Merged Skeptics vs. Knowers/Believers

Paul2 said:
Didn't anyone get the blatant contradiction in these two consecutive sentences?

To say that a craft is "non-human" is to make a claim about their origin.
Click to expand...
Yes, this has been commented on previously.

ETA: But once again, discussion of KotA and his beliefs are not the subject of the thread.
 
RoboTimbo said:
Shouldn't that be enfolded in the loving embrace of a deep sea squid fish?
Click to expand...

I KNOW this smells a bit fishy, but...

The EVIDENCE points towards UFOs being from right HERE, they've always been HERE, a civilization of intelligent, sentient ocean-dweilling squidfish. The squid fish are the real UFO tripulants. Greys are nothing but genetically-engineered biologic robots, built to operate ouside the water and remotely operated by the fishsquids via a telepresence achieved by telepathy and astral projection. UFO debunkers CAN NOT deny this FACT.
 
Paul2 said:
Didn't anyone get the blatant contradiction in these two consecutive sentences?

To say that a craft is "non-human" is to make a claim about their origin.
Click to expand...

Alright, I'll concede that to say they were "non-human" is indeed a statement about where they DIDN'T come from.

I drew this distinction, because I find this is a different thing than saying, "They are X, and they came from Y."

Rather, the only thing I 'know', is that they weren't 'us'...
 
But in this post: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5215004#post5215004 you state that you have no proof of your claims or your beliefs. I'm sorry to keep hammering at this but you keep tap dancing around it as if you know that the answer leaves you with a weak case.

What did you do to ensure that your senses weren't fooled as so many have been before you?

If you continue to tap dance around the difficult questions, at least admit to yourself that you are a "believer" and not a "knower".
 
There can be no such thing as an argument from ignorance, how could there be?;)
 
RoboTimbo said:
But in this post: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5215004#post5215004 you state that you have no proof of your claims or your beliefs. I'm sorry to keep hammering at this but you keep tap dancing around it as if you know that the answer leaves you with a weak case.

What did you do to ensure that your senses weren't fooled as so many have been before you?

If you continue to tap dance around the difficult questions, at least admit to yourself that you are a "believer" and not a "knower".
Click to expand...

I have no "proof" that I can offer 'you', here...

Admittedly, I have been tapping around your question about what I did to ensure my senses weren't fooled. I've done so, because regardless of how long or short that list is, someone will say, "Oh, you forget that it could have been a leaky retina. If you didn't have your eyes dilated then you didn't rule out everything..."

I have seen MANY different types of aircraft, from satellites, and the shuttle down to single engine craft, in all kinds of conditions. In less than ideal conditions or distances, I have been fooled before.

The event in question took place in 'ideal' conditions, at very close ranges.

IF it had been a human craft, I feel 90% confident I could have positively identified it.

These craft or 'objects' were unlike anything I've ever encountered, and could not rectify their maneuverability with ANY human piloted vehicle.

Such maneuvers would KILL a human pilot.

And when two of the objects 'joined together', to make a 4 fold larger version...this 'sealed the deal' for me.

When I take two balls of clay and combine them, I don't get a ball that looks 'twice' as big, it merely looks a little bigger.

I was under no stress at the time of the event, and my eye sight was not hindered by the environment, physical degradation, or chemical alteration.

We saw objects that were more capable than any human craft I'm familiar with.

That said, I'll concede that I am not privy to super-secret military stuff. It COULD have been an X-men creation, or something Bruce Wayne threw together.

My conclusion of non-human was led by the fact that 'we' aren't made to do what these craft accomplished.
 
Still being relatively new here, I have to ask: is KotA serious? Is there an in joke here I'm not getting? I cannot believe that someone who'd been on this forum for eight years would not be familiar with the concept of "argument from ignorance."
 
Andrew Wiggin said:
Hmmmm. I do see where you're coming from, but what do you do when what you saw doesn't violate the laws of flight and physics as understood by everyone else? I've seen a lot of weird stuff, and a lot of it taught me that the world is a strange and non-intuitive place, but nothing has ever defied explanation after sufficient study.

A
Click to expand...

Then I'd ask you to demonstrate how you can flying two object 'toward' each other, have them combine in mid-air, stay stationary for a moment (2-3 seconds), and then split apart and head in opposite directions...

I've actually handled the controls of a single engine craft for a few minutes, with careful oversight by the pilot. To turn the plane, I had to apply the right rudder, and then pull back on the stick while slightly turning it. This cause the plane to 'bank' or arch through the turn.

This is how ALL planes 'turn'. Even the directional exhaust of the F-22 can't accomplish a 90 degree turn without slowing down.
 
King of the Americas said:
If you can provide a mundane explanation, that fits what I saw, please feel free to provide it...?

To date, 'I' have found nothing.

YOU said my belief is "unfalsifiable", I said no such thing.
Click to expand...
You didn't have to say it, "unfalsifiable" is a property. I'm having a hard time believing you would really need this term explained to you as well, you are being disingenuous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom