On the importance of evidence, and it's correct interpretation.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I take it this thread was extracted from some other thread. If so, where is the mention of these two planes? All very confusing.
 
Qorl said:
duendy, Giambattist, Gustav;
Check out my links, this ones are more than real.
Click to expand...

Okay, Qorl Qastle. I'll check them out in a little while, since you mentioned me by name.
 
What does the title of this thread even mean, anyway? "On the importance of evidence, and its correct interpretation"?

Is this solely about airplanes? Is there some over-arching moral?

Degeneration is what I call this. I will no longer be a part of it.

Cheers. :)

Giovanni
 
Stryder said:
Just a point for those not listening:
Click to expand...

This thread has been edited!

The original statement about cropcircles has disappeared. And in fact, I think it was Phlogistician who originally mentioned cropcircles. But you know, hey! Guess WTF??? We'll never know, now that someone has edited several of the posts! Well, WTF do you know? I guess it's another one of those crazy mysteries!

Originally Posted by phlogistician
Did I say 'all'? I don't think I did.
Click to expand...

What happened to the post here that I originally quoted? I can't find it.
Why did it disappear?
 
Giambattista, the original thread included a link to the BBC News, and a story about two aircraft which were photographed having an apparent near miss. Turns out though, that one aircraft was much larger than the other, and it was appeared to be a near miss.

16 people viewed the thread, and nobody replied.

Qorl then tangentially posted a link to some crop circle web site, and people started talking about crop circles. I was rather annoyed the thread had been hijacked.

I've since deleted my original post as nobody wanted to discuss that anyway, it seems.

So screw it. If people would rather talk about crop circles, rather the interpretation of evidence, carry on!
 
Oh, sorry, but no one would ever know since the thread was altered in such a manner.

I'm done talking here. And I'm sure the world will be better for it.
 
phlogistician
I'm interested what you have to say, check out my links.
 
shaman_ said:
Can you show me evidence that every santa claus sighting is just men with fake beards? No? Well then he exists then. Right?

Logic is not your specialty.

I just want to see one crop circle that is made by aliens or vortexes. This is a perfectly reasonable request.
Click to expand...

You're not really this stupid are you? :rolleyes:

And for the record, I have never speculated that ANY Crop Circle was made by an alien intelligence.
 
phlogistician said:
I don't give a rats ass about your links. I'm pissed off at you for hijacking my thread.
Click to expand...

With the help of all peoples Alien God, I hijack your thread. I know you don't give a thing about my sites. Why? Because you are not able to see things from a different prospective. Check out my links, read everything and I Promise I will Not bother you ever again. I will know if you will.
Peace!

Gustav
A Crown.
 
Stryder said:
Just a point for those not listening:

This thread is not about "Corncircles", it's about the relationship of two very Identified planes looking like they were going to collide, however maintaining 1000m's distance (I believe its termed as "Trafficing", Planes are often given different Altitudes to circle airports while waiting clearance for a free runway/landing. It's more noticable during busy holiday times like Before/After the New Year and other breaks)
Click to expand...

No. This thread is not about the two planes either, but an attempt to slander any viable or potential credibility for photographed anomaly. The gist of the thread's intent is: See, UFO photographs are certainly optical illusions because you can't rely on photographs. Evidence? This article.

Key quote from the article: 'But a spokesman for DHL said photographs could be "incredibly deceptive".'

The article.

The photograph.

So Qorl's introductory of photographed crop circles lend an interesting contraposition: photographed crop circles that don't fly.
 
Meanwhile said:
So Qorl's introductory of photographed crop circles lend an interesting contraposition: photographed crop circles that don't fly.
Click to expand...

Which equally, I hate to point out the blindingly obvious, don't either dictate, require or demand an exclusively extraterrestrial explanation in order to explain them in the slightest.
 
I love the title of this thread!

"On the importance of evidence, and it's correct interpretation"

I would rephrase it a bit though:

"On the importance of evidence, and how to interpret it"

A subtle difference maybe.

Does anyone here have the faintest idea about how to regard various types of evidence? How to rank the importance of evidence? How to think about evidence? I would say most have absolutely no clue.

Photographs alone are second only to eyewitness testimony in their uselessness. Please reflect on why this is. Does anyone know why this is?

Any evidence that can be easily attributed to human causes should be. Invoking extraordinary explanations for crop circles is a good example. We now know that many crop circles are made by humans. Without direct and multiple lines of additional repeatable observations and evidence, all such circles are easily explained as human artistic expression.

What motive does anyone have to postulate incredible explanations for crop circles other than to satisfy their need for mystery and fantasy in their lives?

I can't wait to see the arguments against this reasoning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top