• 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.
Why would someone take at face value the idea that they levitated or spoke to a rabitt as a child and not put it down to hypnagogic hallucinations?
 
ufology said:
Paul,

You have already hear my "take". Do you have any useful information I can add to my study of the topic yet?
Click to expand...

Yes… material evidence. Something to make the study more than a claim of what you thought you saw in your subjective opinion.
 
ufology said:
Paul,

In your opinion how long can a memory reside in the average healthy brain before people no longer actually remember what they think they do? A few hours ... days ... years ... how long Paul? Where do you draw the line for you personally? Do you not have any clear memories from your childhood ... young adulthood ... or even as an adult? Or are all your memories suspect and you just aren't really sure of anything?
Click to expand...

Which fallacy do you think you're using here?
 
Did Paul2, or anyone else in this thread, ever say that the accuracy of long-term memories was a function of time only?
 
ufology said:
Paul,

In your opinion how long can a memory reside in the average healthy brain before people no longer actually remember what they think they do? A few hours ... days ... years ... how long Paul? Where do you draw the line for you personally? Do you not have any clear memories from your childhood ... young adulthood ... or even as an adult? Or are all your memories suspect and you just aren't really sure of anything?
Click to expand...

Some memories are right. Some are wrong. How do we tell the difference?

I've been very sure of some memories that later turn out to be wrong.

Memories about one-time events are even more shaky, because they don't get confirmed with repetitions.
 
ufology said:
carlitos,

I came here to network with skeptics for the purpose of identifying flaws in recent cases and sensational stories made in the media. Do you have anything you can share on that or are you just going to sit back and make wise cracks?
Click to expand...

I don't believe you. My recollection (which could be mistaken) is that you came here to try and get "skeptics" to write bad things about Raelians**, which you could then post on your website. You also spent a lot of time trying to redefine "ufology" away from being a classic pseudoscience.

Anyway, what "recent cases?" The cases on your website seem to mostly date from the 1950's and 60's. If you want folks to point out flaws in recent cases, post them here. If you want critiques of sensationalist stories, post those.

** eta - added this:
ufology said:
The issue is that instead of dealing with cases, we're spending time arguing a pointless debate on the semantics of pseudoscience. Perhaps what we should do is start by indetifying major instances of pseudoscience in ufology. Allow me to propose the following as an example:

There is something known as the Raelian Movement. It is a part of ufology because it deals with the phenomena of UFOs and aliens and so on. However ufologists do not consider Realism itself to be ufology any more than an anthropologist would consider Catholicism itself to be anthropology. The Raelian Movement is actually a legally recognized religion in Canada. They have a number of beliefs they say are based on science, and I think those beliefs and practises would probably fit the definition of pseudoscience.

Now if a skeptic here were to compose an objective level-headed report showing the connection between Raelism and pseudoscience, I would be happy to consider publishing it up under the Raelian entry on my website. This would demonstrate cooperation between skeptics and ufologists toward a common cause in a useful and constructive manner. Given the amount of text wasted arguing here, several such constructive articles could have been written by now.

If we were to start cooperating this way and work our way down to more contentious issues, perhaps we could establish a rapport that isn't so adversarial. That would be a healthy and constructive achievement. Anyone who wants to take me up on this offer is welcome to send me a private email to work out the details.

j.r.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Sideroxylon said:
Not that I recall, but this thread has been going for quite a while.
Click to expand...

You're saying you can't remember exactly? That might indicate that memory isn't perfect and that 40 year old memories of lights in the sky could be unreliable.:)
 
FWIW, I can't figure out if Ufology is serious.

He expects all to accept his redefinition's of terms, and his recollections of yesteryear as fact.

And, in a thread titled "UFOs: The Research, the Evidence", answers any call for such with the monosyllabic response "denied". That is beyond odd.

Seems bonkers to me.

ETA: yes, I know it is more than one syllable, that is not the point.
 
Last edited:
While it seems that I can always rely on "The Thread Wouldn't Die" for a few laughs, and it's interesting to note the fanaticism which some people have for their pet belief systems, I still haven't seen anything that proves "those lights I saw in the sky" are actually alien spacecraft.
Any guesses why something so important hasn't been offered yet?
;)
 
Paul2 said:
Some memories are right. Some are wrong. How do we tell the difference?

I've been very sure of some memories that later turn out to be wrong.

Memories about one-time events are even more shaky, because they don't get confirmed with repetitions.
Click to expand...


Paul,

You really love to waffle around. Why can't you just admit that you have plenty of perfectly good memories that extend back years, some all the way to your childhood? Or are you really that far gone that you don't have any?
 
ufology said:
Paul,

You really love to waffle around. Why can't you just admit that you have plenty of perfectly good memories that extend back years, some all the way to your childhood? Or are you really that far gone that you don't have any?
Click to expand...

when are you going to acknowledge your dishonesty ?
you've been shown numerous peer reviewed articles about memory that do not support your position.

most people here do not think this is anything to do with memory, they simply think you're a liar
and you made them take that opinion all on your own
:D
way to go getting the sceptics to help your cause
:rolleyes:
 
Ufology -- Hello. Just wondering -- Independent of anyone's opinions/posts/UFOs/anythings in these threads -- When citing a past experience, couldn't you simply say, "That's how I remember it"? Given that that's what I do, does this reveal to you (or anyone here) that I'm somehow "lacking", or that I have some type of personality flaw? To the best of my knowledge, no one's ever criticized me for it or concluded I'm incompetent, but maybe I'm missing something. Thanks.
 
Marduk said:
when are you going to acknowledge your dishonesty ?
you've been shown numerous peer reviewed articles about memory that do not support your position.

most people here do not think this is anything to do with memory, they simply think you're a liar
and you made them take that opinion all on your own
:D
way to go getting the sceptics to help your cause
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Marduk,

So the default here then that when "those people" have no other way to explain an experience other than to call someone a liar, that's OK? That is really really really sad and does nothing to garner any trust or respect from the people who this forum claims to want to reach out and help. But such would be expected from the ufology bashers here ... as would loaded questions like the one you asked above.
 
PetiteMalleolus said:
Ufology -- Hello. Just wondering -- Independent of anyone's opinions/posts/UFOs/anythings in these threads -- When citing a past experience, couldn't you simply say, "That's how I remember it"? Given that that's what I do, does this reveal to you (or anyone here) that I'm somehow "lacking", or that I have some type of personality flaw? To the best of my knowledge, no one's ever criticized me for it or concluded I'm incompetent, but maybe I'm missing something. Thanks.
Click to expand...


PetiteMalleolus,

So what's your point? Virtually everything we say or type is "how we remember it". The only exceptions would be when we're reciting something from a script or transcribing or cutting or copying and pasting. Or are you saying that you use the phrase in a manner that suggests you're never really sure of anything ... as in "it's just how you remember it"? If so that's fine, but let me ask you, isn't there anything you're sure of? Or is everything you remember all just a fuzzy mush of uncertainty?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom