On 10/26/2011 11:06 PM, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> On 10/25/2011 22:43, Saul Luizaga wrote:
>>> The point being: there are indications of some things out there that are
>>> suspicious, and can't be explained
>>
>> Good so far...
>>
>>> but the logical conclusions are this and that... etc.
>>
>> If they can't be explained, how can you call your conclusions "logical"?
>
> Well all the recollection of testimonials, scientific testing of samples
> taken on sites and ufologist analysis, some ufologists with a background
> of decades and they having normal jobs, so I assume you don't hire crazy
> people so I think they reasoning is sound, they don't do it for a
> living, they are thinking normal people that dedicate their time and
> resources to find out the truth of course they must get money from their
> help but I doubt is big. Ufologists are far more scientific than you
> might think.
Otherwise sane people, with jobs, claim they *know* that the government 
is intentionally producing "chemtrails", on the basis of finding 
Aluminum in water (the single most common element on the damn planet, 
along side Silicon). Just saying...

Post a reply to this message