where is the evidence for alien visitation?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Doesn't matter they vacuumed the carpet. I have a carpet fiber on my shoe.

Anyhoo...my trip to the bar left traces, unlike apparently a trip to and shag with aliens-.
 
spuriousmonkey said:
What...we need to prove your extraordinarty claims??? You make the claims. The burden of proof lies with you. We don't have to prove the negative. Proving negatives is impossible.

notice the "we"

these pseudos travel in packs
like rats

this frenzied mob shares a single deranged mentality

fascinating
(anthropologically speaking, that is)
 
spuriousmonkey said:
Doesn't matter they vacuumed the carpet. I have a carpet fiber on my shoe.

Anyhoo...my trip to the bar left traces, unlike apparently a trip to and shag with aliens-.

oops. does not really matter. you assume forensic record to be infallible and indefinitely preserved. that is unwarranted. as is the continued presence of this fiber on your shoe. it is not as if your shoes are caked with mud from a crime scene. do you assume that all bars have carpets?

spurious
you really need be more analytical and discerning
discount and discard the more sensational incidents that are probably garbage.
considering these ridiculous abductions stories, anal probes and other shit you find in tabloids merely show an utter lack of judgement on your part

you play in the crackpot's ballpark

this is sciforums
are we not smarter than most?

focus rather on the few that defy a simple explanation
you have been skulking around here long enough to what the cases are

deal with those
you would appear so much more intelligent
 
Last edited:
spuriousmonkey said:
Basically you have nothing to say do you?

those little asides are for my amusement
it is you that cannot or simply refuse to rebut my arguments in any meaningful manner

lets see how you conclude

Anyhoo...my trip to the bar left traces

this to me is like a fanatic asserting the existence of god simply because he says so
 
There can be many causes behind eye witness reports. Alien visitation is an extraordinary claim. It needs extraordinary evidence. Not just stories.

We've no idea at all if it's common - or unheard of - for one planet to be surveilling another. Therefore there is no basis whatever to suggest that this state of affairs would be, or must be, "extraordinary".

OKokokok...I'm not sure I'm reading this correctly...you are saying that more credible people are less likely to report contact, and thus the reports we do have are only sightings. So does that mean that only "credible" people have encountered more than simple sighting?

I'm saying that if abduction stories don't have a powerful element of B*S* to them, then the reliability characteristics of those making the claims will not be substantively different than those merely reporting sightings. For instance, if it could be shown that, say, 3% of all sightings are reported by police officers, but only .2% of all abductions, then the discrepancy has to be explained. An easy out would be that police are less likely to lie about this type of thing, so their dwindling numbers in the abducted category is because they don't tend to lie.

Or are you saying that because only kooks report these sightings that nobody believes them?

Not only "kooks" report sightings. That's the problem. If an accountant is, say, deemed to be about 90% reliable as a witness in general, and you've got 100 accountants making UFO sighting reports, then the odds that they are all lying is about the same as quantum luck allowing you to walk straight through your bathroom wall - maybe about once in the history of the galaxy.

The purpose of looking at occupation, etc., in witness reports is that it allows a control, a measure of the reliability of the witness pool in relation to the general public. It's an instrument to gauge the argument, "only kooks report UFO's". Kooks don't fly airliners, perform open heart surgery, operation nuclear powerplants, or file corporate tax returns.

And this whole conversation of credibility actually makes no sense; what makes someone a "credible" witness to a UFO encounter? Duendy says a doctor claims to have removed "strange" artifacts from a patient...because he's a doctor, he's credible? Because he has a PhD?

Yes, that's the idea, but the credentials have to be better than a doctorate downloaded from a Mexican website, and the witness pool has to have more than one or two doctors. Have you ever applied for a passport? Here in Canada you need a signature on your application from one of a select number of occupations - doctor, engineer, etc. Precisely the guys and gals that make more credible statements anywhere - in a legal trial, at work, or even just hanging out at the bar. The reason that the government requires a person with a certain occupation to witness that you are who you claim you are is that they are reliable and responsible.

If, say, 1 in 1000 people are doctors in the USA, and 1 in 1000 eyewitnesses to a UFO are doctors, then this would be powerful evidence that the phenominon is real. If only 1 in 10000 were doctors, then this would suggest that there's a great deal of false reports. Simple analysis - surely someone, somewhere has done this kind of study?
 
amazing
you pull crap out of thin air that has nothing to do with the discussion and then present it as if it is relevant.

lay of the booze and come back when you can put together a coherent thought
 
SO.....if you are a doctor, shrink, airline pilot. Phd, or any one with letters afte your name tis makes you less of a 'kook' does it?

so ll people who are not in high paid careers are potential 'kooks'

what classist shit THAT idea is!
 
duendy said:
you are the second person patronizin me to take a course in science. so how comes then you'll who do....your notion of 'science' is so old hat, dont know hows you have the nerve to SAY 'science'....?? answer THAT?

ok..old phlo, tere may be no hope for him. old and stuck in his ways. but YOU. a young lad. how comesyou are so un-savvyt about Science, ..........
Well yes I was being a little patronising. However you really do seem to have a poor understanding of science duendy and it is clearly affecting your judgement.

Yes I do spend too much time in this part of the forum. I read the other parts but rarely post. I only have so much time for visiting the forum each day and I have spent it arguing with you lately.
 
Posted By:duendy
of course i am.......(rolls ears.....listenup..i listen to a family. a mum, her gran, and two prepubescent boys. ok? they tell me about the amazing experience they have just had. i am LOOKIN and LISTENING..to teir words, their mannerism, emotions, body language....all at. THAT skill you seem to not take into consideration. YOUR focus is seemingly not including that, but is a narrowing on 'solid evidence'. Till then you wold treat that family as common liars or mentally ill wouldn't you?

From everything you've said in this thread, it would seem that your whole belief in UFOs is based on this single documentary of a mom and her kids. You refuse to consider that this mother is a lunatic, or that she is a fame chaser, or that she has alterior motives. There is nothing in you that questions the background of this woman, or if maybe the kids cooked up this mess and the mother decided to back them until the end. That's horrible, because it makes you vulnerable much more than UFO belief; imagine if you were in the crowd at Howard University the other day when that professor said that the white race needs to be eliminated from the face of the Earth! You would believe it simply because a professor said so!

And this doctor you say claims to have alien artifacts pulled from the bodies of his patients...well, a PhD only makes you more educated than someone who does not have a PhD, not any less insane.

The man I speak of, with the PhD in mathematics and a Harvard graduate and professor, is Theodore Kaczynski, AKA The Unabomber. This guy was as intelligent as anyone else (and moreso) and had gifts in speech and even grammar and punctuation. He wrote with better prose than any of your favorite authors, and he was nuttier than even Norval is.

Because a documentary potrays an abduction story in a forgiving, favorable light, evoking sympathy from the viewer by way of sad or erie music and a meloncholy narrator, doesn't mean it's true. I can tell that it touched you, duendy, and that's fine. It's unfortunate, however, that you bought this whole story without anything beyond the story itself; no evidence, no research, no peer review or approval, nothing. You just believe because the woman who told her story seemed believable, and the kids were cute.

JD
 
shaman_ said:
Well yes I was being a little patronising. However you really do seem to have a poor understanding of science duendy and it is clearly affecting your judgement.

me::tus implying that you have a superior understanding of science, right?....Yet didn't you tell me before you WERE@NT a scientist.....? errrrrrm! so what is it you dod do then? you know i am an artist. let's begin there.....what makes YOU sp all-knowin bout science then mr?

Yes I do spend too much time in this part of the forum. I read the other parts but rarely post. I only have so much time for visiting the forum each day and I have spent it arguing with you lately.

tis is actually debating....as argumentaive asit may sometimes sound
 
Gustav said:
amazing
you pull crap out of thin air that has nothing to do with the discussion and then present it as if it is relevant.

lay of the booze and come back when you can put together a coherent thought

So what about using arguments instead of ad hominem attacks? Is that too much to ask for?
 
JDawg said:
From everything you've said in this thread, it would seem that your whole belief in UFOs is based on this single documentary of a mom and her kids.

me:wrong. I have had an interst in te UF ET abduction phenomena for quite a while. I have also read Dr MAck's Passport to te Cosmos tc which offer MUC more open minded research about all this than just denigrating pople who share about this. gaaaawd elp anyone going to YOu jdawwwg if they HAD had an experience!

You refuse to consider that this mother is a lunatic, or that she is a fame chaser, or that she has alterior motives. There is nothing in you that questions the background of this woman, or if maybe the kids cooked up this mess and the mother decided to back them until the end. That's horrible, because it makes you vulnerable much more than UFO belief;

me::no. thatisn't horrible. what is horrible is your utter cynicism, and mistrust, even of your own capacity for understanding what you see and hear. and seem to been a science textbook to inform you very life!

imagine if you were in the crowd at Howard University the other day when that professor said that the white race needs to be eliminated from the face of the Earth! You would believe it simply because a professor said so!

me::see what i mean? bet ya dont. you underestimate and prject and paint everything wit your limited outlook. this is what materialistic science indoctrination does to people as you are revealing. i makes you mistrust your self and everyone else. till te ONLY thing you do trust is the indoctrination. funny but sad and true

And this doctor you say claims to have alien artifacts pulled from the bodies of his patients...well, a PhD only makes you more educated than someone who does not have a PhD, not any less insane.
me::hah wish you'd join the debate below in paranormal forum where the 'superior-spelling brigaade' are arguing the opposite....!

The man I speak of, with the PhD in mathematics and a Harvard graduate and professor, is Theodore Kaczynski, AKA The Unabomber. This guy was as intelligent as anyone else (and moreso) and had gifts in speech and even grammar and punctuation. He wrote with better prose than any of your favorite authors, and he was nuttier than even Norval is.

me::pLEASE come and join the debte jDAWWWWG....its called i fink 'how to spell premonition' or summatlike that

Because a documentary potrays an abduction story in a forgiving, favorable light, evoking sympathy from the viewer by way of sad or erie music and a meloncholy narrator, doesn't mean it's true. I can tell that it touched you, duendy, and that's fine. It's unfortunate, however, that you bought this whole story without anything beyond the story itself; no evidence, no research, no peer review or approval, nothing. You just believe because the woman who told her story seemed believable, and the kids were cute.

me::hhmmmmte patronizing underestimating trip continues........for kick off it wasn't your usual Americana sentimenalist type of docu with the muzak etc. it is more non-musick english.....and not affected.....look Jdawwwg. see what you are doing. you are trying to asert that EVERY abductionreport has been reported by 'lunies, crazies. fame seekers, .......IF you presented your 'thesis' to a propr debae about tis, there would be a hushed silence...of embarrassment! aimed at YOU
JD
trrry an beeeeee mooorrrreeeee empathic...()
 
duendy said:
Originally Posted by shaman_
me::tus implying that you have a superior understanding of science, right?....Yet didn't you tell me before you WERE@NT a scientist.....? errrrrrm! so what is it you dod do then? you know i am an artist. let's begin there.....what makes YOU sp all-knowin bout science then mr?
I work in IT. At the moment I am doing programming and some systems administration. To get into IT I did a two year computer science course after high school. I have done the basics of physics/maths/chemistry/ect.

So I am far from all knowing. As I said earlier, there is a lot that I do not understand. There is a lot that I don't even begin to understand! However I cannot agree with your constant science bashing duendy.
 
shaman_ said:
I work in IT. At the moment I am doing programming and some systems administration. To get into IT I did a two year computer science course after high school. I have done the basics of physics/maths/chemistry/ect.

me::eek:h god...digressing a mo...dont know how you do all that IT programming. i did a course called Creative Technology ...the idea wa to introduce fine artists to state of art creative technology. so i got close up look at the programmers etc.....they all seemed to chew their faces off(chewing gum) and drink loads of coffeee and b very manic......and impatient. we had class in systems design and it was sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo utterly boring beyond blief. maybe it was the tutor....but shit

So I am far from all knowing. As I said earlier, there is a lot that I do not understand. There is a lot that I don't even begin to understand! However I cannot agree with your constant science bashing duendy.
an as i keep telling you shaman_ i am not bashin science as such but SCIENCISM.......for example go checkout Fritjof Capra.....he gives a good overview of NEW science. science that is moving away from mechanistic presumptions. i dont agree with all Capra's philosophy---ie, his seeming uncritical views of Buddhism etc. but i deeply respect his empahsis on Ecoliteracy....unerstanding the intelligence of Nature
 
SO.....if you are a doctor, shrink, airline pilot. Phd, or any one with letters afte your name tis makes you less of a 'kook' does it?

Yes. Exactly. The reason is that high-end professions tend to demand extreme reliability from those that practice them - because of the amount of responsibility involved. If you are an Air Traffic Controller, you can't be "good" 199 days a year and "unstable" for 1. You'll be out of a job. Kooks, by definition, are unstable. Hence they won't be air traffic controllers.

The easiest way to gauge the UFO phenomenon, IMO would be to study the demographics of the people making siting reports, and those making more elaborate claims. My guess is that the abduction crowd will shake out mainly as less reliable witnesses, and that the eyewitness crowd will exhibit hardcore symptoms of credibility that can't be shaken by statistical dissection.
 
and if i may add....

this anecdotal evidence or eyewitness reports is merely a starting point for further investigation. it is frequently used in combination with other forms of evidence if available. no definite claims can be made at this stage. theories are formulated that attempt to explain the sighting of the ufo

now lets deal with the particular theory that gets the pseudo skeptics panties in a bunch

this is where it is tentatively postulated that the ufo due to its unusual characteristics and activity might possibly be of et origin. that it might be local is not entirely discounted.. probabilities are assigned in order to focus the direction of the investigation

now

theories proposed should for the most part be in accordance with existing bodies of knowledge. one should not propose that the ufo was the face of jesus and expect to be taken seriously

so the million dollar question ends up being.... what laws, know or theorized, are being flouted by postulating that the ufo is et?

i say none
 
spuriousmonkey said:
So what about using arguments instead of ad hominem attacks? Is that too much to ask for?

i have
you ignore and refuse to consider all points raised

rebut every point you disagree with
acknowledge your failed assertions

and no, it is not too much to ask for
i similarly feel i am not asking too much from you
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top