Alien Spacecraft - Best Evidence

R

Russ_Watters

Not a Trump supporter...
Valued Senior Member
The mainstream scientific position is that alien spacecraft are probably not visiting earth. There are many reasons why, but that's really neither here nor there. What is important is that that's the position and the position that aliens are among us is an extraordinary claim that isn't mainstream and therefore requires strong proof (in addition to the fact that in science you can only prove positive assertions, not negative ones).

Many Believers seem to believe that a mountain of mediocre evidence, a coverup, or a thousand unexplained events and a probability calculation add-up to convincing proof of alien spacecraft being here. It doesn't work that way. Probability can make predictions, a coverup tells us *something* was covered-up (but not what), but proving something requires strong evidence and only strong evidence is strong evidence.

So with this thread I would like to dispense with the mountain of mediocre evidence, the conspiracy theory allegations and the probability calculations and just see alien spacecraft advocates' best evidence. Don't show me ten incidents that are not well backed by evidence, just show me one that is.

And a note regarding qualifications: they are irrelevant. The evidence must be proven here, so prior knowledge by skeptics such as myself is not required. However, of course, scientific knowledge is important to be able to evaluate the evidence.

Any takers?

[Edit]. And no flooding either. Real evidence is easy to recognize and digest. So don't post 10 links or an hour-long video and tell me to go find the facts for myself.
 
Russ_Watters said:
Any takers?
Click to expand...

You mean really me, right :) ....

''The mainstream scientific position is that alien spacecraft are probably not visiting earth. There are many reasons why, but that's really neither here nor there. What is important is that that's the position and the position that aliens are among us is an extraordinary claim that isn't mainstream and therefore requires strong proof (in addition to the fact that in science you can only prove positive assertions, not negative ones). ''

The assertion that aliens are visiting us, is a big claim. No doubt, it requires some kind of physical evidence for it to be allayed. Doctor Michio Kaku, in a recent visit to I think it was New York, had lunch with Doctor Jack Sarfatti and he made it clear to Sarfatti that he believed that saucers where in our skies. He didn't make any claims about them being ET life, but he really does believe there is technology in our skies someone is responsible for.

Now, when you start to weigh up evidence obtained from sighting reports over the last 100 years, you can clearly see a technological gap between what we are capable of and what these objects apparently can do. This is evidence whether you like it or not.

''Many Believers seem to believe that a mountain of mediocre evidence, a coverup, or a thousand unexplained events and a probability calculation add-up to convincing proof of alien spacecraft being here. ''

When say, you have several objects flying 2000 miles per hour faster than anything we could create for almost 20 years, I wouldn't say this is mediocre evidence. This is exactly what the 1952 UFO washington flap involved. We have multiple official eye-witness testimony, we have radar evidence... we have been able to determine the speed ... flight patterns... all these things amount to an evidence which is anything but mediocre.

''So with this thread I would like to dispense with the mountain of mediocre evidence, the conspiracy theory allegations and the probability calculations and just see alien spacecraft advocates' best evidence. ''

You don't seem to understand what ''evidence'' is. What you are asking for is undeniable proof, no online investigator of the UFO phenomenon could give you that. We do have plenty of evidence for the ET phenomenon, but you seem to have an obscure idea on what constitutes as evidence.
 
Yes, it was largely aimed at you, but I intend to refer back to it for later discussions as well because it sets up scientific ground rules for discussion. To many threads look like verbal diarrhea...

...So it looks to me like in declining, you are acknowledging that you have no quality evidence to support your beliefs. I must say, I am shocked, but impressed that you would so openly acknowledge that.
 
Of course, I don't need to highlight again that scientists take these questions seriously... and even though there is no consensus that we have been visited, some scientists may just be keeping quiet in case of people like you who would attempt to ridicule them.

Michio isn't scared to talk about the possibility of contact

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajTMFLHBwJo
 
Trapped, I assume that since you only presented 1 instance that this is your best evidence. The incident clearly does not rise to the level of extraodanary evidence. I read the write up in Wiki which is HERE.

At best it is a curious set of occurances - but it is not extraordinary evidence of extraterrestrial craft. It simply isn't.:shrug:
 
Russ_Watters said:
Yes, it was largely aimed at you, but I intend to refer back to it for later discussions as well because it sets up scientific ground rules for discussion. To many threads look like verbal diarrhea...

...So it looks to me like in declining, you are acknowledging that you have no quality evidence to support your beliefs. I must say, I am shocked, but impressed that you would so openly acknowledge that.
Click to expand...

There is plenty quality evidence.

You are just trying to create a ''gotcha'' thread. But it's difficult for me to even talk with a skeptic who doesn't even realize that the phenomenon is real. You didn't seem to understand pilots have went missing intercepting them or that the Military has shown an expressed concern to shoot them down, all the time just saying it was conspiracy nonsense.

I can't talk to someone, who is unable to set the facts straight.
 
It's 'Trapped' that does not understand what evidence is. I object to all three of his posts (so far) that they are nothing more than third parties presenting their personal opinions on what others have reported. That most certainly does NOT qualify as "evidence" in the most generous meaning of the word!
 
origin said:
Trapped, I assume that since you only presented 1 instance that this is your best evidence. The incident clearly does not rise to the level of extraodanary evidence. I read the write up in Wiki which is HERE.

At best it is a curious set of occurances - but it is not extraordinary evidence of extraterrestrial craft. It simply isn't.:shrug:
Click to expand...

So far I have only talked about 2 sightings in the other thread and Billvon was concurrently finding it more and more difficult to find a retort to the 1952 sighting. I made some excellent points which none of you have bothered to make any comments on.

Then you expect me to just come in here and what?...
 
Trapped said:
Here Kaku admits that some UFO's are real. Here he makes it clear we need some physical evidence... a 5% of the sightings do give scientists the ''willies.'' That is not mediocre
Click to expand...

5% of the sightings give SOME scientist the willies? This is evidence in your mind? Really? I would be willing to bet that the majority of the scientist do not get the willies - is this extraoridnary evidence against UFOs?

So lets assume that Kaku believes some UFOs are real. Is this extraordinary evidence? Answer - of course not!
 
Read-Only said:
It's 'Trapped' that does not understand what evidence is. I object to all three of his posts (so far) that they are nothing more than third parties presenting their personal opinions on what others have reported.
Click to expand...



This isn't personal opinions, we are stating the facts.

If I wanted to include personal opinions of sightings, I would need to interview the observers and ask them what their opinions are.

In the 1952 case, this isn't about opinions per se, we have physical documented evidence something was in our skies moving far faster than anything for many years to come. This isn't an ''opinion'' it's a fact.
 
origin said:
5% of the sightings give SOME scientist the willies? This is evidence in your mind?
Click to expand...

No, I simply gave that link because the OP was fixated about the ''scientific community not thinking they are alien.'' I can't deny there is no consensus, but there are scientists who clearly believe there is something in our skies which really is strange. These are documented cases.
 
Trapped said:
You didn't seem to understand pilots have went missing intercepting them or that the Military has shown an expressed concern to shoot them down, all the time just saying it was conspiracy nonsense.

I can't talk to someone, who is unable to set the facts straight.
Click to expand...

You have said this before. Either present evidence that pilots have gone missing trying to intercept UFOs or withdraw the claim.
 
Trapped said:
In the 1952 case, this isn't about opinions per se, we have physical documented evidence something was in our skies moving far faster than anything for many years to come. This isn't an ''opinion'' it's a fact.
Click to expand...

Not according to what I have read - your 'facts' are disputed and on very shaky ground.
 
origin said:
You have said this before. Either present evidence that pilots have gone missing trying to intercept UFOs or withdraw the claim.
Click to expand...

There are official documents, memo's explaining that pilots have gone missing. This is the Military who confirm this. The integrity of these cases are almost impossible to deny.

Doesn't stop you from trying, though.
 
origin said:
Not according to what I have read - your 'facts' are disputed and on very shaky ground.
Click to expand...

Disputed with what? Billvon gave theories which never added up. The only shaky ground I saw was one sided the other day, mostly because I know my history on the UFO phenomenon and most of you don't.

But it's ok, try and paint me in a bad light. Propaganda is a thrilling thing.
 
Trapped said:
There are official documents, memo's explaining that pilots have gone missing. This is the Military who confirm this. The integrity of these cases are almost impossible to deny.

Doesn't stop you from trying, though.
Click to expand...

So in other words you don't have any evidence that pilots have gone missing trying to intercept UFOs. Saying there are 'official' documents is a cop out. Where are these 'official' documents?
 
Wow, this went off track fast. I was hoping this thread would be about quality evidence only, not about standards of evidence. Trapped/all, I have created another thread to ask what your standard of evidence is and why you reject scientific standards:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?140098-The-Religion-of-UFOology&p=3146565#post3146565

Obviously, Trapped, if you are using your own personal definition/standard of evidence, there is no way for us to know what it is, much less evaluate it unless you explain it.
 
Russ_Watters said:
Wow, this went off track fast. I was hoping this thread would be about quality evidence only, not about standards of evidence. Trapped/all, I have created another thread to ask what your standard of evidence is and why you reject scientific standards:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?140098-The-Religion-of-UFOology&p=3146565#post3146565

Obviously, Trapped, if you are using your own personal definition/standard of evidence, there is no way for us to know what it is, much less evaluate it unless you explain it.
Click to expand...

Of course I have evidence, I just explained to you it has been documented in history. Here is a case for you to read

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Moncla
 
Trapped said:
Disputed with what? Billvon gave theories which never added up. The only shaky ground I saw was one sided the other day, mostly because I know my history on the UFO phenomenon and most of you don't.
Click to expand...

Oh please! You know the history from the view point of the crowd that believes UFOs are ET craft. That is like looking at the history of WW2 from the writings of the neonazis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top