Merged Is ufology a pseudoscience?

[Aepervius]

Oh, please, Great Australian Pharaoh, you know its not that simple. The anwser is:

[theremin sound]"From beyond the borders of what we call nature"[/theremin sound]

Is that the equivalent of "kittening" the thread , for UFO thread ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CtjhWhw2I8

 

[Akhenaten]

Is that the equivalent of "kittening" the thread , for UFO thread?

Of course not. In ufology circles that's what's known as a documentary.

 

[tsig]

"OMG . . . aliens!!!"

The gist of RRs' and ufologys' argument seems to be "Lots of people have seen things we can't explain* therefore aliens.


*While ignoring all explanations.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I wouldn't do away with those quite so quickly. There isn't enough information to conclude with that much certainty, that any of the above explanations are the actual causal factors for the UFOs reported in those sightings. Certainly they are factors to consider, but there is also other information that negates them. These cases will probably never be solved.

j.r.

There is no "other information that negates them".

There are a lot of tall tales that grow in the telling or as a result of false memories created by regression therapists.

Oh. I forgot Zamor's experimental hot-air balloon sighting.

 

[carlitos]

At least I hope that is what you mean by their bottom line… I do think that is what they are trying to get at – just they are approaching it by calling eyewitness and anecdotal evidence invalid. I suppose you could construe that to mean that it is invalid as proof and I guess they would have a point if they explained it in that way. It is just that they also seem to want to rule it out as potentially contributing to a weight of evidence – and that is where my objection lies – for I believe, while it may not constitute “proof”, it can contribute to a weight of evidence.

...to a pseudoscientist.

Yes, I agree, anecdotal and eyewitness accounts are not valid as proof, but in your opinion, can they contribute to a weight of evidence? If not, why not?

No. Because the plural of anecdote is not data. Another pithy phrase to help you remember the scientific method. Almost as useful as "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

 

[ufology]

How is the difference between a great ufologist and a not-so-great ufologist measured? Biggest flying saucer collection? Number of aliens captured?

What is the difference between a great ( generic ) ufologist and a not-so-great ufologist? A great ufologist is able to discern what information is reasonable and apply it to the pursuit of the truth.

j.r.

 

[tsig]

What is the difference between a great ( generic ) ufologist and a not-so-great ufologist? A great ufologist is able to discern what information is reasonable and apply it to the pursuit of the truth.

j.r.

Ufologists seem more interested in pursuing truth than catching it.

 

[Astrophotographer]

What is the difference between a great ( generic ) ufologist and a not-so-great ufologist? A great ufologist is able to discern what information is reasonable and apply it to the pursuit of the truth.

There is that term again, "truth". Who's version of the "truth" are we describing?

Do you have a list of "great UFOlogists"? I can point to several, who have been described as such and demonstrate they have been taken in by hoaxers and made assumptions in their work that ended up being inaccurate. Their "pursuit of the truth" was blinded by their will to believe.

As I said previously, leave the word "truth" out of it. That term should only be used by Politicians, court rooms (where it seems to be an accepted term used by lawyers), and religious officials. Look at it as a pursuit of establishing facts. Unfortunately, very few facts are ever established in UFOlogy, which is why it remains a pseudoscientific effort.

 

[RoboTimbo]

What is the difference between a great ( generic ) ufologist and a not-so-great ufologist? A great ufologist is able to discern what information is reasonable and apply it to the pursuit of the truth.

j.r.

The next question then is: What is the difference between a great ufologist and a pseudoscientist?

 

[Akhenaten]

What is the difference between a great ( generic ) ufologist and a not-so-great ufologist? A great ufologist is able to discern what information is reasonable and apply it to the pursuit of the truth.

j.r.

I think you would have taken less flak if you'd just gone with the 'most aliens captured' definition.

 

[Stray Cat]

Yes, I agree, anecdotal and eyewitness accounts are not valid as proof, but in your opinion, can they contribute to a weight of evidence? If not, why not?

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

Sorry I've been away. I've been kind of busy since Madonna hired me to help her build this nuclear reactor she's installing in Mars.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Sorry I've been away. I've been kind of busy since Madonna hired me to help her build this nuclear reactor she's installing in Mars.

"Quade, start the reactor!"

 

[ufology]

No I wouldn't, I'm too honest and I answer people's requests.

However, intended flattery is no substitute for a real reply to my post:

I'm sure I've asked you this already, but as you never answered my request, I'll try again; Please could you provide just one example of a UFO sighting investigated by a UFOlogist that doesn't contain the implication of or the blatant use of science?

What point would that serve? Heaven forbid a ufologist might make blatant use of actual science! And what exactly do you mean by "contain the implication of"? That statement could mean different things depending on context. Stray Cat ... you've strayed too far.

j.r.

 

[Stray Cat]

What point would that serve? Heaven forbid a ufologist might make blatant use of actual science! And what exactly do you mean by "contain the implication of"? That statement could mean different things depending on context. Stray Cat ... you've strayed too far.

Your assertion is that UFOlogy is not a pseudo science.
I'm asking for you to provide just one UFO investigation done by a UFOlogist that clearly demonstrates your assertion. Back up your claims with something more than your word on it.
You already know we could find countless examples of pseudo-science (I can provide some if you need them) in UFOlogy, but I have yet to see a single UFO investigation that isn't somehow pseudo-scientific.

Is it that difficult?

 

[GeeMack]

The prediction...

I'm sure I've asked you this already, but as you never answered my request, I'll try again; Please could you provide just one example of a UFO sighting investigated by a UFOlogist that doesn't contain the implication of or the blatant use of science?

I predict a continued demonstration of ignorance. I also predict that if the honest answer is, "I don't know of any," the honesty to provide that answer isn't there. Yep, "ufology" is pseudoscience.

And the result...

I'm sure I've asked you this already, but as you never answered my request, I'll try again; Please could you provide just one example of a UFO sighting investigated by a UFOlogist that doesn't contain the implication of or the blatant use of science?

What point would that serve? Heaven forbid a ufologist might make blatant use of actual science! And what exactly do you mean by "contain the implication of"? That statement could mean different things depending on context. Stray Cat ... you've strayed too far.

Yep. Ignorance and dishonesty both pulled from the "ufologists'" standard tool box and packaged together in the same weaseling response.

 

[ufology]

So you are no expert in FX but you can still think of an excuse why an expert in FX could be wrong... OK.

Have you heard of Barnes Wallis?

Correct, I'm not a mechanic either, but I can still diangnose and repair a variety of problems myself. For video. I understand as much as you said and have watched a couple of tutorials. I've done a few hours of video transfer from camcorders to PC, created titles and and converted file formats. I know about lost frames and other errors, and how error correction tries to compensate and how programs can stitch pieces together. I know that certain algorithms are used within the programs to accomplish all that, and that if the processor and memory isn't up to the job, you can get more errors and it takes more time. That doesn't make me an expert, but it gives me enough knowledge to know that there could be technical issues with the final product that could account for movement you wouln't otherwise get.

I looked at the video several times and the object in question looks like it does shift in relation to the surrounding clouds ... but it's a smaller and more dense blob and in a slightly different position, and is moving quicker, so it seems normal that it wouldn't shift exactly the same.

But like I said, I'm not FX expert. There may be nuances that they can readily spot and that I'd need more training and experience to perceive before I could make that call myself. Thanks for explanation anyway.

j.r.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Your assertion is that UFOlogy is not a pseudo science.
I'm asking for you to provide just one UFO investigation done by a UFOlogist that clearly demonstrates your assertion. Back up your claims with something more than your word on it.
You already know we could find countless examples of pseudo-science (I can provide some if you need them) in UFOlogy, but I have yet to see a single UFO investigation that isn't somehow pseudo-scientific.

Is it that difficult?

I've given him examples of pseudoscience in action based on his definition and he refused to acknowledge that it was pseudoscience.

 

[ufology]

The prediction...

Ignorance and dishonesty both pulled from the "ufologists'" standard tool box and packaged together in the same weaseling response.

OK GeeMack ...

I'm going to ask you nicely. Please stop using the word "dishonest" with respect to me. It implies deceit and fraud. I am engaged in neither here. I've been very tolerant of your abrasive approach, but please understand that I came here in complete good faith. Unlike most other forum members, I've not hidden behind a veil of anonymity. My organization and myself, including my name and identity are all easily traceable. Your attacks on my character are unwarranted and if you continue to make unfounded attacks on my character, I will take it up formally with the forum
administrators.

j.r.

 

[The Man]

The answer is clear : Length of the cigare shaped UFO. Some says the length don't count, but they are mostly jealous.

Sometimes a cigar shaped UFO is just, well, a cigar.