The "Carlos Swett affair"

[rwald]

Carlos, simply because Blue Monk could have faked his digital shot doesn't mean that he did. You must prove that he faked the shot before you can act like it's fake. You can't just say, "It's digital, so it's fake." You must provide some sort of evidence that it is in fact fake.

Ah, why am I bothering. It's evident that you don't understand the meanings of the words "proof" or "evidence." To help you, I'll post definitions of these two key terms:

Proof: noun
1.The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.
2.
a.The validation of a proposition by application of specified rules, as of induction or deduction, to assumptions, axioms, and sequentially derived conclusions.
b.A statement or argument used in such a validation.
3.
a.Convincing or persuasive demonstration: was asked for proof of his identity; an employment history that was proof of her dependability.
b.The state of being convinced or persuaded by consideration of evidence.

Evidence: noun
A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment: The broken window was evidence that a burglary had taken place. Scientists weigh the evidence for and against a hypothesis.

Try reading these and understanding the concepts before you make claims. It will spare you some future embarrassment.

 

[Guest]

BAD MEMORY

Carlos, simply because Blue Monk could have faked his digital shot doesn't mean that he did. You must prove that he faked the shot before you can act like it's fake. You can't just say, "It's digital, so it's fake." You must provide some sort of evidence that it is in fact fake.

Ah, why am I bothering. It's evident that you don't understand the meanings of the words "proof" or "evidence." To help you, I'll post definitions of these two key terms:
Try reading these and understanding the concepts before you make claims. It will spare you some future embarrassment.

:

Hi Rwald:

Are you the same person who posted this before?(09/15/02):

"Carlos, I know that the internet video can be edited, as I proved. I never said that Randi and Harter did the best possible review of your case; I know that it would have been better had they looked at the original video"

Or you know are also regret of your own words?

The method ALL YOU "poor skeptics" are based on are the INCORRECT. That's a fact.

Thanks,

S&S

P.S.

I will try to renovate my signature in the future, I have more "pearls" from you all.

 

[rwald]

"can be edited" does not equal "must be edited". I agree, it is possible that Blue Monk edited his shots. But that does not mean he did. You must prove that he did. Simply saying, "But you edited your shots two months ago!" is not proof that Blue Monk edited his shots now.

 

[Guest]

PROOFS?????

"can be edited" does not equal "must be edited". I agree, it is possible that Blue Monk edited his shots. But that does not mean he did. You must prove that he did. Simply saying, "But you edited your shots two months ago!" is not proof that Blue Monk edited his shots now.

Hi Rwald:

I don't need to prove YOU nothing.
If the possibility exists as you said , you must act as REAL SKEPTICS and don't be SO SURE of a digitized edition of the shot.
That's all.

Remember I was honest enough to the JREF and I didn't send MY digitized tape of the shot, and explained Mr.Randi why I was not sending that CD ROM , I just send a REFERENTIAL TAPE, so they will be free to do what you said before:

RWALD(09/15/02):

"Carlos, I know that the internet video can be edited, as I proved. I never said that Randi and Harter did the best possible review of your case; I know that it would have been better had they looked at the original video"

Thanks,
S&S

 

[Blue Monk]

Is too late, when you SAW THE TAPE at Teleclip in slow motion and stills with their equipments.YOU NEVER said what you saw there.
You needed To make YOUR own digitized version of the SHOT of my application WITH TRICKS on it, easily noticed. The same way Rwald posted a picture of KING Kong dancing IN FRONT of the TOWERS.

Nobody needs to alter anything to disprove your stupid theory Carlos. I understand that you are too stupid to realize that your object just doesn’t appear in any other video.

Fortunately the rest of the world is not so incredibly dense.

Originally posted by S&S
Even to you is hard to see "YOUR BIRD" in your frame still , I guess is number 12, so you have nothing.And NOW no excuses for the FRAMES.

I don’t care if you ever believe it’s a bird. I’m certainly not going to waste my time trying to prove it to you.

I only wanted to see if you could see the object in front of the towers and of course you can.

And of course I have had great fun showing it to other people and telling them about this fool I know that thinks there is a paranormal object passing through the tower.

Of course the laughter gets out of control when I show them the clip that clearly shows there is nothing exiting the tower and explain to them that as hard as it may be to believe there is really a man walking this Earth that is too thick to accept that as proof of his error.

We have all sorts of jokes now concerning ‘magic sombreros.’

Originally posted by S&S
What kind of TAPE you got from TELECLIP?
Where is the address of Teleclip?

VHS

Teleclip-Austin Inc
3601 S Congress Ave # 100, Austin, TX 78704
Phone: (512) 851-8800

Originally posted by S&S
So now AGAIN you are looking from another angle the "PARANORMAL ACTIVITY" as the only proof you can have .

What do you mean the only proof? The other angles prove there is no object passing through the tower Einstein. Duh!

Who the hell dresses you in the morning?

Originally posted by S&S
So you waisted time, money and efforts.

Oh no, it was well worth it to show how foolish you are.

If you put as much effort into analyzing your own tape as you do crying about how your feelings got hurt you’d have something to show.

But you don’t want the facts to come out. You’d rather sit here and cry and call everyone liars and cheaters.

Well, that’s good because I enjoy the hell out of it. You are very entertaining. Please cry and whine some more for me because I just can’t get enough.

Originally posted by S&S
But you still have your enthusiasm in defending Harter's poor answer to my application, that was based in an unknown link of a another digitized version on the internet. Can you please DEFINE what is PARANORMAL?

Harter gave you a great answer. Your theory is nonsense.

paranormal
adjective
impossible to explain by known natural forces or by science.

This is from the Cambridge dictionary.

Don’t they have dictionaries in Ecuador?

Who the hell does your thinking for you when I’m not around?

Originally posted by S&S
WOW, the NONPLUSULTRA of the skeptics are based on an unknown links of digitized images. Sorry IS BLUE MONK link(WOW)

We’ve had to. You’re not intelligent enough to be able to present your evidence so we’ve been forced to use what we can and it has been more than enough to prove your silly little theory is nonsense.

Originally posted by S&S
Yes, you also post a "referential clip" done by yourself.
Sorry you have nothing, and is thair fault if you have a bunch of beleivers of your "magic equipment".

Your theory is nonsense.

Nothing on your tape will ever make your object ‘magically’ appear on any other video. No one has to take my word for anything. There are thousands of clips out there and they all, including yours, prove that you are a very foolish and childish man.

The only thing left is your never-ending crying.

But since you are so damn concerned about your fair treatment here why don’t we take this up in another forum, perhaps one that is friendlier to your view.

I can guarantee there is not a person on this planet except for you and your idiot brother that will not accept the other views as concrete proof that there is nothing passing through the tower.

Want to go somewhere where you can’t claim people are plotting against you? Want to go somewhere where the people have no connection to JREF and therefore would be impartial?

The only thing left is your never-ending crying and I enjoy every minute of it.

 

[Blue Monk]

"can be edited" does not equal "must be edited". I agree, it is possible that Blue Monk edited his shots. But that does not mean he did. You must prove that he did. Simply saying, "But you edited your shots two months ago!" is not proof that Blue Monk edited his shots now.

Let him claim they are faked. I knew that would be his response before I posted them.

He knows they're not.

He just wants a point to argue.

The evidence is out there. If Carlos can convince others it's fake then let him.

Who cares.

The main thing is that anyone can check any clip they want and see that there is no object passing through the tower.

The only thing left to do now is have fun ridiculing Carlos. I say if he's going call anyone who disagrees with him a liar and accuse anyone of dishonesty then he's only proving what we've all known all along.

He's a prick.

Say, did you hear the one about the magic sombrero?

 

[PinkRabbit]

Given that this board is a digital medium and most people cannot simply walk in to a news station and demand to see the tape, for the purposes of this discussion, what option other than a digital version is possible?

