UFO Disclosure
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-09-2015, 12:41 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
You can say it's enough to convince you. As you said, its your opinion, which is fine. But that doesnt make it truth, it still doesn't make it solid, concrete, repeatable evidence. Claiming it is...is dishonest.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2015, 12:43 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(10-09-2015 12:39 PM)adey67 Wrote:  Are you threatening me ?

Dude, I will give you a chance to not make an annoyance of yourself before I simply ignore you on my ignore list.

The next thing you say to me will determine it one way or another.

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
10-09-2015, 12:45 PM (This post was last modified: 11-09-2015 01:02 AM by Hobbitgirl.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
Descriptions of visitors became more identical with their popularity after the 1940s and their introduction into pop culture. If you look back further they are wildly different descriptions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Hobbitgirl's post
10-09-2015, 12:45 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(10-09-2015 12:41 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  You can say it's enough to convince you. As you said, its your opinion, which is fine. But that doesnt make it truth, it still doesn't make it solid, concrete, repeatable evidence. Claiming it is...is dishonest.

I cannot claim anything as being conclusive in regards to whether or not we are being visited by non human intelligent life.

I am not claiming absolute truth.

I am only examining evidence and reaching the point of "possible."

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
10-09-2015, 12:45 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(10-09-2015 10:00 AM)Free Wrote:  Oh, and one other question regarding whether or not multiple eyewitness testimony is inadequate.

Let me see a show of hands to the following question:

Question: Should we overturn all convictions of verbal sexual harassment because we somehow think the multiple eyewitness testimonies are inadequate?

After all, there is no "physical evidence" whatsoever, so don't you think that verbal sexual harassment should not be a criminal offence?

Tongue

What makes you think that all cases of sexual harassment were supported by eyewitness and only eyewitness accounts? And sexual harassment is not a criminal offense unless there has been unwanted physical contact.

Having said that, I think it's fair to ask for physical evidence of a physical phenomena.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2015, 12:49 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(10-09-2015 12:22 PM)Free Wrote:  The difference between all that you posted above and what I am saying is that we have reason to believe in the possible existence of non human intelligent life.

But not to believe that non-human intelligent life has visited Earth.

Stop equivocating.

(10-09-2015 12:41 PM)Free Wrote:  Can they all describe their experience exactly the same? Will they all tell you what God looked like and the descriptions be virtually identical? Would their experiences be all at the same time, in the same location, with absolutely no preconceived beliefs about their God?

This doesn't happen for proponents of alien visitation, either.

Even if it does, again, the absolute best that you are left with is "we don't know, therefore aliens".

It's idiotic.

(10-09-2015 12:43 PM)Free Wrote:  Dude, I will give you a chance to not make an annoyance of yourself before I simply ignore you on my ignore list.

The next thing you say to me will determine it one way or another.

This is possibly the most hilariously pathetic threat I've ever seen.

"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
10-09-2015, 12:49 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(10-09-2015 12:45 PM)Free Wrote:  
(10-09-2015 12:41 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  You can say it's enough to convince you. As you said, its your opinion, which is fine. But that doesnt make it truth, it still doesn't make it solid, concrete, repeatable evidence. Claiming it is...is dishonest.

I cannot claim anything as being conclusive in regards to whether or not we are being visited by non human intelligent life.

I am not claiming absolute truth.

I am only examining evidence and reaching the point of "possible."


It's also possible god exist based on the same sort of very weak evidence. Yet you deny that. It's interesting to me how people can pick and choose like that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2015, 12:49 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(10-09-2015 12:43 PM)Free Wrote:  
(10-09-2015 12:39 PM)adey67 Wrote:  Are you threatening me ?

Dude, I will give you a chance to not make an annoyance of yourself before I simply ignore you on my ignore list.

The next thing you say to me will determine it one way or another.

Perhaps we should just shake hands and leave each other alone we clearly don't get on.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2015, 12:54 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 10:23 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(09-09-2015 09:54 PM)daniel1948 Wrote:  Monty Python expressed it best in the famous Galaxy Song, when they said that the speed of light is the fastest speed there is. Let me repeat: The speed of light is the fastest speed there is. There is no such thing as "faster than light." The phrase "faster than light" is as meaningless as the phrase "three divided by zero." Grammatically, it seems to mean something, but it has no meaning, because there is no such thing as division by zero and there is no such thing as "faster than light."

Period.

The speed of light only applies to information traveling through space. Objects can move away from each other faster than the speed of light because the space between them is expanding faster than the speed of light.

And then there are those pesky tachyons that gave the Romulans so much trouble.

The expansion of space does not help when you are trying to get from one place to another in space. And there is zero evidence for tachyons. They don't help your case.

(10-09-2015 08:57 AM)Free Wrote:  It's merely about possibilities, not conclusiveness.

This is complete and utter bullshit. You are trying to argue that things for which there is zero evidence, and zero reason, which are advocated by nobody but nut jobs and conspiracy theorists, are "possible." What's the fucking point?

This is just some wacko conspiracy argument, but instead of arguing that there is a conspiracy, you are taking the softer line that it's "possible" that there's a conspiracy. Because if all these "possibles" were true, and so many people in high places knew about it, it would take a conspiracy for it not to be public knowledge.

But to think the government could cover up something like space aliens, for this many years, is to attribute to government far more competence than it's ever demonstrated. Real conspiracies come to light far sooner than later. Watergate; Iran-Contra; Gulf of Tonkin...

It just doesn't fucking matter what's "possible." What matters is what is. And the only way we know what is, is by examining evidence, and the nutters who believe in space aliens on Earth have no fucking evidence!!!

"El mar se mide por olas,
el cielo por alas,
nosotros por lágrimas."
-- Jaime Sabines
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes daniel1948's post
10-09-2015, 12:59 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(10-09-2015 12:49 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  
(10-09-2015 12:45 PM)Free Wrote:  I cannot claim anything as being conclusive in regards to whether or not we are being visited by non human intelligent life.

I am not claiming absolute truth.

I am only examining evidence and reaching the point of "possible."


It's also possible god exist based on the same sort of very weak evidence. Yet you deny that. It's interesting to me how people can pick and choose like that.

"Very weak evidence?"

If you mean individual testimonies from people who make claims that defy nature, I see no evidence nor reason to accept those claims at all.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: