This post was originally intended as a reply to "Ivan Seeking's" "Hello" thread below. I just registered and the board would not allow me to post. So I'm trying again with this new thread. Below I've pasted the post I'm trying to submit:
Hello Ivan Seeking, and the rest of the board. My name is Ives. I have been posting on the UFO discussion board at Junjun.com (which is known as "Whispers") for some time. I was referred here by a fellow poster who thought I would appreciate "Ivan Seeking".
I don't have much time tonight, since I am at work waiting for my wife to pick me up (after kids soccer, etc). But I like this thread. I find UFOs fascinating from an Epistemological point of view. I am a trial lawyer well accustomed to constructing and deconstructing arguments, and like no doubt many of you here have realized the transparent nature of debunker arguments, including those of James Oberg, a frequent visitor to Whispers. I am wondering if old Jimo is registered here. . .
Many of you have incidents in mind that shape your views on UFOs. Mine happen to be the UFO sightings near Malmstrom AFB in the 1960s and 1970s. These incidents squarely place the UFO within the parameters of national security consideration, and by themselves establish that the Air Force public positions on UFOs are, shall we say, disengenious.
Having said that, I believe that a major problem in the study of UFOs is a tendency to not acknowledge when we traverse from the examination of data to speculation about that data. Specifically, this seems to happen often when addressing the core identify of the UFO. My own definition of UFO would be something like, "from time to time a phenomenon manifests in such a way to become detectable by our senses. This manifestation is often presented as an airborne object that exhibits behavioral characteristics consistent with intelligent operation and control." The Iran incident mentioned above may fit this descripion. "Intelligent control" is a reasonble inference based on the observable evidence. To suggest that the core nature is that the UFO is an alien spacecraft is speculation. I'm not necessarily arguing that some UFOs are not alien spacecraft, that is certainly one of several possibilities. It may even be reasonable speculation.
Personally, I will confess to a strong hunch that some UFOs are in fact, alien spacecraft. But I have to admit that this conclusion is a leap I have made that is not directly supported by (credible) evidence. If I were to make the case in court, I believe I could make a case beyond a reasonable doubt for the UFO as a manifestation of intelligence. I do not feel I could prevail on the specific assertion that the source of that intelligence is an alien species.
I must go. I will check in later and look forward to conversing with you all.
Hello Ivan Seeking, and the rest of the board. My name is Ives. I have been posting on the UFO discussion board at Junjun.com (which is known as "Whispers") for some time. I was referred here by a fellow poster who thought I would appreciate "Ivan Seeking".
I don't have much time tonight, since I am at work waiting for my wife to pick me up (after kids soccer, etc). But I like this thread. I find UFOs fascinating from an Epistemological point of view. I am a trial lawyer well accustomed to constructing and deconstructing arguments, and like no doubt many of you here have realized the transparent nature of debunker arguments, including those of James Oberg, a frequent visitor to Whispers. I am wondering if old Jimo is registered here. . .
Many of you have incidents in mind that shape your views on UFOs. Mine happen to be the UFO sightings near Malmstrom AFB in the 1960s and 1970s. These incidents squarely place the UFO within the parameters of national security consideration, and by themselves establish that the Air Force public positions on UFOs are, shall we say, disengenious.
Having said that, I believe that a major problem in the study of UFOs is a tendency to not acknowledge when we traverse from the examination of data to speculation about that data. Specifically, this seems to happen often when addressing the core identify of the UFO. My own definition of UFO would be something like, "from time to time a phenomenon manifests in such a way to become detectable by our senses. This manifestation is often presented as an airborne object that exhibits behavioral characteristics consistent with intelligent operation and control." The Iran incident mentioned above may fit this descripion. "Intelligent control" is a reasonble inference based on the observable evidence. To suggest that the core nature is that the UFO is an alien spacecraft is speculation. I'm not necessarily arguing that some UFOs are not alien spacecraft, that is certainly one of several possibilities. It may even be reasonable speculation.
Personally, I will confess to a strong hunch that some UFOs are in fact, alien spacecraft. But I have to admit that this conclusion is a leap I have made that is not directly supported by (credible) evidence. If I were to make the case in court, I believe I could make a case beyond a reasonable doubt for the UFO as a manifestation of intelligence. I do not feel I could prevail on the specific assertion that the source of that intelligence is an alien species.
I must go. I will check in later and look forward to conversing with you all.
It is widely reported that after reviewing the evidence for UFOs, a trial judge concluded that [loosely] "if this were a murder trial instead of a UFO case, there would have been a hanging long ago".