A person's profession, whether it's bus driver, priest, philosopher, President of the United States, or even astronaut, does in no way give them any more credibility than any other human being on any subject.

Edgar Mitchell may be a very bright man who's convinced of his convictions on this issue but not a one of us can substantiate anything he's telling us based on scientific evidence. I'm certain you could find any number of other astronauts, who by your inference have elevated credibility on the subject of UFO's, that would tell us they are certain they do not exist.

As long as there is a profit incentive to a human being to promote issues that are sure to garner controversy, critical evaluation must take place for their claims that includes solid and absolutely verifiable evidence. To date I have seen none.

Just so we can relate here Lindy, recently my interest has been piqued again about the Kennedy assassination. New evidence is coming to light that points once again towards many of the conspiracy theories that have been dismissed in the past. However, I still know that any author or theorist has a huge incentive to push that new evidence out not just because of their desire to seek truth but because there could be a huge financial payoff to anyone finding a new audience for their story. Because of that knowledge of human behavior, I am not satisfied with tiny shreds of evidence even though some things are very compelling. It must be consistent, verifiable, and backed by multiple and often competing sources. Until that occurs I view what I hear and see as entertainment, much the same as I get from going to the movie theater.

I think what sets off your detractors here is not that you present these people's claims as an interesting story that's worth reading but that there's an "I told you so" component to your posts.

It's pretty clear to us that you firmly believe we've been visited by UFO's and that they are responsible for the crop circles you keep pointing out to us. When you post these things it's absolutely rational for people that firmly believe the opposite to lay into you and demand hard evidence far beyond "well it must be true because this astronaut says so".

Art