Many people have been convicted by circumstantial evidence. And in this case we have eyewitness reports.
Now as to what to make of the eyewitness reports, there is no precedent...but that doesn't mean such reports can be dismissed out of hand.
And before all those eyewitness accounts for which there is a precedent, there is always the first one...for which there is NO precedent.
As far as I can tell, this matter is being subjected to empirical examination rather sloppily because no one has taken an accusation of crime to court AND, on the scientific front, there has been nothing to be gained by solving the mystery.
Actually, on the scientific front, there is much to be lost by simply considering or mentioning this conundrum.
As far as I can tell, this particular mystery has rather conveniently slipped between the cracks.
It reminds me of the way Obama operates. He breaks the law on a regular basis...but not in a way that can result in litigation (particular considering that he controls the DOJ).
My motive for bringing Obama into this analysis is that there is a surreptitiousness in both the way Obama operates and the way these so-called "aliens" operate.
Funny also that (as far as I can tell) all abductees agree on one point...the "grays" are, first and last, liars.
Same can be said about Obama. Lying seems to be something he just can't resist. For Obama, lying is an obsession.
I know I just made a quantum leap in connecting Obama to this phenomenon...but there is a connection.
Two major (and hugely enigmatic and inexplicable) influences share a connection.
Is that connection valid? Or is it just a coincidence?
That is the question...and I don't have the answer.
But because I don't have the answer does not mean the question itself is not valid.
WELL PUT.
It’s somewhat fascinating . . . a bit . . .
to observe the way “hallucination” is thrown around in this topic area.
There’s even the laughable term “group hallucination.”
By definition, hallucination is an idiosyncratic INDIVIDUAL term.
No two hallucinations are identical. And the notion that a group of individuals, much less of a hundred or more people are going to have an essentially identical hallucination is absurdly and outrageously ridiculous at the outset.
To pretend that such a notion is “scientific,” is extremely absurd.
BTW, did I miss some posts, I don’t recall ANY responses from the peanut gallery about the allegations I made about the Vatican choosing the side of the Dark Lord vis a vis the critters and related phenomena.
Thunderous silence, it seems to me.
Many of them falsely. The use of circumstantial evidence may be the leading cause of false convictions, at least in the courts of Common Law (which most of the West operates under). The big question is here whether the eyewitness accounts are believeable or are they not believeable due to hallucinations, drugs, dreams, suggestive state, or what have you.
Now as to what to make of the eyewitness reports, there is no precedent...but that doesn't mean such reports can be dismissed out of hand.
And before all those eyewitness accounts for which there is a precedent, there is always the first one...for which there is NO precedent.
Okay, I'm game. What was the first eyewitness account? :) Let us see if the ball has moved over time.
As far as I can tell, this particular mystery has rather conveniently slipped between the cracks.
Not for many. However, I would say again: where's the beef? If hundreds of thousands, or perhaps millions, if some claims are be heralded, of people are involved one way or another in this phenomemon, where are the carcasses? Where are the bones, the cellular and mitochondrial DNA (or equivalent). They just arrested a guy for serial killings because his son was taken in and the son's DNA was a partial match only for one DNA sample. So they followed the father and got his DNA from a slice of pizza that he only partially ate and discarded. They'll convict him on that, too, upheld all the way to SCOTUS if required.
So with that said, where's the beef? I'm an original Trekkie and find the idea of space aliens to be appealing. Nice idea. But I think of them in the same terms that I think of Britney Spears or Lindsay Lohan. Cartoonishly fascinating, but at the same time, unreality.
But because I don't have the answer does not mean the question itself is not valid.
Not that many questions by themselves are invalid. Many answers are, though...
Look at it like this.
He's half black and half white.
What do you get when you mix equal quantities of black and white?
Why, GRAY, of course.
Cheers!