Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 (edited) What I meant is the type that says oh I have a lot of evidence, but in order to see it...pay for it. The ones that lead you towards something. Those who make big claims seeking something from you. Or if you're poor like me, you can stand in the book store and furtively read as much as you can, lol - or hope it ends up at the library eventually Edited March 7, 2013 by madison5716
LeafTalker Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 What I meant is the type that says oh I have a lot of evidence, but in order to see it...pay for it. The ones that lead you towards something. Those who make big claims seeking something from you. I think every book author wants their readers to purchase their books (although I guess there are many people who just want to be read). Otherwise, they get very hungry. And cold. And sometimes wet. And what writer doesn't want to lead you somewhere? What's the point of writing a book, if not to influence someone's thinking, or their emotions -- say, to bring them pleasure? And what is a big claim? I think the person making the claim doesn't think it's big, because it happened to them (if we're talking about BF experiencers here). It only looks big to the person who hasn't had that experience. And that's fine. If a potential book buyer feels the claim is too big to have any foundation to it, or isn't interested in investigating the claim, they don't have to buy the book.
Guest njjohn Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 Leaf, I'm not talking about selling a book. We're talking about the people that come in here and make claims like "OMG you wouldn't believe what I have, what I saw, what I heard" but aren't doing it to discuss it. The ones that lead you on making you think they have something, but to find out more, you have to purchase this or that. I discovered something and pay attention to me. Those are different than what we have in the habituator threads. They are the ones that come here to discuss and yes, they tell their stories, but aren't asking for anything in return. They aren't seeking attention. They're seeking to share their experiences. That's what I mean when I say there's two types of people and those that are complaining about the habituators are confusing. And you're confusing what I'm saying with whatever you think I'm saying Just reread what I wrote.
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 Yes. But news! Habituators aren't talking to you. So they don't care. I've got nothing against "habituators", I'm just tired of the fakes and frauds. I'm sure some of them are legit, I just can't tell one from the other.
Guest DWA Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 ^^^I can't either. So we are definitely on the same page there. I just don't sweat it much...unless one of them comes to me asking me to pay $50 for his story. I can read thousands of them on the Internet for free; a book that doesn't have the proof in it is just one story it is gonna take way too long to read.
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 Here is the order habituation should occur in: 1) Habituation 2) proof gathered and BF real 3) book/story/movie of the week Here is the order many habituators apparently think things should happen: 1) Habituation 2) book/story/movie of the week 3) proof gathered and BF real And here is how some "habituators" think things should happen: 1) book/story/movie 2) sequel to book/story/movie 3) lecture tour St. G-
LeafTalker Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 (edited) I think some might be confusing the claims made by habituators and claims by some that are seeking attention. *Most* of those that hang out in the habituator threads are there to tell their story. They explain behaviors and what they witness and don't ask for anything in return. Those that claim to be habituators and then say "it's in my book," or they are trying to get you to buy something, those are the people that have a burden to provide proof. Isn't that where you brought up books? There is that ambiguous "something" (in "buy something") -- did you mean videos? subscriptions to websites? In my mind that's pretty much still purchasing, and I thought that was your concern: Money. Well, you do mention another concern -- "attention getting" -- which seems tied to money, in your mind. I was trying to point out that asking for money in return for anything is as fair as the day is long, because you don't have to give money to anyone you don't want to. Leaf, I'm not talking about selling a book. We're talking about the people that come in here and make claims like "OMG you wouldn't believe what I have, what I saw, what I heard" but aren't doing it to discuss it. The ones that lead you on making you think they have something, but to find out more, you have to purchase this or that. I discovered something and pay attention to me. Those are different than what we have in the habituator threads. They are the ones that come here to discuss and yes, they tell their stories, but aren't asking for anything in return. They aren't seeking attention. They're seeking to share their experiences. That's what I mean when I say there's two types of people and those that are complaining about the habituators are confusing. And you're confusing what I'm saying with whatever you think I'm saying Just reread what I wrote. I did. Edited March 7, 2013 by LeafTalker
Guest DWA Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 (edited) Personally, I wouldn't pick on njjohn and me. (And this does seem to happen every time somebody brings up the proof issue with regard to selling stuff.) We're defending you. I have no problem with habituators (1) talking to each other about their experiences here and (2) not being required to provide proof. But it's only reasonable to say that if you are publishing something and charging for it, you are being disingenuous in the least if the proof isn't in it. Besides which: when one charlatan gets found out, the "tar baby" effect happens for everyone else who thinks hey, I'm just doing what I'm allowed to do. When you are selling something the burden of proof is on you. Period. Edited March 7, 2013 by DWA
Sasfooty Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 (edited) Here is the order habituation should occur in: 1) Habituation 2) proof gathered and BF real 3) book/story/movie of the week OK. We understand these theories on how things should be, so now lets all understand how they usually are. 1) See, hear, smell BF at our homes & get slapped in the face with the reality of their existence 2) Get habituated 3) Learn that getting proof is impossible 4) Need to come to terms with what is happening 5) Find people here that understand the problem & also want to come to terms with what is happening 6) Talk about it & get accused of insanity, lying, attention seeking, & trying to profit Edited to add: 7) Get snarky Edited March 7, 2013 by Sasfooty 1
LeafTalker Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 (edited) Personally, I wouldn't pick on njjohn and me. (And this does seem to happen every time somebody brings up the proof issue with regard to selling stuff.) We're defending you. I would never "pick on" you, DWA. I agree with you 99.99% of the time. When you are selling something the burden of proof is on you. Period. Oh gosh, I disagree with this. You can't "prove" anything to anyone's satisfaction. People here say you can't "prove" BF exist with DNA! You have to have a "dead body" to "prove" that BF exists (or so "they" say; to me, that's like saying you need to kill a person to prove something -- killing is murder, and not "necessary"). So how is a book (that's something you sell, right?) going to "prove" anything to anyone? Good luck with that. Edited March 7, 2013 by LeafTalker
Guest DWA Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 (edited) You know, if you showed me a book that had photos and video (DVD of course!) that 3.5 million years of evolution as a hunter told me were authentic, I'd buy that book. If Jeff Meldrum told me I was being snowed I'd say: You better prove that, Jeff. One of the things technology has done is allowed some of us to skip the wait for absolute scientific certainty. If we think we can suss what we are seeing, we aren't waiting for Nature to certify for us. Edited March 7, 2013 by DWA
LeafTalker Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 Lol From what I've seen of your writings, I'm betting you would say, "Jeff, can you explain to me why you believe this guy is snowing me?" Then you'd listen respectfully, and then you'd make up your own mind.
Guest DWA Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 (edited) ^^^Hopefully all this transpires before I purchase the book. I just think that differing standards apply when one ventures Into The Marketplace. Now a book like "Enoch" states its bit up front; it doesn't claim proof. I think at the very least one would have to approach this from a conviction that sharing violates something that shouldn't be violated. Which is kinda hard, sez me only, if one is selling a book about it. Edited March 7, 2013 by DWA
LeafTalker Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 (edited) ^^^Hopefully all this transpires before I purchase the book. (If it doesn't, you can resell the book on Craigslist or Ebay or something.) And I totally agree that technology has changed the level of evidence we need (or I need, anyway). I just think that differing standards apply when one ventures Into The Marketplace. Now a book like "Enoch" states its bit up front; it doesn't claim proof. I think at the very least one would have to approach this from a conviction that sharing violates something that shouldn't be violated. Which is kinda hard, sez me only, if one is selling a book about it. I'm with you through "[Enoch] doesn't claim proof." I haven't read it (cash flow issues), but that seems good, to me, to have that disclaimer. That forewarns people who expect "proof" from reading a book. Cool. But I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "one would have to approach this from a conviction that sharing violates something that shouldn't be violated". I know there was some controversy around the book, but I don't know much about it (either the controversy or the book). Edited March 7, 2013 by LeafTalker
Guest DWA Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 What I meant by that phrase is that - as was the case with Enoch (right, that's the way to do it with a book, not quotes, whoops) - one would have to present the book as "my story, if you are looking for proof, you might not want to buy this" ...and make the case that proof would be an inappropriate thing to include between these two covers. As I seem to recall, one can flip through Enoch - no, I didn't buy it; scanned it on Amazon, and sure enough the "trust" disclaimer was in the pages I got to read - and, well, see: no DVD; no recordings; no photos...in other words, this is one man's story, relayed to me; and I am so impatient with the scientific-dissection take on this that I am relaying this story to you as he told it to me. (Autumn Williams claims encounters; and claims the evidence as cited by scientists doesn't satisfy her that she saw an "ape." She trusts, and says so, long-term habituators more than scientists who don't ever seem to have seen one themselves. Her impatience with science was otherwise obvious in the pages I got to read. ;-) ) In this case all bonafides appear to be down. But I guess it really does come down to these considerations with me: Do I want to buy what amounts to an encounter report? Which do I trust more - the synthesis by involved scientists; or what plain old folks claim they are witnessing? How does this one, albeit extended, story stack up against what thousands have reported witnessing? I may be wrong. But I "trust" science a little more than Autumn appears to. ;-)
Recommended Posts