That Damn Bigfoot Thing
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-12-2014, 07:47 PM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(08-12-2014 07:35 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 07:19 PM)Free Wrote:  Perhaps I should have made the wording more clear? Here, try it again:

I understand how you may want to make the comparison between the Fatima thing and the O'Hare thing, but here's a few points to ponder:

a) O'Hare witnesses did not know each other and were not expecting to see an aircraft they could not identify hanging stationary over a hangar.
b) Fatima witness all gathered there with the expectation of seeing something extraordinary.

I repeat same as with my students expecting to see fish then seeing an octopus. They weren’t expecting an octopus but we all know they exist. (we know drones, lenticular clouds, optical illusions, schemas exist).

There can be no comparison between seeing some fish along with an octopus, and seeing known aircraft along with an aircraft that cannot be identified and in which behaved beyond the scope of normal aircraft.

Can we really compare an octopus to a UFO?

Consider

Quote:
(08-12-2014 07:19 PM)Free Wrote:  a) None of the O'Hare witness demonstrated any preconceived beliefs in UFOs or aliens.
b) All the Fatima witnessed were religious.

I don’t see how it can be proven that the witnesses had or didn’t have preconceived beliefs in UFOs or aliens. I’m sure they weren’t asked this when they applied for the job.

The point is that none of the O'Hare witnesses demonstrated any preconceived beliefs in UFOs, but Fatima witnesses all demonstrated preconceived religious beliefs.


Quote:Free, go back to my post with the hyperlinks to papers on the unreliabilty of witnesses and see why humans make such terrible eyewitnesses, our preconceptions, biases and our desire to satisfy our evolved sense of pattern recognition all work against us.

I read it and I understand it. It demonstrates a possibility at best, but not a probability in this case.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2014, 08:09 PM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(08-12-2014 07:47 PM)Free Wrote:  Can we really compare an octopus to a UFO?

[Image: fsm.jpg]
[Image: a6227c58b274af6c86e6000651ad320d-d5tyhte.jpg]
[Image: 0319-ping-ufocamera-640x360.jpg]

Yes Big Grin

(08-12-2014 07:47 PM)Free Wrote:  The point is that none of the O'Hare witnesses demonstrated any preconceived beliefs in UFOs, but Fatima witnesses all demonstrated preconceived religious beliefs.

Of course not, they wouldn’t have been hired if they said as much.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
08-12-2014, 08:27 PM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(08-12-2014 08:09 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 07:47 PM)Free Wrote:  Can we really compare an octopus to a UFO?

[Image: fsm.jpg]
[Image: a6227c58b274af6c86e6000651ad320d-d5tyhte.jpg]
[Image: 0319-ping-ufocamera-640x360.jpg]

Yes Big Grin

lol

YOU WIN!

Quote:
(08-12-2014 07:47 PM)Free Wrote:  The point is that none of the O'Hare witnesses demonstrated any preconceived beliefs in UFOs, but Fatima witnesses all demonstrated preconceived religious beliefs.

Of course not, they wouldn’t have been hired if they said as much.

But ... that's not the point.

We cannot prove or disprove whether or not all of the O'Hare witnesses had any preconceived ideas about UFOs, but it's certainly a fact that pretty much all the Fatima witnesses had preconceived beliefs in religion.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2014, 10:38 PM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(08-12-2014 03:48 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  I know your down with that, ignoring the content and criticisms in peoples posts is your established behavior.

No, ignoring the immaturity, ambiguity, needless excessive length of posts, and misrepresentation of my position is my established behavior.

Quote: You can call my posts brain-dead and fucktarded till you are blue in the face but your opinion is not gonna bother me because a.) you're a mentally unstable whack job on this subject and b.) not a single person has expressed any agreement with you on this subject. At all. Even once.

So, because I accept a very real and likely possibility that intelligent extraterrestrial life exists in the universe, I am some kind of whack job? Since intelligent life evolved on THIS planet it is not reasonable to accept that it has also happened elsewhere?

You know what you sound like? You sound like a fucking theist who thinks god created this earth as the center of the universe, and we are all there is.

It doesn't matter if anyone agrees with me on this subject because I know from experiencing this bunch that not one of them has anywhere near the experience I have with this subject.

When we have presidents, governors, ministers of defense, entire governments, astronauts, air force pilots, the FBI, and thousands of other credible witnesses all claiming the existence of UFOs, then it isn't just me they are disagreeing with.

Yes the evidence so far is almost entirely anecdotal evidence, but there is so much credible anecdotal evidence that only a fool would chose to ignore it.

Quote:So you can continue attempting, poorly, to be witty or clever but if you think I'm taking serious the complaints about my ego from a person who thinks a secretive inner circle of atheists are going out of their way to target him all special like.... then I'm just gonna laugh at you. Some more.
So much hypocrisy.

Says the guy who, along with two others, all neg repped me within minutes of each other, and within minutes of my leaving the forum last week posted my neg reps of all 3 of you. And you are trying to tell me you 3 weren't inspiring each other?

Seriously? How would you know I neg repped the other two unless you spoke to them? How would you know within minutes and then post about it in this thread?

Hmmm? Right ..

Quote:Honestly I'm waiting cause I have other things to do at the moment then spank your whack-a-doo ass and also 'cause if the community here thought I was wrong on this subject I'd seriously consider their advice and let it go..like I did the first time when you bailed. I let it go and I let it go civilly while stating I relate to the time issues. I tried to bury the hatchet and I let it go. I nearly upreped you, but you YOU just could not let it go so you just dishonestly shifted your attempts to prove your position, a point in this forum that has been near universally rejected as incorrect and fallacious, to a new thread.

You seem to have this fascination with the rep feature on this forum, and with how many "likes" you get in your posts. What the fuck do you think this is, a popularity contest?

I don't give a fuck about whether or not you neg rep me or up rep me or like me. You simply don't fucking matter to me. Disingenuous fools like you never matter.

Quote:Don't talk to anyone about ego there Sally, I had already dropped the subject entirely till you started playing your semantic word games again in a new thread trying to prove a point you already demonstrated you couldn't defend in the last one.

All my points were proven. You cried about me not using Occam's Razor, and when i did and it demonstrated my point, you cried foul.

I should have seen it coming, and in fact, I did expect it somewhat, knowing you.

Quote:Once your drop this stupid woo bullshit and except your lack of objectivity on the subject as witnessed by everyone who has commented on the subject....I'll go back to being civil and treating you like any other +rep member of the forum.

There is nothing "woo" about the issue of UFOs. In my experienced opinion, it requires a total idiot to make a claim that the mountain of anecdotal evidence doesn't amount to anything. It is that kind of narrow-mindedness and abuse of skepticism that keeps the subject from being open to serious discussion.

Quote:Seriously ask your self why no one agrees with your presupposition, your methods, or your conclusions.

Because they simply do not understand my position, methods, or conclusions. They have been too busy attacking me with ad hominems, misrepresenting my position, being ambiguous, and posting excessively long posts to even begin to attempt to understand my position.

When people are too fucking busy talking, can you expect them to actually listen?

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 02:07 AM (This post was last modified: 09-12-2014 02:11 AM by WhiskeyDebates.)
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  No, ignoring the immaturity
I can go back and find examples not only of you acting like a petulant little child to me before I even utter a single curse word I can even find examples of you acting that way to other people, in this thread and the UFO one. There were numerous times where you tried to dictate to me what I think and even declared wholesale that the conversation was over like a child stamping his feet.
You don't get to pretend to be morally superior when you started this shit show.
(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  ambiguity
Nope. Just no. I reiterated and rephrased my objections half a dozen times because you were ignoring them. I made a continued and consistent attempt to communicate my objections and you ignored every single one each and every time even BEFORE I started being aggressive in an attempt to bust through your blinders.
I'm MORE than willing to take the time and go back and find multiple examples of posts i made where you selectively edited out every single pertinent criticism of your position. You did this repeatedly and flagrantly.

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  needless excessive length of posts
Awww did all the long words hurted your widdle brain? I think I"LL decide how long my posts should be and you can stuff your jack boots up your ass. You are the first person on this forum that has ever complained that I give their position and opinions too MUCH attention. You are just fishing for excuses at this point.

Again I'll happily go back and quote multiple criticisms that are a single fucking sentence long. Even then the fact I'm verbose is not an excuse to not respond to my points over and over and over, especially when you take the time to respond to every post I make, just never a single point I make.

Everyone else here was able to read my posts just fine judging by the support they got. Maybe take a reading class? *shrug*
For fuck sake Free you bitched that I did not read and comment on an entire 155 page report and now you are whining I leave you with too much to read?hahah Your complaints are just dripping with hypocrisy.

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  misrepresentation of my position.
See this is funny on two levels:
1.) You keep asserting this, but you never once demonstrate an instance of it. You just...assert it. Over and over and over and over and over and over and over. In fact every single time you have TRIED to give an example I've had to take time out of my day to demonstrate that you are strawmaning my position and thus it's not a legitimate example. You have literally created make believe accusations that I never said and then try to argue against them. Happy to provide examples of this as well (I already have several times) which is actually really easy to do because....
2.) This right here.....
(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  So, because I accept a very real and likely possibility that intelligent extraterrestrial life exists in the universe, I am some kind of whack job? Since intelligent life evolved on THIS planet it is not reasonable to accept that it has also happened elsewhere?
...is a 100% complete strawman!! I know, imagine my surprise to see that again.
Sentence 1 (that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe) I have actually stated on several occasions is a stance which I personally believe. Seriously Free....I've said that like 4+ times now.
Sentence 2 is a thing I have never argued here or anywhere else by me, that's a line of argument you pulled out of your ass. I happen to think that statistically it's next to impossible for there not to be evolved life forms outside of this solar system. Personally I think we will find life not native to Earth in THIS solar system in the near future.
You are a fucking nutter because you go from "there is intelligent life in the universe" to "and it's coming here in tiny space ships, and these space ships can ignore the laws of physics, and they like to hang out in airports, and sometimes they cloak themselves and sometimes they don't and..." on and on and on without a single bit of tangible, demonstrable, or testable evidence to justify that leap.
You are engaged in conspiracy thinking: you are taking disparate "facts" and trying to weave a narrative that fits your presuppositions about aliens. You are constantly making unwarranted leaps, and people continue to point this out to you constantly and the only defense you have been able to muster is "nuh uh!!" or "no, you!!1!!".

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  You know what you sound like? You sound like a fucking theist who thinks god created this earth as the center of the universe, and we are all there is.
1.) Oh goody, I accuse you of thinking, talking, and reasoning like a theist on several occasions and you don't address a single one instead you go "I know you are but what am I?". Glad to see you are still betting on that horse. I'm sure it will win a race...someday. Drinking Beverage
2.) It's really easy to think that when you are deliberately and dishonestly strawmanning my position like an asshole, a position that has been clarified for you on so many occasions there is no way at all for me to think you are not doing it deliberately. I really don't believe you are doing it accidentally at this point.
3.) So you don't like other peoples insults and immaturity but it's tots OK when you do it? L.O.L.

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  It doesn't matter if anyone agrees with me on this subject because I know from experiencing this bunch that not one of them has anywhere near the experience I have with this subject.
Uh-huh. If that was the case you would be pointing out the fallacies (you have not done this) in our reasoning instead of us doing so for yours (we have...repeatedly). This is not a simple case of "I disagree with your opinion Free" this is a case of showing you repeatedly how the way you got to your opinion is fallacious. We disagree with you not cause your opinion is odious or unpopular but because it's built on fallacies, you defend it with fallacies, and you are constantly using argumentative tools incorrectly(which by the way you continue to do even after you have been corrected). We disagree with your opinion because it's not logically sound and the confirmation bias is evident and flagrant.

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  When we have presidents, governors, ministers of defense, entire governments, astronauts, air force pilots, the FBI, and thousands of other credible witnesses all claiming the existence of UFOs, then it isn't just me they are disagreeing with.
Argumentum ad populum.
I can say the exact same thing about BILLIONS of peoples personal experiences with god. Your point is fallacious. It's also another strawman as I'm not arguing about the existence of UFOs as a thing people witness or report I'm arguing with your unfounded jump that "its most probably aliens". That's gotta be close to two dozen times I've pointed this out and but you Just. Keep. Strawmanning.

