The "Carlos Swett affair"

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by PinkRabbit
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.



Well out of fairness to Carlos that is not entirely true.

He can provide links to his scanned application, introductory letter, follow-up letter and even the dated delivery receipt.

Doesn't take a genius to figure out his priorities.

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by 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.

I just wish they could come up with a more effective way of eliminating their waste as I am tired of washing my car.

They was that stuff sticks to auto paint it must be radioactive.

[PinkRabbit]

Originally posted by Blue Monk


Well out of fairness to Carlos that is not entirely true.

He can provide links to his scanned application, introductory letter, follow-up letter and even the dated delivery receipt.

Doesn't take a genius to figure out his priorities.

I probably should have been more specific. He has shown zero evidence of anything paranormal.

Yes, he probably sent in a claim, but that's proof of nothing except that he sent in a claim. It doesn't prove it's true in any way, manner, or form.

To the best of my knowledge the amount of evidence substantiating his claim still resides at zero.

Barb

[Wyrd1]

Is all words! Words! Bla Bla Bla!

Your cults have the logic. Is not for woo woo art egomaniacs like Carlos.

How many times do you, Carlos Swett Salas need to be told? You were judged and found wanting. You have no claim and whether you like it or not it is done. I feel bad you wasted a stamp on your envelope but get over it.

This irrational game you're playing isn't fooling anyone. You can claim to be presenting evidence despite the fact that you haven't and it just makes you look delusional. You can say all we have are just insults despite how many times the inconsistencies in your arguments have been pointed out to you and ignored and answered by insults.

How much validation does you ego require? You won't win your claim and the more you play the Crybaby routine the less likely it is that you will ever get the mention in the commentaries. As it stands now you have roughly the Proverbial Snowball's Chance In Hell of getting a mention and as your chances diminish with every post I can't imagine a scenario where success could be less likely.

Are you trying to demonstrate just how delusional one human can be?

What do you think you can accomplish here?

Originally posted by PinkRabbit




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

Hi Barbarita:

Welcome back.
My tape? or my referential tape?
Yes , I send my referential tape to the JREF,told them were the tape was available(not mine), I challenged them, not for the prize per se (as you can read), only for the truth.

But The JREF just did a poor method, they "studied" an internet unknown video. they gave me a poor answer full of lies and or mistakes,no a single word that my application was invalid, they refused to put Harter's answer in the week's commentaries, they are losers. Is not my fault.You have to learn to live with that. Those are your idols. For me are just another group of persons that made a big mistake. That 's the truth , the only truth.
You are just trying to defend your idols. Is not their fault. Is your cult's style.

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by S&S

Yes , I send my referential tape to the JREF,told them were the tape was available(not mine), I challenged them, not for the prize per se (as you can read), only for the truth.

You refuse to face the truth Carlos. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower. That is a demons ratable fact.

Originally posted by S&S
But The JREF just did a poor method,


They did a good method. They were able to determine quickly and efficiently that you claim was nonsense and no doubt threw your tape in the trash along with the others Harter referred to.

Originally posted by S&S
they "studied" an internet unknown video.


True. We do not know what tape was viewed but it is clear that whatever tape they viewed the did come to the correct conclusion. If you don't like their challenge perhaps you should try another. No one owes you anything.

Originally posted by S&S
they gave me a poor answer full of lies and or mistakes,


Once again you show what a dishonest creep you are. You allege lies with no proof. There is no evidence that anyone lied to you and all the evidence I have provided shows quite clearly that there is little need to lie. There is overwhelming evidence to easily show your claim is nonsense and you know it.

Originally posted by S&S
no a single word that my application was invalid,


Harter told you there was nothing supernatural happening. Randi replied himself to verify Harter's findings. This is another clear example of you childishly and dishonestly ignoring facts that you don't like, much like you ignore all of the videos that clearly show you were quite simply and clearly wrong.

Originally posted by S&S
they refused to put Harter's answer in the week's commentaries,


Where does it say in any of the rules concerning the challenge that all applicants will be mentioned in the commentary? No one owes you anything. You applied, you were not accepted for the challenge, and you were informed of that fact.

Originally posted by S&S
they are losers


You are a fool if you think name calling will accomplish anything for you.

Originally posted by S&S
Is not my fault.


It is all your fault. It is your fault for not having enough common sense to test your claim against other videos. It is your fault for not accepting an honest response from JREF. It is also your fault that you have not found a sympathetic ear here for slandering any who disagree with you. You have spent months whining and complaining and slandering those who pay the bill for the very server you are conducting your childish attacks on. That is an irony I am sure is not lost on many.

Originally posted by S&S
You have to learn to live with that.


I am pretty sure everyone here has a clear conscience on this matter. I know you are liar because I have the tape. You may con others but you will never con me.

Originally posted by S&S
Those are your idols. For me are just another group of persons that made a big mistake. That 's the truth , the only truth.
You are just trying to defend your idols. Is not their fault. Is your cult's style.


Yes, the final refuge of a scoundrel. You are a coward who is afraid to face the evidence.

If you are interested in discussing you silly claim then consider this…..

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/thumbs/home01.JPG

<A HREF="http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/videos/home01.rm">
home01.rm</A> 1024 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle that was caught on a home video.



From this angle it would be impossible for anything to pass through the hole made by the first plane without being captured on tape and as you can see for yourself 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/)

I'll let the fact that you will ignore this video as you have all the rest as further proof of your dishonesty and cowardice.

I do so look forward to your next rambling concerning cults. I do hope it was my avatar that inspired you.

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
Here is my new thought, maybe it was a space ship designed to look like a bird.


Hi Junior:

Now that your father made the correct introduction : welcome junior.be free to post all your assumptions.

Funny "bird" , isn't it? It also "dissapear" at some frames.

Thanks,
S&S

[PinkRabbit]

Carlostroll, do we really need to go through the whole thing with your need to come up with "cute" little versions of my name again?

You have posted zero evidence here, but you expect us to all believe you.

I repeat, zero evidence.

What you sent to the JREF has no bearing on what anyone here has seen as the people here do not have access to that tape. What you say it shows is not evidence. It is merely opinion.

Zero evidence.

You have repeatedly called several people liars, yet post no evidence to contradict theirs or prove that they lie.

Again, zero evidence.

The one picture you do post was done by your little buddy latinijral, and is apparently a photograph of a television, and blown up several times over until the distortion makes it meaningless.

Useless evidence equals zero evidence.

In short, you have shown no one here any evidence of your claim. Not one whit.

Neither have you repudiated any of Blue Monk's evidence which shows very clearly there was nothing paranormal. latinijral repeating over and over that something was faked does not equal evidence, especially given that he apparently knows next to nothing about digital imaging, and you know even less than he does.

And now you can incoherently repeat yourself again, and again, and again ... ad nauseum ... acknowledging that you have utterly failed in every regard when it comes to proving your claim.

Barb

Originally posted by PinkRabbit
Carlostroll, do we really need to go through the whole thing with your need to come up with "cute" little versions of my name again?


Barb

Barbarita;

Take it easy, cool yourself." Barbarita" is just a gentle way to call your name. You deserve that consideration from me. I like to respect women, it doesn't matter that you don't like me. Or maybe you do, woman are very strange.

Learn to live with the proofs, if you want.
Are simple:
I send my referential tape(not a digitized version) to the JREF,told them were the tape was available(at any tv station in the USA or the world), I challenged them, not for the prize per se (as you can read), only for the truth.

But The JREF just did a poor method, they "studied" an internet unknown video. They gave me(Harter-JREF) a poor answer full of lies and or mistakes, without a single word that my application was invalid, they are still refusing to put Harter's answer in the week's commentaries, they are the losers. Is not my fault.
You have to learn to live with that. Those are your idols. For me are just another group of persons that made a big mistake. That 's the truth , the only truth.
You are just trying to defend your idols. Is not their fault. Is your cult's style.

But you can try another cult or try to push them to have the guts to publicate a simple stupid answer.

So Barbarita, you make me happy again of your N return.
Keep on posting and defending your cult. Some day you will learn.

Thanks,
S&S

[Junior Bidlack]

Dr. Swett (I am not actually implying that you are a doctor, but you make a better enemy if you have a cool title to your name, i plan on trying out several of them) i pose a question to you...I think that it is quite possible that this "ufo" is in fact an alien bird. (i know that isn't really a question) after using an electron microscope to anylze the film, i have found that the birds composition is not of carbon as an "earthbird" would be made of but in fact the bird is composed of recycled aluminum. I think, based on watching "I am a celebrity get me out of here" that this bird is most likely from the 4th moon of jupiter. What do you think?

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
Dr. Swett (I am not actually implying that you are a doctor, but you make a better enemy if you have a cool title to your name, i plan on trying out several of them) i pose a question to you...I think that it is quite possible that this "ufo" is in fact an alien bird. (i know that isn't really a question) after using an electron microscope to anylze the film, i have found that the birds composition is not of carbon as an "earthbird" would be made of but in fact the bird is composed of recycled aluminum. I think, based on watching "I am a celebrity get me out of here" that this bird is most likely from the 4th moon of jupiter. What do you think?

I am not a Dr.

I studied Architecture.My wife is an architect too.

But I am working in art stuff. Most of my life I did it and I am still doing it.
Call me Carlos, if you want, or use your favorite insult.
Use your microscope:

Thanks,
S&S

[PinkRabbit]

Carlostroll, do not play with my name. In my culture, to use a nickname with someone who is not a friend is insulting, and implies a nonexistent (and profoundly undesired, in this case) intimacy. Given that I detest you, it makes my skin crawl.

I realize that in your mind simply disagreeing with you makes someone a cult member. I mean, after all, how else could anyone disagree with the great Carlos Swett? Please, give me a break. Your video isn't paranormal.

And how do I know that? No cultie mind influence at work. Remember, I've looked at the thing at a news station ... seen it frame by frame on a professional system ... and the object was visible in every single frame. Not easily seen, but there.

Whatever Harter's technique, he's right, you're wrong. Deal with it.

And now I fully expect you to repeat yourself again, since you have nothing coherent to say in defense of your painfully indefensible position, so you just repeat your incoherencies ad nauseum.

Barb

[Blue Monk]

<font size="+2">The Amazing Frame 17</font>

http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/spooky_small.jpg

<font size="+1">Spooky, huh?</font>




Ah yes, an old favorite. Below, of course, is what this frame actually looks like. I captured this straight from the tape.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/frame_17_small.jpg



Oh, and just to keep me honest, here is the same frame from Carlo's idiot friend's website.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/li_012_small.jpg



And yet a third source.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/wct_sh2_88.jpg



Of course it is no accident that that is the only frame he will show. The others clearly show a modulating shape, very remarkably like a bird flapping it's wings (What a shock!). Below is frame 19 as an example.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/frame_19_small.jpg



And again from another source.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/wct_sh2_89.jpg



Of course one can view all of the frames here. (http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/all_frames/all_frames.html)



Be sure to check out my new web-site Creeps who exploit tragedies. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

Originally posted by PinkRabbit
Carlostroll, do not play with my name. In my culture, to use a nickname with someone who is not a friend is insulting, and implies a nonexistent (and profoundly undesired, in this case) intimacy. Given that I detest you, it makes my skin crawl.


And how do I know that? No cultie mind influence at work. Remember, I've looked at the thing at a news station ... seen it frame by frame on a professional system ... and the object was visible in every single frame. Not easily seen, but there.



Barb

Barb, Barbarita:

When you expect something, you should give the example.
I am Carlos or Carlitos (I will like that from you).
You know is a really a thin line from hate to love , and considering your woman nature everything is possible. So feel alive when your skin crawl. Maybe your mind is on an internal fight.

Yes , we have your "word" that you "looked at the thing at a news station ... seen it frame by frame on a professional system ... and the object was visible in every single frame. Not easily seen, but there. ".

The difference is that JREF have the EVIDENCE that I really did it.
In my REFERNTIAL tape I send to them, is also a segment of a tape of a documental of that action , was broadcasted in the news of that station. Read again my letter to Randi, or ask Bidlack or the friends that are close to the JREF and that tape.

The fact : Andrew Harter is full of lies and or mistakes. His analysis is based in a poor method, Randi is still on silence , and they refused to publicate Harter's answer.
Learn to live with that , ans stop crying just for the "Barbarita" stuff. I promise, is just a cute way to call persons, is not offensive as you think it is . Ask some latins friends , if you have some.
But if you still feel offended after this explanation (...) I will call you Barb, I prefer to do it than writing to a pink Rabbit.
Chao Barb.

Thanks,
S&S

[PinkRabbit]

Before this note continues, my apologies to one and all, but this one is a bit derailed.

That said....

Carlostroll (since I know you love the nicknames, you should know this is how I think of you and how I will refer to you as long as you feel the need to bastardize my name and imply any level of familiarity),

Y'know I needed a laugh this morning, and the notion that you're out there apparenly convinced that I'm lusting after you is too damn funny for words. You even got my girlfriend howling with laughter on that one.

Damn, you're funny.

Yep, you're such a stud puppy that no one can resist. Straight men, gay women ... is there no end to your attraction to any and all?

*brief pause for peals of laughter*

However, in the interest of clarity *giggle*, let me just say that I'm still happily, contentedly, and euphorically a lesbian. Women make my heart race and my palms sweat ... the gorgeous redhead lying in my bed does this particularly well, in fact.

But ... should I decide I just need to have a man, let me say that every single man on this board except your little buddy latinijral is infinitely more desirable and ahead of you in line.

For instance, Hal Bidlack is a cutie, tights and all, That Guy Who Juggles is adorable (gotta love a man with a Felix the cat avatar), Blue Monk is fascinating, Wyrd entertaining ... etc, etc, etc.

You, on the other hand are an arrogant, short-sighted, ignorant, dishonest, unethical, self-impressed fool. Not exactly qualities I find attractive. You're also slimy ... and sleazy ... blech.

Oh, and to get back to the topic at hand, you still haven't offered any proof of anything paranormal here, on this message board. You've babbled and complained, and accused people of lying, but proof?

Nope. None of that.

You have offered just as much proof as I have. The difference is I'm not asking anyone to believe me or give me money, just stating what I saw.

Meanwhile, others have seen the tape, and reported nothing paranormal. Any number of other angles show absolutely nothing paranormal. Blue Monk's copies of the image in question show absolutely nothing paranormal, and you still haven't proven he altered the image a whit ... just quoted your little buddy, who clearly knows nothing about digital imaging yelling histrionically that it was faked.

Post a digitized version of your tape, or properly made screen captures (not that photo of a tv cr*p that distorts the image as much as possible). Go on. I dare you.

But you won't. You'll go on whining, and talking yourself into believing that I (and everyone else) want you (brief pause for more laughter), and you're just the poor put upon victim here.

Cue Carlostroll's next repetitive post....

Barb

[Blue Monk]

PinkRabbit,

To be fair Carlos does have his admirers.



http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/carlos_lover.jpg



But on to new business.




<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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]

I didn't know you were so artistic oh Blue One! Your picture looks like the horse is about to express his opinion on Carlos' "arguments."

[PinkRabbit]

Originally posted by Blue Monk


PinkRabbit,

To be fair Carlos does have his admirers.


(chuckle)

Clearly Carlostroll is into it, but ... I dunno, Blue Monk, that horse looks pretty nervous to me.

Barb (still laughing)

Originally posted by PinkRabbit
Before this note continues, my apologies to one and all, but this one is a bit derailed.

That said....

Carlostroll (since I know you love the nicknames, you should know this is how I think of you and how I will refer to you as long as you feel the need to bastardize my name and imply any level of familiarity),

Y'know I needed a laugh this morning, and the notion that you're out there apparenly convinced that I'm lusting after you is too damn funny for words. You even got my girlfriend howling with laughter on that one.

Damn, you're funny.

Yep, you're such a stud puppy that no one can resist. Straight men, gay women ... is there no end to your attraction to any and all?

*brief pause for peals of laughter*

However, in the interest of clarity *giggle*, let me just say that I'm still happily, contentedly, and euphorically a lesbian. Women make my heart race and my palms sweat ... the gorgeous redhead lying in my bed does this particularly well, in fact.

But ... should I decide I just need to have a man, let me say that every single man on this board except your little buddy latinijral is infinitely more desirable and ahead of you in line.

For instance, Hal Bidlack is a cutie, tights and all, That Guy Who Juggles is adorable (gotta love a man with a Felix the cat avatar), Blue Monk is fascinating, Wyrd entertaining ... etc, etc, etc.

You, on the other hand are an arrogant, short-sighted, ignorant, dishonest, unethical, self-impressed fool. Not exactly qualities I find attractive. You're also slimy ... and sleazy ... blech.

Oh, and to get back to the topic at hand, you still haven't offered any proof of anything paranormal here, on this message board. You've babbled and complained, and accused people of lying, but proof?

Nope. None of that.

You have offered just as much proof as I have. The difference is I'm not asking anyone to believe me or give me money, just stating what I saw.

Meanwhile, others have seen the tape, and reported nothing paranormal. Any number of other angles show absolutely nothing paranormal. Blue Monk's copies of the image in question show absolutely nothing paranormal, and you still haven't proven he altered the image a whit ... just quoted your little buddy, who clearly knows nothing about digital imaging yelling histrionically that it was faked.

Post a digitized version of your tape, or properly made screen captures (not that photo of a tv cr*p that distorts the image as much as possible). Go on. I dare you.

But you won't. You'll go on whining, and talking yourself into believing that I (and everyone else) want you (brief pause for more laughter), and you're just the poor put upon victim here.

Cue Carlostroll's next repetitive post....

Barb

Hi Barb.....(almost did it again)

As you admit, my last reply to you made you happy. That's a begining. You are free to have your sexual preferences, but to me you are still a woman , a very interesting woman , so I just do what my nature demands me to do: be clever and nice to you.

Don't worry , I understand your position, you and your friends from the forum you named, are all well identified for their replies.
You must defend them , is part of your actual attitude and beleifs.
But time goes on and maybe you change to another position.

Until then , keep on beleiving in digitized faked version, that Harter did really an excelent analysis of the tape on the internet, that he never lied in his answer to me, that Randi only write about intelligent , non charlatans and smart men . that the JREF answer clearly states that my application was not valid, that I never send nothing to the JREF, that the e.mail can be faked, etc. etc.

Is your world, you liked, you are happy.
I respect cults, are just another kind of humans. Just true beleivers.
Humanity is a diversity, even in sexual preferences, so let's respect that, specially if it is a nice woman like you.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S.
And don't forget your "lesson" : a picture or a digitized version "can not" be faked. Well, only for "fun".
Are all your cult friends also .....you know. I am begining to suspect.

[PinkRabbit]

Carlos, I suggest you learn the difference of laughing with, and being laughed at.

Now, as to the men I mentioned, wasn't defending them in the least. They're quite intelligent and articulate enough to do that on their own. I was simply making the point that I find them infinitely more interesting, charming, and desirable than I find you because you seem to have this bizarre notion that I think you're incredibly attractive when in reality, I think you're one of the least attractive men I've ever seen online. Personally, I would have preferred to leave the whole subject out of this thread, as I don't think it has any bearing on anything, but you seem hell bent on bringing my gender into it, and implying that I'm secretly lusting after you (pause for more laughter), so I figured I might as well respond.

Once again, not believing in any digital files. Saw the analog tape for myself.

Just attesting that what Blue Monk posted corresponded to what I saw, and that I saw no evidence of any tampering in the files he posted. There are usually clues to these things and I saw none of them. Not to say that it's impossible to do such things perfectly, but it's difficult, so the balance of evidence is in his favor.

latinijral's ranting about the files being faked showed no signs of understanding anything about how computer graphics are manipulated, and his notion that his picture of a tv set is somehow an accurate representation of anything puts him in the to ignorant to be listened to category. Given that you apparently view him as an expert, you can guess what I think of your knowledge level.

Not a cult member. Not a JREF member. Don't even spend much time here, and would generally qualify as a lurker. I doubt there are ten people on this board who remember my nick. Ironically enough, I doubt Randi would even consider me much of a skeptic as I'm not an atheist, tend to believe in reincarnation, and do not entirely dismiss the possibility of ghosts or psychic flashes (though I don't believe in the John Edward sorts of on demand psychic ability).

And yet, I still think your claim is bogus.

But don't let reality intrude on whatever fantasy you've got worked out for yourself.

Barb

Originally posted by PinkRabbit
Carlos, I suggest you learn the difference of laughing with, and being laughed at.

Now, as to the men I mentioned, wasn't defending them in the least. They're quite intelligent and articulate enough to do that on their own. I was simply making the point that I find them infinitely more interesting, charming, and desirable than I find you because you seem to have this bizarre notion that I think you're incredibly attractive when in reality, I think you're one of the least attractive men I've ever seen online. Personally, I would have preferred to leave the whole subject out of this thread, as I don't think it has any bearing on anything, but you seem hell bent on bringing my gender into it, and implying that I'm secretly lusting after you (pause for more laughter), so I figured I might as well respond.

Once again, not believing in any digital files. Saw the analog tape for myself.

Just attesting that what Blue Monk posted corresponded to what I saw, and that I saw no evidence of any tampering in the files he posted. There are usually clues to these things and I saw none of them. Not to say that it's impossible to do such things perfectly, but it's difficult, so the balance of evidence is in his favor.

latinijral's ranting about the files being faked showed no signs of understanding anything about how computer graphics are manipulated, and his notion that his picture of a tv set is somehow an accurate representation of anything puts him in the to ignorant to be listened to category. Given that you apparently view him as an expert, you can guess what I think of your knowledge level.

Not a cult member. Not a JREF member. Don't even spend much time here, and would generally qualify as a lurker. I doubt there are ten people on this board who remember my nick. Ironically enough, I doubt Randi would even consider me much of a skeptic as I'm not an atheist, tend to believe in reincarnation, and do not entirely dismiss the possibility of ghosts or psychic flashes (though I don't believe in the John Edward sorts of on demand psychic ability).

And yet, I still think your claim is bogus.

But don't let reality intrude on whatever fantasy you've got worked out for yourself.

Barb

Barb..

Don't worry , you don't need to explain me nothing, I understand your position. I understand how women are. Or are they like men?

You can beleive in whatever you want, is your life.
But this forum is about real evidences.

And you have to live with these evidences:

* Harter made a poor analysis of the tape, he gave me an answer full of lies andor mistakes of interpretation (maybe the language), Randi is still on silence and refuses to publicate HARTER's answer, You beleive in tricked digitized pictures and videos as evidences, there is not a single word that my application was invalid, etc, etc.

Or you better live with the opposite, just respcting and beleiving your "friends" positions.
If you are confortable in that cult, keep on being happy.

I am glad that you are happy.

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

Here some evidence Carlos.

What do you think?

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

[Charlie in Dayton]

Originally posted by PinkRabbit

...But ... should I decide I just need to have a man, let me say that every single man on this board except your little buddy latinijral is infinitely more desirable and ahead of you in line...

Barb

D*mn...there is still hope for me after all...:D

Originally posted by Charlie in Dayton


D*mn...there is still hope for me after all...:D

Sure Cid, Barb is only kidding about her sexual preferences, she never posted yet a real evidence.

And you , you are least are frontal with your "preferences" and beleifs. You are proud to use "scientific" methods and to be in the chair next to your leader. You won the best contribution.
You are really part of the JREF. That's good.

But they are still on silence, they refuse to publicate Harter's answer to my real notarized application.

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

There's nothing there Carlos.

I'm sure they threw your tape in the trash with all the other stupid junk they get from fools.

There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.

Looking forward to show you many more clips that show the same thing.

Anyone want to see just how big a fool Carlos is?

Be my guest....

More tomorrow.

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

Charlatan of the faked picture and digitized video:

Have fun with your friends about a tragedy:
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332&highlight=pictures+smoke

Or call your family and tell them you are sad and lonely, just with your virtual fanatics friends. They will understand. They love you. You can do it too.

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Charlatan of the faked picture and digitized video:

Have fun with your friends about a tragedy:
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332&highlight=pictures+smoke

Or call your family and tell them you are sad and lonely, just with your virtual fanatics friends. They will understand. They love you. You can do it too.

Thanks,
S&S

Same offer as before Carlos. I'll make copies of my video for anyone to view if they wish.

Will you do the same? Well, will you big mouth?

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

Don't forget to call your family. stop drinking to much.
Don't be sad and lonely.
Find a couple, man or woman according at your preferences.
Your family never stopped loving you. You can do it too.
Show them your digitized versions , they will say ok is your life.

Or put anothers section about mockering from the tragedy, enjoy your virtual friends, laugh with them.

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332&highlight=pictures+smoke

Or look at the real world. try to be honest, face the truths.

But you have to learn to live with real evidences:
And you have to live with these evidences:

* Harter made a poor analysis of the tape, just "studied"an unknown link on internet

*Harter never wrote that my application was invalid

*Harter gave me an answer full of lies and or mistakes of interpretation (maybe the language),

* Randi is still on silence and refuses to publicate HARTER's answer,

*You all beleive in tricked anonimous digitized pictures and videos as evidences.

Or just be happy the way you feel now.

Thanks,
S&S

[PinkRabbit]

Originally posted by S&amp;S


Barb..

Don't worry , you don't need to explain me nothing, I understand your position. I understand how women are. Or are they like men?

You can beleive in whatever you want, is your life.
But this forum is about real evidences.

And you have to live with these evidences:

* Harter made a poor analysis of the tape, he gave me an answer full of lies andor mistakes of interpretation (maybe the language), Randi is still on silence and refuses to publicate HARTER's answer, You beleive in tricked digitized pictures and videos as evidences, there is not a single word that my application was invalid, etc, etc.

Or you better live with the opposite, just respcting and beleiving your "friends" positions.
If you are confortable in that cult, keep on being happy.

I am glad that you are happy.

Thanks,
S&S

Carlos,

I doubt you understand anything ... about anything.

The quality of Harter's analysis is irrelevant if he's right and there's nothing paranormal going on. Your application is irrelevant, Randi's response is irrelevant.

What is relevant is what is going on on that tape.

Namely, something, undoubtedly a a bird is flying across the screen. It's out of focus and motion blurred. It is visible in every frame, though only faintly so in a couple of frames. It requires good equipment to see it. Perhaps, that was your problem. There are many levels and types of professional equipment. The object, however, does not go through the building.

And once again, I'm not basing my beliefs on any digitized versions.

I SAW THE DAMN TAPE!!!

Got it?

I SAW THE TAPE!!

Now, if you wish to add something new to the discussion, I suggest you send someone your tape, or have it digitized and try to point out where you think it's different from what's been posted. I dare you. Afraid?

Or you can go on mindlessly repeating yourself like a poorly programmed bot, convincing anyone with any doubts just how dumb you are.

Barb

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Don't forget to call your family. stop drinking to much.
Don't be sad and lonely.
Find a couple, man or woman according at your preferences.
Your family never stopped loving you. You can do it too.
Show them your digitized versions , they will say ok is your life.

Or put anothers section about mockering from the tragedy, enjoy your virtual friends, laugh with them.

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332&highlight=pictures+smoke

Or look at the real world. try to be honest, face the truths.

But you have to learn to live with real evidences:
And you have to live with these evidences:

* Harter made a poor analysis of the tape, just "studied"an unknown link on internet

*Harter never wrote that my application was invalid

*Harter gave me an answer full of lies and or mistakes of interpretation (maybe the language),

* Randi is still on silence and refuses to publicate HARTER's answer,

*You all beleive in tricked anonimous digitized pictures and videos as evidences.

Or just be happy the way you feel now.

Thanks,
S&S

Oh goody! Another opportunity to promote my web-site that is dedicated to your foolishness.

Don't worry Carlos. You won't have to dodge this video long. It's almost time to post another.

I hope you enjoy it.

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

Charlatan:

Don't forget that Bidlack is your Godfather. Keep on posting.

And don't forget to call your real parents, give them the link, they will understand your lonliness and sad attitude.

But remember to think about Harter's answer and the real video they analyzed.

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Charlatan:

Don't forget that Bidlack is your Godfather. Keep on posting.

And don't forget to call your real parents, give them the link, they will understand your lonliness and sad attitude.

But remember to think about Harter's answer and the real video they analyzed.

Thanks,
S&S

That's fine and dandy Carlos.

But what do you think of this video?

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

Even your cult's days are special : they just last few minutes.

Don't get angry , you are already sad and lonely. Call your family, find a couple, enjoy real world.

Learn to face truths, learn about your owm words. See my sig.

Or have fun with your friends, put a side section in your "famous " web page. Be happy:
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332&highlight=pictures+smoke

And Randi is still on silence. They are ashame of Harter's answer to my real notarized application.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S.

Don't worry, Bidlack is your Godfather, he will understand your days.

[Blue Monk]

Yes, yes, Carlos you've said all of that before.

It is just one simple question.

What do you think about this video?

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

Charlatan:

Is a video of one of your "special days".

Really a paranormal day.

Or try to define paranormal. If you can.

Call your real family.
Or ask randi why he is still on silence about Harter's answer

Don't be angry , sad and lonely.
At least your Godfather is happy with you.
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332&highlight=pictures+smoke

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

It's really a very simple question Carlos.

What do you think of this video?

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

Is really a paranormal day . Your days are paranormal. They only last few minutes.

What is paranormal ?Comon give the definition.


Call your family, they love you.

You are sad , angry and lonely. At lesst you are happy with your cult and having fun with the tragedy :

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332&highlight=pictures+smoke

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

Don't worry Carlos, there will be a new one tomorrow and you can have fun ignoring it all day long too.

What do you think of this video?

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Blue Monk


Damn neighborhood kids keep calling me a sissy-mary.

I keep telling them, "It's not a dress, it's a robe!"

Being in a cult is not as easy as it looks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Is just another paranormal day you had.

I told you: call your parents, they will understand you. They love you.

Or keep on having fun with your cult:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332&highlight=pictures+smoke

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

My you're getting all worked up aren't you.

All I'm asking is a very simple question.

What do you think of this video?

Put that mighty brain of yours to work and let's see what you come up with.

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

Charlatan:

Your video is really paranormal. As your days.

Paranormal : ????

Is almost like Randi's silence.

Call your parents.

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

Wow, you are really afraid to face what is on these tapes aren't you Carlos.

That's good to know. :)

Maybe we could have a Carlos Clock, you know, see how many days (months, years) you duck what would be seen by most as a very simple question.

Nahhhh! It's been done to death, hehe.

So where was I? Oh yeah.

What do you think of the video clip Carlos?

I think it's becoming pretty clear how much faith you have in your claim.

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

Charlatan:

Afraid? I already told you: is paranormal, like your days and the silence of Randi.

Give the definition of paranormal, sad man.Call your family , they will undersatnd your frustration.

Or keep on having fun with your cult.:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332&highlight=pictures+smoke

Thanks,
S&S

[Blue Monk]

It's paranormal?

Is that your answer to my question?

Is that what you think of this video?

What is it you think is paranormal about it? Am I understanding you correctly?

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/actual_crash.jpg

<A HREF="http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/actual-crash.avi">
actual-crash.avi</A> 1192 KB

</TD>


<TD>
Here we have an angle from the internet.



Ah, you know the drill. There is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

[MRC_Hans]

Ehh, Blue Monk: What exactly is your point here? You are using a lot of JREF bandwidth here. What is your purpose? Do you think Carlos or Latinjihad will be convinced? Do you think anybody else needs convincing?

Hans :rolleyes:

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Ehh, Blue Monk: What exactly is your point here? You are using a lot of JREF bandwidth here. What is your purpose? Do you think Carlos or Latinjihad will be convinced? Do you think anybody else needs convincing?

Hans :rolleyes:

I'm having fun. Carlos hates for people to see these videos so I enjoy showing them.

The images only use up bandwidth one time not everytime they are posted.

Charlatan:

Are you assuming I hate people for seeing the videos you posted ? Comon , put the evidence that I wrote I hate people for seeing "your" videos.

You can have fun with this kind of videos and replies , you can even include them in your web page , are from your cult:
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14332&highlight=pictures+smoke

Don't worry ,your godfather Bidlack, the administrator only get upset when he see this picture from the referential tape I send to the JREF.

Thanks,
S&S

[alfaniner]

S&S, your video shows something. All others show nothing. Yours is the tricked video.

[Wyrd1]

It's not even really tricked it's just taken on a TV with a curved screen ie an old worthless piece of crap TV that's distorting every part of the image. Look at the lines of the buildings. None of them are straight. They're all compressed. That's why the bird almost seems to assume a hat shaped appearance. That's why very few other people elsewhere has bought into this crap. They know it's all bulls**t.

Why is Carlos silent on the real truths? Why is Carlos not answering questions? Why is Carlos continuing to use his own poor methods to try to win a million dollars? Why is Carlos calling everybody a liar and lying his own damn self?

[max]

What are we supposed to be seeing?

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by max
What are we supposed to be seeing?

A paranormal hat form. Honest, hehe.

If you want to see the whole clip you can view it at my web-siste Creeps who exploit tragedies (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/) .

It is an amatuer video of the second plane hitting the tower and it was shot from a very low angle. As the plane hits an object streaks across the screen, probably a bird. It is strange looking when viewed by itself as the trajectory makes it appear as if it is passing through the building.

Of course even a casual look into the matter reveals that this is simply not the case. The object is out of focus (which is a clear indication that it is much closer that the tower) and so in some frames it looks real spooky, hehe.

Of course it is no accident that Carlos will only show the spooky frames and not the fames that look surprisingly like a bird flapping it's wings, hehe. You can see all of the frames on my site.

The clips and stills on my site were captured personally by me from a tape of the incident I acquired. If you'd like a copy of the video then PM me and I'll send you one.

If you'd like a copy of Carlos' version, well don't hold your breath. If you want to have some fun ask him to produce it and ask him why he won't, hehe. He'll ignore you.

[Blue Monk]

Max,

Also this might help bring you up to speed. I would hate for anyone to miss out on any of the laughing at Carlos experience.

from Carlos' application
CONCLUSION: THERE EXISTS A PARANORMAL ACTIVITY THAT PASSED AT A SUPERSONIC SPEED THROUGH THE HOLE LEFT BY THE FIRST PLANE ON THE OVEN-LIKE FIRST TOWER, AND EASILIY GOT OUT THE OTHER SIDE IN A RAPID DESCENDING TRAJECTORY, WITHOUT ENOUGH ROOM TO MAKE A TURN TO AVOID A COLLISION WITH THE GROUND.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by alfaniner
S&S, your video shows something. All others show nothing. Yours is the tricked video.
Only someone mentally ill or malicious would continue to assert otherwise.
Which do you think it is?
I vote Mentally Ill, in which case, this rant will never end.:mad:

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by subgenius

Only someone mentally ill or malicious would continue to assert otherwise.
Which do you think it is?
I vote Mentally Ill, in which case, this rant will never end.:mad:

Good guess but I believe you are wrong.

Carlos and latinijral never post anything in its entirety. They will post frames but never ALL the frames. To understand these guys you have to look at what they don't show.

They post only what they feel supports their view and they avoid the other evidence with surgical precision. This indicates that they are quite aware of where their claim falls apart.

It's no accident that they will not post the frames that look like a bird flapping it's wings.

It's no accident that they try to change the subject when the discussion veers into uncomfortable territory.

It is no accident that they try to claim I faked evidence by posting a bunch of nonsensical doctored Photoshop documents when, if the charge were true, they could easily prove by simply making their version of the tape available for us to view, which Carlos has repeatedly refused to do.

They have shown time and time again that they are quite aware of the flaws in their argument by very conspicuously withholding that information.

This indicates that they are not delusional but rather simply dishonest.

Carlos has an agenda. It is to get mentioned in Randi's commentary.

Once you understand Carlos' agenda, whatever his motivation may be, everything he has said and done up till now makes perfect sense.

He does not believe this nonsense himself. He probably did at one time but his precise avoidance of such obvious evidence to the contrary clearly indicates that this is no longer true. It is merely a device to get his name in Randi's commentary.

The good news is that this will no doubt provide me with countless hours of entertainment. I do hope you will enjoy the show.

And be sure to visit my daily updated site Creeps who exploit tragedies (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

Oh and if you really want to have some fun try the new game I've invented called the Carlos game. You start by asking Carlos a pointed question. The question must be fair, something that can be answered concerning his claim and something that anyone who was honestly trying to promote his claim would have no problem in answering.

Some examples.
1) Carlos, how do you explain the fact that there is no object in any other videos?
2) Carlos, isn't the object in your video out of focus, exactly as one would expect if it were a bird at closer range?
3) Carlos, if you claim Blue Monk faked his video clips are you willing to make copies of your tape available for comparison like he is?

He will try to change the subject, ignore it, or answer with another question.

The goal of the game is to see who can ask Carlos a reasonable question (it must be reasonable to be fair) and then count the number of times he refuses to answer it.

The person that gets ignored the greater number of times wins!

It will soon become clear that Carlo's problem is not reality, it's honesty.

[subgenius]

"Carlos has an agenda. It is to get mentioned in Randi's commentary."
I don't disagree with you, but its certainly no sign of mental health to pursue this modest and pointless of a goal with such intensity.

Evidence that you are correct: his refusal to identify any other organizations to which he has submitted his video and theory, or what their response was.
If he had a good faith belief in his cause, he certainly would try to bring it to the attention of more appropriate authorities.

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by subgenius
"Carlos has an agenda. It is to get mentioned in Randi's commentary."
I don't disagree with you, but its certainly no sign of mental health to pursue this modest and pointless of a goal with such intensity.

Evidence that you are correct: his refusal to identify any other organizations to which he has submitted his video and theory, or what their response was.
If he had a good faith belief in his cause, he certainly would try to bring it to the attention of more appropriate authorities.

Touché

You are absolutely correct of course. It is rather unseemly to watch a grown man throw a months long temper tantrum.

Originally posted by alfaniner
S&S, your video shows something. All others show nothing. Yours is the tricked video.

Alfaniner:

We have received your video and application to the challenge. Your video is tricked. Your application is not valid.

Andrew Harter (JREF)

Easy, isn't it? No problems, if that was the answer.

But the story is different, you must live with that.

Thanks,
S&S

[alfaniner]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
...
Easy, isn't it? No problems, if that was the answer.

But the story is different, you must live with that.

Thanks,
S&S

No, you must live with it. Your video shows something. All others show nothing. Yours is the tricked video.

Originally posted by alfaniner


No, you must live with it. Your video shows something. All others show nothing. Yours is the tricked video.

Did you have access to the referential video I send to the JREF?

Can you put an evidence you did it.

Thanks,

S&S

[Pyrrho]

Congratulations on 40 pages!

Originally posted by pyrrho2000
Congratulations on 40 pages!

Let's have a party. Invite Randi and Harter .

I put the drinks and the food.

Thanks,
S&S

[Wyrd1]

No party, Carlos. That would offer you some form of validation you don't deserve.

Besides anyone stupid enough to drink whatever you might bring to a party deserves to die squatting on the toilet.

They have received a Notarized Application from a heartless SOB attmpting to capitalize on grief and tradgedy 15 April 2002. It contained a videotape labelled by it's sender as "Referential."

It shows a bird flying close by a videocamera taping the second plane striking the WTC out of focus and appearing as if it actually flew through the hole left by the first airplane.

This loser has made two assumptions. First and foremost he assumes that his opinion that it is a paranormal object means even a little freakin bit to JREF or anyone else outside of Ecuador. And secondly he assumes I care enough about his pathetic attempt to extort money and and or fame from JREF to spend more than the thirty seconds required to determine that it's a video of a friggin bird. I'm emailing his ass our answer even though he really doesn't deserve that much from any thinking human.

I dunno, Carlos, if any such conversation was ever made at JREF HQ by Harter but it's probably not far from the truth.

Go back to your day job and quit wasting your time here or I will taunt yet another time.

[Blue Monk]

<font size="+2">The Amazing Frame 17</font>

http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/spooky_small.jpg

<font size="+1">Spooky, huh?</font>




http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/oooh.jpg

<font size="+1">ooooooh, aaaaah!</font>




http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/frame_17_small.jpg

This, of course, is what this frame actually looks like. I captured this straight from the tape.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/li_012_small.jpg

Oh, and just to keep me honest, here is the same frame from Carlo's idiot friend's website.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/wct_sh2_88.jpg

And yet a third source.



Of course it is no accident that that is the frame they like to show. The others clearly show a modulating shape, very remarkably like a bird flapping it's wings (What a shock!). Below is frame 19 as an example.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/frame_19_small.jpg



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/wct_sh2_89.jpg

And again from another source.



Of course one can view all of the frames here. (http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/all_frames/all_frames.html)



Be sure to check out my new web-site Creeps who exploit tragedies. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

---------------------------------------------
Of course it is no accident that that is the frame they like to show. The others clearly show a modulating shape, very remarkably like a bird flapping it's wings (What a shock!). Below is frame 19 as an example.

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

Yes , your faked frames. you know you did it.You like to do it. Just see the negative latinijral posted,
http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/framesorframes.msnw?albumlist=2

Why don't you post another versions? Just your faked version?

Put all the sequence . As latin did:
http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/analysisoftv.msnw?albumlist=2

Your brain is flapping, charlatan.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S.
And don't forget to put your "bird" at the wall 8the right side of the hole)

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Yes , your faked frames. you know you did it.

Then let's make both of our tapes available. I will to anyone who asks. Why? Because I'm telling the truth.

Will you big mouth? Of course not. You are lying.

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Just see the negative latinijral posted,
http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/framesorframes.msnw?albumlist=2

Yes, a negative of a bird flapping it's wings. By all means everyone here should look at this.

Perhaps you can explain how making it negative is supposed to prove that something is fake.

I swear Carlos, you are a riot.

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Why don't you post another versions?

I think that's an excellent idea. I'm just making sure that it's on someone else's site so you can't falsely claim I faked it also.

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Put all the sequence . As latin did:
http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/analysisoftv.msnw?albumlist=2

latin didn't post all of the frames. He post only 12 and a couple are duplicates. Don't worry, I've downloaded them all and I'm going to post them side by side with mine and a third source. I guess I'll work on that tonight. It really is very revealing what you guys don't show.

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Your brain is flapping, charlatan.

Not as much as your mouth my foolish friend.


Originally posted by S&amp;S
And don't forget to put your "bird" at the wall 8the right side of the hole)

Oh I won't forget. Anyone wanting a sneak peek can already see all of the frames on my website Creeps who exploit tragedies. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

Oh, by the way, what do you think of today's video?

<font size="+1">Video Clip of the Day</font>


from Carlos' application

CONCLUSION: THERE EXISTS A PARANORMAL ACTIVITY THAT PASSED AT A SUPERSONIC SPEED THROUGH THE HOLE LEFT BY THE FIRST PLANE ON THE OVEN-LIKE FIRST TOWER, AND EASILIY GOT OUT THE OTHER SIDE IN A RAPID DESCENDING TRAJECTORY, WITHOUT ENOUGH ROOM TO MAKE A TURN TO AVOID A COLLISION WITH THE GROUND.



<TABLE>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER" VALIGN="TOP">http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/wtc_plane_crash1.JPG

<A HREF="http://http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos/World_Trade_center_Plane_Crash1.mpeg">
World_Trade_center_Plane_Crash1.mpeg</A> 1175 KB

</TD>


<TD>
A similar angle from the internet.



Once again it is quite clear that there is no large dark object passing through or even near either tower.



More videos from this site can be found here at www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html (http://www.niftythings.org/usattack/videos.html).

</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/)

Charlatan:

So a couple of them are duplicated? Ha ha ha. Use this software : ATI Multimedia Center.

Go see again "your" tape frame by frame on youtr tv. ,and notice how "funny" your bird travels . Use a remote control and see the sequence, and don't forget to count :1,2,3,4,go.

That's why Harter and Randi are still on silence. The reason Randi is afraid to publicate Harter's answer.

Call your family. They will always love you.

Thanks,
S&S

[Wyrd1]

The point you seem utterly incapable of comprehending Carlos, is that it flies past the camera exactly the way a bird flies. If the thing was going through the hole it would have had to change trajectory otherwise it would have made another hole in the tower. Unless of course, it was flying in front of the towers like say, a bird.

But you will continue to post the results of your poor research methods. Of this there is NO doubt. And you will post your photos showing just how crappy a TV you have. And you will continue calling us liars, charlatans, and pseudoskeptics because all you have is insults. We have asked for evidence and gotten nothing. We have destroyed your simpleminded ego fed delusional arguments (all two of em) and can safely claim you to be wrong wrong wrong.

Go back to your wife and kids I'm sure they miss you. They won't insult you. Come back here with more lame as hell Carlosiana and we will you taunt you further.

Have a nice day Crayola Boy.

[subgenius]

Ever wonder why Carlos hasn't taken his crusade to his own city?
Maybe it would be bad for his business.

[PinkRabbit]

Personally, I just keep wondering why he thinks a negative filter proves something about an image. It's like he and his little buddy think it's some kind of magic fraud detector or something.

Very strange.

Barb

[subgenius]

By the way ,
a cult would not tolerate the rude uncivil behavior Swetty and his little buddy display, much less dissent of any kind.
He is giving Latin people a bad name for the abuse he gives his host.

[Wyrd1]

Despite the fact that both Whack Jobs like to call us racist I certainly in no way associate their rude behavior with any other parties from Latin America. We have several members of the board that come from South America and none of them are as rude as these twits.

They are giving twits a bad name.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Wyrd1
We have several members of the board that come from South America and none of them are as rude as these twits.


Um that was my point. They are giving others a bad name.

[Wyrd1]

The twits are pretty upset about me identifying Carlos and Latinijral as one of their members. In protest they have started a protest march to Washington to have me stopped. As a matter of fact Twits United left their headquarters in Bismark, ND last week. They are halfway to Seattle even as we speak.

Where is your hair dog trainer or trained dog?

I am back for my long trip on Europe....sorry for your leader.

Originally posted by Blue Monk

What do you think of this video?



I remember a PM I recieved from a "great" member of this forum.
He told me:
If you tricked my picture,,,what is the problem if Blue Monk tricked a video?

[Skeptoid]

If you'd pick up your feet when you walk, instead of shuffling, you wouldn't trip on small continents like Europe. Duh.

[alfaniner]

Huh, huh. "Long trip on Europe". That's cool, Skeptoid. :)

Originally posted by Skeptoid
If you'd pick up your feet when you walk, instead of shuffling, you wouldn't trip on small continents like Europe. Duh.

You mock me but learn much in Europe.

Bring end to JREF!!!!

Also son visit many exotic toilets.

[Wyrd1]

Latinijral still as stupid as ever. Now he's back to cry some more.

When are you going to learn how to at least insult people? You have no arguments, you have no insults. What do you have? Nothing.

Pay attention to your leader.

Enjoy your cult.

[Baker]

Dam this thread is still going how long has it been 2 years now j/k

latininjuredanus
Student

Registered: Feb 2003
Location: In a world of my own
Posts: 40

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Skeptoid
If you'd pick up your feet when you walk, instead of shuffling, you wouldn't trip on small continents like Europe. Duh.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



You mock me but learn much in Europe.

Bring end to JREF!!!!

Also son visit many exotic toilets.


__________________
Why Michael Jackson is in silence about Swett`s challenge

Originally posted by Gomer 08-27-02
"Carlo's 'paranormal hat form' looks like a freakin' bird to me".

Choose your favorite picture on my web page:
http://www.complete_freakin_moron.com/pictures


Wyrd1
Critical Thinker

Registered: Aug 2002
Location:
Posts: 370
Latinijral still as stupid as ever. Now he's back to cry some more.

When are you going to learn how to at least insult people? You have no arguments, you have no insults. What do you have? Nothing.

Pay attention to your leader.

Enjoy your cult.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by latinijral

Bring end to JREF!!!!

[subgenius]

Originally posted by latinijral

Bring end to JREF!!!!


In case anyone is unclear on what the agenda is.
As far as I'm concerned an expressed desire to destroy this Forum is more than adequate grounds for banning.
I will express this to Hal and encourage anyone who agrees to do so as well.

Mr. Stupidgenius:

Those are words of Iggy(latininjuredanus), who is the brother of the army`s dog trainer (Wyrd).
Bidlack told to this dogs to inssult and make a parody.

Read again...

[subgenius]

Originally posted by latinijral
Mr. Stupidgenius:

Those are words of Iggy(latininjuredanus), who is the brother of the army`s dog trainer (Wyrd).
Bidlack told to this dogs to inssult and make a parody.

Read again...
My bad.
You don't want the JREF to end do you?

Originally posted by subgenius

My bad.
You don't want the JREF to end do you?

I don`t care about rats.

But the end is about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Probably you can see your leaders living in an island of the Caribean Sea running from .................................................

That`s all folks.

Originally posted by subgenius

My bad.
You don't want the JREF to end do you?

YES! YES! YES!

You can count on it as sure as you can count on the very clear proof of a paranormal hatform.

I can proof everything! I have pictures in NEGATIVE and many papers that have been NOTARIZED!!!

Enjoy your cult and your pope Randi. The end is near.

You think I am stupid but I have proof.

[Julia]

Latininjuredanus: You are just cracking me up!

Latinijral: Could you please be a little more specific as to how
and when JREF is ending? Thank you.

[Wyrd1]

Latinijral you live in your own little Cuckoo world don't you? For your information Iggy is not the instigator of Latininjuredanus and neither am I. Whoever it is has your crybaby stupid schtick down to perfection. People actually respond to him thinking it's you. I personally love it. He or she must empty their minds and let the words flow. Just like you do.

When are you going to take your crybaby act on the road? You will not win here. You will get nothing from anyone. You are wasting your time and energy to no end.

How can you be so mindless? How can you be so stupid? You don't have even a small clue as to what you're talking about. You post Pictures that don't mean a damn thing and why?

It must be for your God, Carlos Swett. He is the leader of your cult. The cult of the tragically clueless.

Enjoy your cult.

There's no loser like an old loser. You are a loser and your crybaby s**t is already old.

You have a nice day now potty boy.

[Wyrd1]

Why is Carlos in silence about the lies of his pet Potty Boy?

Mr. Stupidgenius:

Those are words of Iggy(latininjuredanus), who is the brother of the army`s dog trainer (Wyrd).
Bidlack told to this dogs to inssult and make a parody.

Read again...

I'm not a dog trainer and I'm in the Navy. Iggy isn't Latininjuredanus. that makes the dumbbuttligger from down south oh for threee if y'all be a keepin track.

Pretty miserable for one post. What kind of pathetic lawyer are you?

[Junior Bidlack]

It seems to me that there is a point where you have to accept that a person is never going to accept that they are wrong, especially when they believe in something so strongly. If that time hasn't come for DR. Swett i would think it has to be fast aproaching.

[Skeptoid]

Junior, I accepted the fact that these two will never give up a long time ago. I poke a stick at them sheerly for my own entertainment ... They're buffoons. If others enjoy the merriment along with me, so much the better. What can I say? I enjoy watching them blow a gasket. Let's see how they like this one:

[Junior Bidlack]

I agree that poking an idiot with a stick is fun, for quite a while even. But at some point it just gets sad.

[Wyrd1]

NEVER! It's always good for a million laughs! More fun that a sack full of Dead Rats Asses! Oh, wait. That's another thread.

Really, I don't care if either Carlos (the cult Goddess) or Latinijral (the cult Potty Licker Boy) EVER admit they're wrong. People have decimated their "arguments" and they keep on going and going like two douchebag versions of the Energizer Bunny. At this point in time I would be very surprised if either one of them ever woke up one day and suddenly began greeting reality on more than a name basis.

All I want to know is why Crayola Boy, the Cult leader is in silence about about Potty Boy's trip to Europe? What went on there? Did Carlos finally get Latinijral to get that Sex Change operation in Denmark?

I love the emblem for the Cult Skeptoid! Awesome! Maybe Carlos can use it for an Avatar when he gets back?

If the Stupe fits, Latinijral, be it. Be proud of who you are no matter how stupid a git that may be.

Thanks.

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
I agree that poking an idiot with a stick is fun, for quite a while even. But at some point it just gets sad.

Sad ????? Junior Bomber man

[Wyrd1]

Sad ????? Junior Bomber man

More poor insults from a fan of Carlos Swett's cult!

Why is your God in silence on Blue Monk's Videos?

Why are in silence on your empty headed waste of time here?

Call the guys in the white coats in Ecuador. They have a nice room ready for you and your cult leader.

Originally posted by Wyrd1


More poor insults from a fan of Carlos Swett's cult!

Why is your God in silence on Blue Monk's Videos?

Why are in silence on your empty headed waste of time here?

Call the guys in the white coats in Ecuador. They have a nice room ready for you and your cult leader.

Not poor insults! Good insults! You just jealous.

My head not empty.
My head full of it.

Enjoy your pope. Enjoy your cult.

You think I am stupid but I have proof.

[Junior Bidlack]

Swett, when i say sad it is that i mean picking on someone is only fun for a while, after time thier pathetic nature comes through and the fun fades as the sadness comes through.

[Junior Bidlack]

Does any body else hate that little crusty thing you get at the top of a katsup bottle?

[Charlie in Dayton]

Ketchup crusties I can live with. Mustard crusties are a b*tch.

And don't EVEN get me started when they happen at the nozzle of a squirt bottle...a little extra pressure to get the condiments oozing, and all of a sudden the stuff is everywhere...sheesh...

[Wyrd1]

You should see what the stuff looks like after the bottle has been sitting out in the desert for awhile. A rainbow of colors!

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by Wyrd1
You should see what the stuff looks like after the bottle has been sitting out in the desert for awhile. A rainbow of colors!

You should see what everything looks like after you have consumed that stuff after the bottle has been sitting out in the desert for awile. A rainbow of colors!

Of course then you get sick and you might die.

[IggyK]

You should see what Wyrd1 looks like after he's been sitting in the desert.

No Latinijral I am not the person who posts as Latininjuredanus. I wised up and stopped posting to you and Carlos a long time ago.

As far as I'm concerned you two are dead to me.

Thanks.

Originally posted by IggyK
No Latinijral I am not the person who posts as Latininjuredanus. I wised up and stopped posting to you and Carlos a long time ago.



WRONG AGAIN low degree admisnistrator of the MSN skepctics forum.

I know truth!!!

If you not believe me I'll post more photos!

http://www.hippy.com/albion/negative_midnight.jpg

There's your proof!!!!!

In NEGATIVE!!!!!

What more proof you need?

You think I am stupid but I have proof.

[Wyrd1]

The nice thing about Latinijral is that he is very consistent.

Consistently mindless. Consistently unimaginative. Consistently saying to others what more aptly can be said about him.

Your MSN Skeptic's forum has no message traffic. You asked for comments about your tricked up photos but nobody responded to you. The only person posting anything there is you. We already know you are not a skeptic so by having skeptic in your title you are lying. By Posting tricked photos you are lying. That makes YOUR forum extremely low grade. Much lower than anything else at MSN.

Enjoy your cult, loser potty boy, Carlos Swett is your lying God.

You will never win. You are wasting your time here.

Why are you in silence about that?

Try and say something intelligent Potty Boy. Maybe somebody will believe you aren't Carlos' Sock Puppet.

Originally posted by Wyrd1
The nice thing about Latinijral is that he is very consistent.

Consistently mindless. Consistently unimaginative. Consistently saying to others what more aptly can be said about him.

Your MSN Skeptic's forum has no message traffic. You asked for comments about your tricked up photos but nobody responded to you. The only person posting anything there is you. We already know you are not a skeptic so by having skeptic in your title you are lying. By Posting tricked photos you are lying. That makes YOUR forum extremely low grade. Much lower than anything else at MSN.

Enjoy your cult, loser potty boy, Carlos Swett is your lying God.

You will never win. You are wasting your time here.

Why are you in silence about that?

Try and say something intelligent Potty Boy. Maybe somebody will believe you aren't Carlos' Sock Puppet.


Hey trained dog of BidLack...you forget something very important.
The MSN forum was created to show the pictures. I am not going to post messages. But when I remember your "low degree skeptics forum= your own words", you prefer to delete it because you (Wyrd and Iggy=latininjuredanus) and Randi looks like stupids liars. About my time....I have time for all.

[Wyrd1]

I'm glad you have enough time to continue spreading your lies and those of your cult leader Carlos Swett Salas.

Waste as much time here as you want to. You will never accomplish anything. You have flushed your honor away, if you ever had any, you have demonstrated your ignorance of science and truth. Everybody but your sock puppet Carlos know you two are wrong in every possible way.

Randy will never give you any part of what you want. Harter is ignoring you. Your precious referential videotape lies in some garbage dump in Florida with your "Notarized Application" where both so richly belong.

All you have are insults instead of arguments. At least your God Carlos had arguments although they were pathetically silly ones.

Enjoy your cult Latin. Insult away. You are my favorite nitwit.

You are wrong about Latininjuredanus being Iggy. You were wrong about me being the Army's dog trainer - more lies from you liar.

You will not accomplish anything here no matter how hard you try no matter how many poor insults you try. If you send me your address I will mail you a dollar so you may buy a clue.

Thanks.

[Wyrd1]

PS Sylvia isn't in my avatar anymore. See who is.

Thanks.

Wyrd:

Do you have honor?
Do you have a family?

[Junior Bidlack]

Does anybody undestand the point of that game they play in Afganistan where they throw around a dead goat while riding on horse back?

[Wyrd1]

I had a family but I gave them up so I could join your Cult with Carlos as my God/Leader.

I will be fully qualified to join your cult after my surgery is complete. I may need a couple of weeks to recover because a complete Lobotomy - removal of all usuable brain tissue as required by Your Cult - is fairly invasive surgery.

If your posts and those of your Superior Officer Carlos are any indication logic and reason are greatly overrated.

Waste your time but have fun.

Thanks.

[PinkRabbit]

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
Does anybody undestand the point of that game they play in Afganistan where they throw around a dead goat while riding on horse back?

The game is called Buzkashi and it's sorta like polo, but with your basic dead goat instead of a ball. Two teams on horseback fight for it, and try to get it into the opposing team's marked goal to win. Hitting, kicking, etc are all acceptable tactics.

Barb

[Skeptoid]

Sounds like a tenderizing procedure. Is the goal a rotisserie? :D

[PinkRabbit]

Originally posted by Skeptoid
Sounds like a tenderizing procedure. Is the goal a rotisserie? :D

Well, as I understand it, the winner does get the goat, so it's very possible. :D

Barb

[Junior Bidlack]

I don't think i would want the goat if i won. It seems like it would be rather mutilated by the game was over, unless of course it is like the nfl where they use a bunch of footballs for each game, maybe they use a bunch of goats an then each person on the winning team gets a goat that is only slightly mutilated.

[Wyrd1]

If the goat flies into the crowd by accident does security ride into the crowd and get it back or does the fan get to keep it?

Originally posted by Wyrd1
I had a family but I gave them up so I could join your Cult with Carlos as my God/Leader.

I will be fully qualified to join your cult after my surgery is complete. I may need a couple of weeks to recover because a complete Lobotomy - removal of all usuable brain tissue as required by Your Cult - is fairly invasive surgery.

If your posts and those of your Superior Officer Carlos are any indication logic and reason are greatly overrated.

Waste your time but have fun.

Thanks.

Family? your dogs and your brother latininjuredanus...that`s all??

Surgery??Lobotomy??? Now I understand why you don`t have hair in the head of your new avatar. Who makes to you? BidLack.

Superior offcer??? Bid lack is Lt. Col , you are only a navy dog trainer.

Fun? you are funny but only for been idiot.

[Skeptoid]

Wow. Wyrd1, I think you better give it up. He just sliced you to shreds with his rapier wit. :rolleyes: I think he's been reading Oscar Mayer. :D

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by Skeptoid
Wow. Wyrd1, I think you better give it up. He just sliced you to shreds with his rapier wit. :rolleyes: I think he's been reading Oscar Mayer. :D What makes you assume he can read?

Hans

[Wyrd1]

Oscar Mayer is just liar full of hot navy dogs who wyrd1 must train for to be his superior BidLack. Is all truths and honors and families.

Oh yea, verily I doth feel shredded to the bone. The sockpuppet done laid into me mighty hard there. Maybe I needs to retire to the back and derive me some comfort from my little doggies.

Or I would if the post made any real sense. Too bad lawyer boy can't seem to do any better than this sort of twaddle. I suppose in Ecuador being a dog trainer must have some sort of negative connotation that it lacks here. If I were a dog trainer so what? I'm not and I've told him many times I'm not but the pottyious one clings to his delusions.

Oh well. At least he's trying to come up with something more original. Good boy Latinijral. That was much better. Keep it up and you may be able to actually post a coherent insult to please your cult leader Carlos.

Woof!

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
What makes you assume he can read?

Hans

Wyrd1: Oscar Mayer is just liar full of hot navy dogs who wyrd1 must train for to be his superior BidLack. Is all truths and honors and families Woof!

[MRC_Hans]

But, cut and paste, he can :rolleyes:


Hans

Is this a bird?

Can somebody show a new "tricked bird"?

Can somebody make a "close up"?

[Blue Monk]

<font size="+2">The Amazing Frame 17</font>

http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/spooky_small.jpg

<font size="+1">Spooky, huh?</font>




http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/oooh.jpg

<font size="+1">ooooooh, aaaaah!</font>




http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/frame_17_small.jpg

This, of course, is what this frame actually looks like. I captured this straight from the tape.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/li_012_small.jpg

Oh, and just to keep me honest, here is the same frame from Carlo's idiot friend's website.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/wct_sh2_88.jpg

And yet a third source.



Of course it is no accident that that is the frame they like to show. The others clearly show a modulating shape, very remarkably like a bird flapping it's wings (What a shock!). Below is frame 19 as an example.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/frame_19_small.jpg



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/wct_sh2_89.jpg

And again from another source.



Of course one can view all of the frames here. (http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/all_frames/all_frames.html)



Be sure to check out my new web-site Creeps who exploit tragedies. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

[MRC_Hans]

The "third source" picture is very interesting. This is because the two other frames show the tell-tale signs of having undergone edge-enhancement, probably more than one cycle of it. You can see this very clearly at the edge of the building: Instead of a more or less fuzzy transit from the gray texture of the building to the blue sky, we see several black/white transitions. Such a treatment will play havoc with small fuzzy shapes.

This the third picture, however, does not show evidence of this kind of "improvement", and, not surprising, the unidentified object looks quite differently. And I dont find it difficult to fit a bird-shape on top of that.

[Wyrd1]

I still can't believe how much Carlos and Potty Boy b*tch and moan about "Harter's poor method" and then post and repost their crappy little photo taken from a TV set with curved edges that so distorts the image that it forms their "hatshaped paranormal object." Notice how no edge of any building is actual straight due to distortion. This is proof? What dolts.

[Junior Bidlack]

My roommate just ate some really old cheese he found in the fridge....Should I take him to the hospital or just keep laughing at him? or maybe even start poking him with a stick?

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
My roommate just ate some really old cheese he found in the fridge....Should I take him to the hospital or just keep laughing at him? or maybe even start poking him with a stick?

Aw man, set up a webcam.

That kind of stuff is gold, hehe.

[Junior Bidlack]

I wanted to go with the stick poking, but unfortunatly i couldn't find a stick, so what i did was throw little balls of paper at him. Not quite stick poking goodness, but still an entertaining activity.

[Wyrd1]

Just don't forget the webcam so you can share the fun.

Originally posted by Blue Monk

Visit 'Creeps Who Exploit Tragedies' at
http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/nonsense/




Hi Blue Monke again.

I have a doubt about your signature.

Who are the creeps who exploit tragedies?

Where are your proofs about that?

The only creep I know who exploit tragedies is Rwald, who posted the tragedy with King Kong. The only guy who protested about it was Carlos. You, BidLack and the clowns were in silence about the "joke" of Rwald.

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by latinijral



Hi Blue Monke again.

I have a doubt about your signature.

Who are the creeps who exploit tragedies?

Where are your proofs about that?

The only creep I know who exploit tragedies is Rwald, who posted the tragedy with King Kong. The only guy who protested about it was Carlos. You, BidLack and the clowns were in silence about the "joke" of Rwald.

Carlos is the creep. His only desire is to get his name in Randi's commentary and has refused any other offer to resolve the matter.

I am very sorry to hear that your neighbor lost their family in the invasion of Panama. That is a terrible thing for anyone to suffer.

I am, however, quite glad that your neighbor and all who loved and cared for that family were not subjected to a couple of creeps who would trivialize their loss with the same three-ring circus you and Carlos have provided.

I am quite sure that had that tragic event been captured on film, your neighbor would no doubt be offended at a couple of creeps who would exploit that video by holding to ridiculous claims in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, turning a blind and callous eye to the suffering it portrayed, only to focus on a bug that crawls across the lens solely for the obscenely trite purpose of getting one's name in print.

Is that clear enough for you?

[Junior Bidlack]

Swett, why are you changing the topic of this thread, i think it is fairly clear that everyone is more intersted in me harasing my roommate when he is ill than you

[Wyrd1]

Swett, why are you changing the topic of this thread, i think it is fairly clear that everyone is more intersted in me harasing my roommate when he is ill than you.

Yes! And why is Junior Bid Lack in silence on the Webcam? Your clock starts right now!

I am making a notarized application to JREF right now and to prove my psychic powers I will predict two things: First, that either Carlos or Latinijral will make more posts. And scond that Junior will show us the stick on a webcam.

Where's the money, Harter? Or are you in silence again?

I must add that it's not about the money it's about TRUTH and HONOR! I'll take payment in crusty ketchup bottles.

[Junior Bidlack]

I don't have a webcam. Or a stick for that matter. Thats why i went to throwing balls of paper at him

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
I don't have a webcam. Or a stick for that matter. Thats why i went to throwing balls of paper at him

Hmmm, what are you hiding?
What are you afraid of?

Your roommate has obviously done something paranormal and your father has ordered you not to show it.

You don't fool me. :p

[Junior Bidlack]

Ok you caught me, when my roommate ate the cheese, he became a duck. So now i have a 4 foot tall duck walking around my room. He still responds to his name but i have not been able to get him to talk. So now i am trying to decide if i should sell him or something to try to make some money or if i should just release him in a pond.

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
Ok you caught me, when my roommate ate the cheese, he became a duck. So now i have a 4 foot tall duck walking around my room. He still responds to his name but i have not been able to get him to talk. So now i am trying to decide if i should sell him or something to try to make some money or if i should just release him in a pond.

The duck of junior

[Blue Monk]

<font size="+2">The Amazing Frame 17</font>

http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/spooky_small.jpg

<font size="+1">Spooky, huh?</font>




http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/images/oooh.jpg

<font size="+1">ooooooh, aaaaah!</font>




http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/frame_17_small.jpg

This, of course, is what this frame actually looks like. I captured this straight from the tape.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/li_012_small.jpg

Oh, and just to keep me honest, here is the same frame from Carlo's idiot friend's website.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/wct_sh2_88.jpg

And yet a third source.



Of course it is no accident that that is the frame they like to show. The others clearly show a modulating shape, very remarkably like a bird flapping it's wings (What a shock!). Below is frame 19 as an example.



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/frame_19_small.jpg



http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/spooky/wct_sh2_89.jpg

And again from another source.



Of course one can view all of the frames here. (http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/all_frames/all_frames.html)



Be sure to check out my new web-site Creeps who exploit tragedies. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

[Wyrd1]

Hey Blue Monk here's an idea some "folks" are proposing over in Banter:

Here's an idea...instead of imploring people to "ignore the trolls", why not make a thread listing all known "troll feeders" and subject them to public humiliation?

When did the whiners take over this forum? This is so freakin irritating to me. Why is the forum only here to be what they want it to be?

Why do some friggin a**holes have to suck the fun out of everything?

[Skeptoid]

Man, you said a mouthful Wyrd1. What a crock of unmitigated bullsh!t. Some people can't accept that they can't create their own personal utopia on this forum and they lash out at those who do. There is an elite here, they do as they please, including feeding the d@mn trolls themselves. But if someone else dares to, look out, you're cluttering up their forum by bumping those nasty trolly threads. I skip over threads that don't interest me all the time and it really isn't difficult. Gotta wonder if the whiners can even tie their own shoes in the morning. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Skeptoid
Man, you said a mouthful Wyrd1. What a crock of unmitigated bullsh!t. Some people can't accept that they can't create their own personal utopia on this forum and they lash out at those who do. There is an elite here, they do as they please, including feeding the d@mn trolls themselves. But if someone else dares to, look out, you're cluttering up their forum by bumping those nasty trolly threads. I skip over threads that don't interest me all the time and it really isn't difficult. Gotta wonder if the whiners can even tie their own shoes in the morning. :rolleyes:

Keep on going

[UnrepentantSinner]

How about you two kiss my @$$.

You know this is about the person I have ignored with the post above this one, not about any general troll feeding.

Give us all a friggin break. No one's trying to remove your toys from your playground.

[Skeptoid]

US,

Let me clarify my point. I've been a bit p!ssed off lately, for this reason: A snide remark was posted in my direction by one of the don't-feed-the-trollers after I replied to one of latin's posts. The following day, this same person yearned for the return of De_Bunk (probably the most prolific troll-baiter this board has ever seen). Then, on the same day that a quite lengthy discussion on troll feeding had occurred, this same person fired off a vitriolic diatribe aimed at latin. I don't know what you call it but I call it a double standard. "Do as I say, not as I do." It's like a parent, cigarette between lips, spanking a child for smoking. Perhaps I was a little harsh in my post above, but disingenuous hypocrisy really p!sses me off.

[Junior Bidlack]

Y'all have been a bit angry in here latley. I think the whole point of this thread is to make fun of Swett. So lets not let differences amoung us come between us and the goal of making fun of Swett.

[c4ts]

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
Y'all have been a bit angry in here latley. I think the whole point of this thread is to make fun of Swett. So lets not let differences amoung us come between us and the goal of making fun of Swett.

I think we've reached a point where making fun of Carlos actually makes him less absurd.

[Junior Bidlack]

That may be true, but at least it is still fun to mess with him

[Skeptoid]

Notice: In the following rant, I use the word "you" in the generic sense. This rant is just a general comment, not directed at anyone in particular.

You want to know what's really absurd? It is the willingness of some on this board to embrace proven liars and admitted poseurs in the name of "playing nice". I think sometimes people forget that this is a skeptics board and not some kind of freakin' sewing circle. Hey, in real life, Uri Geller might be a real nice guy. You want to be pals with the King of Bullsh!t? Fine, be my guest, just do it elsewhere or don't come crying to me that your friend got his feelings hurt when I tell him he's a liar and a con-man. When reasoned debate fails and the (insert choice: liar, charlatan, con-man, woo-woo, delusionoid) doesn't give up and has nothing but insults and false accusations for his detractors, he sets himself up for well deserved ridicule. Some may take their ball and bat and go home, some may naively believe that one more attempt at reasoned debate will change the minds of the delusional, others hang around to poke sticks. People are different. I am my own man. I make my own choices and I play by the rules. I am not a cookie-cutter cutout to be molded to fit into someone else's idea of a perfect world.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Originally posted by Skeptoid
US,

Let me clarify my point. I've been a bit p!ssed off lately, for this reason: A snide remark was posted in my direction by one of the don't-feed-the-trollers after I replied to one of latin's posts. The following day, this same person yearned for the return of De_Bunk (probably the most prolific troll-baiter this board has ever seen). Then, on the same day that a quite lengthy discussion on troll feeding had occurred, this same person fired off a vitriolic diatribe aimed at latin. I don't know what you call it but I call it a double standard. "Do as I say, not as I do." It's like a parent, cigarette between lips, spanking a child for smoking. Perhaps I was a little harsh in my post above, but disingenuous hypocrisy really p!sses me off.

I agree completely and didn't mean to post such a knee jerk reaction. Latin is clearly delusional or retarded (possibly both) and will never ever stop posting his lies about Hal to the forum. IMO the best thing to do is to ignore him. All of us.

There are some other trolls (Franktroll, Jedi Troll) who actually are fun to have around though I've got Franktroll on iggy. I'm not carping about them, and replies to them, I just don't agree with excessively engaging trolls, especially those who've repeatedly crossed the line like latin.

[c4ts]

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
That may be true, but at least it is still fun to mess with him

It's a shame you missed out on Franko, Muscleman, Bigfig, and Agur. Those guys were so fun to mess with, it got to be addictive!

Originally posted by UnrepentantSinner


I agree completely and didn't mean to post such a knee jerk reaction. Latin is clearly delusional or retarded (possibly both) and will never ever stop posting his lies about Hal to the forum. IMO the best thing to do is to ignore him. All of us.

There are some other trolls (Franktroll, Jedi Troll) who actually are fun to have around though I've got Franktroll on iggy. I'm not carping about them, and replies to them, I just don't agree with excessively engaging trolls, especially those who've repeatedly crossed the line like latin.

The line?

[c4ts]

Originally posted by latinijral


The line?

It's an idiom. It means you go too far and it gets on his nerves.

[WildCat]

Carlos and latinjrl are right! You folks haven't been looking at the right part of the pictures. I have found something much more convincing than the ufo. YOU THINK I AM STUPID BUT I HAVE PROOF. YOUR GOD RANDI IS A LIAR AND YOU ARE ALL BRAINWASHED IN HIS CULT. MY NEXT POST WILL SHOW THE PROOF

[WildCat]

Look closely at the circled area.
http://home.mindspring.com/~turniton/proof01.jpg
What do you SEE IN THE WINDOW I HAVE PROOF IT WILL BLOW YOUR MIND YOUR GOD RANDI WILL HAVE TO GIVE ME THE MILLION DOLLARS

[WildCat]

AND HERE THE PROOF
http://home.mindspring.com/~turniton/proof02.jpg
YOU SEE WITH OWN EYES THAT BLACK EYED BUGGER?!! I HAVE PROOF YOU THINK I'M STUPID BUT I HAVE PROOF
IF YOUR CULT LEADER GOD RANDI DON'T GIVE ME MILLION HE WILL SHOW WORLD HE IS LIAR

[WildCat]

:D :p :D :p :)

[UnrepentantSinner]

LOL Great one Wildcat!!!

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
Y'all have been a bit angry in here latley. I think the whole point of this thread is to make fun of Swett. So lets not let differences amoung us come between us and the goal of making fun of Swett.


Hi Junior:

Are you having fun here? With me? Are you sure?

Good for you, must be hard for you outside here.

Thanks,
S&S

[Junior Bidlack]

Swett, i am not quite sure what you mean by that, i think you lost a bit in translation. But don't worry, just try agian, i just wouldn't recomend using one of those online tranlsators.

[Skeptoid]

Junior,

I can help with the translation, Swettish is now almost a second language for many of us. :D Typically, it is an insult. carlos is implying that you must not have much of a life outside of the forum if mockering him is so much fun for you. The same could be said of the time he spends here but he's not bright enough to understand the concept of hypocricy. :rolleyes: Hope this helps.

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
Swett, i am not quite sure what you mean by that, i think you lost a bit in translation. But don't worry, just try agian, i just wouldn't recomend using one of those online tranlsators.

Junior:

Just a recomendation: NEVER (Iam not shouting , just an emphasis) never use an online translator . They really don't work . Maybe Harter or your Daddy used one of those translators. with my notaryzed application, and that's why they lost with me.

Look at Skeptoid, he seems that he really understand my quote with no difficult at all. Was easy , you just needed to be just a little more "free" in your mind. Must be hard to have a daddy militar and also the administrator of this forum. You were educated to obey the "no matter what" reason. Is not really your fault.

Are you happy now?
And Randi is still on silence , and your daddy and his sock puppets must be proud of that. And you?
Are you also with his permission to just bla bla bla.
Look yourself at the same mirror of Blue Monk, poor unhappy , used guy. But remember , you have the chance to keep on posting.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.

Say hello to daddy.

Carlos:

Why Junior hate you and consider you like an enemy?

Originally posted by latinijral
Carlos:

Why Junior hate you and consider you like an enemy?

Hi latinijral:

I will leave the assumptions to Harter.

Maybe Junior can answer you that question.
I don't hate him and I don't consider him my enemy. This is not a war or a fight, and you need at least 2 persons to do that. I am out. I am just debating here(when is possible) with people that wants to debate.

Are you preparing the cake? Is almost a year of Randi's silence.
His clock is ticking.

Thanks,
S&S

[Junior Bidlack]

I don't hate you dude. I just like messing with you. Don't feel bad, i am only 1/2 serious when i call you names and such.

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
I don't hate you dude. I just like messing with you. Don't feel bad, i am only 1/2 serious when i call you names and such.

Hi Junior:

I had that assumption in my mind. Sometimes words you posted like "my enemy" distracted me a little.
Now that you are man enough to clarify the point, is ok to me.

Listen: Don't call names, the administrator moved some threads I created before only with that excuse. And I was not the one,
where some fans of a cult.


Thanks,
S&S

Happy First Anniversary James Randi !!!!!!!.........of being in silence.

Thanks,

S&S

[Junior Bidlack]

Doesn't that also mean that you have spent a year of your life ranting about a picture of a bird.

