UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[Akhenaten]

And your point exactly is what?

Perhaps I can help. I like helping.

It's like this:

Everyone else: UFO = Unidentified Flying Object

You: UFO = "OMG . . . Aliens!"​

Perhaps you might also consider losing the mockery by doing away with that little catch phrase "UFO=OMG Aliens" ... maybe make it a New Year's resolution or something.

Mockery? It's your own bloody definition, Mr Fology.

 

[Akhenaten]

There is a differrence between jumping to the conclusion of alien visitation and jumping to that conclusion without stopping at any points between.

<snip>

Only in the time it takes you to complete the process.

You seem very adept at missing the point that it doesn't make a scrap of difference how you arrive at a conclusion of "OMG . . . aliens!" it's still bollocks.

 

[23_Tauri]

And your point exactly is what?

His point is that you have as much evidence for UFOs being Alien Space Ships as I have for them being Little Miss Witchcraft, i.e. NONE.

Perhaps you might also consider losing the mockery by doing away with that little catch phrase "UFO=OMG Aliens" ... maybe make it a New Year's resolution or something.

If you weren't quite so disengenuous in your line of arguing, and answered other posters' questions instead of ducking and diving all the time, then perhaps other posters would be less inclined to resort to gentle mockery of your faith-based belief in aliens.

 

[ufology]

It is a caricature of what you have been doıng, is it not? If you don't like the caricature, refer to the formal paraphrasing that I used in the beginning of my post. Are you going to be continuing this line in the new year or are your recent posts a move to distance yourself from it?

Yes I will continue to condemn mockery, ridicule, misrepresentations and any other cyber-bullying, subtle or overt that I either experience myself or see perpetrated here or elsewhere ... count on it. Mind you, there are times I have found some of the slams against me to be quite humorous, and when they are delivered with class and in the spirit of lightening the discussion, I have been mature and good natured enough to take a few hits. But otherwise let's keep the discussion clean and constructive. The "UFO=OMG aliens!" mockery has become a tool to paint people who are interested in UFO in a false, negative and stereotypical manner. How does that in any way advance our understanding of the phenomenon?

 

[Garrison]

There is a differrence between jumping to the conclusion of alien visitation and jumping to that conclusion without stopping at any points between, which was the original assertion. There is also a difference between jumping to a conclusion of alien visitation and holding an opinion based on personal experience and/or study. I've also made it clear that ufologists who exploit and exaggerate UFO reports for media attention or in some other way act irresponsibly ( like fabricate reports ) should not be seen as the norm nor be recognized as legitimate anymore than scientists who fabricate data. In other words it's not fair to brand the entire field based on the actions of those who mar its character.

Let's be clear, you have jumped to extreme conclusions with no evidence other than your own potentially flawed memory. You have manufactured evidence in the shape of the various 'clarifications' you have come up with after others have pointed out gaps in your story or alternate explanations, all apparently so you can polish up your story on your own website. You are in fact guilty of all the bad practices you describe above.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Yes I will continue to condemn mockery, ridicule, misrepresentations and any other cyber-bullying, subtle or overt that I either experience myself or see perpetrated here or elsewhere ... count on it. Mind you, there are times I have found some of the slams against me to be quite humorous, and when they are delivered with class and in the spirit of lightening the discussion, I have been mature and good natured enough to take a few hits. But otherwise let's keep the discussion clean and constructive. The "UFO=OMG aliens!" mockery has become a tool to paint people who are interested in UFO in a false, negative and stereotypical manner. How does that in any way advance our understanding of the phenomenon?

You seem down in the dumps and lacking any of the earlier spark and fight.

I gave a fair characterization of your position and my opening could in no way be construed as mocking but at the same time highlights a problem with your argument for redefinition. A problem that has been repeatedly raised by many posters.

My sincere wishes for a happy new year, Mr Ufology.

ETA: Wouldn't mind if you did answer my last questions.

 

[Garrison]

Yes I will continue to condemn mockery, ridicule, misrepresentations and any other cyber-bullying, subtle or overt that I either experience myself or see perpetrated here or elsewhere ... count on it.

Or in other words you will keep criticizing anyone who points out ludicrousness of your attempts to redefine terms and your intellectual dishonesty in constantly embellishing your story.

Mind you, there are times I have found some of the slams against me to be quite humorous, and when they are delivered with class and in the spirit of lightening the discussion, I have been mature and good natured enough to take a few hits. But otherwise let's keep the discussion clean and constructive.

That will require you to present actual evidence, accept eyewitness testimony, including your own, can be faulty, and stop trying to rewrite the dictionary. Are you really prepared to do that?

The "UFO=OMG aliens!" mockery has become a tool to paint people who are interested in UFO in a false, negative and stereotypical manner. How does that in any way advance our understanding of the phenomenon?

What phenomenon? The mockery is the result of your own ineptitude in trying to make any sort of case. If you want to be taken seriously trying making a serious effort to present proper evidence in a coherent way, preferably without the giant bunnys...

 

[Akhenaten]

Yes I will continue to condemn mockery, ridicule, misrepresentations and any other cyber-bullying, subtle or overt that I either experience myself or see perpetrated here or elsewhere ... count on it. Mind you, there are times I have found some of the slams against me to be quite humorous, and when they are delivered with class and in the spirit of lightening the discussion, I have been mature and good natured enough to take a few hits. But otherwise let's keep the discussion clean and constructive attempt to divert the discussion away from the obvious flaws that people keep pointing out in my poorly presented and highly subjective arguments.

FTFY

The "UFO=OMG aliens!" mockery has become a tool to paint people who are interested in UFO in a false, negative and stereotypical manner.

It's your definition.

How does that in any way advance our understanding of the phenomenon?

It doesn't, but you appear too invested in it to ever be able to see the folly in persisting with it.

 

[ufology]

His point is that you have as much evidence for UFOs being Alien Space Ships as I have for them being Little Miss Witchcraft, i.e. NONE.


If you weren't quite so disengenuous in your line of arguing, and answered other posters' questions instead of ducking and diving all the time, then perhaps other posters would be less inclined to resort to gentle mockery of your faith-based belief in aliens.

There is plenty of evidence, just none that is good enough for you. The rest of your accusations are nothing more than misrepresentations. I answer all the questions I can as fairly, openly and honestly as possible given the circumstances. I'm also not obligated to answer every question asked and I will often ignore posts containing flames or other pointless attacks or commentary. But if you want to discuss the topic in an fair and constructive manner, then you will find that I will be quite accommodating.

 

[Garrison]

There is plenty of evidence, just none that is good enough for you. The rest of your accusations are nothing more than misrepresentations. I answer all the questions I can as fairly, openly and honestly as possible given the circumstances. I'm also not obligated to answer every question asked and I will often ignore posts containing flames or other pointless attacks or commentary. But if you want to discuss the topic in an fair and constructive manner, then you will find that I will be quite accommodating.

For the umpteenth time anecdotes are not evidence, accept that and perhaps you will be taken seriously.

 

[ufology]

Let's be clear, you have jumped to extreme conclusions with no evidence other than your own potentially flawed memory. You have manufactured evidence in the shape of the various 'clarifications' you have come up with after others have pointed out gaps in your story or alternate explanations, all apparently so you can polish up your story on your own website. You are in fact guilty of all the bad practices you describe above.

The above is just more misrepresentations and unfounded assertions. First of all, so what if my memory is "potentially flawed" ... everyone's is. That doesn't mean what I do recall isn't accurate enough to form a reasonable opinion. Secondly, I've not "manufactured evidence". I was asked a series of questions and I answered them in the order they were asked. This resulted in a clairification of several points. Again ... so what? That is what discussion is for. Thirdly, I've considered many other people's experiences and investigations in addition to my own, and I've been involved in ufology for many years, so I've certainly not "jumped to any conclusions". Lastly, the discussion was not specifically about me ... it was about ufologists in general, and I am only one of many. So again, perhaps we could address the argument more than constantly attacking the arguer?

 

[23_Tauri]

There is a differrence between jumping to the conclusion of alien visitation and jumping to that conclusion without stopping at any points between, which was the original assertion.

But why stop at Alien Space Ships? Why not stop at Min Min Lights, or Little Miss W, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

There is also a difference between jumping to a conclusion of alien visitation and holding an opinion based on personal experience and/or study.

You have personal experience of an alien visitation? Cool! Did they drop in for Christmas dinner, Folou? Any pictures, videos, alien gifts you'd like to share with the rest of us?

I've also made it clear that ufologists who exploit and exaggerate UFO reports for media attention or in some other way act irresponsibly ( like fabricate reports ) should not be seen as the norm nor be recognized as legitimate anymore than scientists who fabricate data. In other words it's not fair to brand the entire field based on the actions of those who mar its character.

So where are all these responsible True Ufologists^TM who publically criticised the attention-seeking, media whores who exaggerated and fabricated UFO reports at the National Press Club event on behalf of Greer's Disclosure Project?

 

[Akhenaten]

There is plenty of evidence, just none that is good enough for you.

That's because a whole heap of really pathetic evidence will never add up to any amount of good evidence, and your silly anecdotes will never add up to any kind of evidence at all.

Duh.

The rest of your accusations are nothing more than misrepresentations.

This wasn't true the first 45,819 times you said it and it's certainly not true now.

I answer all the questions I can as fairly, openly and honestly as possible given the circumstances.

The circumstances being that you didn't think your story through well enough before you started and therefore some of the answers don't exist.

I'm also not obligated to answer every question asked and I will often ignore posts containing flames or other pointless attacks or commentary.

I'm not sure whether appointing yourself as the Arbiter of Pointlessness is apt or ironic, but it's an interesting title nevertheless.

But if you want to discuss the topic in an fair and constructive manner, then you will find that I will be quite accommodating.

I wouldn't put that to a vote if I were you.

