It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Myopia. It means you can't focus properly at length, or on far away objects. In other words, CC believers only focus on what is put in front of them that supports their belief, rather than looking at length at ALL the evidence and then forming a belief.
Originally posted by Izarith
You have a very perverse understanding of the meaning of shortsightedness my blabbering long winded friend.
I wish you would take the time to read your posts and see the lack of substance and logic that your misleading and corruptive agenda voices as if from a bull horn.
I can see that I make the two year old cry.
I mean you have twisted the meaning of the term "short sited" to the brink of making a two year old child yell foul. Your derogatory tenacity is so obvious that it makes me blush.
I think this will explain the above to you. And probably this is involved in YOUR statement regarding me.
What happened to you my friend? tell us... Who hurt you? It's ok... It's not your fault....
Thanks for the support but I was good before, I know where the fault is.
It's not, your fault.....
It's not your fault....
It's not, your fault....
It's not.....that's it, let the tears come freely. Let the wound bleed. Better now?
When I read people expressing false beliefs and presenting feelings like these above that YOU posted, that are not based in any reality, it reminds me of this.
I wish you would take the time to read your posts and see the lack of substance and logic that your misleading and corruptive agenda voices as if from a bull horn.
It means myopia. That is where the term comes from. Also see nearsightedness or shortsightedness. It also means a lack of caution in practical affairs. So are you saying that people who are cautious in the practical affairs of evidence, particularly a cautious approach towards the acceptance of the ET hypothesis(considering the lack of practical evidence relating to Et's and crop circles) are short sighted?
OK now let me give you a better understanding of what "short sited" really means and how it applies to the topic at hand.
How terribly short sighted, actually basing a belief on evidence from actual evidence. This is by far the dumbest thing I have read, ever.
First of all, the only reason anyone who does not believe that some CC are possibly made by ET has the ability to use evidence and testimony of people who have actually made CC with their own hands and use this to construct a short sited theory is because there is little evidence that ETs have made them themselves.
Do you know where that small amount of "evidence" comes from? Because I do.
Despite the fact that there is a small amount of evidence like radiative reading and testimonies of people describing ET/UFO having anything to do with CC there are still many CC that fall under the category of inconclusive as to what or who they were made by.
It may be possible for ET's to make them, but then it is also possible that Jesus is making them, that Big Foot makes them, or that reptilian shape shifters from under the ground do. There is just as much evidence to support all these making them as ET. So yeah, its possible. Focusing on what is possible is incredibly short sighted given you do not see the large amount of evidence showing HUMANS actually making circles, and that this evidence is surrounding what you can only refer to as a possibility.
This inconclusiveness is just that inconclusive. Meaning there is a possibility that they were made by ET/UFO.
What have I subverted?
Now you strongly believe that CC are all man made, you clearly express this by yet again subverted belittling statements against another thread author because she made an obvious observation based on the evidence of your post.
Here is the meaning again. www.thefreedictionary.com...
You disregard the meaning of "Short sited" and mutilated it to deceitfully fit her under your category of "Short sited" and also implied that she did not actually read the information on the link she herself provided. Not only is this just ungentlemanly like it is also down right against the ATS T/C rules IMO.
Point out where I make that claim.
Anyway how can you claim that Eevee a person who believes that CC are man made, as her videos are attempting to show, (that M-I5 possibly is linked to the making of CC) but also believes that some could be made by ET based on the inconclusive evidence that suggest other possibilities is "Short Sited"!?!?!
Seriously man, who hurt you? Let the anger go. Or at the very least don't take it out on a nice girl trying to show her thoughts and theories on AST
Yes, and it seems I cut you pretty deep dude. You have injected yourself twice now into my posts that were not even remotely directed at you, and you seem to have taken them personally.
We talked about this on another thread remember? Being a troll is not cool. It's so 2006 man.
TA!
Izarith.
making a two year old child yell foul.
Subsequent daylight checks revealed no evidence of the light's existence. That year also saw a large increase in the number of luminosities reported around circle sites. Did we witness a naturally occurring phenomenon - or were we really being scanned by the genuine circlemakers?