When does a subject qualify as science?

reference, I went back and reviewed Ivan's original post with the links to the NSA documents, and with all due respect, the facts of this incident do not support "unregistered plane flies under radar with lights blinking". We should not begin to disregard the testimony of the witnesses there simply because it does not fit our expectations. There is no basis to conclude that what is described is a "misobservation".
No... sorry I wasn't clear. I mean these are the types of events that should be focused on.. instead of the "I saw lights" type story. I said:
we have to focus on those with the most amount of information. The military sightings fit this definition.
Click to expand...
meaning that this story actually has evidence behind it. If we are going to discover anything we are better off investigating this, and not worrying about "I saw lights", "I have a blurry photo", "an alien 'probed' me", etc.

The Iran incidenct would be the one to investigate because it is the LEAST likely to have some simple explaination. That's not to say that it might not be something mundane anyhow.

I've noticed that people in this thread seem to think I am disagreeing with them, even when I'm not... very odd:p
 
Persol, I understood what you were getting at and I agree, investigate the most reliable cases first and see what explainations
can be considered or rejected. Some type of reliable evidence, in
addition to strong and credible eyewitness testimony, should be
criteria for any case to be considered. There are several very strong
cases. The Belgium UFO wave of late 1989 to the early 1990's are
very interesting. The UFOs were huge triangular shaped ones. Some
have suspected secret military operations because of their shape,
but their performance and actions would seem to question that
speculation. Hundreds of witnesses, radar tracking from multiple
sites at the same time and chases by F-16s are all a part of it.
" Of all the reports of UFO sightings, some of the most intriguing ones are those which come in flaps, or waves, have multiple witnesses, and photographs. One of the most heralded cases of this type was the Belgian flap which began in November of 1989. The events of November 29 would be documented by no less than thirty different groups of witnesses, and three separate groups of police officers. All of the reports related a large object flying at low altitude. The craft was of a flat, triangular shape, with lights underneath. This giant craft made not a sound as it slowly, fearlessly, moved across the landscape of Belgium. There was free sharing of information as the Belgian populace tracked this craft as it moved from the town of Liege to the border of the Netherlands and Germany.

This first startling sighting would evolve into a wave over the next several months. On two occasions, a pair of F-16 fighters chased the mysterious object, but to no avail. On March 30, 1990, a frantic call to military headquarters came from a Belgian national police Captain. He marveled at a giant triangle passing over, and simultaneously two ground radar stations were reporting an object of unknown origin on their screens. One of these bases was NATO controlled near the city of Glons, southeast of Brussels. After contacting other radar facilities, they learned that at least four other stations were also reporting the object on their screens. The object was moving across their screens slowly, and failed to send a transponder signal to identify itself.
http://ufocasebook.com/Belgium.html
edit: I failed to mention that a good image, deemed a classic, is
also posted at site. The image came from a 1990 videotape of one
of the triangular UFOs over Belgium.
 
Last edited:
Persol

Q seems to be the only one to completely act this way

True, but I’ve seen others act this way with other topics, relativity for example, Persol? :)
 
Come now. I was polite to MacM on EVERY topic until he just completely refused to listen and started to distort what scientists have actually said. After a couple months of the same weak arguments I just gave up on him. That is also a case where I have done alot more reading/research about it then he has, and he doesn't really know enough to even attempt to shoot down the theory. I posted a string somewhere listing about 35 different things he was wrong about in the course of our 'discussions', none of which he addressed.

This is slightly different though. I can understand if they had already decided that these are UFOs with little green people inside, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Most everybody seems to be open minded about it. You have to admit that 'something' is going on. This may be weather, misidentification, imagination, whatever... but something is there (or at least appears to be).

The main problem with the relativity threads is that they assume to know the truth, and assume to know relativity is wrong, when they don't really have any evidence and usually have a very limited understanding about physics, math, and science in general.

I don't quite see your problem with discussing UFOs as long as nobody assumes without proof to know that they are aliens.

If somebody comes on here saying 'I SAW DIS ALEEN CRAFT', then by all means ream them a new one on my behalf :D
 
Persol

I think the main point here is that this forum has changed quite a bit over the past while. And although there still remains a few rational members here, their numbers have dwindled as they seek reasonable discussion elsewhere.

It appears sciforums is being over-run with kooks, nutters, cranks, crackpots, loons, fanatics, zealots, etc. and they have chased away those who are fed up with their nonsense. Even the mods don’t post much anymore.

This thread topic alone should be ample evidence.

Some time ago, I commented on how much pseudoscience and religious fanaticism was occurring at physicsforums to one of their admins who signed up here and was trying to increase membership. It now appears there is a role reversal in that this place is now the forum where very little rational discussion occurs.

And although they have a pseudoscience board over there (appropriately moderated by Ivan) they have got rid of their religion board and are striving for a more science-oriented forum. Of course, the kooks are dropping like flies over there and most likely are finding new hunting grounds here.

I would very much like sciforums to be a science forum however it is becoming less so.

Some would say to me, “Why not just go elsewhere?” That would be like giving up the battle, and as you know, it’s not something I’m willing to do.
 
I agree. Most people that used to start the interesting science topics have left. Now most new topics are 'this is wrong because', when they don't really understand the theory. I'm spending most of my time here reading the philosophy forums because we still have a few members there who are interesting and intelligent. I figure it is also a good practice of debate and logic to work through ideas here. However, I've completely given up on a few members who seem to completely base their arguments on unsupported assumptions, and see nothing wrong with it. As such, I've drastically cut back my time spent here.
 
Testing thee evidence

Again I beleive

Ufology "love dat word" Is going about it's course in the wrong direction. After a UFO is spotted then an investigation is started. Well what good is that, no ufo anymore. Trace elements are great. But meat is better.

I truly believe UFO incidents can be "provoked" and therefore tested. And I feel this approach has not been tested. I beleive "Alien Space Craft" have shown their weakness on more than one occasion. What weakness you ask?

Curiousity. they are interested in us. What we are doing.

So how do we bring them into view ?

We buzz their curiosity.

As far as Q and James
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. No sign of educated minds here so whats your excuse.
 
Last edited:
(Q):

I understand how you feel. At least you can pick and choose which threads and which forums to spend time on here. I tend to leave most threads in the Pseudoscience forum well alone, because it seems pretty clear that many of the people who post there aren't actually interested in boring stuff like evidence and facts. I think what they really enjoy about the forum is the opportunity to set their imaginations free with fantastic tales of alien abductions, psychic powers, ghosts and government conspiracies. They naturally rally against the party poopers who try to inject a measure of common sense and evidence into their fantasy world.

I don't think sciforums is any worse than any other forum I have participated in. In fact, I'd say it is a lot better than some. I used to spend a lot of my forum time at another forum, but now sciforums is my number one destination for this kind of discussion. At the other forum, I found it became impossible to avoid the crackpots, and little was done by the moderators to control their activities. They posted to almost every thread, on a forum where religion was ostensibly banned as a discussion topic and science was the nominal purpose for the forum's existence. At sciforums, at least discussions of Religion and Pseudoscience have their own areas. It can be fun to pop in now and then and stir the pot a little, but you don't have to stay there and you're not forced to look. (Actually, as a moderator of Religion, I am forced to look, but that's another matter.)

I don't think skeptics will ever beat Pseudoscience. The only way to overcome it is through education, and there will always be people who don't want to be educated. They will be comfortable in their own space, whilst real science continues beyond their range of vision. I think we need to accept that and move on.
 
I think what they really enjoy about the forum is the opportunity to set their imaginations free with fantastic tales of alien abductions, psychic powers, ghosts and government conspiracies.

I couldn’t agree with you more. Those threads that start out with, “Wouldn’t it be interesting if” or “Imagine if” are pretty much what you’re referring to and I have no problem with those.

But when they come on here and begin spouting that we, as taxpayers should be funding these fantastic tales, that gets my hackles up.

At the other forum, I found it became impossible to avoid the crackpots

It appears you have the same problem here. And you are beginning to sound more like me as discussions with those crackpots progresses, but I can understand your frustration.

They will be comfortable in their own space, whilst real science continues beyond their range of vision. I think we need to accept that and move on.

I would hope they could accept that as well and move on.

Thanks James.
 
After a UFO is spotted then an investigation is started.

And that’s fine, just so long as it is the UFOlogist’s that are opening ONLY their wallets.