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
Doesn't that also mean that you have spent a year of your life ranting about a picture of a bird.

Hi Junior:

Would you prefer a spoon?
Or a dowser?
What is your favorite "smart" subject?

Take a piece of cake. Is free.

And he is still on silence.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S.
Support the sock puppet.

[KelvinG]

Now, I'm new to this whole thread, but I scanned the first page today to get the gist. I'm sure this question has been asked of Carlos since there are now 42 pages in this thread, but I'll ask anyways.

If this tape you have is indeed so amazing and worthy of a million dollars from James Randi, why haven't you taken it to major networks and had them air it. Wouldn't CNN be interested in something so incredible? Have you approached any media outlets at all?
I also think that issues of national security might be relevant here as well. Have you offered your theories up to the FBI so they can get to the bottom of this occurance?

Surely the JREF isn't the only place in the world where your amazing discovery can be showcased. If this is your only hope for recognition, then the validity of your claim must be questioned.
Why don't you shop this tape of yours around, garner worldwide attention, and then come back here and shove it all in our faces. Think how ashamed and apologetic everyone at this forum will be when your tape is being aired all over the world, and you are being heralded as a brilliant mind who exposed paranormal activities at the WTC.

Anytime someone comes to this board with an "amazing discovery", I'm always stunned that they never pursue other outlets for exposure of their claim. Hmmm, I wonder why that is?

Originally posted by KelvinG
Now, I'm new to this whole thread, but I scanned the first page today to get the gist. I'm sure this question has been asked of Carlos since there are now 42 pages in this thread, but I'll ask anyways.

If this tape you have is indeed so amazing and worthy of a million dollars from James Randi, why haven't you taken it to major networks and had them air it. Wouldn't CNN be interested in something so incredible? Have you approached any media outlets at all?
I also think that issues of national security might be relevant here as well. Have you offered your theories up to the FBI so they can get to the bottom of this occurance?

Surely the JREF isn't the only place in the world where your amazing discovery can be showcased. If this is your only hope for recognition, then the validity of your claim must be questioned.
Why don't you shop this tape of yours around, garner worldwide attention, and then come back here and shove it all in our faces. Think how ashamed and apologetic everyone at this forum will be when your tape is being aired all over the world, and you are being heralded as a brilliant mind who exposed paranormal activities at the WTC.

Anytime someone comes to this board with an "amazing discovery", I'm always stunned that they never pursue other outlets for exposure of their claim. Hmmm, I wonder why that is?

Hi Kelving G:

I will assume you trust media.
I will assume you trust FBI.CIA and your president
I will assume you trusted U.Geller before.
I will assume you trust S. Browne because is on the media.

But I am sure that you trust Randi.
For me would me more easy, remunerable , etc. to do what you said.
I just wanted a fear , scientific , impartial analysis.
You need to read a little more , or read my signature.
Or read Randi's commentaries what are about.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S.
Edited to put my signature.

[Junior Bidlack]

New guy,
Don't try to use logic on this thread, it doesn't work. The best idea is to simply attack Swett, it doesn't really accomplish anything, but it is fun

Originally posted by Junior Bidlack
New guy,
Don't try to use logic on this thread, it doesn't work. The best idea is to simply attack Swett, it doesn't really accomplish anything, but it is fun

Hi Junior :

Will you please define the word "attack".

You mean the "no matter what reason".?
KelvinG has most posts than you. You are the new guy.
You have a mission here.
But try to be more ...... you know what I mean.

Or keep on having "fun".

Thanks,
S&S

[MRC_Hans]

Carlos: Have you stopped lately t owonder why Randi is "in silence", that is, he is ignoring you?

You made a claim, and it was rejected.

Thats it, finito, end of story. Unless you present new evidence, nothing more will happen.

Hans

[Rusty_the_boy_robot]

Hey I once saw something I couldn't explain. In fact no one can completely explain it! And everyone see's it every single day.

Go outside and drop something and it *magically* falls to the ground!!! I've heard that this *magic* is called gravity!

WHERE THE HELL IS MY MILLION DOLLARS RANDI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

my application
has been delievered safely
i want my money



KA-CHING!

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Carlos: Have you stopped lately t owonder why Randi is "in silence", that is, he is ignoring you?

You made a claim, and it was rejected.

Thats it, finito, end of story. Unless you present new evidence, nothing more will happen.

Hans

Yes I know Randi is ignoring me.

The claim was rejected (?) because Harter did a poor and silly (? members wrote that silly is not an insult) job analyzing the tape and some mistakes in his answer by e-mail to my appliaction.

That's why Randi is still on silence. He knows they did a mistake,
and some members too. Read my signature.

Thanks,
S&S

[Rusty_the_boy_robot]

Carlos and S&S are the same person?

HOW DO WE KNOW THAT?

S&S why should I believe that you are really Carlos and not a trouble maker from Brazili?

Originally posted by Rusty_the_boy_robot
Carlos and S&S are the same person?

HOW DO WE KNOW THAT?

S&S why should I believe that you are really Carlos and not a trouble maker from Brazili?

Hi Rusty:

Please don't shout. my dog is sleeping.
Here are some tips:

A) go to the first page of this thread.

B) Read Linda's post. She is a member of the JREF and administrator of this forum.

C) then read my first post in this forum.

If you still have some troubles I will give you another tips.
I am from Ecuador.

And Randi is still on silence.

Thanks,
S&S

Originally posted by Linda 08-27-2002 05:55 PM

Interesting.....Sr. Swett just registered for the message boards today. I expect we'll be hearing from him.

My first post:Originally posted by S&S 08-29-2002 10:38 PM

Hi.everybody I am Swett

Nothing to hide, Nothing to be afraid of.

But , Randi is hiding something : Harter's poor and .....job.

Thanks,
S&S

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by S&amp;S


Yes I know Randi is ignoring me.

The claim was rejected (?) because Harter did a poor and silly (? members wrote that silly is not an insult) job analyzing the tape and some mistakes in his answer by e-mail to my appliaction.

That's why Randi is still on silence. He knows they did a mistake,
and some members too. Read my signature.

Thanks,
S&S No. The reason your claim was rejected is that it does not fulfil the requirements of the JREF challenge: Your observation cannot be tested.

Further, even a superficial examination indicated that there was nothing extraordinary about the object you found on the video. However, it is not the duty of JREF to prove or disprove your claim, that is YOUR duty.

After your claim being rejected, the film has been examined in detail by lots of people, including myself. Any new evidence discovered in this process has only served to further weaken your case.

I have asked these questions before, and you have ignored them or double-talked about them. Maybe this time you will be man enough to give straight answers:

1) How do you explain that the object is only visible on that particular video? There exist a dozen other videos and many stills of that fateful moment; none of them show your object. Why?

2) What is you comment to the fact that another video clearly shows birds flying in that particular area at exactly the right moment?

3) Even if the vido should show something extraordinary (apart from a plane hitting WTC), how can this ever be YOUR claim? Somebody owns that video, how do you explain that YOU are filing the claim? Is that not an attempt to steal another man's claim?

Hans

[Rusty_the_boy_robot]

Carlos and S&S are completely different names. You are here trying to tell me that YOU think you are "Carlos"? Then why are you posting under S&S? And Carlos is Brazilian and you aren't even Brazilian. Sounds like fraud to me. Randi should sue you for these lies.

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
No. The reason your claim was rejected is that it does not fulfil the requirements of the JREF challenge: Your observation cannot be tested.

Further, even a superficial examination indicated that there was nothing extraordinary about the object you found on the video. However, it is not the duty of JREF to prove or disprove your claim, that is YOUR duty.

After your claim being rejected, the film has been examined in detail by lots of people, including myself. Any new evidence discovered in this process has only served to further weaken your case.

I have asked these questions before, and you have ignored them or double-talked about them. Maybe this time you will be man enough to give straight answers:

1) How do you explain that the object is only visible on that particular video? There exist a dozen other videos and many stills of that fateful moment; none of them show your object. Why?

2) What is you comment to the fact that another video clearly shows birds flying in that particular area at exactly the right moment?

3) Even if the vido should show something extraordinary (apart from a plane hitting WTC), how can this ever be YOUR claim? Somebody owns that video, how do you explain that YOU are filing the claim? Is that not an attempt to steal another man's claim?

Hans
------------------------------------------------------------
Hans:

We have received your tape and application to the challenge at the JREF.
We are so sorry but your claim was rejected , it does not fulfil the requirements of the JREF challenge: Your observation cannot be tested.
Now go get a life.

A.Harter (JREF researcher)
James Randi Educational Foundation

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

But the story is different , Hans. Nothing of this upsets you have now would happened, if I received an answer like that.
You already read the real one. I mean the poor answer I got.

Thanks,
S&S

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by S&amp;S

*snip*
Nothing of this upsets you have now would happened, if I received an answer like that.
*snip*
I don't understand that sentence.

Where are your answers to my questions?

Hans

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
I don't understand that sentence.

Where are your answers to my questions?

Hans

Your question are already answered in this thread.Were easy to answer.
Do you think the others members are not smart as you are?
Do you think you have "original" questions after so many pages.?
Take your time and read s l o w l y.

How about you answering my request.

Harter NEVER wrote something like this:"The reason your claim was rejected is that it does not fulfil the requirements of the JREF challenge: Your observation cannot be tested."


Sorry, you are confused. He gave me a poor -silly, full of mistakes and/or lies answer.

Thanks,
S&S

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by S&amp;S

Your question are already answered in this thread.Were easy to answer.
Do you think the others members are not smart as you are?
Do you think you have "original" questions after so many pages.?
Take your time and read s l o w l y.

So you are NOT man enough to answer my questions. Even though you claim they are easy.

How about you answering my request.

Harter NEVER wrote something like this:"The reason your claim was rejected is that it does not fulfil the requirements of the JREF challenge: Your observation cannot be tested."

How should I know why somebody gave you some answer? I dont speak for him.

Sorry, you are confused. He gave me a poor -silly, full of mistakes and/or lies answer.

He told you your object was not supernatural. Whats wrong with that?



Hans

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
No. The reason your claim was rejected is that it does not fulfil the requirements of the JREF challenge: Your observation cannot be tested.


Hans

Hey Hans:

Are you the same person? Look to your quote and then read this latest quote from you:"How should I know why somebody gave you some answer? I dont speak for him."

What kind of skeptic you are ?A double speech one?

And tell me : where did you read that my claim was rejected because it does not fulfil the requirements of the JREF challenge?
Some friends of your cult told you that?
Because Andrew Harter NEVER wrote that to me.
He just did a poor and silly "study".
That's why Randi is still on silence.

Are you able to answer? Hans? Hello?

Thanks,
S&S

[KelvinG]

Fair enough S&S. I'm saddened that you are going to deprive the world of this amazing discovery while you waste your time ranting on this board.
Good luck.

Originally posted by KelvinG
Fair enough S&S. I'm saddened that you are going to deprive the world of this amazing discovery while you waste your time ranting on this board.
Good luck.

Hi KelvingG:

So you think you are wasting your time here?
Hmmmm.

I am just debating.
And waiting for Randi.

Thanks,
S&S

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Hey Hans:

Are you the same person? Look to your quote and then read this latest quote from you:"How should I know why somebody gave you some answer? I dont speak for him."

What kind of skeptic you are ?A double speech one?

No, I'm the kind of skeptic who tries not to waste time twisting people's words around. So, you found a place where I contradicted myself? Well, congratulations, have a field day!

However, it doesn't matter what I precisely said or did not say. What matters is that your claim is void. It does not matter what reason somebody from JREF choose to give you, your claim is still void. Your claim is void for any and all of these reasons:

- It cannot be tested.
- There is nothing supernatural happening.
- It is not your video

And tell me : where did you read that my claim was rejected because it does not fulfil the requirements of the JREF challenge?
Some friends of your cult told you that?
Because Andrew Harter NEVER wrote that to me.
He just did a poor and silly "study".

And found your claim void.

That's why Randi is still on silence.

There is no message. The case is closed.

Are you able to answer? Hans? Hello?

1) How do you explain that the object is only visible on that particular video? There exist a dozen other videos and many stills of that fateful moment; none of them show your object. Why?

2) What is you comment to the fact that another video clearly shows birds flying in that particular area at exactly the right moment?

3) Even if the vido should show something extraordinary (apart from a plane hitting WTC), how can this ever be YOUR claim? Somebody owns that video, how do you explain that YOU are filing the claim? Is that not an attempt to steal another man's claim?

Are you able to answer? Carlos? Hello?




Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------
Carlos:

We have received your tape and application to the challenge.
It is not your video. It can not be tested, then nothing supernatural is taking place.
Now go back to your life.

Andrew Harter(JREF researcher)

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

No Hans, that is NOT the kind of answer I received.

I received another kind of answer from the JREF, is full of mistakes and /or lies.
And is based in a poor method.

Thanks,
S&S

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
-----------------------------------------------------------
Carlos:

We have received your tape and application to the challenge.
It is not your video. It can not be tested, then nothing supernatural is taking place.
Now go back to your life.

Andrew Harter(JREF researcher)

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

No Hans, that is NOT the kind of answer I received.

I received another kind of answer from the JREF, is full of mistakes and /or lies.
And is based in a poor method.

Thanks,
S&S Carlos, I KNOW that is not the answer you received, but those are the FACTS. Do you admit that those are the facts? Have you been bugging this board for over a year only because of the wording of an answer?

Now, will you answer my questions?

1) How do you explain that the object is only visible on that particular video? A dozen other videos and many stills of that fateful moment exist; none of them show your object. Why?

2) What is you comment to the fact that another video clearly shows birds flying in that particular area at exactly the right moment?

3) Even if the video should show something extraordinary (apart from a plane hitting WTC), how can this ever be YOUR claim? Somebody owns that video, how do you explain that YOU are filing the claim? Is that not an attempt to steal another man's claim?

Or, Carlos, should I start a clock for you?

Hans

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Carlos, I KNOW that is not the answer you received, but those are the FACTS. Do you admit that those are the facts? Have you been bugging this board for over a year only because of the wording of an answer?

Now, will you answer my questions?

1) How do you explain that the object is only visible on that particular video? A dozen other videos and many stills of that fateful moment exist; none of them show your object. Why?

2) What is you comment to the fact that another video clearly shows birds flying in that particular area at exactly the right moment?

3) Even if the video should show something extraordinary (apart from a plane hitting WTC), how can this ever be YOUR claim? Somebody owns that video, how do you explain that YOU are filing the claim? Is that not an attempt to steal another man's claim?

Or, Carlos, should I start a clock for you?

Hans

Hi Hans:
You seems so sure those questions were not asked before in this thread.
And you seems so sure those questions were not responded before in this thread.

You are wrong Hans. A lot of members asked me those questions before. They are answered.
Is your turn to take a trip to the pages of this thread.

You can put me many clocks you want. I will prove you are wrong.
Until then...

Read again my signature.

Thanks,
S&S

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
Hi Hans:
You seems so sure those questions were not asked before in this thread.
And you seems so sure those questions were not responded before in this thread.

You are wrong Hans. A lot of members asked me those questions before. They are answered.

YOU are wrong. I'm sure they have been asked before. Maybe you even answered them. I find your answers unclear and evasive. You have been asking the same questions over and over again, and people have been trying to answer them over and over again. It is your turn to repeat an answer.

Is your turn to take a trip to the pages of this thread.

You can put me many clocks you want. I will prove you are wrong.
Until then...

It is your turn to make a new answer. Prove me wrong now. I am waiting.....

Read again my signature.

Your signature does not answer my questions.


Hans

Originally posted by MRC_Hans


Hans

If you want answers to your repeated questions, at least you should be polite when you post them.

And you should be able to answer my questions too.
Since you don't have an "affair" , I will put you an example:

1) Hans, please give me a definition of paranormal.

2) Hans, Are the birds free to fly in New York ?

3) Hans, where did you read about the claim of the man who shot the video? Or he just shot it? Or he did a claim to Randi?
Is just another video. I just did the observation of the paranormal stuff. You were focused in the criminal impact.

Thanks,
S&S

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by S&amp;S

If you want answers to your repeated questions, at least you should be polite when you post them.

Translation: I dont want to answer those questions.

Carlos, in the beginning, I was polite to you. Not anymore.

And you should be able to answer my questions too.
Since you don't have an "affair" , I will put you an example:

1) Hans, please give me a definition of paranormal.

Off my head: Something unexplainable by physics.

2) Hans, Are the birds free to fly in New York ?

Ehhh? Well, to my knowledge they haven't taxed them just yet.
Are you joking? Of course they are :rolleyes:

3) Hans, where did you read about the claim of the man who shot the video? Or he just shot it? Or he did a claim to Randi?
Is just another video. I just did the observation of the paranormal stuff. You were focused in the criminal impact.

What paranormal stuff? --- Who made the evidence? You?



1) How do you explain that the object is only visible on that particular video? A dozen other videos and many stills of that fateful moment exist; none of them show your object. Why?

2) What is you comment to the fact that another video clearly shows birds flying in that particular area at exactly the right moment?

3) Even if the video should show something extraordinary (apart from a plane hitting WTC), how can this ever be YOUR claim? Somebody owns that video, how do you explain that YOU are filing the claim? Is that not an attempt to steal another man's claim?

Hans

Originally posted by MRC_Hans


1) How do you explain that the object is only visible on that particular video? A dozen other videos and many stills of that fateful moment exist; none of them show your object. Why?

2) What is you comment to the fact that another video clearly shows birds flying in that particular area at exactly the right moment?

3) Even if the video should show something extraordinary (apart from a plane hitting WTC), how can this ever be YOUR claim? Somebody owns that video, how do you explain that YOU are filing the claim? Is that not an attempt to steal another man's claim?

Hans

So..WHy Randi is in silence about Swett`s challenge?

If you read the week``s commentary archive you can read a lot of commentaries about people who wrote about "objects". Obviously...very easy to comment.

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by latinijral


So..WHy Randi is in silence about Swett`s challenge?

If you read the week``s commentary archive you can read a lot of commentaries about people who wrote about "objects". Obviously...very easy to comment. Because there is nothing more to be said. The challenge was sent in and rejected over a year ago. Case is closed, period. Finito. No hay mas de comentar. Comprendo?

Hans

Nothing to say...

Originally posted by MRC_Hans


1) How do you explain that the object is only visible on that particular video? A dozen other videos and many stills of that fateful moment exist; none of them show your object. Why?

2) What is you comment to the fact that another video clearly shows birds flying in that particular area at exactly the right moment?

3) Even if the video should show something extraordinary (apart from a plane hitting WTC), how can this ever be YOUR claim? Somebody owns that video, how do you explain that YOU are filing the claim? Is that not an attempt to steal another man's claim?

Hans
By Hans
1)Off my head: Something unexplainable by physics.

2)Ehhh? Well, to my knowledge they haven't taxed them just yet.
Are you joking? Of course they are

3)What paranormal stuff? --- Who made the evidence? You?


Thanks,
S&S

By S&S

1) Paranormal: something that is out of normal known rules.

2) Birds are free to fly. Not relevant.

3) I just did the observation. I am showing you the evidence..
------------------------------------
At JREF, we 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.

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

Originally posted by S&amp;S
By S&S

1) Paranormal: something that is out of normal known rules.

2) Birds are free to fly. Not relevant.

3) I just did the observation. I am showing you the evidence..
------------------------------------
At JREF, we 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.

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


RANDI`S CLOCK UPDATE= 367 DAYS

[clk]

Originally posted by latinijral



RANDI`S CLOCK UPDATE= 367 DAYS
Please don't post that, latin. Have you forgotten the order your boss gave you? Let me remind you:
Please : trata en lo posible de no enojar a mis "admiradores".
Compòrtate como un chico bueno. Tu puedes.
Yo sè que estàs enojado por los insultos vulgares que has recibido, sòlo por estar de acuerdo conmigo en el "affair", pero es hora que les demuestres que tu eres de otra clase. Ellos ya tienen suficientes problemas de personalidad .

Thanks,
S&S


Since you love clock updates, I have a few for you:
CARLOS'S CLOCK UPDATE= 3 DAYS
LATINIJRAL'S CLOCK UPDATE= 2 DAYS
TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC

Originally posted by KelvinG
Fair enough S&S. I'm saddened that you are going to deprive the world of this amazing discovery while you waste your time ranting on this board.
Good luck.

Hi KelvinG:

I thought this board was part of the world, and mainly this forum would had the most intelligent people of the world.

Thanks,
S&S

[clk]

Originally posted by S&amp;S


I thought this board was part of the world, and mainly this forum would had the most intelligent people of the world.


This forum DID have the most intelligent people in the world....until you and latin showed up. By posting on this board, you two managed to lower the average IQ of this forum by an astonishing 50 points, to where it is now the dumbest forum on the internet. If you and latin leave, then it will once again become the smartest forum, of course.

"Intelligents" giving up?
Hmmmmm.

Thanks,
S&S

[clk]

Originally posted by S&amp;S
"Intelligents" giving up?


Excellent insight. I give this thread 5 stars.

Originally posted by clk


This forum DID have the most intelligent people in the world....until you and latin showed up.

Wake up !!!!!!!!!!!

[clk]

Originally posted by latinijral


Wake up !!!!!!!!!!!

Another reason to give this thread 5 stars.

When the "smart" posters give up, is time for the sock puppets to appear.
Is a rule here.

And Randi is still on silence.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S.

Sorry Blue Monk, nobody trusted your "proposal" (even you!!!).

[clk]

CARLOS'S CLOCK UPDATE= 4 DAYS
LATINIJRAL'S CLOCK UPDATE= 3 DAYS
TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC TIC TAC

My favorite link: http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14418

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by S&amp;S

1) Paranormal: something that is out of normal known rules.
Could be, but this is no answer to MY #1 question:

1) How do you explain that the object is only visible on that particular video? A dozen other videos and many stills of that fateful moment exist; none of them show your object. Why?

2) Birds are free to fly. Not relevant.

Do you not find it relevant that the only other video that confirms your object clearly shows --- a bird???

--- Well, I guess that is a sort of answer. :rolleyes:

3) I just did the observation. I am showing you the evidence..
------------------------------------
At JREF, we 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.

Uhhh, I know your English skills are less than perfect, but that is not the same meaning of "show".

Hans

Originally posted by MRC_Hans


Hans

Hi Hans:

1) We must agree with a concept of "paranormal" first.

You are free to select your favorite definition .

2) A bird? are you sure ? That is what you "think" it is. Is not relevant what you "think" it is.
I explained the REASONS, in my notarized application, why is not a bird or an insect flying between the cameraman and the towers.

What do you think? That you are the only one who had that first assumption? No, no .I did it first.Then I studied, in a proper way, the tape

3)Ok, give me your meaning or your interpretation of "show":

------------------------------------
At JREF, we 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.
------------------------------------

According to your answer , a live tv broadcasting does not constitute a show itself. And then when I showed you the recorded tape I am not showing you nothing.

Thanks,
S&S

Carlos....do you remember when Blue Monk said he buy a poor resolution video on teleclip months ago????

He asked weeks ago $ 100,oo per donator to buy the video at teleclip......How Blue Monk can buy something that he bought month ago????

Or he wants the money for himself.

Or maybe he wants to buy Teleclip !!!!!!!!!!!

[clk]

Originally posted by latinijral

Or maybe he wants to buy Teleclip !!!!!!!!!!!

Or maybe you're a dumbass !!!!!!!!!!!

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by latinijral
Carlos....do you remember when Blue Monk said he buy a poor resolution video on teleclip months ago????

He asked weeks ago $ 100,oo per donator to buy the video at teleclip......How Blue Monk can buy something that he bought month ago????

Or he wants the money for himself.

Or maybe he wants to buy Teleclip !!!!!!!!!!!

You need to reread the post you idiot. I wasn't asking for money. I was offering to pay the expense if anyone wanted to verify that I didn't fake the clip I posted.

You two are obviously too stupid to do it yourselves.

Now go whine to the moderaters you twit.

Originally posted by Blue Monk


You need to reread the post you idiot. I wasn't asking for money. I was offering to pay the expense if anyone wanted to verify that I didn't fake the clip I posted.

You two are obviously too stupid to do it yourselves.

Now go whine to the moderaters you twit.

Blue Monk:

If you like to continue posting in this thread, please try to relax.
I undersatnd your position.

Remember I already did my application to the challenge.
Remember I also received a poor answer based on a poor method by Andrew Harter.
And remember also the silence of James Randi , he refuses to publicate that poor answer (yes , their own words) in his week's commentaries.

Thanks,

[Skeptoid]

S&S: If you like to continue posting in this thread, please try to relax.
I undersatnd your position.

carlos,

I find your recent campaign to pawn yourself off as a model citizen of this forum to be both laughable and nauseating. You, sir, are a TROLL. Have you ever started a thread that you didn't steer full-circle back to your beef with the JREF in some way? Few and far between, if ever. Why are you so concerned with the "concept" of trolls and trolling? It's because you know full well that you fit perfectly into that category. You're trying to see just how far you can push before you get shoved. Everybody's on to you carlos, you read like a cheap novel. Your attemps to claim the moral high ground are insulting, as you are nothing more than a bullsh!tter and a con-man.

Originally posted by Skeptoid

carlos,

I find your recent campaign to pawn yourself off as a model citizen of this forum to be both laughable and nauseating. You, sir, are a TROLL. Have you ever started a thread that you didn't steer full-circle back to your beef with the JREF in some way? Few and far between, if ever. Why are you so concerned with the "concept" of trolls and trolling? It's because you know full well that you fit perfectly into that category. You're trying to see just how far you can push before you get shoved. Everybody's on to you carlos, you read like a cheap novel. Your attemps to claim the moral high ground are insulting, as you are nothing more than a bullsh!tter and a con-man.

Hi Skeptoid:

If you have an answer for that concept difficult to define, go help the JREF administration. They are the one who have troubles with the concept.

About your others insults: well , since you don't have arguments to debate or real evidences to post, I can understand your misery.

Keep on reading my posts in every thread I do, enjoy it, learn a little or just keep on traumatizing (...) yourself.

Thanks,
S&S

Edited to put my signature.

[uruk]

Whew, I just got through reading all the threads.

I just have one question for S&S .

Have you ever considered the possibility that you might be wrong in your interpretation of the video?

I mean, after all, video is a very poor medium as far capturing detail is concerned. the detail on video is limited by the number of pixels elements on the CCD chip and the image sampling rate.

Add to that the fact that image is two-dimensional and thus
judging distance and size relationship is difficult at best.
The whole cinema special effects industry is based on that fact.

Ive seen alot of shows that have people who use image analyzation software to study digitized photos.
(most of which are variations on Photoshop)
the software is very good at showing contrast and color relationships of the individual pixels. And sometimes you can
ferret out extra details in the process. but also realize that
sometimes the digitizing process can add pixel errors and anomolies.

Considering the object on the video, The speed and amount of blur does seem consistant with an object that is close to the camera and moving across the field of view. the camera is focused
at infinity to get a clear image of the towers. therfore any object
passing close to the camera will be out of focus. Assuming the camera is type that is available at any electronics store (read cheap), the sampling rate is around 30 to 35 frames per second
(this does not take into account any frame dropping in the video
compression process) any object moving with sufficient speed will smear (enlogate). Thus the streched appearance.

Also, distance dilutes motion. So if an the object was at t he distance of the towers, the image of the object would be little more clear. And at that incredable speed would cause some
disturbance of the smoke plume and debrie. ( even a UFO has to follow the laws of phyisics).

The other videos of that moment clearly shows that no object (other than debrie) exits the buildings. Also, if anything that huge passed through the buildings would have been seen by and
reported by many people. (you are the only person that I know of who mentions this thing)
In the video you present as evidence, you can actually see the
object enter the frame in the upper left and pass IN FRONT of the
towers. the object is less noticeable when it flies infront of the building because the camera is focused on the buildings in the distance. Light acts like a wave and has a tendancy to refract or bend around the edges of an object. So the light occludes the object. This is further proof that the object is close to the camera and out of focus. This is an effect of contrast and the light path
through the lense of a camera. This effect is also used for effect by film directors.
( I know this because I teach electronics and digital camera systems)


If you are the intelligent person you allude to be, then you must
,as an intellegent person, admit to the possibility that you might
be wrong.

likewise ,I must admit to the possibilty that I might wrong also.
But considering the evidence presented so far I would have to conclude that you have the weaker position.

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by S&amp;S

Hi Hans:

1) We must agree with a concept of "paranormal" first.

You are free to select your favorite definition .


2) A bird? are you sure ? That is what you "think" it is. Is not relevant what you "think" it is.
I explained the REASONS, in my notarized application, why is not a bird or an insect flying between the cameraman and the towers.

What do you think? That you are the only one who had that first assumption? No, no .I did it first.Then I studied, in a proper way, the tape

3)Ok, give me your meaning or your interpretation of "show":

------------------------------------
At JREF, we 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.
------------------------------------

According to your answer , a live tv broadcasting does not constitute a show itself. And then when I showed you the recorded tape I am not showing you nothing.

Thanks,
S&S

On question one: Why is the definition of paranormal important? My question is, why is the object not visible on other videos of the same event? Are you trying to say that this proves the object paranormal? That is a dangerous approach, because you are then effectively saying: "That the event cannot be verified by other videos proves that it is paranormal", but this means that your theory becomes unfalsifyable (because you claim lack of verification as a proof) and this certainly makes it void as a JREF challenge.

So you still have not answered the question.

Yes, I "think" it is a bird. But that is not the point. The point is that the ONLY evidence that verifies the object shows a bird. The video I mention is the only other picture source that shows an object in the air that correlates with the object in "your" video. And that object is very clearly a bird.

"Show". You use the meaning: "Bring to attention".

In the JREF challenge, I read "show" as meaning "to demonstrate by reasoning or procedure"

I could cite the dictionary here, but look for yourself: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=show

The word show has a lot of meanings.

My point is: Obviously, you must be violating the rights of the copyright owner by claiming any kind of recognition for that video.

But basically, this whole discussion is moot: The JREF foundation has rejected your challenge. Whether on not they did this in a nice way is really irrelevant. The fact is that you are unable to present any useful proof of your case.

Hans

Originally posted by uruk

Also, if anything that huge passed through the buildings would have been seen by and
reported by many people. (you are the only person that I know of who mentions this thing)



Hi Uruk:

Here in this thread , you are not the only one who calims to be an expert in video. Just read my signature. Or read when that topic was discussed.
Remember I did a first research with original 3/4 tapes, proffesional equipments, tv studios and personal qualyfied.
Randi also has that tape.

If you like others interpretations about the subject , just goggle it, and choose your favorite .Are almost 10,300 matches.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=wtc+ufo

Yes, and Randi is still on silence.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S.
I never alluded I am an intelligent person, is supposed that you are the intelligent one.

Originally posted by MRC_Hans


On question one: Why is the definition of paranormal important? My question is, why is the object not visible on other videos of the same event? Are you trying to say that this proves the object paranormal? That is a dangerous approach, because you are then effectively saying: "That the event cannot be verified by other videos proves that it is paranormal", but this means that your theory becomes unfalsifyable (because you claim lack of verification as a proof) and this certainly makes it void as a JREF challenge.

So you still have not answered the question.

Yes, I "think" it is a bird. But that is not the point. The point is that the ONLY evidence that verifies the object shows a bird. The video I mention is the only other picture source that shows an object in the air that correlates with the object in "your" video. And that object is very clearly a bird.

"Show". You use the meaning: "Bring to attention".

In the JREF challenge, I read "show" as meaning "To demonstrate by reasoning or procedure"

I could cite the dictionary here, but look for yourself: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=show

The word show has a lot of meanings.

My point is: Obviously, you must be violating the rights of the copyright owner by claiming any kind of recognition for that video.

But basically, this whole discussion is moot: The JREF foundation has rejected your challenge. Whether on not they did this in a nice way is really irrelevant. The fact is that you are unable to present any useful proof of your case.

Hans

Hi Hans:

1)If I asked you to give me a definition of paranormal , just be polite and answer it.
Remember it is a paranormal challenge, so the question is relevant.
And remember also we have Andrew's Harter answer to my challenge , explaining what method he used to "verificate" my claim.

2)"it is a bird" , that is just your assumption , as others members assumptions: missile, bug , blur of the camera ,lens dirty, etc, etc.

I already explained the reasons WHY is not a bird or an insect , crossing between the cameraman and the towers, in my notaryzed application. Is on page 2 of this thread.

3) Show: "To demonstrate by reasoning" as your favorite interpretation of the definition of the word.

I am just doing the observation of the paranormal thing.
I saw it in my tv, in my home , in the tv studios.

Thanks,
S&S

[uruk]

Thanks S&S for your kind reply.

I stand corrected in the matter of the number of people who
claim to have seen the object on the video segment.

But many people can witness an "event" and come away with a
different and possibly incorrect interpretation. This is basic psychology.

3/4 inch video tape is of better quality then those available for home use. But you are still limited by the number of pixels.
Broadcast video is limited to around 540 x 480 pixels for NTSE
and slightly higher for PAL. The playback monitors which are available at TV stations are also similarly limited. Even with
professional equipment, any accurate analysis of video information is difficult at best. The "qualified personnel" who examine video are limited by the low resolution (as compared to film) even with image enhancement software. (which I have a great deal of experiance with)
When you enlarge a video image, all you do is increase the size of the individual pixels, you do not increase the number or resolution of the image. There are some software algorithims
which are used to enlarge small images and increase pixel density but this is done with the information given in the existing pixels, which are basicaly just solid blocks of color. The extrapolation algorithim compares the colors of the surrounding pixels and averages out the colors for the additional pixels which are created to fill in the lost detail.
The system is similar to the anti-aliasing method used in computer graphic renderers. This method is by no means accurate
and the programers clearly state this in the documentation.
( the software is mainly used to enlarge small images for use on billboards and is not indorsed to examine detail in a video image).
There is also software which manipulates color and contrast. But again you are limited by the low resolution of broadcast video.

If you enlarge an area in a video frame and run color and contrast filters you wind up with a mosaic of colors which resemble a blocky "inkblot test" type image.

Inkblot tests are used by psyciatrists to gain insight to a pantient by how they interpret the image. Different people obviously give different interpretations based on thier psychological disposition.

The "qualified personnel" are limited by the resolution of the equipment and are again left to interepret as best they can.

So again I ask, Do you consider the possibilty that your interpretation of the video might be incorrect?

Originally posted by uruk
Thanks S&S for your kind reply.

I stand corrected in the matter of the number of people who
claim to have seen the object on the video segment.

But many people can witness an "event" and come away with a
different and possibly incorrect interpretation. This is basic psychology.

3/4 inch video tape is of better quality then those available for home use. But you are still limited by the number of pixels.
Broadcast video is limited to around 540 x 480 pixels for NTSE
and slightly higher for PAL. The playback monitors which are available at TV stations are also similarly limited. Even with
professional equipment, any accurate analysis of video information is difficult at best. The "qualified personnel" who examine video are limited by the low resolution (as compared to film) even with image enhancement software. (which I have a great deal of experiance with)
When you enlarge a video image, all you do is increase the size of the individual pixels, you do not increase the number or resolution of the image. There are some software algorithims
which are used to enlarge small images and increase pixel density but this is done with the information given in the existing pixels, which are basicaly just solid blocks of color. The extrapolation algorithim compares the colors of the surrounding pixels and averages out the colors for the additional pixels which are created to fill in the lost detail.
The system is similar to the anti-aliasing method used in computer graphic renderers. This method is by no means accurate
and the programers clearly state this in the documentation.
( the software is mainly used to enlarge small images for use on billboards and is not indorsed to examine detail in a video image).
There is also software which manipulates color and contrast. But again you are limited by the low resolution of broadcast video.

If you enlarge an area in a video frame and run color and contrast filters you wind up with a mosaic of colors which resemble a blocky "inkblot test" type image.

Inkblot tests are used by psyciatrists to gain insight to a pantient by how they interpret the image. Different people obviously give different interpretations based on thier psychological disposition.

The "qualified personnel" are limited by the resolution of the equipment and are again left to interepret as best they can.

So again I ask, Do you consider the possibilty that your interpretation of the video might be incorrect?

Hi Uruk:

Pixels at 3/4 tapes ? Check it again.
Thanks,
S&S

Edited To add signature

[uruk]

One other thought I had when I reread your claim on page two;

I'm reminded of the "Apollo hoaxsters", (the people who claim the moon missions were faked),the majority of thier claims are based on video and photographic materials. The one thing that became clear to me was they were misinterpreting what they were seeing. This was probably due to thier lack of knowledge of how cameras work, the nature of optics and light, the laws of physics,
and the environment in space.

(There is a precedence in history when UFO believers were mistakeing the reflection of the shutter and caustic light anomolies in the lense for UFOs)

I'm going to make some assumption here based on this thread activity.

1. I'm assuming that you are not an expert on video equipment
Since you mentioned that went to the TV station to view the
original tape and confered with "qualified personnel".

2. I'm also assuming that never took classes in physics, optics,
electronics, Digital video systems, etc.

3. I'm assuming too that the extent of the examination was to look at the original 3/4 inch video tape on an editing deck with frame-by-frame advance and a large color calibrated monitor.

If my assumptions are wrong, please inform me as to how the video was examined. was there image enhancement filters used?
If so what kinds were used, was the image enlarged? was any extrapolation software used? What equipment was used? Who were the "qualified personel" what are their credentials? what area of video are they experts in? ( are they just editors and cameramen or do they have experiance in image manipulation and forensic examination?

now according to your claim on page two, you are claiming that
there is a "hat shaped paranormal activity" taking place. This claim is based on the examination of a single video tape from
a single angle.( all the other videos of the same moment presented from diffierent angles show nothing passing through the buildings)

Now with all the information I presented to you in my posts
all of which can be verified in textbooks, manuals,etc..as too the limited veracity of video tape and the scarce video evidence that support your claim. I ask again.

Do you consider the possibilty that your interpretation of the video might be wrong?

Hi Uruk:

Sorry I forgot to answer your question:

"Do you consider the possibilty that your interpretation of the video might be incorrect? "

Not in the same way I consider Andrew Harter's incorrect interpretation of an unknown link of internet. And the big mistake of the JREF is that is the official answer to my application.

As I wrote before, I did a different analysis.
I will like you to read my translated application. Is on page 2.

Thanks,
S&S

[uruk]

1623
Re: wtc ufo

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Uruk:

Pixels at 3/4 tapes ? Check it again.
Thanks,
S&S

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

How a video camera works 101.

light reflected off an object enters the through the lens and is focused onto the imaging surface. In the early days of videography this used to be a device called a videotron tube,
now days we use a chip called a carged-coupled device or a CCD chip.. On high quality (broadcast) video cameras three CCD chips are often used not for added resolution but for color separation. ( one chip for each color; red, blue, green or more accurately cyan, magenta, and yellow).

The CCD chip is an array of photo-transistors. A photo-transistors is an electronic component which allows current to flow when exposed to light. How much current flow depends on how much light is recieved by the photo-transistors. The voltage levels coming from each individual photo-transistors makes up what is called a picture element or what is refered to as a PIXEL.

The number of photo-transistors or PIXEL on the array is determined by the video standard of a particular country. To date there are four officialy recognised standards; NTSC=525x480, PAL=624x520, SECAM=624x520, and HDTV=1180x720.

The reason for dividing up the image this way is because the TV screen is divided up into individual phosphorous dots.
an electron beam scans and strikes the dot (actually three beams aimed at three dots per pixel; one for each color) the brightness and color for each dot (pixel) is determined by the intensity (voltage) level of the beam as it is scan across each dot. (pixel)

The image on your TV screen is actually a mosaic of little glowing phosphorus squares.

you can verify this yourself by puting a magnifing glass up to your TV screen and see the individual pixels.

Now if you are using a digital camera (D1) the voltage level coming from each photo-tranistor or pixel is convereted to a digital number by an electronic chip called an ADC or analoge-to digital-converter and stored as as digital information directly on the magnetic medium (digital video tape). or if you have have a S-VHS, Betamax, or 3/4 (analoge) camera. the voltages are encoded into a composite signal stored in analog form on the magnetic medium (video tape) The composite signal contains info about the voltage levels and color of each individual pixel.

So, pixels on 3/4 inch tape? you bet! they're in there!

[Blue Monk]

Uruk,

I just wanted to give you some background on how I acquired my information presented on my website here. (http://home.austin.rr.com/bluemonk/nonsense/)

The captures of the angle Carlos refers to on this site were captured by me.

I found a company (the address and contact info is on my site) that records the news for archival, educational and research purposes directly from live feeds and I purchased a copy from them.

I work at the University of Texas and was able to view the tape in the Center for the Advance Study of Art and in the Multimedia Department both of which have the most current equipment possible.

I work in the Fine Arts Computer Lab where I made the capture. I used a Mac G4 and Final Cut Pro. I intentionally captured in a large format to maintain the aspect ratio. In a smaller format you can capture all of the pixels but since the aspect ratios are slightly off the resulting image tends to be a bit distorted horizontally. The larger format insures that all of the data is captured and a correct aspect ration is maintained to insure accuracy.

I also took care to capture all 22 frames that the object appears on. I did absolutely nothing to alter the lighting or sharpness or altered the image in any way and the resulting capture is an accurate copy of the clearly raw footage as it was broadcast on the ABC network during the 5 o'clock news the same day of the event.

If you are interested I'll be glad to post the exact equipment I viewed the tape on and did the capture on if that would help. I would have to do that tomorrow as I'd have to look to see the exact make and manufacturer of the decks and monitors.

If you would like a copy then PM me with and address and I would be more than happy to send you one.

If you wish to order directly from the company then I have provided that info on my site.

I would also like to point out that the 'referential' tape Carlos sent to JREF was him being interviewed and not a tape of the actual event. If Carlos is unhappy that Harter did not view an actual tape then he simply should have provided one and to my knowledge he has not acquired a copy himself to this date and if he has he has refused to post it.

Be that as it may, if you view my clip and compare it to what Harter says in his reply you will see that the clip is exactly as Harter described.

If you are knowledgeable in this area or possibly would like to produce a digital version of this then PM me and I'll send you the original tape I received from Teleclip and keep a copy for myself or you can order it yourself from the information I've provided on my site.

Be forewarned though, if you do produce an accurate version like I did Carlos will simply accuse you of faking it as he has with me.

All of the other videos you have seen I have collected from the internet. There are a couple of links to other versions of Carlos tape (which match mine by the way) that aren't on my site in this thread, Video of the Day (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14418). They are near the end of the thread.

If you have any specific questions concerning how I captured that clip then feel free to ask.

Thanks,
Blue Monk

Originally posted by uruk


1. I'm assuming that you are not an expert on video equipment
Since you mentioned that went to the TV station to view the
original tape and confered with "qualified personnel".

2. I'm also assuming that never took classes in physics, optics,
electronics, Digital video systems, etc.

3. I'm assuming too that the extent of the examination was to look at the original 3/4 inch video tape on an editing deck with frame-by-frame advance and a large color calibrated monitor.




Hi Uruk:

1. I know the basis.I like all that stuff. I am not an expert like you are assuming you are or Harter must be.
I went to different tv stations, not to analyze MY own recorded tape. The analysis were made with the tapes the own stations had. I repeat : their own tapes , their own personal, their own equipments. I told the JREF to do the same, I just send a referential tape , and told them to go to the nearest tv station and analyze their tape with their equipments.They did not.

I assume also that Andrew Harter is not an expert on video equipment and he just saw and "studied" an unknown link on the internet, according to his poor answer to my application.

2. The basis as I told you. I use to work in visual art and have friends and access to proffessional equipments and personal.
Randi is a media man , he also has those recurses. But they preferd the internet.

3. The analysis was did the same way proffesionals of any part of the world should do it. The monitors at tv stations are not too "long" at the editing deck.They are black and white and colored .The numbers of frames are highly superior of most internet tapes. The deck is useful to run and back the tape in every single frame. You can even slow motion the tape and recorded then and start a new study frame by frame.

Check some pictures at latinijral web page.
Compare the hand and the "long" of the monitor.
And the movement of the hand.
Remember those are digital pictures (of course you can tell me they can be faked). But also notice that I also send those referential tapes to the JREF of the sesion of the ananlysis recorded and broadcasted by the tv stations of my country.
And don't forget were just referential tapes. But Andrew (JREF) just "studied" an unknown link of internet.

Of course the 3/4 tapes are also able to be watch in a wide screen television (with no distorsion by pixels) set and also monitored the frames in really slow-slow action.

------
Now Uruk :

3/4 tapes and pixels ? Distorsion if you see it in wide long tv sets? Comon, was not broadcasted from those tv phones (yes pixels) some reporters did it from the war of Iraq.
The crash of the second plane was broadcasted live with the regular cameras .

You just need a regular 29 inch wide television. Or a 14 inch monitor. It doesn't matter. All we need is honesty.

You are the expert according to your words.
Remember the image was broadcasted live and the tape is almost in all the tv stations of the world.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S.

http://groups.msn.com/SkepticsForumIsJamesRandialiar/shoebox.msnw
Edited to add:
Pixels_square?
Not the tv monitor, and the 3/4 tape?

[hal bidlack]

Carlos and Latin

I believe the time has come to bring this to a close. You have had over a year to make your case, and just short of 2000 posts on your two main threads (in addition to quite a few 'additional' threads). In the two main threads alone, you have posted 751 times, and Latin has posted 326 times.

You seem intent on ignoring alternatives (e.g., contacting the media to make your case), but repeat your unique way of posting over and over, and often do so in what I consider to be an uncivil manner (granted, you get back much of that too)

I believe the JREF forum has demonstrated a clear willingness to listen to all points of view on this issue, but that window now is going to close. You and Latin are welcome to continue to post on subjects other than the WTC attack if you like. Should you could to continue to spam the board with this issue, I shall take appropriate actions. It is my judgement, as administrator of this board, that your combined 1000+ posts have met the standard to be called spam. I do not wish to suspend or ban you, and I am loath to take this step to reduce free expression, but I believe firmly that we have given you plenty of time to make a reasoned case.

Should you object to this decision, you may appeal to Linda, and then to Mr Randi, both of whom have the authority to revoke my decision. Short of that, I declare these threads closed. You are, of course, free to contact any of the media outlets I provided for you in my detailed posting of some weeks ago, in order to publically make the case against my actions.

Hal Bidlack
Administrator