

De_Bunk

Originally posted by De_Bunk
No...you are insane...a fool that has tried to bait this board with total garbage

De_Bunk


De Bunk`s style and life

HARTER`S PARANORMAL BIRD

PEACE TIME

I am sure of this: Not only the members of the forum deserves respects, but also the guests of this JREF forum.

The administrators "thought" that is better to hide this thread here and took off it from the Banter because of ..... (I better shhhh)

This "particular" thread with my name on it is really long enough.

There had been 1277 replies , more than 17000 views and 33 pages.

I didn't count the members that wrote here but are really a big number also, some others members I saw them just "reading "the thread at the "who's on line".
But there are also a LOT of views from GUESTS.

I must say now I really apreciate all your replies and views. I also have to deal with your "adjectives" but is a good experience for all of us.

I respect all of you visitors and members in your thoughts about this thread and my person.

I am also sure that what I claimed and replied in this thread is true. I am not changing my position and you know all about it.

You all are free to continue posting, here at this thread, your opinions and questions .Please remember that I am not the authr of this thread.

Thanks,
S&S

[hal bidlack]

Carlos,

Couple of things:

first, it was just little 'ole me that moved the thread, no other mod is in anyway responsible.

Second, I begin to doubt your seemingly sincere PMs to me. This post, and a few others, seem deliberately provocative to me. My good feelings about your goals are a tad less, and slipping.

Originally posted by bidlack
Carlos,

Couple of things:

first, it was just little 'ole me that moved the thread, no other mod is in anyway responsible.

Second, I begin to doubt your seemingly sincere PMs to me. This post, and a few others, seem deliberately provocative to me. My good feelings about your goals are a tad less, and slipping.

Dr. Hal Bidlack:

I know that you had your reasons to move this thread from the banter.You didn't like the attention and the views it had there. Nobody asked you, even not the author of this thread, and you know that even the members that don't agree with my position here , said that is very suspicious that movement you did .

I also doubt about your sincerity in "defending me" in the thread " can we smoke a peace pipe". You were not defending me and you know that, you just was defending Blue Monks's digitized version, because JREF needs that no matter if it is faked.

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=261593#post261593post261593

You were not honest enough and I am very frontal to tell you that.

I did what I promised, I created that thread, expressed my "emotions", began to write in some others threads , remove my signature on those threads, etc.

I am Carlos Swett the same person who privated you and that trusted you. You failed.

Thanks,

S&S

[hal bidlack]

sigh...

ok then. whatever.

Originally posted by bidlack
sigh...

ok then. whatever.

Yes; only sighs.

Thanks,

S&S

Originally posted by hal bidlack
sigh...

ok then. whatever.


sigh of worry or afraid???

Originally posted by Thanz

Andrew's 'investigation' seems pretty dodgy as well. We all know that a video on the internet is not likely to be of broadcast quality. I haven't seen the whole video - I just saw the short thing linked to in this thread. But Andrew seems to be saying that it didn't come from behind the tower, so therefore it is not paranormal. Huh? There must be more to this. The apparent speed of the object (again, I just saw the crappy thing linked to) seems to go against the 'bird' hypothesis.

Thanz

Originally posted by latinijral



sigh of worry or afraid???

Latin ijral :

Or maybe they are not prepared to do a fair analysis, I mean with the correct equipments and independent personal.Or they just are internet beleivers.

http://edenex.iespana.es/edenex/analisiswtc.html

Thanks,

S&S

[The Fool]

Originally posted by S&S


Latin ijral :

Or maybe they are not prepared to do a fair analysis, I mean with the correct equipments and independent personal.Or they just are internet beleivers.

http://edenex.iespana.es/edenex/analisiswtc.html

Thanks,

S&S

What would you call a "fair analysis". enlarging each frame and studying it? Its already been done. Face the truth S&S no amount of analysis is ever going to come to any other conclusion than "the smudge on the video can be explained as a number of things but exactly which explanation is correct cannot and never will be provable" Now explain to me how a dark mark on a video frame is "paranormal". The most that anyone could ever say is "nobody knows what it is" It may be a lot of things.

This has been explained to you over and over and over and over and over again. Get over it. Either commence legal action against JREF if you believe you have a case of shut up....

[Wyrd1]

Hey Latin! I still have the SuperVHS. How you doin'?

Carlos is smoking the peacepipe these days but how about you? When are you going to give this up?

I like your photo on your Avatar. Is it you? When was it taken?

A long time ago you pointed out in a very negative manner that my Skeptic's Forum wasn't getting much activity and you were correct. How is your little group doing?

Why did you post member's photo's there?

Why is Randi in silence about YOU?

Is it really wrong to feed Trolls?

Originally posted by Wyrd1
Hey Latin! I still have the SuperVHS. How you doin'?

Carlos is smoking the peacepipe these days but how about you? When are you going to give this up?

I like your photo on your Avatar. Is it you? When was it taken?

A long time ago you pointed out in a very negative manner that my Skeptic's Forum wasn't getting much activity and you were correct. How is your little group doing?

Why did you post member's photo's there?

Why is Randi in silence about YOU?

Is it really wrong to feed Trolls?


Hi Wyrd:

I replied you at the "peacepipe".

Don't forget that James Randi is the best propaganda for trolls.
Just look at Sylvia's commercial at Randi's web page.

Thanks,

S&S

Originally posted by Wyrd1
Hey Latin!

Carlos is smoking the peacepipe these days but how about you? When are you going to give this up?

I like your photo on your Avatar. Is it you? When was it taken?




About the photo in my avatar....He is a my first son making a donation to your leader....and waiting for an "amazing T-s**t" to clean his as*.

[Skeptoid]

Same joke, different thread. Latin, you're an easy foil.

[Wyrd1]

Instead of the pretty balloons you should have bought him toilet paper. Since you'll have buy a Tshirt from JREF and your child may want to get up and leave some day try giving him some of that instead. It's better than bark and leaves and unlike a Tshirt won't clog up your plumbing. That is if you have plumbing. Knowing how stubborn you are

Originally posted by Skeptoid
Same joke, different thread. Latin, you're an easy foil.



And the same analysis about you:


Skeptoid is the mixture between an skeptic and a stupid:


Skeptic + stupid = Skeptoid


I am sure that you are the fool who buy that t-shirt to JREF.

[Skeptoid]

You need to get some new material. Must be the 5th or 6th time you clever fellows have used that one. This is a tough room, the natives are getting restless.

Merry Christmas to all the members and guests of this thread.

Thanks for your time in reading it.

Thanks,

S&S

[Wyrd1]

It's been a whole lot of fun.

Happy New Year to all!

HAPPY NEW YEAR

To all the members and guests that post or read this thread:

My best wishes of a better 2003 (after Christ) Year.

Peace on Earth.


Thanks,

S&S

Carlos...the new pictures are coming soon.

[thaiboxerken]

Artifacts from a news video are not paranormal events.. anyone that wants to try and claim the prize for simply pointing out artifacts on a tape should be placed in an insane asylum.

Yeah, we've covered that on way back around post # 3.

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
Artifacts from a news video are not paranormal events.. anyone that wants to try and claim the prize for simply pointing out artifacts on a tape should be placed in an insane asylum.

Hi thaiboxerken:

So write to James Randi and tell him to don't comment about stupids pictures of "ufos".

This tape was transmmited live to all the world. Is in all the networks and tv stations of the world. And James Randi is still on silence. Why?
Ask him.

Carlos:

With the new pictures I posted, why don`t we start an analysis of the tricked pictures of Blue Monk. Remember that Bid Lack support his tricked pictures and poor resolution video.

He try to erase the object: You can compare:

Here is the album of frames (http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/framesorframes.msnw )

You can use 2 tools:
Filters: http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/framesorframes.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=41
Negative: http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/framesorframes.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=40


Conclution: Blue Monk tryes to erase the paranormal object.


Compares with these:

http://sc.communities.msn.com/tn/71/80/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/7/47.jpg

[MRC_Hans]

The moment of impact of the second plane was filmed from several places. The real proof that something was there would be to show it in some of the other pictures/videos, taken from other positions. Then it would be possible to find, with reasonable certainty, the position, course, speed, and size of the alleged object.

As this must have occured to you, I take it that those other shots dont show anything?

Hans

[thaiboxerken]

Originally posted by S&S


Hi thaiboxerken:

So write to James Randi and tell him to don't comment about stupids pictures of "ufos".

This tape was transmmited live to all the world. Is in all the networks and tv stations of the world. And James Randi is still on silence. Why?
Ask him.

If he's silent, why should I write to him to stay silent? These artifacts on the video are hardly spaceships or ghosts or lemmings.

[hal bidlack]

It's funny, but Carlos still doesn't get why this who pile of nonsense is so offensive. He's managed to pretend to not understand the facts of what it takes to apply for the prize (e.g., saying IN ADVANCE what power he claims).

What is truly offensive is the manner in which he trivializes the deaths of 3000 people.

Does he claim that Al Qaeda didn't crash airplanes into the WTC and the Pentagon (as to the latter, I can testify that they did first hand)? Were the aliens "flying through the building" at the moment of impact just to show off? It's simply bizarre, thoughtless, and cruel.

I have wondered, from time to time, if Carlos/Latin are even able to understand the rules of the prize. He consistantly replies with the same tired re-posts that have nothing to do with the rules. But clearly he is a fairly smart fellow, and so I admit that I am at a loss to explain it. His private PMs to me have been touching and warm, and his posts (e.g., about Blue Monk) are mean and shallow. I just don't get it.

Originally posted by hal bidlack
It's funny, but Carlos still doesn't get why this who pile of nonsense is so offensive. He's managed to pretend to not understand the facts of what it takes to apply for the prize (e.g., saying IN ADVANCE what power he claims).

What is truly offensive is the manner in which he trivializes the deaths of 3000 people.

Does he claim that Al Qaeda didn't crash airplanes into the WTC and the Pentagon (as to the latter, I can testify that they did first hand)? Were the aliens "flying through the building" at the moment of impact just to show off? It's simply bizarre, thoughtless, and cruel.

I have wondered, from time to time, if Carlos/Latin are even able to understand the rules of the prize. He consistantly replies with the same tired re-posts that have nothing to do with the rules. But clearly he is a fairly smart fellow, and so I admit that I am at a loss to explain it. His private PMs to me have been touching and warm, and his posts (e.g., about Blue Monk) are mean and shallow. I just don't get it.

Hi Mr. Hal Bidlack:

You know that in my application to the challenge I wrote my point about that tragic success. Of course I disagreee with ANY kind of brutal attacks between humans or to nature. I didn't brought that subject to this forum. I even didn't create this thread.

According to your reply it seems that if that paranormal object would appear at the final of the superbowl, you JREF will comment about it.

Try to separate (I know that is hard to you, I understand that)the paranormal event from the criminal attack you suffered.In the rules of the challenge there was nothing about an "special" event.

I didn't even challenged the JREF for the money per se(read the letter to James Randi), I just wanted to be honest with you and of course I wished the same from JREF, but an answer that you studied the video at the internet is really a poor method.

What about the mockery of Rwald with his digitized version?

Remember I send JREF the referntial tape. I never POSTED here that tape. I am so sad about the death of inocent people (ecuadorians in the list) not only in that criminal attack but also in the other side of the world lyke a consequence of irrational positions.

So please Hal, don't make assumptions about my feelings. I am a peaceful man. I hate wars and terrorism.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.
It is not funny to me.

[thaiboxerken]

You hate death of innocents.. and yet you tried to capitalize on the 9/11 newscast tape. Hmmmmm...

You will not listen to reason or rational explanations of the artifacts that are on your tape. This shows that you are just a deluded believer that won't let facts stand between you and your beliefs.

Not only that, you are an arrogant and egotistical person. Do you really think you are so much better than the rest of the world that you can pick out a "UFO" in a broadcast that has been seen world wide and yet no one else did? Do you not think that the news editors saw them and dismissed them for the artifacts that they are? Go back to the woods, computers are too much technology for your simple mind.

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
You hate death of innocents.. and yet you tried to capitalize on the 9/11 newscast tape. Hmmmmm...

You will not listen to reason or rational explanations of the artifacts that are on your tape. This shows that you are just a deluded believer that won't let facts stand between you and your beliefs.

Not only that, you are an arrogant and egotistical person. Do you really think you are so much better than the rest of the world that you can pick out a "UFO" in a broadcast that has been seen world wide and yet no one else did? Do you not think that the news editors saw them and dismissed them for the artifacts that they are? Go back to the woods, computers are too much technology for your simple mind.

Hi thaiboxerken:

Capitalize what? The truth?

This is part of an e-mail I send to James Randi after he wrote me this :"What in hell are you raving about".just because I wrote to him and asked for my application.

I AM GIVING YOU A SECOND CHANCE. REMEMBER ALSO THAT I DON´T DO IT FOR THE MONEY ,per se; THE MILLION DOLLAR PAPERS WERE GOING TO SHARE BETWEEN THE VICTIMS OF THE TRAGEDY OF NEW YORK AND THE POOR PEOPLE OF MY COUNTRY ( BUILDING SCHOOLS OR SOMETHING LYKE THAT ).REMEMBER: I AM AN ARTIST AND MONEY IS NOT MY PRIORITY. ! LA VERDAD ANTE TODO ¡

I WILL WAIT FOR YOUR ANSWER.

CARLOS SWETT

3 JUNE, 2002

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

If you are curious about my position to the money read the letter I send to him with my application to the challenge:page 1
http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/oficialchallenge.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=14

This is page 2:

http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/oficialchallenge.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=13

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

Is easy to speculate when you don't know the facts.

I only received from them (JREF) an official answer from Andrew Harter (with the aprooval of Randi) of his "study frame by frame" of a video ON INTERNET. Yes , they did that poor method.

Now ask them why they are still on silence about my application.

Thanks,

S&S

[thaiboxerken]

You are missing the point, S&S.. you have no valid claim. Calling an artifact on a video "UFO" does not qualify for the JREF prize. You are a FOOL and IDIOT.

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
You are missing the point, S&S.. you have no valid claim. Calling an artifact on a video "UFO" does not qualify for the JREF prize. You are a FOOL and IDIOT.

Hi Thaiboxerken:

And what about the "UFOS" in pictures and videos that James Randi ALWAYS comments about them?

Where in my application I wrote it was an UFO?

The video was broadcasted LIVE to all the world.

You are missing the point, but I will not call you FOOL and IDIOT, just a Randi's fanatic.

Thanks,

S&S

[thaiboxerken]

And what about the "UFOS" in pictures and videos that James Randi ALWAYS comments about them?

So all you want is Randi to comment on the mundicity of your claim?

Where in my application I wrote it was an UFO?

Whatever you call it, it's not supernatural.

The video was broadcasted LIVE to all the world.

Yes, and it was taped as well. What makes you think you are so much more observant than all of the professional editors that have seen the tape several times?


You are missing the point, but I will not call you FOOL and IDIOT, just a Randi's fanatic.

The point is, you are upset that no person will take your foolish claims seriously. I suggest you get therapy.

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
And what about the "UFOS" in pictures and videos that James Randi ALWAYS comments about them?

So all you want is Randi to comment on the mundicity of your claim?

Where in my application I wrote it was an UFO?

Whatever you call it, it's not supernatural.

The video was broadcasted LIVE to all the world.

Yes, and it was taped as well. What makes you think you are so much more observant than all of the professional editors that have seen the tape several times?


You are missing the point, but I will not call you FOOL and IDIOT, just a Randi's fanatic.

The point is, you are upset that no person will take your foolish claims seriously. I suggest you get therapy.

Kickboxer:

A) Yes. Is not that Randi's job? Why he is still on silence?

B)Just I did it first. I have no compromise, only the truth.

The point is that you are still replying me and you get answers, not insults. Maybe you need the therapy.

Thanks,

S&S

[thaiboxerken]

A) Yes. Is not that Randi's job? Why he is still on silence?

Is it his job to state that your "claim" is nonsense? Do you not think that his silence is a statement itself? I suggest you go complain to his boss.


B)Just I did it first. I have no compromise, only the truth.

What truth? You saw a strange artifact in a video, many have also seen it after you pointed it out.. you seem to be the only one that sees "paranormal" activity in it. Do you think you have some divine knowledge that no other person has?


The point is that you are still replying me and you get answers, not insults. Maybe you need the therapy.

Your very claim is an insult to the intelligence of the human race. I'll tell you what, go show your tape to a psychologist and see what happens.

[Pyrrho]

Carlos Swett's claim has already been examined by the JREF and dismissed. It is nonsense.

Your claim is dead, Carlos. It has been dead for months and months. Come April, it will have been dead for a full year. Nothing you do will bring it to life.

I suggest that you and latinijral quit crying about it and find something constructive to do with your time.

Whiners...

[thaiboxerken]

Yep, I will let it die as well. I am placing these fools on ignore.

Originally posted by thaiboxerken

A) Yes. Is not that Randi's job? Why he is still on silence?

Is it his job to state that your "claim" is nonsense? Do you not think that his silence is a statement itself? I suggest you go complain to his boss.



The goal of JREF (http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/oficialchallenge.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=18)
http://sc.communities.msn.com/tn/71/80/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/4/12.jpg

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by latinijral


The goal of JREF (http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/oficialchallenge.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=18)
http://sc.communities.msn.com/tn/71/80/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/4/12.jpg

Apparently you genuinely suppose that the JREF has to pay you the million dollar prize just because you say that your copy of a TV broadcast is evidence of the paranormal...well, you are in error. It does not work that way. That specific line of text in that paragraph does not imply any sort of contract or guarantee that the prize money will be paid just because someone makes a claim and sends in dubious "evidence". You must follow the official rules.

This has been explained to you before.

Other people have tried the same stupid trick and have failed, just as you have failed, and will continue to fail.

Originally posted by pyrrho2000
Carlos Swett's claim has already been examined by the JREF and dismissed. It is nonsense.

Your claim is dead, Carlos. It has been dead for months and months. Come April, it will have been dead for a full year. Nothing you do will bring it to life.

I suggest that you and latinijral quit crying about it and find something constructive to do with your time.

Whiners...

Hi Pyrrho:

Since you are a skeptic:
Are you sure that my claim was examined by the JREF? You only have my replies, they can be false, the e-mails too.

Where did you READ that my claim was examined since James Randi is still on silence about it?

If my claim is death: why are you still posting about it?

It seems to me that you are just crying, because you are intelligent and were not nominated as the poster of the year.

I just put facts.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.
Only this quote deserves Randi's answer: "strange artifact"

originally posted by thaiboxerken
What truth? You saw a strange artifact in a video, many have also seen it after you pointed it out.. you seem to be the only one that sees "paranormal" activity in it. Do you think you have some divine knowledge that no other person has?

Originally posted by pyrrho2000


Apparently you genuinely suppose that the JREF has to pay you the million dollar prize just because you say that your copy of a TV broadcast is evidence of the paranormal...well, you are in error. It does not work that way. That specific line of text in that paragraph does not imply any sort of contract or guarantee that the prize money will be paid just because someone makes a claim and sends in dubious "evidence". You must follow the official rules.

This has been explained to you before.

Other people have tried the same stupid trick and have failed, just as you have failed, and will continue to fail.


The million dollar prize to me????

I want your comment about not only the specific line, also of this:


"The Foundation is committed to providing reliable information about paranormal claims. It both supports and conducts original research into such claims"

Where is that information????????????????????


The JREF does not involve itself in the testing procedure, other than helping to design the protocol and approving the conditions under which a test will take place

Is this true?????????????????????????????????

MORE LIES OF JREF

[davidhorman]

S&S:

According to your reply it seems that if that paranormal object would appear at the final of the superbowl, you JREF will comment about it.

If this same object had appeared on an ordinary, boring videotape of the superbowl, no-one would comment about it. You probably wouldn't have noticed it. I think you would have at least some and recognise it as a bird, as most of us have done, with considerable supporting evidence.

But put it against a backdrop of horrific cruelty and suffering, and suddenly is must be paranormal. Why is it so impossible to believe that this was a bird? In all likelihood it was startled into flight by the second impact, arriving in shot a few seconds later.

Your evidence has been weighed, measured, and found to be wanting.

Latinijral:

The JREF does not involve itself in the testing procedure, other than helping to design the protocol and approving the conditions under which a test will take place

Is this true?

(superfluous question marks removed)

Yes, but irrelevant. There's nothing to test, only opinions to be stated.

It is just barely possible that this was a paranormal object. Whatever evidence there is for this conclusion, it is far outweighed by the evidence against it. It's even far outweighed by the specific evidence that it's a bird.

David

Originally posted by davidhorman
S&S:



If this same object had appeared on an ordinary, boring videotape of the superbowl, no-one would comment about it. You probably wouldn't have noticed it. I think you would have at least some and recognise it as a bird, as most of us have done, with considerable supporting evidence.



Latinijral:



(superfluous question marks removed)

Yes, but irrelevant. There's nothing to test, only opinions to be stated.


David

Hi David:

The James Randi's week's commentaries are FULL of analysis of stupid pictures and videos, unknown pictures and videos.

Now you know that is possible to have a frame by frame with NO JUMPS on it. Well , not at an internet tape.

Keep on going with you beleifs.

Thanks,

S&S

[davidhorman]

The James Randi's week's commentaries are FULL of analysis of stupid pictures and videos, unknown pictures and videos.

Can you give one example, and the reasons why it is relevant to this discussion?

Now you know that is possible to have a frame by frame with NO JUMPS on it. Well , not at an internet tape.

Blue Monk has already supplied us with an AVI file containing all frames/fields.

David

Originally posted by davidhorman


Can you give one example, and the reasons why it is relevant to this discussion?



Blue Monk has already supplied us with an AVI file containing all frames/fields.

David

Hi David:

Just go to his page, the week's commentaries and type UFO in search. There are "ONLY" 49 matches (49 weeks). Enjoy yourself.

Yes Blue Monk supplied you his own digitized version.
Is just a "little" different from the one that was broaccasted.


Thanks,

S&S

[davidhorman]

Just go to his page, the week's commentaries and type UFO in search. There are "ONLY" 49 matches (49 weeks). Enjoy yourself.

I'm guessing that most of those couldn't be dismissed quite as easily as saying "it's a bird."

That, and if a claim is made that makes the news, Randi will have much more reason to comment on it.

Since you've only managed to convince two people, you're probably not worth his time.

David

[Wyrd1]

News Flash!

Tireless researcher that I am I have found the actual bird in the video. His name is Randy Robin and he lives under the eaves of a building on west 54th street. Here is what he has to say about Latinijral and Carlos' attempts to bilk the Amazing one of a million dollars:

"Cheep!"

Q. What do you think of the cheesey pictures Latinijral posts at his website purporting to show you being a hatshaped object?

"Cheep."

Randy has spoken.

The question is how do you distinguish between the validity of one BS claim and another? If Latinijral and Carlos live in Fantasyland what is their address?

Originally posted by davidhorman


I'm guessing that most of those couldn't be dismissed quite as easily as saying "it's a bird."

That, and if a claim is made that makes the news, Randi will have much more reason to comment on it.

Since you've only managed to convince two people, you're probably not worth his time.

David

Hi David:

Keep on guessing.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S. Read again the application, the "news" part. Is on page 2.

Originally posted by Wyrd1
News Flash!

Tireless researcher that I am I have found the actual bird in the video. His name is Randy Robin and he lives under the eaves of a building on west 54th street. Here is what he has to say about Latinijral and Carlos' attempts to bilk the Amazing one of a million dollars:

"Cheep!"

Q. What do you think of the cheesey pictures Latinijral posts at his website purporting to show you being a hatshaped object?

"Cheep."

Randy has spoken.

The question is how do you distinguish between the validity of one BS claim and another? If Latinijral and Carlos live in Fantasyland what is their address?

Now ask the other Randi.

Thanks,

S&S

THE CLOCK IS TICKING....

[Pyrrho]

My research indicates that the bird which appears as a fast-moving blur in certain video clips of the terrorist attack at the World Trade Center is none other than Sturnus vulgaris, the European Starling:

http://www.wbu.com/chipperwoods/photos/estarling.htm

http://www.gsmfc.org/nis/nis/Sturnus_vulgaris.html

http://www.inra.fr/Internet/Produits/HYPPZ/RAVAGEUR/6stuvul.htm

http://www.abdn.ac.uk/~nhi158/efficiency.htm

http://biology.umt.edu/flightlab/abstracts/BWTSTARL.htm


Their flight at all speeds consisted of alternating flapping and non-flapping phases. Wing postures during non-flapping phases included glides, partial-bounds and bounds. Glides were performed proportionally more often within each speed and were longer in duration than either of the other two non-flapping postures, but the percentage of bounds increased markedly with increasing flight speed. The shift from flap-gliding at slow speeds towards flapbounding at fast speeds was consistent with reducing mean power output relative to continuous flapping.


The movement of the blurred object in the aforementioned video clips is consistent with the flight descriptions quoted above.

This link shows both the bounding-type flight path and the undulating flight path:

http://www.biology.leeds.ac.uk/staff/jmvr/Flight/PWV/index1.htm

My own field observations show that starlings do not flap continuously during flight; the birds flap to gain speed, and then "dive" for short period before flapping again. This results in an undulating flight pattern, as illustrated below. This undulating movement is seen in the aforementioned video clips; tracking the blurred object as it enters the frame and travels roughly diagonally across the image shows that it does move in the typical starling flight path.

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Pyrrho , finally you identified YOUR bird. I knew it you can do it.

Now go ask the prize at the American BIRD Watchers.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.

It still a paranormal bird, it dissapears in THAT SPECIAL frame. You know that.

[Pyrrho]

Carlos, you do not have the original recording. You cannot say with certainty that the bird vanished, because you cannot eliminate the possibility that the recording skips a frame or two at that point.

Also, others have explained quite clearly how the bright background could have washed out the blurred bird in the foreground.

Your claim is still dead.

Originally posted by pyrrho2000
Carlos, you do not have the original recording. You cannot say with certainty that the bird vanished, because you cannot eliminate the possibility that the recording skips a frame or two at that point.

Also, others have explained quite clearly how the bright background could have washed out the blurred bird in the foreground.

Your claim is still dead.

Hi Pyrrho :

Your "stumus vulgaris"bird assumption is dead. In only one reply. Poor bird, is beautiful.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.
And Harter studied it at the internet. I did not.

Originally posted by pyrrho2000
My research indicates that the bird which appears as a fast-moving blur in certain video clips of the terrorist attack at the World Trade Center is none other than Sturnus vulgaris, the European Starling:



The "paranormal bird" has a name:
Sturnus vulgaris (copyrighted by pyrrho2000)

Originally posted by Wyrd1
News Flash!

Tireless researcher that I am I have found the actual bird in the video. His name is Randy Robin and he lives under the eaves of a building on west 54th street. Here is what he has to say about Latinijral and Carlos' attempts to bilk the Amazing one of a million dollars:

"Cheep!"

Q. What do you think of the cheesey pictures Latinijral posts at his website purporting to show you being a hatshaped object?

"Cheep."

Randy has spoken.

The question is how do you distinguish between the validity of one BS claim and another? If Latinijral and Carlos live in Fantasyland what is their address?

Congratulations Sylvia Wyrd:

You have the power to talk with "dead paranormal birds".

Are you going to be at Larry King??????

Wyrd: be careful if Randi read this, he can put a new clock in his web page(Wyrd`s clock update), no matter if you don`t challenge him like Sylvia Browne.

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by latinijral


The "paranormal bird" has a name:
Sturnus vulgaris (copyrighted by pyrrho2000)

I do not hold the copyright on the name Sturnus vulgaris, but otherwise you are correct.

Originally posted by pyrrho2000


I do not hold the copyright on the name Sturnus vulgaris, but otherwise you are correct.

Hi Pyrrho:

According to your words is a "paranormal bird". Bingo.


Thanks,

S&S

[Wyrd1]

Ha! Ha! Sylvia Wyrd! Oh what rapier like wit from Lawyerboy Latinijral.

Yes it is true I am even now speaking with that dead paranormal bird and he's saying something about the letter O. Does the letter O mean anything to anyone in the audience? (Points at one particularly manical looking person clutching a picture of his son on the potty) Yes you sir!

"Why is Randi in silence?"

The bird is telling me because its O...O...O... OVER! Yes that's what he's saying! Because your claim is over!

Thank you all very much and tune in next week.

(PS Randy the Robin is now having an identity crisis after the recent evelation that he is fact a dead Starling. Tune into the next episode of the Pet Psychic to see how Dr Phil resolves the problem.)

Originally posted by Wyrd1


"Why is Randi in silence?"

The bird is telling me because its O...O...O... OVER! Yes that's what he's saying! Because your claim is over!




Where did you read that my claim is over? At Randi's commentaries? Where?

According to your words I am a liar, so where did you read it?


Thanks,

S&S

[Wyrd1]

I am in direct communication with a dead parrot (Robin Starling whatever) who tells me your claim is over. Otherwise I have only your word that Harter has officially denied your claim with Randi's approval. Here's a quote from one of your posts.

" only received from them (JREF) an official answer from Andrew Harter (with the aprooval of Randi)"

According to my words I am calling you a liar. Perhaps I shouldn't take your word for it?

From: "JREF"
To: "Carlos Swett"
Subject: RE: JAMES RANDI´S CLOCK UPDATE (9 DAYS)
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 15:00:44 -0400

We have received your application and video tape. I've seen this tape before and pointed out what was taking place to others.
You have made two assumptions, one following the other. Both are incorrect.
Your first assumption is that the object comes from behind the second tower.
This is not the case. I've gone frame by frame through a copy of this video that's available on the Internet. You can clearly see that the object is IN FRONT OF THE TOWERS when you look at it frame by frame. The object is dark and difficult to see at some points against the smoke, but it is there. A bird could certainly be the culprit.

You have no claim. There is nothing supernatural taking place.

Andrew Harter
Researcher
James Randi Educational Foundation
201 SE 12th Street
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
Phone (954) 467-1112

Even though you broke faith with me after offering to smoke the peace pipe (As you did with all of JREF) I am still willing to make a peace offering to you. I am willing to give you the bird.

Vaya con Dios.

Originally posted by Wyrd1
I am in direct communication with a dead parrot (Robin Starling whatever) who tells me your claim is over. Otherwise I have only your word that Harter has officially denied your claim with Randi's approval. Here's a quote from one of your posts.

" only received from them (JREF) an official answer from Andrew Harter (with the aprooval of Randi)"

According to my words I am calling you a liar. Perhaps I shouldn't take your word for it?

From: "JREF"
To: "Carlos Swett"
Subject: RE: JAMES RANDI´S CLOCK UPDATE (9 DAYS)
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 15:00:44 -0400

We have received your application and video tape. I've seen this tape before and pointed out what was taking place to others.
You have made two assumptions, one following the other. Both are incorrect.
Your first assumption is that the object comes from behind the second tower.
This is not the case. I've gone frame by frame through a copy of this video that's available on the Internet. You can clearly see that the object is IN FRONT OF THE TOWERS when you look at it frame by frame. The object is dark and difficult to see at some points against the smoke, but it is there. A bird could certainly be the culprit.

You have no claim. There is nothing supernatural taking place.

Andrew Harter
Researcher
James Randi Educational Foundation
201 SE 12th Street
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
Phone (954) 467-1112

Even though you broke faith with me after offering to smoke the peace pipe (As you did with all of JREF) I am still willing to make a peace offering to you. I am willing to give you the bird.

Vaya con Dios.


Wyrd:

You don't get it.

Since I am a liar (according to your words) and THAT e-mail is just another post I did , how are you so sure that is true?

Did you have an official commentarie from the other side? (Randi or the JREF). Where did you read that my claim is over? Did you understand now? O K , ask your bird.

Thanks,

S&S

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by S&S


Where did you read that my claim is over?

Latinijral was kind enough to re-post copies of your email correspondence with Randi and the JREF:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=296940#post296940

Here is where your claim ended:


From: "James Randi"
Reply-To: "James Randi"
To: "Carlos Swett"
CC: "Andrew Harter"
Subject: Re: REFRESHING YOUR MEMORY
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 16:47:19 -0400

Andrew made the right decision, with my approval. What you presented is nothing mysterious.

Your application is closed.

James Randi

Originally posted by pyrrho2000


Latinijral was kind enough to re-post copies of your email correspondence with Randi and the JREF:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=296940#post296940

Here is where your claim ended:



Hi pyrrho:

Are you talking to your bird too?

Those e-mails could be faked, since you consider us(latinijral and I) like liars.

Where did you read from Randi or the JREF that I made the challenge and that my application or claim was not valid or ended?.

Answer please.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.

And don't forget the method used by Harter.

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by S&S


Hi pyrrho:

Are you talking to your bird too?

Those e-mails could be faked, since you consider us(latinijral and I) like liars.

Where did you read from Randi or the JREF that I made the challenge and that my application or claim was not valid or ended?.

Answer please.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.

And don't forget the method used by Harter.

:eek:

Carlos, in the first and second pages of this 34-page thread, you yourself posted what you claimed was the text of emails from Harter and Randi. You commented on those texts; you used them as the basis for supporting your complaints that the JREF had not properly examined your claim. I suppose you're trying to be sarcastic by saying those emails could be fakes, but if you insist upon such a statement, you'd be calling yourself a liar.

If the email from Randi is genuine, then your application was closed, and your claim was ended at that time.

If the email from Randi is an invention of you or latinijral and is not genuine, then you and/or latinijral are a couple of liars, by your own admission.

If all of your posting is an effort to get Randi to mention you in his Commentary, or some other public mention, I am quite certain that your efforts will have been in vain.

What a waste of bandwidth...I think I'll do the JREF a service and leave you alone.

Originally posted by pyrrho2000


:eek:

Carlos, in the first and second pages of this 34-page thread, you yourself posted what you claimed was the text of emails from Harter and Randi. You commented on those texts; you used them as the basis for supporting your complaints that the JREF had not properly examined your claim. I suppose you're trying to be sarcastic by saying those emails could be fakes, but if you insist upon such a statement, you'd be calling yourself a liar.

If the email from Randi is genuine, then your application was closed, and your claim was ended at that time.

If the email from Randi is an invention of you or latinijral and is not genuine, then you and/or latinijral are a couple of liars, by your own admission.

If all of your posting is an effort to get Randi to mention you in his Commentary, or some other public mention, I am quite certain that your efforts will have been in vain.

What a waste of bandwidth...I think I'll do the JREF a service and leave you alone.

Hi Pyrrho:
You are a skeptic.

According to your reply you are admiting that you NEVER saw a word about me in Randi's commenataries.

So you beleive in me.

Randi's still on silence . Why?

Thanks,

S&S

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by S&S


Hi Pyrrho:
You are a skeptic.

According to your reply you are admiting that you NEVER saw a word about me in Randi's commenataries.

So you beleive in me.

Randi's still on silence . Why?

Thanks,

S&S

Yes, it is true that I never saw a word about you in Randi's commentaries.

No, I do not believe in you.

I cannot speak for Randi, but I can guess that Randi has had nothing to say about you or your claim because your claim was examined and promptly dismissed. Also, your claim was just one of hundreds of nonsense claims, and Randi cannot possibly be expected to mention them all in his commentaries.

Like it or not, Carlos, your claim was insignificant. It did not and does not merit special mention by Randi.

I've wasted enough time on this. Farewell.

Originally posted by pyrrho2000


Yes, it is true that I never saw a word about you in Randi's commentaries.

No, I do not believe in you.




Hi Pyrrho:

You never saw a word of Randi and YES you beleive in me , your assumption is based in the e-mails I posted, therefore you know I posted the truth: Harter gave me an oficial answer with lies or missinterpretations based in the poor method he did

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.

Farewell? I doubt that, you know how many members said that before and returned? Ask Whodini, he likes to counts those facts.

[Wyrd1]

Hey Carlos! My Bird wants to know if your pants are still on fire?

I believe in you.

You are my hero.

Randy the Robinwannabe wants to thank you for nearly making him famous.

Why is Latinijral in silence?

Originally posted by Wyrd1
Hey Carlos! My Bird wants to know if your pants are still on fire?

I believe in you.

You are my hero.

Randy the Robinwannabe wants to thank you for nearly making him famous.

Why is Latinijral in silence?

Wyrd:

Please take this reply as easy as you can.

I am straight.
But you are also free in your sexual inclinations, and I will respct that.
Now try to be more.......whatever.


Thanks,

S&S

Hey Pyrro:

You forgot to comment about this:

I want your comment about not only the specific line, also of this:


"The Foundation is committed to providing reliable information about paranormal claims. It both supports and conducts original research into such claims"

Where is that information????????????????????


The JREF does not involve itself in the testing procedure, other than helping to design the protocol and approving the conditions under which a test will take place

Is this true?????????????????????????????????

MORE LIES OF JREF

IS BLUE MONK A LIAR?


Sorry Blue Monk, but the evidence shows you like a tricker liar, sorry for your fans too.

Do you remember this picture that you posted:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?s=&postid=298539

If you put your picture in negative tool you can see something "amazing":

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?s=&postid=298548

Also you can see the "tricked" using filters:
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?s=&postid=298552

If you compares your tricked with this one, you can see an "amazing" difference:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?s=&postid=298559

[Wyrd1]

Carlos, get over yourself. I am not gay and if I were I doubt you'd be my type. I said you were my hero. How in the hell can even a multi delusional non english speaking freak like you get a Gay thing out of that?

You've been inhaling far too many paint fumes. Try wearing a respirator and perhaps your mind will clear up and you can see the birds and the trees again. Whoops! I said the B word! Sorry about that! You can't see birds only "paranormal" objects. How pointlessly cruel of me to mention them to you?

Latinijral is still busy trying desperately to get someone to believe Blue Monk tricked up his photos. What a sad little person? Maybe next time you come to dinner your wife will let you sit at the grownup table. Until then keep up the good work.

Originally posted by Wyrd1
Carlos, get over yourself. I am not gay and if I were I doubt you'd be my type. I said you were my hero. How in the hell can even a multi delusional non english speaking freak like you get a Gay thing out of that?




Wyrd:

Well, if you said so. I trust you.
Anyway there is nothing wrong being gay. Is just a choise.

Keep on going.

Thanks,

S&S

[Wyrd1]

Well, thanks for your support.

You are right, being gay is just a choice. It isn't mine or your either. Not that it matters.

Originally posted by Wyrd1

You are right, being gay is just a choice. It isn't mine or your either. Not that it matters.

WYrd:

Did "your bird" told you that?

Now go and see the kind of video that your leader, Jeff Corey and CF Larsen are most worried and that deserves commentaries in their skeptic's web pages:
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/show...8680#post298680

Thanks,

S&S

[Wyrd1]

Hey Buttmuch! You makin fun a muh Bird? Why I otta!


'WYrd:

Did "your bird" told you that?"

You told me that too but your memory isn't any better than your eyesight. You've been watching too many crappy TVs or else you're using lead based paint.

I mean that in a nice way.

Originally posted by Wyrd1
Hey Buttmuch! You makin fun a muh Bird? Why I otta!


'WYrd:

Did "your bird" told you that?"

You told me that too but your memory isn't any better than your eyesight. You've been watching too many crappy TVs or else you're using lead based paint.

I mean that in a nice way.

Wyrd :

Please answer:

Do you think this video deserves OFFICIAL commentaries of Randi, Jeff Corey, CF LARSEN and similars?
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/show...8680#post298680

Why?

Thanks,
S&S

[Skeptoid]

Originally posted by S&S


Wyrd :

Please answer:

Do you think this video deserves OFFICIAL commentaries of Randi, Jeff Corey, CF LARSEN and similars?
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/show...8680#post298680

Why?

Thanks,
S&S

YOur link no work. Is based in poor method. Are you afraid? Why are you on silence?

Originally posted by Skeptoid


YOur link no work. Is based in poor method. Are you afraid? Why are you on silence?

Skeptoid:

The link worked 2 days ago. Is a thread at the banter. Created by Jeff Corey, member of NYASk

JREF Forums > JREF Topics > JREF Banter > Orbs videotaped at stripper joint

Try this:http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11930

Or this COMMENTARY at this SKEPTIC page from CF Larsen from the SAME topic:

http://www.nyask.com/ghoststripclub.htm


Now, join the analysis of THAT video. Then answer the question.

Thanks,

S&S

Originally posted by S&S


Skeptoid:

The link worked 2 days ago. Is a thread at the banter. Created by Jeff Corey, member of NYASk

JREF Forums > JREF Topics > JREF Banter > Orbs videotaped at stripper joint

Try this:http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11930

Or this COMMENTARY at this SKEPTIC page from CF Larsen from the SAME topic:

http://www.nyask.com/ghoststripclub.htm


Now, join the analysis of THAT video. Then answer the question.

Thanks,

S&S

Carlos:

This "skeptics" can analyze videos:

Ghosts in the Parking Lot?
by Claus Larsen
On January 7th, 2003, I was cordially invited as a board member of NYASk by Reuter TV to investigate a security tape that alledgedly showed a ghost in the parking lot of a New Jersey strip club.

Don't say that the life of a skeptic is dull!



Alas, no ghosts. There were a couple of different segments, taken at various times, but they were less than convincing. Blurs, jittery movements, nothing clear whatsoever.

The recording itself wasn't the best quality. It was a time-lapse recording, with maybe 5-10 frames per second. Very jittery. Black and white. Extremely dark.

In one segment, it was obvious that the light was extremely close to the lens. It never got behind any object in the parking lot and was extremely jitterish. The camera in this segment was placed on a roof, where access was easy. A guy with a pole, a fishing line and a paper cutout could have done it.

In another, the owner went out on the parking lot several times, because he couldn't see the light he was seeing on his camera. Since the camera was high up, the light could simply be not down in the parking lot, but higher up in the air. Why would something invisible to the human eye show up on camera? When at last the owner looked at it (he could see where to look when he got back to the camera), he said that it became nervous (or something to that effect, I can't remember the word) and disappeared quickly. The light could well be a flashlight or a laser pointer in this case.

The tape itself was a video tape of a computer recording directly from the camera. I was told that the security camera sent the signals directly into the computer - which makes sense, in this day and age. Who wants to fiddle with magnetic tapes, when you can just dump it on a harddisk and delete it, if nothing happened? I'll buy that explanation.

However, this does raise the question of whether the recording could have been tampered with. At least in one segment, three frames showed something that could easily have been a white smear placed by a graphics program. No movement, just three frames with a white smear on each. Nothing could be recognized.

Even if no tampering took place, I couldn't get a copy of the file itself, which could have enabled me to investigate further. It's a pity, but this is often the case.

The owner was trying all the time to tell us where the light was, even though it was clear that at least in one segment, the light was not as far away as he said it was. He also said at one time that it looked like a profile - if so, the ghost must have been severely disfigured! I couldn't recognize anything.

It looked like a hoax, but I am not sure if the owner is in on it or not. Someone could be pulling his leg. Or not.

I was also interviewed, and the segment will be offered to TV stations - probably as a filler. It hardly qualifies as prime time material.

[Wyrd1]

We'd analyse your video but none us have access to professional studios (with real sh***y monitors, apparently.) We've been going round and round about this but why should any of bother to go to a studio and analyse anything? You and Carlos WILL NEVER BE SATISFIED unless Randi says you were right which you were not.
Randi has dismissed your improper claim and I would psychically predict he is never going to end his silence about your dismissed claim. Using a basic mathematical formula we get D which is your dissatisfaction times R for Randi's concern equals zero. 2D x R=0.
Since we know your dissastisfaction is great R must equal zero. 2D times 0 equals 0. Science in action.
Take a siesta and go out and resume whatever you think of as your real life.
Face it, muchachos, you aren't going anywhere with this nonsense. Not now not ever.
But feel free to keep playing. 35 pages ain't so much.

Originally posted by Wyrd1
We'd analyse your video but none us have access to professional studios (with real sh***y monitors, apparently.)


Wyrd:

Yes , YOU had analyzed a digitized faked version of the video in this forum.

James Randi does have access to proffesional studios and tv stations. I did it.

But Andrew Harter just analyzed another unknown digitized version on the internet.

Thanks,

S&S

[Wyrd1]

"James Randi does have access to proffesional studios and tv stations. I did it.

But Andrew Harter just analyzed another unknown digitized version on the internet."

You did not contact JREF before you sent the video. This would have served to confirm that the conditions which must be met for your challenge would be to analyse the events on professional equipment. Since you made no such condition beforehand you really have to valid complaint.

It's Randi's challenge. If you want to win the challenge then you must meet his conditions. You did not do that. Nothing was agreed to ahead of time. If Randi agrees with Harter that the internet version of the video is sufficient to determine nothing supernatural took place then that's the way it is. If you had an agreement beforehand it would be a whole different matter.

Why can't you see this? What is so difficult to understand? The challenge is normally for people who claim to be able to do some sort of psychic and or supernatural thing. It isn't for people with videotapes of UFOs, Ghosts, or who even know people who can provide these things. If Randi spent time going to a professional studio every time someone made a challenge based on a picture of a ghost or whatever he would be deluged with challenges.

Carlos, you did your best. But even with your notarized application and all your arguing back and forth here Randi has finished with your challenge. He isn't going to reopen it or respond to you.

Originally posted by Wyrd1
"James Randi does have access to proffesional studios and tv stations. I did it.

But Andrew Harter just analyzed another unknown digitized version on the internet."

You did not contact JREF before you sent the video. This would have served to confirm that the conditions which must be met for your challenge would be to analyse the events on professional equipment. Since you made no such condition beforehand you really have to valid complaint.


Carlos, you did your best. But even with your notarized application and all your arguing back and forth here Randi has finished with your challenge. He isn't going to reopen it or respond to you.


Another poor answer from a man that "thinks" he is a skeptic.

He is just a Randi's beleiver.

Thanks,

S&S

[Purple Tentacle]

You have no claim. There is nothing supernatural taking place

Originally posted by Purple Tentacle
You have no claim. There is nothing supernatural taking place

What digitized version on the internet you ALSO saw?

Did you see the same Andrew Harter did? Please tell us.

Or the faked digitized version of Blue Monk?

Or Rwald's?

Poor method.

Thanks,

S&S

[Wyrd1]

This is what passes as an argument Carlos?

"Another poor answer from a man that "thinks" he is a skeptic.

He is just a Randi's beleiver."

You aren't going to win. That isn't a "poor answer" that is the truth. You don't have a clue about what a skeptic is all about or else you would have admitted your mistake months ago.

Aswer Mr Bidlack's question. Would a signed message from Randi shut you up?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hal bidlack 01/22/2003
Carlos,

Let me ask you this, although given our history, I am not very hopeful that you will answer directly, but rather will spew additional false charges.

You claim that Randi is "silent" on your claim because he has not sent you a personal letter with his signature on it. Although you have received a personal email from him, you feel this is not enough. You also seem to think that your claim is very special, and therefore should be mentioned in Mr R's on-line commentary.

So here's my question: If Mr Randi said, in his weekly commentary, something like "Carlos, your case is close" would that satisfy you? (why do I think the answer is no)

If not, when I'm at the JREF next week, I'll ask Mr Randi to sign a piece of paper that has the same statement, and I'll send it to you. And given your earlier comments, if you are a man of honor, that would end this silliness, right? (unless, of course, you would like to rationalize it further?)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Hi Mr. Bidlack:

I am just making an assumption. Your hurry now is maybe because the amazing meeting is near to begin , and who knows if "somebody" there will ask you about my case. Remember is just an assumption.

About your question:H.L.:"If Mr Randi said, in his weekly commentary, something like "Carlos, your case is close" would that satisfy you? (why do I think the answer is no)"

I am a man that have principles. Maybe you don't remember what I want from Mr. Randi , but is easy : is on the e-mails I send to him, is posted in the first page and first post of the "swett affair", is also posted in this thread , and I did it almost all the time.

Now that you finally agreed with me that this thing is a matter of honour, I will again post you here what I want to see in his weeks commenatries with his sign on it:

A) My notarized application to the challaenge, and the date that was received in the JREF.

B) The translated notarized application,you can use Patricios' version or do your own. This is just to be fair enough with the people that don't speak english. I accept Patricio's translation, is clear enough.Is on page 2 of the "Swett affair"

C)The ORIGINAL answer that Andrew Harter gave me in respond to my application. Please put that was did it with Randi's aprooval as Randi said. Put the dates of those answers.

That's all I want.

That will show all the world who is lying, the method that KREF did to analyze the tape, and if in the answer they gave me there is or not a single word that my application was not valid according to the rules.

If you have troubles with the dates , just ask me or latinijral.

This answer I am giving you demonstrates that I always wrote here at the forum about these 3 basic points.

Do you think that is so simple just to write :" Carlos :you have no claim". Maybe those kind of commentaries will satisfy Randi's beleivers, but not me. I am just rationalist. I want to keep myself honest, I am proud of that.

When I see those 3 points WRITTEN in Randi's commentaries with his sign on it, then I want you to send me the same papers to a adress I will tell you. I thank you that kindness you have with me.

I will wait for your answer.Thank you again for your worries to put end at this "sillness"(according to your words)

Thanks,

S&S

JREF OWN GOAL:



The Foundation is committed to providing reliable information about paranormal claims. It both supports and conducts original research into such claims.

http://www.randi.org/research/index.html

[Wyrd1]

LATINIJRAL OWN GOAL:



To annoy thinking people with complete and utter nonsense. To boldly go where anyone will listen to my tired lame crybaby stick.

"Is Harter's poor answer! Is Not Bird Look at My notarized Application!"

You boys have spent too much time around the Xray machines. Your brains are rotted.

Show us the application again! Come on!

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hal bidlack
well, I agree they have little honor. That was demonstrated by Carlos's stabbing me in the back after I asked the 3000+ members of the forum to give him a second chance, based on PMs he sent me suggesting he was serious about getting along.

But, Mr Randi is very clear on how he wants this board run: as open as possible. Thus just because the two gentlemen from the south are truly heartless (at least from my personal 9/11 experience), they will not be banned for simply being jerks. And I think they are too smart to willfully violate the explicit rules of the board.

They are masters at redefining the question once they get cornered. But their attacks on Blue Monk, to say nothing of the tastlessness of their basic premise make it clear that these men are, by any normal standard, truly selfish and mean. And frankly, that's about as nasty a thing as I can think to call someone.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Mr Bidlack:

You asked me a direct question, I gave you a direct answer. As you will notice there is a minute of difference between my reply to Lainijral and your reply. I answered him first just because I didn't saw yours while I was writing.

Is that the way you also answer :"south","heartless""jerks".

I was honest enough from my first letter to Randi and from my first reply and to the last.

Don't try to hide the mistakes with free insults. You asked me , I answered you. Just tell me you and the JREFare not able to face the truth.

My 3 points are just the facts, what is the mistery?

Thanks,

S&S
How many times you need to know what I want, what is the fear?

Are the JREF afraid of their own answer they gave me?

Face the truth. Have respect to Randi's fans. Just do it.

Originally posted by S&S
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hal bidlack
well, I agree they have little honor. That was demonstrated by Carlos's stabbing me in the back after I asked the 3000+ members of the forum to give him a second chance, based on PMs he sent me suggesting he was serious about getting along.

But, Mr Randi is very clear on how he wants this board run: as open as possible. Thus just because the two gentlemen from the south are truly heartless (at least from my personal 9/11 experience), they will not be banned for simply being jerks. And I think they are too smart to willfully violate the explicit rules of the board.

They are masters at redefining the question once they get cornered. But their attacks on Blue Monk, to say nothing of the tastlessness of their basic premise make it clear that these men are, by any normal standard, truly selfish and mean. And frankly, that's about as nasty a thing as I can think to call someone.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Mr Bidlack:

You asked me a direct question, I gave you a direct answer. As you will notice there is a minute of difference between my reply to Lainijral and your reply. I answered him first just because I didn't saw yours while I was writing.

Is that the way you also answer :"south","heartless""jerks".

I was honest enough from my first letter to Randi and from my first reply and to the last.

Don't try to hide the mistakes with free insults. You asked me , I answered you. Just tell me you and the JREFare not able to face the truth.

My 3 points are just the facts, what is the mistery?

Thanks,

S&S
How many times you need to know what I want, what is the fear?

Are the JREF afraid of their own answer they gave me?

Face the truth. Have respect to Randi's fans. Just do it.


Bid Lack is confused.

[Wyrd1]

How ironic that this little ditty comes from one of you two:

Bid Lack is confused.

How can you two birdwatchers accuse anyone of being confused? Neither one of you has enough pesos to buy a clue and yet you are quick to accuse the most reasonable and most rational person in this entire thread of being confused.

Why am I not surprised? You two bleed irony. You claim to be honorable men but you're out to make money on the deaths of thousands.

You accuse everyone of engaging in nothing but insults but you insult virtually everybody who posts a message even if they say nothing negative to you.

You accuse Randi and Harter of being dishonest but you both have lied and cajoled your way through this entire discussion and have done everything you can to lie about your motives.

You two ought to be ashamed. Your wives should be ashamed. Your children should be ashamed. And your parents should be ashamed. You have brought dishonor on all of them. You continue to bring dishonor on them and you will not stop until someone makes you stop.

Mr Bidlack I am sorry they have attacked you. What can expect from these two trolls in the future? More of the same I expect.

BEFORE: BEFORE
This reply is for Mr. Bidlack, but YOU all can read it if you want.

_______________________________________________


From: Carlos Swett

Date: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 11:20:29 AM

To: randi@randi.org

Cc: jref@randi.org

Subject: Re: REFRESHING YOUR MEMORY


I´m sure that you get hundreds of pompous claims every week, but also I´m sure that you DON´T GET MANY OFICIALS APPLICANTS TO THE CHALLENGE.
Well, I´m that kind of applicant.

Sorry,if your JREF DIDN´T TELL YOU ABOUT IT (?????), that explains why: you send me to hell, don´t remember me ,want to make a deal to shut me up, etc.

I received yesterday an e-mail with the oficial answer (by ANDREW HARTER)
for my aplication to the challenge. Is poor, deficient,and full of lies. I HOPE (AS YOU USE TO) YOU PUBLICATE THAT POMPOUS ANSWER IN YOUR WEB PAGE BUT WITH MY NOTHARIZED DEMAND. People will decide who is telling the truth.

I SEND TO YOU(in the same package )a letter giving you aditonal information of my application. Ask for it, if you want,at the JREF.

I admired your work, but don´t loose energies making FREE PUBLICITY(?$) to people(lyke SYLVIA BROWNE)that never applies to the official challenge.

Mr.ANDREW HARTER said that he saw this tape before and pointed out what was taking place to others.
I ASKED IN YOUR WEB PAGE FOR THAT ESPECIFIC COMMENTARY.
RESULTS:NOTHING
¿WHO ARE OTHERS? ¿A SELECTED GROUP?

THE CLOCK IS TICKING AGAIN.........13 DAYS

FORGET ABOUT THE MONEY.....IF THAT IS YOUR REAL PROBLEM.

CARLOS SWETT.-
GUAYAQUIL, ECUADOR,S.A.

P.S. USE A REAL TRANSLATOR , NOT A VIRTUAL TRANSLATOR.


__________________________________________________
__
_------------------------------------------------------------------
__________________________________________

Mr. Bidlack this is the answer to your word BEFORE:

I told BEFORE toJames Randi what an honorable man should do.(april 16, 2002)

I told YOU BEFORE what I want.

I want To see in James Randi commentaries just the SAME answer they gave me . Is not to long. I will help you and post it again if you want.

Just do what I said BEFORE(04/16/2002) to James Randi:



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I received yesterday an e-mail with the oficial answer (by ANDREW HARTER) for my aplication to the challenge. Is poor, deficient,and full of lies. I HOPE (AS YOU USE TO) YOU PUBLICATE THAT POMPOUS ANSWER IN YOUR WEB PAGE BUT WITH MY NOTHARIZED DEMAND. People will decide who is telling the truth.

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



Mr . Bidlack is simple, your "thoughts" were wrong, maybe because of that bad day you had when you wrote that insulting and racist reply.
I am still sure that you are a clever and smart man, is not important for me where you come from, you deserves my respects like every person of the world.

Thanks,
Carlos Swett (S&S)


P.S.

I "thought" the commentaries about Sylvia were the ones that have the lengty part of them.
Did she make the challenge? Or is just a commercial?Or is the main subject?
http://www.randi.org/jr/012403.html

[hal bidlack]

Originally posted by S&S
...Mr. Bidlack this is the answer to your word BEFORE:

I told BEFORE toJames Randi what an honorable man should do.(april 16, 2002)
Mr . Bidlack is simple, your "thoughts" were wrong, maybe because of that bad day you had when you wrote that insulting and racist reply.
...
Thanks,
Carlos Swett (S&S)


Carlos,

So now, in a sad attempt to distract from your unwillingness to admit you are wrong, you accuse me of rascism. This is a very unfortunate turn of events. I can only assume you refer to my "gentlemen from the South" reference. And in your twisted way of reading things, you think that's racist. It was a regional reference, you foolish man. I'm a gentleman from the West. Heck, Randi is a gentleman from the South from where I live. I was attempting to find a gentle way to refer to you and Latin. But you twist, misspeak, and now cast a massively offensive charge my way.

You will recall I tried to help you, and that you assured me of your honorable intentions. I can not for the life of me understand why you would choose to follow the path you have chosen, but from now on, you and Latin walk it alone. I am deeply, deeply disappointed in you. Before I thought you were a misguided soul. Now I think you are a mean and spiteful person. You have both my pity and my contempt.

[Beleth]

The promo to the challenge says:
"[W]e offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event."

Carlos is showing something. Check.
Carlos is claiming that it is evidence of a paranormal event. Check.

So what's the problem?

Proper observing conditions.

Having a home-videotaped recording of an event broadcast on television be your single source of information simply can't be construed as "proper observing conditions" under any reasonable definition of the word "proper."

Videotapes like this are useful in two cases:
1) Instant-replay-type cases, where a videotape is scrutinized after an already-directly-observed event to determine whether something did or did not happen.
2) Casino-cheater-type cases, where the event may not have been directly observed, but investigators can go back over a tape to see if cheating actually happened.


Back to being pedantic.

The actual application states the following:
"Applicants must state clearly what they claim as their special ability ..."

I am unsure what, if anything, Carlos is claiming as his "special ability." Surely it can't be the ability to hit the Record button on his video recorder. Nor can it be the ability to not see the bird fly in front of the second tower.

Carlos, if you don't have a special ability, I don't see what claim you have.

[Pyrrho]

A look at the first post in this thread shows that Swett's behavior toward Randi was confrontational and insulting from the beginning. S&S's latest posting of his email to Randi confirms S&S's mean-spirited attitude.

I applaud Hal Bidlack for his handling of this mess.

Originally posted by hal bidlack


Carlos,

So now, in a sad attempt to distract from your unwillingness to admit you are wrong, you accuse me of rascism. This is a very unfortunate turn of events. I can only assume you refer to my "gentlemen from the South" reference. And in your twisted way of reading things, you think that's racist. It was a regional reference, you foolish man. I'm a gentleman from the West. Heck, Randi is a gentleman from the South from where I live. I was attempting to find a gentle way to refer to you and Latin. But you twist, misspeak, and now cast a massively offensive charge my way.

You will recall I tried to help you, and that you assured me of your honorable intentions. I can not for the life of me understand why you would choose to follow the path you have chosen, but from now on, you and Latin walk it alone. I am deeply, deeply disappointed in you. Before I thought you were a misguided soul. Now I think you are a mean and spiteful person. You have both my pity and my contempt.


Hi Mr Bidlack:

I am posting your nice and gentle reply:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But, Mr Randi is very clear on how he wants this board run: as open as possible. Thus just because the two gentlemen from the south are truly heartless (at least from my personal 9/11 experience), they will not be banned for simply being jerks. And I think they are too smart to willfully violate the explicit rules of the board.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Those "nice" words , you smart man from the north, just reflect your incappacitty to face the truth. You asked me BEFORE what I want to see in Randi's commentaries with his sign on it, I am just telling you what I said to Randi BEFORE, just to publicate the e-mail Andrew's Harter with the aprooval of Randi send me.All the words. Are so few.

YOUR OWN WORDS, The JREF words, Harter's words, Randi's words.

Not my words, no my commentaries, not my ego.

Is not NEW to me that persons try to hide from the truth just using insults.

How can a person from the "south" can be a gentleman if is a heartless and jerk?

Go fool somebody else, not me.
Gentleman is something else, and you know an example .

When the honour is touched, you have to fight for it. Is just a matter of truth.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.

I am from Ecuador. I am in the middle of the world.
I don't live in the U.S.A.

[Wyrd1]

How's the aroma of tose burning bridges Carlos? You have alienated every person who tried to help you.

You can be proud now. You've demonstrted your miserable lack of honor now for all to see.

[Pyrrho]

I have obtained raw, unedited and unretouched digital video which shows "paranormal events" similar to the "paranormal event" touted by Mr. Swett.

As soon as I have more closely analyzed this video, it will be made available for download, possibly some time tomorrow, January 25.

More details will be given at that time.

Originally posted by pyrrho2000
I have obtained raw, unedited and unretouched digital video which shows "paranormal events" similar to the "paranormal event" touted by Mr. Swett.

As soon as I have more closely analyzed this video, it will be made available for download, possibly some time tomorrow, January 25.

More details will be given at that time.

Pyrrho:

What details?

You must wrote this BEFORE(in the same post) since you were posting to an skeptic group.

Obtained how?
Analyzed how?
Who are you?
Why you didn't just posted before YOU analyze it "closely". ?
What were your proofs that was unretouched?

Just put your digitized version , whenever you want.

Now let's wait if Bidlack, Randi or whatever, put their OWN E-mail with their answer to my application.

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by S&S


Pyrrho:

What details?



All relevant information will be given at the appropriate time.


You must wrote this BEFORE(in the same post) since you were posting to an skeptic group.

Obtained how?
Analyzed how?
Who are you?
Why you didn't just posted before YOU analyze it "closely". ?
What were your proofs that was unretouched?

Just put your digitized version , whenever you want.


All relevant information will be given at the appropriate time.

Originally posted by pyrrho2000


All relevant information will be given at the appropriate time.

[/b]

All relevant information will be given at the appropriate time. [/B]

Pyrrho:

You are an intelligent man.
You know that you should did it BEFORE you study it "closely".

I can assume that you are not satisfy with Blue Monk's version, neither with Harter's internet study.

I am waiting for yours digitized version and all your "relevant " in formation.

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by S&S


Pyrrho:

You are an intelligent man.
You know that you should did it BEFORE you study it "closely".

I can assume that you are not satisfy with Blue Monk's version, neither with Harter's internet study.

I am waiting for yours digitized version and all your "relevant " in formation.

Your childish word games are stupid and boring.

Blue Monk performed a brilliant analysis. Harter's analysis was sufficient to determine the nature of the object in the video. I am satisfied with both.

Be patient. To avoid confusion, I must say that the videos in my possession are not of the World Trade Center.

Later...

[Pyrrho]

Digital videos of birds support the observation that the "Paranormal Event" claimed by Carlos Swett is nothing but a bird.

A brief article, with individual frames and short clips can be read here:

http://psandoval.0catch.com/forthebirds.html

I can't put the full videos on the site because of space restrictions and download restrictions.

The originals are 12-second AVI files, 320x240. The original AVI files are 4 megabytes each. The clips on the web site are converted to QuickTime MOV format. Medium JPEG compression was applied during conversion.

No pigeons, sparrows, or starlings were harmed in the production of the videos, except that they may have experienced disappointment because I didn't bother to bring any bird seed.

[Wyrd1]

Pyrro2000 nice work but all for naught I'm afraid. Carlos will never admit he's wrong. He will accuse you of doctoring your evidence and about the Birds video he will say something profound like: "I know there are Birds! Come back when you have arguments!"

The members of this forum have proven Carlos to be a delusional fool, evil troll, liar and jerk. He is shameless in his his attempts to bend the truth to get his money and respect neither of which he deserves.

He claims to have honor and that he has been treated badly. In his twisted psyche I suppose he believes this is so. He has no honor and he was treated exactly as he deserves.

Look at how he accused Hal Bidlack of racism to try to get something out of him. How manipulative was that? For my money, calling them "Gentlemen From The South" is an insult to all males in South America.

Randi never wanted to send him to hell but there's a spot waiting for him there. He'll be surrounded by his fellow terrorists and then he can share their fate. I believe they'll have birds pecking at their eyes and genitals. How appropriate!

[Pyrrho]

Yeah, Wyrd1, you're right. The bird issue went splat long ago.

I figure Randi, Harter, and Bidlack can handle Heckle and Jeckle...I'm just having fun throwing cream pies and rotten tomatoes. :D

Originally posted by pyrrho2000

Blue Monk performed a brilliant analysis. Harter's analysis was sufficient to determine the nature of the object in the video. I am satisfied with both.



Pyrro, Pyrro, Pyrro:

1.- You still support the tricked pictures and poor analysis of a low resolution unknown video.
2.- Where is Harter`s analysis.....I don`t see it.
3.- Satisfied??? obviously you are a Randi believer.


Refreshing your memory about Blue Monk`s tricked pictures:

Pyrro:

Refreshing your memory about Blue Monk`s tricked pictures

Can you see the difference??


P.S: You forgot to comment about the goal of JREF.

Originally posted by pyrrho2000


I can't put the full videos on the site because of space restrictions and download restrictions.




Nice work for the birdwatchers.Or to this kind of fans:Pyrro2000 nice work but all for naught I'm afraid.

Now try to explain about the form of the "birds", why the "other" bird is flying upside down? I mean look at their "bodies", and look at my application the REASON why is not a bird or an insect crossing between the cameraman and the towers.Yes I told that FIRST.

Or your birds dissapear too "only" in some special frame?

You are intelligent , well those are your words.

Now, go fool somebody else. Your "observation" and "analysis" is not new, is older than this thread . Just check the internet. Loser.

Thanks,

S&S

[Pyrrho]

Dear Carlos and latinijral,

I do not give a splay.

You're welcome,

Pyrrho

p.s. Did you know that birds can be artists?

http://www.monpa.com/ba/

p.p.s. latin, why post a 25k picture? Haven't you learned how to optimize your images? I can optimize those to 10k with no loss of quality. What software are you using? If you need some technical assistance I'd be happy to help. Optimize, optimize, optimize!

Originally posted by pyrrho2000
Dear Carlos and latinijral,

I do not give a splay.

You're welcome,

Pyrrho

p.s. Did you know that birds can be artists?

http://www.monpa.com/ba/

p.p.s. latin, why post a 25k picture? Haven't you learned how to optimize your images? I can optimize those to 10k with no loss of quality. What software are you using? If you need some technical assistance I'd be happy to help. Optimize, optimize, optimize!

Pyrrho:

The birds and the elephants too. I am sure you have those pictures in your house. Besides you are the specialist in birds, and also intelligent. Now go buy some elephant stuff, is bigger, just for you : loser.

Originally posted by Pyrrho 12/07/2002
1. Just because they say I'm stupid doesn't make it so. I know I'm intelligent. I don't have to prove it to anyone. Insults from parents hurt, and hurt badly, but they don't have to hurt as much or for as long.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S. Now analyze with your software the picture latinijral posted.
Or go with your cries to Bidlack, maybe he will teach you how to be more "original" or "gentleman", or maybe how to put another poor excuse.

Edited because I forgot my signature. Was a promise to Bidlack.
Only in this thread.

[Pyrrho]

Ah, you see, that was my opinion back in 2002. I have since come to the conclusion that I am incredibly ignorant, and completely stupid as well.

Here, I'll set it up so you can put it in your sig:

"I am stupid. - Pyrrho"

:D

[Wyrd1]

Arguments are lost on these two losers, Pyrrho.
I'm just having fun throwing cream pies and rotten tomatoes.

That's about these two are good for. How many times will they keep repeating the same stupid lame crap? The bird isn't flying upside down they're just watching it on the world's crappiest TV. Look at how the lines of the Tower is deformed. No wonder they see a hat shaped object. They need a flat screen plasma TV so they can see the bird.

And how many more times will they make the claim that Blue Monk tricked his video? It's only too obvious that the image was altered by the station logo not Blue Monk. And it all just goes to show you that it's a waste of time demonstrating how wrong they are. Like all paranormal nuts they'll just make excuses for why reality is not conforming to their delusions.

And how many more times will they cut and paste their stupid application and the correspondence with JREF? They are the only two people who care and the only two people who believe. Nobody else does. You gotta wonder why they're wasting their time here.

But, hey! It's their time time to waste. We COULD just leave them alone to stew in each others juices. Or we could just keep throwing rotten tomatoes at them.

Face it Carlos, you have lost. Randi will never give you any money. Randi will never tell you anything. He has washed his hands of you.

No money for you!

You realize Don Quixote was a novel and not an instruction manual for life? Windmills watch out! Here comes Don Carlos and his faithful companion Latiijral.

[davidhorman]

Or your birds dissapear too "only" in some special frame?

I'm not sure what good it will do, but here's an image I made by "differencing" two of the frames that Blue Monk digitised - these are the frames where Carlos claims the object is inside the tower.

Turn your brightness up and you can see the arrows point to two areas that are different between frames, and each area is of the same size and in the right position to be the bird.

David

Originally posted by davidhorman


I'm not sure what good it will do, but here's an image I made by "differencing" two of the frames that Blue Monk digitised - these are the frames where Carlos claims the object is inside the tower.

Turn your brightness up and you can see the arrows point to two areas that are different between frames, and each area is of the same size and in the right position to be the bird.

David

Davidhorman:

Who cares about Blue Monk's faked version? Only you and the fanatics of the farse. You are just another loser.
Try to do what I did. Ask your leader Randi why he is on silence , ask Bidlack why they refuse to publicate their OWN answer signed by James Randi.
Just this short poor answer:

>From: "JREF"
>To: "Carlos Swett"
>Subject: RE: JAMES RANDI´S CLOCK UPDATE (9 DAYS)
>Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 15:00:44 -0400
>
>We have received your application and video tape. I've seen this tape
>before and pointed out what was taking place to others.
>
>You have made two assumptions, one following the other. Both are incorrect.
>
>Your first assumption is that the object comes from behind the second
>tower.
>This is not the case. I've gone frame by frame through a copy of this
>video
>that's available on the Internet. You can clearly see that the object is
>IN FRONT OF THE TOWERS when you look at it frame by frame. The object is dark
>and difficult to see at some points against the smoke, but it is there. A
>bird could certainly be the culprit.
>
>You have no claim. There is nothing supernatural taking place.
>
>Andrew Harter
>Researcher
>James Randi Educational Foundation
>201 SE 12th Street
>Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
>Phone (954) 467-1112
>Fax (954) 467-1660
-------------------------------------------------------------

Then you can read my application again , again, and again.

Between frames? only with your faked digitized versions, not with the correct equipments , loser.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S. prepare your bags, join the fanatics . Jeff Corey will be there.

[davidhorman]

Who cares about Blue Monk's faked version?

I don't believe it is faked. It's better than any evidence you've made available to us.

Only you and the fanatics of the farse. You are just another loser.

Yup, you've really lost it.

Try to do what I did. Ask your leader Randi why he is on silence

I don't owe any allegiance to Randi, and although I did once send him an email and got a polite and informed reply, I'm sure as hell not going to pester him to repond to this drivel.

David

Originally posted by davidhorman


I don't believe it is faked. It's better than any evidence you've made available to us.



Yup, you've really lost it.



I don't owe any allegiance to Randi, and although I did once send him an email and got a polite and informed reply, I'm sure as hell not going to pester him to repond to this drivel.

David

I don't care what you beleive. Is not a matter of beleifs, is a matter of facts.

I received from Randi, after I asked him when I am going to receive my answer to the application , "what in hell are you raving about, who are you?, I want to deal with you".
Yes, was 10 days AFTER they received my application(I have the FED Ex guide).

You received a polite and informed reply from him, because you are a beleiver and fanatic of him.Maybe he wants your contribution.

Is a BIG difference. Face the truth. Look at Pyrrho, he learned how.

Thanks,

S&S

[davidhorman]

I don't care what you beleive. Is not a matter of beleifs, is a matter of facts.

Very well, I don't care if you believe that Blue Monk faked his video. You've got no evidence that your belief is a [I]fact[I].

David

Originally posted by davidhorman


Very well, I don't care if you believe that Blue Monk faked his video. You've got no evidence that your belief is a [I]fact[I].

David

David:

You admited that you are a beleiver. The proof about Blue monk's faked digitized version are already posted. Those are facts Loser.

Thanks,

S&S

[Wyrd1]

Loser: noun 1. One who has lost. 2. One who isn't going to win. 3. Carlos Swett.

Those are facts you can't argue with.

You're the loser Carlos since you will never win your challenge. You're still wasting your time here bitching about a tricked version when you haven't provided your version of anything. Only blurry pictures taken of a really crappy TV.

You will never win.

Nobody here agrees with you or Latinijral and nobody is likely to join you.

Waste your time.

Call everyone else a loser but it's a matter of fact. You are the loser.

I am here at the forum, to teach you all how to face a truth, to debunk all those pseudo skeptics charlatans.
Is a matter of HONOUR.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S. "the dogs are barking....."

[davidhorman]

You admited that you are a beleiver.

Stop bandying that word around as if it were an all-in-one insult and argument-winner. I believe in this, you believe in that, the Pope believes in the other.

I believe that what Blue Monk posted is accurate, because I have no evidence to the contrary and it is the most reasonable assumption to make without other evidence.

You, on the other hand, believe that the video shows a paranormal object flying through the tower, with no supporting evidence, and it's certainly not the most reasonable assumption to make in this case.

David

Originally posted by davidhorman


Stop bandying that word around as if it were an all-in-one insult and argument-winner. I believe in this, you believe in that, the Pope believes in the other.

I believe that what Blue Monk posted is accurate, because I have no evidence to the contrary and it is the most reasonable assumption to make without other evidence.

You, on the other hand, believe that the video shows a paranormal object flying through the tower, with no supporting evidence, and it's certainly not the most reasonable assumption to make in this case.

David

Hey loser:

I made the challenge, your leader received the notarized application and the REFERNTIAL tape. Read again.
They just studied an unknown link at the internet. I did not, I did it the proper way. They made mistakes in their answer. They refuse to publicate their OWN Harter's words in the week's commentaries. Randi is still on silence.
You are still beleiving in Blue Monk's faked digitized version. You are the beleiver, you are the loser. I just put facts.

Thanks,

S&S

[davidhorman]

They just studied an unknown link at the internet. I did not, I did it the proper way. They made mistakes in their answer. They refuse to publicate their OWN Harter's words in the week's commentaries.

They who? I don't give a damn about Randi and the JREF's take on all this, I was talking about Blue Monk's work.

Randi is still on silence.

Randi quite rightly dismissed you as a kook, but that's not what we're talking about.

You are still beleiving in Blue Monk's faked digitized version. You are the beleiver, you are the loser. I just put facts.

Again, what fact? You have not established as a fact that Blue Monk faked anything.

David

[Wyrd1]

Woof woof! We aren't losers! We are on the winning side of this argument you are on the losing side.

It was a bird not a paranormal notarized application.

YOU made two Assumptions.

You have tried to get personal gain from the loss of thousands of lives and you have no honor.

You have no evidence you have no case we don't have to prove sh*t to you you have to prove it to Randi and Harter. You can't so you lose.

Randi will never mention you in his commentary. Randi will never break his silence.

You will never win.

You are the loser.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who cares about Blue Monk's faked version?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Originally posted by davidhorman


I don't believe it is faked. It's better than any evidence you've made available to us.


David

[hal bidlack]

As a matter of basic courtesy, please stop reposting your pictures. They slow down page loads, and I think after as many posts as you have made of them, folks get the idea.

You may certainly continue to insult, demand, misquote, misrepresent, and such, put just to show one nice characteristic, could you please stop with the pictures?

Such regular repeats, with no new information other than insults, begins to edge toward spamming. Just stop posting the pics, eh?

Originally posted by hal bidlack

You may certainly continue to insult, demand, misquote, misrepresent, and such,



What do you mean? Like this kind of insult?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hal bidlack

But, Mr Randi is very clear on how he wants this board run: as open as possible. Thus just because the two gentlemen from the south are truly heartless (at least from my personal 9/11 experience), they will not be banned for simply being jerks. And I think they are too smart to willfully violate the explicit rules of the board.

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

Bidlack "definition" of gentleman from the south : Heartless and jerks.

Yes Bidlack : YOU called me that. Do you really think I deserve that from you?ANSWER BIDLACK.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you mean ? Like this kind of misquote?


I can only assume you refer to my "gentlemen from the South" reference. And in your twisted way of reading things, you think that's racist. It was a regional reference, you foolish man. I'm a gentleman from the West. Heck, Randi is a gentleman from the South from where I live. I was attempting to find a gentle way to refer to you and Latin. But you twist, misspeak, and now cast a massively offensive charge my way.

Then you LIED : " I was attempting to find a gentle way to refer
to you and latin"

Look at your first quote , what a gentle way !!!!!!

GO FOOL SOMEONE ELSE.Liar.
Go fool these bunch of fanatics and beleivers.
Two faces.


Be frontal.

Thanks,

Carlos Swett (S&S)

[hal bidlack]

yeah, pretty much.

Originally posted by hal bidlack
yeah, pretty much.

Mr. Hal Bidlack ,
Please don't be proud of lying.

Your own quotes that I posted is a proof that you are a liar and hipòcrita (in spanish). I wish that you were in a bad day when you wrote that.
I am sure that the fanatics are proud of those words, but think in the neutral people, in the guests, in other kind of members. Your position as an administrator can be questioned by them.

I deserve from you a personal and public apologize , and you know why.
I will not admit LIES from you or anyone.

Look at JEFF COREY, he is still proud of his miserables lies.


Thanks,
Carlos Swett (S&S)

Debunking the liers and pseudo skeptics charlatans like JEFF COREY

[Wyrd1]

Why should anyone have to apologize to you for calling you and your drained hound jerks? You are. Your actions have defined you. The stupidest notion that you have attempted to pass off as truth is that you are an honorable man. You are not. You have alienated everyone on this board with your rude comments and convenient butchery of English to suit your ends.

And what exactly are your ends at this juncture? To try and get Randi or Harter to respond to you? To get them to trouble themselves to go and watch the ugly videotape of the second plane crashing into the World Trade Center at a TV studio?

Why on Earth do you think anything like that is going to happen?

You have demonstrated you inability to grasp basic physical laws which clearly preclude you being correct in your application.

You refuse to accept that the prize being awarded depend on "proper viewing conditions" and that a videotape cannot constitute proper viewing conditions no matter where you view it.

You refuse to accept the conclusions of Harter which Randi agreed with that nothing supernatural took place.

You refuse to accept that They who make the rules have ruled against you and you have no other recourse.

You will never win.

Randi will never respond to you.

Everybody in this forum with the exception of LatinIsdrool thinks you are wrong and will not change their minds because you have NO evidence.

Call us all half assed skeptics all you want but we see through your BS and we know who the two main losers are.

Debunking charlatans , LIARS and pseudo skeptic$$$$$$


Thanks,

Carlos Swett (S&S)

[Skeptoid]

Wyrd1: They who make the rules have ruled against you and you have no other recourse. Actually all the arguments he's had lately could be settled in a court of law. Man, I'd buy tickets to be in the peanut gallery. With Latin Dorkowicz representing him ... :D Carlos would be the first person in the history of jurisprudence to get the chair in a civil suit. :D I'm laughing my a$$ off just thinking about it. :D Imagine Ball and Peen, the in a sack brothers, telling the judge he's a liar and a believer. "Your Honor, you're a TRIPLE LOSER and a miserable dog. Now get your fat a$$ off the bench and go down to a TV station to look at my video on proffessional equipments!" :D
I could go on ...

[Wyrd1]

"With Latin Dorkowicz representing him .

I love that line, man! I hope they get the chair!

Carlos! Why are you in silence about your lies? I never said I was a dog trainer liar! Liar liar!

Who are you trying to impress with your scurrilous lies and that reknowned bed wetter Latinijral?

