Ah, there's the ad-hominem attacks you were talking about.
I made an entirely valid comparison between what he stated about my religious beliefs to his beliefs in the paranormal. If you dislike it, that's too bad; MR is the one that brought up personally held beliefs - I simply pointed out the similarities between what he was trying to ridicule (religion) and what he personally believes (aliens).
1) I was not aware you had a neural link with my head, and thus had intimate knowledge of what I understand and do not understand. Fascinating - you should share this ability and/or technology with the world at large, as it would no doubt be incredibly useful in helping law enforcement agencies and psychotherapists alike in their work.
2) Per Merriam Webster:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perception
Definition of perception
1a : a result of perceiving : observation
1b : a mental image : concept
2 (obsolete) : consciousness
3a : awareness of the elements of environment through physical sensation color perception
3b : physical sensation interpreted in the light of experience
4a : quick, acute, and intuitive cognition : appreciation
4b : a capacity for comprehension
I would say that, by every measure of the word, we were all aware of the chance for something to be lost in retelling / lost in translation. Again, what is it that makes you pick this particular battle, when it isn't even a battleground to begin with?
Sounds like an admission of guilt to me.
Then I accept that you haven't a counter argument to make, nor feel your claim has merit enough to even bring up to the Administration. Thank you.
Hold the phone -my claim is not, and to the best of my recollection has never been, that "eye witness testimony is bullshit by nature" - my claim is that eye-witness testimony ALONE is insufficient evidence; extraordinary claims DEMAND extraordinary evidence, and simply saying "I saw a little green man with my own two peepers!" is not extraordinary evidence.
I am curious, Yazata, as to why you are suddenly being deceptive in this.
In post 56, MR said:
I replied with the quote from MIB in post 57
This was, specifically, to make the point that just because people
think they know something, they can be incorrect. Now, do you wish to contend that is incorrect?
MR responded with a personal attack:
I responded with the contention that there is, in fact, more corroborating evidence for Religious claims (and that they are more aligned) than there is for the Paranormal claims MR repeatedly makes, and that it was ironic that MR is perfectly willing to accept said paranormal claims on far less evidence, yet will deride Religious claims vehemently, regardless the backing.
How you come to the conclusion that I am the one "moving the goalposts", I cannot even begin to comprehend. I made the comparison to illustrate the point that they are similar in terms of their sources of evidence, and yet MR accepts the one with the smaller body of evidence whilst dismissing the one with the larger body of evidence.
Now, if you wish to say there is more evidence for Paranormal Activity beyond the eye witness tellings... I would dearly love to see an actual, hands-on analysis of an alien craft or alien body, or perhaps a reasonable definition recorded interaction with an extra terrestrial. We live in an age where a large percentage of the World Population carries a high definition video camera with them at all times, after all.
