The "Carlos Swett affair"

[Lucifuge Rofocale]

Re: VERY FAST

That stupid of Lucifuge (even his nick is) is a big chicken that was in silence all this time. He knew about the challenge before you posted this thread, and was in the ostrich silence like Randi and the JREF, and just came here to post a letter of MY BROTHER .

Can you understand that your challenge is too stupid to waste time in it? I wrote the original letter to show you how stupid it is but I don't have more time to spend with morons like you. I posted the letter in the forum because it was very funny and shows clearly what a delusional monkeys you and your ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ brother are.

P.S. Salúdame al peruano con una yuca.(you can translate this)

Metete la yuca al culo y muevete

 

[Lucifuge Rofocale]

Well, I had remained silent on all this stuff since the day I realized it was pointless to continue. In my opinion the debate became circular long ago, and it's very likely that no positive insight will ever come out of it.

And even worse, we have now entered the "insult stage". It's obvious that nothing interesting or positive will ever result from an insult exchange.

But now a new element has been added. It seems that Swett and Lucifuge Rofocale have been holding a private mail exchange since the early days of this thread or perhaps even before it was born. I really don't know what's been hapenning on this regard, Lucifuge should clear things up for us.

It was about a week before. The original claim came to my hotmail account, I read it and answered with the email that it is in the bottom of my first message.

It was obvious that there was no sustance in the claim of the ecuatorian sisters, so I lost interest and didn't participate in the thread. I had enought with Franko and Jedi Knight .

But the things started to get funny with this delusional clown letter. He is so paranoid! So here I am.

Swett is obviously annoyed and he's shooting insults in every direction. Just to illustrate this fact, let me translate part of his letter to Lucifuge:would translate as: See?, I got a free insult out of nothing. I have never used any bad word or had any bad intention against him, and certainly will never do, and yet I was also insulted.. LOL!

Go figure

And a final wondering: is latinijral Carlos Swett's brother?

It looks like.

Nos vemos Patricio

 

[Guest]

Entroncado con la Yuca

Can you understand that your challenge is too stupid to waste time in it? I wrote the original letter to show you how stupid it is but I don't have more time to spend with morons like you. I posted the letter in the forum because it was very funny and shows clearly what a delusional monkeys you and your ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ brother are.



Metete la yuca al culo y muevete

Now you are showing your ass , because you can't show your face.

Where were you before "member of the JREF" as you originally posted in an e-mail before this thread, farsant.

You came here now to join the only members left in this thread: the clowns ,that their only arguments are the insults.
You and your stupidities represent well your summision, lameculo de Randi.,

For you is Ok that Harter studied the tape "frame by frame" on the internet because you have ◊◊◊◊ in your brain.
"
"The world is little"

Carlos Swett

P.S.
La yuca no quiere salir de tu culo, chupamedias gallina llorona.

 

[Wyrd1]

I'm talkin to Dumbo!

Yo! Carlos, I banned your loser BEHIND from the Skeptic's Forum, not Iggy. You keep claiming to have answered people in this Forum's questions. You, sir, are a liar. You have yet to answer Smiley01's questions, you have not reasonably answered even one question from anyone. If IJRAL is your brother it would explain how he got ahold of your "notharized" application. It would also explain how he knew what Randi and Andrew said to you. Of course that may be a lie as well but who really cares if you are IJRAL, Latin, or Latinijral. I will ask one question of you now, even though I know you won't answer it any more than you have answered any other questions.
If the so called paranormal object is passing OUT of the hole in WTC Tower Two then why is it no SMOKE follows in it's wake? You say it must be a large object so it should have created enough of a vortex to pull a trail of smoke with it. Since it did not, in my opinion, it could not have come out of the hole in the tower. Since it was out of focus it must have been much closer to the camera than any part of the tower. Go ahead and insult me. Go ahead and call me a clown. Deflect criticism any way you can for your lost cause. You have lost your challenge and thanks to your behavior in this forum you have lost your dignity. Any man with honor would apologize to this group for what YOU have said and wasting time.

 

[Patricio Elicer]

Re: VERY FAST

I can see how fast you are in translating , but when I asked to do it with my notarized application you were extremely slow, Why?

Because I was busy by then.

Why in your first post of this Thread ( you are the author of this Thread , not me) you also insulted me without my presence in the forum?

Well, I can't let this pass. Carlos, please tell me where in my first post I did insult you. If I did, I'll have no problem in making a public apology to you, because it's not within my style to insult people.

 

[Guest]

DOUBLE LOSER : WYRD

Yo! Carlos, I banned your loser BEHIND from the Skeptic's Forum, not Iggy. [/QUOTE

Wird:

So you miss me.
You are the one that is following me.
THIS IS MY AFFAIR so I am banning you now, DOUBLE LOSER.

Thanks,
S&S

 

[Wyrd1]

good comeback

That was quite some comeback Carlos. What about the smoke? Why doesn't it follow your paranormal object out the hole?

 

[Hellbound]

Well, he's at the point now where he won't even release the evidence.

The company I work for specializes in graphics, so I have the equipment needed to digitize the tape and do a very good frame-by-frame analysis of it on a computer.

In the chat last night, I posted him two addresses to which he could send me the tape (an offer he made earlier, saying if we gave him an address he woudl send it).

He then refused, because I wouldn't give my full name, instead giving only a first name and a last initial.

So, Carlos, how about it? You can send the tape to:

(Address removed for privacy reasons. Request for evidence was refused by S&S)

Let's see it.

 

[Guest]

VERY BUSY

Because I was busy by then.
Well, I can't let this pass. Carlos, please tell me where in my first post I did insult you. If I did, I'll have no problem in making a public apology to you, because it's not within my style to insult people.

Patricio:

On 08/27/2002 you put this thread on the forum with MY NAME on the title.

Here is a part of what you said that day, according to a talk with IJRAL on the chat the day before:

Patricio 08/27/02 :
"We had a long and calmed exchange in Spanish, and he said he was pissed with Randi, because in his opinion he (Randi) had lied to a claimant. I'd like to share my findings about the whole thing with all of you who still don't know about it"

As you see Patricio, again you were very fast translating a private talk with him in spanish, and posting the e-mails between the foundation and Carlos Swett.

The "ONLY THING" you forgot to translate was MY NOTARIZED APPLICATION,.

How can people in any forum of the world can emit judgements without looking to what "the other part is really claming?"

Well YOU did it, without posting the translated application, that's is an BIG insult for MY NAME .
Here are again your words in that same initial post of the thread:

Patricio 08/27/02:
"But first, my apologies to everyone who were in the room at that moment for not making an instant translation of the exchange. I was just unable to, because everything went too fast .
Mr. Swett repeatedly calls Randi a liar, but I really fail to see where Randi or Andrew may have lied on their replies. IMO Andrew's reply made perfect sense to the case.
I think this is another example of how badly a person (two persons in this case) can delude himself when strong emotions come "

How badly?, I asked YOU if I can post here what YOU wrote me in a private message, so people of THIS FORUM can see how YOU changed your mine about me, HARTER and RANDI. Can I ?

Was easy for YOU when I was not present at the forum, and your bad example of prejudgements gave other members (NOT ALL) the chance to insult me.

So you were busy by that time?
Was my enter in the forum (after 30 quotes of differents members) and was my insistence to YOU to do "FIRST THE FIRST" the motive that forced you to do the translation of my notarized application. In the "betweens " you had enough time to post several messages.(BUT NOT WHAT AN HONEST DEBATER MUST DO).

Now , you finally appears like a "saint" who had been "insulted", and crying and looking for mama.

Be man enough.

I, Carlos Swett (my real name) had been insulted by Randi, received a bunch of lies from Harter, insulted and banned with no reasons at the msn Skeptics Forum, answered ALL the questions in this forum, received insults from the clowns of ABC, entered the JREF chat, debate with anyone, support THE BIG SILENCE OF RANDI(is not a written word from him) about my application and his poor answer , my wife and children want the time I spend in this, etc., etc,BUT I AM STILL FIGHTING HERE.

In the middle of that "caos"exists persons of this forum that are really with the "inquietud" of analize the proper way the tape.

Those "FEW" persons are the main reason to see me keep on going, and I give them my thanks, and to all of the viewers of this thread.
Perhaps, those few members are who voted for Rwald in his "brainless" poll

Sorry Patricio, you asked and I just answer.

Thanks,
S&S

 

[Guest]

ASK FOR THE TAPE AT JREF

Well, he's at the point now where he won't even release the evidence.

The company I work for specializes in graphics, so I have the equipment needed to digitize the tape and do a very good frame-by-frame analysis of it on a computer.

In the chat last night, I posted him two addresses to which he could send me the tape (an offer he made earlier, saying if we gave him an address he woudl send it).

He then refused, because I wouldn't give my full name, instead giving only a first name and a last initial.

So, Carlos, how about it? You can send the tape to:

Thad B., Technology Dept.
11601 Otter Creek Road South
Mabelvale, AR 72103
USA

Let's see it.

Who are you ? an initial? a nick name?
I give you a tip: ask JREF FOR MY TAPE, is mine and I am giving you my permission(CARLOS SWETT) to receive it in my name, besides the "amazing duo" are in silence about my application.


But that's not the big point : you are correct, THAT IS THE WAY or the correct method to analize the image: proffesional equipments.
I did it, HARTER DID NOT See now the difference?

But you are still failing in one point: "digitize the tape".
Is that a proof? I did it , too.
Rwald did it too ,BUT INSERT ON IT "HIS GALLOW HUMOR", so a digitize tape can be tricked.
The ONLY way is to go to your nearest tv station, ask for THEIR TAPE of the same shot and analize it with their own tv equipments. My tape is just a reference of the COMPLETE SEQUENCE, as I told JREF.

Who are you?Are you afraid of what?
You have my private e-mail

Thanks,
S&S

 

[Patricio Elicer]

Re: VERY BUSY

As you see Patricio, again you were very fast translating a private talk with him in spanish

I did not translate anything the IJRAL said in the chat that night. I started the theard just to explain who IJRAL was, why he was so angry and what the whole issue was about, because people were confused about it.

The "ONLY THING" you forgot to translate was MY NOTARIZED APPLICATION,.

How can people in any forum of the world can emit judgements without looking to what "the other part is really claming?"

Well, you should have submitted your application in English in the first place. I'm not a translator and it's not an easy task for me to translate a long and technical document. I didn't forget to translate it, I just didn't consider it was worth the effort to do it, because I explained the case and posted a link to a self-explanatory animation. I also posted a link to your application, so that any really interested person could translate it.

Well YOU did it, without posting the translated application, that's is an BIG insult for MY NAME

Hmmmm... weird, I don't follow your rationale here. I didn't post your application on the internet, it was already there, I just linked it. If you were so interested in people knowing its details, you should've posted a translated version in the first place. As I said before, I explained what your case was, and considered it was sufficient for the people to understand it.

I asked YOU if I can post here what YOU wrote me in a private message, so people of THIS FORUM can see how YOU changed your mine about me, HARTER and RANDI. Can I ?

Oops, sorry I missed that request. Of course you can post here what I said to you in PM. I don't see where I changed my mind however.

So you were busy by that time?
Was my enter in the forum (after 30 quotes of differents members) and was my insistence to YOU to do "FIRST THE FIRST" the motive that forced you to do the translation of my notarized application. In the "betweens " you had enough time to post several messages.(BUT NOT WHAT AN HONEST DEBATER MUST DO)

Yes, I translated the application because you asked me to do it. Again, I didn't do it before because I didn't think it was so necessary for the people of the forum to understand your claim.

Sorry Patricio, you asked and I just answer.

Don't feel sorry, you just answered my question.

 

[Guest]

LLORANDO

I I'm not a translator and it's not an easy task for me to translate a long and technical document. I didn't forget to translate it, I just didn't consider it was worth the effort to do it, because I explained the case and posted a link to a self-explanatory animation.

