heliocentric said:
Sure it is, its the largest body of eye-witness testimony in the ufo community, and the witnesses (i think bar maybe one or two) are all ex-military, some of whom are pretty high ranking.
Its an icredibly valuble part of the jig-saw for those trying to understand what 'ufos' are and where they come from.
Those trying to understand UFOs and "where they come from" refuse to accept any balanced or objective view of the topic. Rejected out of hand by those that readily accept the ETI explanation of UFOs are the more prosaic, mundane and anthropogenic explanations. It would seem that the unproven, undemonstrated and untestable is preferable to that which has been demonstrated and tested time and again.
Then there is the UFO apologetic that seeks to give the
air of objectivity by maintaining a plausible deniablity in their belief that UFOs are ETI based. This, they realize, is an outlandish and hokey concept and, rather than defend the position with any rationality, they respond to critics with things like, "you're the one assuming UFOs are alien, I'm saying they're simply
unknown." This thin veil of intellectual dishonesty, while transparent, provides that "plausible deniability" in the face of reason.
But with regard to Greer's witnesses, volume and appeals to authority are all they contain. Indeed, many of his "witnesses" are carrying baggage of their own which severely limits their credibility. Others are simply repeating the second-hand stories of someone they know. Some are clearly embellishing facts with sensationalism and hyperbole. Some may even
believe what they are saying. But none are credible. Rank and status does not imply credibility. Indeed, the trend I noted in a post above is a valid question: why is the demographic so consistent. If these were credible claims, we would expect to see the demographic of the "witnesses" reflect the true demographic of the military they come from. It doesn't. How many African Americans or women are represented? Are these people not employed by the military? Was not the military one of the earliest American institutions to de-segregate?
heliocentric said:
Eye-witness testimony within the context that its being used (to push congress for an investigation) can be used as evidence, and definitely counts a such.
Eyewitness testimony is useless and suspect without cooborating
physical evidence. Of which there are none. No photos. Not one captain's log (from either a spaceship or a military source). Not one spaceship hood-ornament. No DNA samples. No alien implants. Nothing. Just fantasies of believers rallied around a cause. You can see that bullshit at any Pro-Choice/Pro-Life rally.
heliocentric said:
What exactly do you mean by 'believers'? are you suggesting the witnesses had some kind of prior belief that influenced their judgement. And if so do you have anything to prove this is the case?
I was assuming you actually
read the document you claimed to have obtained. It is
replete with the belief of others. Do a text search for Clifford Stone. Read about belief.
heliocentric said:
Again i dont think belief even enters into the argument, there is no faith-based need to 'believe' at all costs within the disclosure report. Its an erroneous argument. As is comparing a supernatural entity like god which is entirely illusive to ufos which are not; we already know they exist.
I think youre interpreting a testimony of seeing a ufo as part of a much wider belief in something else.
You couldn't be more wrong. It is ALL about belief. Indeed, Greer is a prophet or cleric of sorts. A cult leader within the religious framework of the ETI-UFO culture, albeit a proto-religious framework. In the absence of physical evidence to support the ETI-UFO hypothesis, it is exactly faith that one needs in order to maintain it. It would be erroneous, even intellectually dishonest, to
discount belief in the argument for this hypothesis. Particularly when it is followed with phrases like "we already know
they exist." I'm sure this will invoke the
plausible deniability argument where you cry foul and say you "only meant
unidentified flying objects." But this, again, returns us to the intellectual dishonesty: we all know what we're really talking about with regard to the so-called Disclosure Project is space aliens that the government is keeping secret. We aren't talking about UFOs as some unknown phenomena, we're talking about Greer's version of space aliens who are visiting the planet with full knowledge of world governments.
Finally, it is completely appropriate to compare space aliens visiting in UFOs to the supernatural. This is because they are. They are said to appear/disappear; abduct in the night; speak with their minds; fly with/without machines; move through walls/ceilings; etc, etc. These space aliens cannot be measured or quantified and are completely incorporeal. They exist, to date, only in stories and myths. They are as every bit supernatural as ghosts, goblins, pink unicorns, Ba'al, Yahweh, and astral projection. Indeed, UFO nutters like Whitley Streiber are fond of including supernatural feats like astral projection with their 'visitations.' They are supernatural. If they aren't, where is one that can be empirically examined or measured?
heliocentric said:
The evidence relies on the shoulders on the reputations it rests apon, disbelief can always come into play when dealing with personal reports because youre really taking someones word for it. But if you consider why such a large group of people offen from the same agencies, and offen with reputations to protect would go out of their way to tell bare-faced lies then i think offen theres more reason to believe that theres some truth to the matter rather than it all being a huge hoax and conspiracy of lies to make some retirement money.
The answer is as simple as the comparative links I gave you: belief. They
believe in something bigger than they. Status and station, rank and position mean little with regard to the validity of evidence when it comes to eyewitness testimony. If either of these conditions validated belief or offered credibilty to claims, our world would be a quite different place. There are world leaders and dignitaries and people of high status all over the world who believe in the hokey and supernatural. Tom Cruise & scientology; Reagan &astrology; Hitler & eugenics; Bush & xianity; etc. I had a battalion commander when I was in the U.S. Army that I used to read tarot cards to (1992). He was a Lieutenant Colonel then and now a brigadier general. He bought every word I 'read' to him and even based some minor command decisions on it. I spent over 12 years in the military and have met soldiers of all ranks who believed in all sorts of things. Their ranks and status within the military did not validate their beliefs.
heliocentric said:
Again beleif doesnt enter into it, if youve seen a ufo youve simply seen a ufo, nothing more nothing less. You cant infer a whole belief system from someone seeing an object in flight. you wouldnt say a bird spotters society which specialises in spotting a particular rare bird have a 'belief' in that particular bird. Its an entirely erroneous position.
This is the
plausible deniability fallacy that I was talking about with regard to the ETI-UFO hypothesis. We aren't talking about the strict definition of UFO as
Unidentified
Flying
Object, where there is something in the sky and we all agree it is simply something that has yet to be identified as plane, bird, star, cloud, delusion, etc. We're talking about the 'Disclosure Project.' Its in the thread title. If you think Greer et al weren't talking about space aliens, then you aren't talking about the same 'disclosure project' we are.
heliocentric said:
That is kind of worrying, although im not sure if his personal beliefs really enter into it, as long as hes not fabricated testimonies and put words in peoples mouth, which to date noone has claimed he has then i think the evidence hes collected still stands up.
He has indeed been accused of that by one of the people whom he listed as a 'witness' no less. I'll have to dig for that reference, but I have a clear recollection of it. The individual was a high-ranking official and was misquoted in a clearly dishonest fashion. Moreover, his 'testimonies' fail on other grounds as well: many of the 'witnesses' simply have too much emotional and intellectual baggage to be taken seriously. Stone and Daniel Sheehan are two off the top of my head. The 'testimony' of Gordon Cooper is another.
James Oberg has written a very good article on Coopers account in which he concludes, "Cooper has found himself on the receiving end of frauds and fabrications attached to his name. His usefulness to UFO proponents is based on his honest advocacy of serious UFO research (a desire shared by many serious researchers in the field, including myself)."
heliocentric said:
Greer does seem a pretty effective collector of testimony and should probably exclusively concentrate on that area. Everytime ive seen him try to theories or put the peices together himself i'll admit he frequently does seem to get it wrong.
As I've pointed out in a previous post, there are many people who have demonstrated the ability to collect testimony. Such is the function of
belief not reality. In much the same way the devoutly religious believe in their god(s) and ritualize their lives accordingly, the devout ETI-UFO believer does the same. And, in much the same way individuals within religion use the beliefs of others to gain status and position, so, too, do individuals within the ETI-UFO culture.