Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2011 15:36:45 GMT -6
The word analysis makes me laugh every time I see it posted. It also makes me roll my eyes whenever I hear someone mention it.
The reason why I have such a reaction to the word "analysis" is quite simple.
When I was in high school, I took advanced English courses. One of the courses I took was called "Analysis of Literature".
One day, our teacher told us we had to bring in our favorite short story for the class to analyze. I decided that since I had had a short story published in a literary magazine when I was 15, that I would bring in that story as my "favorite".
Our teacher divided us into groups of five where each of us would read the stories of the other members of the group, then we would vote on the "best" story. The "best" stories would then be read and "analyzed" by the entire class and the teacher.
Well, my story was voted "best" in my group surprisingly enough so the teacher then subjected the story to her own personal analysis. I was sitting there in disbelief at what she was ascertaining from the story I had written. Most of the things she came up with were incorrect.
The teacher then gave all the class members a test on each of the short stories. The test I was given on my short story, I failed. One of the questions I got wrong was, "What was the point the author was trying to get across?"
After class, I brought my graded test paper up to the teacher's desk and tossed it down in front of her face. She looked up at me, annoyed and said, "What?"
"I want you to change my grade." I stated cooly.
"Why?"
"I am the author of this story. It's under a pen name."
The teacher stared at me for a few seconds, her face turned red. She looked down at her desk, moved my test paper off of her grade book and flipped it open to my name. She erased the failing mark with her pencil and marked an A on it. She then handed me back my test paper, and ignored me. I left her classroom, feeling satisfied.
Analysis indeed.
The point I am trying to make is simple:
The problem with analysis is it is done by people. Everyone knows that people are not perfect.
Why is it that everyone believes an advanced English teacher's opinions? Because she has a piece of paper that says she knows what she is talking about.
But- when you expose her to something she has never read before written by a person she has never spoken to before (as far as she knows at least...), she begins to speculate about the person's intentions and ultimately fails to understand the author's intent in her supposed "analysis"... which is not "analysis" but is in fact nothing more than pure speculation.
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 26, 2011 18:03:06 GMT -6
The word analysis makes me laugh every time I see it posted. It also makes me roll my eyes whenever I hear someone mention it. The reason why I have such a reaction to the word "analysis" is quite simple. When I was in high school, I took advanced English courses. One of the courses I took was called "Analysis of Literature". One day, our teacher told us we had to bring in our favorite short story for the class to analyze. I decided that since I had had a short story published in a literary magazine when I was 15, that I would bring in that story as my "favorite". Our teacher divided us into groups of five where each of us would read the stories of the other members of the group, then we would vote on the "best" story. The "best" stories would then be read and "analyzed" by the entire class and the teacher. Well, my story was voted "best" in my group surprisingly enough so the teacher then subjected the story to her own personal analysis. I was sitting there in disbelief at what she was ascertaining from the story I had written. Most of the things she came up with were incorrect. The teacher then gave all the class members a test on each of the short stories. The test I was given on my short story, I failed. One of the questions I got wrong was, "What was the point the author was trying to get across?" After class, I brought my graded test paper up to the teacher's desk and tossed it down in front of her face. She looked up at me, annoyed and said, "What?" "I want you to change my grade." I stated cooly. "Why?" "I am the author of this story. It's under a pen name." The teacher stared at me for a few seconds, her face turned red. She looked down at her desk, moved my test paper off of her grade book and flipped it open to my name. She erased the failing mark with her pencil and marked an A on it. She then handed me back my test paper, and ignored me. I left her classroom, feeling satisfied. Analysis indeed. The point I am trying to make is simple: The problem with analysis is it is done by people. Everyone knows that people are not perfect. Why is it that everyone believes an advanced English teacher's opinions? Because she has a piece of paper that says she knows what she is talking about. But- when you expose her to something she has never read before written by a person she has never spoken to before (as far as she knows at least...), she begins to speculate about the person's intentions and ultimately fails to understand the author's intent in her supposed "analysis"... which is not "analysis" but is in fact nothing more than pure speculation. Oh Gosh Lorelei, I love this true story. So well told. I have saved this, and may even I wish to incorporate into a talk about the issues being discussed here in general in the future. Teachers often philosophically say they also learn from their students. But I think you thoughtfully taught your teacher a good life lesson that day too. Thank you. Ufo4peace (supposedly), you are doing this all back-wards. There is nothing solidly proven about Willingham we can all agree on. That has to be established first if anything further can be proceeded on. 'Analysis' is conducted near the end of this process after we have gathered enough solid supportable facts. So far there is little to nothing in this Willingham claim. You need real evidence (not circumstantial, not second or third hand here-say that lives and thrives on the Internet). You cannot analyze what you seriously do not have first. You still are doing the research. And frankly Willingham looks very weak so far. Where Willingham maybe pulling any wool over the public eyes is the confusion seeing him in his CAP Air Force auxiliary uniform, and confusing it with being a first line fighter pilot. So far there is no evidence he ever flew in any jet yet except as a airline passenger. I do not care if Willingham was a jet pilot who witnesses an alleged saucer crash or not, it is not about who is right or wrong. The whole process you use ufo4peace is fallacious and incorrect in arriving at a conclusion. You already have a conclusion, that is the problem. When no one seems certain at all about Willingham in the first place. There are so many who drown in ufology because they think they walk on water. The truth is not a club to trounce with or an end that justifies everything. We are not wishing to doubt whether Willingham's story is for real or not, but we all disagree with the flawed process you are following. You have not found sufficient facts that we can establish as true to continue this process. We all thoughtfully seek the truth. The truth is also a path, in which to build on to find further truths. Lets find out if Willingham is telling the truth or not first. That is at the core of all of this, and perhaps the core about much in Ufology in general. Steve
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Dec 27, 2011 1:45:57 GMT -6
This is what I got for the Willingham case in my UFO crash archive: - 1955. Langtry, Texas, Mexican side of Rio Grande
Source: Noe Torres & Ruben Uriarte - The Other Roswell: UFO Crash on the Texas-Mexico Border Source: FOX 4 News (Dallas): The Tex Files: Del Rio Flying Saucer Mystery by Richard Ray Source: W. T. Zechel, GSW [Ground Saucer Watch]
Robert B. Willingham. Chased UFO that crashed at Langtry, Texas, Mexican side. |Disc|Nocturnal|Aeronautics|Crash|Debris|Harassment|Heat|Sparks| |ET| As far as the loony bins people on this forum who claim to have psychic ability that comes and goes when it wants to, see disappearing houses, also disappearing cars on the road, claim global warming is really caused by volcanoes, personal life jibber-jabber, the kardashians or what not. There's no point in continuing this discussion. This homely little forum stinks. ;D
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Dec 27, 2011 2:10:21 GMT -6
Well I was juts being honest. You can speculate until the cows come home but analysis is pretty important. Honestly, I was talking about the analysis of human beings. Sorry, I thought I was making that clear. You writing style is very fragmented. Start by writing in complete sentences. "I want to ask you to quit analyzing." Analyzing what? Crazy people. Okay, I'm going to another forum where people are less loony because I just like focusing on the UFO and ET subject matter.
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Dec 27, 2011 6:18:36 GMT -6
'Analysis' is conducted near the end of this process after we have gathered enough solid supportable facts. So far there is little to nothing in this Willingham claim. You need real evidence (not circumstantial, not second or third hand here-say that lives and thrives on the Internet). You cannot analyze what you seriously do not have first. Actually gathering information and data is pretty important. Sometimes what a witness states and what is reported or what is written in a book are not the same thing. It's important to make this distinction especially in UFO cases. There's also a double standard in your logic. What's the point in investigating a UFO sighting or abduction claim if there's no hard evidence or solid proof? This is coming from a guy that likes to gather information from abductees (probably why he's really here) and draw alien anatomy. Another problem with these types of fringe forums is people like to tell tall tails, the campfire story syndrome, like psychic ability only comes and goes when it wants to that's why I can't pick the winning lottery numbers or they observed a disappearing house. Then you want to turn around and be Mr. Serious claiming a UFO crash witness is a liar. They could very well be lying but what does that make you? You can't have you cake or fruitcake and eat it too.
