The Thing about UFOs...
- Thread starter EndLightEnd
- Start date
Who thinks more critically than an astronaut, or a pilot, or a President...
But I agree about our reality is limited by our fundamental biological limits on our senses. While this does make these things questionable, I dont see then how ANYTHING we get from our senses can be said to be true using that argument.
By attributing ALL UFO sightings to errors in perception I think is a mildly stupid thing to do because there are documented MASS UFO sightings. Especially considering the thousands of eye-witnesses, SEVERAL people in high government positions ADMITTING their existence, and the records for THOUSANDS of years in our history is proof for anyone with their eyes open...
Military test projects would be the only answer that explains the maneuvers people describe.
I'm not sure I follow what you mean by "pulled this crap." Perhaps you can elucidate your meaning.
Truly you have me confused with another poster. If not, please specify what this "comfort zone" is alleged to be comprised of and what evidence you can cite that validates your poorly constructed and mixed metaphor of "blinders" and "earplugs."
First, I was unaware of any "defense" that I was mounting on any other member of this forum. Second, perhaps you should have sent this other member a PM instead of continuing in a public forum where, by definition, participation is encouraged and welcome. Third, as a moderator here a Sciforums, let me welcome you and ask that you and other members refrain from the flaming and trolling this discussion was beginning to take on. This was one of the reasons I decided to post: to hopefully redirect the conversation away from name-calling and needless flaming. Finally, I ask that you continue to use all-caps when referring to me as you have in the quote above, particularly if the reference is a pronoun. It makes me feel good to know that I rate that sort of respect and attention. That last statement was sarcasm, by the way.
The "matter," as it were, was clear in the post you quoted. I was merely pointing out that there are other probable options and that the poll was poorly constructed. I think I wrote as much somewhere. If not, perhaps it is clear now?
Nor have I implied this.
Of course I would be a fool if I made such a denial. Fortunately I don't. Some people see weather events. Some people misidentify airplanes and airships. Others misidentify birds and even planets. There are any number of plausible, prosaic and demonstrable reasons people see Unidentified Flying Objects. A few of these people, a very small minority, fallaciously and irrationally jump to the conclusion of "space aliens" when a ready and understandable explanation eludes them. Some, just want the attention and completely fabricate and fill in details that weren't there. This is an established and well-documented and scientifically understood fallible of human nature.
And I challenge you to think critically and avoid fallacies like appeals to authority. The only thing such testimonials demonstrate is that astronauts are as likely to be fallible as non-astronauts, which is statistically predictable.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
Well I do, for one. Pilots and astronauts are trained to follow patterns. Their lives depend upon it. Are they more critical in their thinking than Joe Blow Public? You bet. But are they critical enough? I doubt it.
And as for President's. Critical thinking in the rought and tumble of political life, sure, but an ability to assess unusual phenomena for which they have zero training. No way.
Which is why science requires that experimental results be duplicated by others, that research be subject to peer review, that known biases or interpretation errors be eliminated by the experimental procedure as in double blind drug tests. By taking care we can arrive at observations in which we have confidence. This is what makes the issue of UFO research so difficult - we cannot duplicate events and we do not have a prepared means of conducting and recording our observations.
1. The volume of the sightings is irrelevant, since our perception is at work all the time and the potential for being mislead is there all the time. What is important is not the quantity of the sightings, but their quality. If ET landed on the White House Lawn tomorrow and held a press conference, that is all we would need. One quality observation. (Once we've determined it isn't a clever hoax.)
2. I did not attribute them to faulty perception, but to faulty perception of 'regular' objects. Damn it, I've even been fooled by Venus, quite convinced it was a helicopter and even once I had established it was not, remaining emotionally disbelieving because it was so unusually bright.
If the manouvers they describe were real that would be true. However, just as in the previous example, people report Venus as moving. Small objects nearby that are interpreted as large objects far away will be capable of performing 'impossible' manouvers.
false if pertaining to their field of expertise
study and train for naught eh skin?
This is another very poorly constructed and fallacious argument. There is nothing to suggest that one's occupation or status informs their critical thinking skills. Your argument is known as an appeal to authority and it is a logical fallacy because it doesn't follow that an astronaut is trustworthy in his ability to provide objective testimony in all circumstances. The astronaut is, after all, human and still subject to all the fallibilities of any other human, including mental illness, delusion, fantasy, psychological deficiencies, and out right misinterpretation based on preconceived biases (called confirmation bias).
If the astronaut, pilot, or president already believes in the paranormal and supernatural, then they're going to observe things in the world that provide these beliefs with confirmation. There are members of each of the categories you listed as trustworthy based on their titles and status who believe in all manner of gods, demons, angels, astrology, magic, witchcraft, and so on. I can give examples and cite sources if it pleases you, but certainly that's out of the scope of the discussion.
Suffice it to say, that if you plan on presenting a good argument for whatever your position is on UFOs (or any other topic for that matter), it will help you to have a basic understanding of logic and critical thought. I can recommend some books if you like or I might even have a website bookmarked somewhere if you're interested. I suspect, however, that you'll merely dismiss me as being anything but genuine in my desire to see you educate yourself.
Which is why I refrained from saying "statistically equal" to the rest of the population or populations of other professions.
I would say that one would expect fewer pilots and astronauts to be fallible in observational skills, particularly when in flight. But I would also say that fallible astronauts must be statistically predictable since training alone cannot eliminate poor observational skills and reasons for delusion. That latter point in particular since there are many, many reasons why one might find themselves subject to delusion. This usually occurs when you expect to see something or something you observe fits an expected pattern. Or even when something falls outside an expected pattern and the brain cannot make it fit.
The hijackers of the airplanes on 9/11 trained as pilots. Why didn't their critical thinking skills improve to the point in which at least some of them questioned their actions enough to stop? The reason is, of course, they already had beliefs established that pilot training could not dissuade. The same is true with astronauts, presidents, doctors, lawyers, policemen, soldiers, CEOs of corporations, etc.
Thats exactly why its so SIGNIFICANT that people from ALL WALKS OF LIFE have observed the phenomena. Thank you for proving my point.
Weve already established there is no proof. So how do you expect me to provide a logical argument that doesnt involve speculation? Ive already stated I believe UFOs to definitely be government black projects. I cant do much more than that can I?
Try to keep up weve been over this already.
The question is what is causing the phenomena? Are you denying its existence?
Im asking people to ask themselves about this question, because its an important one.
You can ignore sightings by highly trained individuals, sightings by rednecks, sightings by presidents, sightings by millionaires, you can ignore mass sightings, and thousands of years of recorded history, you can ignore everything you want thats YOUR CHOICE. You can cherry pick information on the obvious false cases and attribute Apollo 14 astronaut Dr. Mitchell's statement about UFOs and the governments to senility.
You can either take all these pieces and put them together, or just stare blankly at them scared at what the completed picture is.
You couldnt have said it better, people have their perceptions and stick to them. Yourself included.
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
Recently I watched this series on ufologist Dan Ackroyd. He one of those rare ones who are neutral toward alien intentions...not assuming they are either benevolent or malicious.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3-GS-dZj2c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3-GS-dZj2c
Just a reminder - I'm still waiting on your list of names of scientists who are recognized to be experts in the study of UFOs.
So far, you've named only one.
Its good, then, that we can agree on that. You're welcome.
EndLightEnd said:
Your response here has nothing to do with passage you quoted from me. I'm not commenting on any specific belief you have but, rather, criticizing your ability to think critically and formulate logical arguments. For you to include the title of "philosopher" in the tagline under your avatar, this is a very serious criticism and one that you should take to heart. My point has nothing to do with your speculations about UFOs but your understanding of basic (indeed, very basic) philosophy.
Therefore, you're inclusion of "try to keep up..." not only makes you look weak in your ability to formulate an argument (this is an ad hominem argument that implies that I'm not up to your standard or station), it makes you look stupid. This is because you're mischaracterizing my words into something you feel more able to refute or because you simply don't comprehend them. And this is a shame since I don't think you to be "stupid" by any means.
I think, then, we should define the "phenomena." What are they? I'm not sure if it was intentional or not, but you did use the plural of the term, so a reader is left to assume that you're speaking of two or more separate phenomena, each a separate set of processes observed (or believed observed) by an individual.
Personally, I don't see these phenomena or any single phenomenon as significant enough to warrant undo significance. There are, however, significance-junkies and mystery-mongers out there who do, and, as an anthropologist, I find these people fascinating and worthy of study.
Having said that, I invite you to list your own hypotheses (that's a plural form of hypothesis, by the way) regarding the set of phenomena regarding UFOs and alleged sightings of UFOs (keep in mind that "alleged" doesn't imply that something wasn't observed, only that an individual is asserting that something was based on that individual's experiences).
Please also define what you mean by "phenomena," or clarify if you didn't intend the plural of phenomenon.
I realize that you have already discussed one or more hypotheses, but these are scattered throughout the thread and a summary would make for a more coherent point for you and entice genuine discussion. You could, perhaps, even create a new thread since that might be departing from the more general nature of this one, which began with a poorly constructed poll.
On the contrary, I wouldn't ignore these alleged sightings at all. In fact, the cumulative nature of these provide for interesting study on human behavior and culture. I'm not sure why you suggest I'm "cherry pick[ing] information" -or were you perhaps giving me permission to do so? If you do decide to start a new thread or continue in this one, perhaps you might simply provide use with what you consider an ideal sighting (or several ideal sightings) which essentialize whatever premise(s) you establish. Assuming you're willing to establish any.
I'm not sure I follow what this statement is intended to imply. If it was important, could you restate or elucidate it?
Actually, I'm not as included as you would probably hope. I'm very willing to revise any position or assertion I hold or make when shown viable evidence that contradicts those positions or assertions. I'm also not generally given to blindly accept on faith extraordinary speculations and truth claims prima facie without extraordinary evidence or solid, sound and cogent arguments.
I wouldn't give Friedman that much credit. After all, what research has the guy done? What peer-reviewed publications has he appeared in? He has a Masters in physics, but that and a stately beard don't automatically elevate the validity of his opinions. His opinion is no more or less valid than yours or mine if it has to be judged on educational merit.
FOCLMFAO
, , , well there yah are skinny, I was wondering where you had gone. This thread just
didn't seem to be one you could ignore. How yah been? I see you are still "at work" as an
IAC agent. How's the pay? What are the bennies? Better than mine? LOL
EndLightEnd
I had to pick the "Both" as now there are craft that have been built by mankind that can
do much of what the ET's craft can do. But that is only in the last 50-75 years. You do
give some good arguments, yet as you can see these Information Acquisition and Control
agents in these forums will twist your words and flat out lie. Many of us have tried to
reason with "them" and have learned it is a waste of time. Besides, it is their job after all. I
stopped coming to forums like these as it is all ways the same tactics and posters or their
sock puppets. Even though they change their names on other forums you can still
recognize who they are by their methodologies of postings.
Discussion forums are all ways monitored to find out who knows what, how they learned
it, and to destroy the poster of truth any way they can.
Take care, , ,
Norval
, , , well there yah are skinny, I was wondering where you had gone. This thread just
didn't seem to be one you could ignore. How yah been? I see you are still "at work" as an
IAC agent. How's the pay? What are the bennies? Better than mine? LOL
EndLightEnd
I had to pick the "Both" as now there are craft that have been built by mankind that can
do much of what the ET's craft can do. But that is only in the last 50-75 years. You do
give some good arguments, yet as you can see these Information Acquisition and Control
agents in these forums will twist your words and flat out lie. Many of us have tried to
reason with "them" and have learned it is a waste of time. Besides, it is their job after all. I
stopped coming to forums like these as it is all ways the same tactics and posters or their
sock puppets. Even though they change their names on other forums you can still
recognize who they are by their methodologies of postings.
Discussion forums are all ways monitored to find out who knows what, how they learned
it, and to destroy the poster of truth any way they can.
Take care, , ,
Norval
I only gave one point for his having named him because it least Friedman has SOME credientials as a scientist - unlike all the other woo-woos.
Yes, and we are STILL watching you through your TV. So be afraid - be VERY afraid!!
But if you want to escape us, go ahead and commit suicide (and you have our full permission) - because that's the only way to break our control...
Damn near poetry Skinny!
A moderator??...movin up in the world huh.
Anyways good to see you back in the crazy section, lol.
Man, I always remembered you as intelligent but your writing has really taken on some nice lucidity over the years...not to take anything away from your prior writing or put any undue pressure on now, lol.
Dang Skinny, I can't wait (or at least hope you get to see these anti gravity crafts or (metallic saucers in my case and just assuming they are anti gravity because of the way they were moving).
Not sure if you remember my particular story but myself and a friend saw aprox 25-30 of these metallic saucer shaped crafts over Kewlowna B.C. Canada, no if's and's or buts about it, clear as day my friend.
Would love to have more great minds see these things...especially you cause I know it would probly blow your mind, lol.
ET or man made, awareness needs to be increased on the subject of their presence me thinks(somehow).
I am begining to worry that it may not be a good thing either way, but may actually be more fearfull if they are indeed man-made.
I know that you will have to have your own experience or something is going to have to happen on a huge public scale for you to finally see or accept this shit as real but I don't blame you cause I would be the same way.
Anyways, this is just a friendly shout out more than anything...like a yearly hello...take care and don't ban too many of us nutters
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
I'm looking forward to seeing the documentary 'Beyond the Blue' as soon as its available. The director here talks about interviewing a scientist from CNES France's equivalent of NASA on the release of the governments ufo files.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjF2kr6EzKM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjF2kr6EzKM
Never heard of that before, when is it going to be released?