That Damn UFO Thing
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-11-2014, 09:45 AM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(30-11-2014 09:30 AM)Free Wrote:  Here is another hypothetical scenario.

A report comes in to Homeland Security that an unidentified aircraft was observed in a stationary position over the Empire State Building in New York City.

The US Airforce scrambles its fighter pilots, and they head for the area. They see an unidentified aircraft which then begins to move towards the east. They pursue it east at a high speed, and even attempt to shoot it down as it flies over US waters in the Atlantic ocean, off the coast of Maine.

6 trained fighter pilots failed to shoot down the aircraft and the aircraft itself demonstrates exceptional maneuverability and speed insomuch that it accelerates over the water until it can no longer be visually seen.

Afterwards, the pilots were interviewed and none of them could identify what kind of craft it was, or who was responsible for it.


So the question is this:

Is there any evidence that what they saw was an aircraft?

You keep missing the point. No one is saying that eyewitness testimony isn't evidence,
just that it is not good or sufficient evidence without corroboration by physical or objective evidence.

And of course some eyewitness reports are more credible than others, but they're not generally sufficient to substantiate extraordinary claims on their own.

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
30-11-2014, 09:58 AM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(30-11-2014 09:45 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-11-2014 09:30 AM)Free Wrote:  Here is another hypothetical scenario.

A report comes in to Homeland Security that an unidentified aircraft was observed in a stationary position over the Empire State Building in New York City.

The US Airforce scrambles its fighter pilots, and they head for the area. They see an unidentified aircraft which then begins to move towards the east. They pursue it east at a high speed, and even attempt to shoot it down as it flies over US waters in the Atlantic ocean, off the coast of Maine.

6 trained fighter pilots failed to shoot down the aircraft and the aircraft itself demonstrates exceptional maneuverability and speed insomuch that it accelerates over the water until it can no longer be visually seen.

Afterwards, the pilots were interviewed and none of them could identify what kind of craft it was, or who was responsible for it.


So the question is this:

Is there any evidence that what they saw was an aircraft?

You keep missing the point. No one is saying that eyewitness testimony isn't evidence,
just that it is not good or sufficient evidence without corroboration by physical or objective evidence.

And of course some eyewitness reports are more credible than others, but they're not generally sufficient to substantiate extraordinary claims on their own.

So what it comes down to is whether or not people view the eyewitness reports at O'Hare airport as being extraordinary, and the credibility of the witnesses?

The aircraft at O'Hare bears considerable similarity to what I described in my aforementioned hypothetical scenario, and the witnesses at O'Hare are more intimately familiar with aircraft than those US fighter pilots, since many of the witnesses were aircraft mechanics.

I actually see more credibility with the O'Hare situation than I see with the hypothetical scenario.

There were more than a dozen eye-witnesses at O'Hare, all experienced with aircraft, and all reporting the same thing.

There is very good reason why this UFO report is considered by many to be perhaps the greatest UFO report of them all.

The credibility factor is off the scale.

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
30-11-2014, 10:08 AM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(30-11-2014 09:58 AM)Free Wrote:  
(30-11-2014 09:45 AM)Chas Wrote:  You keep missing the point. No one is saying that eyewitness testimony isn't evidence,
just that it is not good or sufficient evidence without corroboration by physical or objective evidence.

And of course some eyewitness reports are more credible than others, but they're not generally sufficient to substantiate extraordinary claims on their own.

So what it comes down to is whether or not people view the eyewitness reports at O'Hare airport as being extraordinary, and the credibility of the witnesses?

The aircraft at O'Hare bears considerable similarity to what I described in my aforementioned hypothetical scenario, and the witnesses at O'Hare are more intimately familiar with aircraft than those US fighter pilots, since many of the witnesses were aircraft mechanics.

I actually see more credibility with the O'Hare situation than I see with the hypothetical scenario.

There were more than a dozen eye-witnesses at O'Hare, all experienced with aircraft, and all reporting the same thing.

There is very good reason why this UFO report is considered by many to be perhaps the greatest UFO report of them all.

The credibility factor is off the scale.

No, it's not. Human perception is fallible; without corroborating physical evidence eyewitness testimony is insufficient.

And I think you are inflating the observational skills of those witnesses.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
30-11-2014, 10:12 AM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(30-11-2014 09:58 AM)Free Wrote:  
(30-11-2014 09:45 AM)Chas Wrote:  You keep missing the point. No one is saying that eyewitness testimony isn't evidence,
just that it is not good or sufficient evidence without corroboration by physical or objective evidence.

And of course some eyewitness reports are more credible than others, but they're not generally sufficient to substantiate extraordinary claims on their own.

So what it comes down to is whether or not people view the eyewitness reports at O'Hare airport as being extraordinary, and the credibility of the witnesses?

The aircraft at O'Hare bears considerable similarity to what I described in my aforementioned hypothetical scenario, and the witnesses at O'Hare are more intimately familiar with aircraft than those US fighter pilots, since many of the witnesses were aircraft mechanics.

I actually see more credibility with the O'Hare situation than I see with the hypothetical scenario.

There were more than a dozen eye-witnesses at O'Hare, all experienced with aircraft, and all reporting the same thing.

There is very good reason why this UFO report is considered by many to be perhaps the greatest UFO report of them all.

The credibility factor is off the scale.


No, it is not. 12 people out of several hundred thousand think they saw something. No photos, no video evidence, no physical evidence exists to corroborate their story. That is the definition of non-credible. The fact that they agree with your presupposition is the only reason you want to believe them. As has been pointed out ad nauseum in any other circumstance where even a larger group claims to have seen something you dismiss it as not credible because it is not you pet theory. Occams razor here says the simplest explanation is those 12 people did not see what they thought they saw.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Revenant77x's post
30-11-2014, 10:19 AM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(30-11-2014 10:08 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-11-2014 09:58 AM)Free Wrote:  So what it comes down to is whether or not people view the eyewitness reports at O'Hare airport as being extraordinary, and the credibility of the witnesses?

The aircraft at O'Hare bears considerable similarity to what I described in my aforementioned hypothetical scenario, and the witnesses at O'Hare are more intimately familiar with aircraft than those US fighter pilots, since many of the witnesses were aircraft mechanics.

I actually see more credibility with the O'Hare situation than I see with the hypothetical scenario.

There were more than a dozen eye-witnesses at O'Hare, all experienced with aircraft, and all reporting the same thing.

There is very good reason why this UFO report is considered by many to be perhaps the greatest UFO report of them all.

The credibility factor is off the scale.

No, it's not. Human perception is fallible; without corroborating physical evidence eyewitness testimony is insufficient.

And I think you are inflating the observational skills of those witnesses.

If these vehicles are indeed extraterrestrial and possess exceptional ability at evading capture, then the expectation that we could somehow get any kind of physical evidence from the craft itself is exceptionally unreasonable.

There are numerous reports of visible sightings of UFOs that demonstrate non human capabilities that have been detected on radar (physical evidence) as well as observed by experts in aviation. They have been tracked on radar, pursued by military aircraft, observed by expert witnesses, and purportedly physically examined on the ground by military personnel at the Rendlesham UFO Incident.

With the experience and knowledge that I have garnered over the years on this subject, I find the O'Hare incident anything but "extraordinary."

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
30-11-2014, 10:24 AM (This post was last modified: 30-11-2014 10:31 AM by Free.)
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(30-11-2014 10:12 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(30-11-2014 09:58 AM)Free Wrote:  So what it comes down to is whether or not people view the eyewitness reports at O'Hare airport as being extraordinary, and the credibility of the witnesses?

The aircraft at O'Hare bears considerable similarity to what I described in my aforementioned hypothetical scenario, and the witnesses at O'Hare are more intimately familiar with aircraft than those US fighter pilots, since many of the witnesses were aircraft mechanics.

I actually see more credibility with the O'Hare situation than I see with the hypothetical scenario.

There were more than a dozen eye-witnesses at O'Hare, all experienced with aircraft, and all reporting the same thing.

There is very good reason why this UFO report is considered by many to be perhaps the greatest UFO report of them all.

The credibility factor is off the scale.


No, it is not. 12 people out of several hundred thousand think they saw something. No photos, no video evidence, no physical evidence exists to corroborate their story. That is the definition of non-credible. The fact that they agree with your presupposition is the only reason you want to believe them. As has been pointed out ad nauseum in any other circumstance where even a larger group claims to have seen something you dismiss it as not credible because it is not you pet theory. Occams razor here says the simplest explanation is those 12 people did not see what they thought they saw.

You continue to say 12 people out of several hundred thousand, but there were not several hundred thousand people outside to view the craft, and there were not several hundred thousand people anywhere near the airport. Therefore, are you intentionally over-stating the possible witnesses in some obvious attempt to decrease the credibility factor?

If so, you are not successful.

Why not say 350 million, and include the rest of the geographical USA? Or go further and say the whole world?

You statement here is just silly, and you expect me to give your opinion any credibility? You will need to be more intellectually honest than this.

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
30-11-2014, 10:40 AM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(30-11-2014 10:19 AM)Free Wrote:  
(30-11-2014 10:08 AM)Chas Wrote:  No, it's not. Human perception is fallible; without corroborating physical evidence eyewitness testimony is insufficient.

And I think you are inflating the observational skills of those witnesses.

If these vehicles are indeed extraterrestrial and possess exceptional ability at evading capture, then the expectation that we could somehow get any kind of physical evidence from the craft itself is exceptionally unreasonable.

How about pictures, video, or radar records? Those would be nice.

Quote:There are numerous reports of visible sightings of UFOs that demonstrate non human capabilities that have been detected on radar (physical evidence) as well as observed by experts in aviation. They have been tracked on radar, pursued by military aircraft, observed by expert witnesses, and purportedly physically examined on the ground by military personnel at the Rendlesham UFO Incident.

With the experience and knowledge that I have garnered over the years on this subject, I find the O'Hare incident anything but "extraordinary."

Extraterrestrials visiting Earth is not an extraordinary claim? Shocking

You're daft. Drinking Beverage

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
30-11-2014, 10:45 AM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
(30-11-2014 10:40 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-11-2014 10:19 AM)Free Wrote:  If these vehicles are indeed extraterrestrial and possess exceptional ability at evading capture, then the expectation that we could somehow get any kind of physical evidence from the craft itself is exceptionally unreasonable.

How about pictures, video, or radar records? Those would be nice.

Pictures would not convince me, nor would video. That has been explained. If that is what would convince you, then take a look at this picture and voila, there you have a picture.

Photoshop anyone?

Quote:
Quote:There are numerous reports of visible sightings of UFOs that demonstrate non human capabilities that have been detected on radar (physical evidence) as well as observed by experts in aviation. They have been tracked on radar, pursued by military aircraft, observed by expert witnesses, and purportedly physically examined on the ground by military personnel at the Rendlesham UFO Incident.

With the experience and knowledge that I have garnered over the years on this subject, I find the O'Hare incident anything but "extraordinary."

Extraterrestrials visiting Earth is not an extraordinary claim? Shocking

You're daft. Drinking Beverage

Why would it be? You seem like a reasonable man, and with the universe as vast as it is, why would it be extraordinary?

I think it's inevitable.

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
30-11-2014, 10:50 AM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
There is evidence that they saw some unidentified object or phenomena that they think could maybe be an aircraft, there is no evidence that what they think they saw was actually an aircraft. Its called an Unidentified flying object for a bloody reason.

I'm not trolling you, I'm raising objections to your fallacious justifications, your poor analogies, and your insistence that because they think its an aircraft therefor it is.

If they think its an aircraft based on alleged similarities to human aircraft then its more likely to be a human made aircraft that has yet to be revealed to the public. Which would rationally explain the rush to cover it , but that's just conjecture.

Which is exactly what any lawyer worth his salt would say if a witness claimed he believed it was an aircraft. Conjecture.

If you pay such close attention to what people right how about you address the issues with your position I bloody WROTE instead of just declaring them to be wrong with out providing any justification for that assertion.

I'm finding hard to keep my responses measured and not treat you like I would a theist when you make the same kind of arguments and avoid addressing a whole bunch of valid complaints just like they do.

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
[+] 3 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
30-11-2014, 10:59 AM
RE: That Damn UFO Thing
And another thing you are conflating court room evidence with scientific evidence. The judge could rule that it was an alien craft that they saw, that its pilot is named Bob and he came here for margarita Thursdays down at the local YMCA.

That does not prove, or even make the belief that it was justified, that it actually was.

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
[+] 1 user Likes WhiskeyDebates's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: