UfO's Created the Debunker

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by fluid1959, Sep 17, 2003.

  1. fluid1959 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    187
    This topic is not about Ufo's its about debunkers.

    You will not find what is commonly called a UFO DEBUNKER in any other areas of science or discovery. The only anomally simular would be
    1539 Copernicus. His theories that the earth revolved around the sun were outlawed. Theoretical evidence for the Copernican theory was provided by Newton's theory of universal gravitation around 150 years later. Copernicus warns the debunker~...Perhaps there will be babblers who, although completely ignorant of mathematics, nevertheless take it upon themselves to pass judgement on mathematical questions and, badly distorting some passages of Scripture to their purpose, will dare find fault with my undertaking and censure it. I disregard them even to the extent as despising their criticism as unfounded.

    The dictionary lists debunk as "to disclose to unmask to unshroud". And yet a UFO debunker does exactly thee opposite. In the search for truth, they are the passionate know it alls, who are there to enlighten you . They know everything there is to know about any evidence that ever existed. Unfortunately they don't.

    Until the 1950's there was no such thing as the Debunker. When the White House was Buzzed by a large UFO formation in 1952 twice one week apart .The Government realized it must do something to soften the swelling fear in the citizens. So "scientic announcements" were made that the phenenomon was "Temperature Inversion" the UFO Debunker was born. All newspapers reported faithfully the Governments findings. Hearing further outcries for the truth about Flying Saucers. Project Blue Book was created to show our Governments full attempts to clarify all of these flying saucer reports. But unlike it's stated mission. It was more of a Roach Motel for UFO information. Information went in but i't never checked out.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Messages:
    5,874
    Assuming that UFOs are "areas of science or discovery" (which is usually untrue), one would not expect to find UFO DEBUNKERs in biology, chemistry, and anthropology. But there are plenty of debunkers in those fields... they're commonly referred to as peers to those scientists who get 'debunked.'

    You see, ufology, as some like to call it, isn't actually a science. This is evidenced by the lack of scientific method and the rejection of peer review (what you would call "debunking.") In biology or genetics, when when a researcher makes a claim, it gets published in a peer reviewed source, such as a journal. His/her peers then have the opportunity to attempt to duplicate results or methodology then criticize the work or conclusions. If the methodology is flawed, it would be subject to criticism out of hand with remarks referenced to previous or current work.

    "Ufology" rejects this proven method of scrutiny because of the weak arguments it presents, such as mere anecdotal evidence and inconclusive imagery. What little hard evidence, such as radar screen recordings, is usually presented to favor only one hypothesis without offering or considering alternatives.

    But to debunk your hypothesis about "debunkers:" plenty of other pseudoscience claims are routinely debunked, including the various claims of Atlantis, ESP, Psi, telekinesis, channeling, tarot, astrology, witchcraft, psychic dowsing, pyramidology, numerology, etc., etc.,.....

    I'm not sure what you were implying by using "anomaly," but the hypotheses of Copernicus and how they were viewed by the status quo was hardly an occurance that deviates from the norm in history. Much of our scientific and technological progress resulted from unpopular ideas. That they were eventually accepted, particularly in societies where supression of ideas was the norm punishable by torture and death, was telling of the veracity of the hypotheses. That these hypotheses withstood testing and allowed for prediction of new hypotheses created a situation where not to accept them would jeapardize the credibility of the status quo. Even if it took many years (or lifetimes) to get the acceptance.

    Pseudoscientific fields like "ufology" haven't met the rigorous testing deserving of accpetance. "Ufology," unlike Copernican theory, also does not follow scientific method.

    This is the common reaction that "believers" have toward anyone who is willing to ask questions that threaten their beliefs. "Ufology" relies upon faith just as surely as any religion. To examine a religion with a critical eye invites accusation of heretic, atheist, doubter, etc.

    Actually it is "fortunate" that all is not known. Life would be boring if one knew "everything there is to know" about the universe. Those that debunk the wild and fantastic claims of "ufologists" are frequently better educated than the ufologist. Along with education comes the ability to use critical reasoning.

    There are also many who debunk pseudoscience claims like UFOs and crop circles as a way to encourage the claimants (so-called ufologists, cereologists, etc.) to make better hypotheses and back their claims. Just because the claims are fantastic doesn't mean they're impossible. But without proper methodology, even a claim that is true might never be recognized or accepted.

    Why wouldn't there have been? People have been making pseudoscientific claims for centuries. I could cite you one or two pre-1950 "debunkings," but it would be better if you applied some actual critical thinking.

    If you want, I'll debunk that for you

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Of course the information I give you will be historical and not of my own field work, but then your claim that it occurred is historical as well... albeit pseudohistorical.

    First, I stand by the fact that "debunkers" have always been around in one form or another.... second, why is the temperature inversion hypothesis more improbable than alien spacecraft over one of the world's more populated regions?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. fluid1959 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    187
    Which expertise are you referring yourself too? Let me guess....

    1) You personally analyzed crop circles with radiation burns with your microscope and discovered no unnatural phenomenon?

    2) Or maybe your a Photo expert analyst and through scientific measures have determined all Ufo Photography and film to be forgeries.

    3) Or your a brilliant Astrophysicist who through mathematical Equations derived the No flying saucer can reach earth in my lifetime theory.

    4) Or your a Doctor that did a study in the Journal of Psychiatry concerning mass UFO psychosis, which you have traced to drinking water, specifically in Mexico, Belgium, Israel,Japan, Germany, Nevada. and a well near Betty and Barney Hills House?

    5) Maybe your a Beef chasing Jack the Ripper of the dairyland and you have a fetish for cow parts?

    6) Maybe your Astronaut Edgar Mitchell's second grade teacher, and you knew that boy was going to grow up to be a liar.

    Deaf dumb blind or drunk its your illusion of lack of evidence.

    Debunkers ?
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2003
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Messages:
    5,874
    Me? or Andre?

    Your post was a bit ambiguous.

    If me:

    7) Anthropology major fascinated with why people believe in so much crazy shit

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. 2inquisitive The Devil is in the details Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,181
    post by Andre:

    needs to be debunked. It's wrong
    ==================================
    Sure, Andre, let me play the role of a debunker. There is no physical
    proof that mirages or temperature inversions exist. Photos are not
    proof as they can easily be altered. The people reporting them
    were probably hallucinating or just lying. It is well known that
    people that are suffering from thirst and heat exhaustion in the
    desert often see things that are not there (hallucinating). The
    ships capitans and artic explorers could have been exhausted
    and hallucinating or just mistaken about their actual locations
    and were much closer to the landmarks than they thought they were.
    =====================================
    Now the above is not my actual view, but just shows how some
    debunkers work.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. 2inquisitive The Devil is in the details Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,181
    by Andre:

    So this debunking has the same merit as "there is no proof that the computer screen that I'm looking at, exist". That is something for very abstract filosophy
    =================================================
    But Andre, you have given absolutely no physical proof, just
    statements by yourself that you believe they exist with no real
    evidence.
    "Results must be reproducable".... How do you propose to produce
    a temperature inversion?
    "this mirage will occur if the right temperature inversion is occuring at the right time".... A UFO will appear if you are standing at the right
    place at the right time.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2003
  10. 2inquisitive The Devil is in the details Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,181
    Andre, I did say in my post on this subject that I would "play the role"
    of a debunker, and that was not my actual view of temperature
    inversions. My point was that these are the tactics often used by
    some, NOT ALL, debunkers. I have no problem with skeptics who
    raise legimate questions. Now about the report that the UFOs above
    Washingto D.C. were just a temperature inversion with associated
    mirages. Mirages only occur at small angles above a relatively flat
    surface, not above a city filled with skyscrapers. Temperature inversions could happen above a city, but would not produce the
    visible objects seen by so many people and by the airline pilots
    who were in the air when they spotted them. I have a link to the
    actual reports obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.
    They are very interesting, or at least I think they are.
    http://www.project1947.com/fig/1952d.htm
    I can also give a link to the Washington Post newspaper story on the
    incident. You may have to scroll down the list to the 1952 Washington
    D. C. link to access it. http://www.rense.com/general8/flew.htm
     
  11. 2inquisitive The Devil is in the details Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,181
    Yes, Andre, I agree with what you said. There is no reason to think
    this case alone contains enough circumstancial evidence for one to
    alter his views dismissing UFOs as optical illusions, misidentifications
    of common or uncommon phenomena, or just stories made up by
    some people. But the fact remains that MANY such cases are "solved"
    by postulating temperature inversions and swamp gas as the culprit.
    The case over St. Louis, MO was "solved" by postulating swamp gas
    as the culprit, for instance. Many people, including professionals,
    report they see metallic objects that reflect light along with the radar
    returns, but the official position is to discount all eyewitness testimony as unreliable and "solve" the case by saying atmospheric
    phenomena were responsible for the radar returns. They fail to
    mention that the atmospheric phenomena changes speed, direction,
    and altitude in compliance with the "discounted" eyewitness sightings. Again, this is certainly no proof of UFOs, but the practice
    is questionable in my view.
     
  12. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    fluid1959:

    <i>You will not find what is commonly called a UFO DEBUNKER in any other areas of science or discovery. The only anomally simular would be 1539 Copernicus. His theories that the earth revolved around the sun were outlawed. Theoretical evidence for the Copernican theory was provided by Newton's theory of universal gravitation around 150 years later. Copernicus warns the debunker~</i>

    The Copernicus thing is actually a warning against dogma. He was suppressed by the Church, when in fact his theory was as viable as the dominant geocentric theory of the time.

    Similarly, the theory that there are no alien visitations is at least as viable as the theory that we are being visited. In fact, to most educated people, it is the preferred theory.

    <i>The dictionary lists debunk as "to disclose to unmask to unshroud". And yet a UFO debunker does exactly thee opposite. In the search for truth, they are the passionate know it alls, who are there to enlighten you . They know everything there is to know about any evidence that ever existed. Unfortunately they don't.</i>

    Good point, but not generally applicable. Only <b>some</b> people are like this.

    <i>Until the 1950's there was no such thing as the Debunker.</i>

    Until 1947 there was no such thing as a flying saucer.

    <i>When the White House was Buzzed by a large UFO formation in 1952 twice one week apart .The Government realized it must do something to soften the swelling fear in the citizens. So "scientic announcements" were made that the phenenomon was "Temperature Inversion" the UFO Debunker was born.</i>

    The UFO debunker, or the conspiracy theory?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    <i>All newspapers reported faithfully the Governments findings.</i>

    Not true. In fact, newspapers were very keen to get their hands on anything to do with flying saucers, regardless of whether there was any evidence apart from anecdotes.

    <i>Which expertise are you referring yourself too? Let me guess....

    1) You personally analyzed crop circles with radiation burns with your microscope and discovered no unnatural phenomenon?</i>

    I don't believe any reliable source has ever reported unusual radiation associated with crop circles.

    <i>2) Or maybe your a Photo expert analyst and through scientific measures have determined all Ufo Photography and film to be forgeries.</i>

    That's impossible, of course. Many photos are of real things, just not alien spacecraft.

    <i>3) Or your a brilliant Astrophysicist who through mathematical Equations derived the No flying saucer can reach earth in my lifetime theory.</i>

    Well, there <b>are</b> powerful arguments against interstellar travel, in fact.

    <i>4) Or your a Doctor that did a study in the Journal of Psychiatry concerning mass UFO psychosis, which you have traced to drinking water, specifically in Mexico, Belgium, Israel,Japan, Germany, Nevada. and a well near Betty and Barney Millers House?</i>

    We don't need tainted drinking water to account for concocted UFO stories. Money or fame is usually a bigger motivator.

    <i>5) Maybe your a Beef chasing Jack the Ripper of the dairyland and you have a fetish for cow parts?</i>

    Maybe the people who mutilate cows do.

    <i>6) Maybe your Astronaut Edgar Mitchell's second grade teacher, and you knew that boy was going to grow up to be a liar.</i>

    Maybe he is a liar. Who knows? (What is he supposed to have seen?)
     
  13. 2inquisitive The Devil is in the details Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,181
    =================================================
    As far as I know, he has not seen any UFOs. I have to edit this post.
    Seems Dr. Mitchell no longer wants to be associated with Dr. Greer
    and the Disclosure Project. I don't blame him. He does state, for him,
    it is not a matter of believing in UFOs, it is the preponderance of
    evidence and the evidence keeps building. He also believes we are
    looking at likely reversed engineered technology in some instances.
    http://www.ufomind.com/misc/1998/jan/d27-003.shtml
    http://www.rense.com/general10/mitch.htm
    edited for content
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2003
  14. BigBlueHead Great Tealnoggin! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,996
    With respect to the 6 questions listed before...

    Isn't this about burden of proof?

    If I can produce a picture of a flying saucer and I don't know what it is, why should I consider my speculations valid? I can't just go around saying:

    1) Crop circles were made by Santa Claus
    2) Any picture of a UFO is a Hallmark greeting card
    3) Spaceflight is only possible by carrots
    4) All UFO sightings are caused by infected plantar warts
    5) Cows mutilate themselves for fun
    6) Edgar Mitchell is actually a fictitious character played by a dog

    These are spurious claims. No one has to argue with them because they are almost definitely garbage.

    My real concern in this post, thought, is that many "ufologists" have brought two premises to the table that they have no right to bring:

    A! That all of these events are connected, and
    B! That they are all caused by aliens.

    Where is the proof for these two premises? Even if a flying saucer landed on my house and aliens jumped out and made tea, it still doesn't mean that they ever made crop circles or mutilated cows.
    Even if I found Edgar Mitchell sitting on top of a mutilated cow in the middle of a crop circle, it doesn't mean that aliens are real or related to this find.

    So, while we're discussing debunking (which would imply that there was a solid theory) please explain why we should accept A and B.
     
  15. 2inquisitive The Devil is in the details Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,181
    I would suppose it is because UFOs have been seen in the area
    where the other events happened. In the case of crop circles,
    they are usually the small luminescent balls thought to be a type
    of unoccupied probe. They have been witnessed on several
    occasions by people in the area when the crop circles were made.
    Have you not seen the video tapes of the light balls? One has been
    shown several times on TV of two light balls moving around in circles
    and the crops laying down in a crop circle while they were still in the
    air above the circle. They then flew off. The glow of objects and of
    UFOs in general at night is thought by at least some physicist to be
    a sheath of ionized and excited air molecules often called an air
    plasma. It can vary in intensity and often obscures the object
    completely or makes it look "fuzzy" or unclear. It is not a "hot"
    plasma like a flame, but is thought to be caused by intense radiation
    in the x-ray range. I not aware of any UFOs beeing seen at the site
    of mutilations, but they have been observed within a few miles of
    the site. Black, unmarked military type helicopters are most often
    seen and heard near mutilations. I have no idea why.
     
  16. BigBlueHead Great Tealnoggin! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,996
    OK. Even if you have proven a relation between two things, (which in this case no one has) you still can't decide ad hoc which direction the relation goes in.

    Here is an example. Suppose we notice a statistical preponderance:
    "85% of people whose houses burn down are tobacco smokers."
    Can we then assume that having your house burn down makes you take up tobacco smoking? No! That's crap.

    If UFOs are spotted near crop circles, that could mean a million things.

    Everyone assumes this means "UFOs make crop circles" which is one possibility.

    It could also mean that UFOs are as puzzled as we are by the phenomenon, and take every chance to investigate.

    It could mean that giant invisible circle beasts are jumping around in the cornfield looking for mice, and the glowing scavengers that always surround them tend to hover above their heads at this time.

    It could mean that a crop circle actually represents a naturally occurring "corn lens" which focuses ambient radiation and produce air ionization briefly before burning out and becoming normal corn again.

    It could even be a coincidence, since people see UFOs other places too.

    I seem to recall that there were some people with planks who claimed responsibility for making the original crop circles. Of course, ufologists did not believe them...

    I apologize, but I haven't seen the video you're referring to, so I won't comment on that one in particular. All the same, there is more than one possible explanation EVEN assuming that UFOs are EXACTLY WHAT UFOLOGISTS THINK THEY ARE, which is still a bit of a stretch for me.

    C'mon. If anyone really knew that they were an "unoccupied probe" they wouldn't be unidentified. Part of the reason I often criticise this particular field is because the traditional ufologist seems much too willing to fill in missing information with their own imagination.
     
  17. 2inquisitive The Devil is in the details Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,181
    BigBlueHead, I didn't say we "knew" they were unoccupied probes,
    I said some "thought" they may be. This is speculation admittedly.
    But there are reasons for that speculation and some of the ones doing the speculation are true scientists. I can't list all the sources
    that I, personally, have read because this forum is not set up to
    post large amounts of info and some of the sources are books by
    physicists on the UFO phenomena. One such story that seems
    related, again no proof, is in an interview of Wilbert Smith, a Canadian
    radio engineer. He examined a small piece of metal shot off a glowing
    two foot diameter flying disk by a military jet near Washington D.C.
    in July, 1952. It was a matrix of magnesium orthosilicate with a great
    number of 15-micron spheres scattered through it. The composition
    of the spheres was not stated in the interview, but rust was said to
    be present. That to me indicates at least a possibility of iron present.
    I, of course, have no proof of the above, but it is supposed to be documented. Now, the following is total speculation on my part, which
    I hope is permitted in pseudoscience. Are you familar with the small
    15 to 40 micron diameter magnitized iron spheres found in the soil
    of "true" crop circles? Could there be a connection? I don't know, but
    it could lead to speculation. Also, crop circles have been observed in
    all kinds of vegetation, including the strangest to me, STRING BEANS!
    The leaves nor the beans were damaged, they were just collapsed
    close to the ground in a neat circle. I don't know if your invisible
    beast could have done that.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Here are a couple of links:
    http://roswellproof.homestead.com/debris8_misc.html#anchor_3701
    and one to the spheres found at crop circles.
    http://www.bltresearch.com/magnetic.html
     
  18. BigBlueHead Great Tealnoggin! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,996
    What I'm saying is that even if A is associated with B it doesn't mean that A caused B. I see hawks flying over the highway all the time. They are there when car accidents happen, so there is a relation. However, the presence of hawks does not cause car accidents.
     
  19. 2inquisitive The Devil is in the details Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,181
    How about if the hawks hit the windshield of a car, the driver loses control and has an accident, and the whole thing is videotaped by
    a third party? Of course, the video could be faked. The balls of light
    have been videotaped on several occasions, but only one tape I
    am aware of shows the crop laying down in a circle in a matter of
    a few seconds. Nothing was near the circle other than the balls of
    light overhead. I am not aware of any serious challenge that the
    tape was faked, but I can't be sure, of course.
     
  20. 2inquisitive The Devil is in the details Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,181
    in post by JamesR:

    until 1947 there was no such thing as a flying saucer.
    ========================================
    Technically you would be correct. However, unidentified objects
    in the sky have been reported throughout much of recorded history.
    The term "saucer" was first known to be used by a Texas farmer
    in 1878 to describe the object seen over his farm.Later, in 1948, Kenneth Arnold
    described the movements of the objects he witnessed as "moving
    like a saucer would if you skipped it across water." A reporter coined
    the term "flying saucer" after that. Probably the largest mass sighting
    in history was the so called "Battle of Los Angeles" in 1942.
    Have you ever heard of the Battle of Los Angeles? Few have. Imagine a visiting spacecraft from another world, or dimension, hovering over a panicked and blacked-out LA in the middle of the night just weeks after Pearl Harbor at the height of WWII fear and paranoia. Imagine how this huge ship, assumed to be some unknown Japanese aircraft, was then attacked as it hung, nearly stationary, over Culver City and Santa Monica by dozens of Army anti-aircraft batteries firing nearly 2,000 rounds of 12 pound, high explosive shells in full view of hundreds of thousands of residents. Imagine all of that and you have an idea of what was the Battle of Los Angeles.

    The sudden appearance of the enormous round object triggered all of LA and most of Southern California into an immediate wartime blackout with thousands of Air Raid Wardens scurrying all over the darkened city while the drama unfolded in the skies above... a drama which would result in the deaths of six people and the raining of shell fragments on homes, streets, and buildings for miles around.
    http://www.rense.com/ufo/battleofla.htm
     
  21. fluid1959 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    187


    Maybe your Astronaut Edgar Mitchell's second grade teacher, and you knew that boy was going to grow up to be a liar.

    Edgar Mitchell - a trained scientist and U.S. astronaut maintains that the Roswell incident was and is being "covered-up" by the U.S. Government:
    " Make no mistake - Roswell happened, I've seen secret files which show the government knew about it - but decided not to tell the public". (statement made in 1999)
     
  22. BigBlueHead Great Tealnoggin! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,996
    But establishing the existence of flying saucers does not mean anything about crop circles, cattle mutilation, FTL travel &c. If their existence is established that does not mean that all speculations about them are true.
     
  23. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    2in

    Rense.com is a crank site. They place articles with pictures of balloons with the intent of spreading visiting alien propaganda.
     

Share This Page