Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
Yeah see something you don't recognise then make something up to explain it.
That will work right?
UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?
- Thread starter Magical Realist
- Start date
That will work right?
Zero Point Native
Registered Senior Member
Oh, so what you’re implying is that I should accept other people’s erroneous observations? Hmmm. That doesn’t sound like you at all.
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
What expertise do you have?
Zero Point Native
Registered Senior Member
Eyeballs
Hamsters, fish and birds have eyeballs too.
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
Eyeballs. Right. Not eyes but eye balls.
What do you do with those eye balls at 750nm?
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
And those "eyeballs" are connected to a brain right? How is that working out?
Says the pot to the kettle.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
How has that been going?
Have you seen any UAPs?
Is it your advice to wegs that she not make any judgments about UAPs unless she has seen them with her own eyeballs?
How practical do you think that advice will turn out to be?
Do you think that, should you see one, you are in a better position to objectively determine its origin then others who have bene in that position, such as, say an Air Force pilot?
Zero Point Native
Registered Senior Member
I turn them towards the sun to see if my toes can bend upward inside the creamy sand of blue hornets passing lethal gas from inside watermelon drops.
Zero Point Native
Registered Senior Member
Zero Point Native
Registered Senior Member
Oh look, he's advanced his one word thought vocabulary with another word, sort of.
Are you off your meds again?
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Some of those were not yes/no questions.
How has that been going?
How practical do you think that advice will turn out to be?
Zero Point Native
Registered Senior Member
Been going pretty good. Thanks.
As practical as I make it to be.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
I started with the premise that you are engaging in good faith.
Have you seen any? Your generic response 'yep' suggests you have, but - were that true - I would assume you'd expound upon it.
This does not seem to be a constructive response. Certainly I don't know how it helps wegs.
Did I get it wrong? Are you not engaging in good faith?
TheVat
Registered Senior Member
My take is that statistical significance is often not determinable because that requires what is lacking in UAP: a complete list of the probabilities of all possible causes of events. Since we don't know all the causes of anomalous events or their respective frequencies or the veracity of all witnesses or how transient some causes might be, we are utterly without a way to assess the probabilities of UAP events. We can only treat such events as singular and evaluate each on its own empirical merits. There really won't be a determinable sigma. (Sigma is for things like LHC experiments where you shoot two protons at each other at a precisely determined speed, over and over, in a repeatable way that gives the same conditions each time.) Or P.Informative discussion on philosophy.stackexchange:
How improbable does an event have to be before we can say it didn't happen by chance?
How improbable does an event have to be before we can say it didn't happen by chance?
What is the probability threshold below which we can confidently say that a blind process did not create the supposed event? For example, how many heads in a row would we need to say that it did notphilosophy.stackexchange.com
I am thinking about observational accounts of exotic events such as UAP sightings and their recurrence.
He's not allowed to. Action is being taken.