Yossarian wrote:Awesome, I'll take two. Smallest size you have, plox.
/sighJacuzzi_Jackson wrote:I doubt they were chinese lanterns, but they could have been. As i've said they moved in a controlled, precise way and they scattered in different directions before vanishing which would suggest it wasn't the wind moving them. But thats besides the point - why are you being a bitch about it? I don't think they were aliens, you've decided that for me. And thats what you are mocking me for, something you'd added to what i said yourself. Self serving mock tactics. I can play that game too. Its obvious from what you said and your attitude that you wet the bed regularly, and for that you deserve mocking. Lol bed wetter.
Kow wrote:It's certainly true that aliens arrived in time of modern technology and indeed interest in space. Just a coincidence of course.
Jacuzzi_Jackson wrote:I got all your jacuzzi needs covered. The mini hand jacuzzi. The tiny ear jacuzzi. The popular sexy bits jacuzzi.
Also now for dogs.
Kow wrote:@mod You're thinking of Prometheus. Anyway, the idea may be that any kind of phenomenon from solar activity to misfirings in the brain, etc etc would be interpreted as whatever is current to local civilisation and culture.
They come to Sheffield for the Ale. And pie.djchump wrote:PS - I still can't get past the idea that, because someone has seen something in the air that they can't immediately identify (hence, U.F.O.), that that in any way hints to aliens from another planet! "I'm not sure they were aliens or anything..." Well, I'm entirely 100% sure they *weren't* aliens, because if there's an extra-terrestrial race with the intelligence and technological ability for inter-stellar travel across the light years of empty space between their home planet and ours (and the necessary social stability to have survived long enough to reach to that technological point), then they sure as fuck ain't going anywhere near Sheffield.
Kow wrote:@mod You're thinking of Prometheus.
Anyway, the idea may be that any kind of phenomenon from solar activity to misfirings in the brain, etc etc would be interpreted as whatever is current to local civilisation and culture.
There was something odd about the very invention of the phrase 'flying saucer'. As I write this chapter, I have before me a transcript of a 7 April 1950 interview between Edward R. Murrow, the celebrated CBS newsman, and Kenneth Arnold, aÂ
civilian pilot who saw something peculiar near Mount Rainier in the state of Washington on 24 June 1947 and who in a way coined the phrase. Arnold claims that the newspapersÂ
"did not quote me properly . . . When I told the press they misquoted me, and in the excitement of it all, one newspaper and another one got it so ensnarled up that nobody knew just exactly what they were talking about . . . These objects more or less fluttered like they were, oh, I'd say, boats on very rough water . . . And when I described how they flew, I said that they flew like they take a saucer and throw it across theÂ
water. Most of the newspapers misunderstood and misquoted that, too. They said that I said that they were saucer-like; IÂ
said that they flew in a saucer-like fashion."
Arnold thought he saw a train of nine objects, one of which produced a 'terrific blue flash'. He concluded they were a newÂ
kind of winged aircraft. Murrow summed up: 'That was an historic misquote. While Mr Arnold's original explanation has been forgotten, the term "flying saucer" has become a household word.' Kenneth Arnold's flying saucers looked and behaved quite differently from what in only a few years would be rigidly particularized in the public understanding of the term: something like a very large and highly manoeuverable frisbee.
Kow wrote:No, I'm talking about using what's culturally relevant to explain things which have no immediate explanation. There's a difference between fashionable and relevant to modern culture.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!