Hi Patricio: You are the official translator of this thread.

Don't forget what you said in your very first post:

Patricio 08/27/02:
"But first, my apologies to everyone who were in the room at that moment for not making an instant translation of the exchange. I was just unable to, because everything went too fast .

-----------------------------

You just DID a prejudgement without puting My notarized application, was your mistake. Is a fact chileno llorón.
You just are as Randi : AFRAID of the truth.

The "amazing silence" is getting bigger and bigger.

Thanks,
S&S

 

[rwald]

Speaking of the "amazing silence"...

Last night, I emailed Randi's radio show about Carlos Swett. Randi mocked Carlos, and said, "Carlos, you're wrong, you're an idiot." He also commented that if Carlos had above a 3rd grade reading level, he might have been able to understand the rules. Now, I agree that Randi was insulting Carlos. There's no question about that. The key point is, Randi certainly was not silent about Carlos. So, all of Carlos's arguments about Randi's silence are completely unfounded.

Just like all the rest of Carlos's arguments.

rwald
Corresponding Secretary of the Association of Brilliant Chaps

 

[Patricio Elicer]

Last night, I emailed Randi's radio show about Carlos Swett.

Thanks rwald for clarifying that point. I heard Randi's response, but I kept wondering about who sent the e-mail

 

[Guest]

NO COMMENTS ABOUT SWETT, WHY???

Please read.... This is Randi (09-27-2002 until 10-28-2002)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guys, this is Randi - on Linda's nickel.

I don't get the time to check in here, but when I do, I'm pretty annoyed at some of what's going on. I refer to matters of good taste and consideration.

One example is "Franko." I've read posts in which half of his modifiers are vulgar and obscene. This doesn't shock me, because I take it as an indication that Franko just doesn't have the ability to express himself in more acceptable language, but it does annoy me, especially when I realize that others may be shocked and may resent it.

The LAST thing we want to do is to censor this forum. We also want to avoid the necessity of throwing anyone off. However, we may have to do some housekeeping if the situation continues as it is presently. PLEASE don't make this necessary.

We're about to post (or is it already up?) a set of guidelines that we believe to be very reasonable and acceptable. It's common sense: you're welcome here, to exchange ideas and thoughts --- but good manners and thoughtfulness count. Arguing can be done reasonably and soberly, without being nasty or cruel. We must do just that.

An added thought, while I have the floor: it seems to me that if someone avers that he or she simply "believes" something to be true or false, why should you spin your wheels carrying on that there's no "proof" for the belief? Blind belief, in my opinion, is dangerous and illogical, but that's one of the things we stand for: freedom of thought and belief. Disagree as much as we might, anyone can believe that God is a cabbage, lives in Duluth, and speaks French. We have to accept that statement of belief, though we may not endorse it. BUT: if that person states that he or she can PROVE it, let the fur fly.

Let's try to remember: "I believe this to be true, as a matter of faith, without any supporting evidence" is a statement that just can't be argued with; yes, you can argue with the logic of HAVING this kind of belief, but if it's "blind," it's unassailable.

That's just a suggestion to those who enter into fruitless harangues with persons who are satisfied and content with their beliefs. Wheel-spinning is a waste of intellect and time, in my opinion.

Oops. Been on too long. Just haven't the time to spend here, and I'm sorry that I won't be able to answer responses or comments on the above. Just not enough time. And you might consider sparing Jeff much of the avalanche of comments....?

I assume that EVERYONE here is going to be with us in January for the Amazing Meeting.....?

Make nice, folks.

James Randi.

 

[Skeptoid]

I can't for the life of me figure out why you would expect Randi to say anything at all about Swett in this post. The topic of Randi's post was how he expects us to conduct ourselves on his forum. Besides, Randi has said all he needs to say about Swett's application.

You have no claim. Case closed. You and Swett are delusional and in denial. Do you really want to go to your graves with the words "poor answer" on your breath? Is Swett's pride hurt so badly that he must continue this charade in order to save face? This is how school children act. Drop this obsession of yours and go back to living a normal life.

 

[Wyrd1]

Carlos

Banned for no reason? With comments like these:
"insulted and banned with no reasons at the msn Skeptics Forum, answered ALL the questions in this forum, received insults from the clowns of ABC" YOU began the insults when we didn't post the answers you wanted and you were banned for the big lie "answered al questions in this forum..." You have still failed to answer my last question or any questions. Randi is right about his assessment of your mental state at the beginning of his dealings with you and since. You are nothing but a lying troll. You will not answer questions because you CANNOT and you lie because you have to. You have no answers you have no case. This whole idea you have cooked up is about the dumbest pile of crap I have ever seen. Of that you can be proud but no matter what else happens you aren't going to get your way. The biggest reason you were banned from the Skeptics Forum is because you will not understand that simple fact. Iggy told you many times that we couldn't help you talk to Randi even if we believed you and I doubt if any of the members of this forum, except the moderators perhaps, can help you either. By this time Randi is convinced, I'm sure, that you are just another crazy person. They answered your challenge and they are finished with you. Too bad you are too stupid and too immature to realize that and go away. Until then you're candidate for insults and derision. Have a nice day.

 

[Guest]

RANDI'S VOICE

Speaking of the "amazing silence"...

Last night, I emailed Randi's radio show about Carlos Swett. Randi mocked Carlos, and said, "Carlos, you're wrong, you're an idiot." He also commented that if Carlos had above a 3rd grade reading level, he might have been able to understand the rules. Now, I agree that Randi was insulting Carlos. There's no question about that. The key point is, Randi certainly was not silent about Carlos. So, all of Carlos's arguments about Randi's silence are completely unfounded.

Just like all the rest of Carlos's arguments.

rwald
Corresponding Secretary of the Association of Brilliant Chaps

Hi Rwald :

So now you became Randi's voice.

Is he afraid?Can be man enough to put that in words with his sign on it?

I Carlos Swett , I am not afraid, I told him FIRST directly to HIM that HE is a CHICKEN and a LOSER(in my case), that he has a poor - liar researcher like Andrew Harter, that they (both) used the most stupid method to analize the tape, THAT THEY NEVER TOLD ME THAT MY APPLICATION WAS NOT VALID, and that don't be worry for the MONEY, that the main reason is to find the TRUTH.

See the difference? I AM FRONTAL.

If all Randi's commentaries at SWIFT are about charlatans, IDIOTS, trolls and similars, WHY I am not there?

Randi : When are you going to put my notarized application and the poor answer you gave me, with your sign on it?
What are you afraid of?

You Rwald and similars ,told before that Randi NEVER read the posts at the forum, well is another lie from ABC.(Assiociation of Brainless Clowns).

Thanks,
S&S (Carlos Swett)

P.S.
Rwald , I know you are worry because of your 5 votes in the stupid poll you did.
You "think " that IJRAL and I voted for you.
And the others 3 votes?
I "think" were votes from Randi, Harter and Linda .
Investigate

 

[Martin]

THEY NEVER TOLD ME THAT MY APPLICATION WAS NOT VALID

'You have no claim' - Andrew Harter

'Your application is closed' - James Randi

'Swett, you are a complete and utter moron' - MartinM

 

[Doubt]

Swett,

You keep saying that they never told you your claim was not valid. Many people here have told you that the phrase “You have no claim” means the same thing. What about this don’t you understand? The word “valid” is not needed to convey the meaning.

There are many ways to express an idea in English. Here are a few others that Randi could have used. Many are informal.

Your claim amounts to nothing.
Your claim is invalid.
Your claim is not worth the paper it is written on.
Your claim is garbage.
Your claim and 50 cents could get you a cup of coffee.
Your claim will be stored in the circular file. (Circular file is a slang expression for garbage can.)
Your claim does not meet the rules of the challenge.
Your claim cannot be taken seriously.
Your claim does not amount to a hill of beans.
Your claim does not meet the criteria for the prize.

Do you still think Randi never told you your claim was invald? Or are you just playing semantic games?