> Yes I am a friend of Xavient Haze. He has used my Wi-Fi. Do my
> words not hold value? I don't support all the views Xavient has
> expressed. In fact he and I have debated many topics. IMHO I
> take the ancient alien theory with a grain of salt. I have seen
> this theory debunked many times. I also have seen many
> interesting points worthy of investigation. I am interested in
> the subject but have not researched It very thoroughly so I
> can't way in on the evidence or lack thereof. I can way in on
> the way this argument is handled on this forum. Xavient is
> passonate about this topic. We wonder about the events that
> took place in ancient Egypt. We strive to understand what
> happened in our distant past. Let us not allow our egos to get
> in the way of knowledge. We all should also have some level of
> truth criteria.
It’s strange that you should appear on Xaviant’s last day, waiting until the very end of his month, to ‘way (sic) in’ on what he has (or indeed, hasn’t) been saying all month.
Graham, in his opening post, expressed how disappointed he was in his guest's performance here, and rightly so. Xaviant might as well not have been here for all he contributed. He didn’t discuss his book, he didn’t answer many of the questions posed to him. Instead he threw out one-liners and posted links to subjects which didn’t seem at all relevant to the topic of aliens in Egypt.
He never explained, for example, how the resurrection of a 30,000 year old virus was relevant. He didn’t tell us why a UFO spotted over Long Beach in 1951 was relevant. He didn’t tell us why he thought Captain Kirk believing in aliens was relevant, (the article he linked to didn’t even say that). He didn’t tell us why water found in the atmosphere of an exo-planet was relevant, or why NASA sending a robotic mission to Europa was. Of the shotgun topics he threw out, four got no replies at all, a further three got only one, and another three got only two.
Where’s the argument you say he presented? You say he was ‘thrown into a lions den’. If by that you mean that people challenged him, then yes, certainly. But what did he expect, with such subject matter and such a lacklustre presence here? Instant agreement? He was challenged and didn’t rise to it, and people noticed. Of March's thirty-one days, he participated on only eleven. He’s been silent now for six days – strange for someone 'passionate' about his topic, wouldn’t you think?