The Washington National Airport Sightings

Give it up. Do you think myself and you are the ony one's reading this?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant, an attempt at an appeal to consequences. Not going to work.

Anything I have said has complied to science
Click to expand...

Except for the whole "alien" bit maybe....wait no, nothing you've said has complied with scientific standards.

what you have said complies mostly to guess-work...
Click to expand...

And "lights in the sky, it must be aliens!" isn't guesswork? LOL! You're too funny sometimes.

in fact, that very fact you have said most pilots experience hallucingetic properties is beyond science
Click to expand...

Why is it bad science? All humans are prone to hallucinations due to various facts of our biology(which I kindly laid out for you), all of our pilots(ever) have been human, ergo it follows logically that all pilots hallucinate. Not necessarily while in the air, and not necessarily noticeably, but they still do. Therefore this is not bad science but a logical progression from known biological facts. QED.

especially when you take into consideration that there have been over 5000 cases of pilot testimonies.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant as I never said that they were all hallucinations.

Please don't bother trying again. It's getting ridiculously easy to destroy your posts. Come back again once you've calmed down and are able to pose something of a challenge for me.
 
@Mister --

You are highly trolling. Either you are incompetent to the nature of evidence, or you don't know it's difference to proof, in which case, god bless, you must be somewhat retarded.
Click to expand...

Reported for insulting another poster.
 
@Mister --

How many times do I have to explain this though... Am I being reported for stating the obvious?
Click to expand...

No, you were reported for directly insulting another poster, namely me, by saying that if I don't "get it" that I must be retarded. The point isn't whether or not I took offense, it's that I'm sick and tired of your bullshit so I'm not going to stand for it anymore.

Whenever anyone, for any reason, questions the "evidence" you present, or provides an alternative explanation for it you lash out, eventually terminating in insults like the last one. And if I remember correctly that was what your last ban was for as well, so it's obvious that someone other than myself noticed this trend of yours.
 
Not divulging in you anymore. Case closed, as I said. You've admitted to knowing a big difference in the larger part of our arguements which kept refuting. I don't want to waste any more time on you!
 
@Mister --

Yup. The difference is that I'm not willing to make large and unparsimonious assumptions(and I've showed conclusively that they are indeed assumptions) based on wish thinking. Oh, and I've actually worked in a lab before, that's another difference.
 
Mister said:
You are highly trolling.
Click to expand...

Oh, that's rich. So far you've posted a video showing UFOs over Washington, and then said you don't care about the video, and started a thread about 'chemtrails' and then said you don't care about those either. THAT is trolling kid.
 
Mister said:
Who cares about the video anyway?
Click to expand...

I do. The fact you linked to it shows you lack critical thinking and discernment.

The discussion of the video debunked it. But you didn't bother reading that, or investigating it, you just offered it up as 'proof'.

I suspect you do this a lot, and do not look critically at stories that appeal to you.
 
Coz' I went on youtube and extracted a video which claimed to be the actual footage. Just thought it would have been a nice addition.

Fact is, if it is not real, it still does not address why people here are qouting erreneous qoutes concerning the contention that no one saw anything.

I will argue this is false all the way. Video is irrelevant now.
 
GeoffP said:
Well, I read the source on that wiki, and I don't think the Air Force's explanation is so iron-cast. Can one perhaps debate each point in turn? For starters: is that video of the lights moving past the White House real or no?
Click to expand...

Yeah, the airforce explanation is pretty much bogus. As for the video, probably not. I am awaiting to see where the information against this came from. Some gave a small clipping, which had errors all the way through it.

Wouldn't bother me much if it did turn out to be a fake video. It doesn't impact the wiki article in any way.
 
He's not telling you how to do it, he's telling you to start adhering to the scientific method.
 
Mister said:
As I have explained, no conventional explanation can account for this sighting. Which means two possible explanations can only hold:

A) They are intellects from another world
B) They are intellects from this world
Click to expand...

Isn't (B) a conventional explanation? (e.g. the B-52 bomber explanation?)

More importantly, how have you established that "no conventional explanation can account for this sighting"? I could list about 10 possible conventional explanations off the top of my head. Have you really considered all the possibilities?

By the way, you should always take accounts of how fast UFOs move, how far away they are etc. with a grain of salt. Observers tend to be notoriously inaccurate about such things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top