UFO Disclosure
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-09-2015, 02:03 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 01:37 PM)morondog Wrote:  If all I have is anecdotal evidence of a claim (e.g. ghosts) am I justified in accepting the claim, Free?

Of course not, but anecdotal evidence is not all this is available to support the belief in the possibility that intelligent non human life is visiting earth, and claims of something supernatural such as ghosts are not a fair comparison to something being described as physical, such as possible alien aircraft.

Quote:Suppose I had the following:
1. A Police report annotated by the American ghost society with timestamps detailing interviews of 12 unidentified experts-on-things-that-go-bump-in-the-night who all agree that they saw a white humanoid glowing thing doing things "that no human could possibly do". And for good measure, it then blasted off into orbit making no sound.
2. Evidence of a government cover-up.

Would you accept this as evidence of ghosts? If no, why? It's literally a direct facsimile of your argument regarding this alleged UFO, merely with ghosts substituted. I've even given you the benefit of all the witnesses agreeing and there actually being a cover-up.

If yes... well I'm really hoping you won't say that, 'cos IMO all that's left in that case is to diagnose you as irreparably barmy.

Firstly, demonstrate that anything supernatural can possibly exist.

I am not trying to be difficult here. I have demonstrated how alien life can possibly exist and evolve on another planet by using our own evolutionary record as a model of how all creatures, human and non human, on earth have evolved.

So the thing you need to do to make a fair comparison is to show, with reason and circumstantial evidence- such as what I used with the evolutionary process- how a supernatural ghost can exist.

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, 02:19 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 02:03 PM)Free Wrote:  I have demonstrated how alien life can possibly exist and evolve on another planet
That is not disputed - Drake equation has been known for a long time. But ghosts have properties we can only being to guess at. ("Aliens have technologies we can only begin to guess at" - sound familiar), so there could well be something there that *as far as our current knowledge goes* is "supernatural".

I'm *also* not trying to be difficult, nor do I believe the crap I wrote above, I'm just making as exact a copy of your own argument as I can.

Quote:So the thing you need to do to make a fair comparison is to show, with reason and circumstantial evidence- such as what I used with the evolutionary process- how a supernatural ghost can exist.
I *have* (not, but I'm pretending). There are many things we don't know. Bigfoot is one possibility, maybe that's what gets labelled as a ghost. Something so far unidentified and therefore classed as "supernatural". So something that people label as a "ghost" can definitely exist.

Now, tell me why you reject my 12 honest witnesses and my Police report annotated by the American ghost society *and* my cover up as being evidence for the supernatural?

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
16-09-2015, 02:23 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 01:43 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 01:24 PM)Free Wrote:  The reality is, you don't know. Anyone who claims that the Big bang is a fact, needs to prove it.

Oh but ... if you can't prove it, is it okay to "believe" it to be true based upon the "interpretation" of the "supposed evidence?"

What do you suppose is the reason they call it the Big Bang THEORY?

Drinking Beverage

Are you really this dumb? It's called a theory because it can be modified if experimental evidence that contradicts it comes to light. It's *our best guess* and the way we tell it's *good* is because it makes specific predictions which we then test with experiment.

Fact is short-hand for "proven beyond reasonable doubt". Nothing in the external world is "proven" as in mathematically proven, because there's just too much that we don't know.

Your alien "evidence" is *solely* anecdotal. There is nothing else to back it up. If there was, you'd be *actually* winning the argument instead of "winning".

No, I am not dumb, and your assumption that I am is precisely your problem.

Theory:

"A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

The Big Bang theory provides "an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory."

Don't get me wrong here, I also "believe" in the Big bang theory, but I am not so irrational as to attempt to distinguish my beliefs about the Big Bang as being anything other than a belief.

No matter what the interpretations of the evidence for the Big Bang indicates, the reality and intellectually honest position to take regarding the Big Bang is that what those interpretations seem to indicate cannot be demonstrated as providing any conclusive evidence of a singularity or that any Big Bang actually did occur.

No matter how you spin this, it's all a matter of belief, and possibilities.

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, 02:28 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 02:23 PM)Free Wrote:  Don't get me wrong here, I also "believe" in the Big bang theory, but I am not so irrational as to attempt to distinguish my beliefs about the Big Bang as being anything other than a belief.
You don't draw a distinction between belief backed up by *experimental* verified evidence - data, peer review, the works - and any old belief? That's not being irrational?

Quote:No matter what the interpretations of the evidence for the Big Bang indicates, the reality and intellectually honest position to take regarding the Big Bang is that what those interpretations seem to indicate cannot be demonstrated as providing any conclusive evidence of a singularity or that any Big Bang actually did occur.
Back to "can we really know anything absolutely?" Of course not, can you really be sure I just typed this sentence? There are a million things including space wizards that *could* have resulted in the evidence we see for the Big bang today. But if you want to judge the most likely to have occured we have no other tool than the scientific method.

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
16-09-2015, 02:30 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 02:19 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 02:03 PM)Free Wrote:  I have demonstrated how alien life can possibly exist and evolve on another planet
That is not disputed - Drake equation has been known for a long time. But ghosts have properties we can only being to guess at. ("Aliens have technologies we can only begin to guess at" - sound familiar), so there could well be something there that *as far as our current knowledge goes* is "supernatural".

I'm *also* not trying to be difficult, nor do I believe the crap I wrote above, I'm just making as exact a copy of your own argument as I can.

Quote:So the thing you need to do to make a fair comparison is to show, with reason and circumstantial evidence- such as what I used with the evolutionary process- how a supernatural ghost can exist.
I *have* (not, but I'm pretending). There are many things we don't know. Bigfoot is one possibility, maybe that's what gets labelled as a ghost. Something so far unidentified and therefore classed as "supernatural". So something that people label as a "ghost" can definitely exist.

Now, tell me why you reject my 12 honest witnesses and my Police report annotated by the American ghost society *and* my cover up as being evidence for the supernatural?

I reject it because you have not demonstrated reasonable precedence of anything that can be possibly demonstrated as a ghost in the same way that I have demonstrated the possible existence of aliens via the analogy of how human and non human life evolved on earth.

The existence of all life on earth serves as a precedence of how life can evolve on other planets.

You have no precedence for a ghost.

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, 02:32 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 02:30 PM)Free Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 02:19 PM)morondog Wrote:  That is not disputed - Drake equation has been known for a long time. But ghosts have properties we can only being to guess at. ("Aliens have technologies we can only begin to guess at" - sound familiar), so there could well be something there that *as far as our current knowledge goes* is "supernatural".

I'm *also* not trying to be difficult, nor do I believe the crap I wrote above, I'm just making as exact a copy of your own argument as I can.

I *have* (not, but I'm pretending). There are many things we don't know. Bigfoot is one possibility, maybe that's what gets labelled as a ghost. Something so far unidentified and therefore classed as "supernatural". So something that people label as a "ghost" can definitely exist.

Now, tell me why you reject my 12 honest witnesses and my Police report annotated by the American ghost society *and* my cover up as being evidence for the supernatural?

I reject it because you have not demonstrated reasonable precedence of anything that can be possibly demonstrated as a ghost in the same way that I have demonstrated the possible existence of aliens via the analogy of how human and non human life evolved on earth.

The existence of all life on earth serves as a precedence of how life can evolve on other planets.

You have no precedence for a ghost.

I just told you, you have no idea what could or could not be possible. Who are you to claim you know everything about whether or not a ghost is possible? If ghosts are possible, then you have to take my police report seriously.

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
16-09-2015, 02:39 PM (This post was last modified: 16-09-2015 02:47 PM by Free.)
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 02:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 02:23 PM)Free Wrote:  Don't get me wrong here, I also "believe" in the Big bang theory, but I am not so irrational as to attempt to distinguish my beliefs about the Big Bang as being anything other than a belief.
You don't draw a distinction between belief backed up by *experimental* verified evidence - data, peer review, the works - and any old belief? That's not being irrational?

It is only rational when I demonstrate how they are both beliefs, which is all my intention here was.

Beliefs only, nothing more.

Quote:
Quote:No matter what the interpretations of the evidence for the Big Bang indicates, the reality and intellectually honest position to take regarding the Big Bang is that what those interpretations seem to indicate cannot be demonstrated as providing any conclusive evidence of a singularity or that any Big Bang actually did occur.
Back to "can we really know anything absolutely?" Of course not, can you really be sure I just typed this sentence? There are a million things including space wizards that *could* have resulted in the evidence we see for the Big bang today. But if you want to judge the most likely to have occured we have no other tool than the scientific method.

Agreed! I have no argument against this. What people here don't seem to realize is that Ufology has come a long way since the 50s and it attempts to utilize the scientific method to determine the possibilities that I speak about.

Famous mainstream scientists who have shown interest in the UFO phenomenon include Stanford physicist Peter A. Sturrock, astronomer J. Allen Hynek, computer scientist and astronomer Jacques F. Vallée, Stephen Hawking, and many others.

It's not anywhere near as bizarre as some of you think it is.

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
16-09-2015, 02:41 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 02:32 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 02:30 PM)Free Wrote:  I reject it because you have not demonstrated reasonable precedence of anything that can be possibly demonstrated as a ghost in the same way that I have demonstrated the possible existence of aliens via the analogy of how human and non human life evolved on earth.

The existence of all life on earth serves as a precedence of how life can evolve on other planets.

You have no precedence for a ghost.

I just told you, you have no idea what could or could not be possible. Who are you to claim you know everything about whether or not a ghost is possible? If ghosts are possible, then you have to take my police report seriously.

If ghosts are possible, then yes, I would take your report seriously. Wouldn't you?

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, 02:47 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 02:39 PM)Free Wrote:  Agreed! I have no argument against this. What people here don't seem to realize is that Ufology has come a long way since the 50s and attempts to utilize the scientific method to determine the possibilities that I speak about.
So where are the peer-reviewed papers published in major journals? If you got your hands on some actual evidence then it's effect would be electric. Journals would fall over themselves to be the first to publish it.

Quote:It's not anywhere near as bizarre as some of you think it is.
... Well, so far it seems pretty darned bizarre. If you allege that you use the scientific method, what's with this bending over backwards to accept evidence uncritically? Why is it de rigeur to point out that the eyewitness testimony you've got has multiple problems to the point that it's not credible?

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
16-09-2015, 02:55 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(16-09-2015 02:41 PM)Free Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 02:32 PM)morondog Wrote:  I just told you, you have no idea what could or could not be possible. Who are you to claim you know everything about whether or not a ghost is possible? If ghosts are possible, then you have to take my police report seriously.

If ghosts are possible, then yes, I would take your report seriously. Wouldn't you?

And it is eminently true that ghosts are possible, just like leprechauns are possible. We haven't ever seen one, but then, there's multiple anecdotes concerning them. Can you be *sure* they are impossible? What if they do exists but the legends concerning them are just a bit garbled?

I was hoping you'd see the obvious flaws that I left in my analogy. Things like the annotated report *prepared by the American Ghost Society* - a biased organisation.

There are reasons why the testimony of the 12 honest "things that go bump in the night" experts, who are unidentified in the report, might be untrustworthy. Why are they unidentified, how do we know they're honest, and can we trust the report's transcript of their testimony?

How they could possibly speculate that the ghost "did things that no human could possibly do", and how is it that it being human would be the *only* other possibility to it being a ghost? What if the observed ghost was e.g. burning marsh gas (source of many will-o-the-wisp stories), for example?

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: