On 10/25/2011 4:53 PM, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Forgot to say, check the series 'UFO Files' and again, not everything is
> false not everyone/everything is true but some things are. Bob Lazard is
> a attention whore fake witness for example that does appear in the
> series but there are others that do offer truthful and objective
> indication of ET presence, I suggest you to re-read my post:
> news://news.povray.org:119/4e9f7644@news.povray.org you're assuming many
> wrongful things about my posts & myself when I explained how and why
> precisely to avoid people assuming things but you looks like you
> over-read it and did it anyway.

Funny, given that Lazard is one of the few people that can even be 
proven, based on the evidence, to even exist, instead of having been 
made up, by among others, Lazard, in some cases, its hardly helping the 
argument to claim that he is less credible than people that there are no 
records of, outside of the claims made that they where in fact "at" 
various places, like Roswell.

The ones you can verify, you get so much contradictory details, that its 
hardly clear at all what they did see, report, etc., at the time, never 
mind years later, after they had plenty of time to embellish. And 
***everyone*** embellishes. There is no person on earth, with the 
possible exception of some people with near perfect photographic 
memories, who doesn't construct every detail of what happened to them 
10. 20, etc. years prior, out of fragments, complete with modifications, 
distortions, and misremembered details. At best, some of us have 
friends, neighbors, and relatives that are also there, and *they* offer 
versions that mostly coincide, to the result is "close" to the original. 
Divorce someone of anyone they can talk to about it, then leave them 
decades to only construct their own narrative of events, from their own 
faulty recollections, and I would be surprised if they remembered 
"anything" accurately, which they didn't have clear reason to recall.

We know that even the act of recalling an event both "strengthens" that 
memory, but alters it at the same time. If you haven't had a reason to 
recall it at all, for decades, what does that do to it, when you try to 
recover it? It certainly can't be trustworthy. And that isn't just 
opinion, its an entire field, called neuroscience.

Post a reply to this message