You keep demanding the people here "prove" something and don't seem to understand the concept that you're the one who must prove something. You've accused a whole raft of people of lying, either subtly or openly because they don't agree with you, yet the only thing we have here is your word, which doesn't jibe with what ANYONE else has seen (except latinjrl ... who, I personally think is you, given your shared ineptitude in English).

How about you post your version of the tape and prove that Blue Monk edited his as you've pretty much accused him of doing. You say you have one, so let's see it. We can't see your referential tape, but you could show us your much acclaimed proof. Frankly, all we've seen from you to date is your word, and to be perfectly honest, it's nowhere near good enough.

Barb

 

[Guest]

ARE YOU SURE???

The main thing is that anyone can check any clip they want and see that there is no object passing through the tower.

:

Hi Blue Monk:

Are you sure? I have your "analysis" of your missing frame just in that part. And now in "YOUR" digitized version , is also HARD to see "the bird" in that part of the building.

Besides you are still refusing to isolate "your bird" and study its form. Askl Latin for help.
Congratulations for "your 's beleivers".

Thanks,
S&S

 

[Blue Monk]

Re: ARE YOU SURE???

Are you sure? I have your "analysis" of your missing frame just in that part. And now in "YOUR" digitized version , is also HARD to see "the bird" in that part of the building.

So what?

Originally posted by S&S Besides you are still refusing to isolate "your bird" and study its form. [/B]

I'm not refusing.

I don't give a damn.

I don't analys your magic hat for the same reason I don't analys the water stains in my toilet.

I don't care and there is no point.

 

[thatguywhojuggles]

How incredibly f*cking pathetic is this? It boggles the mind that this man has spent 2 months pursuing this. You are truely a world class idiot, Carlos.

 

[Guest]

???????????????? ANOTHER LOSER?

So what?



I'm not refusing.

I don't give a damn.

I don't analys your magic hat for the same reason I don't analys the water stains in my toilet.

I don't care and there is no point.

Hi Blue Monk:

I thought you made a big effort , with money and time spend, nights without resting well to make a "good digitazed version", preparing Harter's defense, but not now you appear just like another loser.

Just relax, now you have a bunch of "beleivers".Maybe you receive a T-shirt from JREF

Thanks,
S&S

 

[Guest]

THE SAMEGUY

How incredibly f*cking pathetic is this? It boggles the mind that this man has spent 2 months pursuing this. You are truely a world class idiot, Carlos.

Hi:

Are you the same "that guy"?.

How many times you said you will never post here?And I am not calling you idiot.

Is that also in your "diary"?
Is a hello kitty diary?

Thanks,
S&S

 

[Thanz]

Hi Blue Monk:

I thought you made a big effort , with money and time spend, nights without resting well to make a "good digitazed version", preparing Harter's defense, but not now you appear just like another loser.

Just relax, now you have a bunch of "beleivers".Maybe you receive a T-shirt from JREF

Thanks,
S&S

Carlos,

I don't know Blue Monk from Adam, but I have to protest at you calling him a loser. He has done more work on YOUR application than you have yourself. All you did was see something on a videotape, make a copy, and send it to the JREF. It wasn't your tape, you didn't shoot the video, and you could not even explain what was on it. You claim that it wasn't a bird or insect because you couldn't see it in front of the towers. You claim that it goes in one hole, and out the other. You don't even explain why this makes it paranormal.

Blue Monk, on the other hand, finds a copy of the video on the internet which shows that it is in front of the towers. That isn't good enough for you. He also finds another shot of the same incident from a similar angle, which doesn't have the object at all. This is enough to prove that your claim is false. Again, you claim that the object is paranormal because it passes through the tower. If your claim were true, it would have been on every shot of the tower at that moment. However, it is only on the one shot. Blue Monk could have stopped here, and I (as well as others) would have been grateful for his hard work and help.

But it wasn't good enough for you, was it Carlos? NO, you still insisted there was a paranormal object even though you had no explanation as to why it was not on the CNN tape. So, Blue Monk, on his own initiative and at his own expense, obtained a broadcast tape of your claimed paranormal object. He viewed the tape at no less than 3 professional quality video stations. The object was in view the entire time. He then posts digitized images of YOUR tape (which you have never done) which prove that the object never goes into the tower. He also shows several other views, none of which have the object.

Blue Monk has proven that your claim is 100% false. The only 'loser' here is you - you have lost the JREF challenge and can't accept it. You have even stooped so low as to accuse Blue Monk of cheating. I have lost what little respect I had for you.

When I first learned about this video, I was intrigued, I thought that the object merited some further investigation. Now that I have seen the further investigation, I am convinced that there is nothing paranormal in your clip.

I have asked you twice to remove the quote from my earlier post from your signature. You have said that I need to ask in a proper way. I do not know what you mean by this, so I will ask you once again: Mr. Swett, please remove my quote from your signature.

Thank you to all of you who have supported my requests to have the quote removed, only to have your points fall on deaf ears. I truly appreciate the effort.

The biggest thank you goes to Blue Monk, who has been tireless in his efforts to show to Carlos his error. When this began, I thought that Carlos simply was upset because he wanted an investigation and explanation of the object, and didn't get it from the JREF. Blue Monk has now done all he can do short of going back in time to show what the object is or isn't, and Carlos still protests. Thank you Blue Monk. Carlos, please accept the truth and move on.

 

[davidhorman]

Carlos,

One very good reason that neither I nor anyone else wants to analyse the form of the object (besides the fact that our animated GIFs have clearly shown that it flaps like a bird) is that there isn't any real way to do a decent analysis. The information is simply not available.

Secondly, you have now, finally, outright accused BlueMonk of fraud. So you should reject any other analysis by any of us.

So how about answering my question, the same one BlueMonk and others have asked you time and time again:

Why does the object not appear in any other of the videos made of the second impact?

David

 

[Skeptoid]

Say, did you hear the one about the magic sombrero?

Carlos walks into a bar wearing his cosmic sombrero. Bartender says, "Hey, where did you get that stupid looking thing?" Sombrero says, "Ecuador". *Rimshot*

 

[Guest]

Re: Randi's Pope Here...

It will be interesting to see where this goes from here. This reminds me of the challenge of teaching logic, evidence, and reason. My students really enjoyed silly theories, and often were not bothered by the problem of non-falsifyability.

Sorry for your students and your boss Mr. R. Please share with them this link.
Congratulations Blue Monk for your tricks, maybe you can send an aplication to JREF and be a part of the amazing meeting.

Frame 17: in negative big picture

Frame 17: with filters big picture

Frame 21: in negative: Change your eraser Blue Monk

Frame 21: with filters: confirmed....blue Monk must change his eraser.

POOR TRICKY "SKEPTIC"

quod erat demonstrandum

 

[Guest]

100 % tricked

Blue Monk has proven that your claim is 100% false.

Blue Monk has proven that his "digitized video analysis and pictures" is 100 % tricked.


Originally posted by Thanz 08-27-02
"Andrew's 'investigation' seems pretty dodgy as well. We all know that a video on the internet is not likely to be of broadcast quality.

 

[Guest]

ANOTHER

Sorry, friends, I forgot this:


This is another digitized version with the paranormal "King kong" in front of the towers.

Author: Rwald

 

[Blue Monk]

You're not very bright are you, latinijral.

Your little smear campaign is never going to make your object appear on these other videos.

<A HREF="http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/wtc/proof.html">

</A>

And I completely enjoy pointing out how foolish you and Carlos are.

There is no dark object passing through or even near either tower. The proof is here.

I think these accusations of altering images is hilarious coming from you. You have offered nothing but altered images.

I can't wait to post my movies again to make fun of your foolishness so please write again soon.

 

[Guest]

Blue Monk is a lia*!!!!!!!!

Frame 17: in negative big picture

Frame 17: with filters big picture

Frame 21: in negative: Change your eraser Blue Monk

Frame 21: with filters: confirmed....blue Monk must change his eraser.

POOR TRICKY "SKEPTIC"

quod erat demonstrandum