Yes, maybe...
But maybe is not good enough. Would you like to be prosecuted on only the grounds of what someone else claims you have done? Wow...
Anecdotes might be a reason to investigate but it's not evidence.
- Status
Yes, maybe...
But maybe is not good enough. Would you like to be prosecuted on only the grounds of what someone else claims you have done? Wow...
Anecdotes might be a reason to investigate but it's not evidence.
If you can provide evidence that you were nowhere near the scene of the crime you will go free. If your lawyer can show that there is reasonable doubt, you will go free. Reasonable doubt being like plausible other explanations.
The anecdote (claim) from an eyewitness will get checked. You're still ok with being prosecuted on nothing but a witness statement?
ufology
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,681
You know that is a really good question ... you'd think it would be here someplace ... after all these are the JREF's finest ...
j.r.
So you're now saying that you actually don't have any real evidence. You were just claiming that you had? Ok, glad we sorted that out.
Marduk
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 10,183
so, dragons are real then, pretty much every culture on earth has one in their mythology, and mythology is anecdotal isn't it
are you scared to go outside
fairies must be real as well, oh my god, sasquatch too, and God, also sea monsters, unicorns, giants, elves, goblins, the flying spaghetti monster, he's real too
you don't seem to understand, that one unreliable report carries the same value as thousands of unreliable reports, the volume is not important, the value of the evidence is.
see your mother has two heads and three legs, I just said that, now by your standard that must be true or else I wouldn't have said it,
ufology
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,681
The above is supposed to be an answer to following questions:
So are you saying that the eyewitness testimony is valuable or not then?
Does it mean that if the police can't verify the eyewitness testimony, it never happened?
As you can see, the answer given has nothing to do with the questions that were asked. Why? Because it's pretty obvious that eyewitness testimony in a hit and run case would be very valuable, and that even if it weren't proven, it doesn't mean it didn't happen. But the skeptic can't admit that without losing ground, so it's better to dodge the questions and be as evasive as possible. Once they admit that human perception is not 100% fallible and eyewitness testimony has value, their whole strategy of denial goes out the window.
j.r.
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
Nobody here invented the scientific method. It's the product of some of humanity's greatest minds and a lot of bitter experience.
Marduk
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 10,183
Actually I´d like to ask why sceptics community does believe that people see dreams? Where is the evidence?
Can a true sceptic believe in anything that isn´t proven? If can I wonder why would he discard his reputation of a good sceptic and his great name here. Wouldn´t that compromize all his other wild belief-systems as well?
If you do believe that people see dreams, how can you prove it. All you have is anecdotes and stories. Maybe even your own experience, but as a hard boiled sceptic you certainly know that you can´t believe even your own observation, since it´s possible that you was wide awake and only imagined that you dreamed.
EEG is a piece of paper with diagrams on it. It doesn´t 100% prove that people actually experience things while unconscious.
Or maybe you are saying that everybody knows it to be true. I could say that many many people say same about many other parapsycholical phenomenons and UFOs too. So a great deal of people knowing something doesn´t prove anything.
Ok. Of course you know that I am kidding you, but I wonder why sceptics really do believe they experienced something while unconscious.
I am not really expecting anyone to take this challenge and showing the evidence of dreaming.
Can a true sceptic believe in anything that isn´t proven? If can I wonder why would he discard his reputation of a good sceptic and his great name here. Wouldn´t that compromize all his other wild belief-systems as well?
If you do believe that people see dreams, how can you prove it. All you have is anecdotes and stories. Maybe even your own experience, but as a hard boiled sceptic you certainly know that you can´t believe even your own observation, since it´s possible that you was wide awake and only imagined that you dreamed.
EEG is a piece of paper with diagrams on it. It doesn´t 100% prove that people actually experience things while unconscious.
Or maybe you are saying that everybody knows it to be true. I could say that many many people say same about many other parapsycholical phenomenons and UFOs too. So a great deal of people knowing something doesn´t prove anything.
Ok. Of course you know that I am kidding you, but I wonder why sceptics really do believe they experienced something while unconscious.
I am not really expecting anyone to take this challenge and showing the evidence of dreaming.
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
The reason witness are partially trusted in this case is because the claim they are doing is not extraordinary. Partially because corroborative evidence will be required like a missing person or a corpse or whatnot. If somebody came up with a claim of having witnessed a cabal of noam chomski, obama, jon edward , and the pope sodomising kitten and eating baby heart live, you would be much much more skeptic than if they said they witnessed their neighbor strangulating their wife after a hefty domestic dispute. You would especially require corrobative evidence in both case, as just saying "it was so" will be laughed out : for example missing persons and bodies would be required.
Furthermore the justice system is very well aware that witness make for a fragging poor evidence. Which is why they will always try to get *other* evidence. Witness can lie, witness can be mistaken, heck many studies show people are fragging poor at recalling something which happened a few minutes ago but surprised them (like the auto accident / theft where people were unable to agree on a car color).
The value you assign witness in the justice system is a myth.
Marduk
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 10,183
you seem to think that dreaming is a subjective experience so therefore its valid to compare it with Ufology
all this says is you don't know much about the science of Oneireology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneirology
well, consider yourself wrong then
really, you should think about your argument better before subjecting anyone to it
btw, did you come up with any evidence of those radiation burns yet
also quick question
where did you first meet Ramjet ?
Last edited:
ufology
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,681
Hey Tomi ... let me do it for them ...
"So now you're confusing dreams with UFOs ... OMG I had a dream ... therefore aliens !!"
How was that ... pretty close do you think?
j.r.
Last edited:
Marduk
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 10,183
well, he was confusing dreaming with UFOs wasn't he
oneireology is a science isn't it
or are you going to deny that as well
not at all like ufology then
lol
Last edited:
I wonder if people saw skeletons of dinosaurs and thus became the myth of dragons. Maybe unicorn was actually rhinoceros described by a far away traveller. Some images of unicorns were probably based on real animals, such as the one-horned rhinoceros or the narwhal—a small whale with a single long tooth or tusk that resembles a spiral ivory horn.
Fairies could have been dragonflies seen from distance. Gods, elves, gnomes could be actually very old ET sightings if we turn the mythology upside down and for a second think that mythology could come from true experiences sometimes and also if we speculate that there has been ET visitations here. Old myths at least are full of stories of "men from the sky" who access great powers of flying and great destruction etc.
Could be only stories though. I am not claiming anything just referring to a possibility with a universe vast in it´s time and space (time being thousands of years of mythological incidents here). This is pure speculative of course.
Sea monsters? Well, there has been seen (and catched) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_squid
Flying spaghetti monster? Well, I am not going into that.
Santa Claus? Is Santa Claus real? I think it depends what you mean by Santa Claus. If you are referring to a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_claus#Saint_Nicholas
Then he at least once was real.
We could also think that Mickey Mouse is sort of a real think in existence and even Santa Claus in a phenomena (not a real person, but a show person; actors play).
My point is: myths can be based upon real events. Even pink unicorns. What about goblins and all those small creatures in myths? Could they be early sightings of the typical "modern" ET.
I am not saying. Just speculating.
Fairies could have been dragonflies seen from distance. Gods, elves, gnomes could be actually very old ET sightings if we turn the mythology upside down and for a second think that mythology could come from true experiences sometimes and also if we speculate that there has been ET visitations here. Old myths at least are full of stories of "men from the sky" who access great powers of flying and great destruction etc.
Could be only stories though. I am not claiming anything just referring to a possibility with a universe vast in it´s time and space (time being thousands of years of mythological incidents here). This is pure speculative of course.
Sea monsters? Well, there has been seen (and catched) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_squid
Flying spaghetti monster? Well, I am not going into that.
Santa Claus? Is Santa Claus real? I think it depends what you mean by Santa Claus. If you are referring to a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_claus#Saint_Nicholas
Then he at least once was real.
We could also think that Mickey Mouse is sort of a real think in existence and even Santa Claus in a phenomena (not a real person, but a show person; actors play).
My point is: myths can be based upon real events. Even pink unicorns. What about goblins and all those small creatures in myths? Could they be early sightings of the typical "modern" ET.
I am not saying. Just speculating.
ufology
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,681
well, he was confusing dreaming with UFOs wasn't he
oneireology is a science isn't it
or are you going to deny that as well
Well I'm going to end today's session on a high note there ... goodnight from Calgary at 1:30am here.
j.r.
you seem to think that dreaming is a subjective experience so therefore its valid to compare it with Ufology
all this says is you don't know much about the science of Oneireology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneirology
well, consider yourself wrong then
really, you should think about your argument better before subjecting anyone to it
btw, did you come up with any evidence of those radiation burns yet
also quick question
where did you first meet Ramjet ?
Wikipedia article about Oneirology doesn´t prove anything. It just proves that science is studying brains and stories about dreams. It doesn´t prove dreams though. Sorry.
Marduk
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 10,183
ok, you are making the mistake there of taking a story and looking at its elements and then thinking that they all happened together.
Dragon mythology is based on ancient stories of large sea creatures (all the earliest dragons lived in the sea) the idea of dinosaurs being responsible was added long after those stories existed
Unicorns are based on Greeks travelling to different countries where the artwork was a different style to what they were used to, so a side on picture of a gazelle, shows only one horn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicorn#Unicorns_in_antiquity
the stuff about virgins and magic were all added after the fact
the same is true of all the other examples, they start off with a misunderstanding of something perfectly mundane and then human imagination gets hold of them and embellishes the facts
so thats exactly the same as ufology, where someone sees something mundane, then adds a lot of fiction to it to make it more exciting
this of course means, that ufology, has exactly the same qualities as any other myth
but its still a myth
uhuh, so youre saying that theyre studying something they have no proof exists
dry that out, instant fertiliser
ever admit you were wrong about anything tomi, you asked for proof that dreams exist, and the fact that there is a branch of science dedicated to studying them isn't proof enough ?
perhaps you can list for me the other branches of science that study non existant things,
while youre at it, that radiation burn evidence, did you find it yet, or doesn't it exist ?
Last edited:
The difference between you and me is that I am more open minded. As long as there is not enough evidence I am open to the possibility that a case might be "alien". I am also open to the possibility that it might be mundane. You on the other hand insist that some cases MUST be "alien" because there are a lot of them. A very closed minded approach.
So dowsing works, people can read minds, talk to the dead and cast spells on their enemies? Homeopathy works, faith healing works? God, allah, shiva, vishnu and a few thousand other gods exist? Just because many people claim to have personal experience of them? Clearly it's a ridiculous position to claim that something is true just because many people claim so.
Wrong question. Where is the explanation (mundane or "alien)?. The sad thing is that the cases that remain unexplained remain so because there is not enough reliable information available.
As you can see, I gladly admit I don't have an answer for some cases.
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
Exactly. The myth of visiting alien spacecraft is based on real events - observations of satellites/birds/unfamiliar aircraft/reflections/flares/lanterns/insects etc etc which the observer doesn't have the necessary information to identify. Your best similar example was fairies being based on observations of unfamiliar insects.
Catch a fairy in a jar so it can be examined in a laboratory and it moves from myth to reality. If and when objective evidence for visiting aliens is found the same will happen; until then they are no more likely to exist than fairies.
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
How often those myth turned out real showed something extraordinary ? Practicaly near enough never. It nearly always turned out to be ordinary, or an exageration.
But even then it is not a good argument for UFO, it is only a good argument for open mindness and a testament to witness and story telling being a very very very poor investigation tool ! But instead of recognizing the poorness of that tool, you turn it around and pretend it is evidence of something.
Well. No. Present us a corpse, an item, materials, we can discuss. If all you have is story, we can use the EXACT same body of story you jsut gave us as evidence that human like to invent stuff and beautify their story. Case closed.
To take again your judicial evidence case : all you have is a witness which may have been mistaken. Without a missing person or a body, you have NOTHING. And that is the part which is hard to swallow for psudoscientist ufologist.
- Status