Comments on: Stephenville in Fate http://www.ufomystic.com/2008/03/10/stephenville-in-fate/ UFO News, Views, and More Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:40:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Richelle Hawks http://www.ufomystic.com/2008/03/10/stephenville-in-fate/#comment-5160 Richelle Hawks Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:29:35 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/stephenville-in-fate/#comment-5160 So--the alternative would be to actually exclude the information? It seems the options would be to rehash the obvious, which has already been done ad naseum--a monkey could figure it out--or just not include it. Lovely. So–the alternative would be to actually exclude the information? It seems the options would be to rehash the obvious, which has already been done ad naseum–a monkey could figure it out–or just not include it. Lovely.

]]> By: disownedsky http://www.ufomystic.com/2008/03/10/stephenville-in-fate/#comment-5154 disownedsky Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:59:58 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/stephenville-in-fate/#comment-5154 "Perhaps the reason the size commentary is absent has to do with the idea that your points about perspective has been rehashed to death and the writers assume their audience is smart enough to have a grasp on it." No, I'm not buying that. Why include information that we all know is meaningless and misleading? “Perhaps the reason the size commentary is absent has to do with the idea that your points about perspective has been rehashed to death and the writers assume their audience is smart enough to have a grasp on it.”

No, I’m not buying that. Why include information that we all know is meaningless and misleading?

]]> By: Richelle Hawks http://www.ufomystic.com/2008/03/10/stephenville-in-fate/#comment-5147 Richelle Hawks Mon, 10 Mar 2008 15:15:10 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/stephenville-in-fate/#comment-5147 Perhaps the reason the size commentary is absent has to do with the idea that your points about perspective has been rehashed to death and the writers assume their audience is smart enough to have a grasp on it. Perhaps the reason the size commentary is absent has to do with the idea that your points about perspective has been rehashed to death and the writers assume their audience is smart enough to have a grasp on it.

]]> By: disownedsky http://www.ufomystic.com/2008/03/10/stephenville-in-fate/#comment-5146 disownedsky Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:23:24 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/stephenville-in-fate/#comment-5146 All these size estimates strike me as dubious, and quoting the size estimates without comment is even more dubious. If you see lights in the sky, it's very unlikely you know how far away they are (if there is a background object like a mountain you can upper bound the distance, but not so in this case), so size and altitude are simply unknowns. You also don't know if you are seeing lights on a structured object or just lights. All these size estimates strike me as dubious, and quoting the size estimates without comment is even more dubious. If you see lights in the sky, it’s very unlikely you know how far away they are (if there is a background object like a mountain you can upper bound the distance, but not so in this case), so size and altitude are simply unknowns. You also don’t know if you are seeing lights on a structured object or just lights.

]]>