This is how I visualize this debate:
On one side of the argument, there are those who like to define their world with clear boundaries... THIS can be and THIS cannot be. I will accept a new military aircraft, but NOT a flying saucer, no matter how much evidence is given to me, because flying saucers are so improbable that they simply don't exist. They do not conform to my boundaries of "real life".
On the opposite side, we have those who yearn to leap beyond the boundaries built by others... those who see alien spacecraft where only 747s exist, simply because they want to believe in an infinite universe. I will accept a saucer, but not the "close-minded" ideas of people telling me that it was just an airplane. Flying saucers have got to exist, because the universe must be more interesting than what I've been told. Those who disagree must be hiding from the truth, or even working to conceal it.
Then... Somewhere in between the two extremes, there are those who are willing to consider that ET really has been abducting people, but have seen no good proof... and are seen merely as more truth-blind debunkers for not accepting circumstatial evidence.
And there are a very few people who believe in extraterrestrial life because they have actually experienced it first-hand... but they are ignored because they are seen as simply more unscientific pro-ET zealots by the real debunkers.
It seems like we have a little of each in on this board.
Which one are you?
On one side of the argument, there are those who like to define their world with clear boundaries... THIS can be and THIS cannot be. I will accept a new military aircraft, but NOT a flying saucer, no matter how much evidence is given to me, because flying saucers are so improbable that they simply don't exist. They do not conform to my boundaries of "real life".
On the opposite side, we have those who yearn to leap beyond the boundaries built by others... those who see alien spacecraft where only 747s exist, simply because they want to believe in an infinite universe. I will accept a saucer, but not the "close-minded" ideas of people telling me that it was just an airplane. Flying saucers have got to exist, because the universe must be more interesting than what I've been told. Those who disagree must be hiding from the truth, or even working to conceal it.
Then... Somewhere in between the two extremes, there are those who are willing to consider that ET really has been abducting people, but have seen no good proof... and are seen merely as more truth-blind debunkers for not accepting circumstatial evidence.
And there are a very few people who believe in extraterrestrial life because they have actually experienced it first-hand... but they are ignored because they are seen as simply more unscientific pro-ET zealots by the real debunkers.
It seems like we have a little of each in on this board.
Which one are you?