Why is sciforums traffic so low now?

[Magical Realist]

It's unexplained by the simple fact that we do not have enough data to determine what it is.....Unworldly or otherwise. It's really simple to understand.
Unless of course you have had any knowledge of our apparent self proclaimed alien friend krash?

What data rules out otherwordly, particularly for those encounters where 3 ft tall occupants are witnessed exiting the white oval-shaped craft that then ascends and leaves burned traces on the ground? What else is there but otherworldly?

 

[DaveC426913]

cease your pathetic mouth and leave MR alone and i will--it is that simple.

You seem to not understand how the internet works.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

"That isn't what actually happened."

Ah Oh... if you'r recolection is corect... it apears that i have once agan been intelectually dishonest... so shoud i expect anuther PM from Kitta givin me a "pont"

 

[DaveC426913]

So if it's unexplained, then no natural cause or hoax or hallucination explains it right? What keeps it from being explained by something otherworldly? What rules that out?

Nothing rules it out. No one is ruling out the entities-formerly-know-as-aliens, or visitation.

Just like nothing rules God out either.

It's simply a question of - as always - not having quality of evidence to rule out mundane explanations.

We don't say 'Hey, mankind evolved a highly complex brain - that's super unlikely - therefore God'.
Nor do we say ''Hey, people have seen a guy in oldie-timie clothes driving and oldie-timie car - that's super unlikely - therefore time travel'.

It's just not useful as an analysis tool. It's useful for an author, but not for getting the truth.

The truth will out. Eventually. And if it turns out to be aliens, because irrefutable evidence is brought forth, then that's when it will be known.

 

[Magical Realist]

Nothing

rules it out. No one is ruling out the entities-formerly-know-as-aliens, or visitation.

Good. Thanks for speaking for paddoboy...How do you know he thinks that?

 

[paddoboy]

What data rules out otherwordly, particularly for those encounters where 3 ft tall occupants are witnessed exiting the white oval-shaped craft that then ascends and leaves burned traces on the ground? What else is there but otherworldly?
[/MEDIA]

Your link could possibly be explained by other means.
In the mean time, instead of wasting my time "going round in circles" with you, I refer you to the previous post just up there by Dave.

 

[paddoboy]

Good. Thanks for speaking for paddoboy...How do you know he thinks that?

Because that's what I have already inferred and which you have misconstrued as per usual, to try and prop up your own preconceptions.

 

[Magical Realist]

Because that's what I have already inferred and which you have misconstrued as per usual, to try and prop up your own preconceptions.

Dave knows what you want to say? Sounds like a good case for telepathy to me.

 

[Magical Realist]

Your link could possibly be explained by other means.

So these cases aren't unexplained like you claim they are? What's the explanation?

 

[paddoboy]

And it continues. The flittering in, flittering out, never making official contact, never leaving any hard evidence and this is supposedly happening many thousands of times over the years...not even a trace of off worldly faeces.

Dave know what you want to say? Sounds like a good case for telepathy to me.

Whatever your vivid impressionable imagination tells you. [Or possibly even just a case of deliberate misinterpretation and obfuscation that many posters have accused you of]

 

[DaveC426913]

So these cases aren't unexplained like you claim they are? What's the explanation?

No. you have deliberately drawn a faulty conclusion.
.
Saying they can be explained is not the same as saying they are explained. That would be the error you so often make - in demanding any given case is settled when it's not.

You know they have not actually been explained, but to try to rebut you act deliberately obtuse by pretending pad said something he didn't. That is dishonest. And it's why it's hard to take you seriously.

 

[paddoboy]

So these cases aren't unexplained like you claim they are? What's the explanation?

We dont know...It's unexplained with the data available...It's Unidentified.
Illusions, Imagination, hot Sun, atmospheric phenomena, prank, you understand unexplained? You understand Unidentified? They don't mean automatically alien.....or if it suits your current status, time travellers...or if you need to be further obtuse....inter-dimensional beings.

 

[paddoboy]

deliberately obtuse. .

further obtuse.....

Hmmmm, perhaps MR is right...we are connecting via telapathy.

 

[DaveC426913]

Hmmmm, perhaps MR is right...we are connecting via telapathy.

It's the ghosts in period clothes - they told me.

 

[Magical Realist]

No. you have deliberately drawn a faulty conclusion.
.
Saying they can be explained is not the same as saying they are explained. That would be the error you so often make - in demanding any given case is settled when it's not.

You know they have not actually been explained, but to try to rebut you act deliberately obtuse by pretending pad said something he didn't. That is dishonest. And it's why it's hard to take you seriously.

So says you. What is paddoboy's thoughts on this?

 

[DaveC426913]

Good. Thanks for speaking for paddoboy...How do you know he thinks that?

Because, like virtually every other member here, with the exception of a few, he is rational, and knows that one cannot prove a negative.

 

[Magical Realist]

We dont know...It's unexplained with the data available...It's Unidentified.
Illusions, Imagination, hot Sun, atmospheric phenomena, prank, you understand unexplained?

Sounds like explanations to me. Either something is explained or unexplained. Which is it paddoboy?

 

[Magical Realist]

Because, like virtually every other member here, with the exception of a few, he is rational, and knows that one cannot prove a negative.

How do you know that? Have you met each other?

 

[paddoboy]

So says you. What is paddoboy's thoughts on this?

So you are dishonest and just as Bell's says. And yet you continue with your "programmed"nonsense.

 

[DaveC426913]

So says you. What is paddoboy's thoughts on this?

Well, that's the beauty of a public forum with multiple contributors who understand logic. It's not like everyone here with a science background grew up in a vacuum. We all know how scientific skepticism works.