Re: reality

Message posted by JB737 on June 19, 2007 at 12:02:42 PST:

Your logic is impeccable, but your 3 premises are flawed:

1. Dismiss all purported eyewitnesses who say there IS an underground component to Area 51. They must all be liars and/or conspiracy theorists.

2. Accept eyewitnesses who agree with your opinion. They must be honest folks who would never lie, even out of a sense of patriotism for a disinformation campaign (or fear of their lives if there were a hidden base and they spilled the beans about it.)

3. It is easy for the base to hide the huge amount of dirt from any excavation, so when a huge amount of dirt shows up, it cannot even possibly be from underground construction.

Hence we can conclude without any actual investigation, that we still have "no evidence" of an underground base.

That's watertight logic, but ONLY IF you first accept the 3 premises. In reality, none of the 3 premises is proven, much less all of them.

To me, blindly accepting all 3 premises, is worse than trying to figure out whether the dirt pile might have more than its one assumed purpose.

I personally lean toward the dirt pile not being from underground-base construction. But I want to investigate all possible evidence in either direction, rather than declaring the whole idea to be "unrealistic".

I'm not promoting some wacky conspiracy theory, which I can understand dismissing as OT. I'm just suggesting that we should try to verify where all the dirt came from, as it might help prove or disprove whether the current construction has an underground component.

Underground construction would make some sense at the world's most secure base, and require no conspiracy theory. Just some good planning and secrecy, both of which exist in such an abundance out there, that a general lack of hard evidence is EXPECTED, by design. Using that lack of hard evidence as proof that an underground component doesn't exist already, or isn't being built now, shows too little respect for their ability to keep secrets.

Despite our having pictures of their above-ground buildings, the camo dudes, and the JANET terminal, there is little doubt of their superb ability to keep secrets about the base itself. So a lack of evidence does not prove a lack of existence of underground facilities or anything else there.


In Reply to: Re: Dirt pile (Long) posted by Joerg (Webmaster) on June 19, 2007 at 7:30:23 PST:


[ Discussion Forum Index ] [ FAQ ]