aliens do exist in historical artwork

[Reiku]

The true scientific discipline allows one to reach any conclusion, just so long as the evidence is the right kind required for the facts at hand. Twisting a theory when there is empiracle data against that theory is not the scientific discipline.

Since there is no proof to hand of the existence of ET, does not necessarily suggest that such proof does not exist, nor does it exclude that there is evidence for the arguement.

 

[Rhaedas]

But the burden is to show strong evidence of that existence. Questionable artwork that can be interpreted in different ways could add to other evidence, but by itself it is inconclusive exactly what the artist intended. So the natural assumption is to conclude that since the paintings are religious, why would the objects in question not be religious as well?

 

[Reiku]

But the burden is to show strong evidence of that existence. Questionable artwork that can be interpreted in different ways could add to other evidence, but by itself it is inconclusive exactly what the artist intended. So the natural assumption is to conclude that since the paintings are religious, why would the objects in question not be religious as well?

Of course artwork is not strong evidence. I don't believe I have ever stated it was. I said there exists evidence to the contrary skeptical conventional belief-system. A lot more evidence exists than mere art-work.

 

[Rhaedas]

This particular thread is about artwork being strong evidence, which I disagree.

 

[Robittybob1]

it seems people are uncomfortable with this thread

why though ? I wonder

unlike photo's

paintings cannot be faked as far as their content is concerned

paintings are what they are

and by people that have NO compunction to depict what they know or see

But they are painting scenes that happened hundreds if not thousands of years before. So it is just an artists interpretation of "other worldly" events. We say we can't prove God exists so how do you attempt to paint God? There are many versions of the impossible. I saw God in a dream once as "the Four faces of the Four Winds". so in my mind at that time that is how I might have depicted the actions of God. Where do the painters get their inspiration from?

 

[origin]

Of course artwork is not strong evidence. I don't believe I have ever stated it was. I said there exists evidence to the contrary skeptical conventional belief-system. A lot more evidence exists than mere art-work.

Wrong. The evidence for aliens is no better or worse than the evidence for the lockness monster or big foot. They are all silly fantasies that sound like
they are from some superstitious surf in the middle ages. It is rather pathetic!

 

[AlexG]

paintings cannot be faked as far as their content is concerned

paintings are what they are

Tell that to Picasso, or Jackson Pollock.

 

[Reiku]

This particular thread is about artwork being strong evidence, which I disagree.

I disagree as well. That meaning, I agree with you.

 

[Reiku]

Wrong. The evidence for aliens is no better or worse than the evidence for the lockness monster or big foot. They are all silly fantasies that sound like
they are from some superstitious surf in the middle ages. It is rather pathetic!

Here, I'll do what you did to me. Next time you want to use a word, spell it right, or look it up, it's a quick google search ''Loch Ness''.

Anyway, tell me when a picture was taken of the mythical Loch Ness Monster? You do realize that the entire of lake of Loch Ness has been thoroughly investigated?

Terrible example likening UFO's to that. Big Foot... I mean common?

UFO's are completely different. Video evidence, eye-witnesses, official reports are made on these every day, in nearly every country of the world. You have a very distorted sense of logic.

 

[Reiku]

Also Origin, you should be careful saying UFO's are a myth. Unless of course you are not conforming to standard definition.

 

[Arioch]

Now extraterrestrials visiting Earth, there's a myth.

 

[Reiku]

Now extraterrestrials visiting Earth, there's a myth.

In what form?

A complex EBE (Extraterrestrial Biological Entity) may indeed be considered as much to the closed mind. However ET can be in the form of Microscopic bacteria. These bacterium may inhabit large spans of the cosmos which leading experts are telling us today.

You are so un-informed, or with supposed informed opinions, outside the real scientific possibilities it is unbelievable sometimes. I hope you wake up and smell reality, even without seeing the reality people like me see. just except, our galaxy should be teeming with life.

 

[Reiku]

Then ask, ''what makes us so important, that we should sit here like vegetables asking questions about what might exist?''

 

[Arioch]

@Mister --

Semantic bullshit.

 

[Reiku]

Hardly. Just tells me that you cannot discern between science and what you consider bullshit. Nice to know where your scientific priorities lye.

 

[Arioch]

@Mister --

You just made about four completely unsubstantiated assumptions in one posts.

1. That there is life out there is an assumption, a fairly safe one but an assumption none the less.

2. That life is plentiful in the universe(similar but separate from your first assumption). Again, given that over ninety nine percent of the universe is utterly hostile to life you have no basis for making this assumption.

3. That this life has found it's way here. Again, you have literally no way of knowing this, it's an assumption based on a complete lack of evidence. Gosh, you're starting to sound like a christian here.

4. That this life could survive here. Even if our atmosphere wasn't toxic to the microbes and even if they managed to survive the entry into our atmosphere, they would not be able to survive here as pretty much all of the niches on our planet are already filled by things which have been evolving to fit those niches for millions of years if not more. They would be outcompeted and either consumed or merely destroyed, possibly seconds after their arrival here.

Sorry, this many blind assumptions with absolutely nothing to base them on is not science, it's religion.

 

[Reiku]

I haven't said anything beyond science. I've seen many statements by yourself which cannot be substatiated.

 

[Arioch]

@Mister --

Where? Keep in mind that common knowledge doesn't have to be linked. Your claims are far from common knowledge, in fact i think that you're just pulling them out of your ass.

 

[Reiku]

Give it up. Do you think myself and you are the ony one's reading this?

Anything I have said has complied to science, what you have said complies mostly to guess-work... in fact, that very fact you have said most pilots experience hallucingetic properties is beyond science, especially when you take into consideration that there have been over 5000 cases of pilot testimonies.

 

[Arioch]

@Mister --

that very fact you have said most pilots experience hallucingetic properties is beyond science,

Well it's a good thing I didn't say that then. What I did say, and what you desperately attempted to straw man into an argument you can fight against, was that humans hallucinate. It's a fact of our biology, nothing anyone says or does is going to make that go away.

especially when you take into consideration that there have been over 5000 cases of pilot testimonies.

Again? Where did I say that they were all hallucinations? In fact I explicitly said that they weren't. However we're spilling over into another thread, what say we take this back to the original thread so we don't muck this one up too much.