UFO Disclosure
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-09-2015, 12:26 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(11-09-2015 08:34 AM)adey67 Wrote:  I thought the F4 Phantom turned like a truck leastways that's how a pilot in Vietnam described it in this book I read once.

It's not as nimble as an F-5 or an F-16, of course, but both the Blue Angels and the Thunderbirds aerobatic teams flew the F-4 for years.

We had F-4Es at my base, in a Reserve wing. They do have high wing-loading and rely on their very powerful engines for a good portion of their lift. They can't engage in sustained maneuvers without losing altitude, for that reason, but they can easily manage a 45° turn. The idea that that is some sort of impossible maneuver is laughable.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2015, 12:32 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(11-09-2015 12:24 PM)Free Wrote:  More of your bullshit. But carry on, it can get entertaining.

Neither the part where you can't substantiate your claims nor the part where you get pissy when called on it is bullshit.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
11-09-2015, 12:32 PM (This post was last modified: 11-09-2015 12:40 PM by Unbeliever.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
(11-09-2015 07:09 AM)Free Wrote:  He was ignored for the following reasons:

1. Constant False Comparison Fallacies: He continues to point to false comparisons, such as the last one in which I replied to him, wasting my time reviewing his bullshit reasoning.

Such as comparing the idea of an intelligent, civilized species living alongside us on Earth to the idea of an intelligent, civilized species living alongside us on Earth.

(11-09-2015 07:09 AM)Free Wrote:  2. Ignoring Evidence: He wrongfully insists that oral testimony given via multiple eyewitness testimonies is not evidence, when every court in the civilized world demonstrates that it is.

Not without actual evidence to back it up, it isn't.

(11-09-2015 07:09 AM)Free Wrote:  3. Misrepresenting My Views: Due to # 1 & 2 above, he misrepresents my position, and also by not being capable of distinguishing between a positive claim and and a claim of possibility, he constantly insists that I am making positive claim of the existence of alien visitation when I have clearly, numerous times, have been stating it as being but one of the aforementioned possibilities.

Except that this is a blatant lie. You do not argue for possibility, which is a useless position to take. You argue for the rationality of making the conclusion of truth.

(11-09-2015 07:09 AM)Free Wrote:  4. Chas has demonstrated Unbeliever's other faulty reasoning blunders at least twice in this thread now, and there are numerous others.

Chas and I have had moments like this before. As per usual, we're saying the same thing phrased slightly different ways, as I pointed out previously.

EDIT: In response to your last post, Chas, again, we're still saying the same thing in different ways, though I admit that this may be my fault when I re-examine my posts and see that I have never fully defined the term "consider" as I use it.

When we dismiss a claim, as you say, we ignore it. We act as if it was never brought up, because the lack of evidence in its favor makes acting as though it is anything other than baseless speculation is rather pointless. We behave, in fact, the same way that we would if we knew that the claim was false. If someone suggests to you that mole people live at the center of the Earth, and you dismiss the claim, you go about your life exactly as before. It doesn't change anything about the way you behave when you dismiss the claim. And you'd act exactly the same way if the claim were actively proven to be false - that is, you wouldn't change a single thing about your actions.

Your behavior, in either instance, is equivalent. This is what I mean when I say "consider it to be false".

...So, basically, Free, you are wrong in every way possible.

"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
11-09-2015, 12:34 PM (This post was last modified: 11-09-2015 12:39 PM by Unbeliever.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
(11-09-2015 07:29 AM)Free Wrote:  If he decides that he will be civil, mature, and stops his bullshit fallacies, I will remove him from ignore.

I absolutely fucking hate when people use too many logical fallacies in their discussions. We see theists do it all the time, and we nail them for it, so seeing an atheist do it is doubly aggravating because we should reasonably expect them to not be such fucking hypocrites.

Oh, the irony.

"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
11-09-2015, 12:36 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(11-09-2015 10:22 AM)adey67 Wrote:  
(11-09-2015 09:24 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  There's an actual google search result for f-4 drives like a truck. Whoda thunk? Big Grin

Glad to see I wasn't completely mistaken like you say whoda thunk it.

From the thread in that link:

Quote:How well does the Phantom fly? It brought me home with damage that would have destroyed a F-8, F9F or any British or Soviet fighter of the era. So, I'm highly partial to the Phantom. In a climb, it wasnt' until the F-15 that there was anything that could out climb us. Hence, we tended to use vertical maneuvers rather than horizontal ones. That said, the Phantom had enough excess power to hold speed through the turn if called on. Stalls were ugly. We had a hard deck of 10,000 feet above ground level for slow flight. Below 10,000 AGL, any stall called for a ride on the ejector seats. Some stalls were unrecoverable at any altitude. (But, the same is true for almost all jets.) Having said that, the Phantom handled very well at low speeds. It was easy to fly on approach and very stable. (Thanks to high wing loading and a good AOA unit.) At altitude, the Phantom handled better than most. It has a coffin corner, like all jets, but you have to be really high like in FL500 high to encounter that problem. (The F-15 can fly at CLASSIFIED altitude before it runs into its coffin corner.)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2015, 12:45 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(11-09-2015 12:22 PM)Free Wrote:  
(11-09-2015 11:38 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  In a court of law, eyewitness testimony is given less weight than physical evidence, and rightfully so.

Of course it does, but my whole point here was to have people acknowledge that oral evidence is, in fact, actual evidence. That's really the whole point of this part of the discussion, and I have no idea why it had to go on as long as it did.

Because you're giving it a weight that it doesn't merit. The weaknesses in eyewitness testimony are well-documented, yet you seem to gloss them over, so folks are making sure that the point is made. Perhaps if you acknowledged the justice of the complaint, the subtopic would fade off and the thread would get back on track?


(11-09-2015 12:22 PM)Free Wrote:  
Quote:Also, there are no "sexual harassment" convictions. It is not a crime.

That depends which country you live in.

Give us a few convictions that were obtained by verbal reports and nothing else, then.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2015, 12:46 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
Oh joy this nonsense again. :l

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
11-09-2015, 12:46 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(11-09-2015 12:22 PM)Free Wrote:  Of course it does, but my whole point here was to have people acknowledge that oral evidence is, in fact, actual evidence.

No, it isn't.

Your "point" was to have people acknowledge that oral evidence is evidence of the account and all its assumptions being accurate. They are not equivalent.

No one here has denied that anecdotes signify something. Generally, it means that the person relaying the story saw something worth investigating. They are not, however, evidence of the type that you require. They do not in any way act as verification of their own accuracy, no matter how many people agree with the story or how many degrees they hold.

The number of anecdotes regarding UFOs indicates that people have seen UFOs.

It does not form any kind of evidence that those UFOs were actually craft of any description, let alone alien in origin.

"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
[+] 2 users Like Unbeliever's post
11-09-2015, 12:51 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(11-09-2015 12:32 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(11-09-2015 12:24 PM)Free Wrote:  More of your bullshit. But carry on, it can get entertaining.

Neither the part where you can't substantiate your claims nor the part where you get pissy when called on it is bullshit.

You see, your problem is this:

(11-09-2015 12:19 PM)cjlr Wrote:  "I don't know therefore I do" is a goddamn awful argument when theists try it, and it's a goddamn awful argument when Free tries it.

While ignoring my truthful position of:

Quote:I do not conclude that alien visitations are factual, but only postulate the possibility."

Therefore, when I say that "someone" is misrepresenting my position, it can be demonstrated as factual, and thereby that person can rightfully be categorized as being "intellectually dishonest."

Wouldn't you agree?

Big Grin

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
11-09-2015, 12:52 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(11-09-2015 12:51 PM)Free Wrote:  Therefore, when I say that "someone" is misrepresenting my position, it can be demonstrated as factual, and thereby that person can rightfully be categorized as being "intellectually dishonest."

Wouldn't you agree?

Oh yes.

You really should stop trying to misrepresent your own position.

"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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: