UFO Disclosure
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-09-2015, 07:52 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 07:47 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 07:43 PM)Free Wrote:  So before you judge me just remember that Unbeliever- to his credit- finally conceded a point on the issue of anecdotal evidence

I conceded nothing. I have been saying this same exact thing since the beginning of the thread. I honestly have no idea why you were shocked by my acknowledgement that backing up anecdotes with actual evidence makes any given case quite a bit stronger.

You simply fail to understand what is said to you.

Yes you did. Here it is.

(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.

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, 08:02 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(14-09-2015 06:36 PM)Free Wrote:  
(14-09-2015 04:29 PM)cjlr Wrote:  But that's just the thing, Free. You aren't actually reading the source you purport to worship.

The statement in the Wikipedia article is unsubstantiated. If the source document I linked to - the one you originally provided - isn't the source of that claim - and, get ready to eat shit, because it isn't - then where, precisely, does it come from?

I'm just curious.

I'm asking for the in-line citation from the original source document. Can you provide that?

If it's really there, this should be very, very easy for you to do. Why haven't you?

If you go back to the Wiki site, you will find links to the article in the Chicago Tribune, as well as as a written commentary on the Wiki from the reporter who broke the story. Investigate the story online, and watch the YouTube videos, particularly this one.

This video is a leaked video depicting the reporter from the Chicago Tribune speaking with the anchor at the new station just previous to the news broadcast, which incidentally went world-wide very quickly.





That doesn't answer my question.

A news report simply conveys what other people say they saw. If even that.

You have failed to substantiate your claims through the source you purport to be working form. Thus is your dishonesty revealed. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200. Sorry.

Repeating what other people say they saw is not evidence. Are you aware of that? Are you aware that this is literally apologetics 101?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
15-09-2015, 08:04 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 07:49 PM)Free Wrote:  WhiskeyDebates! You've just been caught out lying to everybody in this thread! What will you do now??

Yes, more hiding behind "witty" - and I say that with the strongest possible emphasis on those quotation marks - image posts rather than responding to the points raised. Par for the course at this point.

There was no FAA cover-up at O'Hare, and the only claims of such are unsourced and unsupported.

There are no credible witnesses in the NARCAP report, and those witnesses that they do have openly contradict one another, when they agree that there was an object at all. Many witnesses openly state that they saw nothing, and the report is so desperate as to include several witnesses who may have been entirely fictional simply because one witness or another remembered someone standing nearby.

There is no discrepancy in the transcripts unless you ignore all actual data regarding the real time of the given conversations.

There is no actual evidence regarding the presence of an unknown craft or what its characteristics might have been.

The only possible rational conclusion is this: there was no alien craft at O'Hare International Airport.

"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, 08:05 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 07:52 PM)Free Wrote:  Yes you did.

And, again, you fail to understand.

It is not a concession if it has been central to my position since the start of the discussion.

I am not responsible for your lack of reading comprehension.

"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, 08:05 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:02 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(14-09-2015 06:36 PM)Free Wrote:  If you go back to the Wiki site, you will find links to the article in the Chicago Tribune, as well as as a written commentary on the Wiki from the reporter who broke the story. Investigate the story online, and watch the YouTube videos, particularly this one.

This video is a leaked video depicting the reporter from the Chicago Tribune speaking with the anchor at the new station just previous to the news broadcast, which incidentally went world-wide very quickly.





That doesn't answer my question.

A news report simply conveys what other people say they saw. If even that.

You have failed to substantiate your claims through the source you purport to be working form. Thus is your dishonesty revealed. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200. Sorry.

Repeating what other people say they saw is not evidence. Are you aware of that? Are you aware that this is literally apologetics 101?

I gave you the source; the Chicago Tribune, hence the reason for the video.

I am working from multiple sources.

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, 08:09 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:05 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 07:52 PM)Free Wrote:  Yes you did.

And, again, you fail to understand.

It is not a concession if it has been central to my position since the start of the discussion.

I am not responsible for your lack of reading comprehension.

No, it's a concession.

Here is it in long-form:

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

You need actual evidence for that.

You said, "Yes, it is," to my statement about anecdotal evidence, and then contrasted your statement with the conjunction of "But ..."

You agreed to my statement, but then set a condition by saying, "But anecdotes cannot be used as corroboration other anecdotes, because they themselves may be equally wrong or fraudulent."

It's clear what you said.

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, 08:09 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:05 PM)Free Wrote:  I gave you the source; the Chicago Tribune, hence the reason for the video.

I am working from multiple sources.

Do you care that your sources contradict each other?

Do you care that your sources contradict each other, even when taken singly?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2015, 08:11 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
Look, Free. Just pull a Kingschosen and say your personal convictions are fundamentally and knowingly irrational. Then we can call keep being friends and you don't have to pretend your godawful ex culo shitstorm constitutes anything within the same galaxy as what might constitute "evidence". Alright?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
15-09-2015, 08:11 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:09 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 08:05 PM)Free Wrote:  I gave you the source; the Chicago Tribune, hence the reason for the video.

I am working from multiple sources.

Do you care that your sources contradict each other?

Do you care that your sources contradict each other, even when taken singly?

Point them out so we can discuss them.

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, 08:12 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:09 PM)Free Wrote:  No, it's a concession.

So we're down to ignoring the meaning of words now, not just fallacies and concepts. Wonderful.

I don't particularly care what you want to think on this front. Continue to delude yourself if it strokes your fragile ego.

"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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: