UFO Disclosure
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-09-2015, 10:25 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 10:08 AM)Free Wrote:  The only reason i am repeating myself is so that the lurkers are fully aware that you have been outted as being intellectually dishonest.

Oh, certainly. It's entirely coincidence that you duck back behind shouts of "but I already proved you're an idiot" every time that something comes up that you can't actually respond to - such as, for example, the god-of-the-gaps nature of your arguments, or the difference between verifiable evidence and hearsay, and so on. It is not in any way a cheap, blatant dodge and red herring attempt.

If you want to believe that the lurkers are cheering you on, feel free. It's just one more baseless speculation to add to your ever-growing list, and it wouldn't make you any more right even if it were true. Popularity is not a substitute for truth.

Anecdotes are not evidence. Science is not based on anecdotes. Curiosity and the urge to know more are not equivalent to evidence. How much belief you hold in the truth of an anecdote is not evidence. Courtrooms do not admit bare assertions as evidence without corroboration.

And repeatedly asserting that I am a liar does nothing but make you look like still more of a fool.

And at this point, it is clear that you have given up on the conversation. You are not responding to points raised; you simply post a new picture of a broken wagon any time that you are unable to come up with a reply. There's nothing happening here, and I am not interested in an internet dick-measuring contest.

I see no point in responding to the same points that I have already dealt with multiple times. For those reading the thread, if I do not respond to a post of Free's, assume that I have already dealt with it in one of my previous posts. You can read back over the thread if you wish to see for yourself.

As it is, this "argument" has become too repetitive and asinine to hold my attention.

"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
15-09-2015, 10:26 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 10:25 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 10:08 AM)Free Wrote:  The only reason i am repeating myself is so that the lurkers are fully aware that you have been outted as being intellectually dishonest.
As it is, this "argument" has become too repetitive and asinine to hold my attention.

Be careful not to let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

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
15-09-2015, 10:28 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
As a final note:

(15-09-2015 10:24 AM)Free Wrote:  My position on anecdotal evidence is only that the belief in a claim increases exponentially when multiple eyewitnesses' testimony is corroborated. This is a no-brainer.

Yes, it is. But anecdotes cannot be used as corroboration other anecdotes, because they themselves may be equally wrong or fraudulent.

You need actual evidence for that.

"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
[+] 1 user Likes Unbeliever's post
15-09-2015, 10:33 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 10:28 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  As a final note:

(15-09-2015 10:24 AM)Free Wrote:  My position on anecdotal evidence is only that the belief in a claim increases exponentially when multiple eyewitnesses' testimony is corroborated. This is a no-brainer.

Yes, it is.

Wow! Never expected this.

The issue is settled.

Quote: But anecdotes cannot be used as corroboration other anecdotes, because they themselves may be equally wrong or fraudulent.

Yes they can, and even when they can, they can all still be equally wrong no matter how many eyewitnesses are present. All they do, collectivity, is exponentially increase belief in the claim, but they can never conclusively prove the claim to be true.

Quote:You need actual evidence for that.

Physical evidence is required to conclusively prove a claim.

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
15-09-2015, 10:36 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 10:24 AM)Free Wrote:  Don't even try to obfuscate and strawman my position. It just makes you look even more stupid than you already are.

Yes, that's exactly what I was doing Rolleyes You paranoid, delusional twit.

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
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
15-09-2015, 10:42 AM (This post was last modified: 15-09-2015 10:52 AM by Free.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 10:36 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 10:24 AM)Free Wrote:  Don't even try to obfuscate and strawman my position. It just makes you look even more stupid than you already are.

Yes, that's exactly what I was doing Rolleyes You paranoid, delusional twit.

Since you have been demonstrated as exhibiting characteristics unbecoming that of an honest person, everything you say now is held in suspicion of treason of reason.

Until you admit my point regarding anecdotal evidence, nothing you can say can be trusted, nor taken seriously.

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
15-09-2015, 10:52 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 10:33 AM)Free Wrote:  
Quote: But anecdotes cannot be used as corroboration other anecdotes, because they themselves may be equally wrong or fraudulent.

Yes they can, and even when they can, they can all still be equally wrong no matter how many eyewitnesses are present. All they do, collectivity, is exponentially increase belief in the claim

For some very silly people, perhaps.

"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
15-09-2015, 11:02 AM (This post was last modified: 15-09-2015 11:06 AM by Free.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 10:52 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 10:33 AM)Free Wrote:  Yes they can, and even when they can, they can all still be equally wrong no matter how many eyewitnesses are present. All they do, collectivity, is exponentially increase belief in the claim

For some very silly people, perhaps.

It really depends on the strength of the claim, and any judge's opinion on the credibility of the witnesses.

Remember, this entire discussion all comes down to "belief." Some hard-core skeptics will dismiss it without even investigating it. Others will investigate to some degree, and still dismiss it. Yet others, who do investigate it thoroughly, can still dismiss it, or accept it as having enough evidence to warrant belief in the claim.

Why?

Because the more anybody knows about something, the more their belief in it increases or decreases. It doesn't mean that what they believe is true or false, but only that they have more reason than others to believe/disbelieve that something is true or false.

When it comes to claims, all claims require some degree of physical evidence to approach conclusiveness. However, it is my opinion, that virtually nothing can ever be conclusively proven, or that damn few things are capable of being conclusively proven.

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
15-09-2015, 11:09 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 11:02 AM)Free Wrote:  It really depends on the strength of the claim, and any judge's opinion on the credibility of the witnesses.

Neither of which can be established without evidence.

(15-09-2015 11:02 AM)Free Wrote:  Remember, this entire discussion all comes down to "belief."

No, it doesn't. Belief is irrelevant. Belief is arbitrary. Belief can be assigned to any proposition to any degree, especially if there is no actual evidence in hand.

What it comes down to - what it has always come down to - is whether or not that belief is rational.

"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
15-09-2015, 11:15 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 11:09 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 11:02 AM)Free Wrote:  It really depends on the strength of the claim, and any judge's opinion on the credibility of the witnesses.

Neither of which can be established without evidence.

(15-09-2015 11:02 AM)Free Wrote:  Remember, this entire discussion all comes down to "belief."

No, it doesn't. Belief is irrelevant. Belief is arbitrary. Belief can be assigned to any proposition to any degree, especially if there is no actual evidence in hand.

What it comes down to - what it has always come down to - is whether or not that belief is rational.

But ... this case all comes down to whether or not you make a choice to believe or disbelieve that the 12 witnesses, deemed credible due to being familiar with various aircraft, actually seen a UFO.

So what do we do about that? Do we dismiss it out of hand? Or do we investigate the claim to measure it's truth value?

If interested, we investigate it. If not, we can dismiss it. If someone isn't interested enough to investigate it, then we can dismiss their position completely, whether they believe it or not.

If, for example, you suddenly said, "I believe they are telling the truth," I would ask you why so that I can then determine whether or not your position of belief is based upon your knowledge of the case, or if it's based upon nothing at all.

If you had not investigated the case, your belief or disbelief in it is meaningless.

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: