That Damn UFO Thing
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-11-2014, 12:06 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(28-11-2014 11:57 AM)Free Wrote:  The issue is whether or not eyewitness testimony is considered to be evidence.

It's as simple as that.

Drinking Beverage

Evidence is not proof. It's a beginning, not an end.

Personal testimony is not evidence of external phenomena. It is evidence only that an individual - in their cultural milieu and with a great deal of post-hoc revisionist "recollection" - claims or believes to have experienced something. It is not evidence for that thing in any meaningful sense.

If personal experience and eyewitness testimony count as evidence for alien craft, then they count as evidence for alien abduction. They count as evidence for ghosts. They count as evidence for angels and angelic visitation. They count as evidence for bigfoot and chupacabra. They count as evidence for psychic channeling and dowsing. They count as evidence for telepathy.

Do you find those other sets of evidence compelling?

Why or why not?

...

(28-11-2014 12:04 PM)Free Wrote:  
(28-11-2014 11:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  We observe cosmic redshift and cosmic microwave background. This is empirical evidence.

It is empirical evidence of cosmic redshift and microwace background only.

The rest is theory, and I know you are smart enough to know that.

Concede this point or not?

Oh, sweet Jesus the irony.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
28-11-2014, 12:07 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(28-11-2014 12:04 PM)Free Wrote:  
(28-11-2014 11:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  We observe cosmic redshift and cosmic microwave background. This is empirical evidence.

It is empirical evidence of cosmic redshift and microwace background only.

The rest is theory, and I know you are smart enough to know that.

Concede this point or not?

No, your understanding of evidence is poor.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2014, 12:12 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(28-11-2014 12:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-11-2014 11:57 AM)Free Wrote:  Really?

Here's his statement:


http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid692599

The O'Hare UFO incident has at least 12 eyewitnesses.

The issue is whether or not eyewitness testimony is considered to be evidence.

It's as simple as that.

Drinking Beverage

There is no evidence that confirms their belief that what they saw was a vehicle.
It's as simple as that.

That does not matter in the slightest. Here's another plausible hypothetical scenario:

The Chicago Tribune investigated the situation and asked the FAA if they had any records of the UFO claims, and they responded "No."

Due to the persuasiveness of the eyewitness reports, the Chicago Tribune applied to the Freedom of Information Act to have access to the public FAA records, which turned up evidence that the FAA did indeed have plenty of evidence, demonstrating that they lied.

12 people, experienced with aircraft, all claimed that what they seen was an aircraft vehicle.

The Chicago Tribune decides press charges against the FAA for covering up reports that indicate that US airspace was invaded by unknown aircraft, posing a real danger to the USA.

The case goes to court, and the 12 witnesses who seen the aircraft are registered.

So again, here's the question:

Would the judge consider their testimony as evidence?


Drinking Beverage

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2014, 12:14 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(28-11-2014 12:07 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-11-2014 12:04 PM)Free Wrote:  It is empirical evidence of cosmic redshift and microwace background only.

The rest is theory, and I know you are smart enough to know that.

Concede this point or not?

No, your understanding of evidence is poor.

Ah, but Chas...

When all of our available cosmological evidence admits of only a single coherent explanatory theory, that's obviously not evidence for that theory.
(and let's just nevermind that all scientific theories are by definition only ever provisionally accepted, naturally)

But when a dozen eyewitnesses (out of thousands at the site) claim to have seen "something" it's not just evidence that they think they saw something but must be construed as evidence that the thing was real.

You know; because reasons.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
28-11-2014, 12:19 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(28-11-2014 12:12 PM)Free Wrote:  
(28-11-2014 12:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no evidence that confirms their belief that what they saw was a vehicle.
It's as simple as that.

That does not matter in the slightest. Here's another plausible hypothetical scenario:

The Chicago Tribune investigated the situation and asked the FAA if they had any records of the UFO claims, and they responded "No."

Due to the persuasiveness of the eyewitness reports, the Chicago Tribune applied to the Freedom of Information Act to have access to the public FAA records, which turned up evidence that the FAA did indeed have plenty of evidence, demonstrating that they lied.

12 people, experienced with aircraft, all claimed that what they seen was an aircraft vehicle.

The Chicago Tribune decides press charges against the FAA for covering up reports that indicate that US airspace was invaded by unknown aircraft, posing a real danger to the USA.

The case goes to court, and the 12 witnesses who seen the aircraft are registered.

So again, here's the question:

Would the judge consider their testimony as evidence?


Drinking Beverage

I would guess that their testimony is of little relevance since the suit is about what the FAA's evidence and actions were.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2014, 12:20 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(28-11-2014 12:07 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-11-2014 12:04 PM)Free Wrote:  It is empirical evidence of cosmic redshift and microwace background only.

The rest is theory, and I know you are smart enough to know that.

Concede this point or not?

No, your understanding of evidence is poor.

And it's been demonstrated conclusively that it isn't me who doesn't understand the definition of "empirical."

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2014, 12:21 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(28-11-2014 12:19 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-11-2014 12:12 PM)Free Wrote:  That does not matter in the slightest. Here's another plausible hypothetical scenario:

The Chicago Tribune investigated the situation and asked the FAA if they had any records of the UFO claims, and they responded "No."

Due to the persuasiveness of the eyewitness reports, the Chicago Tribune applied to the Freedom of Information Act to have access to the public FAA records, which turned up evidence that the FAA did indeed have plenty of evidence, demonstrating that they lied.

12 people, experienced with aircraft, all claimed that what they seen was an aircraft vehicle.

The Chicago Tribune decides press charges against the FAA for covering up reports that indicate that US airspace was invaded by unknown aircraft, posing a real danger to the USA.

The case goes to court, and the 12 witnesses who seen the aircraft are registered.

So again, here's the question:

Would the judge consider their testimony as evidence?


Drinking Beverage

I would guess that their testimony is of little relevance since the suit is about what the FAA's evidence and actions were.

On the contrary, their testimony would support the evidence on the tapes.

Drinking Beverage

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2014, 12:23 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(28-11-2014 12:20 PM)Free Wrote:  
(28-11-2014 12:07 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, your understanding of evidence is poor.

And it's been demonstrated conclusively that it isn't me who doesn't understand the definition of "empirical."

You are delusional.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2014, 12:24 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(28-11-2014 12:21 PM)Free Wrote:  
(28-11-2014 12:19 PM)Chas Wrote:  I would guess that their testimony is of little relevance since the suit is about what the FAA's evidence and actions were.

On the contrary, their testimony would support the evidence on the tapes.

Drinking Beverage

Nope. It has no bearing on the FAA's evidence (if any).

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2014, 12:31 PM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(28-11-2014 09:55 AM)Free Wrote:  
(28-11-2014 09:48 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  I just read the Chicago Tribune article by Hilkevich http://web.archive.org/web/2007111707341...ldiraq-hed and while it certainly sounds unusual this stood out for me “No controllers saw the object, and a preliminary check of radar found nothing out of the ordinary, FAA spokeswoman Elizabeth Isham Cory said.”

So what did those people see? We’ll never know.

Actually, the recording from the ground controller said the following:

"The FAA’s ground controller notified incoming Flight 5668 to “use caution for the, ahhh, UFO”.

This is actually on tape. They knew it was there.

The following website gives a "play-by-play" of the event, including witness reports.

O'Hare UFO Report

Read the transcript more closely, the person Sue from United Airlines is passing along info from a pilot. Then the controller passes that info on. It does NOT originate from the tower.

“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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: