Aliens filmed in UFO?

reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts


Thanks for the constructive response.

Nice, constructive one line response. I thought that was frowned upon around here?

Wait, let me get this straight.....the only response you consider "constructive" would be something that supports dribble like this?

I could parrot what many others have mentioned in this thread about how the poor video quality lends itself to "creative interpretation", but there is no need to say that, as others have picked up on that fact early on.

I guess I could go into some of the highly questionable dealings of Dorothy, which would make her involvement in such a thing like this make more sense I guess...but that is search-able here on ATS and google.

But the important thing here is to note that you only want people to talk about the possibilities that this is 100% legit, rather than to rain on your parade. That is the problem with this subject, and it pains me to see you adding to it without question.

Like I said, don't get upset with me, get upset with the questionable folks you parrot that make it so easy for even a half-brained ninny like myself to dismiss their ignorant claims.

[edit on 16-11-2009 by IgnoreTheFacts]

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
*snip*

Like I said, don't get upset with me, get upset with the questionable folks you parrot that make it so easy for even a half-brained ninny like myself to dismiss their ignorant claims.

[edit on 16-11-2009 by IgnoreTheFacts]

Like the notoriously questionable folks such as Dr. Bruce Maccabee, Jeff Ritzmann, David Biedny (ex ILM employee), the CGI staff of ILM, and the late Dr. J. Allen Hynek.

Half brained ninnies always seem to have trouble with the breadth and scope of well researched and documented scientist and professional types...

Cheers,

Erik (Well known parrot of Dorothy Izatt material on ATS)

reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts


I was more referring to your comments being 'unconstructive' in the way you just keep constantly whining about 'unequivocable proof'; using snide, offensive terminology and posting your rants in everybody's threads without ever addressing subject matter.

Objective, constructive debate is one thing (whatever your position) but just engaging in embittered cynicism doesn't realy help anybody.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]

There isn't much to say about the amazing Dorothy that hasn't been covered here before. Check this thread out:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If your not laughing before the end of the first page your taking this way to seriously. I especially like Breadfan's comment on that page, too true!

reply to post by redwoodjedi


Erik -good to see you bud
I'm sure you've seen these Dorothy Izaat piccies before but thought I'd post them anyway.









Cheers.

Hey Karl!!

Yeah. I've seen all of those before. The thread everybody keeps referring to is mine. Kewl! Lot's of good reference material on it and I keep updating it as more info comes in. Sweet old gal, Dorothy. No scheister for sure.

By the way, IGNORE -

Breadfan has been a banned member since about the time he started posting his volatile tripe on my thread. Jeff Ritzmann then came along and picked the thread up nicely and kept it from being derailed into an unrecoverable tailspin.

It's OK to have an opinion. Display it proudly and with gusto and with, most importantly here, corroborative information delivered in a mannerly and professional etiquette or else you risk looking like more of an @$$ than those you are lambasting with those same alleged characteristics.

You catch more flies with honey, buddy.


Sorry about the off-topic sidetrack there, Karl. Shouldn't happen again. Great thread and as always, I S+F'd it for ya'.

Cheers,

Erik