UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

[Magical Realist]

Ah yes. The nervous "lol" that is characteristic of Magical Realist when he can't think of a good response to a post. Followed inevitably by him ignoring the entire thing and repeating the point that was just addressed at length.

Really, MR, have you no integrity at all? Is this really the best you're capable of?

Now with the insults on my own character and intelligence. You haven't learned a thing have you? Why don't you go read the Sci Forum rules on proper netiquette that you supposedy authored?

 

[James R]

Now with the insults on my own character and intelligence.

It seems you didn't read my post, above.

My personal observations on your character, based on my assessment of your posts to this forum, do not amount to me bullying you.

Also, don't you think it's a little rich for you to complain about my offering my opinions about you, when you spend so much of your time offering up your own assessments of my character and motivations?

A little less obvious hypocrisy might lead to people taking your complaints more seriously.

I apologise if I hurt your feelings, fragile flower.

 

[Magical Realist]

It seems you didn't read my post, above.

My personal observations on your character, based on my assessment of your posts to this forum, do not amount to me bullying you.

Also, don't you think it's a little rich for you to complain about my offering my opinions about you, when you spend so much of your time offering up your own assessments of my character and motivations?

A little less obvious hypocrisy might lead to people taking your complaints more seriously.

I apologise if I hurt you feelings, fragile flower.

You get off on putting people down. It's what you do.

 

[James R]

Feeling persecuted, Magical Realist? Looking for love/sympathy?

 

[DaveC426913]

You get off on putting people down. It's what you do.

And again:


MR, you keep equating insults with "getting off".
You can only guess at JamesR's kinks, but you know your own kinks.
You are revealing more about yourself than about anyone else.

Also, you have a dirty mind.

 

[Magical Realist]

And again:
View attachment 2935

MR, you keep equating insults with "getting off".
You can only guess at JamesR's kinks, but you know your own kinks.
You are revealing more about yourself than about anyone else.

Also, you have a dirty mind.

Whatever makes you feel better about yourself.

 

[Bells]

Mod Note

Does saying shit like that make you feel better about yourself?

Whatever makes you feel better about yourself..

Putting people down has everything to do with feeling better about yourself.

It's what you get off on.

Just the same insult over and over again repeatedly getting you off in your own sick way.

You get off on putting people down. It's what you do.

Whatever makes you feel better about yourself.

*Check's title of thread*

Nope, it is not about self love..

It's meant to be about "in defence of space aliens"..

And yet for the last few weeks, you have not exactly discussed this thread's topic, instead, relegating yourself to discussing what you think people get off on and anything but this thread's topic.

You aren't the only one, but since you have deliberately gone out of your way to avoid discussing this thread's topic, despite being reminded of it, can you please tell me in a small paragraph or less why I should leave this thread open?

Because right now, the only argument for it is that it keeps you and a few others contained to this one thread.

It has absolutely no value. Except for daily reports from all sides about how such and so said/did/posted this or that..

 

[river]

Magical Realist:



How about we bring this back to the facts for a minute?

Is it true or false that river mostly posts semi-coherent one-line posts to this forum? This, you will recall, was my observation.
Is it true or false that river displays in his posts to this forum a low level of understanding of and ability to engage with scientific thinking (to single out just one field that he has touched on in various discussions)?

You might potentially disagree with me, and assert that, on the contrary, your perception of river is that he is an intelligent and erudite individual with deep insights to offer on a number of different topics. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find any examples to support that thesis on this forum, but I'd be very happy to be proven wrong if you have any.

The next step is to consider what I should and shouldn't be allowed to post as my personal opinion based on my own observations about river and the general quality of his posts.

It sounds a lot like you're arguing that I should never say anything negative about anybody here, Magical Realist. It sounds like you think that all members are delicate snowflakes whose feelings might be hurt if I give my personal opinion about the value or lack thereof in their posts. It sounds like you think I'm bullying poor little river, who should be coddled and protected from me on the grounds that... well, on what grounds, exactly? On the grounds that he's not able to stand up for himself, so that he needs you to step in and do it for him? On the grounds, perhaps, that you doubt his ability to construct a reply in refutation to what I posted about him and his posts?

Then we come to the real reason you're stepping up to defend river, as I see it. You don't like it when I express my opinions about the value or lack thereof in your posts to this forum. The complaints I level against river - the lack of supporting argument or evidence in his posts, to take one example - apply to you, to a slightly lesser degree. You figure that the best way for you to avoid criticism or review is to stridently oppose the posting of considered criticism of anybody's posts to this forum. That's it, isn't it?

The fact is, Magical Realist, river chooses to come here and post, as do you. If you're a fragile flower who gets all riled up at any criticism of the content of your posts to this forum, I'd say that, probably, this is not the best place for you to hang around. Your posts here will be subjected to critical analysis. You will be expected to support your claims with arguments and evidence. These are not just my principles, as applied to this forum. This has been part of the general ethos of this online community from the start.

I understand that it is in your interests to promote a conceptual buffer between yourself and people like me on this forum, in the hope that I might focus more on the inanities of people like Spencer666 or river and less on your abject failure to make a good case for any of your woo beliefs on this forum. I also understand that it is very much in your interests to try to dumb down the forum and to promote a culture in which intellectual criticism is considered bullying.

Inanity is what I speak of James on this thread ? ( context is High lighted ) .

Not to me though , for me my thinking is more knowledgeable and advanced . You just spout mainstream ; political correct thinking .

When one is conservative in ones thinking , as you are , your thinking becomes restricted to your own narrow view . Inanity is everywhere , but not in yourself ; not in your thinking . You put limitations on others because you have limitations of what you can conceive , imagine and understand ; and want to really .

Being conservative is where most people , like yourself are . Its a mindset . A mindset that is stagnant , and a more comfortable place in which to understand things . A comfort zone of thinking . I get it . I get where your coming from .

Have a good day James R .

river

 

[James R]

river:

Congratulations. That might well be the longest post I've ever seen you manage to put together on this forum.

not to me though , for me my thinking is more knowledgeable and advanced . You just spout mainstream ; political correct thinking .

If your thinking was as advanced as you claim, you could explain your reasoning and methods to your readers. But you can't and you don't. That suggests that you're just making one more grandiose, unsupported claim.

Clearly, you're not at all equipped to comment on anything even mildly technical that I might write here, so we can safely ignore your thoughts on my thinking.

You have a good day, too!

 

[river]

river:

Congratulations. That might well be the longest post I've ever seen you manage to put together on this forum.


If your thinking was as advanced as you claim, you could explain your reasoning and methods to your readers. But you can't and you don't. That suggests that you're just making one more grandiose, unsupported claim.

Clearly, you're not at all equipped to comment on anything even mildly technical that I might write here, so we can safely ignore your thoughts on my thinking.

You have a good day, too!

And clearly you have no curiosity nor motivation to seek knowledge on the subject ; what evidence does the pro-alien have ? Should be a question that you want answered . But you refuse to do so , why who knows .

For me the evidence is clear .

There are more advanced living Beings than our selves in this Universe . Simple as that .

And I prefer Written testimony . Details .

 

[James R]

And clearly you have no curiosity nor motivation to seek knowledge on the subject ; what evidence does the pro-alien have ? Should be a question that you want answered . But you refuse to do so , why who knows .

I don't know what you're talking about. I've been participating in this thread, looking at all the nonsense Magical Realist has served up. How does that not indicate curiosity on my part?

For me the evidence is clear .

There are more advanced living Beings than our selves in this Universe . Simple as that .

Please present your best evidence.

And I prefer Written testimony . Details .

Great! Please present your best evidence and I'll take a look.

 

[river]

I don't know what you're talking about. I've been participating in this thread, looking at all the nonsense Magical Realist has served up. How does that not indicate curiosity on my part?


Please present your best evidence.


Great! Please present your best evidence and I'll take a look.

Let me put it this way ; what books have you read on the subject ?

Name one or two , and if I don't have this book , I will buy it . Then we can discuss page by page .

 

[DaveC426913]

Books are not evidence. And we certainly shouldn't need to read a specific book to analyze evidence.

If you have a book that references evidence you find compelling, that evidence will exist outside the book, and we can analyze it at our leisure and in our own way. That's the nature of science - it's public, not secret, and withstands multiple independent methods of analysis.

Got some evidence?

Because without it, your claim, here, is a completely unfounded opinion - formed by someone(s) who wants you to read their book(s).

 

[river]

Books are not evidence. And we certainly shouldn't need to read a specific book to analyze evidence.

If you have a book that references evidence you find compelling, that evidence will exist outside the book, and we can analyze it at our leisure and in our own way. That's the nature of science - it's public, not secret, and withstands multiple independent methods of analysis.

Got some evidence?

Because without it, your claim, here, is a completely unfounded opinion - formed by someone(s) who wants you to read their book(s).

So you haven't read just one book on the subject !

So what you get then any information from mainstream tv ? Are you kidding me . Seriously

 

[James R]

Let me put it this way ; what books have you read on the subject ?

Too many to name. Most of them I read when I was much younger, before I realised why UFOs are bunk.

I've also followed a lot of UFO investigations in the "skeptic" literature, in publications such as Skeptic magazine and Skeptical Inquirer. Have you ever read any of those?

 

[river]

Too many to name. Most of them I read when I was much younger, before I realised why UFOs are bunk.

I've also followed a lot of UFO investigations in the "skeptic" literature, in publications such as Skeptic magazine and Skeptical Inquirer. Have you ever read any of those?

Name one

No

 

[James R]

Name one

What does it matter? Suppose I were to tell you that I've read a book called UFO mysteries by E.M. Schultz, published in 1984. What would that prove to you?

No

Why not?

 

[foghorn]

what books have you read on the subject ?

Have you heard of Blue Book? Well, I read a book once, it was green. I also read a little book, I think it was red.

 

[wegs]

I think MR is ''defending space aliens'' based on what he believes to be true. Nothing more or less. Why all the fuss?

 

[DaveC426913]

So what you get then any information from mainstream tv ?

TV shows are also not evidence.

You need to get away from the idea that some specific source - such as an author of a book or a TV show - can be convincing.

Books and shows don't own facts or evidence. Those things are public.

Things that are not public - such as those only found in a book or a TV show - are not facts; they're narrative.

So all we've heard from you so far is "I believe this guy that wrote this book."

If you ever ave any evidence, we're here.