UFO Disclosure
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-09-2015, 05:15 PM (This post was last modified: 09-09-2015 05:19 PM by Unbeliever.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 04:58 PM)Free Wrote:  That is simply not true. I can relate two examples from my own experience.

It is none of my concern how irrational you or the people you associate with choose to be.

Regardless, in both of the examples you give, there is evidence. Camera records, the smell of cigarette smoke and the presence of cigarettes on the smoker, the mileage on the car in question, and so forth.

(09-09-2015 04:58 PM)Free Wrote:  You are attempting to analogize 12 expert witnesses- who had no preconceived beliefs- with a book that shows examples of situations where a preconceived system of beliefs led to mass conclusions?

False analogy.

If the witnesses in question didn't have a preconceived set of beliefs which led them to conclude that there was a craft involved, then they presumably had evidence that led them to this conclusion.

If they have evidence, then it is no longer bare assertion.

(09-09-2015 04:58 PM)Free Wrote:  An anecdote is a short and amusing but serious account, which may depict a real/fake incident or character.

They are not equivalent.

No.

An anecdote, in this context, is any claim made of witnessing a given phenomena.

(09-09-2015 04:58 PM)Free Wrote:  The precedence we are speaking about is what you decided to not post with the rest of my quoted statement. You cherry picked the above quote of me from out of the context, ignoring the demonstration of precedence.

I do not cherry pick. I select the lines which actually require a response.

If you want me to respond to your entire post, I suggest that you start writing posts of actual substance.

"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
09-09-2015, 05:18 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 04:24 PM)Marozz Wrote:  
(09-09-2015 03:48 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Which is to say, none. Because eyewitness testimony doesn't matter if there's no actual evidence to back it up.

And this is the appeal to consequences fallacy regardless.


Then this is a miscarriage of justice.

Cops don't pull cars over for speeding while they are going twenty miles an hour because someone told them that they were doing ninety an hour ago.


No, it doesn't.


Wrong.


Wrong.


Anecdotes eliminate nothing.


They are equivalent.


It hasn't.

You don't understand what you are talking about. Your attitude towards evidence and "eyewitness accounts" is, quite frankly and without hyperbole, medieval. It is the sort of nonsense that led to the Salem witch trials and the murder of innocents during the Spanish Inquisition, and the type of more modern idiocy found in the charlatans like Uri Geller and Sylvia Browne. It is nonsense.

Anecdotes are not evidence. "Eyewitness accounts" are anecdotes. No number of anecdotes, no matter how high the number or where they come from, constitutes a substitute for actual evidence.

This is not something that you can argue against. This is not something that you are going to overturn. This is, and has been for several centuries, one of the central concepts of logic and rationality.

Anecdotes are not evidence.

I agree, eyewitness accounts don't constitute evidence. Thousands of people witnessed the Miracle of the Sun in Fatima in October 1917 after a couple of kids saw the Virgin Mary. An utter load of bollocks but millions of Catholics would beg to differ.

So you also are comparing 12 expert witnesses with no preconceived beliefs to a religious gathering of crazed religious fanatics who were already predisposed to expecting something to happen?

Really?

Big Grin

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 05:19 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
Millions of people have claimed to have seen God. Do you believe them or not? Why or why not?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 05:22 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 05:19 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Millions of people have claimed to have seen God. Do you believe them or not? Why or why not?

Put them all together, and none will have seen God at the same time, same place, and be able to provide the exact same description.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 05:25 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 05:22 PM)Free Wrote:  Put them all together, and none will have seen God at the same time, same place, and be able to provide the exact same description.

False.

Examples of divine manifestation claims have precisely as much evidential support as those regarding alien ships.

"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
09-09-2015, 05:31 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
When we're using eyewitnesses to prove the existence of something, it's not enough for me. I need more.
In fact the more eyewitnesses you produce, the more I'm inclined to insist that if that many people have seen it, the easier it should be for you to present it to me in person.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes pablo's post
09-09-2015, 05:35 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 02:43 PM)Free Wrote:  It isn't baseless speculation when multiple eyewitness can identify a suspect in a court of law. Here is a scenario:

A guy is seen jaywalking in front of 10 witnesses, who report it to a nearby police officer. The officer didn't see it, and he cannot turn back time to see it, but he arrests the man for jay walking.

The only evidence is the 10 eyewitnesses, and the guy gets convicted.

The problem you have is that the video of a non-governmental interview is simply hearsay, which is not admissible in a court of law, where testimony is taken under oath.

Perhaps they all saw the same thing. Or perhaps they weren't subject to court rules forbidding communication between witnesses, and talked about it at the company picnic over a cold one.

Your comparison fails, because when perjury is at stake, a man tends to be more circumspect. Comparing a private interview with subpoenaed testimony is inapt. It's more accurate to compare it to an interview not taken under oath, and regarding a topic that has little evidence at all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
09-09-2015, 05:35 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
I am not an ornithologist. I don't know a Clark's Nutcracker from a carrier pigeon. Therefore, to me, every bird is a UFO. It flies and I cannot identify it. Except for penguins, which don't fly, and kiwis and ostriches, and a few others.

But space aliens? I am not sure which is more idiotic: belief in God, or belief that the Earth has been visited by space aliens. The speed of light is the fastest speed there is, and the nearest planets that might have technological civilizations are so far away that it would just take too long to get here. This is not a problem that can be solved with technology. It's a fundamental limitation.

Of course, lots of things that fly manage to evade identification by the folks on the ground. So, UFOs: yes; space aliens, no!

"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
09-09-2015, 05:45 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 05:35 PM)daniel1948 Wrote:  I am not an ornithologist. I don't know a Clark's Nutcracker from a carrier pigeon. Therefore, to me, every bird is a UFO. It flies and I cannot identify it. Except for penguins, which don't fly, and kiwis and ostriches, and a few others.

But space aliens? I am not sure which is more idiotic: belief in God, or belief that the Earth has been visited by space aliens. The speed of light is the fastest speed there is, and the nearest planets that might have technological civilizations are so far away that it would just take too long to get here. This is not a problem that can be solved with technology. It's a fundamental limitation.

Of course, lots of things that fly manage to evade identification by the folks on the ground. So, UFOs: yes; space aliens, no!

^^This. Even if they could somehow get something with the mass of a spacecraft up to the speed of light, given the enormous distances, it's still incredibly slow.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like pablo's post
09-09-2015, 05:58 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 05:31 PM)pablo Wrote:  When we're using eyewitnesses to prove the existence of something, it's not enough for me. I need more.
In fact the more eyewitnesses you produce, the more I'm inclined to insist that if that many people have seen it, the easier it should be for you to present it to me in person.

The only thing I am trying to prove is the quality of the possibility.

For sure, the eyewitness testimony in this cannot conclusively prove that it was an alien controlled spacecraft, but what it does, at least for me, is bring the slider of credibility up a few notches.

Even in a court of law where multiple eyewitness testimony convicts a defendant, a judge may reach a conclusion of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. But even here in that scenario that judge's conclusion could still be wrong.

I'm not looking for conclusiveness with this particular case, because it cannot be achieved. All I am saying is that from the hundreds of UFO case files I have investigated over the course of my life, this particular one- when properly researched- is about the best I have ever seen as far as credibility is concerned.

Does it conclusively prove anything? Absolutely not.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: