Stargate Project

Discussions on UFOs, ghosts, myths etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: Stargate Project

#21  Postby Jango » Dec 18, 2014 10:41 am

Am I skeptical that whomever was studying this (protected by national security) yielded any "extraordinary results?" Of course. However, I naturally question some things right off the bat. From the looks of things, if this thread is any indicator of common intelligence, whomever was running the experiment should have called it off before it even officially started. The strange thing about that is that it didn't. Could that be a bureaucratic thing? Sure, but it could also be that they carried out their experiment and the reason the project (like MKUltra) went on for so long is that they were getting something they wanted that was worth them being operationally active for 10+ years (with MKUltra that meant that universities and prisons and mental institutions around the country provided willing support knowing full well what was going on in their backyard). And I have been surprised by things like this before, I had thought, "No way, it would never happen," but low and behold, "Oh shit, it did happen." The intersection of Logic and Politics is an interesting PPV MMA bout, eh? Pray for the best, but prepare for the worst.
Brainstorm take me away from the norm.
User avatar
Jango
 
Posts: 98
Male

Country: CONUS
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Stargate Project

#22  Postby Jango » Dec 18, 2014 11:10 am

A simpler concept is -- with what kind of certainty can a person judge the capabilities of the Department of Defense or the Central Intelligence Agency? Much is known about them but the unknown amount about them is of an unknown quantity. Making any sort of absolute when speaking of such amoeba like multi-billion dollar security services who get away with telling us, "It's classified. Trust us, it isn't anything bad." People who claim to be devout skeptics fall for that shit like a cat with a brand new open box in the house. They fail to recognize the extent of their ignorance on the issue. If the government denies something about a project they worked on for years-and-years, the burden of proof is on them to back up their claims, something also that is ironic about so many sworn skeptics -- they don't hold the government to any logical standard of burden of proof. To these people, once officialdom has said its piece, the story is over, their thinking on the matter goes back to rest and then it isn't in the forefront of their mind anymore and then it is just a distant memory. But for those of us that can actually think for ourselves, the story isn't over. History is full of examples where some despot denied genociding so-and-so when everyone the world over is like, "We've literally watched you do it." The Poles felt like that for a long time before the Soviets finally admitted in the late 80's to massacring 10,000+ of them during World War II. If the Nazis had won World War II, they had already set up the framework for officially denying involvement in the eugenics program that killed millions-and-millions of people. What some people think is them being skeptical is actually them being idealistic. Why would you give those with the monopoly of violence the benefit of the doubt?
Brainstorm take me away from the norm.
User avatar
Jango
 
Posts: 98
Male

Country: CONUS
United States (us)
Print view this post

Previous

Return to Paranormal & Supernatural

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest

cron