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  Yes the evidence so far is almost entirely anecdotal evidence, but there is so much credible anecdotal evidence that only a fool would chose to ignore it.
I won't speak for the others but I did not ignore any evidence presented. I evaluated it and I found it utterly lacking for the types of claims YOU proceeded to make on the basis of it. Anecdotal evidence is not sufficient for the types of claims YOU were making. You your self have said that, and you can correct me if I'm wrong on the number, of all UFO encounters in your opinion only 0.1% are ACTUALLY extraterrestrial in nature. Forgetting for the moment that that's a made up, arbitrary number, you pulled outta your ass, if you want that 0.1% to be taken seriously as probable or even possible you are gonna need more than anecdotal evidence.
(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  Says the guy who, along with two others, all neg repped me within minutes of each other
If by "minutes apart" you mean HOURS apart then sure.

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  and within minutes of my leaving the forum last week posted my neg reps of all 3 of you.
If by "minutes apart" you mean more than a goddamn day after you left then sure. Jebus you are dishonest in your representation of events.


(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  And you are trying to tell me you 3 weren't inspiring each other?
Or maybe I saw your petty childish down rep of me and decided to go check if you had acted like a petty childish asshole to anyone else who argued with you? And oh look, you had in fact done just that.
Oh but no no no you are the victim here, watch out for fluoride in the drinking water.Hobo

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  Seriously? How would you know I neg repped the other two unless you spoke to them? How would you know within minutes and then post about it in this thread?
There were only so many people involved in your asskicking and all their profiles are public you paranoid wackjob. How would I know about it? I get notifications of any change on my account rep/email wise instantly. You paranoid whackjob. It was like 7 clicks worth of work. Goddamn man....

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  I don't give a fuck about whether or not you neg rep me or up rep me or like me. You simply don't fucking matter to me. Disingenuous fools like you never matter.
Oh ya man you just refuse to deal with anything childish or insulting. Rolleyes If humans could live off hypocrisy you could single highhandedly feed the world. You keep asserting I'm disingenuous but everything you try to demonstrate it it's a strawman.
"You don't matter to me at all fool now excuse me while I write a response to every single post you make. Just not any of the substance obviously."
Rolleyes


(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  All my points were proven.
Not a single one. Anytime anyone complained you just repeated the original assertion again. And then again. And then again. And then again.

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  You cried about me not using Occam's Razor, and when i did and it demonstrated my point, you cried foul.
I didn't cry about you not using Occam's Razor I criticized you for maintaining your position was the most probable explanation of event's which was in direct conflict with Occam's Razor. I cried foul cause you tried to dishonestly and incorrectly apply Occam's Razor to make it look, incorrectly, like it supported your position when it did not.

Yes you should expect me to correct you when you were doing it wrong. The fact you continued to do it wrong after I showed you how it was wrong and even provided the fucking definition so you could SEE you were wrong just makes you a asshole.
(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  There is nothing "woo" about the issue of UFOs.
That's why you started the thread in the Conspiracy Theory section right? There is nothing woo about unexplained sightings. There is nothing BUT woo when you repeatedly try to explain them as something you already just happen to believe in without compelling testable or demonstrable evidence.


(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  In my experienced opinion, it requires a total idiot to make a claim that the mountain of anecdotal evidence doesn't amount to anything.
I'm not convinced your opinion is anything other than rampant confirmation bias, but leaving that aside I personally think it DOES amount to something. It just does not amount to what you have repeatedly claimed it does because you have not met the burden of proof to show that it does.

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  It is that kind of narrow-mindedness and abuse of skepticism that keeps the subject from being open to serious discussion.
Blow a cactus, I was trying to have a perfectly open and serious discussion until you acted like a belligerent child and declared me a "fool" that I was "done" and possessed the "inability to reason" outta nowhere. Not the attitude one expresses when he is interested in an "open and serious discussion". That's the attitude of an asshole. How did I respond? No insults, no attitude, I even said I was willing to over look your shitty attitude and tried to continue the conversation in a respectful manner. And I got more belligerent bullshit from you in return.

