gigantor Posted May 5, 2016 Admin Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) I'm a little confused hiflier. You started with a board of ethics for the entire community, independent of any forum or group, and now it seems like you are proposing a BFF board to vet every report posted on the BFF and elsewhere? I don't think that's a direction the membership would want to go. Edited May 5, 2016 by gigantor 2
Guest DWA Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) And what, precisely, is to vet? IF YOU WERE NOT THERE YOU CAN'T. Unless you know something that disqualifies it. Hint, not "the witness's character," even The Boy Who Cried Wolf saw one, and Freeman found what appear to be authentic tracks and shot a film no one has been able to debunk. ("That picture looks just like this [pic of Joe Suit]; we can prove he was at that place when you took this.") And who really cares, when every single guy in a suit *looks like one*? This, once again!, is not gonna be how this field advances. Boots on ground in field for maximum possible time will get this done. Not Boards of Butthurt Bigfeeters. Just sayin. Edited May 5, 2016 by DWA
hiflier Posted May 5, 2016 Author Posted May 5, 2016 Not at all g. Only evidence presented directly to the board would be evaluated. That same evidence could be presented to the BFF at the same time for opinion and discussion as well if the researcher wished to. Members here have always brought reports in for discussion or material from YTube or photos. The board would only be for vetting physical evidence presented from the fielf. BigTreeWalker's bone samples for instance should BTW present them. The board could then set up a scientific inquiry and testing as it's reputation becomes more respected. As I said that respect wouldn't happen overnight. But the board's veracity and reputation within the scientific community should be one of it's main goals. The ethics side of the board would be for vetting people both famous and not so famous and some of that would involve whether field researchers bring good evidence or are found to be hoaxers. If the board had existed during the Standing/Dyer debacles then an awful lot of bandwidth and turmoil on the Forum might have been spared along with the "primate arm" thing that Dr. Disotell put to bed.
Guest DWA Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 The BFF is to *talk* about this. It's not I didn't think a murder board that will, at best, discourage people from talking about this, which should do wonders for advancing That Magic Day when we all know. Yuh-huh.
Guest DWA Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 Oh and BTW: I thought the BFF would take immediate action per its own rules and bylaws against anyone found out beyond cavil to be a faker here.
hiflier Posted May 5, 2016 Author Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) DWA, you know for a guy who says he reads? You don't. I already went over what you wrote in post #47.........REMEMBER? If not then you need to begin at the beginning and actually READ this time. But if all you want to do is cherry pick for the sake of arguing then I'm not your audience. You say others don't read and here you are demonstrating the proof that HEY! You don't either. Makes one think if after 9500 posts that you actually have any basis anything you've been saying for....how long now? "Murder board"? Seriously DWA. I can see you're struggling with this- BIG TIME! And the rule on someone hoaxing the membership is........? C'mon, you can do it. Edited May 5, 2016 by hiflier
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 Just because MUFON board members may be tainted (I don't know either way) doesn't mean you should ignore the scheme. Their model is successful. I'm suggesting a similar model for your proposal, not tainted board members... MUFON is run by retired Air force and Intelligence types with a non disclosure in the reporting form. Obviously what they are looking for are classic UFO as a product of military identification protocols. They are not looking for Aliens, they are looking to shush and get reports on covert aircraft, projects, hostile infiltration for reasons of military intelligence and to keep the public quiet about such matters as cruise missile testing that crashes in remote areas of northern Maine and is seen by a hunter, for instance. No doubt the cover is for "alien craft". In fact the Area 51 phenomenon was started as a counterintelligence disinformation program. This is all a matter of public record.
hiflier Posted May 5, 2016 Author Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) ^^THIS. Thank you. The CIA admitted in 1996 that UFO's were a cover for the U2 and SR-71 Blackbird flights. Again public knowledge. No Aliens, No UFO's. Edited May 5, 2016 by hiflier
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) I've seen several UFO, I reported one to MUFON. I posted the story in some thread here, I just don't get aliens out of it, I see them as a manifestation on natural forces. Basically photon plasma exiting a cloud (bubble) of gas under an intense electro-magnetic field. The bubble and photons are caused by the geo electro magnetic field. Edited May 5, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna
Guest Crowlogic Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 Hey Crowlogic, check out post # 34 and tell me honestly and without bias what you would do or what you would expect to have done with the hypothetical member who fabricated the encounter report. Can't seem to draw any proponents to address it. That poster would get banned. It is good politics to nip it in the bud and since a new member has little traction or status it's an easy kill. Hoaxing and lying run side by side with the serious truthers. So much so that one is nearly inseparable from the other. But then there is a willingness and need to believe so even if a hoaxing liar gets snagged there is always an audience willing and waiting to embrace them elsewhere. Just think Portals as a good example. The more perplexing question is what if the liar/hoaxer was highly regarded pillar of the bigfoot community? I think only newbies can be run off. If some very established highly regarded people were to come forward and say they indeed fabricated hoaxes or lied the need to believe factor would kick in and the excuses for why said respected member admitted to hoaxing. They would call foul that somehow that person was being coerced or under duress to come forward in that manner.
Incorrigible1 Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 There was that guy that turned out to be a chicken farmer.
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 The BFF hardly ever bans hoaxers. Hoaxers thrive on the forum.
Guest DWA Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 ...and I'm not even sure it's too worth the time to focus on nailing storytellers. I always considered people's experiences take or leave. It is the volume and consistency of the evidence that tells, not any single report. While it may be fun to go over details of videos and sightings, the needle won't move on this until interesting evidence is followed up in the field.
Incorrigible1 Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 ^So fibs and made up stories figure into your "volume and consistency?"
Guest DWA Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 Your assessment of the entire report database, please, and I am looking for...what you will not be able to give me. Are empty promises your thing? Please up game.
Recommended Posts