--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > In this case Ha! also means "I'm not going to get into > an argument about whether or not Doug and Dave were CIA > stooges trying to discredit the hideous truth about > crop circles as it's too preposterous and obviously > just some TBs reflexive creation to cope with the > fact OTHER people were doing it too. And not only am > I NOT narrow minded I'm actually open to any new ideas > but have higher standards of evidence than some wishy- > washy Newage nerd's sub X-files conspiracy theory website.
See, the above is why I say you aren't really interested in exploring the issue. The government coverup angle, while it's well documented, isn't that important, yet you used that part of the article as an excuse to trash the whole thing rather than examining all the other points it made. And the Web site itself is not, of course, a "conspiracy theory" site. Plus which, that article wasn't presented as "evidence" of anything. It's just a good survey, an overview, of the various unanswered questions about crop circles. This is typical skeptopathic behavior: pick out one thing you can quibble with and dismiss the whole kit and kaboodle on that basis. <snip> > I'm also not a smartass but have thought a lot about > crop circles and have reached the conclusion that the > balance of probabilities would indicate total hoaxing for > the purposes of seeing what sort of mythos the imaginations > of people starved of any kind of orthodox spiritual outlet > will come up with. Your thinking about crop circles, at least as reflected in your posts, is quite poorly informed as to a whole host of facts about them. That's what makes you a smartass. (Same with Barry, but he's even less well informed.)
