• 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.
RoboTimbo said:
Let's see if ufology will make any attempt at answering the legitimate questions posed to him or if he will simply dishonestly continue to play the wounded martyr.
Click to expand...


And here we have our first contribution. Let's see what hoax Robo wants to contrubute to our top 10 list! Oh ... nothing ... just more name calling. OK ... so who's next?
 
ufology said:
And here we have our first contribution. Let's see what hoax Robo wants to contrubute to our top 10 list! Oh ... nothing ... just more name calling. OK ... so who's next?
Click to expand...

Yep, no answers there. The pseudoscience continues.

olog, why do you continue to dishonestly equate UFOs (Unidentified Flying Objects) with alien craft?
 
ufology said:
And now we see Carlitos present another less enviable tactic, the addition of accusatory remarks like "dishonestly fail to explain"
Click to expand...


He's absolutely correct. You deliberately ignore or refuse to respond to arguments you don't like. That kind of behavior is cowardly and dishonest.


ufology said:
the strawman in the form of off topic subject matter
Click to expand...


That's not off-topic, and it's not a strawman argument, either.

You really ought to worry more about learning the rudiments of argumentation, before making accusations of logical fallacies that you don't even understand.


ufology said:
This example also illustrates the additional tactic of making proclaimations such as calling the topic a "faith-based belief system", as if simply saying it makes it true.
Click to expand...


Your very own statements on these forums support Carlitos' allegations that your beliefs are based in faith, and not any form of evidence or logic.

In your own words:
  • you regularly proffer arguments from ignorance and incredulity in the same manner as demonstrated by religious adherents;
  • you flatly ignore or handwave away evidence that contradicts your beliefs, just as the religoius faithful do;
  • you employ faith-based platitudes such as "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence";
  • most tellingly, you have flatly stated that nothing anyone says can shake your belief that you have personally witnessed an alien craft, even though there's no way you could possibly have known that's what it was.

ufology said:
Add to that more accusatory remarks and proclaimations and the whole thing amounts to nothing more than name calling and character attacks. Another fine example of the JREF at work enlightening our community.
Click to expand...
ufology said:
And here we see RoboTimbo engaging in a real common tactic, the application of derogatory labels. The use dehumanizing labels for the enemy are a common tactic in times of war, which also reveals Robo's adversarial nature ... seeking out conflict and creating an excuse for it all at the same time.
Click to expand...
ufology said:
And in steps GeeMack to defend the proclaimations and labeling and faulty logic, as if somehow because he thinks the same way, it's all OK. There seems to be a growing collective. I wonder what next? More name calling? More proclaimations? More faulty logic? Maybe a combination of all three. We seem to be overdue for some mockery and ridicule. Perhaps another creative picture or perhaps an animated GIF.
Click to expand...


There you go with more of that pseudoscience stuff we were talking about:

Personalization of issues

  • Tight social groups and authoritarian personality, suppression of dissent, and groupthink can enhance the adoption of beliefs that have no rational basis. In attempting to confirm their beliefs, the group tends to identify their critics as enemies.
  • Assertion of claims of a conspiracy on the part of the scientific community to suppress the results.
  • Attacking the motives or character of anyone who questions the claims (see Ad hominem fallacy).
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience#Personalization_of_issues
 
Last edited:
ufology said:
Dear Readers,

Now we see more denial and the use of huge fonts, as though that somehow makes their position valid. They are also confusing the idea of "claims" and "evidence". The claim is that people have seen UFOs ( alien craft ), the evidence is their testimony. Testimony is counted as evidence in dictionaries and courts of law and in this thread. Moving the goalposts to make "scientific evidence" the only allowable evidence is not valid. Points can be made regarding the validity of firsthand knowledge and anecdotal evidence, but it cannot be fairly ruled as inadmissible.
Click to expand...

Testimony is a claim not evidence or do you not understand basic English?
 
RoboTimbo said:
Yep, no answers there. The pseudoscience continues.

olog, why do you continue to dishonestly equate UFOs (Unidentified Flying Objects) with alien craft?
Click to expand...


And why don't you contribute a proven hoax to our top 10 list of proven UFO hoaxes? Or is it your preference to use character slams?
 
ufology said:
And now we see Carlitos present another less enviable tactic, the addition of accusatory remarks like "dishonestly fail to explain", as if that somehow not addressing the strawman in the form of off topic subject matter somehow makes his position valid. This example also illustrates the additional tactic of making proclaimations such as calling the topic a "faith-based belief system", as if simply saying it makes it true. Add to that more accusatory remarks and proclaimations and the whole thing amounts to nothing more than name calling and character attacks. Another fine example of the JREF at work enlightening our community.
Click to expand...

Oops - I failed to include "dishonestly play the martyr" in my guesses as to which intellectually dishonest reply you would make.

So, again you failed to explain how your "I know what I saw" is different from virgin of guadalupe-witnesses' "I know what I saw" or bigfoot believers' "I know what I saw." You already have the martyr complex down, so I'll leave out the jesus stuff.

Ps - beliefs without evidence are by definition "faith based." It's just too bad if you don't like this accurate characterization of your belief system.
 
Last edited:
So still no responses for our top 10 list ... wait no ... edit ... there is one just posted above just as I posted this ... thanks ehcks. I'll go check them out. Perhaps we could have some more suggestions that aren't videos too.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7626449&postcount=13760

So our first link is here ( thanks to ehcks ) to some hoax videos: http://mashable.com/2010/06/22/best-ufo-videos/

  1. World Trade Center video.
  2. Haiti UFO Sightings August 06 2007
  3. Green Sphere UFO
  4. UFO Caught Live on TV News Turkey
  5. UFOs visit the space shuttle
  6. Mexico City UFO footage 1997
  7. UFO Over Paris
  8. Ovni en Mexico
  9. Huge UFO Over Shanghai China
  10. UFO Triangle Pyramid Over Kremlin Moscow
There is very little information on the hoaxers here. Does anyone have any information on the hoaxers? Some videos are obviously hoaxes, while to my untrained eye for video, the Mexico City one could be real. How do we know the Mexico city one is a hoax. One post says it's because of it's size and the way it wobbles. But those don't seem to be really good reasons. Maybe there is some kind of heat or other optical distortion ... who is the faker and how was it done?
 
Last edited:
ufology said:
So still no responses for our top 10 list ... I wonder how many pages this will go on for? Here's the link again in case anyone wants to see my last effort at turning this thread into something useful.

<snip>
Click to expand...


Sorry, but no. What you are trying to do is take this thread off-topic. Just your latest dishonest strategy.

We all are still waiting for your evidence, which if you care to notice is the topic here. Got any?

Thought not.
 
What is that, like the eighth time he's dodged my question? Ufology, this isn't the "top 10 hoax" thread, it's the one where you're meant to be providing evidence for alien craft and stuff.
 
Last edited:
ufology said:
So still no responses for our top 10 list ... wait no ... edit ... there is one just posted above just as I posted this ... thanks. I'll go check them out. Perhaps we could have some more suggestions that aren't videos too.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7626449&postcount=13760
Click to expand...

This thread is for believers like yourself to present active evidence to refute the null hypothesis that 'all UFO sightings have a mundane explanation', why would anyone feel compelled to provide evidence that supports the null hypothesis?
Once again you are trying to shift the burden of evidence, how about you present your top 10 cases you think represent actual alien spacecraft instead.
 
ufology said:
So still no responses for our top 10 list ... wait no ... edit ... there is one just posted above just as I posted this ... thanks ehcks. I'll go check them out. Perhaps we could have some more suggestions that aren't videos too.
Click to expand...

We don't need more. 10 obvious hoaxes, most with a known hoaxer who admitted to the video is enough.

What you need to do now is offer your side. You don't even need ten. Just one video of a real alien spacecraft.

Just one real alien spacecraft. That's it. If you can do that, you're right. If you can't, you're wrong. Do you have one?
 
Third time is a charm I hope.

Since this seems to have been missed, I'll repost this:

Drs_Res said:
ufology said:
Drs_Res said:
Could you take the image and indicate the core object minus the glow? Maybe as a red circle or something?

I'll keep in mind that the edge might not be 100% discernible, but a close estimate would be nice. You did after all say that it was about 15.55 feet (I think that was the number) in diameter, so you must have had some idea where the edge was vs. the glow. You can even tag the the red circle with the words "Estimated size of the Core", or something to that effect.

Thanks.
Click to expand...


Drs_Res

I don't think I could do that with any real accuracy on the scale of the picture I posted because the picture is too small. The relative size of the object to the trees as it neared them and landed behind them gave clues as to it's size. In this picture I can't really get that across accurately. Maybe if the image was the size of a picture window, like what human perception sees, but that's just way too big to post here and nobody has a monitor that big anyway. When I get more time I'll create an illustration that is larger and closer and in scale. About the only thing you could do is imagine a sphere of light about 15 feet wide. Note that in the illustration, this was just before the object departed and it had gotten much brighter, so the core size seems larger because of that.
Click to expand...

The reason that I asked for something close to scale for the core on this picture is because you said earlier that this was a good representation of what you saw. I was trying to picture how much of the "Object" labeled UFO was core vs. glow in that picture. Is it possible that you have the object labeled "UFO" to large, even though you are including the glow?

Another question if you don't mind. Was the sky clear that night / morning?

Thanks.
Click to expand...


And this:

23_Tauri said:
Drs_Res said:
Another question if you don't mind. Was the sky clear that night / morning?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
And another question for you, whilst you're answering Drs_Res's question if you will, <SNIP>. At any time during the sightings (night or early morning) could you see the reflection of the orb / light / UFO / shiny thing in the lake?

Edited by Locknar: 
Politeness Man throws his Stainless Steel handkerchief; name calling is never civil/polite.... Post <SNIP>'ed, breach of rule 0.
Click to expand...

BTW, if you can't recall or are unsure, please just say so.

Thanks.
 
There is nothing more productive that can come from me talking about my own sighting anymore on this thread. Sometime maybe I'll get someone who is good at doing graphic art to help me do an illustration that would represent the object more lifelike. If that happens I'll post up a low res illustration. In the mean time please forward your suggestions on our top 10 UFO hoaxes ( non-video ) or more information on the hoaxers and methods from the top 10 videos posted earlier. Thanks.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7626542&postcount=13770
 
Last edited:
ufology said:
There is nothing more productive that can come from me talking about my own sighting anymore on this thread. Sometime maybe I'll get someone who is good at doing graphic art to help me do an illustration that would represent the object more lifelike. If that happens I'll post up a low res illustration. In the mean time please forward your suggestions on our top 10 UFO hoaxes ( non-video ) or more information on the hoaxers and methods from the top 10 videos posted earlier. Thanks.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7626542&postcount=13770
Click to expand...

Shouldn't you settle on your final set of embellished numbers before calling for a graphic artist to represent your UFO ( firefly )?
 
Last edited:
ufology said:
There is nothing more productive that can come from me talking about my own sighting anymore on this thread. Sometime maybe I'll get someone who is good at doing graphic art to help me do an illustration that would represent the object more lifelike. If that happens I'll post up a low res illustration.
Click to expand...


Already done.


PseudoFirefly2.gif


All it needs is the sonic boom to be added and you'd swear you were there that night.
 
ufology said:
There is nothing more productive that can come from me talking about my own sighting anymore on this thread. Sometime maybe I'll get someone who is good at doing graphic art to help me do an illustration that would represent the object more lifelike. If that happens I'll post up a low res illustration. In the mean time please forward your suggestions on our top 10 UFO hoaxes ( non-video ) or more information on the hoaxers and methods from the top 10 videos posted earlier. Thanks.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7626542&postcount=13770
Click to expand...

I'll take that as a hand wave or just an "I don't know / can't recall" then.

This thread is not about hoaxes and hoaxers. If you want to talk about that, I would suggest you start a new thread for that topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom