Just more moronic retaliation on the part of the incredibly fearful. To all those seriously interested: You *do* realize that 100% of this retaliation in this thread is based in fear.
While it is
possible that I am, indeed, a moron, it isn't likely nor have you shown it to be true given that I've schooled you in logic, rhetoric and argumentation quite handily. That would seem, prima facie, to place you at least a rung under a "moron."
With regard to "retaliation," I would say that if you're aren't mature enough to engage in a logical discussion that questions and criticizes your claims (and you've made several), then you're in the wrong place. Don't bitch and cry when you get responses to nutty ideas or even good ideas that aren't well thought or expressed. It is, after all, a discussion forum. If you were looking for mental masturbation of your woo theories, you might have looked at one of the paranormal/ufo sites out there instead of a science site. They'll pat you on the back all day long.
It's over. We have annihilated the anti logic of the scientific hucksters and closed minded here.
At least you're big enough to recognize your own self-annihilation. This is quite a shame since I, personally, have endeavored to share some critical thought and education on argumentation and logic.
UFOs are real and quite possibly the result of non human technology.
Which is
not inconsistent with anything I've stated. The UFO phenomenon is real. It does exist -else we wouldn't be discussing it. That at least
some of the sightings are the result of non-human technology *is* possible. It just isn't very probable nor is there any good reason to believe it is the case.
Also, before there is ANYMORE ridiculous fear based
I am most curious, however, what this "fearful" and "fear based" reference is in regard to? What reason, specifically, do you think that I or other have to base "fear" about UFOs upon? I find this outlook fascinating and truly want to know if it's just rhetoric and a well-poisoning ad hominem or if you actuall believe those that disagree with you and dare to question your beliefs and assertions are somehow "afraid." If the latter is the case, what is the basis for this alleged or perceived fear?
It's time for the three (and the a forth if ReadOnly can somehow drop the insults and emotional outbursts) to do a little leg work and get with REALITY.
What you see as insulting and emotional outbursts are legitimate questions, query, criticism and rebuttal to your poorly constructed arguments and assertions. Almost none of which you've actually addressed.
A couple of questions to my biggest fans on this thread...
Firstly...
What are your motivations to come here and constantly insult and attack us "woo-woos", why not just leave us to talk in peace.
Pardon me, but please take this opportunity to explore the post counts and registration dates of your "fans" and compare them with you and electrifixtion. You came to our science forum and decided to post pseudoscientific ideas. The posts moved to the
Pseudoscience subforum, populated largely (though not exclusively -spookz still haunts us) by the scientifically minded.
If anyone has the right to question the presence of the other, it is us. We welcome, however, your presence as long as you're willing to participate in dialog and have others that disagree with your beliefs, superstitions and irrational ideas offer their criticisms, rebuttals, and counterpoints.
If this is unacceptable, you can leave at any time. I rather hope you stay, however. But if you do, keep in mind that this is the
pseudoscience subforum of a
science forum. There are plenty of opportunities elsewhere on the internet to discuss paranormal, supernatural and speculative nonsense on UFOs without fear of criticism or inquiry.
The only reason I can see for the insults is your attempt to make any new comers to the thread see me as an unreliable source, and even a deliberate liar. This is unacceptable.
It is unacceptable, which is why we expose such things. I haven't noticed any deliberate lies, but you are, indeed,
an unreliable source since you and elect. have yet to answer queries, criticism and rebuttal with any logical and rational discourse.
Instead, we only get the reliance on logical fallacy and speculation.
As I think about it, it occurs to me that the closest thing to a "lie" I can think of on your part is the inclusion of "philosopher" in your avatar title since there has been little evidence of even basic understandings of philosophical discourse. See my earlier posts.
Secondly...
This is not so much a question but an issue with your methods. It seems you are incapable of thinking that we perceive UFOs to be ANYTHING other than "space aliens". No matter how many times we say this is only one possibility you are incapable of accepting this at face value. UFOs are not synonymous with space aliens for me, but apparently they are for you guys.
I've asked several times for some clarifications (see my earlier posts), yet these requests appear fall on deaf ears. Still, the only thing I've actually been critical about, with you specifically, is your poor argumentation and lack of support for your premises and assumptions.
This is a discussion forum and such discussions are a part of academic discourse. I realize that this is not an academic forum, but that's my own discussion style. You're free to ignore me if you'd like, however, I still reserve the right to criticize and refute illogical and unreasoned claims, assertions, etc. you make.
This is a feeble attempt to label us as crackpots who are so gullible we will believe anything.
On the contrary, it's been quite successful due mainly to you and electrafixtian to adequately or even partially address logical and legitimate criticisms.
As I have stated many times before I believe the majority (if not all) of UFOs observed from the 1900s on are man-made in nature. But this does not seem to register, you seem to content to ignore this statement and continually revert to "space aliens" as our explanations, which it is not. Slander and misdirection are the tools of you skeptics.
Please. Clarify. What portion, if any, do you assign as likely to be "extraterrestrial" and what probability do you see this? On what basis do you exclude natural and human-psychological/pathological explanations -if at all?
Such clarifications I've been calling for throughout the thread.
And Finally...
Every person in the US military who has had to report a UFO sighting has had exactly the experience. Their superiors always say "Soldier, this never happened, you will not speak of this ever again."(or something to that effect.)
This is untrue. I don't think its an intentional "lie" on your part, but merely an assumption based on logical fallacy (again -why the "philosopher" moniker at your avatar?). I'm a vetern of the armed forces. I witnessed a UFO and spoke about it to members of my unit -several were officers and fellow non-commissioned officers.
Not one ever made such a comment. Indeed, I had a lively and interesting discussion with two officers about the incident.
Further to the point, in the program which aired on ABC's Primetime last night, the U.S.A.F. colonel said (and I paraphrase), "no one ever told us not to talk about it. No one ever told us not to report it."
That incident has been shown to be a hoax (see Phlog's link in the related thread).
Why do you think defenders of our country are threatened to keep quiet on a phenomena that doesnt exist?
This, too, is a logical fallacy. You've created a slippery slope that doesn't exist. You're premises collapse, leaving this assumption to hang in the wind like flatulent expression in a place of worship.
I
don't think defenders of our country are threatened to "keep quiet." Indeed, I've never known this to be the case unless there were national secrets and non-disclosure issues -for instance, I cannot reveal to you some of the specifics of several missile systems I used to work on. If those missiles were fired and one went off-course and caused a "UFO sighting," it is possible that I might not be able to comment for reasons that have nothing to do with it being labeled a UFO by significance-junkies and mystery-mongers.
Such an event never took place, by the way.
As far as you know.
They have found a way to instantly synthesize momentum and inertia.
This is an example of pseudoscientific jargon: take some scientific-sounding words, apply them to your own beliefs, and have them confirm a conclusion you already have.
There are no good reasons to believe such nonsense. While it is very possible (even probable) that there exist technological advancements used in military equipment that isn't publicly available, there's no reason to believe that anything special is occurring that violates laws of physics as we currently understand it. Momentum and inertia cannot be "synthesized," they either exist as products of energy and work or they don't.
And I've yet to see evidence of anything going on that suggests that military scientists and researchers have created any new physical laws or found work arounds to physics since I've yet to see evidence of a UFO sighting that didn't have some very mundane and prosaic explanations.
My position is: some people are significance-junkies and mystery-mongers and apply undo significance and mystery to anything that defies
their imediate understanding.
phlogistician
You are the only one here basing your claims solely on your experience. Now, that my friend, is bullshit. Just because you say it's so, does not make it so. VERY weak.
Its as if you looked in the mirror when you wrote that. Truly you aren't so daft as to ignore the logical and reasoned arguments he (and I) have presented and then to
dare to say "because you say it's so, does not make it so?" Isn't this
exactly what you've been doing?
What is the name of the most compelling scientist investigating UFOs and what is the citation to his most compelling research?
You say this is so, but fail (FAIL) to support this claim. Does this not fit with your complaint of Phlog?