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Dec 27, 2011 7:20:51 GMT -6
You seem to be ignoring the points I brought up about how Mr. Willingham managed to see something that crashed 150 miles away from him and how the Mexican government managed to mobilize their troops and get them out to the crash site in less than 15 minutes when there is no Mexican town or military base with 50 miles of the crash site. These are discrepencies in his story that need to be taken into consideration.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2011 8:33:16 GMT -6
"You writing style is very fragmented. Start by writing in complete sentences. " Thanks . In my reply #26 I was talking and made note of personal comments that you (ufo4peace) have decided to add to your discussion about Mr. Willingham and this event. Instead of stopping these personal comments, it seems that you would like to say more personal comments. I said, the personal comments are useless. I really don't think we should continue to discuss about that I think "the personal comments are useless". It seems to be something you do that you do not wish to change, and I will try to ignore these parts of your conversation. sincerely, jc
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Dec 27, 2011 10:21:45 GMT -6
You seem to be ignoring the points I brought up about how Mr. Willingham managed to see something that crashed 150 miles away from him and how the Mexican government managed to mobilize their troops and get them out to the crash site in less than 15 minutes when there is no Mexican town or military base with 50 miles of the crash site. These are discrepencies in his story that need to be taken into consideration. Actually the Mexican military could have been anywhere 50+ years ago and I looked at a map and the Rio Grande was not that for away if he broke off formation. Also I meant brightly lit instead of nocturnal. I'm so used to saying nocturnal light. You also have to figure that knowing the actual flight path would be more accurate but you are only getting general info. In cases like these you have to learn to not take things too literally. As I stated earlier my problem is not the details because it is a very old case but digging deeper into his background. I'd think you get more answers that way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2011 10:29:48 GMT -6
UFO4peace, please DO leave this "loony bin". Don't let the door hit you on your way out... ;D
I think what JC is trying to say is that when you are engaging in a debate, it's bad form to resort to personal insults and attacks. I agree with her on this.
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Dec 27, 2011 11:20:26 GMT -6
Actually the Mexican military could have been anywhere 50+ years ago and I looked at a map and the Rio Grande was not that for away if he broke off formation. Also I meant brightly lit instead of nocturnal. I'm so used to saying nocturnal light. You also have to figure that knowing the actual flight path would be more accurate but you are only getting general info. In cases like these you have to learn to not take things too literally. As I stated earlier my problem is not the details because it is a very old case but digging deeper into his background. I'd think you get more answers that way. It would help to know if what he says about his background is true but so far nobody has been able to verify it. I keep seeing inconsistencies. In one photo he is wearing a uniform that shows pilots wings on it while in another uniform he only has a half-wing observers badge. There has to be a way to verify it one way or another.
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Dec 31, 2011 0:55:53 GMT -6
UFO4peace, please DO leave this "loony bin". Don't let the door hit you on your way out... ;D I think what JC is trying to say is that when you are engaging in a debate, it's bad form to resort to personal insults and attacks. I agree with her on this. Lorelei stop being such an OT bimbo. If you're not loony bin then don't let it bother you.
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Dec 31, 2011 1:00:37 GMT -6
Actually the Mexican military could have been anywhere 50+ years ago and I looked at a map and the Rio Grande was not that for away if he broke off formation. Also I meant brightly lit instead of nocturnal. I'm so used to saying nocturnal light. You also have to figure that knowing the actual flight path would be more accurate but you are only getting general info. In cases like these you have to learn to not take things too literally. As I stated earlier my problem is not the details because it is a very old case but digging deeper into his background. I'd think you get more answers that way. It would help to know if what he says about his background is true but so far nobody has been able to verify it. I keep seeing inconsistencies. In one photo he is wearing a uniform that shows pilots wings on it while in another uniform he only has a half-wing observers badge. There has to be a way to verify it one way or another. Well I was trying to separate what he is actually saying from what people claim he says but never mind. This forum like so many other paranormal-conspiray-UFO all wrapped into one is about tin foil hat fun and games. Then again, that would be most of UFOlogy including people who claim to be serious investigator and it seems our system wants to keep it that way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2011 1:03:37 GMT -6
Ah so now he calls me a bimbo. What other insults do you have in your arsenal consisting of middle school vernacular? I'm very impressed with your wordiness... or should I say... the lack thereof?
Lolz... I am... like... VERY offended by that... ;D ;D ;D
You're so funny!!! I mean that... lol!!
I can't wait to see what you're going to post next. It might just get you booted out of here. Please, do continue with your childish behavior!! ;D
I'm really laughing right now... no joke... ;D
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Dec 31, 2011 1:42:18 GMT -6
You already have a conclusion, that is the problem. Part of the problem with this case is a UFOlogist put the hypothesis before the actual witness testimony. That would explain some of the discrepancies. So Kevin Randle using Whillingham to put doubts in an MJ-12 document is fallicious. A document stating a Del Rio crash my be completely unrelated to Whillingham's claims whether they be true or not. He never mentions the words Del Rio in his interviews and the 1950 date.
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Dec 31, 2011 1:45:10 GMT -6
= probes = alien abductions. ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2011 16:41:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by lois on Dec 31, 2011 23:23:36 GMT -6
ufo4peace.. Thanks for your consern. I don't get that a lot from people. Just kidding about the time travel I can see now what those words meant. I knew you were kidding about the time travel.. but I told my husband I can see the future from someone who lives there.. shamira
|
|
|
Post by lois on Dec 31, 2011 23:28:49 GMT -6
ufo4peace...Didn't you know all ufo witnesses are liers?? Did not take me long to realize that..from my own past..
|
|
|
Post by lois on Dec 31, 2011 23:48:50 GMT -6
I'm in the dark about this case. Is it the same crash in Mexico where the Mexican government got to the scene and found the US military at the crash site. The Mexican military was supposedly to have kill Americans on the spot and set their bodies ablaze in the middle of nowhere and left with the saucer.. And you wonder why some do not believe a ufo case to have any merit.. I do not recall the case now.. But there was a pilot who was first on the scene, I did believe that part.. of the case. Whether or not he seen the crash itself I do not know. Radar showed the unidentified object go down and sent a pilot out into the dessert.. Like I have always said I'm not good at remembering names but this is the case I always associated the burned bodies with.
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Jan 1, 2012 1:00:50 GMT -6
Where did you here about the Mexicans killing the Americans and burning their bodies? I haven't read that anywhere. Did I miss something?
|
|
|
Post by lois on Jan 1, 2012 1:17:07 GMT -6
Sky ..It was near the border somewhere .. I read it about 30 years ago, had to be from our library, as the only books I did read was from there and most were ufo encounters. This memory is a true one but what I read I never truly was sure of.. . who could ever read that and not forget it. As it was etched in my mind forever. As I gave it a picture which was not pretty at all.. A picture connects me to all I read or ever read. I would have to read a lot of books there to ever find it.. Many are gone when I try and find them again years later at our library.. The thought came to me after I posted it.. it may of been the other way around, we come upon them at the site and we killed them instead and took the ufo.. the bodies burning sort blurred out the rest I think.. Now I would not put nothing passed our government. They have killed before over keeping ufos a top secret especially back in the early years.
|
|
|
Post by lois on Jan 1, 2012 1:40:43 GMT -6
It would of had to of been some troops out of Texas, to get to this site so quickly..It was not a book for this encounter only, it had many ufo encounters in it. I believe there was a few citizens from Mexico who came upon this event but never went near the site and left instantly so not to get involved. How there story came about I have no reference for it either. My mind is full of strange cases without ever putting it down on paper. All that reading is lost I'm afraid. You know me .. I can remember it everything so why write it down? I sure wished I had now.. It has slipped in and out of my mind many times this event, but always asking was it not the one with the pilot who searched for it first. Has there ever been another ufo case near the border in Mexico??
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Jan 1, 2012 8:52:02 GMT -6
This crash at Langtry is the only case that I know of that happened near the border. I hadn't heard about the troops fighting over it but it wouldn't surprise me if they did. I'll keep my eyes open for any stories about it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2012 10:20:43 GMT -6
Thanks lois . It would be interesting if sky or myself could find something about this in one of our books. I'm almost to the point of unpacking my library. I don't like it that they are in cardboard boxes, for one, though I made sure that they weren't stored in a basement or an attic. I think its time to get those books out. . .
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Jan 2, 2012 5:14:58 GMT -6
It would of had to of been some troops out of Texas, to get to this site so quickly..It was not a book for this encounter only, it had many ufo encounters in it. I believe there was a few citizens from Mexico who came upon this event but never went near the site and left instantly so not to get involved. How there story came about I have no reference for it either. My mind is full of strange cases without ever putting it down on paper. All that reading is lost I'm afraid. You know me .. I can remember it everything so why write it down? I sure wished I had now.. It has slipped in and out of my mind many times this event, but always asking was it not the one with the pilot who searched for it first. Has there ever been another ufo case near the border in Mexico?? There are UFO crash reports from the mid 1950s listed in my UFO info based forum. disclosure.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=ufocrash"tilted down about a 45 degree angle till it hit the ground." This leads me to believe that either the story is legit or he heard something from someone else. Tilt at a 45 degree angle is a little known detail of a disc-shaped craft flight characteristic.
|
|
|
Post by lois on Jan 2, 2012 13:14:30 GMT -6
Ufo4peace.. I saved everything from mufon forum which you posted. But my Computer Crashed and loss it all. thanks for posting the above.. Most interesting.. much references ..45 degree.. I agree.. You know most videos if true films show saucers do come down this way..
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Jan 4, 2012 3:15:31 GMT -6
Ufo4peace.. I saved everything from mufon forum which you posted. But my Computer Crashed and loss it all. thanks for posting the above.. Most interesting.. much references ..45 degree.. I agree.. You know most videos if true films show saucers do come down this way.. I got a lot of reports. Here's a 1987 case - Fort Carson, Colorado
|
|
|
Post by lois on Jan 4, 2012 20:12:49 GMT -6
It is hard for me to understand how one could forget a up close ufo sighting.. I will remember the date of what I witnessed, if I lived to be 5,000 years old.
I don't recall this story..... A large disc is rarely seen up close I believe.. In outer space, many have been seen by Nasa..
|
|
|
Post by ufo4peace on Jan 7, 2012 7:54:16 GMT -6
Well politics aren't in my favor on this forum so this will be my last response but Orloron- Gaillac, France from 1952 would another case where UFOs are described as tilted on angle. I'm sure NASA has observed these objects in outer space. Unfortunately, most people do not have access to that footage.
People can catch me on the new MUFON forum and UFO Casebook under the name techy...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2012 10:44:54 GMT -6
Well politics aren't in my favor on this forum so this will be my last response but Orloron- Gaillac, France from 1952 would another case where UFOs are described as tilted on angle. I'm sure NASA has observed these objects in outer space. Unfortunately, most people do not have access to that footage. People can catch me on the new MUFON forum and UFO Casebook under the name techy... Isn't this the third time you've said you weren't going to post anything here anymore? LOL... ;D And yet you keep posting here... LOL...
|
|