- Status
23_Tauri
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2010
- Messages
- 4,927
Last edited:
You've had exactly that given to you; that it hasn't suited your objectives is entirely your own fault. You have done nothing with your time here except try to foist your personal definition of well understood terms off on others and assert unsupported claims as evidence.
ufology
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,681
R.A.F.
This thread is simply discussing the research and evidence. Do you not have any recent research or evidence to present a skeptical point of view on? Get out there and find something useful instead of blaming me for your lack of initiative.
Last edited:
dlorde
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 6,864
You've had it. No evidence has yet contradicted the default position that all UFOs are of mundane origin.
'Nuff said.
ufology
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,681
Garrison,
I've asked for some skeptical input on recent UFO sightings, science and other things related to ufology reserch and evidence. You say I've been given "exactly that". Well sorry to say, but the few useful tibits that were provided from before are old news now, and all you have done above is misrepresent my position and attack me again.
So again, I ask if you have anything consructive to share from a skeptical point of view on recent UFO sightings, publications ... whatever. Let's move it along to something new please.
Do your own homework...
You're asking us to prove you wrong again. This is not how science works. If you can't prove yourself right, we are free to assume you are wrong.
You created the null hypothesis "All UFOs are of mundane origin" at the exact moment you created your "UFOs are alien craft" claim. It's your hypothesis, not ours, and it's your job to find the evidence.
If you have none, then we are to agree with your null hypothesis, because it has not been disproved.
Marduk
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 10,183
what research, what evidence
where ?
are you that conceited that you can't see that the only thing you have contributed to this thread is lies, deceit and dishonesty and have shown even the fence sitters the study of ufology is utter, utter garbage
are you currently writing posts here from a mental institution ?
just asking ?
you are clearly obsessed with something that has no substance
Last edited:
Enough nonsense, this thread is for UFO believers like yourself to present evidence. The only case you've presented is your own which you've turned from vague claim to outright hoax with you endless editing. Are you going to present any real evidence for consideration?
Hate to Break this to ya, but it will be the same non-news in another 60 years.
That you don't "like" that there is no evidence for aliens IS NOT OUR FAULT...again, you are being willfully ignorant...refusing to accept anything to goes against your cherished belief system.
The "skeptical input" is that THERE IS NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE FOR THE IDEA OF VISITING ALIENS...DO YOU UNDERSTAND??
23_Tauri
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2010
- Messages
- 4,927
Squid Fishing Monthly!
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
That's what you've gotten. You didn't like it so you rebelled. Were you hoping that skeptical input would consist of, "Wow! You're right! We don't know what that Unidentified thing is either so it must be OMG Aliens!"?
No, I've explained to you that because you've pinned your ego to your irrational belief system that you see legitimate questions to your beliefs as character attacks against you personally.
Ok, let's discuss the J Randall Murphy UFO ( firefly ) Hoax. Why do you think the story changed so much in such a short period of time? Do you think it's because of J Randall Murphy's dishonesty?
23_Tauri
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2010
- Messages
- 4,927
On the contrary, understanding the null hypothesis is science that people - like yourself - interested in ufology would find very useful, and there's been plenty of explaining of the null hypothesis here.
ufology
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,681
De_Bunk,
Sorry I missed your questions there. Sometimes I think the window doesn't refresh everyone right away. I'll treat your whole post as a series of questions:
Q. Tell me why not a single alien UFO has been seen directly above someones head..?
A. I've run across a few sighting reports of UFOs that passed directly overhead of the observer. However they are rare, probably for the same reason that most aircraft are not seen flying directly overhead unless you are standing on a runway. It's a statistical improbability.
Q. Why is/are every UFO picture/vid taken from afar..?
A. UFOs have demonstrated consistently evasive behavior. It's hard to get close to them. Plus cameras always make things look farther away. Take a picture of that big full moon sometime ... it never looks like the way you perceive it.
Q. In the entire history of mankind...there has been no definitive proof ... In this day and age of digital cameras .. Cellphone cameras .. etc ... Yet still nothing ...
A. Yes it's certainly frustrating from a ufology perspective. There seems to be an active effort to keep us from acquiing hard evidence. Add to that the prevalence of new forms of photographic and video hoaxes that come with this new technology, and the evidence is cloudier than ever. However the issue of proof is also relative. What kind of proof will do? If one takes the human experience into account, a very reasonable case can be made. If one rejects human experience, then we are rejecting the best available publicly accessible evidence we have.
Q. Maybe you believe in 'Alien abduction' as well....
A. I believe something strange is going on with respect to the abduction issue, but that is more of a specialty area, and it goes beyond what I can say for sure based on my own experience and study.
Q. Why would an alien race, that is that advanced..and travelled trillions of miles, even need to take a human from this planet?..
A. Well if they came all this way and found the planet to covered in all this life, they might be curious about it and want to study it. As the dominant species, humans would probably be of special interest.
Q. BUT...I do believe that there is life on other planets...and, once again, i also think that they would also have the technology NOT to be seen...
A. Perhaps you are right. There are reports of UFOs vanishing, becoming translucent, even changing shape. The more we've advanced our own technology, the more they seem to adapt theirs to counter our detection. Back at the dawn of the Modern Era, UFOs were routinely tracked on radar and seen visually.
Q. Unless mankind is that inferior to them that they don't care....and in that case...Mankind is in trouble...
A. Well maybe. It's still a long way from any supply base for them to launch an invasion from unless they build one on the moon or something first. Personally I think they're probably beyond that mentality anyway. Let's hope so or we're in for a rough ride.
Last edited:
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
No, evidence is not relative. A claim that you saw aliens is not also evidence for itself. Also, you are mistakenly using the word "proof" again when you mean "evidence". You've been called on that before. Why do you ignore it?
ufology
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,681
The null hypothesis was developed by a statistician and some statistical studies have been done based on official USAF sighting reports. Perhaps you would like to comment on how those studies relate to the statistical application of the null hypothesis? The studies were carried out by the Battelle Memorial Institute. I look forward to your commentary.
Last edited:
- Status