UFO Disclosure
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-09-2015, 07:50 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(28-09-2015 06:59 PM)Banjo Wrote:  
(28-09-2015 06:26 PM)Free Wrote:  Just so you know, the Big Bang theory is built entirely on circumstantial evidence.

Holy Shit!

Big Grin

Uh, no.

And that link shows us many things, and those many things are circumstantial to the support of the Big Bang THEORY.

None of those things can PROVE a Big Bang THEORY..

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
28-09-2015, 07:56 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(28-09-2015 07:50 PM)Free Wrote:  
(28-09-2015 06:59 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Uh, no.

And that link shows us many things, and those many things are circumstantial to the support of the Big Bang THEORY.

Look for all I know the universe was born from an exploding slug. The fact is I cannot and do not try to prove it.

Free the BBT has nothing to do with aliens visiting earth.

If you have actual evidence, show us. Or, STFU.

You are beginning to appear insane Free. Seriously mate. I mean over the top, should be locked up insane.

Is that the persona you wish to be labeled with here? You are coming across like dickheads such as Q and Heywood!

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-09-2015, 08:07 PM (This post was last modified: 28-09-2015 08:10 PM by Free.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
(28-09-2015 07:56 PM)Banjo Wrote:  
(28-09-2015 07:50 PM)Free Wrote:  And that link shows us many things, and those many things are circumstantial to the support of the Big Bang THEORY.

Look for all I know the universe was born from an exploding slug. The fact is I cannot and do not try to prove it.

Free the BBT has nothing to do with aliens visiting earth.

If you have actual evidence, show us. Or, STFU.

You are beginning to appear insane Free. Seriously mate. I mean over the top, should be locked up insane.

Is that the persona you wish to be labeled with here? You are coming across like dickheads such as Q and Heywood!

The point of the BBT is to demonstrate how beliefs in the BBT are built upon supporting evidence.

This argument is all about how the supporting evidence builds upon the belief of alien visitation.

MY point is to demonstrate that if people- including all those involved in this discussion- can believe in the possible Big Bang when all the evidence is circumstantial (and some of that evidence is theoretical itself), then I and others like me are equally justified to believe in the possible visitation of alien life to earth based upon the circumstantial evidence also.

I could care less what you think of "Free." You see "him," but you don't know me at all, and never will.

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
28-09-2015, 08:29 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(28-09-2015 05:50 PM)Free Wrote:  "Aliens are not visiting earth because there is no evidence and the distance is too far."
No, this is a strawman. Our, or mine at least, argument it's that you are irrational for accepting as true that which has not been shown to be true. You are accepting claims as true that have yet to meet their burden of proof, and this is entirely counter to the most basic of skepticism and logic. You are playing connect the dots and the image it's making is a cat, is very clearly a cat, however you want, or even need, it to be a dolphin so you start adding your own dots until it becomes a dolphin yet the whiskers are still there and evident to everyone else in this thread.

Quote:There is no direct evidence of aliens visiting earth, since only direct evidence would prove it conclusively.
The problem is naturally that there ABSOLUTELY should be "direct" evidence of visitation. If it's a real object interacting in the real world it would absolutely leave real testable evidence as literally every single other real object operating in real space does. But this is the ONE single phenomena in all of reality that can go on for centuries and leave not a SINGLE bit of evidence that can be directly proven to relate to it?
And no to justify the alien visitation hypothesis wouldn't even require direct evidence, even some indirect evidence (radiology, DNA) would lend credence to it and even THAT doesn't exist.

Quote:However, the available history and photographs, as well as government documents and eyewitness accounts, all point to the possibility that aliens have indeed visited earth, and have been doing so for a very long time.
No, even if I was to for the sake of argument give you all those as proof that UFOs actually exist just no. Not one single instance of UFO's have been demonstrably related to extra-terrestrial activity or origin. We have an UNIDENTIFIED phenomena that has never had even been conclusively linked to aircraft. Even by your own estimation 99% of sightings are false.
The history of UFO sightings is evidence ONLY for the possibility that UFO's are a real phenomena. Full stop. There is nothing linking these phenomena to aliens. Your just adding your preferred explanation into the gap of "unknown". Could it possibly be aliens? Sure, but that means nothing. If you have a hypothesis that you can't proven in anyway, and you have already said it's unprovable, then it's a worthless hypothesis. That's not opinion, that is a scientific fact. It explains nothing, presents WAY more questions then it answers, violates Occam's Razor, is untestable as a hypothesis, unfalsifiable, and fits exactly 0% of the available data.

Saying "Well it is possible" tells us exactly nothing about the phenomena. It's jsut an attempt to shoehorn in your preferred notion. We could sit around and spend eternity listing things it could possibly be. No one here, except you, cares what it MIGHT, because what it MIGHT be tells us nothing at all, be we care what it actually is.

Is there any evidence linking "flying saucers" to "an advanced hereto unknown alien civilization capable of traversing the stars, while remaining completely undetectable to any equipment, even equipment specially designed to locate aircraft, and leaving not a single physical trace"? No there is not.

Quote:No one has ever debunked the oldest photographs which clearly show possible disc shaped aircraft, as well as other types of aircraft.
Burden of proof, no one has to debunk anything.

Quote:No one has ever debunked the government documents that all arrive at the opinion that these aircraft are real, and not fantasy or fictitious.
1.) An opinion is not a demonstration of them existing.
2.) Burden of proof, we don't have to debunk anything, they must prove that their opinion is correct and you know what....?
3.) They did an extensive investigation of UFO's from 1947 (the year of the Twining memo) to 1969ish investigating over 12,600 claims and failed to support that opinion in a staggering way. In fact according to that study there is NO evidence of extra-terrestrial involvement. That none of the UFO's that were labeled "unidentified" at the investigations conclusions "represented technological developments or principles beyond the range of modern scientific knowledge".

So if you want to sit there and pretend memos containing opinions published BEFORE an actual investigation into the subject (which found ZERO evidence of UFO's being aircraft beyond what we are capable of let alone alien in origin) happened as proof of the governments position on UFO's you go right ahead.

Meanwhile here is the actual CURRENT position of the USAF based on investigation and not opinion:

As a result of these investigations, studies and experience gained from investigating UFO reports since 1948, the conclusions of Project Blue Book were:

1.) No UFO reported, investigated, and evaluated by the Air Force has ever given any indication of threat to our national security.
2.) There has been no evidence submitted to or discovered by the Air Force that sightings categorized as "unidentified" represent technological developments or principles beyond the range of present day scientific knowledge.
3.) There has been no evidence indicating the sightings categorized as "unidentified" are extraterrestrial vehicles.


Honestly pretending the government believes UFO's are real aircraft, and then going on to assert aliens is a possible explanation, based on an opinion piece from BEFORE an investigation no less, when their actual position is the exact opposite of that is the height of dishonesty.

Quote:No one has ever debunked the 12 O'Hare witnesses' claims of all seeing a metallic disc shaped aircraft hovering over the airport.
Burden of proof, we don't have to debunk anyones claims. They have to prove them. They have not.

Quote:And everybody in this thread has only ever thrown assertions at this circumstantial evidence without ever producing one actual shred of doubt.
If you think that the failure to prove even the most basic of claims time and time and time and time again is not a" shred of doubt" you are insane. If you think that it's unreasonable to, in a phenomena (that by your own account) is 99% of the time false, to withhold belief when presented with nothing more anonymous unproven hearsay then you fail to understand what skepticism is and why we apply it to ALL claims.
If you think you can totally ignore the burden of proof at every turn then you are as anti-science as any creationist we have ever had here.

Quote:I got news for you buddy ... assertions do absolutely nothing. You can say "it's a hoax," or "it's a lie," or "it's a big conspiracy," but none of that does a damn thing because none of that is supported by any evidence whatsoever.
More hypocrisy. All you got is assertions. Assertions from anonymous people, repeated by other people which you have labeled as "unprovable" to justify your inability to prove it and take as Holy Gospel because you can't prove it wrong.

How about this, I've got no reason to believe that it's NOT a hoax/lie/mistake. You have no reason to believe that it IS a hoax/lie/mistake. How would we go about proving which of us is correct? Oh right? We would compare their claims to testable, demonstrable, and verifiable evidence.

Except we can't because you have labeled the claim as unproveable, which makes the claim worthless as an explanation for what happened that day.

Quote:You have done absolutely squat to disprove any of it, and I am quite frankly very very disappointed in you all. Such a pity, really.
Disprove imply it's been proven. It hasn't, and it's not our responsibility to debunk unproven claims. It's the job of the people resenting the claim to prove it and every last one has failed.

Including you, so save your disappointment for yourself and your scientific and logical ignorance.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
28-09-2015, 08:49 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(27-09-2015 06:40 PM)Free Wrote:  
(27-09-2015 04:48 PM)Chas Wrote:  It does not generate belief - it generates questions.

Without belief in a possibility, there could be no questions.

The question "why does that happen?" is not based on a possibility.
The question "is it possible that ... ?" is not based on a possibility.

Quote:
Quote:We observe the red shift, an observable effect of the expansion. One cannot observe 'metric space expansion'.

Yet you are forced to believe it exists when you cannot observe it in any way, correct?

Nope. We observe it by its effects. This simple concept seems to elude you. Facepalm

Quote:
Quote:No, we believe observable evidence. The maths are a model.

And there's your state of belief. That's all I was looking for, a little honesty here.

What does that even mean? What belief?

Quote:You believe the observable evidence, and you also believe what cannot be observed, such as metric space expansion. And then upon those beliefs, you conclude the possibility of the Big Bang.

I don't "believe" the observable evidence, I see it.
We observe the expansion by its effects.

Quote:And that is perfectly normal.

Quote:Neither of those is strong enough, by orders of magnitude, to have the effect of changing the observed changes in wavelength, and they are not even applicable to Hubble's Law.

But how can we know that? I mean we've never been outside the gravitational effect of our solar system to make any kind of comparison. Do we really have any idea how much of a multiplication of metric space expansion can be compared to our point here on earth? 5X? 10x? 1000X?

Do we know?

Yes, we do know. Read a physics book.

Quote:
Quote:Yes, we do know. Gravity is the weakest force and would have no appreciable effect on those observations.

But again, we've never been outside the gravitational effect of our solar system, so how can we be so certain of how much space expands until we get outside of our solar system?

By observing the red shift of galaxies.

Quote:Do we have any data at all on how much space expands outside gravitational influences?

Yes, see above.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
28-09-2015, 09:29 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(28-09-2015 08:07 PM)Free Wrote:  MY point is to demonstrate that if people- including all those involved in this discussion- can believe in the possible Big Bang when all the evidence is circumstantial (and some of that evidence is theoretical itself), then I and others like me are equally justified to believe in the possible visitation of alien life to earth based upon the circumstantial evidence also.

And you are wrong, for a great many reasons.

This is not complicated.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-09-2015, 11:34 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(28-09-2015 09:29 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  And you are wrong, for a great many reasons.

This is not complicated.

No no, Free is "winning". Rolleyes

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2015, 12:32 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(28-09-2015 05:50 PM)Free Wrote:  I got news for you buddy ... assertions do absolutely nothing. You can say "it's a hoax," or "it's a lie," or "it's a big conspiracy," but none of that does a damn thing because none of that is supported by any evidence whatsoever.

He says, having accused everyone of lying and conspiring against him after they didn't accept his bullshit assertions. Mother of God man, do you even read the tripe that you post?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2015, 07:42 AM (This post was last modified: 29-09-2015 07:51 AM by Free.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
(28-09-2015 08:29 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(28-09-2015 05:50 PM)Free Wrote:  "Aliens are not visiting earth because there is no evidence and the distance is too far."
No, this is a strawman. Our, or mine at least, argument it's that you are irrational for accepting as true that which has not been shown to be true. You are accepting claims as true that have yet to meet their burden of proof, and this is entirely counter to the most basic of skepticism and logic. You are playing connect the dots and the image it's making is a cat, is very clearly a cat, however you want, or even need, it to be a dolphin so you start adding your own dots until it becomes a dolphin yet the whiskers are still there and evident to everyone else in this thread.

What I accept as "true" is only the "possibility" of aliens visiting earth, as I have been stating since the beginning.

What I do not accept as true is your assertion that I am making some kind of positive claim that it's true that aliens ARE visiting earth, and that is a strawman in itself.

All the evidence I have provided is circumstantial evidence to demonstrate a historical chain of evidence going back to the year 1870 and forward in an effort to demonstrate a cohesive chain of the evidence as a possible explanation for the possibility that aliens have visited earth by using historical photographs, official government documents, and both historical and recent eyewitness accounts.

In any court, when crystal clear photographs are presented, and official government documents are presented, and numerous eyewitnesses are available, then a judge absolutely would permit all of this as circumstantial evidence to support a position.

This argument is NOT an argument science can answer. This is an argument in which only a judge and/or a jury can deal with, and all the evidence I have provided is completely legitimate, cohesive, and cannot be dismissed via mere assertion.

If you or anyone here thinks it is not evidence admissible in a court of law, you are fucked in the head, because it is absolutely legitimate.

The problem you are having is you simply don't fucking like the idea that I actually DO have evidence to support my position, and you have absolutely NONE to dispute it, and absolutely must rely on the logically fallacious deny without evidence position- aka Burden of Proof- because you have absolutely no other options.

Therefore the evidence stands, completely undisputed.

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
29-09-2015, 07:47 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(29-09-2015 07:42 AM)Free Wrote:  Therefore the evidence stands, completely undisputed.

Oh look, he put it in bold *and* underlined Rolleyes Must be pretty good evidence then Yes

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: