Merged Their Return

[dafydd]

Name one great discovery that was made on the basis of anecdotes alone.

Heck, you can even throw in videos and etchings if you want.

Did Columbus discover America by going to the king and queen and saying he heard a bunch of stories about it? No, he WENT there.

Did Newton formulate his theory of gravity by going around and asking people about their experiences? No, he made direct observations.

Was the Big Bang theory worked out by examining old creation stories from primitive cultures? No, a bunch of physicists got together, looked at the data, did the math, and came up with the only explanation that fit.

Anecdotes are useless. They may occassionally point us in the right direction, but it is senseless to come to any kind of conclusion based only on unverifiable stories that may or may not be true.

We don't make progress by telling each other stories,that's for round the campfire when you're camping. I bet Kota could tell a rattling yarn.

 

[Psiload]

Here's an example of anecdotal UFO report.

A witness reported the events which took place at a Mexican air show in 1993. The witness reported seeing "A silver balloon looking object." which flew between a formation of helicopters. The witness stated that one of the helicopters broke out of formation and went in pursuit of the object. The witness testified that the object increased its rate of speed and escaped pursuit.

The witness strenuously insists that his memory of the events is "reliable".

The object couldn't have been a mere balloon, because balloons can't increase their speed and outrun a helicopter. Therefore, we can reasonably and confidently conclude that the witness saw some sort of highly-advanced, ET-piloted craft.

It would be foolish and ignorant to conclude otherwise.

 

[carlitos]

We don't make progress by telling each other stories,that's for round the campfire when you're camping. I bet Kota could tell a rattling yarn.

Like this one about Pearl Harbor?

It JUST SO HAPPENS, that my fianee's father was one of the radar tower operators out there. HE says that they picked up on a radar signal, but that they summized that it MUST have been a radar glitch because the signal was too big to be an attack of that size.

The signal was actually interpretted as a 'large flock of birds', and thus the alarmed was not sounded, until one of these birds laid an egg.

Crazy, huh?

 

[King of the Americas]

You know the really funny thing here? I never used the word "dramatically". It's almost as though you're, what's the phrase, clearly mis-representing the truth of the matter.



Indeed. It's so intact that you got the details wrong.



Except that, as I already noted, you have no idea if that is actually the case. You think you remember an actual event, but you have no evidence the event actually took place other than the memory you're using the event as evidence to prove its accuracy. A beautiful textbook case of circular reasoning.


...

I'll concede that you didn't use the word "dramatically"...the word you actually used was "significantly"... Either way, please qualify that statement? Because I don't interpret a single mistake, a "6" becoming "7" as significantly changing my story.

There were no details to get wrong, in the case of my memory of my sister handling "A" Hope Diamond. I saw her handle a Hope Diamond replica, period. You can call "Kinne's Jewelry" in Gainesville Texas 940-665-3931, and ask them if they have a Hope Diamond replica on display in an upstair area. Whether or not this is proof of the story I've relayed is up to you. I'd only add, that the stone in question is 'upstairs', and I haven't seen it with my own eyes in over 2 decades, because I am in a wheelchair.

I don't think mis-stating someone else's stance is going to win any debate. And I don't think my story has changed significantly. Then again you sense a big difference between the words "dramatically" & "significantly", so maybe your whole value system is screwed up. Maybe in your head, small differences, mean BIG DIFFERENCES. I really don't know at this point how you arrive at the conclusions you do... Your thought process doesn't make sense to me.

 

[GeeMack]

So, what was it that I saw?

The credibility of the witness is non-existent as supported by the repeated demonstrations of lack of reliable memory and frequent lies told right here in this thread. The only thing baffling about this whole ordeal is how anyone could, in light of the proven lies and demonstrably failed memory, continue to make unsupported assertions of having seen aliens and expect anyone else to take them seriously.

 

[GeeMack]

First, please explain to me how "6" becoming "7" is dramatically changing my story? See I don't understand that.

Or was that a 5? Remember this, well, those of you who can remember things for more than a few hours?...

The ONLY change that has occurred were the total number of objects changed from "6" to "7".

Less than 10 hours later...

I wrote about it on message boards both the THSMB and JREF both have been erased by time itself. All that we have are my recollections here from the past several years. Wherein my discrepancies were "5" to "6", in my numbering them.

Let the record show that the witness cannot remember what he wrote 10 hours ago. Any claims to have a clear memory of anything that happened over one day ago may be summarily rejected.

 

[GeeMack]

I don't think mis-stating someone else's stance is going to win any debate.

Then stop accusing other people of lying when they aren't lying. On the other hand, there's absolutely no hope of you winning this debate, so carry on.

 

[Psiload]

Like this one about Pearl Harbor?

I remember an even better one. The King once told a tale in which he purported to recollect a bad experience he had back in grade school which was caused by his having drank too much Jolt Cola.

After asking the King how old he currently was, and doing a little research, I expressed my sympathy for the King, explaining that it must have been awkward to be a teenager and still be attending grade school.

Jolt Cola didn't exist before 1985 you see.

 

[King of the Americas]

I remember an even better one. The King once told a tale in which he purported to recollect a bad experience he had back in grade school which was caused by his having drank too much Jolt Cola.

After asking the King how old he currently was, and doing a little research, I expressed my sympathy for the King, explaining that it must have been awkward to be a teenager and still be attending grade school.

Jolt Cola didn't exist before 1985 you see.

In '85, I'd have been in the 4th or 5th grade.

What do you propose I said?

 

[Psiload]

You probably claimed it happened in Kindergarten, and I expressed sympathy that you had(to no one's surprise) been held back a number of times.

Hey, I'm not the one claiming his memory is accurate and reliable here.

 

[King of the Americas]

You probably claimed it happened in Kindergarten, and I expressed sympathy that you had(to no one's surprise) been held back a number of times.

Hey, I'm not the one claiming his memory is accurate and reliable here.

Just so we are clear, you don't know what I said or when, but you are sure I am wrong...

Got it.

 

[Stray Cat]

I'll concede that you didn't use the word "dramatically"...the word you actually used was "significantly"... Either way, please qualify that statement? Because I don't interpret a single mistake, a "6" becoming "7" as significantly changing my story.

The point about the use of the word "significantly" is that the altering numbers signify that your story changed, ergo it is correct usage.

 

[King of the Americas]

The point about the use of the word "significantly" is that the altering numbers signify that your story changed, ergo it is correct usage.

sig·nif·i·cant (sg-nf-knt)
adj.
1. Having or expressing a meaning; meaningful.
2. Having or expressing a covert meaning; suggestive: a significant glance. See Synonyms at expressive.
3. Having or likely to have a major effect; important: a significant change in the tax laws.
4. Fairly large in amount or quantity: significant casualties; no significant opposition.
5. Statistics Of or relating to observations or occurrences that are too closely correlated to be attributed to chance and therefore indicate a systematic relationship.

So you and Cuddles think changing a "6" to a "7", within the whole of a story, is a significant change...?

 

[King of the Americas]

So to summarize:

We've got:

-"a moment skyward"

-reverting back to the bronze age

-flaunting our whores

-ending civilization

-stack up a big pile of rocks

-build big ass runways or pictograms

Of these, I think the only ones with any credence would be the last two, given some who made huge piles of stone and the Nazca pictograms are 'gone'.

That said, I have no rocks, nor any large sectors of land on which to doodle.

So, given all that I think the "moment skyward", is the best most doable plan.

I am however, still open to any serious suggestions, that might coax our heavenly onlookers to descend once again.

 

[Toke]

You forgot about setting out cups of mead*.

It is well known to attract both elves and pixies, and if we all do it, they may deem it time to show themselves to society at large.

*Add a few drops of good malt to make it irresistible for the pixies.

 

[King of the Americas]

You forgot about setting out cups of mead*.

It is well known to attract both elves and pixies, and if we all do it, they may deem it time to show themselves to society at large.

*Add a few drops of good malt to make it irresistible for the pixies.

I want to get U.F.O.'s to descend. Not get my Uncle Frank Orona to show up. He can hear a bottle cap open 2 counties away.

 

[Toke]

You are rather closed minded, dismissing elves and pixies just because there are no hard evidence of them.

 

[bruto]

We've got:

-"a moment skyward"

-reverting back to the bronze age

-flaunting our whores

-ending civilization

-stack up a big pile of rocks

-build big ass runways or pictograms

Of these, I think the only ones with any credence would be the last two, given some who made huge piles of stone and the Nazca pictograms are 'gone'.

That said, I have no rocks, nor any large sectors of land on which to doodle.

So, given all that I think the "moment skyward", is the best most doable plan.

I am however, still open to any serious suggestions, that might coax our heavenly onlookers to descend once again.

I think the big piles of stone and pictograms are a pretty poor bet anyway. They're still there, and still nothing has landed. Clearly visible and commodious modern landing strips exist throughout the world, but no UFO's have availed themselves of these either.

But whether or not the moment skyward is a good idea, you have a serious problem. If your idea that many people must do this at once in a particular location is valid, then you lack the fundamental resources to make it happen. First you must persuade people that you're not just being silly. This seems so far to have been a difficult hurdle. Viewing this thread as a test run of your persuasive skills I don't think you should be making short term plans for your event. You have a lot of work ahead of you.

 

[bruto]

I want to get U.F.O.'s to descend. Not get my Uncle Frank Orona to show up. He can hear a bottle cap open 2 counties away.

On the other hand, I have read that some of the characters in Beowulf were based on real people. By your own standards, this makes Beowulf history. And thus, by your standards, we can say that there's historical evidence that a large assemblage of mead drinkers could result in a visitation of monsters. Maybe those monsters were another manifestation of your saucer gods. If so, a big mead drinking party is not such a bad idea. I suppose it's heartless to use Uncle Frank as bait, but we all must sacrifice a little for progress and truth.

 

[King of the Americas]

You are rather closed minded, dismissing elves and pixies just because there are no hard evidence of them.

I did no such thing...