In defence of space aliens

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,820
    "Skeptics, who flatly deny the existence of any unexplained phenomenon in the name of 'rationalism,' are among the primary contributors to the rejection of science by the public. People are not stupid and they know very well when they have seen something out of the ordinary. When a so-called expert tells them the object must have been the moon or a mirage, he is really teaching the public that science is impotent or unwilling to pursue the study of the unknown." (Vallee, J., Confrontations, New York: Ballantine Books, 1990.)
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,203
    So then, I have to ask... what do you make of this "Flat Earth" craze that has started up again thanks to several high-profile celebrities (with, apparently, the combined education of a four year old) that are proclaiming it truly is flat and that "fish eye lenses are responsible for making it look round" et al?

    People are, unfortunately, not as smart as we would like to think... and are all too easily swayed to believe something stupid when someone "important" tells them it must be true.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,820
    I've not heard of this. How do they account for planes and boats traveling around the world without falling off the edge?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,203
    https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Flat_Earth_Wiki

    https://wiki.tfes.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions

    Welcome to the Flat Earth Wiki, otherwise known as The FEW - a collaborative resource maintained by the Flat Earth Society!

    This website is dedicated to unraveling the true mysteries of the universe and demonstrating that the earth is flat and that Round Earth doctrine is little more than an elaborate hoax.

    and

    Yeah... they're serious.
     
  8. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,203
    https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/9/16424622/reddit-conspiracy-theories-memes-irony-flat-earth
    And

    http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-41399164
    Let that sink in - NASA guards the edge of the world to prevent people falling off...

    just... *headdesk*
     
  9. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    375
    I feel there is more to this quote... A skeptic is "a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual." (dictionary.com) To "flatly deny the existence" doesn't seem compatible with skepticism. In fact, it would be the skeptics that should doubt such denial.

    Is this quote referring to skeptics in general, or a specific group of skeptics? What is the context?

    Edit: I answered my own question: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=208348

    This quote is from an ufologist, and thus probably refers to UFO-deniers, not skeptics in general.
     
  10. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,103
    There is a lot more to the quote.

    It was from an introduction to "Confrontations: A scientist's search for alien contact", by Jacques Vallee. And that line that he quoted is actually quoted quite a bit in UFO sites.

    The paragraph in full (starts from page 20 of the book):

    In the course of my field work on UFOs I also accumulated evidence in three related domains I consider to be outside the scope of the present book. First, I obtained much new information about cults. I am repelled by this material, yet the cultist temptation is definitely present among many witnesses and quite a few ufologists. My attempts to sound an alarm on this subject in an earlier book Messengers of Deception went largely unheeded. Many ufologists even became angry at me for pointing out that a belief in extraterrestrials could be used to manipulate unsuspecting populations. Perhaps the experience of the People’s Temple in Jonestown, Guyana, will have to be repeated before the full impact of cults in our society is realized. Cults are driven by irrational beliefs, and they serve a psychological purpose in their members by providing a release from the confrontation with the unknown. It is my view today as it was when I wrote Messengers of Deception ten years ago that science, by refusing to openly study the UFO phenomenon, drives many sincere witnesses into such cults. The skeptics, who flatly deny the existence of any unexplained phenomenon in the name of “rationalism” are among the primary contributors to the rejection of science by the public. People are not stupid and they know very well when they have seen something out of the ordinary. When a so-called expert tells them the object must have been the moon or a mirage, he is really telling the public that science is impotent or unwilling to pursue the study of the unknown. He is contributing to the growth of irrational movements in modern society.

    Context, as they say, really is everything.

    His argument is a whine that the lack of scientists showing an interest in UFO's and reports of UFO's is driving people who have experienced something or seen something, into this cult like belief system - which I guess we see quite extensively on the internet, where film footage of helicopters from a distance, is touted as being UFO's and people buy into it, in a sort of cult like fashion. And in a way, it is used to manipulate, ermm, gullible people into believing without question.
     
  11. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    375
    Ah, thank you for adding the proper context! This indeed strongly suggests we should read "deniers" where it says "skeptics".
     
  12. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,629
    It should also be noted that it's something written by a (fiercely) pro-woo person making a claim he doesn't (or can't) justify: "the primary contributors to the rejection of science by the public".
    What? People who say "where's the scientific evidence?" make a non-scientific public reject science?
    Apart from the complete lack of figures to support his claim all he's saying is that people who don't know - or are already ignoring - science (apparently) get uppity when a scientists says "Show me the science".
     
    Bells likes this.
  13. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Fun fact: complex partial seizures often feature components of prosopagnosia, retrograde and anterograde amnesia, autoscopy, and just plain weirdness. In short, I--along with countless other epileptics--have experienced episodes which are not unlike "alien abduction experiences"--right down to the witnessing of oneself being probed by "greys," and having no idea as to how the hell one got there,or got "back," for that matter. Typically, the face blindness aspect isn't quite that extreme, but I have seen people as largely featureless, their visible orifices--eyes, nostrils, mouth--appearing as simply black holes. IOW, they look pretty much like this:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Except, sometimes even a bit more freaky--like the figures in Adrian Lyne's Jacob's Ladder or the people on the train in Alan Parker's The Wall.

    Fun times!
     
  14. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    375
    True. I just didn't want to open that can of worms.

    And I bet that when a scientist (or '"skeptic"') shows the science, it's all "conspiracy", "close-minded", or "they got it all wrong" without any arguments.
     
  15. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,820
    John Alexander, NIDS, “Refuting Fermi: No Evidence for Extraterrestrial Life?”

    “The undeniable reality is that there are a substantial number of multi-sensor UFO cases backed by thousands of credible witnesses. In the physical domain there are many photos, videos, radar tracking, satellite sensor reports, landing traces including depressions and anomalous residual radiation, electromagnetic interference, and confirmed physiological effects. Personal observations have been made both day and night, often under excellent visibility with some at close range. Included are reports from multiple independent witnesses to the same event. Psychological testing of some observers has confirmed their mentally competence. Why is none of this considered evidence?


    There are over 3000 cases reported by pilots, some of which include interference with flight controls. On numerous occasions air traffic controllers and other radar operators have noted unexplained objects on their scopes. So too have several astronomers and other competent scientists reported their personal observations. Many military officials from several countries have confirmed multi-sensor observations of UFOs. The most senior air defense officers of Russia, Brazil, Belgium and recently a former Chief of Naval Operations in Chile all have stated that UFOs are real. These cases and comments are a miniscule fraction of the total body of evidence."

    Evidence? Did someone ask for evidence?

    http://www.ufoevidence.org/
     
  16. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,203
    I'm no pilot, but I'd imagine any number of things can give the feeling of interference with flight controls, including lightning strikes, strong winds, ice, turbulence, mechanical failure, being tired, etc

    During WWII, the use of radar reflective Chaff scared German bomber pilots into a frenzy, when a dozen or so incoming British interceptors suddenly blossomed into a swarm of hundreds of aircraft.

    Unexplained doesn't necessitate extraterrestrial.

    Yes, and these are undeniably, unquestionably UFO's.

    That doesn't make them aliens. It simply means they are objects, flying through the air, that are unknown to the observer. None of that is evidence for alien life.
     
    RADII likes this.
  17. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,820
    "An unidentified flying object, or UFO, is in its strictest definition any apparent object in the sky that is not identifiable as a known object or phenomenon. However the term is widely used in popular culture to refer more specifically to supposed observations of craft of extraterrestrial origin."---https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_flying_object

    Remember THIS compelling case?

    http://www.texasufosightings.com/buzz/zimbabwe-ufo-incident-new-amazing-witness-testimony
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2017
  18. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,203
    Well, when there is evidence enough to show it is in fact a craft of alien origin from an extraterrestrial source, it will cease being a UFO and, quite possibly, be a bogey.
     
  19. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,820
    Uh..there seems to be some confusion between seeing a ufo and believing in a conspiracy theory. One is a perceptual experience and the other is a belief. If someone believes in their own perceptual experience, despite skeptics bitching that ufos can't exist and that they were hallucinating or seeing swamp gas, they are the ones being scientific. The skeptics are the ones pushing a belief that requires them to set aside perceptual experience for the faith held proposition that ufos don't exist. So the skeptics in this case are actually demoting the scientific approach of accepting what was experienced and exploring it further. They deceptively parade around under the noble banner of science while mocking and dismissing experiencers of ufos as crazy or gullible or money-grubbers. They do a tremendous disservice to the spirit of true science which is to remain agnostic on the matter while researching the phenomenon as it presents itself. Fortunately the ufologists are doing just that and patiently gathering up the necessary evidence that shows ufos to be a very real and empirically evidenced phenomenon to all the world.

    Dr. Margaret Mead, world-renowned anthropologist, "UFOs - Visitors from Outer Space?,"

    "There are unidentified flying objects. That is, there are a hard core of cases - perhaps 20 to 30 percent in different studies - for which there is no explanation... We can only imagine what purpose lies behind the activities of these quiet, harmlessly cruising objects that time and again approach the earth. The most likely explanation, it seems to me, is that they are simply watching what we are up to." (Mead, Margaret, "UFOs - Visitors from Outer Space?," Redbook, vol. 143, September 1974.)
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2017
  20. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,203
    Nothing in that post does anything, Magical Realist, to address the fact that seeing an unknown and unidentifiable object in the sky does not give one the ability to simply divine that it is somehow an alien creature piloting something from another planet.

    Not knowing what something is does not make it aliens.
     
    Magical Realist likes this.
  21. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,820
    Right. A large metallic disc that flies at high speeds silently in the sky and shoots rays out of itself and even lands in fields with small beings that exit it isn't of extraterrestrial origin. How could you know that? What else COULD it be?
     
  22. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,982
    "What else could it be" is not science.

    It is argument by incredulity - a fallacy: "I cannot imagine how this could be false; therefore, it must be true."

    Which is why this thread exists.
     
  23. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,203
    As DaveC said... "What else could it be" isn't science.

    What could it be? Literally anything. That's kind of the point - we don't know what it is... if we did, it wouldn't be a UFO at that point.

    Presenting something you don't know and cannot prove or even support as fact is dishonest.
     

Share This Page