• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

Status
Not open for further replies.
ufology said:
Given the interest in the topic by so many people, should they not be allowed to explore the topic and form their own opinions?
Click to expand...
Who's stopping them?

This forum helps people to explore the topic, it doesn't hinder their research.
 
RoboTimbo said:
Regardless of how many people are interested in the subject, everyone is free to have an opinion. Did you think differently? Is that why you came here - to try to get skeptics to suspend critical thinking about your pet subject?

Now, let's get back to the lack of any evidence that aliens have been the cause of any UFO sightings. Are you still insisting on using the unfalsifiable pseudoscientific null hypothesis: "Some UFO sightings are the result of alien visitation"?
Click to expand...


So then if we all are entitled to explore the subjects we are interested in, then I would assume that we are all free to conder all the information at hand on all sides of the issue? Would you agree that is fair?
 
ufology said:
So then if we all are entitled to explore the subjects we are interested in, then I would assume that we are all free to conder all the information at hand on all sides of the issue? Would you agree that is fair?
Click to expand...

Not when you misrepresent that "information" as you have...not fair (or scientific) at all.

You really thought you had "something" there...didn't you? Sorry to "burst" your "bubble". :)
 
ufology said:
I can accept that from your point of view you find the evidence to be insuficient.
Click to expand...

Think about that statement for a second. Why is it that we find the evidence insufficient? Could it possibly be that the evidence is unconvincing?

The "hallmark" of a good scientific theory is the ability to convince others.

So why in the heck is it our "fault" that YOUR evidence isn't convincing???
 
R.A.F. said:
Think about that statement for a second. Why is it that we find the evidence insufficient? Could it possibly be that the evidence is unconvincing?

The "hallmark" of a good scientific theory is the ability to convince others.

So why in the heck is it our "fault" that YOUR evidence isn't convincing???
Click to expand...



R.A.F.
  • The question wasn't about being free to believe, but about being free to explore all sides of the issue. So your response, "Sure...if you don't care about being taken seriously, you can believe anything you want." does not address the question.
  • I also make no claim that it is your "fault" if you choose different parameters than I do for what you believe. In fact, you will note that I had said quite the opposite, in that you are entitled to your view ( or at least what I assume is the same view as indicated by your sympathies here ) and that it makes sense within the parameters it has been outlined in the null hypothesis proposed by such posters as Paul and Robo.
So again, do you believe that those interested in the subject should be free to explore all sides of the issue and form their own opinions?
 
Stray Cat said:
Who's stopping them? This forum helps people to explore the topic, it doesn't hinder their research.
Click to expand...


Stray ... This forum does that to a certain degree. But if people want to explore the subject from all points of view, should they not be entitled to view everone's point of view, including those of other websites, books and videos as well? Or do you think that only your opinion and those who sympathize, should be the one people are allowed to consider?
 
ufology said:
Stray ... This forum does that to a certain degree. But if people want to explore the subject from all points of view, should they not be entitled to view everone's point of view, including those of other websites, books and videos as well? Or do you think that only your opinion and those who sympathize, should be the one people are allowed to consider?
Click to expand...

Points of view apply to topics of opinion and philosophy. They don't apply to topics of fact.

There either are non-mundane UFOs or there aren't. A different point of view is irrelevant. You must have evidence disproving the null hypothesis which is "All UFOs are of mundane origin." If you don't, then you have nothing to add.
 
Last edited:
ehcks said:
Points of view apply to topics of opinion and philosophy. They don't apply to topics of fact.

There either are non-mundane UFOs or there aren't. A different point of view is irrelevant. You must have evidence disproving the null hypothesis which is "All UFOs are of mundane origin." If you don't, then you have nothing to add.
Click to expand...


ehcks ...

You are entitled to your way of approaching the issue, but not everyone approaches it that way. Many people don't even know your way exists. They just want to look at the information and consider it for themselves. Should they not be able to do so?
 
ufology said:
ehcks ...

You are entitled to your way of approaching the issue, but not everyone approaches it that way. Many people don't even know your way exists. They just want to look at the information and consider it for themselves. Should they not be able to do so?
Click to expand...

Of course people should be able to read whatever fiction they want, what is annoying is when somebody try to pass it off as facts in order to increase sales/interest.
 
Toke said:
Of course people should be able to read whatever fiction they want, what is annoying is when somebody try to pass it off as facts in order to increase sales/interest.
Click to expand...


Should people not be allowed to determine for themselves, as you have, what is fact vs. fiction by having the opportunity to view the information for themselves?
 
ufology said:
Should people not be allowed to determine for themselves, as you have, what is fact vs. fiction by having the opportunity to view the information for themselves?
Click to expand...

Looking for information is good. Dispersing misinformation is bad. I'm not sure I can make that simpler.

Until you have evidence that disproves "All UFOs are of mundane origin," you have no information.
 
ufology said:
So then if we all are entitled to explore the subjects we are interested in, then I would assume that we are all free to conder all the information at hand on all sides of the issue? Would you agree that is fair?
Click to expand...

If you read this thread, you will see that the skeptics have considered all sides of the issue. It is the skeptics who did the exploration. It was the previous failed pseudoscientific UFOlogist who couldn't see any side except OMG PseudoAliens! It's the skeptics who say, "Yes, I could easily be convinced." It's the credulous who say, "No matter what you say, no matter there is no evidenece, I know they're aliens!"

Are you going to start doing anything differently? Are you going to consider that fallacious thinking has brought you to the point where you believe some UFOs are alien invaders? Or will you close-mindedly continue to subscribe to your pseudoscientific null hypothesis which is "Some UFOs are of alien origin"? That means that you start with your conclusion, pseudoscientifically.

Ask a skeptic what it would take to convince them that some UFOs are alien spaceships. Can you guess what the answer is? If you said "Just one confirmed case of an alien spaceship", you'd be right.

Now ask a pseudoscientific UFOlogist what it would take to convince him that he has engaged in fallacious reasoning. What would the answer be?
 
ehcks said:
Looking for information is good. Dispersing misinformation is bad. I'm not sure I can make that simpler.

Until you have evidence that disproves "All UFOs are of mundane origin," you have no information.
Click to expand...


Should people not have the opportunity to determine for themselves what constitutes "dispersing misinformation" by reviewing the available information? Additionally, is it not possible, knowing full well the information may not be accurate, to still find value in owning the material becuase it constitutes part of their topic of interest?
 
ufology said:
Should people not have the opportunity to determine for themselves what constitutes "dispersing misinformation" by reviewing the available information? Additionally, is it not possible, knowing full well the information may not be accurate, to still find value in owning the material becuase it constitutes part of their topic of interest?
Click to expand...

You're asking for the allowance to lie because you expect your audience to not be sure you're lying?
 
RoboTimbo said:
If you read this thread, you will see that the skeptics have considered all sides of the issue. It is the skeptics who did the exploration. It was the previous failed pseudoscientific UFOlogist who couldn't see any side except OMG PseudoAliens! It's the skeptics who say, "Yes, I could easily be convinced." It's the credulous who say, "No matter what you say, no matter there is no evidenece, I know they're aliens!"

Are you going to start doing anything differently? Are you going to consider that fallacious thinking has brought you to the point where you believe some UFOs are alien invaders? Or will you close-mindedly continue to subscribe to your pseudoscientific null hypothesis which is "Some UFOs are of alien origin"? That means that you start with your conclusion, pseudoscientifically.

Ask a skeptic what it would take to convince them that some UFOs are alien spaceships. Can you guess what the answer is? If you said "Just one confirmed case of an alien spaceship", you'd be right.

Now ask a pseudoscientific UFOlogist what it would take to convince him that he has engaged in fallacious reasoning. What would the answer be?
Click to expand...


Robo ...

Perhaps the skeptics have considered all sides of the issue. But what about the people who unlike you don't have it all figured out. Should they not be free to review whatever information is available on all sides of the issue and discover all these amazing truths for themselves?
 
RoboTimbo said:
Seek out all the facts you want, just don't make them up.
Click to expand...


Should people not be free to examine the available information and determine for themselves from multiple sources who is making up facts and who isn't?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom