where is the evidence for alien visitation?

Doesn't matter they vacuumed the carpet. I have a carpet fiber on my shoe.

Anyhoo...my trip to the bar left traces, unlike apparently a trip to and shag with aliens-.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

notice the "we"

these pseudos travel in packs
like rats

this frenzied mob shares a single deranged mentality

fascinating
(anthropologically speaking, that is)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Basically you have nothing to say do you?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

oops. does not really matter. you assume forensic record to be infallible and indefinitely preserved. that is unwarranted. as is the continued presence of this fiber on your shoe. it is not as if your shoes are caked with mud from a crime scene. do you assume that all bars have carpets?

spurious
you really need be more analytical and discerning
discount and discard the more sensational incidents that are probably garbage.
considering these ridiculous abductions stories, anal probes and other shit you find in tabloids merely show an utter lack of judgement on your part

you play in the crackpot's ballpark

this is sciforums
are we not smarter than most?

focus rather on the few that defy a simple explanation
you have been skulking around here long enough to what the cases are

deal with those
you would appear so much more intelligent

 

those little asides are for my amusement
it is you that cannot or simply refuse to rebut my arguments in any meaningful manner

lets see how you conclude

Anyhoo...my trip to the bar left traces

this to me is like a fanatic asserting the existence of god simply because he says so

 

We've no idea at all if it's common - or unheard of - for one planet to be surveilling another. Therefore there is no basis whatever to suggest that this state of affairs would be, or must be, "extraordinary".

I'm saying that if abduction stories don't have a powerful element of B*S* to them, then the reliability characteristics of those making the claims will not be substantively different than those merely reporting sightings. For instance, if it could be shown that, say, 3% of all sightings are reported by police officers, but only .2% of all abductions, then the discrepancy has to be explained. An easy out would be that police are less likely to lie about this type of thing, so their dwindling numbers in the abducted category is because they don't tend to lie.

Not only "kooks" report sightings. That's the problem. If an accountant is, say, deemed to be about 90% reliable as a witness in general, and you've got 100 accountants making UFO sighting reports, then the odds that they are all lying is about the same as quantum luck allowing you to walk straight through your bathroom wall - maybe about once in the history of the galaxy.

The purpose of looking at occupation, etc., in witness reports is that it allows a control, a measure of the reliability of the witness pool in relation to the general public. It's an instrument to gauge the argument, "only kooks report UFO's". Kooks don't fly airliners, perform open heart surgery, operation nuclear powerplants, or file corporate tax returns.

Yes, that's the idea, but the credentials have to be better than a doctorate downloaded from a Mexican website, and the witness pool has to have more than one or two doctors. Have you ever applied for a passport? Here in Canada you need a signature on your application from one of a select number of occupations - doctor, engineer, etc. Precisely the guys and gals that make more credible statements anywhere - in a legal trial, at work, or even just hanging out at the bar. The reason that the government requires a person with a certain occupation to witness that you are who you claim you are is that they are reliable and responsible.

If, say, 1 in 1000 people are doctors in the USA, and 1 in 1000 eyewitnesses to a UFO are doctors, then this would be powerful evidence that the phenominon is real. If only 1 in 10000 were doctors, then this would suggest that there's a great deal of false reports. Simple analysis - surely someone, somewhere has done this kind of study?

 

Extraordinary in the sense that alien lifeforms on the planet earth would be major news.

 

amazing
you pull crap out of thin air that has nothing to do with the discussion and then present it as if it is relevant.

lay of the booze and come back when you can put together a coherent thought

 

SO.....if you are a doctor, shrink, airline pilot. Phd, or any one with letters afte your name tis makes you less of a 'kook' does it?

so ll people who are not in high paid careers are potential 'kooks'

what classist shit THAT idea is!

 

Well yes I was being a little patronising. However you really do seem to have a poor understanding of science duendy and it is clearly affecting your judgement.

Yes I do spend too much time in this part of the forum. I read the other parts but rarely post. I only have so much time for visiting the forum each day and I have spent it arguing with you lately.

 

From everything you've said in this thread, it would seem that your whole belief in UFOs is based on this single documentary of a mom and her kids. You refuse to consider that this mother is a lunatic, or that she is a fame chaser, or that she has alterior motives. There is nothing in you that questions the background of this woman, or if maybe the kids cooked up this mess and the mother decided to back them until the end. That's horrible, because it makes you vulnerable much more than UFO belief; imagine if you were in the crowd at Howard University the other day when that professor said that the white race needs to be eliminated from the face of the Earth! You would believe it simply because a professor said so!

And this doctor you say claims to have alien artifacts pulled from the bodies of his patients...well, a PhD only makes you more educated than someone who does not have a PhD, not any less insane.

The man I speak of, with the PhD in mathematics and a Harvard graduate and professor, is Theodore Kaczynski, AKA The Unabomber. This guy was as intelligent as anyone else (and moreso) and had gifts in speech and even grammar and punctuation. He wrote with better prose than any of your favorite authors, and he was nuttier than even Norval is.

Because a documentary potrays an abduction story in a forgiving, favorable light, evoking sympathy from the viewer by way of sad or erie music and a meloncholy narrator, doesn't mean it's true. I can tell that it touched you, duendy, and that's fine. It's unfortunate, however, that you bought this whole story without anything beyond the story itself; no evidence, no research, no peer review or approval, nothing. You just believe because the woman who told her story seemed believable, and the kids were cute.

JD

 

tis is actually debating....as argumentaive asit may sometimes sound

 

So what about using arguments instead of ad hominem attacks? Is that too much to ask for?

 

trrry an beeeeee mooorrrreeeee empathic...()

 

I work in IT. At the moment I am doing programming and some systems administration. To get into IT I did a two year computer science course after high school. I have done the basics of physics/maths/chemistry/ect.

So I am far from all knowing. As I said earlier, there is a lot that I do not understand. There is a lot that I don't even begin to understand! However I cannot agree with your constant science bashing duendy.

 

an as i keep telling you shaman_ i am not bashin science as such but SCIENCISM.......for example go checkout Fritjof Capra.....he gives a good overview of NEW science. science that is moving away from mechanistic presumptions. i dont agree with all Capra's philosophy---ie, his seeming uncritical views of Buddhism etc. but i deeply respect his empahsis on Ecoliteracy....unerstanding the intelligence of Nature

 

Yes. Exactly. The reason is that high-end professions tend to demand extreme reliability from those that practice them - because of the amount of responsibility involved. If you are an Air Traffic Controller, you can't be "good" 199 days a year and "unstable" for 1. You'll be out of a job. Kooks, by definition, are unstable. Hence they won't be air traffic controllers.

The easiest way to gauge the UFO phenomenon, IMO would be to study the demographics of the people making siting reports, and those making more elaborate claims. My guess is that the abduction crowd will shake out mainly as less reliable witnesses, and that the eyewitness crowd will exhibit hardcore symptoms of credibility that can't be shaken by statistical dissection.

 

and if i may add....

this anecdotal evidence or eyewitness reports is merely a starting point for further investigation. it is frequently used in combination with other forms of evidence if available. no definite claims can be made at this stage. theories are formulated that attempt to explain the sighting of the ufo

now lets deal with the particular theory that gets the pseudo skeptics panties in a bunch

this is where it is tentatively postulated that the ufo due to its unusual characteristics and activity might possibly be of et origin. that it might be local is not entirely discounted.. probabilities are assigned in order to focus the direction of the investigation

now

theories proposed should for the most part be in accordance with existing bodies of knowledge. one should not propose that the ufo was the face of jesus and expect to be taken seriously

so the million dollar question ends up being.... what laws, know or theorized, are being flouted by postulating that the ufo is et?

i say none

 

i have
you ignore and refuse to consider all points raised

rebut every point you disagree with
acknowledge your failed assertions

and no, it is not too much to ask for
i similarly feel i am not asking too much from you

 

Not true.

It's you who ignores arguments.