 

[Garrison]

The above is just more misrepresentations and unfounded assertions. First of all, so what if my memory is "potentially flawed" ... everyone's is. That doesn't mean what I do recall isn't accurate enough to form a reasonable opinion.

That is exactly what it does mean in the absence of corroboration.

Secondly, I've not "manufactured evidence". I was asked a series of questions and I answered them in the order they were asked. This resulted in a clairification of several points.

You embellished your story with new details to eliminate alternate suggestions. Anyone who cares to can trace the evolution of your story through this thread.

Again ... so what? That is what discussion is for.

No discussion is not for the purpose of helping you improve your story.

Thirdly, I've considered many other people's experiences and investigations in addition to my own, and I've been involved in ufology for many years, so I've certainly not "jumped to any conclusions".

Again anyone who cares to read your previous posts in this thread will see that is untrue.

Lastly, the discussion was not specifically about me ... it was about ufologists in general, and I am only one of many. So again, perhaps we could address the argument more than constantly attacking the arguer?

But you provide an excellent specific example of the behaviour of ufologists in general, and since all you've offered by way of evidence is your own suspect memory naturally you become the focus of the discussion.

 

[Akhenaten]

The above is just more misrepresentations and unfounded assertions.

<waaaaaah>

 

[23_Tauri]

There is plenty of evidence, just none that is good enough for you.

And why is your evidence for aliens any better than my evidence for witches? As pointed out to you earlier in this thread, thousands of people have had first hand experience of witches over the centuries, have seen them flying, performing acts of superhuman trickery in the skies. Why don't you accept that evidence? It's no better or worse than your evidence for alien space ships.

The rest of your accusations are nothing more than misrepresentations.

Where have I misrepresented you? You believe some UFOs are Alien Space Ships, right?

I answer all the questions I can as fairly, openly and honestly as possible given the circumstances. I'm also not obligated to answer every question asked and I will often ignore posts containing flames or other pointless attacks or commentary.

I too ignore flames, after they were used to kill all my relatives back in the 1580s.

But if you want to discuss the topic in an fair and constructive manner, then you will find that I will be quite accommodating.

As long as others accommodate your belief in UFOs being Alien Space Ships? Is that what you mean?

 

[ufology]

For the umpteenth time anecdotes are not evidence, accept that and perhaps you will be taken seriously.

For the "umpteenth time" anecdotal evidence is evidence. It is often used to provide direction for further investigation and to determine the liklihood of a given situation, particularly in the evaluation of medical treatments and legal cases. In ufology anecdotal evidence is used to create statistical models and to reinforce case studies. For example if several unconnected witnesses all report seeing the same object at a particular time and location, it is likely that some sort of object was indeed seen. It would be irresponsible from an investigative standpoint to ignore this evidence simply because it is anecdotal.

 

[Sideroxylon]

That's because a whole heap of really pathetic evidence will never add up to any amount of good evidence, and your silly anecdotes will never add up to any kind of evidence at all.

[...]

I don't see how he thinks the personal accounts on his website do anything for his credibility as any kind of researcher. Accounts of talking rabbits and a spaceship that he experienced as a seven-year-old. It seems very naive to me.

 

[Garrison]

For the "umpteenth time" anecdotal evidence is evidence. It is often used to provide direction for further investigation and to determine the liklihood of a given situation, particularly in the evaluation of medical treatments and legal cases. In ufology anecdotal evidence is used to create statistical models and to reinforce case studies. For example if several unconnected witnesses all report seeing the same object at a particular time and location, it is likely that some sort of object was indeed seen. It would be irresponsible from an investigative standpoint to ignore this evidence simply because it is anecdotal.

So let's take your anecdote and apply the above. Was there any further investigation? No. Are there other independent witnesses to the event? No. What you have is that you say you saw a light in the sky, that's it period. All you offer is your 40 year old memory and endless assertions that your recollection is so perfect that you can dismiss all mundane explanations for what this light might have been, assuming it wasn't some half remembered dream or hallucination in the first place.
An anecdote might be a basis to go and find actual evidence, it is not evidence in itself. Frankly your story doesn't even rise to that level given your willingness to embellish it to favour your preferred explanation.

 

[Akhenaten]

For the "umpteenth time" anecdotal evidence is evidence.

For the umpteenth-and-one time, no it's not.

Especially for such an extraordinary claim as "OMG . . . aliens!"

It is often used to provide direction for further investigation and to determine the liklihood of a given situation, particularly in the evaluation of medical treatments and legal cases.

Cool. When you find an alien that needs his appendix removed or wants to sue his neighbour it should come in really handy.

In ufology anecdotal evidence is used to create statistical models and to reinforce case studies. For example if several unconnected witnesses all report seeing the same object at a particular time and location, it is likely that some sort of object was indeed seen. because there's no real evidence.

You're not getting very much right today.

It would be irresponsible from an investigative standpoint to ignore this evidence simply because it is anecdotal.

Is it irresponsible to ignore the stories one hears about witches?