UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[Akhenaten]

You have admitted that you have no material scientific evidence.

You have evaded the very simple question:

Feet to the flames.

What do "alien craft" look like?

Why are you unable to answer this simple question?

You must have missed this answer.

Is that the one that says "Well golly children, they can look like anything you want them to. Mine was a little fluffy bunny" or words to that effect?

 

[AdMan]

...alien craft can vary in appearance in all aspects from the seemingly mundane to the highly unusual....

So you're saying that basically anything you think you see flying above that you can't readily explain (or maybe you can, but it's only "seemingly" mundane) may be an alien craft.

Is that right?

ETA: Just trying to pin down your description of "alien craft".

 

[Akhenaten]

So you're saying that basically anything you think you see flying above that you can't readily explain (or maybe you can, but it's only "seemingly" mundane) may be an alien craft.

Is that right?

Sufficiently right, I'd say.

ETA: Just trying to pin down your description of "alien craft".

Anything that looks sufficiently alien.

 

[John Albert]

Who'd have guessed we'd be seeing yet even more semantic distortions from J. Randall Murphy?

 

[Sideroxylon]

I am confused. How do we distinguish with sightings of witches from UFOs (OMG... Aliens!!!)?

 

[Tomtomkent]

It appears the appearance of an alien craft is much like the behaviour or characteristics and attributes, in that if Folo sees something, or hears a story about something, those count, with out a definate description to compare them to.

 

[23_Tauri]

You aren't making any sense if you think the above validate the ECREE bias. Rather it simply demonstrates that some people deem some things to be extraordinary while other people don't. Either way all that is needed is sufficient evidence, not "extraordinary" evidence,

Which you don't have!

Take me to the bottom of your garden, fu, not tell me another blinkin' story!

 

[Akhenaten]

I am confused. How do we distinguish with sightings of witches from UFOs (OMG... Aliens!!!)?

Sightings of UFOs ( OMG . . . Aliens! ) are more sufficient than sightings of witches.

 

[23_Tauri]

I'll go back to graden shed analogy for you. If someone claims they have a shed at the bottom of the garden, and the claim requires some sort of evidence, then such things as a reciept for purchase, a land titles plot showing the location on your property, and a report from a housing inspector rating the condition and value of the shed along with the other property would probably be considered sufficient to validate the claim. However it would still not definitively prove it was actually there.

And yet you are happy to believe in the existence of alien spaceships visiting Earth on the basis of a few stories about things that could be lots of things other than alien space ships (and which have been found to be), a mating firefly and some anomalous radar propagation?

Crumbs. Have I woken up in topsy-turvy land this morning?

 

[23_Tauri]

Anything that looks sufficiently alien.

Which according to my Rredefinictionary, also means anything that looks sufficiently unknown. So that means it can look like anything you want to it to look like, because it's completely unknown what it looks and behaves like.










I think.

 

[ufology]

So you're saying that basically anything you think you see flying above that you can't readily explain (or maybe you can, but it's only "seemingly" mundane) may be an alien craft.

Is that right?

ETA: Just trying to pin down your description of "alien craft".

Not exactly. I tried to explain to the person who asked the original question that alien craft are identified more by their performance than their appearance. After all we can make objects that look alien enough no problem ( for example a flying saucer or glowing sphere ), therefore simply seeing something that looks alien isn't sufficient to conclude that it is something alien. What we can't do that I'm aware of is make our facsimilies duplicate the performance of alien craft. Instantaneous high speed accelleration, decelleration and changes in direction without any visible means of propulsion are not possible with any known manmade technology that I'm aware of.

 

[ufology]

And yet you are happy to believe in the existence of alien spaceships visiting Earth on the basis of a few stories about things that could be lots of things other than alien space ships (and which have been found to be), a mating firefly and some anomalous radar propagation?

Crumbs. Have I woken up in topsy-turvy land this morning?

Not exactly. I believe alien craft have visited Earth because I've seen one. If I'd never seen one myself I'd only believe that given the various reports and studies that it's reasonable to think that the probability of alien visitation is high enough to be taken seriously.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Which according to my Rredefinictionary, also means anything that looks sufficiently unknown. So that means it can look like anything you want to it to look like, because it's completely unknown what it looks and behaves like.










I think.

Could you look up "sufficient" please? That is another term that has had me scratching my head recently.

 

[Akhenaten]

Not exactly. I tried to explain to the person who asked the original question that alien craft are identified more by their performance than their appearance.

You can't attribute any kind of performance characteristics to something that hasn't even been shown to exist.

After all we can make objects that look alien unknown enough no problem ( for example a flying saucer or glowing sphere ), therefore simply seeing something that looks alien unknown isn't sufficient to conclude that it is something alien unkonown.

See how ridiculous things look when they're translated into Ufologese?

What we can't do that I'm aware of is make our facsimilies duplicate the performance of alien craft.

What does 'argument from incredulity' mean to you, folo?

Instantaneous high speed accelleration, decelleration and changes in direction without any visible means of propulsion are not possible with any known manmade technology that I'm aware of.

We don't have sufficient evidence that any of those things have ever actually happened.

 

[23_Tauri]

I have no idea what that waffling nonsense is supposed to be an anology for, or why you think it addresses the issue of you having two wildly contradictory statements about evidence for Omgaliens ( UFOs ( alien craft ) ) within a single paragraph.

I dunno about you, but I have never in my life come across someone who wanted such a high standard of evidence to prove the existence of a garden shed. Surveyor's report and he's still not convinced!

And yet when it comes to an Alien Space Craft, any old **** will do.

 

[Akhenaten]

Not exactly.

Is 'not exactly' more or less than 'sufficiently'?

I believe alien craft have visited Earth because I've seen one.

In what significant way does this claim differ from the thousands of claims of bigfeet sightings?

If I'd never seen one myself I'd only believe that given the various reports and studies that it's reasonable to think that the probability of alien visitation is high enough to be taken seriously.

In what significant way is 'reasonable' any less subjective than 'extraordinary'?

Surely one person's 'reasonable' is another person's 'ridiculous'.

 

[23_Tauri]

Not exactly. I believe alien craft have visited Earth because I've seen one.

No you haven't, fu, don't lie.

Do you really need everyone here to explain this to you yet again?

If I'd never seen one myself I'd only believe that given the various reports and studies that it's reasonable to think that the probability of alien visitation is high enough to be taken seriously.

I wager that's because you don't understand ECREE.

 

[Akhenaten]

I dunno about you, but I have never in my life come across someone who wanted such a high standard of evidence to prove the existence of a garden shed. Surveyor's report and he's still not convinced!

Yeah, I just shook my head and let that bit of blather go through to the keeper.

I've tried to imagine a real world conversation where someone asks to see proof of any standard at all for garden shed ownership but my imagination isn't sufficient for the task.

And yet when it comes to an Alien Space Craft, any old **** will do.

As long as there's sufficient of it.

And it's not antipragmatic.

 

[23_Tauri]

I am confused. How do we distinguish with sightings of witches from UFOs (OMG... Aliens!!!)?

Hotness rating. Witches are on the whole much hotter than alien Space ships.

 

[23_Tauri]

Could you look up "sufficient" please? That is another term that has had me scratching my head recently.

It says "are you referring to a garden shed or an Alien Space Ship?"

That's it.

Not very good this redefinictionary, is it?