To try and act like you were the open minded, rational, and polite one is an abject fucking LIE.

(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  Because they simply do not understand my position, methods, or conclusions.
Except every single time you try to demonstrate this you have to resort to strawmanning. We all understand your presupposition, your methods and your conclusions, which is why we have been able to dismantle them as the fallacious nonsense they are.
It's not US creating strawmen.


(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  They have been too busy attacking me with ad hominems, misrepresenting my position, being ambiguous, and posting excessively long posts to even begin to attempt to understand my position.

When people are too fucking busy talking, can you expect them to actually listen?
Yadda yadda yadda making strawmen blah blah blah failing to demonstrate yak yak yak I've said it a dozen times. What's actually funny is that you have been doing every single one of those, and it's be actually demonstrated, and yet I had utterly no problem responding to nearly every shitty point and shitty analogy you concocted. Maybe you're not dishonestly editing out the criticisms maybe you are just lazy? That took me less then 12 minutes to write so i guess we will see.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
09-12-2014, 08:25 AM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
I had backed away from this whole UFO debacle because it didn't seem to be getting anywhere. I see that hasn't changed.Big Grin

The other night I watched this video of Matt Dillahunty debating Matt Slick on various things. Matt Slick's defense of theism reminded me strongly of Free's defense of alien UFO pilots.

He argues that it explains all the evidence, that it is reasonable to believe because there is no proof of the contrary, that nobody has a better answer, that there are witnesses, and more. I suggest watching it and seeing how often arguments being made for aliens line up with arguments for god that are obvious fallacies in that context.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
09-12-2014, 09:42 AM (This post was last modified: 09-12-2014 11:14 AM by Free.)
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(09-12-2014 02:07 AM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  No, ignoring the immaturity
I can go back and find examples not only of you acting like a petulant little child to me before I even utter a single curse word I can even find examples of you acting that way to other people, in this thread and the UFO one. There were numerous times where you tried to dictate to me what I think and even declared wholesale that the conversation was over like a child stamping his feet. You don't get to pretend to be morally superior when you started this shit show.

Are you actually trying to compare my behavious to THIS?

Sure, go back and find an example where I did anything even remotely as juvenile as that. Go ahead, I can wait.


Quote:
(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  ambiguity
Nope. Just no. I reiterated and rephrased my objections half a dozen times because you were ignoring them. I made a continued and consistent attempt to communicate my objections and you ignored every single one each and every time even BEFORE I started being aggressive in an attempt to bust through your blinders.
I'm MORE than willing to take the time and go back and find multiple examples of posts i made where you selectively edited out every single pertinent criticism of your position. You did this repeatedly and flagrantly.

And you are saying there was no ambiguity with THIS?

As I pointed out earlier- which again has so obviously and easily eluded you- your posting methods in which you make accusations lack the actual evidence of whatever specific point you are trying to make. You do not give back-links to your claims, leaving me to wonder which specific post I made that you have an issue with. Not only that, you use excessively long run-on sentences that would make any publisher throw your work in the garbage at first glance. And to top it all off, aside from stupid, your post is stupidly long. Even in this post, you divide a sentence into single words and over-analyze with repetitious bluster in the hopes of what? Getting a couple of "likes" and maybe another rep point?

Hey I just updated you with a positive rep point, because you appear to need it. Smile


Quote:
(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  needless excessive length of posts
Awww did all the long words hurted your widdle brain? I think I"LL decide how long my posts should be and you can stuff your jack boots up your ass. You are the first person on this forum that has ever complained that I give their position and opinions too MUCH attention. You are just fishing for excuses at this point.

See what I mean by your intellectual dishonesty? Did I refer to "long words" or did I refer to "needless excessive length of posts?"

Enough said. Point proven.

Quote:Again I'll happily go back and quote multiple criticisms that are a single fucking sentence long. Even then the fact I'm verbose is not an excuse to not respond to my points over and over and over, especially when you take the time to respond to every post I make, just never a single point I make.

Should I be as juvenile as you and say something to the effect of, "Awww did me ignoring your irrelevant posts hurt your widdle feelings?"

The fact of the matter is many points you "think" you made are left void of any reasoning as to why you think that way. Do you think you can just get away with saying something similar as "It's a logical fallacy" without justifying your reasoning? I ignore your posts for many reasons, one of which is a great and general lack of substantiation for them.


Quote:Everyone else here was able to read my posts just fine judging by the support they got. Maybe take a reading class? *shrug*
For fuck sake Free you bitched that I did not read and comment on an entire 155 page report and now you are whining I leave you with too much to read?hahah Your complaints are just dripping with hypocrisy.

And again you refer to the 'support" you get. Hell, Since you are so preoccupied with it I will even place a "like" to your post since you seem to think it amounts to something. I find it hilarious that you disagree with 12 experienced witnesses on the O'Hare thing, yet a few "likes" to your posts makes you think it means something. Now THAT is hypocrisy.

Not everyone dude. I received some messages in my inbox and also email. It would appear to me according to what I have been told that many people do not get involved with this thread out of fear of being constantly ridiculed and derided. Some have even expressed contempt at how juvenile you and a couple others have been.

But I am made of far tougher skin than that, and have been down this road with pseudo-skeptics such as yourself many many times. You, nor anyone else here, is saying anything I haven't seen before from others who simply have very limited experience with this topic, just like you.


Quote:
(08-12-2014 10:38 PM)Free Wrote:  misrepresentation of my position.
See this is funny on two levels:
1.) You keep asserting this, but you never once demonstrate an instance of it.

Lies. Here are two examples of both you and unfogged misrepresenting my position, and for fuck sakes try to exhibit some semblance of somebody who can follow along:

Here's an example from Unfogged who insisted I made a positive claim:

Quote:Fourth, leaping to an alien pilot doesn't seem any more likely than other wild guesses. Claiming that they must be a pilot from the future in a time ship seems hardly more disprovable than the claim that it must be a pilot from another world. Maybe they are how the angels appear to us as they travel from earth back to heaven....

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid692156

My response:

Quote:Who's making that leap? Have I? Have they? Or are you?

Sure, an alien craft is possible and for the reasons I stated in previous posts. But nobody is conclusively saying it was an alien craft.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid692176

His ignoring my objection and continuation of misrepresenting my position:

Quote:When you identify it as a vehicle you are making a leap.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid692195

My objection again, with emphasis on the witnesses making the claim, not me:

Quote:They all claim that they seen a large disc hovering in the sky some 1600 feet up, that had lights, a distinct shape, and which they watched go straight up, blowing a hole in the clouds.

12 witnesses- highly experienced with aircraft- claim to have seen a metallic disc shaped object- an aircraft- with lights performing maneuvers in the sky, and somehow you believe that we should think that what 12 experienced people seen was NOT a vehicle?

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid692224

I never made any positive claim whatsoever that the vehicle was alien. I suggested a possibility, and that is a damn far cry from making a statement of fact.

Now here's just ONE example of YOU:

Quote:It's more disappointing however because "alien life exists in the known universe" is not the claim you are making. You are making the claim that they exist AND that they travel billions of billions of light years to come to earth to hang out above airports for no discernible reason. These are WILDLY different claims.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid693087

Now by all means, please point to any post where I made a positive claim of any such thing.

Stating something as being possible is NOT the act of making a positive claim, and it is these kinds of posts- which intentionally misleads the readers since I said absolutely nothing that even closely resembles it- that demonstrate to me your intellectual dishonesty, and why many of your posts went unanswered.

If you can't tell the fucking difference between a positive claim (which I did not make) and a proposition of a possibility (that doesn't even remotely resemble what you claim I said), then is there any fucking wonder why we are at odds over this thing?

I will return later and finish off the rest of your fucked up diatribe. Enjoy your updated rep status and the "like" I gave you in your last post.

Drinking Beverage

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 11:20 AM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(09-12-2014 08:25 AM)unfogged Wrote:  I had backed away from this whole UFO debacle because it didn't seem to be getting anywhere. I see that hasn't changed.Big Grin

The other night I watched this video of Matt Dillahunty debating Matt Slick on various things. Matt Slick's defense of theism reminded me strongly of Free's defense of alien UFO pilots.

He argues that it explains all the evidence, that it is reasonable to believe because there is no proof of the contrary, that nobody has a better answer, that there are witnesses, and more. I suggest watching it and seeing how often arguments being made for aliens line up with arguments for god that are obvious fallacies in that context.

Matt Slick! Thank you so much unfogged, I knew there was a theist he reminded me of but i couldn't remember the guys name for some reason. I know exactly what debate you are talking about now and ya that's pretty much dead to rights.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 11:31 AM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(09-12-2014 09:42 AM)Free Wrote:  Here's an example from Unfogged who insisted I made a positive claim:

Quote:Fourth, leaping to an alien pilot doesn't seem any more likely than other wild guesses. Claiming that they must be a pilot from the future in a time ship seems hardly more disprovable than the claim that it must be a pilot from another world. Maybe they are how the angels appear to us as they travel from earth back to heaven....

My response:

Quote:Who's making that leap? Have I? Have they? Or are you?

Sure, an alien craft is possible and for the reasons I stated in previous posts. But nobody is conclusively saying it was an alien craft.

Had you not been posting that you believed aliens were likely visiting Earth? Did you or did you not say that you were 70% convinced that this incident was an alien craft? That is a claim that it was very probably an alien craft. If you want to mince words, I didn't say that you claimed it was conclusive, but I was trying to treat your claims as they would be reasonably understood by anybody reading all that you had posted. Picking out specific sentences and saying "I didn't make a positive claim here" is a shyster trick.

Quote:My objection again, with emphasis on the witnesses making the claim, not me:

Give me a fucking break. You claimed that these were experienced witnesses and that you accepted their testimony. In your own words:

Quote:12 witnesses- highly experienced with aircraft- claim to have seen a metallic disc shaped object- an aircraft- with lights performing maneuvers in the sky, and somehow you believe that we should think that what 12 experienced people seen was NOT a vehicle?

You aren't just saying that THEY made a claim, you are saying that you accept that claim. In conjunction with all the other things you've posted it was quite clear that you accepted 'alien craft' as the most probable answer. That's you making a claim. That's what I was responding to.

You're obviously not at all stupid but from my perspective you have a huge blind spot and an emotional attachment to the idea of aliens being here. The evidence FOR that just isn't there, at least not that I've seen.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
09-12-2014, 11:39 AM (This post was last modified: 09-12-2014 11:45 AM by Free.)
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(09-12-2014 11:31 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(09-12-2014 09:42 AM)Free Wrote:  Here's an example from Unfogged who insisted I made a positive claim:


My response:

Had you not been posting that you believed aliens were likely visiting Earth? Did you or did you not say that you were 70% convinced that this incident was an alien craft? That is a claim that it was very probably an alien craft. If you want to mince words, I didn't say that you claimed it was conclusive, but I was trying to treat your claims as they would be reasonably understood by anybody reading all that you had posted. Picking out specific sentences and saying "I didn't make a positive claim here" is a shyster trick.

Quote:My objection again, with emphasis on the witnesses making the claim, not me:

Give me a fucking break. You claimed that these were experienced witnesses and that you accepted their testimony. In your own words:

Quote:12 witnesses- highly experienced with aircraft- claim to have seen a metallic disc shaped object- an aircraft- with lights performing maneuvers in the sky, and somehow you believe that we should think that what 12 experienced people seen was NOT a vehicle?

You aren't just saying that THEY made a claim, you are saying that you accept that claim. In conjunction with all the other things you've posted it was quite clear that you accepted 'alien craft' as the most probable answer. That's you making a claim. That's what I was responding to.

You're obviously not at all stupid but from my perspective you have a huge blind spot and an emotional attachment to the idea of aliens being here. The evidence FOR that just isn't there, at least not that I've seen.

Hey! Nice attempt at avoiding the fact that you misrepresented my position, dispshit.

The fact of the fucking matter is YOU DID MISREPRESENT MY POSITION.

It doesn't matter in the slightest whether or not I thought it was possible that they seen an "aircraft," as you completely LIED about my position in that saying that I was positively claiming that the aircraft was an alien craft.

You lying and intellectually dishonest sack of shit.

Drinking Beverage

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: