• 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.
edge said:
So particles can travel faster than light?
Click to expand...
Even the scientists who have been running these experiments doubt it.

edge said:
So where could a person get one of these particle accelerators?
Click to expand...
Argos?
edge said:
When traveling through rock they aren't affected, very interesting.
Click to expand...
You know this how?
edge said:
So how would this fit in with aliens?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't
edge said:
Is this proof of what we will call Warp1 in the future?
Click to expand...
No
edge said:
Seems like the more we discover the more possible that aliens have been here.
;)
Click to expand...
No, we have started to uncover evidence of a particle that may or may not travel faster than light. We have not uncovered any evidence of aliens.
 
GeeMack said:
Only in a world where arguments from ignorance trump objective reality.
Click to expand...
Really?
It also falls into one of my categories, time travel or travelers.
Witnessing a craft is not an arguments from ignorance, it is reality, get over it.
This could change physics, as we know it.
This would open doors we thought weren’t there or might be there.
We have already seen demonstrations of that type of physics but you refuse it based on 100-year-old theories.
Wake up can you smell the coffee?
What do you think pushed them to look this way; first they were saying it might open a black hole, but now?
We’ll have to wait for a confirmation.
 
Forgot to add; they said also that the age of the universe might have to be re-calculated, intresting that!
 
edge said:
We’ll have to wait for a confirmation.
Click to expand...
Yes that would be sensible, instead of already building wild speculations in order to shore up a blind belief in aliens.

And whilst we wait for that confirmation we can also wait for confirmation that you saw an alien craft...



...



...



...



...


still waiting.
 
edge said:
Forgot to add; they said also that the age of the universe might have to be re-calculated, intresting that!
Click to expand...
This is nothing new.

“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.” - Albert Einstein
 
edge said:
So particles can travel faster than light?
So where could a person get one of these particle accelerators?
When traveling through rock they aren't affected, very interesting.
So how would this fit in with aliens?
Is this proof of what we will call Warp1 in the future?
Seems like the more we discover the more possible that aliens have been here.
;)
Click to expand...
Errrr....... no. edge, I think the above indicates that you completely missed the whole point of my post. I wasn't implying this at all, but quite the opposite: that we don't jump to far-out conclusions. Science is conservative. It's don't make dumb claims. It's wants verification, repeatability, that kind of thing.

Sigh.
 
Last edited:
23_Tauri said:
Errrr....... no. edge, I think the above indicates that you completely missed the whole point of my post. I wasn't implying this at all, but quite the opposite: that we don't jump to far-out conclusions. Science is conservative. It's don't make dumb claims. It's wants verification, repeatability, that kind of thing.

Sigh.
Click to expand...

Sure but it is them that are making the speculations just in case they're right.
I just made them before they did.
Because of what I have seen...something other than ourselves demonstarting it.
This I am sure of, some one else is and has been showing us the way.
You don't have to believe me now but later you might.:)
 
23_Tauri said:
Errrr....... no. edge, I think the above indicates that you completely missed the whole point of my post. I wasn't implying this at all, but quite the opposite: that we don't jump to far-out conclusions. Science is conservative. It's don't make dumb claims. It's wants verification, repeatability, that kind of thing.

Sigh.
Click to expand...

How boring is that? ;)
 
23_Tauri
says:

that we don't jump to far-out conclusions. Science is conservative. It's don't make dumb claims. It's wants verification, repeatability, that kind of thing.
Click to expand...

"Because it is crazy".
We'll see and this is what I know also, repeated verification that UFOS are real and I got that, "verification", believe it or not.
My only concern is who’s piloting these conveyances?
 
ufology said:
As you can see, if what I'm hoping to do is to establish the truth, it's obviously something that I believe still needs to be done beyond what I personally believe. Perhaps the skeptics here might acknowledge that sometime.
Click to expand...
As everyone can see, in the context of your divorcing truth from reality, your "establish the truth" means that you want to create your own reality which has nothing to do with anyone else's reality.
 
ufology said:
Resume:

I have already acknowledged several times that I don't have scientific proof, material or otherwise to present as evidence.
Click to expand...
And it has been noted several times that you bait and switch the word "proof" when asked for "evidence".

That doesn't mean alien craft haven't visited Earth or aren't still here.
Click to expand...
Nor does it mean that Santa Claus doesn't live at the North Pole and deliver presents to the good boys and girls around the world. Nor does it mean that there isn't an invisible dragon living in my garage. Why did you pick out just one unevidenced extraordinary claim that there is no evidence for?

It just means that the evidence presented so far isn't good enough for you to accept. That's fine, I don't expect you or anyone else to blindly believe anything.
Click to expand...
No, it means that there hasn't been any evidence of aliens presented so far. You've presented claims. Do you comprehend the difference? Why or why not?
 
edge said:
23_Tauri
says:



"Because it is crazy".
We'll see and this is what I know also, repeated verification that UFOS are real and I got that, "verification", believe it or not.
My only concern is who’s piloting these conveyances?
Click to expand...

you jumped from UFO to Alien craft there without any evidence
even Rramjet is opposed to that kind of thinking
can I ask if you've joined USI yet
they clearly need your support
and your money
;)
 
ufology said:
GeeMack:

You've taken a partial quote and posted it out of context to misrepresent my position. For the benefit of the readers, I was asked to describe a situation where truth doesn't correspond to objective reality, and I illustrated how it can occur. The specific question was:

Q. Tell us about a situation where truth doesn't correspond to objective reality.

​
My answer was as follows:

A. Truth and reality are two seaparate issues. Therefore truth itself doesn't correspond to objective reality or any other reality.

Truth is about a said premise. For example, it is true that in Canada, 100 cents equals 1 dollar.

So I'm presuming that what you really mean to ask is what situation could there be for a premise to be true outside the context of objective reality. In this case the answer would be a subjective situation, as described in my initial definition. To provide another example, if you have any imagination, you could close your eyes and see a small pink elephant inside a brown room with hardwood floors. And when you see that small pink elephant in that brown room with hardwood floors, that small pink elephant is truly there in the imaginary room. After all, if it weren't there in the imaginary room we would have to say that it isn't true that it is there in the imaginary room.

There are both objective and subjective truths.
​
=====================

So as the readers can now see, you either don't comprehend the concept that truth corresponds to a given premise and that reality is a separate issue that provides context, making it either objective or subjective; or you do comprehend what was illustrated and have intentionally misrepresented my position. Please tell us all which one you prefer us to think?
Click to expand...

Your fallacy here is known as "false dichotomy". You've presented a situation where you only allow two differing viewpoints when, in fact, there are more options than the two you've given.

So I put it to you that you either knew you were doing it deliberately and dishonestly or you are genuinely as clueless about it as you are about the null hypothesis. Which is it?
 
ufology said:
Akhenaten:

Granted or "grant it" ... whatever; and since we're being picky, you might want to check your spelling on "civilisations".

The interpretation of alien as being from outside of our human civilization implies that UFOs may come from a place on Earth not connected with human civilization ( any nation or culture known to exist on Earth ).
Click to expand...
No, you are incorrect. You have improperly conflated two different concepts here - aliens and UFOs. The two have nothing to do with each other. Unless you have some evidence that they do? No?

I think the chance of this is unlikely because we have explored so much of the planet that we should have discovered them by now. However because we don't know for certain where UFOs originate, we can't rule it out either.
Click to expand...
Many UFOs originate in misperceptions and hoaxes so we do know where those originate. You've again mistakenly conflated the terms "alien" and "UFO", incorrectly thinking that they are somehow related.
 
Last edited:
ufology said:
Sideroxylon:

In the past I've suggested possible explanations for sightings other than as UFOs ( alien craft ), so I've already proven your assumption wrong.
Click to expand...

By suggesting other possible explanations for UFOs and then in the same sentence equating them with alien craft, you have cemented in the fact that his and everyone's assumption is correct.
 
Last edited:
Sideroxylon said:
And that is the approach I don't see enough of among the UFO "research" community. Your website doesn't reflect a rigorous and intellectually honest approach either. From a few unidentified lights in the sky as well as incredible and unverifiable stories of face to face or spiritual encounters, we arrive at the view the world has a long history of interaction with a pantheon of alien visitors, complete with government cover ups.

You come here and try to present the relatively sane face of UFO "research" but are very shy of the malarkey. It is easy to see how low your evidence bar is. Your website would be a very different place with the application of any kind of honest inquiry.
Click to expand...


Sideroxylon:

Your take on the USI website is misplaced. It is not an attempt to be scientific. It simply aims to provide information for those interested in ufology. It includes a wide range of views and issues related to ufology from UFO religion ( Raelism ) to the mainstream sciences ( astronomy, meteorology, cosmology ... etc. ) including skeptics and debunkers, plus entertainment and culture ( mostly sci-fi ). Visitors can choose from the complete range of topics and points of view and decide for themselves what to believe. It can't get any more intellectually honest than that.

Also, if you think the site is heavility biased then have a look at the Travis Walton entry. Much of the ufology community simply believes his story while debunkers don't. See how does USI presents it. Check out the Sagan entry in which it mentions how his discoveries regarding Venus debunked the claims of Venusians. Check out the USI Confidence Rating, a system that demands some objective verification of claims made by channelers and abductees before they can be taken seriously. Check out the YF-12A entry telling how many UFO reports were the result of manned reconnaissance flights. Even as you read this I also have in my queue to add some debunking by skeptics from this very site ... a place I came to seek out skeptical opinion to include on the USI website.

Try as you might to put down people's interest in UFOs, ufology is a very interesting and entertaining subject for many people. Should they not be able to access to all points of view, choose what they want to study, and make up their own minds? If you can show me a skeptics website that facilitates this process better than USI I'll be very surprised.

Lastly, so what if USI claims secret documents remain undisclosed? It's true. So what if history recalls stories of ancient UFO sightings. The stories do exist and they are presented in the context of myth and religion. USI also doesn't pretend to be completely unbiased, but our school of thought says,
"USI members are encouraged to explore their own beliefs in the context of the work done by others and to be as objective as possible. Healthy skepticism is also encouraged, particularly with respect to claims made by abductees and contactees."
​
Rather than work against USI, I suggest that you recognize that more progress can be made by assisting it in identifying fake videos and debunking UFO sightings. Submit the case studies, and I'll review and post them as I get the time and opportunity. This is an extraordinary opportunity for skeptics and ufologists to build bridges. I know of no other group attempting this. Why be so quick to condemn it?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom