Merged Is ufology a pseudoscience?

[ufology]

Suppose you stop running away for a minute and answer the question. Give an example of something that you do consider to be a pseudoscience.

Dig up a case and take it to the Evidence thread or is there a general pseudoscience thread someplace maybe? And I'll have a look at it there. If I'm qualified enough to make a judgement I'll let you know ... or at least provide an opinion.

j.r.

 

[GeeMack]

You have some nerve lecturing people on netiquette after you altered a post of mine upthread.

How's that definition of ufology coming along? I didn't rrealise rredefinition was such an arduous task.

Several conventional, common usage definitions for the term were listed in Post #1833 by carlitos. Of course in the usual style of a "ufologist", where ignorance is bliss and where truth and objective reality are completely unrelated, ufology chose to ignore them in favor of his own dishonest reworking.

Words are defined by common usage. "Ufology" isn't chatting about alien movies and going to UFO festivals. That would be UFO lore. "Ufology" is the pseudoscientific field of studying UFOs, most often with the preexisting belief that they are aliens visiting Earth. We find perfect, definitive examples of it right on ufology's own alien believers club web site...

Our aim is to illuminate the truth by presenting accurate, objective, and verifiable information that can be enjoyed by all our visitors. To achieve this goal, content from multiple sources is distilled into concise articles for a general audience. This methodology greatly contributes to accuracy and economy because cross checking facts and eliminating redundant data are a natural part of the distillation process.

[...]

USI recognizes the physical existence of UFOs as outlined in the official USAF definition and concurs with the Estimate Of The Situation reached by Project Sign to the extent that some UFOs are extraterrestrial in origin. Most importantly, USI stands with all those people who honestly know from the evidence of their own conscious and unimpaired senses, that Earth is being visited by objects of alien origin.

Because pseudoscience is...

Pseudoscience: Something that calls itself science or presents itself as science but doesn't meet accepted scientific standards.

We see all that nonsense from the USI web site about objective methodology and illuminating the truth, so it undeniably, "presents itself as science". And we see the part about starting with the preexisting belief that aliens are visiting Earth, so it clearly "doesn't meet accepted scientific standards".

"Ufology", even by ufology's own definitions and his own statement of purpose on his own web site, is pseudoscience.

 

[John Albert]

Maybe you missed this response:

Well if we used another thread like the Evidence thread, then by all means pick whatever cases you want. I'll play the the part of the defense, which means that each case must be presented by the writer as being scientific, or if they don't call it a scientific study outright, it must be shown to make a sufficient scientific impression through the use of consistent scientific formatting and other trappings of science. Then it must be demonstrated how the report fails to meet accepted scientific standards. If it can be shown that the report presents itself as being scientific and fails to meet accepted scientific standards, then it counts as pseudoscience.

There already exists a thread for that. It's called the Evidence thread. Starting a new one would be redundant and a breach of Rule 11.

Didn't you learn your lesson the last time you got banned?

 

[Stray Cat]

So you don't have any cases then?

Another dishonest tactic.

Yes, sure I can provide hundreds of cases of UFOlogy as pseudo science.
However, I am aware that as soon as I or anyone here do, you will simply hand wave it away as you have with everything else that's been explained to you over and over again. And I doubt anyone is willing to open another mammoth thread where case after case is presented to a dishonest debater who doesn't understand critical thinking, logic or science. So that he can make rulings (using his own personal definitions of terms) and judge on the credibility of his own hobby.

Suffice to say (and it's been said enough already) that any part of UFOlogy that states or implies a conclusion of aliens in flying saucers is pseudo scientific, simply because it flies in the face of science and yet makes claims about the material universe.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Dig up a case and take it to the Evidence thread or is there a general pseudoscience thread someplace maybe? And I'll have a look at it there. If I'm qualified enough to make a judgement I'll let you know ... or at least provide an opinion.

j.r.

A case of what? Have you deliberately misunderstood?

Give me an example of some other discipline, hobby, whathaveyou, that you would consider to be a pseudoscience.

 

[John Albert]

Kindly point out just where I said that.

I was merely pointing out that UFOlogists organizing conventions is totally irrelevant in determining whether or not UFOlogy is a pseudoscience. Isn't that the same thing you were getting at?

We all accept that the culture, conventions, club meetings actually occur, but really...how important are those meetings?

So UFOlogy isn't a pseudoscience because they have conventions?

Well...

Ghost hunters have conventions, Homeopaths have conventions, Astrologers have conventions, Psychics have conventions...

Seems like a lot of pseudoscientists like to get together for conventions and conferences, just like real scientists do, and any other groups of people who all share a common interest.

Holding conventions does not prove that UFOlogy isn't a pseudoscience.

 

[ufology]

We see all that nonsense from the USI web site about objective methodology and illuminating the truth, so it undeniably, "presents itself as science". And we see the part about starting with the preexisting belief that aliens are visiting Earth, so it clearly "doesn't meet accepted scientific standards".

"Ufology", even by ufology's own definitions and his own statement of purpose on his own web site, is pseudoscience.

The USI website doesn't claim that ufology is a science or that the site itself is scientific. You are certainly misrepresenting the site. Now that you've thrown the opportunity I held out to the group here into the shredder and burned the bridge with my group, I have a whole bunch of interesting new material for the Skeptics entry that I'm sure you really won't be interested in.

j.r.

 

[John Albert]

The USI website doesn't claim that ufology is a science or that the site itself is scientific. You are certainly misrepresenting the site. Now that you've thrown the opportunity I held out to the group here into the shredder and burned the bridge with my group, I have a whole bunch of interesting new material for the Skeptics entry that I'm sure you really won't be interested in.

Oh, snap!

We've burned our bridges with the Ufology Society International.

They're international! You know what that means? There's nowhere in the world we can hide!

We'd better hitch a ride on one of those flying saucers and get off this planet quick, before they catch up with us!

 

[Akhenaten]

The USI website doesn't claim that ufology is a science or that the site itself is scientific. You are certainly misrepresenting the site. Now that you've thrown the opportunity I held out to the group here into the shredder and burned the bridge with my group, I have a whole bunch of interesting new material for the Skeptics entry that I'm sure you really won't be interested in.

j.r.

Does it have any examples of fields that you consider to be pseudoscience?

If it did then you could just provide us with a link rather than running away from what is a blindingly simple question every time it's asked of you.

 

[Agatha]

Is brave Sir Robin ufology running away? Brave, brave Sir Robin ufology.

 

[RoboTimbo]

The USI website doesn't claim that ufology is a science or that the site itself is scientific. You are certainly misrepresenting the site. Now that you've thrown the opportunity I held out to the group here into the shredder and burned the bridge with my group, I have a whole bunch of interesting new material for the Skeptics entry that I'm sure you really won't be interested in.

j.r.

We can no longer call the medical profession medicine then since doctors sometimes go to conventions. Is that your logic?

Also, if you could name one example of something that you consider to be a pseudoscience.

 

[Apology]

I knew reading all those Ann Rice novels, watching the Twilight movies, and dressing as a vampire one Halloween would come back to bite me on the ass one day.

Now, who wants to be immortal?

 

[GeeMack]

The USI website doesn't claim that ufology is a science or that the site itself is scientific. You are certainly misrepresenting the site. Now that you've thrown the opportunity I held out to the group here into the shredder and burned the bridge with my group, I have a whole bunch of interesting new material for the Skeptics entry that I'm sure you really won't be interested in.

Oh, teasing us. I simply must go see! Okay, no, probably not. I predict it's just more whining about being persecuted.

But the USI organization will now be forever linked through the Internet directly to this discussion. Anyone Googling around about it will be able to come here and see how the USI purports to engage in "ufology", how it claims to be objective and thorough, how its purpose is to "illuminate the truth" or explain something about material reality (a scientific endeavor by any rational definition), and how it turns legitimate science on its head by starting with the preconceived notion that aliens are visiting Earth. They will be able to compare the discussions here with what they find there and realize that "ufology" relies on the wholly dishonest tactic of redefining terms to prop up their faith. They might even come to the conclusion that there's something approaching a fraudulent presentation by the USI when the foundation of what they stand for over there is denied right here in this discussion.

So much for "ufology" not being pseudoscience. Objectively and definitively it is indeed.

 

[Lucian]

Why do you want to redefine "ufology" to include fiction, entertainment, sociology, journalism, anthropology, history and other similar fields? I am puzzled by your insistence that the ballet I watched the other night is part of ufology.

I have an OED next to me which doesn't list the word, but online MW does, as does dictionary.com and freedictionary.com.

Ufology culture is a fact. Examples have been provided that include film and celebrations ( e.g. the film Close Encounters & The Roswell UFO Festival ). Just because concise dictionaries don't recognize these things doesn't mean they aren't there. Or would you deny that the Roswell UFO festival is part of ufology culture?

j.r.

I checked the online version of the OED. It does include "ufology:"

The study of UFOs

The OED also discusses the suffix -logy. They note that, in English, words ending in -logy fall into two classes:

(1) those which have the sense of ‘saying or speaking’, examples of which are the words anglicized as battology, brachylogy, cacology, dittology, eulogy, palillogy, tautology; and (2) names of sciences or departments of study.

Ufology doesn't fit the first class, so it must fit in the latter. Darn those non-thorough concise dictionaries.

 

[John Albert]

The OED also discusses the suffix -logy. They note that, in English, words ending in -logy fall into two classes:

(1) those which have the sense of ‘saying or speaking’, examples of which are the words anglicized as battology, brachylogy, cacology, dittology, eulogy, palillogy, tautology; and (2) names of sciences or departments of study.

Ufology doesn't fit the first class, so it must fit in the latter. Darn those non-thorough concise dictionaries.

Those guys seem to redefine language a lot, and certainly do speak a lot of lies. Maybe its definition is "the speaking of lies about UFOs."

 

[Akhenaten]

Oh, snap!

We've burned our bridges with the Ufology Society International.

They're international! You know what that means? There's nowhere in the world we can hide!

We'd better hitch a ride on one of those flying saucers and get off this planet quick, before they catch up with us!

Salvation is at hand!

Time to twist our Goosekedial to the right and the left with a great big smile.
This is the way we get to see a Goose Balloon for you and me.

Geeska, Goska, Gooseketeer, Goose Balloon time now is here!​

ETA: Oops! Almost forgot to include our motto!

 

[John Albert]

But the USI organization will now be forever linked through the Internet directly to this discussion. Anyone Googling around about it will be able to come here and see how the USI purports to engage in "ufology", how it claims to be objective and thorough, how its purpose is to "illuminate the truth" or explain something about material reality (a scientific endeavor by any rational definition), and how it turns legitimate science on its head by starting with the preconceived notion that aliens are visiting Earth. They will be able to compare the discussions here with what they find there and realize that "ufology" relies on the wholly dishonest tactic of redefining terms to prop up their faith. They might even come to the conclusion that there's something approaching a fraudulent presentation by the USI when the foundation of what they stand for over there is denied right here in this discussion.

Don't forget the part about truth having nothing to do with reality.

 

[John Albert]

Salvation is at hand!

OMG that gooseblimp is grotesque!

 

[RoboTimbo]

Salvation is at hand!

You know it's just going to get nominated.

 

[Akhenaten]

You know it's just going to get nominated.

Library Lady is going to have a fit.



Thanks, RT.