UFO Disclosure
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-09-2015, 10:14 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 09:57 AM)Free Wrote:  The problem is that when you say such things, without clearly demonstrating why they are so "god awful" to such an extent that you actually prove it

This entire thread has been doing exactly that.

And no one cares whether or not you like the Miracle of the Sun comparison. It is a tangential point at best. Your arguments are still utterly invalid.

"We don't know" is not equivalent to "maybe aliens" any more than it is equivalent to "maybe wizards", even granting everything else that you have argued for - and since your premises are just as weak as your conclusion, there's really no reason to grant even that much.

"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
[+] 3 users Like Unbeliever's post
16-09-2015, 10:35 AM (This post was last modified: 16-09-2015 10:57 AM by Free.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 10:14 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 09:57 AM)Free Wrote:  The problem is that when you say such things, without clearly demonstrating why they are so "god awful" to such an extent that you actually prove it

This entire thread has been doing exactly that.

And no one cares whether or not you like the Miracle of the Sun comparison. It is a tangential point at best. Your arguments are still utterly invalid.

"We don't know" is not equivalent to "maybe aliens" any more than it is equivalent to "maybe wizards", even granting everything else that you have argued for - and since your premises are just as weak as your conclusion, there's really no reason to grant even that much.

Any chance you would actually like to tackle the challenge on the preceding page at This Post?

My point here is that if you, or anyone else who has been using these comparisons, cannot demonstrate why they are fair, then why should I trust your judgement on how you evaluated my comparisons and analogies?

And that is precisely why I have reason to hold your evaluations in serious doubt.

Considering the fact that not one of you who have been using these comparisons against my arguments have demonstrated how any of your comparisons are valid, then it is perfectly reasonable- considering my view of them at this post- for me to consider those comparisons as false until you can demonstrate that they are 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
16-09-2015, 11:12 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 10:35 AM)Free Wrote:  Any chance you would actually like to tackle the challenge on the preceding page at This Post?

No, because, I reiterate, no one cares whether or not you like it. It is tangential. It does not matter.

Whether or not the Miracle of the Sun (an example used once or twice at most, and not even by the main contributors to this thread) is an equivalent comparison is utterly, absolutely irrelevant to whether or not your argument is valid - which it isn't - or sound - which it isn't.

Your constant attempts to obfuscate this point only further illustrate the fact that you either don't understand or don't care how logic works.

"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
16-09-2015, 11:17 AM (This post was last modified: 16-09-2015 11:20 AM by Free.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 11:12 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 10:35 AM)Free Wrote:  Any chance you would actually like to tackle the challenge on the preceding page at This Post?

No, because, I reiterate, no one cares whether or not you like it. It is tangential. It does not matter.

Whether or not the Miracle of the Sun (an example used once or twice at most, and not even by the main contributors to this thread) is an equivalent comparison is utterly, absolutely irrelevant to whether or not your argument is valid - which it isn't - or sound - which it isn't.

Your constant attempts to obfuscate this point only further illustrate the fact that you either don't understand or don't care how logic works.

It matters to be. To reiterate my point:

My point here is that if you, or anyone else who has been using these comparisons, cannot demonstrate why they are fair, then why should I trust your judgement on how you evaluated my comparisons and analogies?

If you- or anyone else- cannot demonstrate why those comparisons are true, then you and anyone else cannot be trusted to provide a fair evaluation of my comparisons.

It's that simple.

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
16-09-2015, 11:30 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 11:17 AM)Free Wrote:  It matters to be.

Yes, you said this.

It doesn't matter to anyone else, because everyone else can see how much of a pointless aside this is. It's not an argument. It's you shoveling as much shit as possible and hoping that it will stick, because this is what you always do when you have been thoroughly lambasted for your idiocy on whatever the previous point was.

You run away.

When it was demonstrated over and over again that none of your "sources" actually showed that the FAA had hidden anything, you ran away to the time stamp debate.

When it was pointed out that nothing in the report made any kind of sense with the time stamps arranged as you contended that they were, you hid behind a tangential discussion about the reasons for your behavior.

When the posters here hammered in the point that your attempts at justifying your childish behavior did nothing to actually change the irrational nature of your argument, you jumped to dragging up a comparison made more than seventy-five pages back by someone who is no longer participating in the discussion and started demanding justifications for it.

You have conclusively failed to provide rational justification for a single one of your conclusions over the entire course of this thread. You have not provided a single instance of evidence regarding the presence of any unknown craft, let alone an alien one. You constantly and deliberately misinterpret the facts in hand in order to make your case seem stronger than it really is, and when others point out your fallacious reasoning, you run away saying "more on this later" and think that no one will notice that you have utterly failed to deliver on all points.

No one cares what you think about the Miracle of the Sun comparison.

At this point, I highly doubt that anyone cares what you think at all.

"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
16-09-2015, 11:50 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 10:48 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 07:33 PM)Free Wrote:  I will return later to expose the rest of the bullshit.

Slight problem(s) though with the transcripts as presented by NARCAP.
[Image: 1c2bb910-44a9-418b-aa8d-6c46c1f7fa8f_zpsp3fiyfyl.jpg]

Everyone might have to come back to this one from time to time, but here is what is important:
Note the recording number and the time listed.
Note the number of recordings.

[Image: a3f622ae-3ce5-47c7-88c8-23441881ee7d_zps1ogwvean.jpg]
This section of the report lists Table 3 as representing Recording #1 with a time between 4:30 and 4:32. Despite being a nearly a full minute sort, given that it was an approximation, this largely gels with Figure 10 in the first picture. No real problem so far.
Please note however that this transcript only contains start and stop times.
[Image: Screenshot_2015-09-15-20-57-531_zpshin7xagn.jpg]
The first sentence above Table 4 calls this the "second recording" and takes place between "4:47 and 4:49pm" and lasts for 89 seconds. However if you go back to Figure 10 you will see that the second recording is for the time 4:52 and 4:53 so they have confused which call belongs to which. However then then go on to list Table 4 as having Recording #3 so it seems do not notice this error and display the correct ( 3rd) recording.
Please note however that this transcript, as can be seen below, only contains a start time and no stop times despite a stop time being mentioned in Figure 10.
[Image: b8fdf99b-8990-416c-9127-8e318db96f23_zpskpjzmgz3.jpg]
Again the reports author errors in saying that Table 5 is a transcript of the 3rd recording at 4:52-4:53pm when according to Figure 10 recording #3 is at 4:47-4:49pm. Again however Table 5 actually uses Recording #2, the correct one, so the authors error, while amateurish and repeated twice in a row, is not actually damaging.
A few things to note is that this transcript features ONLY a start time and NO end time. (this is important in a bit) It should also be noted that the recordings are presented out of order, #1 ->#3 ->#2.
[Image: Screenshot_2015-09-15-21-01-541_zps0vah5ewl.jpg]
The author of the report lists the forth recording at 4:47:39-4:47:58 lasting for 19 seconds and informs the reader this exchange is Table 6. However Figure 10 lists no recording starting or ending at that time, and in fact has completely different times for Recording #4. Table 6 then goes on to list ENTIRELY different times from the authors assertion.
[Image: Screenshot_2015-09-15-21-03-501_zpsmfw7pldh.jpg]
Lasting far longer than 19 seconds.
[Image: 7cb46741-d241-41b8-bdbc-cc97c0829fe3_zps3du4zaxb.jpg]
Also please note that in Table 6 every single line has a time stamp on it. This is only true for transcripts alleged to be before 4pm and this is missing from EVERY other transcript which has at best in one case both a start and a stop time and in the others ONLY a start time.
[Image: Screenshot_2015-09-15-21-06-341_zpsej3eek21.jpg]
The time stamp on every line even ends in Table 6 once it's dealing with post 4pm times listing only a start time (the original start time for table 6 according to the author of the report) and one other time ...exactly the time when A/C2 (asserted by the author to be Witness B) talks about "seeing it, a UFO (not a craft Tongue) a half hour ago".
I'd also like to draw attention to the fact that there is a gap in table 6 over nearly an HOUR, which means that the transcripts in the report are edited and not the originals.
It also seems that everything from 3:57:20 -3:59:11 shouldn't be in table 6 at all because he says that table 6 starts at 4:47:39 and ends at 4:47:58 and lasts 19 minutes in total. In fact even Figure 10 lists no recordings starting at 4:47:39 and ending at 4:47:58 OR starting at :3:57:20 and ending at 3:59:11.
Furthermore Figure 10 lists 5 recordings but Recording #5 is no where to be found in the report.

Some questions:
How can Figure 10 possibly be accurate if it lists end times which don't appear anywhere in the transcripts?
Where did the transcripts from 3:57:20-:3:59:11 come from given that the author says recording #4, which is table 6, starts and ends nearly an entire HOUR after that? Why are they included in table 6 at all, and where do they actually belong?
Where is recording 5?
Why does a single transcript (the one that's not even supposed to be in table 6) contain time stamps for each instance while the others only include Start times, and a single stop time? Why does this then revert back to normal once we get the the correct times for Table 6? Why aren't the time stamps constantly applied? Did the FAA give NARCAP transcripts with dozens of missing time stamps or did NARCAP delete the other time stamps? Why does this inconsistency ONLY occur in times which don't seem to belong in the table they are in and during the "timezone" error?

All of this is explained by the fact that we have written transcripts from the FAA that show us the clerical errors, and the fact that NARCAP also obtained all the voice recordings from 3 tapes they received as a result of the Freedom of Information Act filing.

The contradictions you believe are present are not because of NARCAP, but because of the differences between what the FAA sent them on the written transcripts and what NARCAP discovered on the tapes.

So yes, since you are reading the report which includes both what was on the transcripts and what was on the tapes, NARCAP is showing you the contradictions, and if you read carefully, they explain them.

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
16-09-2015, 11:57 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 11:30 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 11:17 AM)Free Wrote:  It matters to be.

Yes, you said this.

It doesn't matter to anyone else, because everyone else can see how much of a pointless aside this is. It's not an argument. It's you shoveling as much shit as possible and hoping that it will stick, because this is what you always do when you have been thoroughly lambasted for your idiocy on whatever the previous point was.

It is an argument when it has been demonstrated that the arguments against my position are false.

If people are going to use false comparisons and be grossly negligent with all reason in some effort to have an argument with me, then it isn't me who is trying to shovel any shit around here, now is it?

If you cannot present fair arguments due to the logical fallacies you present, then you haven't contested anything I have said with any kind of solid reasoning whatsoever.

All you are doing is asserting with logical fallacies, and demonstrating nothing. Hence, the idiocy isn't on me, but on all those who have no idea how logically and reasonably invalid their arguments actually are.

Since you all use these logical fallacies liberally, then none of you actually have a valid argument here.

It's that simple.

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
16-09-2015, 12:04 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
Hi. I see that I got mentioned.

Anyway, Free... why are you so hostile?

Being hostile, arrogant, dismissive, and egotistical does nothing... nothing in the slightest... like at all... to boost your case and persuade others to your opinion.

This is like Debate 101.

Being humble, gracious, open-minded, slow to anger, and not retaliating will make people more willing to take you seriously and actually listen to your evidence and possibly be persuaded to the case that you present.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
16-09-2015, 12:18 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 11:57 AM)Free Wrote:  It is an argument when it has been demonstrated that the arguments against my position are false.

Save that you have failed to demonstrate this.

But we've been over all of this before. At this point, the discussion is functionally over. Your arguments have been shown to be absolutely worthless time and again, and this is just you trying to come up with anything you possibly can so that you don't have to admit that you were wrong.

As far as actual discussion goes, we're done here. You have made it perfectly obvious that you are out of ammunition. All that's left is the peanut gallery.

"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
16-09-2015, 12:22 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 12:04 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Hi. I see that I got mentioned.

Anyway, Free... why are you so hostile?

Being hostile, arrogant, dismissive, and egotistical does nothing... nothing in the slightest... like at all... to boost your case and persuade others to your opinion.

This is like Debate 101.

Being humble, gracious, open-minded, slow to anger, and not retaliating will make people more willing to take you seriously and actually listen to your evidence and possibly be persuaded to the case that you present.

Hey Kings,

I have tried to be. I get hostile when I am being lied to. I don't mind a good argument at all, but when people need to resort to logically fallacious comparisons- and then deny they are fallacious when they so obviously are- then i feel I am being lied to and ridiculed with their lies.

If they cannot be honest, then they should not attempt an argument at all.

Also, some people here are so "scientifically inclined" that the concept of "speculation" is completely "alien" to them. And when such speculation is supported with evidence grounded in reality, all they can point to is the speculation part while ignoring the well grounded reality.

For example, I speculate that intelligent life can evolve on other planets insomuch as to be superior to the human race and capable of interstellar travel, while pointing as evidence to our own evolutionary process which denotes life forms right here on earth that have various levels of intelligence.

I will draw comparisons between how humans existed just a couple of thousand years ago, and how we evolved intellectually and technically to the state we exist in today.

Yet, all I see from this bunch are claims of "unfalsifiable" et al, when the fact of the matter is I am merely positing possibilities built on the foundation of evidence from our own human history.

Sure it's all speculative, and that is clearly obvious, so any such attacks on it as being "unfalsifiable" are ridiculous and a waste of time, because of course they are unfalsifiable, but what's being ignored here is the argument and evidence to support a possibility, as opposed to a proclaimed fact.

They want a little green man, and nothing else matters. It doesn't matter how much circumstantial evidence or anecdotal evidence is available, for without that little green man I am somehow "fallacious" in my arguments.

And we see this from this group of supposedly scientifically "endowed" individuals who almost all believe that a singularity once existed to create a Big Bang, yet all they have is circumstantial and anecdotal evidence to support their belief in their own "little green man."

I find this hypocritical, pretentious, and intellectually dishonest.

But thank you for your kind words, I will consider them carefully and endeavour to incorporate them into my attitude.

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: