The Logic of a UFO Sighting

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Trapped, Dec 13, 2013.

  1. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,125
    Ah, I see now, you are under the delusion there are no gullible idiots in those categories. Gotcha.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Was the speed measured? I don't see the measurement you keep claiming listed in that quote.

    By the way: that recounting says the pilot thought he was seeing a meteor: I thought we were supposed to believe everything they say?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,517
    Well, you claim that thousands of researchers, scientists, presidents, first ladies, policemen, military and civilians are gullible because they've claimed to have seen ghosts. If you can't trust them, who can you trust?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Trapped Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,058
    Of course the rational mind first attempts to believe in something a bit more down to Earth, so to speak. There have been plenty UFO phenomenon people have witnessed who first tried to identify it by thinking it was some natural conventional explanation. It isn't only until later, either during the sighting or by later investigation we find that there is no conventional explanation.

    I don't hold it against him attempting to identify what he saw as a meteor... after all, let's be honest, back then the idea of aliens visiting us wasn't really the sort of thing you would first imagine. The whole series of events over that seven day period where obviously the same craft the military claimed to have tried to intercept. I know this, because the statistics for them not being the same phenomenon must be very very low. The objects the military claimed to have tried to intercept, 'displayed intelligent control,' and 'acting accordingly.'

    There are multiple accounts of ground, air, radar and radar operator sightings of the objects from the tower. We have radar evidence that was evaluated at what speed they moved at. It was recorded (assuming this was the highest speed recorded) at around 7000 miles per hour. Whether or not the wiki article mentions this exact information taken from the account I quoted, is irrelevant. The objects are all clearly the same phenomenon. To maybe suggest they are not, is practically insane.
     
  8. Trapped Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,058
    I am not discussing ghosts. You know my opinion of that.

    I don't know of any official documents released by the military or the government on the existence of ghosts. Maybe you could all enlighten us? Nor do I know of any serious scientific study which has proven the ghost phenomenon is real. Yet we have had five major scientific investigations, according to Stanton Friedman, I assume three of them to be Project Sign, Project Grudge and Project Blue Book. While Grudge and Blue Book was designed to cast doubt on Sign, Sign determined that the most likely explanation for UFO's where of extraterrestrial origin. These were competent government scientists. We know Grudge and Blue Book where there to intentionally debunk with misinformation because the head of the scientific chair later confessed to it. His name was Doctor Hynek.

    So no, ghosts have nothing on the strong evidence supporting UFO's and their possible origins.
     
  9. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    So that's a no to both, then:

    -No, the sighting you quoted is not the source of your speed claim.
    -No, pilots should not be believed if they say they favor a conventional explanation. They should only be considered infallible if they forward an alien spacecraft explanation.

    Thanks, I think we're all clear on how your "logic" works.
     
  10. Trapped Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,058
    Well not directly in that paragraph, it later talks about the radar evidence being evaluated. If the objects where seen to be moving away at incredible speeds, disappearing on the radar simultaneously, then it is very possible this was one of the instances reported and measured. I can't find any reason not to trust what that paragraph says, so I must take it at face value. If speeds have been measured of them moving at 7000 mph as wiki claims then the reports of them disappearing as fast as they move away from aerial observers must all be inter-related. I don't really think it takes Sherlock Holmes to figure, the events over the week are all the same phenomenon and there is a clear consensus from radar measurements (the paragraph case included) where these objects did in fact move at 7000 mph whether you like it or not.
     
  11. Trapped Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,058
    Very clever. But no, this is not what I am saying.

    Clearly the overwhelming evidence they were not meteors, since we have radar and observational confirmation that they were not meteors. These pilots favoured a conventional explanation at the time, this is not meant to mean their minds didn't change later hearing upon the evidence of the case.
     
  12. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,517
    The RAF had an official briefing for any aviators flying at the Montrose air base in Ireland to beware of the ghost of Desmond Arthur. It was part of the training of new cadets, since the ghost would regularly show up and haunt new trainees. He'd even be seen flying his biplane from time to time.

    But that's nothing new; The Ministry of Defense has had a long history of investigating ghosts. From a recent story:
    ===========
    Revealed: How the Government studied the paranormal for use in war on terror
    6 Oct 2008

    Secret documents have revealed the MoD have been studying the paranormal and other unexplained scientific phenomenon for use in the war against terror.

    The newly released files show that just after 9/11, the Ministry of Defence conducted a research project into psychics - with the possibility they could be used to locate terrorist cells.

    . . .
    That's also the official approach according to Nick Pope, who once ran the MoD's UFO project.

    He said: "Everything that you think is Sci-Fi, someone in government or in the private sector is trying to get it to work."

    In the Nineties, he worked for the MoD in a department blandly named Secretariat (Air Staff), looking at strange phenomena including UFOs, crop circles and even ghost sightings on military bases.
    =================

    Here was an early 20th century study that proves the soul does leave the body. If it leaves the body it must go somewhere - to think otherwise would be practically insane.

    =======
    In 1901, MacDougall weighed six patients while they were in the process of dying from tuberculosis in an old age home. It was relatively easy to determine when death was only a few hours away, and at this point the entire bed was placed on an industrial sized scale which was apparently sensitive to the gram. He took his results (a varying amount of perceived mass loss in most of the six cases) to support his hypothesis that the soul had mass, and when the soul departed the body, so did this mass. The determination of the soul weighing 21 grams was based on the average loss of mass in the six patients within moments after death. Experiments on mice and other animals took place. Most notably the weighing upon death of sheep seemed to create mass for a few minutes which later disappeared. The hypothesis was made that a soul portal formed upon death which then whisked the soul away.
    =====
    18% of Americans have seen ghosts. What percentage have seen extraterrestrial aliens?
     
  13. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Clearly, you use the word "clearly" as a substitute for actual evidence, since the actual evidence is anything but "clear". The case you listed includes a host of vague, hearsay accounts from a variety of apparently knowledgeable sources and while the consensus is not "clear" (it isn't anywhere close to unanamous), it is in fact the opposite of the conclusion you reached. The best that you could reasonably claim is that some of the many people involved eventually came to believe they had seen alien spacecraft and some did not.
    Actually, from reading in the wiki we should conclude that most of the "observational confirmation" wasn't just that most of the radar contacts weren't meteors, it was actually that most of the radar contacts were false contacts. Because the wiki describes a considerable effort spent by the military chasing radar contacts that they never saw visually.

    Sherlock Holmes or not, you are moving the goalposts. You started by claiming (or at least implying in this case - you explicitly claimed in other cases) that the measurements and visual observations were simultaneous. Now you are arguing that it doesn't matter that they were not because you can logically conclude they were the same objects. But still, yeah, it does matter. Have you ever gotten a speeding ticket? Consider the following scenario:

    A cop pulls you over and writes you a ticket for going 100 mph in a 45 mph zone. You tell him you were going the speed limit. He says: "Well, I didn't have my radar gun out, but you looked like you were going pretty fast and last week I clocked a guy in the same model and color car going 100 mph, so I figure that guy was probably you."

    Do you think that ticket would hold up to a court challenge?

    In any case, just for the record, radar can track meteors: http://www.gizmag.com/sutters-hill-meteor-fastest-kiloton-radar/25552/
     
  14. Trapped Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,058
    Are you confusing the government hiring psychics? Because, I don't understand how an investigation into ghosts even helps a war on terror.
     
  15. Trapped Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,058


    You always draw false premises, just like this one, assuming this is all ''hearsay.'' When did radar evidence become ''hearsay?'' Yes, we have witness accounts and physical evidence in the form of radar. I know exactly what you are trying to do. This wasn't a fantasy or delusion of hundreds and hundreds of people just suddenly decided to make up. This isn't ''hearsay,'' much of what you hear about that day, is considered fact.

    You just can't dismiss the quality of the witnesses nor ignore the radar evidence. You can, but I won't listen to you. That kind of thinking rots my brain.
     
  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,517
    Same way an investigation on UFO's might affect national security.
     
  17. Trapped Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,058
    I am going to sound like the government myself in respect to UFO's, but how exactly are ghosts going to affect national security?

    Though, we know for certain UFO's are a matter of national security. The government just doesn't want to admit it; even though it obvious... any UFO in our skies is always a matter of national security because of espionage.
     
  18. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,517
    A haunted military base might significantly reduce readiness, and thus impact national security. If ghosts decided to team up and go after, say, the Air Force - you could cripple our military.
     
  19. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Indeed, ghosts have been known to form powerful armies, as they did in the incident chronicled by the Middle Earth documentary, "Lord of the Rings".
     
  20. Trapped Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,058
    Really?

    Yeah... forgive me billvon, you didn't sell it to me. Good try though.
     
  21. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    [sigh]

    hear�say

    noun
    1.
    information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.

    In other words, if they tell me what they saw, that's direct testimony. If you (or the wiki) tell me what they saw, that's hearsay. Most of what the wiki says is not direct quotes and none of the supposed radar evidence was recorded. So the majority of the evidence is hearsay. You've demonstrated with your continued lies about the simultenaity of the radar and visual sightings that hearsay can't automatically be trusted. Hearsay is one of the primary means by which the aliens myth grows: as the story is told and re-told, it morphs into something it was not.
    I'm not. What I'm saying is tha you are lying/decieving about their testimony by being selective in picking-and-choosing which testimony you believe and which you don't and twisting the testimony to be things it wasn't.
    There is no radar evidence, only hearsay testimony that there was radar evidence. The difference means you, I , or a radar expert can't analyze what was displayed on that radar screen.
    Too late!

    Then, of course, you declined to respond to the rest of the sentence, which was that the consensus - mixed as it is - of those involved during and just after is actually against your conclusion. You are aware that that's the case, right?
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2014
  22. Grumpy Curmudgeon of Lucidity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,876
    Trapped

    No, actually you have only eliminated the specific conventional explanations that were investigated. You have not ruled out ALL conventional explanations(and you may NEVER do so). And Aliens are at the END of the list of all explanations(way behind even some of the wilder ones of Earthly origin, like secret Nazi science from hidden bases in the Antarctic or the South American jungle, much more likely than Aliens), for the scientific reasons we have all been giving you, no matter how much you want them to be Aliens. All serious sightings(IE those not having obviously irrational behavioral, psychological or pharmacological origins)have been examined and all but 4% have been identified, THAT 4% REMAINS UNIDENTIFIED, they have not been identified as Alien Spacecraft. It's really telling that all sightings of strange flying objects that occurred before say 1500 involved things with wings, angels, fairies, demons, griffons, dragons, etc. even the claimed flying machines had wings or were pulled/lifted by things that had wings, but from about the 1800s on, those things are rarely seen, but now we see machines in their place and no flapping wings whatsoever. I miss all those Steam Punk UFOs, the modern ones have no style.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It has something in common with how our gods throughout history resembled the societies(and matched or exceeded only the current technology)they were gods of.

    Grumpy

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,517
    Sounds like we're even - you're not having much luck selling space alien visitations, either. Are you having any better luck selling your book?
     

Share This Page