Originally posted by Wyrd1
"

I never said I was a dog trainer


Yes, Wyrd, you were the dog trainer of your dogs Iggy and Smiley in your "low degree skeptic forum".


Now, in this pseudoskeptic "high degree forum" you are one of the dogs.

And how about Skeptoid....the mixture of a skeptic and a stupid.

[hal bidlack]

Folks, as I posted on the other "carlos thread," lets try to not just drop into name calling. If you want to argue about the 'claim' feel free, but let's try to do it at a higher level.

If it ends up only being name calling, I'll move this thread to flame wars.

[Wyrd1]

In an effort to get along I have deleted my last post since it had not been answered.

As I said in another thread insults are all our two cranks understand. They have never intelligently countered the many logical arguments posted by Blue Monk and others but it hasn't stopped them from constantly flooding threads.

They will never win. (Doesn't matter to them!)

Randi will never give them what they want (a million bucks)

Yet I predict they will easily post 200-300 more posts each saying little more than LIARS Charlatans and Pseudoskeptics.

It's a jiggy world we live in.

[DrMatt]

Originally posted by pyrrho2000


The animated GIF contains 5 frames. The first frame has a delay of 0.5 seconds; the other four frames each have a delay of 0.25 seconds. The GIF therefore displays for 1.5 seconds each time it loops. Each delay can be altered in image-editing software. Because of this, it's not possible to tell how much time the original video would have required for this sequence.

A slowed-down version (1 second per frame):


http://psandoval.0catch.com/gif.html

Its position corrolates with the angle of the view. It's a lens effect.
*yawn*

Originally posted by DrMatt


Its position corrolates with the angle of the view. It's a lens effect.
*yawn*

Hi DrMatt:

Artist: You bring a NEW theory of a member to this thread.

But remember Phyrroh was writing about an animated GIF at internet.

Missile, bird, orbs,blur, lens effect, digitized versions, etc.

Thanks,
S&S

Originally posted by S&S
Debunking charlatans , LIARS and pseudo skeptic$$$$$$


Thanks,

Carlos Swett (S&S)

You forget "three eyes".

[DrMatt]

Originally posted by S&S


Hi DrMatt:

Artist: You bring a NEW theory of a member to this thread.

But remember Phyrroh was writing about an animated GIF at internet.

Missile, bird, orbs,blur, lens effect, digitized versions, etc.

Thanks,
S&S

I saw the animated GIF in question. It's a lens effect.
There isn't anything to see there at all. And there's certainly nothing supernatural about it--or even suprising.

Originally posted by DrMatt


I saw the animated GIF in question. It's a lens effect.
There isn't anything to see there at all. And there's certainly nothing supernatural about it--or even suprising.

Artist:

If you are so sure, then Harter , Randi , and all their fanatics are wrong.

Write Randi about it.

Thanks,
S&S

Originally posted by S&S


Artist:

If you are so sure, then Harter , Randi , and all their fanatics are wrong.

Write Randi about it.

Thanks,
S&S

Another theory...fine....but wrong.

[davidhorman]

By S&S, from a Michael Jackson thread:

you are making an acussation. You need to have proofs.

Shame you won't apply that to your accusation of fakery against Blue Monk.

David

[Skeptoid]

Originally posted by davidhorman

Shame you won't apply that to your accusation of fakery against Blue Monk.
So what's a little hypocrisy to a self-deluded liar, fraud, and general nuisance?

Originally posted by Skeptoid

So what's a little hypocrisy to a self-deluded liar, fraud, and general nuisance?

Is not my fault you don't want to face those evidences.How many times were posted here?

Keep on beleiving in HIS digitized version, pseudo skeptics and fanatics.

Thanks,

S&S

[Wyrd1]

I'm guessing Carlos jus said "Nada." Big surprise.

Too bad we can't believe in YOUR version Carlos. You've never posted squat. All we get are pictures taken from the world's crappiest TV. Your art must not pay well if that one is the best you can do.

No wonder you keep seeing things that aren't there.

QUOTE]Originally posted by Tesserat At the "affair"-page29

Hey Carlos
I don't believe what you said that Harter and Randi wrote. I think that you digitally changed it. I'm sure that Harter actually wrote "Your claim is not valid" but you changed it so that you'd have something to whine about.
You lied, and you faked Andrew's words. You owe him an apology.

[/QUOTE]

Yes Tesserat, I am just helping you and others pseudo skeptic to learn how to face a truth.
But Hal Bidlack (messanger Of Randi) have excuses , and refuses to publicate HARTER's answer, so you and everyone will be sure who is lying.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S.

Refresh your poor memory pseudo skeptics, beleivers in digitized versions and poor answers.

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7041&perpage=40&pagenumber=29

[Wyrd1]

We already know who's lying, Carlos. You are. But keep up the baseless claims. What the heck? Aparently you and Latin have nothing else to do.

You will never win.

Originally posted by Wyrd1
We already know who's lying, Carlos. You are. But keep up the baseless claims. What the heck? Aparently you and Latin have nothing else to do.

You will never win.

Lying?
"we already know?" : the sock puppets.

I am the one who wants James Randi to publicate Harter's answer (not missing a word) in his week's commentaries.

How can you tell who is lying?
Where is your evidence, pseudo-skeptic?


Thanks,
S&S

[Charlie in Dayton]

Originally posted by S&S

I am the one who wants James Randi to publicate Harter's answer (not missing a word) in his week's commentaries.
Thanks,
S&S

Why do you want this?

[Ted]

I really don't understand why this thread is going on and on like this!

Look. I've seen the videotape. Not the Internet version, I'm talking about the original tape Carlos mailed to the JREF. I saw it directly, and in slow motion. My understanding is that this tape is still available for viewing at the JREF.

The buildings on the tape are in focus, the object (which DOES pass in front of the buildings) is not. All this object does is fly to the ground in a straight line. That's all it does.

1. It is obviously a bird, out of focus from being so close to the camera. Poor thing was probably frightened by all the commotion.

2. Even if it was an alien spacecraft, a ghost, or whatever, THIS VIDEO WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR THE MILLION DOLLAR CHALLENGE! Come on now, if something like that did appear, would everyone who happened to photograph it get a million bucks???

Originally posted by Ted
I really don't understand why this thread is going on and on like this!


2. Even if it was an alien spacecraft, a ghost, or whatever, THIS VIDEO WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR THE MILLION DOLLAR CHALLENGE! Come on now, if something like that did appear, would everyone who happened to photograph it get a million bucks???

Ted:

We have received your notarized application and referntial tape. Why you send us those kind of things? A VIDEO WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR THE MILLION DOLLAR CHALLENGE! !!!!!!!.
Is that clear to you?
I saw and studied the video at an unknown link at the internet just for fun. It is obviously a bird, out of focus from being so close to the camera.

Now get back to your work (if you do some) and let us continue analyzing and writing about SYLVIA, URI, dowsers, the meeting, religions, charlatans, UFOs , pictures and videos of other kinds.

You can send your donation.

A.Harter (JREF researcher)
J.Randi( the boss).
_-------------------------------------------------------------------------


Thanks,
S&S

[Pyrrho]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by S&S

I am the one who wants James Randi to publicate Harter's answer (not missing a word) in his week's commentaries.
Thanks,
S&S
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Charlie from Dayton:

Why do you want this?

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

What's your answer, Carlos?

Originally posted by pyrrho2000
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by S&S

I am the one who wants James Randi to publicate Harter's answer (not missing a word) in his week's commentaries.
Thanks,
S&S
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Charlie from Dayton:

Why do you want this?

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

What's your answer, Carlos?

Because Bidlack asked it . He is Randi's messanger.

Is a short answer, but....
And also because:

Originally posted by Tesserat At the "affair"-page29
Hey Carlos
I don't believe what you said that Harter and Randi wrote. I think that you digitally changed it. I'm sure that Harter actually wrote "Your claim is not valid" but you changed it so that you'd have something to whine about.
You lied, and you faked Andrew's words. You owe him an apology.



Satisfy? just tell me.

Thanks,
S&S

[Ted]

And, perhaps you could tell us this:

Why should the JREF pay you a million for your blurry bird video, and not the "Bigfoot" video (the famous one with the ape creature looking over his sholder), the "Alien Autopsy" video, the numerous "psyhic surgery" videos, the "luminious lights over the crop circle" videos, or any other of the many videos out there showing ghosts, paranormal powers, ect? What is it about your video that makes it so special? Heck, if anything the other ones are much more convincing.

Are you beginning to see now why I say that I don't see how any video, in and of itself, should qualify for the Challange, no matter what it showed?

Even if you don't, at least tell us what is on your video that is so great. OK, a camera is focused on burning buildings in the distance, and a bird flies in front of the scene. Whoopee. Why should it be deserving of any attention?

AND, KNOCK IT OFF ALREADY WITH THOSE STUPID QUOTES!!! Once you have quoted someone that should be enough. I can read it the first time, thank you.

[Wyrd1]

I hope you noticed, Ted, that Carlos, who complains bitterly about insults not arguments ignored your arguments and went for the cheap insult.

Carlos is nothing but a hypocrite. Everything he accuses us of being he is.

We have pointed out umpteen billion times that the object is out of focus and thus must be substantially closer to the camera than the buildings in the background but Carlos ignores that. You would think an artist would have spent some time around cameras and would understand "depth of field" as it relates ti the focal length of any lens. No such luck.

In fact Carlos and his little poochy Latinijral pretty much ignore all of the many arguments put fort that have effectively rendered his own arguments invalid. Doesn't help. Doesn't mean a thing to them. All Carlos wants to do is cry about "poor methods" of investigation (forget that even those poor methods show his claim to be false.) And he likes to whine about how Randi has never mentioned his specious claim in his commentaries.

I can absolutely guarantee you two things: 1) Carlos will never admit he is wrong and 2) He will never willingly go away. If you join into any of the many threads Carlos infects be prepared for a very long haul.

[Ted]

Originally posted by Wyrd1

I can absolutely guarantee you two things: 1) Carlos will never admit he is wrong and 2) He will never willingly go away. If you join into any of the many threads Carlos infects be prepared for a very long haul.

I know, but I'm trying to discourage people from bombarding the JREF with videos because of a new urban legand that says that the JREF will pay a million dollars for videos it can't disprove.

The trouble with this whole thing is that it misses the whole idea of the Challange, which is a scientific TEST under controlled circimstances that IS AGREED UPON BY BOTH THE CLAIMANT AND THE JREF BEFORE IT IS DONE. It is not about coming up with some kind of story or video or artifact, or whatever and then presenting this to get a prize. If people start thinking in those terms, the result will be nothing but trouble.

Also, I don't like the idea of people believing that Challange claimants are being cheated somehow.

Originally posted by Ted
And, perhaps you could tell us this:

Why should the JREF pay you a million for your blurry bird video, and not the "Bigfoot" video (the famous one with the ape creature looking over his sholder), the "Alien Autopsy" video, the numerous "psyhic surgery" videos, the "luminious lights over the crop circle" videos, or any other of the many videos out there showing ghosts, paranormal powers, ect? What is it about your video that makes it so special? Heck, if anything the other ones are much more convincing.

Are you beginning to see now why I say that I don't see how any video, in and of itself, should qualify for the Challange, no matter what it showed?

Even if you don't, at least tell us what is on your video that is so great. OK, a camera is focused on burning buildings in the distance, and a bird flies in front of the scene. Whoopee. Why should it be deserving of any attention?

AND, KNOCK IT OFF ALREADY WITH THOSE STUPID QUOTES!!! Once you have quoted someone that should be enough. I can read it the first time, thank you.

Ted :

I understand your frustration. You seem to be a close friend of Randi (like Bidlack).

Why are you paying me attention?

Why Randi paid attention to the others videos?

Why Harter, Randi or the JREF didn't WROTE, in their answer to my application, that my referntial tape or the video DON'T qualify for the Challange, no matter what it showed?
Why They are still on silence?
Why they refuse to publicate their OWN answer (Harter's words)?


Do you know the difference of this video from the others?
Was broadcasted LIVE to all the world. Every tv station has the same copy. Is a fact, is not a "self made" video.
Now go see my referntial tape again and again, read my application and focus in the reason why is not a bird or an insect. Yes , it is there, in my application.

Thanks,
S&S

[davidhorman]

Was broadcasted LIVE to all the world. Every tv station has the same copy. Is a fact, is not a "self made" video.

Then it should be a simple matter for you to prove your accusation that Blue Monk faked his stills - stills which prove far beyond a reasonable doubt that the object involved was in front of the towers, and did not go through the tower as you contend.

David

[Ted]

Originally posted by davidhorman


Then it should be a simple matter for you to prove your accusation that Blue Monk faked his stills

David

1. Forget the Internet video! The "original" video (the one Carlos sent) shows that the object passes in front of the towers. It also shows that the object is so out of focus that it can't be much more than 100 feet or so from the camera, and is therefore a few feet across at the most.

2. The JREF does not pay for videos, only for TESTS agreed upon IN ADVANCE by BOTH the claimant and the JREF.

3. Even if the JREF was foolish enough to offer to pay money for a video, Carlos would not be the claimant, since he, by his own admission, was not the one that shot it.

Originally posted by Ted


1. Forget the Internet video! The "original" video (the one Carlos sent) shows that the object passes in front of the towers. It also shows that the object is so out of focus that it can't be much more than 100 feet or so from the camera, and is therefore a few feet across at the most.

2. The JREF does not pay for videos, only for TESTS agreed upon IN ADVANCE by BOTH the claimant and the JREF.

3. Even if the JREF was foolish enough to offer to pay money for a video, Carlos would not be the claimant, since he, by his own admission, was not the one that shot it.

Another lawyer.
And pseudo-skeptic.

And Randi's fan.

But.....

Thanks,
S&S

Originally posted by Ted


1. Forget the Internet video! The "original" video (the one Carlos sent) shows that the object passes in front of the towers. It also shows that the object is so out of focus that it can't be much more than 100 feet or so from the camera, and is therefore a few feet across at the most.




Hi Ted:

Did you read Carlos`s notarized challenge and letter?
I guess no.

The video that Carlos sent is only a REFERENCIAL TAPE.

How can you determinated the object is 100 feet from the camera?

[Wyrd1]

Because of the focal plane of the lens. The object was probably closer depending on the lens. We have explained "depth of field" to you before but neither of you seem to understand it and how much it undermines your case.

Any camera lens can be set to "infinite" focus but each lens has limitation to how close something can be to it and still be in focus. If you have a 50mm lens the vice a 500mm lens an object may be much closer and still be in focus. You have to check the lens to really be able to tell how close the object was. At 100 feet the lens would have had to have been a 500mm lens or longer (maybe 1000mm.)

Not that this argument means anything to our mentally challenged pair.

Liars charlatans and pseudo skeptics. Followers of our God Randi. I'm glad they never insult any of us. Our feelings would be hurt.

[Wyrd1]

Did you read Carlos`s notarized challenge and letter?

How could anyone miss the damn thing? You've only posted 50 times or so. By this time a person with any intellect whatsoever would realize that we are not impressed by it even a little bit.

You claim to see a hat shaped paranormal object but thanks to your pictures (posted over 50 times) we see the shape is owing to the poor quality of the TV you watched it on. Your mistakes are understandable. It's owing to your "poor methods" of using a sh*tty TV instead of a relatively good quality TV. Then you could see the bird etc...

Why are you still in silence?

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by S&S


Another lawyer.
And pseudo-skeptic.

And Randi's fan.

But.....

Thanks,
S&S Why dont you adress the points mentioned (again) in Ted's post?

--- Or why dont you get on with your life?

Hans

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by latinijral



Hi Ted:

Did you read Carlos`s notarized challenge and letter?
I guess no.

The video that Carlos sent is only a REFERENCIAL TAPE.

How can you determinated the object is 100 feet from the camera? Even so, what about the two other points?

Hans

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Even so, what about the two other points?

Hans

-----------------------------------------------------
*
Hans:

We have received your referential tape and application to the challenge.
Please read this two points carefully:
1. The JREF does not pay for videos, only for TESTS agreed upon IN ADVANCE by BOTH the claimant and the JREF.

2. Even if the JREF was foolish enough to offer to pay money for a video, YOU would not be the claimant, since he, by his own admission, was not the one that shot it.

I studied "frame by frame"an internet video of your referntial tape just for fun, with some friends of the JREF.

Now, go back to your work, if you have one, and let us continue writing about Sylvia, Uri, Michael, dowsers, religions, pictures and videos of UFOS, etc.

Andrew Harter (JREF researcher)
James Randi (the boss)

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

Another point Hans?

Thanks,
S&S

P.S.
*Why they didn't write something like that?
A big mistake.

[Wyrd1]

At once again he ignores the arguments. Big surprise. Carlos if you were interested in the truth you might want to engage your brain. You should try it. You got what your challenge deserved. You got nothing.

P.S. Give Latinijral your notarized application so his kid can get off the potty.

Originally posted by Wyrd1
At once again he ignores the arguments. Big surprise. Carlos if you were interested in the truth you might want to engage your brain. You should try it. You got what your challenge deserved. You got nothing.

P.S. Give Latinijral your notarized application so his kid can get off the potty.

The man in the middle of your avatar has my notarized application . Is the same man that is on silence and afraid to write about it. Is the same loser like you.
Enjoy your cult.

Thanks,
S&S

[Wyrd1]

Yea, Carlos he probably used it to wipe his ass. That was all it was worth in the long run. Good job staying in your little delusional world. Don't come out to play. Reality will frighten a mental midget like you.

Latinijral, sorry it looks like no toilet paper for your kid. Print out some of your pictures instead. They might make decent toilet paper.

Originally posted by Wyrd1
Yea, Carlos he probably used it to wipe his ass.


And you are probably the one who cleans and wipes him every day.

Enjoy your cult.
He is still on silence.

Thanks,
S&S

Originally posted by Wyrd1
Yea, Carlos he probably used it to wipe his ass. That was all it was worth in the long run. Good job staying in your little delusional world. Don't come out to play. Reality will frighten a mental midget like you.

Latinijral, sorry it looks like no toilet paper for your kid. Print out some of your pictures instead. They might make decent toilet paper.

You are a liar.

Where your evidence?

How you get toilet paper off computer screen?

Carlos great man. Only fools look at video for truth.

He sent NOTARIZED application. What more proof you want?

Why Randi still silent about Carlo's haircut?

[Wyrd1]

I See your point. How could I have been so wrong? A NOTARIZED applicaton couldn't possibly be wrong.

And if you rub your kids ass on the screen... well you know.

Originally posted by Ted


I know, but I'm trying to discourage people from bombarding the JREF with videos because of a new urban legand that says that the JREF will pay a million dollars for videos it can't disprove.

The trouble with this whole thing is that it misses the whole idea of the Challange, which is a scientific TEST under controlled circimstances that IS AGREED UPON BY BOTH THE CLAIMANT AND THE JREF BEFORE IT IS DONE. It is not about coming up with some kind of story or video or artifact, or whatever and then presenting this to get a prize. If people start thinking in those terms, the result will be nothing but trouble.

Also, I don't like the idea of people believing that Challange claimants are being cheated somehow.

Urban legend?mmmmmmmmmm.

Maybe because they read Harter's poor answer to my application without a single word that my application or sending a referential tape is NOT VALID. His method to analyze the tape was absurd.

Besides that tape was broadcasted live to all the world. Is not faked.

And Randi is still on silence and with fear to publicate Harter's answer. He knows about that BIG mistake.

Thanks,
S&S

[subgenius]

You know, I read through 1400+ replies, so excuse me if I missed if someone asked this already:
Anyone ever ask S&S if he has taken his cause to others, like the media, governments, etc., and if so, what the reaction has been?
So why would it be different here?
If he hasn't, why not? Why does he think this forum can do anything about the phenomenon he thinks occurred?
Why wouldn't the media, or government agencies be very interested in the phenomenon he thinks is shown by clear and convincing proof? Maybe they're in a vast conspiracy? Cult?
So it was broadcast all over the world and he's the only one who sees the phenomenon? Does he ask himself why?

Originally posted by subgenius
You know, I read through 1400+ replies, so excuse me if I missed if someone asked this already:
Anyone ever ask S&S if he has taken his cause to others, like the media, governments, etc., and if so, what the reaction has been?
So why would it be different here?
If he hasn't, why not? Why does he think this forum can do anything about the phenomenon he thinks occurred?
Why wouldn't the media, or government agencies be very interested in the phenomenon he thinks is shown by clear and convincing proof? Maybe they're in a vast conspiracy? Cult?
So it was broadcast all over the world and he's the only one who sees the phenomenon? Does he ask himself why?

Yes, maybe you missed.

http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/oficialchallenge.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=14

http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/oficialchallenge.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=13

Or you can try your favorite link here:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=wtc+ufo

But Randi is still on silence. and Harter 's answer is really poor, is based in a poor method. They are afraid to publicate their own answer to my application.
You must learn to live with that.

Thanks,
S&S

[subgenius]

So they've all expressed interest in your findings and agree with them?

Originally posted by subgenius
So they've all expressed interest in your findings and agree with them?

The ones who looked the profesional 3/4 video tape at the tv stations , yes.

The persons that had access to the real unfaked video , yes.

The people that focus in the facts that show the video , yes.

But I never went to "ufologists" or yellow media. I don't trust those cults or any cult.
I presented to Randi. And he is still on silence, about their own answer (Harter's answer).

There are more than 9000 links and different interpretations of the phenomenon and Randi is still on silence.
But he always write about "similar" interpretations, pictures or videos. Not about this one.

Thanks,
S&S

[subgenius]

So if people in power have seen and agreed with your findings why aren't they doing anything about it?
This forum isn't as powerful as them.
Are you pursuing them to do something as much as you are harassing everyone here? If not, why not?

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by subgenius
So if people in power have seen and agreed with your findings why aren't they doing anything about it?
This forum isn't as powerful as them.
Are you pursuing them to do something as much as you are harassing everyone here? If not, why not?

I guess I'll have to post them again but there are like a zillion shots of the same event from different angles, many very clear and close-up at the hole the object is supposed to be passing through and of course there is nothing there.

Why would anyone make a fuss over something that is so incredibly easy to disprove.

I sure would miss hearing Carlos whine about it though, hehe. Makes my day.

Originally posted by subgenius
So if people in power have seen and agreed with your findings why aren't they doing anything about it?
This forum isn't as powerful as them.
Are you pursuing them to do something as much as you are harassing everyone here? If not, why not?

Hi subgenius:

Why should I ?
But on the other hand I recurred to JREF, and all I got is a poor answer based in a poor method. And The silence of Randi about their own answer (Harter's word).

This forum was the one who named me in the first post of this thread. Is even in the title of the thread.
That's the reason I am giving you your own medicine.

What evidence do you have that I am wrong?
A digitized version of a charlatan?
The poor answer of Harter?
The silence of Randi?
Or the insults of a cult?
Or just because "most" of the members say so?

Thanks,
S&S

[davidhorman]

What evidence do you have that I am wrong?
A digitized version of a charlatan?

It's better than the evidence you've provided to back up your assertion that the pictures are faked - which is exactly none.

David

Originally posted by davidhorman


It's better than the evidence you've provided to back up your assertion that the pictures are faked - which is exactly none.

David

You are the one who "beleives " in that faked version.

Is your problem , not mine.

I just did it different, also Harter.

Thanks,
S&S

[subgenius]

Originally posted by S&S


Hi subgenius:

Why should I ?
S&S
Since you have made a very important discovery and there are those who could do something about it, as opposed to this forum which can do nothing except give you attention.
Care to provide the evidence of all these important people that agree with you?

Originally posted by subgenius

Since you have made a very important discovery and there are those who could do something about it, as opposed to this forum which can do nothing except give you attention.
Care to provide the evidence of all these important people that agree with you?

Hi subgenius:

First I must recognize that you changed your just insulting attitude , that's good for the entire forum. I appreciate that from you.

I did what I had to do according to my possibilities.

If you can define what is for you "important people" I will help you.

If you think Randi is an important people (I did to) , well I gave him the evidences too.
But Harter in his name did a poor analysis based in a poor method (viewing an unknow link on the internet) and gave me a poor answer with mistakes on it and with not a single word that my application was not according to the rules or invalid.

And you know Randi is still on silence and refuses to put (as Bidlack wrote) Harter's answer in his week's commentaries.

Thanks,
S&S

[subgenius]

Originally posted by S&S


Hi subgenius:

First I must recognize that you changed your just insulting attitude , that's good for the entire forum. I appreciate that from you.

I did what I had to do according to my possibilities.

If you can define what is for you "important people" I will help you.

If you think Randi is an important people (I did to) , well I gave him the evidences too.
But Harter in his name did a poor analysis based in a poor method (viewing an unknow link on the internet) and gave me a poor answer with mistakes on it and with not a single word that my application was not according to the rules or invalid.

And you know Randi is still on silence and refuses to put (as Bidlack wrote) Harter's answer in his week's commentaries.

Thanks,
S&S
Since you continue to refuse to answer this simple question, and you are the insulting one guilty of everything you accuse others of, you now have the distinction of being the only one on my ignore list.
Too bad you don't know when you're not welcome, or when to leave.

Originally posted by subgenius

Since you continue to refuse to answer this simple question, and you are the insulting one guilty of everything you accuse others of, you now have the distinction of being the only one on my ignore list.
Too bad you don't know when you're not welcome, or when to leave.

A simple question where is not a definition of your own of what important people is?
Comon, you can put that definition.

I told you I send it to Randi . He is still on silence.

Giving up?

Thanks,
S&S

[subgenius]

Originally posted by S&S


A simple question where is not a definition of your own of what important people is?
Comon, you can put that definition.

I told you I send it to Randi . He is still on silence.

Giving up?

Thanks,
S&S
Anyone you think is important.
Got evidence?
Adios.

[hal bidlack]

Carlos,

I actually do think I understand your frustration. Certainly continue to post here as often as you like. But in addition, you might consider taking this important story to the larger world, if it is as significant as you believe.

As we seemingly refuse to give your position a fair hearing, and as you believe it to be worldly in its importance, I can only assume that you will immediately provide the global media listed below with your evidence. If you are correct, we will soon look very, very foolish on a global scale. Go for it.

I provide the following direct contacts for you:

New York Times:
e-mail nytnews@nytimes.com or leave a message at 1-888-NYT-NEWS.

Washington Post
writers and editors (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/interact/longterm/stfbio/wpemail.htm)

Newsweek
http://www.msnbc.com/modules/newsweek/info/nwinfo_contactus.asp

National Enquirer
homepage with contacts (http://www.nationalenquirer.com/)

Art Bell
According to the website, Bell retired, but this link will get you the new guy doing his show.
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/info/contactus.html

Ecuadorian Newspapers
http://www.thelocalpapers.com/global/31/Ecuador.html

60 Minutes
Click the "feedback" link at the bottom of: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml

The BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/services/feedback/html/default.stm

Univision
Spanish language network http://www.univision.com/content/content.jhtml?cid=72228

El Comercio
- Ecuador's daily news source for over 90+ years. http://www.elcomercio.com/

[subgenius]

Originally posted by hal bidlack
Carlos,

I actually do think I understand your frustration. Certainly continue to post here as often as you like. But in addition, you might consider taking this important story to the larger world, if it is as significant as you believe.

As we seemingly refuse to give your position a fair hearing, and as you believe it to be worldly in its importance, I can only assume that you will immediately provide the global media listed below with your evidence. If you are correct, we will soon look very, very foolish on a global scale. Go for it.

I provide the following direct contacts for you:

New York Times:
e-mail nytnews@nytimes.com or leave a message at 1-888-NYT-NEWS.

Washington Post
writers and editors (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/interact/longterm/stfbio/wpemail.htm)

Newsweek
http://www.msnbc.com/modules/newsweek/info/nwinfo_contactus.asp

National Enquirer
homepage with contacts (http://www.nationalenquirer.com/)

Art Bell
According to the website, Bell retired, but this link will get you the new guy doing his show.
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/info/contactus.html

Ecuadorian Newspapers
http://www.thelocalpapers.com/global/31/Ecuador.html

60 Minutes
Click the "feedback" link at the bottom of: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml

The BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/services/feedback/html/default.stm

Univision
Spanish language network http://www.univision.com/content/content.jhtml?cid=72228

El Comercio
- Ecuador's daily news source for over 90+ years. http://www.elcomercio.com/
My point exactly.
Should be a good test of whether he's sincere or just playing a game to destroy the forum.

Originally posted by hal bidlack
Carlos,

I actually do think I understand your frustration. Certainly continue to post here as often as you like. But in addition, you might consider taking this important story to the larger world, if it is as significant as you believe.

As we seemingly refuse to give your position a fair hearing, and as you believe it to be worldly in its importance, I can only assume that you will immediately provide the global media listed below with your evidence. If you are correct, we will soon look very, very foolish on a global scale. Go for it.

I provide the following direct contacts for you:

New York Times:
e-mail nytnews@nytimes.com or leave a message at 1-888-NYT-NEWS.

Washington Post
writers and editors (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/interact/longterm/stfbio/wpemail.htm)

Newsweek
http://www.msnbc.com/modules/newsweek/info/nwinfo_contactus.asp

National Enquirer
homepage with contacts (http://www.nationalenquirer.com/)

Art Bell
According to the website, Bell retired, but this link will get you the new guy doing his show.
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/info/contactus.html

Ecuadorian Newspapers
http://www.thelocalpapers.com/global/31/Ecuador.html

60 Minutes
Click the "feedback" link at the bottom of: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml

The BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/services/feedback/html/default.stm

Univision
Spanish language network http://www.univision.com/content/content.jhtml?cid=72228

El Comercio
- Ecuador's daily news source for over 90+ years. http://www.elcomercio.com/

Hi Bidlack :

I undersatnd your frustration to face a simple fact.
You made (JREF) a terrible mistake in your answer to my application.
You gave me a poor excuse why Randi refuses to put Harter's answer in his week's commentaries (is he ashame of that answer?)
Your foundation is the one who should debunk charlatans.
The media is open to charlatans as Sylvia and Uri. You go and trust them.

Face the truth Bidlack. You are the ones (JREF) that are on silence.
Just put Harter's answer and will see who lied or made the mistakes.
Are you following me? You are welcome.


Thanks,

S&S

Edited to put my sig.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by S&S


Hi Bidlack :

I undersatnd your frustration to face a simple fact.
You made (JREF) a terrible mistake in your answer to my application.
You gave me a poor excuse why Randi refuses to put Harter's answer in his week's commentaries (is he ashame of that answer?)
Your foundation is the one who should debunk charlatans.
The media is open to charlatans as Sylvia and Uri. You go and trust them.

Face the truth Bidlack. You are the ones (JREF) that are on silence.
Just put Harter's answer and will see who lied or made the mistakes.
Are you following me? You are welcome.


Thanks,

S&S

Edited to put my sig.
Evidence of obvious lack of good faith/mental illness.

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by S&S
You made (JREF) a terrible mistake in your answer to my application.


JREF's response was correct. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower and the evidence of the fact is overwheliming.

Anyone wishing to view the video in question can visit my website Creeps who exploit tragedies. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

Originally posted by S&S
You gave me a poor excuse why Randi refuses to put Harter's answer in his week's commentaries (is he ashame of that answer?)

Now we get to the real motive. You want your name in the commentary and you will say or do anything to get it. Check out my video of the day.

There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.

Originally posted by S&S
Your foundation is the one who should debunk charlatans.

Creeps who exploit tragedies. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

Originally posted by S&S
Just put Harter's answer and will see who lied or made the mistakes.

Harter's response to Carlos
We have received your application and video tape. I've seen this tape before and pointed out what was taking place to others.

You have made two assumptions, one following the other. Both are incorrect.

Your first assumption is that the object comes from behind the second tower. This is not the case. I've gone frame by frame through a copy of this video that's available on the Internet. You can clearly see that the object is IN FRONT OF THE TOWERS when you look at it frame by frame. The object is dark and difficult to see at some points against the smoke, but it is there. A bird could certainly be the culprit.

You have no claim. There is nothing supernatural taking place.

Andrew Harter
Researcher
James Randi Educational Foundation

Now go to Creeps who exploit tragedies. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/) and view the frames one by one and judge for yourself.

I will make a copy of the video available for any who wish to verify it's authenticity. Carlos refuses to make his available.

To order a copy yourself the information in on my site.

I will be posting addition versions I have collect via the web for your comparisons.

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/secondcrash010911.jpg

<A HREF="http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/movies/secondcrash010911.ram">
secondcrash010911.ram</A> streaming

</TD>


<TD>
This is a very clear shot of the hole this object is supposedly exiting. It is very clear that there is nothing passing through
this building when the second plane hits.



I'll be posting new videos daily.
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>




Be sure to check out my new web-site Creeps who exploit tragedies. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)



[i]The Blue Monk Adopt a Video Program: Since I have recently lost access to my free server space I am looking for homes for some of my videos so I can make them available online. I now have over 60 from various angles and broadcasts and they all show that there is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower. I am scrounging up bits and pieces of server space for this project but any help would be appreciated.



Face it, a couple of megs in donated web space can greatly enhance your laughing at Carlos experience.

[subgenius]

Blue Monk:
"Now we get to the real motive. You want your name in the commentary and you will say or do anything to get it."
________________
Nice job on the website, you're doing a great service to us all.
Its hard to respond to some of that crap without giving them credence.
JK does the same thing when he takes every tragedy (DC snipers, Uniz of Ariz mass murder, Shuttle crash, etc.) and uses it to "prove" his delusional theories.
You should attempt to avoid giving our friend any publicity if at all possible.
There are only two possibilities at the point: he's trying to destroy the forum/he's mentally ill. They are not mutually exclusive.
Edited to add:
I wouldn't waste too much bandwidth on the vids, as no one agrees with him. I support your effort to expose those who exploit tragedy.

[Wyrd1]

Again with the Blue Monk Tricked Videos (TM)

Blue Monk you are too motivated for the likes of Carlos who really only wants to complain about how mean old Harter did him dirt and how Randi is ignoring him. Such a sad pathetic existence. Why Carlos doesn't say to hell with all this and resume his art career is beyond me. There are bridges to decorate, with birds I noticed, and pools to mosaic. Still Carlos languishes here in Woo woo hell. Somehow he thinks he will accomplish something but everytime he comes close he shoots himself in the foot with his arrogant patois.

What can possibly be the motives of Mr Swett? He has a career. He has a family which appears to be quite a nice one. He has at least one friend a lawyer who seems to be devoted to him. He seems to be quite charming with the ladies, the ones that don't view him as a total kook anyway. With all this going he insteads spends his time trying to pretend he has arguments that no one can refute despite being repeatedly trounced and pretending that he never started insulting anyone (that liar Harter doesn't count) before they insulted him.

He also seems keen to point out that here is a thread with his name on it as if that gives a special reason for belonging here. He never seems to pay any mind to the fact that his friend Latinijral, also known as Is_James_Randi_a_Liar is the one who brought up his case in a very detrimental manner during a chat session. How was Patricio to know that by mentioning his name he would stick around like an evil spirit haunting JREF?

Well it's just too friggin bad cause he ain't a gettin what's here for. And all the complaining and bitchin and moaning in the world isn't going to gain him anything. But it's his life and his time and if he wants to spend it tilting at windmills like some virtual Cyberspace Don Quixote who are we to say nay?

Originally posted by subgenius

Evidence of obvious lack of good faith/mental illness.

Evidence of an absence of arguments. The Cult's style.

Thanks,
S&S

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by pyrrho2000


An e-mail isn't an official application. The JREF Challenge requires that you read the rules and fill out a notarized application. Then you have to wait your turn.

Please see:

http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


My question: Is an e-mail an official answer to a real notarized application?

quote: By e-mail?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have received your application and video tape. I've seen this tape before and pointed out what was taking place to others.

You have made two assumptions, one following the other. Both are incorrect.

Your first assumption is that the object comes from behind the second tower. This is not the case. I've gone frame by frame through a copy of this video that's available on the Internet. You can clearly see that the object is IN FRONT OF THE TOWERS when you look at it frame by frame. The object is dark and difficult to see at some points against the smoke, but it is there. A bird could certainly be the culprit.

You have no claim. There is nothing supernatural taking place.

Andrew Harter
Researcher
James Randi Educational Foundation

_------------------------------------------------------------------

That's the reason James randi is afraid ti post this simple , short and stupid reply in his week's commentaries. Bidlack, Randi and the JREF are afraid to do it.

I send to them a self adress envelope, according to the rules.
They received the application , and NEVER wrote a single word that it was not valid. They just studied an unknown link on internet. LOSERS.

Thanks,
S&S

[Wyrd1]

Okay, they should have sent you an answer in the self addressed stamped envelope.

It still doesn't make your claim a winner. In your notarized application you venture your opinion that you saw something Paranormal. Harter and Randi disagreed. It doesn't matter whether you like their method or not. It doesn't matter if you want to hold onto your opinion in the face of logic and reason. What matters is that birds flying in front of cameras are not paranormal objects. It doesn't matter a good goshdarn if the viewer is sophisticated enough to understand that.

Nobody is afraid of answering you or any other pompous windbag artist. The only person afraid of the truth is you since you hide from it on a daily basis.

Truth: The object was out of focus.
Truth: The most likely reason for it to be out of focus was because it was much closer to the camera than any other object in view.
Truth: The speed of the object is consistent with that of a bird flying 25 to 50 feet in front of the camera.
Truth: The size of the object is consistent with that of a bird flying 25 to 50 feet in front of the camera.
Truth: The object is not visable in any other video taken at the same time indicating that it was not a large object entering and exiting the holes in the WTC.
Truth: No one present in NYC eyewitnessed any large UFOs near the WTC at the time of the incident despite the fact that many would have been able to see it if your theory were correct.

The only argument you have is that you saw a hatshaped paranormal object. You have a highly inflated ego so you think that's the only argument that means anything but you are wrong.

Why is JREF ignoring you now? Because you were wrong and they feel no further need to continue an endless debate with a pompous man who will never admit he is wrong.

I only admit that they are afraid of their own answer, their own method and their own lies. JREF is afraid to publicate in an official way their own answer.

Okay, try my "ego" in japanese:

http://www2.justnet.ne.jp/~kiti/Ufo/wtc/wtc.htm

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
I only admit that they are afraid of their own answer, their own method and their own lies. JREF is afraid to publicate in an official way their own answer.

Okay, try my "ego" in japanese:

http://www2.justnet.ne.jp/~kiti/Ufo/wtc/wtc.htm

Still trying to get your name in Randi's commentary I see.

Your link only proves there are stupid Japanese also.

Their method was sound. They easily determined you claim was nonsense and probably threw your tape in the trash. Face it Carlos, you're just fruitcake #7456.

Boy, you must have sold a lot of art to be this determined to get some free publicity. Why don't you just take out an ad.

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/WorldTrade01.jpg

<A HREF="http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/movies/WorldTrade01.avi">
WorldTrade01.avi</A> 2118 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle provided by CNN.



This shot is interesting for two reasons. First, it is from an angle very similar to the shot in question. Second, it captures a number of birds in flight. It is interesting to note how similar they look to the image in question and it is also interesting to note the altitude they are flying at.



Most importantly, of course, it is quite clear that there is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.

</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>



I'll be posting new videos daily.



Be sure to check out my new web-site Creeps who exploit tragedies. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

[Wyrd1]

They should have sent you a letter and I'm sorry that they didn't do that but from Harter's reply he at least looked at your referential video. How else would he have known what you were talking about? And it only takes anyone who is a real skeptic a few minutes to determine the culprit is a bird and not a large flying object. How do they do that? Just look at the list I gave you. Logic and reason determine that it is far more likely to have a prosaic explanation than anything paranormal.

A paranormal explanation requires you to ignore too many things. Lack of eyewitnesses, lack of other viewing angles that should be there, lack of physical evidence (something should have been knocked loose in the WTC) and so on. A prosaic explanation such as a bird or insect only has to ignore one thing, Why is the one frame show no evidence of anything in front of it? But given the frame rates, the lack of focus, the fact that video is interleaved explains that little problem fairly well IMHO. You can maintain that it is a poor way to anaylse the question in your opinion but you can't expect Randi and Harter to concur with you. They were satisfied and it's too bad that isn't good enough for you but you won't get any additional consideration from them.

It's time to move on. I know your ego and pride probably won't allow you to but you need to tell yourself that all the complaining isn't going to get you anywhere you want to be.

Your challenge is done whether you want to accept it or not. More complaints are just a waste of your time.

JREF"ego" or choose your favorite album:
http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/shoebox.msnw

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
JREF"ego" or choose your favorite album:
http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/shoebox.msnw

Well that's very convincing evidence Carlos.

Why don't you cough up a copy of your tape if your so sure of it. You've claimed mine is faked, you could easily show me up if that were true by simply making copies of yours available.

You don't even believe this nonsense.

All you want is to get your name in Randi's commentary and you will lie, cheat and slander and sink to any low, including exploiting a tragedy to do it.

Hey Carlos, you used to demand that I answer your questions. How come you don't do that anymore?

Be sure I check out my new video that shows your claim is nonsense tomorrow.

and the day after....
and the day after....
and the day after....

And don't forget my web-site, Creeps who exploit tragedies (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

To all the charlatans that like to have fun with the tragedy, and to the charlatans that are in silent about it:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332

And to the charlatan of the faked digitized version:

http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/shoebox.msnw

Thanks,
S&S

Choose your favorite link and your favorite digitized version, there are only 9090.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=wtc+ufo&btnG=Google+Search

And Randi is still on silence.
And nobody knows which link Harter "studied" it frame by frame.
Only the cult's members are sure of that. They can even swear in name of their god.

And the cult still try to defend a truth bigger than their bla bla bla.

Harter gave me a poor answer (by e-mail?) based in a poor method with lies and /or mistakes on it.
Randi and Bidlack are afraid to publicate their own answer (Harter's) in the weeks commentaries. JREF losers.
Officially you don't have nothing, you are just a bunch of charlatans.

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
To all the charlatans that like to have fun with the tragedy, and to the charlatans that are in silent about it:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332



Yes that was a tacky thread and it went on a whole two days.


Originally posted by S&amp;S

And to the charlatan of the faked digitized version:

http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/shoebox.msnw

Thanks,
S&S

Excellent example of my point, thank you Carlos.

The image is on screen for a total of 22 frames.

Why won't you post them all? More importantly why do you specifically not post the last one near the edge when that is the frame you claim I faked?

As I've said, your selective posting of evidence shows you have a clear understanding of exactly where your claim breaks down.

You aren't dillusional, You're dishonest.

But thanks for reminding me, I'll be sure an repost ALL 22 frames and I challenge you to do the same. Thanks for the link though. I'll make sure our versions are posted side by side so anyone can see exactly what you are leaving out.

And as I've said before, I'll make copies of the tape available for anyone. Will you do the same, Well, will you big-mouth :)

I offer your selective withholding of evidence as proof you are a con-man.

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Randi and Bidlack are afraid to publicate their own answer (Harter's) in the weeks commentaries.

Now the heart of the matter.

That is all this nonsense is about isn't it Carlos? Getting your name in the commentary.

Originally posted by Blue Monk


Now the heart of the matter.

That is all this nonsense is about isn't it Carlos? Getting your name in the commentary.



They refused to put Harter's ANSWER to my application., because of his poor method, lies and /or mistakes. Of course I made the official notarized application.What kind of "fame" should that be? I will just be another charlatan like you.

My name is on this nonsense works, I already had my "15 seconds" of "fame". And the works are there not to be "famous", just for the people. Are free to everyone. I just did it. And I didn't faked anybody.

Searching for "fame" is just for charlatans like you.
I don't pretend that you like my works, I just do it with my best efforts. Now they belong also to you, they are not mine now.
There are only 2 pages, few examples, is not even my web page( I don't have one and I don't need one ,yet)

http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/carlosswett.msnw?albumlist=2

Do you want to write now about money, the prize or the million dollar? You better write about the truth. If you can, charlatan.

Thanks,
S&S

[Junior Bidlack]

I don't know why all of you are so against this Swett guy. I think that the big problems come from the translations of his spanish to english. What you may not know is that in some parts of South America the word for "ufo" is quite similar to the word for "Bird." This simple misunderstanding could have lead to some of the issues you all have discused. You may also be interested to know that his "thanks" at the conclusion of each post can be tranlated as "I am an idoit and simply ranting out of alcoholism and and addition to licking the toads i find living in my drain spouts." I hope that by clearing up this misunderstanding i can help the confusion that is being displayed here.

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
I don't know why all of you are so against this Swett guy. I think that the big problems come from the translations of his spanish to english. What you may not know is that in some parts of South America the word for "ufo" is quite similar to the word for "Bird." This simple misunderstanding could have lead to some of the issues you all have discused. You may also be interested to know that his "thanks" at the conclusion of each post can be tranlated as "I am an idoit and simply ranting out of alcoholism and and addition to licking the toads i find living in my drain spouts." I hope that by clearing up this misunderstanding i can help the confusion that is being displayed here.

WoW!! only 5 posts and you are showing your intelligence.
Keep on going, obey your cult "junior Bidlack".

Thanks ,
S&S

Edited to add the signature. Your boss (Bidlack) like it. But "only" in this thread.

[hal bidlack]

Carlos, meet my son.

Son, meet Carlos.

Originally posted by hal bidlack
Carlos, meet my son.

Son, meet Carlos.

Bidlack: educate your son.
He insulted me before your introduction.

Nice to meet him, I didn't know he was your son.

He is welcome here too, but I hope is prepared enough to debate not to give some free insults.

You know what I mean. you all are basically an honest family. Sometimes your "feelings" made you did some mistakes with me, but I understand your position.

Peace,

Thanks,
S&S

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
I don't know why all of you are so against this Swett guy. I think that the big problems come from the translations of his spanish to english. What you may not know is that in some parts of South America the word for "ufo" is quite similar to the word for "Bird." This simple misunderstanding could have lead to some of the issues you all have discused. You may also be interested to know that his "thanks" at the conclusion of each post can be tranlated as "I am an idoit and simply ranting out of alcoholism and and addition to licking the toads i find living in my drain spouts." I hope that by clearing up this misunderstanding i can help the confusion that is being displayed here.

I like him already!!!!

Originally posted by Denise


I like him already!!!!

Why Not?

Is your cult's style. Just bla bla bla. But evidences , those are really hard to you : "moderator" and fanatic.

But I love you just the way you are.

Thanks,

S&S

edited to add the signature, was a promise to Bidlack, he asked me to removed from others threads.

[PinkRabbit]

Originally posted by S&amp;S


Why Not?

Is your cult's style. Just bla bla bla. But evidences , those are really hard to you : "moderator" and fanatic.

But I love you just the way you are.

Thanks,

S&S

edited to add the signature, was a promise to Bidlack, he asked me to removed from others threads.

The notion of a guy who has yet to show even one tiny, itty bitty, little, infinitessimally small hint of evidence complaining that others don't show any is just too funny for me to pass up.

Oh, he's made claims that he has evidence, claims that others have lied, claims of fakery (also completely unproven), but evidence?

Naaaahhhhh.

Not a bit of it.

He won't send his tape to anyone, won't post screen caps (I'm not counting his little buddy latinijral's badly distorted photographs of a television ... which are a bad joke), won't do anything but make outrageous claims, hurl insults, and accuse everyone who doesn't believe them of being in a cult, being afraid, and being a liar.

God, you're tiresome, Carlos.

Barb

[Junior Bidlack]

Here is my new thought, maybe it was a space ship designed to look like a bird. I think that that is an answer that is both logical and can solve this argument. Based on my own mathematical calculations, i took calc in high school. I have found that the internal didactic calibrations of a the inter-related functions of a bird's sporatic manuevering that a bird shape is infact an applicable shape for a potential space craft. The key is materials, while a bird is made out of flesh and "feathers" the space craft bird would have to be constructed out of a high denisity low weight Altec polimer. This is the kind of polimer used to make the little things at the ends of shoe laces. And if this proves to be right then maybe i should get the million dollars. I mean I am the one who just thought of this, and i could also use a new car. And i think i may be able to control other people's minds although that is in the early stages.