Q: sick em' boy.

Woof!
 
Originally posted by (Q)
And that’s fine, just so long as it is the UFOlogist’s that are opening ONLY their wallets.
Click to expand...
I don't mind public funding going to UFO research... as long as it is serious research and they aren't going in it biased towards any specific answer (unless they have evidence). If enough evidence is there to do serious research, then it should be done.

The question is if their is enough evidence. I think the fact that so many people claim that it's aliens is fascinating in itself. It would be an interesting psych study.
 
Many discoveries are made using assumptions. Is that biased?
I dont think so? Sometimes when assuming you discover your totally in the wrong direction. Thats still science. Debunkers need no science. Nothing needs to be tested. Ever wonder why the airforce started project Blue Book to begin with ? Because they needed too!
 
Many discoveries are made using assumptions. Is that biased?

No. But there is a big difference between making assumptions based on the scientific method as opposed to wishful thinking.

Debunkers need no science. Nothing needs to be tested.

Debunkers seek hard evidence – something that can be tested. Believers, on the other hand believe anything their imaginations can conjure, regardless and most times in contempt of science.

Ever wonder why the airforce started project Blue Book to begin with ? Because they needed too!

As a result of these investigations, studies and experience gained from investigating UFO reports since 1948, the conclusions of Project Blue Book were:

- No UFO reported, investigated and evaluated by the Air Force was ever an indication of threat to our national security;
- There was no evidence submitted to or discovered by the Air Force that sightings categorized as "unidentified" represented technological developments or principles beyond the range of modern scientific knowledge; and
- There was no evidence indicating that sightings categorized as "unidentified" were extraterrestrial vehicles.

Since the termination of Project Blue Book, nothing has occurred that would support a resumption of UFO investigations by the Air Force. Given the current environment of steadily decreasing defense budgets, it is unlikely the Air Force would become involved in such a costly project in the foreseeable future.

http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/Unidentified_Flying_Objects_a.html
Click to expand...

I would hope that the Air Force has the sensibility to continue their lack of involvement.
 
The Q-uestion wasn't what did project blue book find!
The Q-uestion was why did they start project blue book to begin with.
But Q when you replied to the post at least you were in the same catagory. Smooth


sick em : rover
 
That is great Q, an intelligent post with material that can be debated.
I will let Ives or Ivan respond first, partially because of their superior
abilities and partially because I have to be offline for awhile. Thanks.
 
The Q-uestion wasn't what did project blue book find!
The Q-uestion was why did they start project blue book to begin with.

The reason for starting the project is irrelevant. Most likely, it was to satisfy the mob mentality running amok at the time. Why do you think it was started? “Needed” is not a specific term to use in this case - you’ll need to clarify.

More importantly and more relevant are the results – null.

But Q when you replied to the post at least you were in the same catagory. Smooth

At least the post adequately refuted your less then relevant question.
 
Damn Q. You're posting actually problems now and they are completely ignoring them. It's disappointing really.
 
In post by fluid1959:
Ever wonder why the airforce started project Blue Book to begin with ?
========================================
Q's response:
As a result of these investigations, studies and experience gained from investigating UFO reports since 1948, the conclusions of Project Blue Book were:

- No UFO reported, investigated and evaluated by the Air Force was ever an indication of threat to our national security;
- There was no evidence submitted to or discovered by the Air Force that sightings categorized as "unidentified" represented technological developments or principles beyond the range of modern scientific knowledge; and
- There was no evidence indicating that sightings categorized as "unidentified" were extraterrestrial vehicles.

At least the post adequately refuted your less then relevant question.
=============================================
I thought those were some of the reasons given by the Air Force
for terminating the project, not beginning it. Tusk!Tusk! That reading comprehension thing again.
1. No UFO indicated a threat to our national security.
I'll buy this, UFO's don't blow things up.
2. No evidence SUBMITTED TO or DISCOVERED by the Air Force
represented tech beyond the range blah, blah blah.
OK, they don't have a bunch of flying saucers sitting in S-4
3. No evidence they were extraterrestrial vehicles.
See answer to no.2
The Condon Report was one of the main reasons Blue Book was shut down. Would you like me to point out a few things in the
Condon Report?
;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top