Where did the paranormal go?

Angilion said:
1) There is some evidence of some contamination with some hazardous materials. This goes as far as evidence from medical exams and autopsies, which originate from outside the base and aren't secret. They've been presented in court.
2) Some people think that some of the work done at the site has been moved to other sites. Note that I am not saying that this happened.
3) I think it's plausible that (1) might have led to (2), if (2) happened.
Click to expand...

There is evidence of some workers being exposed to hazardous materials via the use of open burn pits, there isn't (AFAIK) evidence of the test facility itself being contaminated or unable to be used etc..

But more to the point, you're still not providing any clarification about what you're referring to re: these claims being made...

"Some people think that some of the work done at the site has been moved to other sites."

Who? Who are these people? Do you have a link?

You've referred a few times to there being a plausible hypothesis or allegations being made but you're seemingly unwilling or unable to link to these allegations/claims, why is that?

Is it something you've read on a conspiracy website or something and now don't want to link to? Is it something you've made up yourself? If not then why not just provide some clarification. I've not asked you to provide a complete proof that this is defiantly true etc.. I'm asking you where this hypothesis/allegation has come from.
 
dowie said:
There is evidence of some workers being exposed to hazardous materials via the use of open burn pits, there isn't (AFAIK) evidence of the test facility itself being contaminated or unable to be used etc..

But more to the point, you're still not providing any clarification about what you're referring to re: these claims being made...

"Some people think that some of the work done at the site has been moved to other sites."

Who? Who are these people? Do you have a link.

You've referred a few times to there being a plausible hypothesis or allegations being made but you're seemingly unwilling or unable to link to these allegations/claims, why is that?
Click to expand...

Because it's irrelevant. It's irrelevant for several reasons:

1) You know that some people think some of the work done at the site has been moved to other sites. That's been mentioned right here in this thread.
2) Providing a multitide of links to people saying they think some of the work done at the site has been moved to other sites serves no purpose. If you actually wanted to see more people saying that and you hadn't seen them already, you would have looked online for it. You've already decided it's impossible and silly that anything could have been moved.
3) How many people have said it or written it is irrelevant to whether it's plausible.

Why don't you hold yourself to your own standards and provide links to people saying it's impossible and silly for anything to have been moved from the site for any reason? Not that it would serve any purpose for the same reasons I gave above and because it's all speculation, but it would be nice if you held yourself to your own standards.

Here's a deal - you provide links to people saying it's silly and impossible for anything to have been moved from the site and I'll provide links from people saying it isn't. Then we can both be wasting time on pointless links to show people saying things we already both know people have said. Won't that be fun?
 
Angilion said:
Because it's irrelevant. It's irrelevant for several reasons:

1) You know that some people think some of the work done at the site has been moved to other sites. That's been mentioned right here in this thread.

2) Providing a multitide of links to people saying they think some of the work done at the site has been moved to other sites serves no purpose. If you actually wanted to see more people saying that and you hadn't seen them already, you would have looked online for it. You've already decided it's impossible and silly that anything could have been moved.
3) How many people have said it or written it is irrelevant to whether it's plausible.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is irrelevant, I'm interested in where the allegations came from that you have referred to and am simply asking you for a link. That is hardly an unreasonable question to ask. The other poster is clearly a lunatic, yes he's made some very vague claim about the base being moved(that is the first time I've heard of that claim), you then came in and talked about some apparent plausible hypothesis, allegations... I've simply asked where those have come from as I'd like to know what you're referring to and who is making those allegations... from the source itself. You simply repeating them or giving the summary doesn't answer that question.

Why don't you hold yourself to your own standards and provide links to people saying it's impossible and silly for anything to have been moved from the site for any reason? Not that it would serve any purpose for the same reasons I gave above and because it's all speculation, but it would be nice if you held yourself to your own standards.

Here's a deal - you provide links to people saying it's silly and impossible for anything to have been moved from the site and I'll provide links from people saying it isn't. Then we can both be wasting time on pointless links to show people saying things we already both know people have said. Won't that be fun?
Click to expand...

I've not made any claims about other people saying X is impossible... in relation to this allegation.

You've made claims, the onus is on you. If I make claims I'm happy to explain, clarify or provide the basis for them. (The claims I've made in this thread have been for example re: the public info released about previous uses of the base in the U2 program for example - if needed I can explain where I read that information and provide a link)

I really don't know why this is such an issue for you, though your continued reluctance to answer or provide anything makes me start to think you're making it up yourself.
 
Last edited:
aardvark said:
see this though:
https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4179
Click to expand...
I'm not saying anybody reading the report shouldn't be cautious. Just that it presents itself as an interesting read. Even the report you refer to suggests there was no evidence of trickery. Furthermore, the magician who did attend, stated that what he witnessed could not have been performed as a trick.
 
ethan said:
I'm not saying anybody reading the report shouldn't be cautious. Just that it presents itself as an interesting read. Even the report you refer to suggests there was no evidence of trickery. Furthermore, the magician who did attend, stated that what he witnessed could not have been performed as a trick.
Click to expand...
"Could not have been performed as a trick" or "I don't know how it was done"?
 
enkoda said:
"Could not have been performed as a trick" or "I don't know how it was done"?
Click to expand...
I'm afraid the the whole purpose of a "magician" is to deceive.

Placing trust in such a person's honesty is not something I would personally be prepared to do. "It's not a trick, honest guv. It's real magic paranormal activity."
 
FoxEye said:
I'm afraid the the whole purpose of a "magician" is to deceive.

Placing trust in such a person's honesty is not something I would personally be prepared to do. "It's not a trick, honest guv. It's real magic paranormal activity."
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Like someone posted earlier that they'd seen things science couldn't explain - I'm afraid that just exposes a lack of scientific knowledge, and nor does it confirm the paranormal.
 
dowie said:
I don't think it is irrelevant
Click to expand...

But I do, and explained why.

I've not made any claims about other people saying X is impossible... in relation to this allegation.
Click to expand...

No, you've made the claim yourself, directly. On the basis that you think it's silly and that the site is still there.

You've made claims, the onus is on you.
Click to expand...

Likewise. However, we both know that some people have said some stuff has been moved from the Groom Lake base. That's the only claim I've made. Once which we both know is true.

I really don't know why this is such an issue for you, though your continued reluctance to answer or provide anything makes me start to think you're making it up yourself.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course. I use multiple identities and hire actors to make the videos. Because I'm a lunatic.

Just write off everyone as a lunatic. You'll be content then.

I'll just point everyone back to post 200, where I gave my answer:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/32917605/
 
ethan said:
I'm not saying anybody reading the report shouldn't be cautious. Just that it presents itself as an interesting read. Even the report you refer to suggests there was no evidence of trickery. Furthermore, the magician who did attend, stated that what he witnessed could not have been performed as a trick.
Click to expand...

But it could, and the report explains how. Stuff done in the dark, with no video recording...relatively easy. Good magicians pull off tricks in bright lighting with an audience of thousands, sometimes including some people right in front of the magician. Very good magicians can fool other very good magicians, who can't determine how the trick was done even when watching carefully in good lighting with expert knowledge. It would be much easier inn complete darkness with all conditions controlled by the people doing the "magic".
 
CREATIVE!11 said:
The paranormal vanished when smart phones with hd video became a thing...
Notice how all these grainy alien videos dried up? Yeah that's why.
Click to expand...
"There was magic then, nobility, and unimaginable cruelty; and so it was until the day that a false sun exploded over Trinity, and Man forever traded away wonder for reason."
 
Angilion said:
No, you've made the claim yourself, directly. On the basis that you think it's silly and that the site is still there.
Click to expand...

So what? I've adopted the position of both not being convinced of the "hypothesis" and also now by your claim that there was some accusation/hypothesis along those lines in the first place.

Likewise. However, we both know that some people have said some stuff has been moved from the Groom Lake base. That's the only claim I've made. Once which we both know is true.

Yes, of course. I use multiple identities and hire actors to make the videos. Because I'm a lunatic.

Just write off everyone as a lunatic. You'll be content then.
Click to expand...

No not likewise, if there is something I've claimed then I'm happy to back it up or clarify.

I never said you're a lunatic, you are however a bit prone to believing in things easily perhaps and/or just making things up and then carrying on with the pretence when called out. Some lunatic made some claim about the base being moved, you've then added in some narrative about there being some plausible hypothesis that it or part of it was moved as a result of some contamination.

I've simply asked where this claim came from, do you have a link etc.. and you've spent several posts just avoiding it.

I suspect therefore you've just made up your own conspiracy.
 
Last edited:
ethan said:
He was very specific about what he said.
Click to expand...
Why, I ask, why would anyone accept the testimony of a "magician" employed by the Paranormal Society (or whatever it was) on a matter of "paranormal investigation".

Just why would anyone even begin to think this was credible testimony?

It's like asking a con artist if he thought a scam he had set up was an honest venture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom