V-shaped UFOs in NM photos

examiner ^ | January 16 2009

[JoeProBono]

CHAMA, NM - Several meandering V-shaped UFOs near a mountain slope here turned up on a woman's digital photos. Three photos shot with a 21 megapixel camera caught multiple crafts approaching in the first frame, one craft in frame two moving close to the ground while the others take positions in the sky, and then frame three shows all of the crafts moving out of the area.

[Quix]

Am curious . . . Vic . . . or any of the rest of you . . .

And I realize this is my turf--psychology and all--but I don't have a lot of colleagues handy at the moment so you're it! LOL.

This issue of BELIEF and PERCEPTION is an interesting issue.

We know from quite a lot of research that

EXPECTATION can alter perception.

And

that BELIEF can alter perception--BELIEF tends to involve DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS about what will be observed.

I notice that I'm often tweaky about the perceptions of a long list of naysayers being compromised by their willful blindness. But most of the time, I'm writing that fingers in cheek. I think there's an element of it that's true . . . but I'm mostly thinking that underneath it all, THEIR PERCEPTIONS ARE REASONABLY GOOD--THEY ARE JUST DENYING WHAT THEY ARE PERCEIVING.

Now, I'm not so sure.

It increasingly seems to be the case that a sizeable percentage of naysayers have BELIEFS ABOUT the UFO phenomena that are SOOOOOO INTENSE, ENTRENCHED, NARROW, RIGID ETC.

THAT they are truly INCAPABLE of objective observations and objectively registering those observations on their consciousness.

I think I'd always allowed that such might be partially going on for some few poor souls. But I didn't really think it was THAT bad.

Recently, it seems that the evidence is repeatedly slapping me in the face--IT !!!!IS!!!! THAT BAD!

I know that with folks who have gathered on mountains in the past to await Christ's return per one of their presumptive "prophets" . . . that when the day comes and passes with no APPEARANCE, they merely accommodate the non-appearance in some intellectual slight-of-brain sort of way.

This seems to be what I've been reluctant to acknowledge is REALLY GOING ON with so many of the naysayers.

When confronted with objective reality . . . the naysayers either:

1. Simply deny and block out the evidence--sounding for all the world like they REALLY DO NOT SEE the red barn door 3 feet in front of their eyes.

OR

2. They refuse to look at the barn door--pretending that if they don't open their eyes--it won't be there.

That last one is incredible. As Piaget demonstrated, that kind of mental process is outgrown around age 2 or so.

What DYNAMICS--emotional or otherwise--drive an adult--partiuclarly a college educated adult, as some of the naysayers seem to be, . . . particularly "hard science" types . . . WHAT DRIVES such a person to such a stance? What forces are THAT STRONG so as to

DISTORT so WHOLESALE the very raw perceptions of reality???

That's really a fascinating question to me. And I don't have a lot of easy answers.

Would love for some ideas, if any of you have such ideas.

THANKS for being there.

[Religion Moderator]

I am also an Admin Moderator. And the rules are applied equally to whatever we see, but we mods do not individually read every single post on every forum. I do try to read everything on the Religion Forum however. That is my specialty.

Also, moderators are individuals. I, for instance, am biased in that I use a softer hand in proportion to however long a Freeper has been on the forum. Quix has been here about 8 years, you about 6 months - so I personally would be proportionately more gentle with him than with you. And a person who signed up this week and smarted off at me like you just did, would be instantly banned. But because you have been here for awhile, I shall ignore it.

[Travis T. OJustice]

I fully expect that quix, having been around a lot longer than I would get that treatment, and I have no beef with that. what sucks is that he made a ton of personal attacks when I made none, and I got your “knock it off” until several days after the fact. He’s whining because I got to poin out that he’s had close to a dozen of his personal attacks instantly removed wiithout me pointing it out. Clearly, he had to search for something that was questionable, and it clearly took him a long time.

You can’t see the crap i was referring to, in general, (i’m pretty sure) because it’s gone. Any of my replies to quik were certainly nicer than his very personal attacks wherrein he likes to involve my family members. For someone who professes to be a Christian, he sure doesn’t show it in his personal attacks with those who use fact to comment, and he wouldn’t know fact if it bit him in the ear.

Anyhoooooo, I do appreciate the response, which was kinder and gentler than i really expected. :) I was kind of ticked when i wrote that response this morning.

Be well,
TTOJ

[Travis T. OJustice]

http://www.tk421.net/gallery/sounds/twilight.wav

[JoeProBono]

Why We Cannot Accept UFO Disclosure

[Travis T. OJustice]

ROFLMAO! Good stuff. Not quite as good as the Onion or Iowahawk, but funny stuff nonetheless.

[houeto]

WHAT DRIVES such a person to such a stance?

Mathmatical probabilities?

There are billions of humans with hundreds of millions of recording devices but not one video with "unquestionable" proof of existence of intelligent yet non-human visitations.

Just my attempt at an answer Quix.

[Quix]

Thanks.

Good article.

It appears that good reality testing is not a popular nor plentiful item amongst some naysayers.

Amazing.

It's been interesting . . . The Religion Forum has very strict rules--much stricter than the regular forum and much, much, much stricter than Chat.

I tend to try very hard and mercifully, amazingly successfully to post within the RELIGION FORUM rules in all parts of FR. It's the best discipline, for me.

1. One of the very key issues on that forum is to avoid ANY PERSONAL attacks.

2. Attacking perspectives, ideas, issues, positions etc. are not personal attacks REGARDLESS of whether the THIN-SKINNED TAKE THEM PERSONALLY, OR NOT. A lot of emotionally . . . compromised . . . folks have great difficulty distinguishing between

THEIR PRODUCTS AND THEIR PERSONHOOD. Kind of like 2 year old Johnny all upset because mommy dared to flush his great product in the toilet instead of treating it as part of his cherished person.

It's amazing how many pretendingly mature adults throw such a fit when their WORDS, IDEAS, POSITIONS, PERSPECTIVES are attacked as though they'd taken a dirty arrow to their literal beating hearts. Incredible.

3. Generic comments about a class of folks are NOT considered PERSONAL attacks! DOH! Fancy that! What a novel idea! GENERAL DOES NOT EQUAL PERSONAL! Wow. A normal English dictionary governs the Religion Forum! What a shock! LOL! /sar

4. INFERENCES, IMPLICATIONS, EXTRAPOLATIONS imputing comments as personal attacks are considered, there, to be THIN-SKINNED WHINING. Such thin-skinned whiners are advised rather forcefully to stay off the OPEN threads.

5. Using "You" and other personal pronouns in an attacking way IS considered to be a PERSONAL attack. DOH! Yet again a normal English dictionary rules in the RELIGION FORUM vs in the poor reality tested minds and fantasies of hard sciences graduates!

So, in the RELIGION FORUM, I try and avoid personal pronouns altogether. Outside it, I'm very cautious about HOW I use personal pronouns.

It is REALLY fascinating . . . I have been unable to find more than ONE POSSIBLE place where a post of mine has been pulled on these threads. When a post is pulled, a note is left that the post has been pulled. My eyesight is not that bad! I also can still count to 10--probably even 20! LOL.

Perhaps this current crop of naysayers has jumped planet into an alternate reality with very crazy rubber dictionaries and very slippery reality??? LOL.

I suppose I could be a LOT easier on such naysayers. Focusing so hard on the hard sciences often seems to leave little cognitive space or skills for language comprehension and facility.

[Quix]

Doesn’t fit, houeto.

That’s an intellectual probability issue.

And, while I believe as stated, your probability conjecture leaves out some key facts not entered into the equation, it’s still just an intellectual probability.

The fierceness of so many naysayers attitudes and drivenness

psychodynamically

HAS

to come from much deeper than an intellectual probability.

I agree that the RELIGION OF SCIENTISM turns probabilities and lop-sided UNSCIENTIFIC conjectures about stacked deck probabilities into passionate RELIGIOUS ISSUES.

But that’s my point . . . AT THAT POINT AND TO THAT DEGREE, WE HAVE ENTERED PASSIONATE BELIEF, RELIGION—NOT MERE INTELLECTUAL, SCIENTIFIC PROBABILITIES.

And, speaking of probabilities, even merely in the case of the video about all the Australians interviewed in that case—the probability that all those folks are lying or hallucinating is near zero. And that would easily be defendable in a court of law.

There have been multiple explanations about the photo thing. Naysayers choose not to buy into such explanations. That’s their right. But to then RELIGIOUSLY STAMP THEIR FEET AND WHINE that THEIR PASSIONATE RELIGIOUS CONSTRUCTION ON REALITY IS

OBJECTIVE

REALITY—is laughable to the max. All the more so with them whining about OBJECTIVITY! LOL.

[Joya]

Well, Quix, well done. I always look forward to reading your posts. Thanks so much for your diligent work.

I admire you greatly.

Thanks, too, for your friendship.

Joya

[Quix]

It’s long been fascinating on FR . . .

kind of like hunting wild pigs . . .

when the arrow strikes home, the whining and squealing erupts immediately.

---

It’s also been fascinating to observe . . . how

HORRIBLY DASTARDLY IT’S seen to be . . . by the . . . uhhhh . . . emotionally challenged . . . naysayers so often . . . to be

“ACCUSED” of having ATTACHMENT DISORDER AS MUCH AS I!!!

That guilt by association must be REALLLLLLLLLY HORRIBLE to stick in their craw so much! LOL.

Sometimes, confirmations can be perversely sweet. LOL. [slapping hands.]

[Quix]

Thanks much for your kind comments and encouragements.

You certainly know me beyond most folks! LOL.

Besides all that, you’ve even seen genuine for real diplomas and transcripts! LOL.

[Joya]

The papyrus ones and the ones etched in bark. As well as those chiseled into stone tablets. LOL.

[JoeProBono]

PHOTOS: UFO Appears Then Disappears On San Miguel Mountain

[Quix]

Lots of things have been asserted which are demonstrably untrue. Thankfully, the record is clear in terms of the following:

---

HARSH POINTEDLY PERSONAL ASSAULTS USING “you”
.
ENGLISH and POSTING LESSON:
.
As the most strict rules on FR—in the RELIGION FORUM—assert:
.
THESE would
NOT
be a PERSONAL attack:
.
UFO spotted opposite Houses of Parliament......
Thursday, February 05, 2009 1:46:35 PM • 31 of 76
Travis T. OJustice to TaraP
.
BWAHAHAHA! Some retards actually believe this tripe!
.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009 8:37:54 AM • 10 of 36
Travis T. OJustice to JoeProBono
.
Are those UFOs near that mountain? No
Of course not, because only someone who is really screwed up in the head would believe in UFO’s.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
################################################
.
THESE
WOULD BE
A PERSONAL ATTACK:
.

.
UFO spotted opposite Houses of Parliament......
Thursday, February 05, 2009 1:46:35 PM • 31 of 76
Travis T. OJustice to TaraP
BWAHAHAHA! [You] retards actually believe this tripe!
.

Tuesday, February 03, 2009 8:37:54 AM • 10 of 36
Travis T. OJustice to JoeProBono
.
Are those UFOs near that mountain? No
Of course not, because only someone [like you]—who is really screwed up in the head—would believe in UFO’s.
.
###########################################
###########################################
.
[1]
.
V-shaped UFOs in NM photos
Friday, February 13, 2009 9:00:14 AM • 1,323 of 1,333
Travis T. OJustice to Religion Moderator
I fully expect that quix, having been around a lot longer than I would get that treatment, and I have no beef with that. what sucks is that he made a ton of personal attacks when I made none,
.
####################################################
.
[2]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 2:04:30 PM • 96 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to freeplancer

No wonder you believe in UFO’s, because you clearly have a basic lack of cognitive function, junior
.
######################################
.
[3]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 2:01:35 PM • 93 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
For a post to be pulled, it would have to be a personal attack like yours. My comments don’t meet the criteria
.
####################################
.
[4]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 2:00:00 PM • 91 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
Please continue to call us insane.
.
Now there you go, being a liar again. I didn’t call you insane. Geez, a little reading comprehension would benefit you well.
.
##################################################
.
[5]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:51:48 PM • 82 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
I hate to see folks end up in hell needlessly—particularly for lack of information, lack of warning.
.
Then you should wise up quickly!
.
#######################################
.
[6]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:51:04 PM • 79 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
and in your case, they were clear personal attacks. Way to continue to skirt truth, though, like you do in all the UFO threads. Clearly, honesty and you ahve not been friends in a VERY long time.
.
####################################################
.
[7]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:42:28 PM • 68 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
If you were’n an ass, you’d have less problems.
.
##########################################
.
[8]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:41:13 PM • 67 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
It’s more difficult to show your homies just what a hypocritical dirtbag you are when all the really egregious post are pulled, though.
.
#########################################
.
[9]
.
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:38:09 PM • 66 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
Ah, i’ve finally showed you for the liar you are! Can’t take the heat, eh? Shown up for being a hypocrite, and you dont’ like it. I’m sure glad I’m not you, and don’t have to face your god for the things you pulled while claiming to be christian! Bummer they don’t sell asbestos any more, i understand it’s damn hot where you are headed.
.
#############################################
.
[10]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:28:13 PM • 60 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
Then not are you just morally bankrupt, and a hypocrite, but you are flat out ignorant. Mean spirited and ignorant.
.
############################################
.
[11]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:18:30 PM • 54 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
I didn’t think you had the vocabularly to figure it uot to begin with. Now, it’s more than vocabulary where you fail, but overall mental capacity to comprehend a not-very-difficult subject.
.
################################################
.
[12]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 12:51:11 PM • 36 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to freeplancer
.
Why don’t you follow the whole history of Mr Hypocrite quix personally attacking me before making any further stupid comments, mk?
.
###############################################
.
[13]
.
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 12:26:42 PM • 27 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
Yes, hypocrite is the perfect word to describe you. Scumbag would work very well, as well.
.
###########################################
.
[14]
.
UFO filmed above Somerset coastline UK 11 Feb 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009 12:06:50 PM • 14 of 121
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
because you sure remind me of those who rape little boys in the name of religion.
Fargin hypocrite.
.
########################################
.
[15]
.
Video: UFO filmed above Somerset coastline by holidaymakers
Wednesday, February 11, 2009 1:52:15 PM • 26 of 46
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
I love having someone to laugh at. That may not be fair, though, sometimes I feel guilty like I did when i was a kid, laughing at those in the ‘state hospital’. Same deal, only you aren’t in the hospital.
.
##################################################
.
[16]
.
.
Fighter jets scrambled after UFO follows plane over Athens: jets were scrambled to intercept a UFO
02/10/2009 12:18:22 PM PST • 89 of 154
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
LMAO! Lame debate skills! First, you go for a personal attack, now you play the lame “troll” crap. Fairly well exposes your lack of caharacter.
.
##################################################
.
[17]
.
VIDEO: New Possible UFO Sighting Near Stephenville, TX
Monday, February 02, 2009 1:07:24 PM • 74 of 124
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
Do you have any clue at all what a freakin hypocrite you are being?
.
################################
.
[18]
.
David Cameron: we will publish secret UFO files (UK - Prime Minister Hopeful)
Wednesday, January 28, 2009 12:19:42 PM • 27 of 38
Travis T. OJustice to Quix
.
[one has to see the pics! LOL. Cute and fun but still personal attacks though the “you” is implied. No biggy to me . . . but given the category . . . they pretty well fit.]
.
##########################################
.
BTW, attempts to provoke someone to abandon being a thread disrupter by assaulting their ideas, perspectives, positions is ACTUALLY QUITE DISTANT from a harsh PERSONAL attack to their personhood.
.

[Quix]

thanks.

[Travis T. OJustice]

THESE WOULD BE A PERSONAL ATTACK:

LMAO! It only meets the criteria with your creative editing!

Once again, you have to be a liar to make your point.

[Religion Moderator]

On the Religion Forum, they would be pulled because they are directed to an individual Freeper rather than a group having a certain belief. The guideline on the Religion Forum is "discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal."

Making it personal also includes attributing motives or otherwise reading minds - and making the thread about individual Freepers. All of the dispute between the two of you would be considered "making it personal" - getting the thread off-topic if it were posted in the Religion Forum.

Quix' indictment post would also be pulled as "thread-hopping" - we cannot tolerate carrying disputes from thread to thread on such sensitive matters as what Freepers believe.

Actually, I'd probably pull the whole thread for "childish behavior" if it had been posted in the Religion Forum.

But this thread is in chat and has become unbearably mean, so instead I will banish the thread to the smokey backroom.

[Mashood]

The Green Goblin?

[Travis T. OJustice]

You may notice that Quik agrees with me, and somehow, in my rush to post, i didn’t point out that my comments, AS I WORTE THEM, are not personal attacks. Even quik agreed. It was only when he wrote in stuff that i didn’t write, that he somehow made them perosnal, and made it appear as though I wrtoe it that way, which, clearly, I didn’t.

Thank you, quik, for pointing out that I was, and have been all along, correct in that I didn’t make the personal comments you claim, and the only personal comments I made were in reply to the ones where you made comments that involved my family members in a VERY SLEAZY manner.

RM, I appreciate you pointing out how mean quik has been.

Thanks, all, and have a good weekend!