I'm VERY Sceptical about UFO's-it's ALL Rubbish!!!!

D

Dave

Guest
If you don't believe in UFO's and Extra-terestrial beings, sightings of UFO's, Abduction experiences and the like - why the heck do you non-believers and skeptics keep bombarding a post set up expressly to discuss the topics of Aliens and Extraterestrials and to talk about UFO's and aliens and sightings and abductions etc etc etc???!!!
Why aren't you all bonding on the UFO skeptics home page instead of bagging everything that gets posted here.
( http://hugin.imat.com/~sheaffer/ufo.html#trent if your looking for a place to call home ! )LMAO
Discussion - yes.
Debate - Yes.
Knock the believers - NO!
We want to prattle on about UFO-logy, not get a mouth full from someone who insists on debunking at every opportunity.
If you don't believe - fine - shove off! This is a forum to discuss things like Aliens and Extraterestrials - not to proclaim an irrefutable non-existance of same every new posting that arrives!. I for one want to share in "discussion and debate" on the topic, not get the loopy crap that follows every really good opener on this forum!
e.g. The last new topic was generalising that some money hungry entity has set up this exoSci site to make it into a money spinner, sucking up our poor and humbled earnings on merchandise instead of feeding our kiddies. What the hell was that post for?? Or about??!!!
Stanton Friedman said of the skeptics:
If one can't attack the data, attack the people. It is easier. (i.e Lori and the abuse she gets!)

Hecklers, give me and this forum a break, PLEASE!!!!
Regards,
Dave


[This message has been edited by Dave (edited June 10, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by Dave (edited June 10, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by Dave (edited June 10, 1999).]
 
The last new post did not say that and you know it. It was a message against all the con artists out there, and in no way reflected upon this forum. I didnt write it but I have that much common sense.

The very purpose of this forum is to have a discussion of ufology. Isnt that what is happening?
 
I used the word forum instead of site -( I have edited the error)
My bad...but the first thing you see on daveW's home page ( http://www.exosci.com / )is an ad for the new star wars soundtrack.
Good on him...I don't send him money for using and sharing this site...does anybody else around here make voluntary donations to keep this site up and running?
I don't see him plugging stuff down our throats, nor pop-up windows appearing every new page all the time. Perhaps I read an implied ( or is it inferred..me not strong on grammer )message against exoSci, after all he said behind every site....was that an exclusive or inclusive statement?
Regards,
Dave
....and Yes...THIS is debating....Thank you for debating with me, Corp!
 
I did not see a message against ExoSci. Perhaps you or others did, and maybe I missed something.

I think what he is targetting is the people that advertise in the Weekly World News (god that mag is funny :) )

BTW, is this DaveW's site? I thought ExoSci was setup independently and they bought out Aufora....I could be wrong
 
Now wait a minute Dave, you want us to believe that this should be a forum where only pro-UFO supporters can post? I can just see it now, a bunch of people engaging in free-wheeling fantasy, with no rational voices attempting to balance the discussions. What good will it do anyone who wants to learn more about this subject if everyone just posts as much random crap as they can dream up on the next lunch break?

If that is the case, then I can't wait until I can get home and drop some really good acid, log in to this board, and post wave after wave of hallucinations that hit me during my "trip". I really don't think you want to read about all the creatures that seep into my room through the walls, and melt and shimmer before my eyes tonight.

But hey, if this is to be a skeptic-free board, then I should have no problem posting these "alien" experiences, now should I.

Now I am thinking about changing my screen name, but more on that later.

In the meantime Dave, I think we should remember that many of those who have played the devil's advocate on certain occasions, have been the ones who have helped make many of these topical discussions interesting, because they have forced many of us to really think about the original topic or idea that has been presented.

As for the "loopy crap" well my friend, I am afraid there will never be an end to that, unless you start your own board somewhere and spend all you free time editing it out.
 
Here we go! ( with humour in mind, Skep!)

Errrr, Skepticus, are you suggesting that perhaps some of the posters here are "halucinating acid dropping trippers" who want to share their drug induced episodes with a bunch of UFO freaks?
Do you think without the skeptics that "They will (/might) start engaging in free wheeling fantasies?" and that without skeptics that perhaps "everyone will just post as much random crap as they can dream up on their next lunch break?"
hmmmmm.....I had hoped there may be very few such posters with that kind of caliber here...I know there were a bunch of school kids at one point messing things....and there's always idiots on every board...you can spot them (most of the time )...then there's the funny guy - like chuklesB..keeping it light. I guess, now that I know I may be debating with a bunch of crackheads I better lighten up or shove of myself!

On a serious note,
Have you, yourself, seen a "flying saucer"?
(I'd say UFO but the Corp. canned me for using that term - too generalised, I guess!)
 
I caught you on that because everyone has seen a UFO in their lives.
 
You're right, Matt. It was an astute observation and makes perfect sense. Well done. I'll be more specific in the future.
Rgards,
Dave.
 
Dave:

I'm what you'd call a devout skeptic when it comes to UFO's, abductions, etc. So, what am I doing here, you ask. Here's my reasoning:

If I am right, then I'm only doing good by dissuading people out of their delusions. However, if I am wrong -- then perhaps one way for me to discover that fact is to confront the 'true believers'. I have never in my life been abducted or seen a flying saucer. While the others claim to have evidence for their own encounters, I have no evidence of my own. So my only resort is to examine theirs -- critically examine it to see if the claims even make sense. Also, even supposing there is evidence of something strange going on -- I do not agree with the leaps of faith performed by some to conclude that the unexplained is also intelligent and extraterrestrial. I would like to argue with them about the reasoning used to arrive at such conclusions -- and see who's left standing in the end.

Like everybody else, I am searching for grains of truth within piles of garbage. The only difference between you and me is that I take a critical approach whenever I can consciously make such a choice.

------------------
I am; therefore I think.
 
That was a lucid and well thought out reply that showed no anomosity or prejudice. Thanks!
Even though at times you have suggested drug induced episodes (the Prozac story)as one reason for experiences,the best part of you has always taken a non-defaming stance in your replies.
We are all looking for answers, (as you may have guessed - I want to know more, lot's more!) and perhaps some-one out there has a few more pieces for my jigsaw. You, as a SKEPTIC are quite welcome to curtale any "I Believe" hysteria that may build up here, it's when the devout NON-believers start attacking the people here, I get irritable and I start to wonder what their personal satisfaction of doing this is driven by. (e.g Why are they bothering to even be on this board??!)
Maybe another coat of skin on my behalf is required?
Regards,
Dave.
 
Amen! Skeptics and believers unite to kill the beraters...heh (j/k)

BTW how did you know my name?
 
Boris

Hmmm...It's always interesting to hear the views of a sceptic. However, you mention that one of the reasons that you are participating in this forum is to either gain knowledge yourself or to help people to stop being delusional. I would have to ask you what your knowledge of the subject is? One of the most frustrating things about this whole subject for me is the fact that the vast majority of skeptics know very little about the subject indeed. In fact your average man in the street would probably be very suprised at many of the true facts surrounding UFOs. In my mind any rational or reasonably intelligent person who actually looks into the evidence of some of the more well researched cases will have to conclude that this mystery is very real indeed. Sceptics always say that there is no evidence. I beg to differ. We have thousands of hours of video tape of anomolous objects, thousands of photos, many of which are crystal clear, around 4000 ground traces, over 3500 reports by civil and military pilots and also a huge number of radar reports. On top of all this we have thousands of pages of government documents relating to the subject. The Belgium military even admitted in 1991 that something was going on in their airspace that they did not understand. I could go on. Just how much evidence do the sceptics want before they admit that something is behind this.

You quite rightly point out that some people perform "silly leaps of faith" to the ETH theory. That's fair enough, but I too am sick to death of some people trying to explain away certain sightings as the usual weather balloons, venus and the like when these objects where clearly no such thing.
During the history of Ufology there have been countless explanations given for sightings which have been so stupid as to defy belief. People who have half a brain simply won't accept them.

Personnaly Boris, I do not need anyone to help me get over my "delusions" as it would be almost impossible for anyone to convince me that UFOs are not real. However, what they are is a different question and I'm not yet prepared to say I believe totally in the ETH theory. All I am sure about is the fact that there is 100% a real mystery here.

The fact that you say that you might gain knowledge from this forum from "the true believers" strikes me as a little unlikely. How would you separate chaff from wheat? It would be pure folly to take an unknown person's facts at face value. Would you be prepared to research what they had told you to accertain its level of validity. I don't know what you level of knowledge about the subject is, but what you say could mean you have not studied it in depth. Apologies if I'm wrong! What level of evidence would it take to convince you that this mystery is genuine?




[This message has been edited by Spadge (edited June 22, 1999).]
 
Spadge:

No, I'm not denying all evidence out of hand. Some of it just seems a bit crazier than the rest. As to the mystery -- yes, there's definitely something going on. Be it an actual phenomenon, or a psychological one -- either way it deserves investigation. And I basically agree with you wholeheartedly when it comes to 'landing site' anomalies and various sightings. What I question big-time is all the abduction stories, as well as the visions of little grey people with big black eyes.

------------------
I am; therefore I think.
 
Boris

Yes....I totally agree with you. There are a lot of crazy aspects to this mystery and I think this is one of the reasons that some people's brains switch off whenever the term UFO gets mentioned. Some stories stretch the bounds of human incredulity to the utmost limit.

Like you, I too am not yet convinced about abductions or grey aliens. However, I am not ruling the possibility out either. The problem for me is that nobody has yet suggested any reason for the abduction thing (aliens included) that makes total sense to me.

In fact, the whole UFO mystery is much the same to me in that respect.



[This message has been edited by Spadge (edited June 24, 1999).]
 
The subject matter here is very interesting. It is always best, in my opinion, to not judge nor critisize anyone but rather to ask endless questions until the light of the matter surfaces. However, not all are tactful nor wise in their expression of curiosity when confronted with eyewitness accounts of reports of uncommon phenomena. This may be due to lack of genuine and authentic interest in what others experience in life. This lack of genuine interest on the part of those who did not experience a UFO sighting, for example, more often than not leads to animosity and loathesome behavior. It is somewhat like that sort of contention between believers in God and atheists. The bottom line, boys, is that the fact of the consistent and persistent presence of the mere mention of a recurring phenomena proves there is some substance of truth there, though the non-eyewitness did not experience the phenomenon himself. The fact that an atheist disbelieves in God proves that He exists for one cannot disbelieve in an nonexistent thing! If a person has never seen nor tasted a banana certainly it would be beyond his awareness--he wouldn't be able to talk about it. Then, if i asked this person to tell me what a banana looked like he'd be confounded for he wouldn't have a clue as to what i was talking about. Likewise, if i asked him to tell me what a banana tasted like he would be at a loss to give an answer. I believe this is the case of the individual who has never seen a UFO, a flying saucer, a strange creature exiting from a gigantic metalic object that just landed ever so silently in his backyard. In other words, disbelief in a thing does not prove it does not exist! The fact of the disbelief itself proves there is something because one cannot disbelieve in a non-existing thing.
I have several times had the opportune occasion to interview actual eyewitnesses who've experienced bizarre phenomena of the nature under discussion here. Some of these people had quite credible reputations in their communities; some were close friends; and some i had met for the first time in my life. Moreover, i have also experienced seeing what is termed a UFO (see elsewhere in this forum where i post the account).
To throw cold water on someone who claims to have seen something extraordinary seems to me not a very tactful nor wise approach to discovering the fact of the matter. I believe the best method is that used by the wise Socrates. This Greek was indeed very wise because a priori he was open minded and exercised a high degree of respect and courtesy toward all whom he came in contact.

------------------
dumaurier
 
Dumaurier:

Socrates wasn't as wise as you claim, otherwise he wouldn't end up being executed for his incessant nagging. ;)

But I would like to address a gaping fallacy in your post: stating that if something can be disbelieved, it therefore exists! Yesterday, my dear Dumaurier, I saw outside my window a flying purple people-eater. It had three long, flexible necks with two heads on each, two dinosaur-like feet and a long, spiky, pointed tail. It was breathing fire and belching smoke -- but by the time I was able to find my videocamera, poof -- it was gone, and not even the smoke remained! But I swear it was real, I really do ( ;)) Now, could you please oblige me and deny this sighting -- thereby proving its validity??!!!

We cannot make up something that embodies concepts we never learned of. However, we are always free to manipulate the various building blocks of our present world-experience, and rearrange them into absolutely any odd constellation we please. So much for the banana theory...

------------------
I am; therefore I think.
 
If someone had no knowledge of bananas but saw one thrown overhead wouldn't it be considered an Unidentified Flying Object? :D

[This message has been edited by god (edited July 01, 1999).]
 
Godfrey,
I'm not sure if that was supposed to be humourous or serious but I found it very funny! It was also a rational enough question to be taken as a serious one!

p.s. I call you Godfrey all the time because I don't think you're really God. LOL
No offense meant.
Regards,
Dave.

[This message has been edited by Dave (edited July 01, 1999).]
 
God,
it surely would ! :) :)

------------------
we are midgets standing on the backs of giants,
Plato
 
Boris,

Socrates is considered one of the wisest men of all time. He was murdered by his enemies who had the capacity of understanding not wider than the distance between the ground to the bottom surface of my heels on my beach sandals when i feel overweight :) (Oh, but you should know that Plato and Aristotle, to mention just two, were Socrates' students, no? My. My. Tsk. Tsk.)


Boris states:
"But I would like to address a gaping fallacy in your post: stating that if something can be disbelieved, it therefore exists!"

No arguement here, Boris dear. You cannot even ponder for one trillionth of a second something that doesn't exist because you've never heard of it--it has never crossed your mind and nobody has ever mentioned it. Therefore, how can you believe or disbelieve in it, pray do tell?


Boris further writes:
"Yesterday...I saw outside my window a flying purple people-eater. It had three long, flexible necks with two heads on each, two dinosaur-like feet and a long, spiky, pointed tail. It was breathing fire and belching smoke -- but by the time I was able to find my videocamera, poof -- it was gone, and not even the smoke remained! But I swear it was real, I really do ( ) Now, could you please oblige me and deny this sighting -- thereby proving its validity??!!!"

Brother Boris, i believe you :) (Hope your curtains didn't catch aflame from all that fire!).


And Boris further writes:
"We cannot make up something that embodies concepts we never learned of."

Exactly my point, dearest.


And still he contends:
"However, we are always free to manipulate the various building blocks of our present world-experience, and rearrange them into absolutely any odd constellation we please. So much for the banana theory..."

The fact is, dear brother:
that some people (especially we who love bananas) have experienced bizarre things which remain unexplained in the minds of those seekers after "scientific" evidence and concrete facts. Yet, if i saw a UFO, i saw a UFO. Now, if you don't believe me, that's just too bad. I saw what i saw. Period. Whether you believe me or not does not take away from the fact that i saw what i saw. The fact of your disbelief proves there is something to disbelieve in.

To the other guys here:
You are hilarious--and i just had to roll on the floor to your humour. A good joke is always welcomed :)



------------------
dumaurier
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top