UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[John Albert]

I will go out on a limb here and predict that a concerted effort will be made to cherry pick a word or two from your research, apply some convoluted logic, twist some actual definitions into some bogus ones, and generally continue to dishonestly hammer away at the already failed argument that "alien" is somehow interchangeable with "unknown".

I'm expecting him to ignore it altogether, like he has done with my last several posts.

 

[RoboTimbo]

YourDictionary.com also has a thesaurus that categorizes its synonyms by definition:

http://thesaurus.yourdictionary.com/unknown​

John, this tells me that "alien" is being used out of context by the poster ufology. Is that correct? Is that what you were referring to when you exposed his fallacy of equivocation? I note that the poster ufology has expressed deep concern about context so this should clear up his misuse of the term.

 

[John Albert]

John, this tells me that "alien" is being used out of context by the poster ufology. Is that correct? Is that what you were referring to when you exposed his fallacy of equivocation? I note that the poster ufology has expressed deep concern about context so this should clear up his misuse of the term.

It tells me that "alien" isn't a synonym for "unknown" unless you're talking about people.

It tells me that "unknown" is not synonymous with "extraterrestrial," "otherworldly," or "of non-human manufacture."

I also looked up "unidentified," and none of the definitions contain any of those synonyms either.


All of this tells me that the poster ufology is once again trying to mangle the English language in order to semantically define outer space aliens into existence, even though absolutely no evidence exists whatsoever to support that extraordinary claim.

It tells me he's still just as dishonest as he always has been in his posts on the JREF forums.

 

[Krikkiter]

ufology's research methods are therefore fundamentally flawed and anything that's presented as evidence (based on flawed research methodology) must be discounted.

 

[Sideroxylon]

We will have to cut our intrepid UFO researcher some slack today with Wikipedia down.

 

[23_Tauri]

As usual, you're committing a fallacy of equivocation, misusing a word totally out of context in an attempt to bolster your failed argument.

Hey John, could you imagine the pickle we'd all quickly get into if we started to replace one word with a random synonym will-nilly whilst talking to each other, just because it was listed under another word in the thesaurus? From my perspective, it looks like uf doesn't even understand how words work.

I might try this exercise later today when I have break, see what utter gobble-di-gook comes out the other end of my newly patented Random Synonym Generator^TM

I'm expecting him to ignore it altogether, like he has done with my last several posts.

Welcome to the club. I've been ignored by uf for weeks. Perhaps if strapped some flashlights to our ears and did a figure of eight dance we might attract his attention?

 

[ufology]

The fact that no object in UFO reports has ever been proved to be an alien craft does show that no UFO has ever turned out unequivocally to be an alien craft, however.

Spektator,

Proven how and to whom and in what context? What makes you so sure? Do you have some kind of ultra secret clearance to view Space Command surveillance records? Can you get inside the heads of eye-witnesses to judge their experiences for yourself? How do you know with absolute certainty that nobody has had it proven to them? In reality all you are saying is that you don't have sufficient evidence to be personally convinced. That's fine. Perhaps someday if you are lucky that will change for you.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Appeals to cover ups are lame in the extreme. And who are Space Command?

 

[ufology]

Appeals to cover ups are lame in the extreme. And who are Space Command?

Sideroxylon,

I made no reference to a "cover up", simply to the existence of high level security surrounding Space Command ... which you can lookup for yourself when Wikipedia returns from protest ... and then you'll realize why they might have sufficient proof for our previous poster. And BTW it's been proven that there has been a widespread suppression of information related to UFOs in the past, and there is no reason to think the latest information would be open for public inspection. So your "lame" comment is clearly based on faulty information. Or maybe you have some other reason besides "lame" that you'd like to share?

Kudos for Wikipedia taking a stand !

 

[Akhenaten]

Spektator,

Proven how and to whom and in what context?

All of the people to whom you're so desperate to prove the case for "OMG . . . aliens!" of course.

What makes you so sure?

Your inability to provide such proof, despite your desperation.

Do you have some kind of ultra secret clearance to view Space Command surveillance records?

Do you you have any evidence that this would help in some way?

Can you get inside the heads of eye-witnesses to judge their experiences for yourself?

No, that's why such stories are treated as claims rather than as evidence.

How do you know with absolute certainty that nobody has had it proven to them?

Because it's a charachteristic of proof that it's common to everyone, regardless of subjective bias. Personal belief systems such as your own are not the result of proof.

In reality all you are saying is that you don't have sufficient evidence to be personally convinced.

No, that's not what's being said at all. Ignoring most of us might allow you to pretend that people like Spektator are lone voices in the wilderness, but it most certainly isn't true. Nobody with any critical thinking skills believes your silly stories.

That's fine. Perhaps someday if you are lucky that will change for you.

Luck has nothing to do with it.

 

[Akhenaten]

And who are Space Command?

The sole repository for all knowledge concerning Omgaliens, apparently.

 

[23_Tauri]

Is that the sound of a little foot stamping or am I just imagining it?

 

[Akhenaten]

Sideroxylon,

I made no reference to a "cover up", simply to the existence of high level security surrounding Space Command ... which you can lookup for yourself when Wikipedia returns from protest ... and then you'll realize why they might have sufficient proof for our previous poster.

Does Wikipedia know why they are the only agency that has knowledge of the Omgaliens and why it's so important that it's kept secret and how you alone have been able to penetrate the veil of secrecy?

And BTW it's been proven that there has been a widespread suppression of information related to UFOs in the past, and there is no reason to think the latest information would be open for public inspection.

Take this drivel to CT. I'm sure they could do with a laugh over there.

So your "lame" comment is clearly based on faulty information. Or maybe you have some other reason besides "lame" that you'd like to share?

'Lame' seems like a quite adequate description of your arguments to me, although 'pathetic' and 'comical' also work pretty well.

 

[Akhenaten]

Is that the sound of a little foot stamping or am I just imagining it?

I heard it all the way down here in Kangastan, so it's not just you.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Sideroxylon,

I made no reference to a "cover up", simply to the existence of high level security surrounding Space Command ... which you can lookup for yourself when Wikipedia returns from protest ... and then you'll realize why they might have sufficient proof for our previous poster. And BTW it's been proven that there has been a widespread suppression of information related to UFOs in the past, and there is no reason to think the latest information would be open for public inspection. So your "lame" comment is clearly based on faulty information. Or maybe you have some other reason besides "lame" that you'd like to share?

Kudos for Wikipedia taking a stand !

Pony up the evidence. I can wait until Wiki is back online. I know it is pretty much your own only source for research.

 

[Stray Cat]

And BTW it's been proven that there has been a widespread suppression of information related to UFOs in the past,

So remind us. Of all the documentation that was in the past suppressed, that people such as Podesta fought the government in court to have such documents released (against the wishes of the government who were desperate to keep the documents secret), how many of those documents have provided information about aliens?

 

[23_Tauri]

I heard it all the way down here in Kangastan, so it's not just you.

Hark! I hear it again! If I listen very closely I think I can make out some words:

"It's been proven that people have seen alien spaceships, and it's been proven that it's all being covered up by Space Command itself. I haven't any evidence but it's true, it's true true true I tell you!!!" (stampstampstampstamp)

 

[RoboTimbo]

Spektator,

Proven how and to whom and in what context?

But we do know that UFOs ( witches ) have been proven in courts of law ( triers of fact ). You seem to be agreeing.

What makes you so sure? Do you have some kind of ultra secret clearance to view Space Command surveillance records?

Do you? Space Command probably knows all about UFOs ( witches ).

Can you get inside the heads of eye-witnesses to judge their experiences for yourself?

You mean the witnesses to UFOs ( witches )?

How do you know with absolute certainty that nobody has had it proven to them?

We know with absolute certainty that courts of law ( triers of fact ) have had witches proven.

In reality all you are saying is that you don't have sufficient evidence to be personally convinced. That's fine. Perhaps someday if you are lucky that will change for you.

In reality all you are saying is that you don't believe in UFOs ( witches ) but your reglion makes you believe in Alien Space Ships. That's fine. Perhaps someday you can gain critical thinking skills and comprehend the null hypothesis.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Sideroxylon,

I made no reference to a "cover up", simply to the existence of high level security surrounding Space Command

Which you claim they've been covering up.

... which you can lookup for yourself when Wikipedia returns from protest ... and then you'll realize why they might have sufficient proof for our previous poster.

Why have you never linked to Wikipedia and this evidence ( not proof, you keep using that word in the wrong context )?

And BTW it's been proven that there has been a widespread suppression of information related to UFOs ( witches ) in the past, and there is no reason to think the latest information would be open for public inspection.

ftfy. I agree with you. It seems reasonable that the government would want to hush up the existence of UFOs ( witches ).

So your "lame" comment is clearly based on faulty information. Or maybe you have some other reason besides "lame" that you'd like to share?

No, your appeal to coverup is clearly lame based on fantasy and wishful thinking. Do you have some other evidence you'd like to share?

 

[Akhenaten]

And who are Space Command?

And why are they in charge of information about the quite-likely-of-terrestrial-origin Omgaliens.

Shouldn't it be in the care of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services?

Although how either agency would be able to suppress infomation about the Omgaliens that are active in other countries is a mystery.


So many questions, folo, and so much ignoring of them to do. Where do you find the time?