I see a trend here. Everything that has to do with U.F.O.'s, Psi or the Paranormal is put into the prison of the unexplained. Why can't we
explain or identify some U.F.O.'s and say there most likely craft flown by extraterrestrial beings?
It's unexplained because there is not enough scientific evidence to tell us what they are and how they work etc.
"Actual UFOs" cannot be identified. This is why they they unidentified flying objects. We cant say they are "MOST LIKELY" craft flown by
extraterrestrial beings because there is not enough solid evidence to prove that. Is it "POSSIBLE" - Yes. "MOST LIKELY" - No. I'd choose different
There's mountains of evidence to support this conclusion. Let me say this again. The conclusion is SOME of these U.F.O.'s are mostly likely
controlled by extraterrestrial beings.
There's not mountains of evidence.
Again, "MOST LIKELY" - No. "POSSIBLY" - Yes.
"The conclusion is SOME of these UFOS are POSSIBLY controlled by extraterrestrial beings."
Yeah, that looks slightly more accurate
Although I would personally minus the word conclusion. Since there technically is not enough evidence to "conclude" anything.
Why can't I reach this conclusion based on the available evidence? Why do I have to put everything that skeptics disagree with into the black
hole of the unexplained?
You can and you don't "have to" do anything. You're entitled to think what you want like everyone else obviously.
But at the end of the day none of us really "KNOW" anything. We can speculate. And lean a little more one way than the other based on what we might
"think." But to "KNOW" is something entirely different. And until we know for sure (we don't) It's safe to put these things in the unexplained
category, at least for now.
U.F.O.'s are called Unidentified Flying Objects. This doesn't mean we can't identify some of them based on the available evidence.
Yes, actually it "does" mean we cannot identify
them based on available evidence.
Actual UFOs cannot be identified based on anything. This is why they are called UFOs. Flying objects which are called UFOS which are not "Actual UFOs"
are called "whoops I made a mistake" "or whoops I am an idiot" and are put into the "NON-Legitimate UFO files...." In which they were never Actual
"UFOS" to begin with.
People have never seen parallel universes yet people have reached the conclusion based on the available evidence that parallel universes
There is no available evidence.
People can conclude their existence if they want but at the end of the day It's merely opinion or heresay. Skeptics can lean more one way or the other
at times, but skeptics tend not to write anything in stone.
Now, what am I supposed to do here? Take the word of a skeptic that had nothing to do with the case and believe that the Detective must be an
idiot. Or should I listen to the Detective with over 30 years experience who worked these cases?
I am unsure if you're asking for advice or if this is a rhetorical question.
If you want advice I would highly suggest to keep your ears and mind open to BOTH sides, and keep your eyes and ears open to anything else you may
come across on the topic and try to learn more based on that; to fill in gaps, to provide information, to put the pieces of the puzzle together using
"your own" intellectual capabilities mixed with information you gather and thoughts you may think on that information.
IMO I'd never choose to take just one persons word and make it my own .
I believe Psychics exist but it has nothing to do with anything magical or supernatural. It most likely has to do with non locality and
And of course as always you're entitled to the option to believe that.
But on the other hand I'd again switch "MOST LIKELY" to "POSSIBLY" since there is no proof.
But since you "BELIEVE" it I guess you don't need proof, because "BELIEVING" something is similar to a "BELIEF" in a religion. Don't need proof just a
strong inclination to choose those words instead of saying "I'm not sure" or "POSSIBLY."
A belief in and of itself is not fueled from proof.
At the end of the day, I'm supposed to just stick my head in the sand and say these things can't be explained and this is because the
explanation doesn't agree with the skeptics belief system. So it could never be Psychic Ability exist, it always has to be Psychic Ability is
unexplained or it's just a bunch of stupid cops who get bamboozled by old ladies.
You can believe it wholeheartedly exists. Nobody is stopping you.
There just exist other people who would tend to choose to not make that conclusion final UNTIL there is something that makes them think "I know this
Like I said, I think a lot of these things have explanations but their just kept in the unexplained prison because the explanation doesn't
agree with the skeptics preexisting belief.
Skeptics don't have a "preexisting belief" they don't technically "believe" anything, hence why they are called skeptics. They are "skeptical." As
said above, skeptics can, at times, lean more one way than the other, but skeptics do not write anything in stone.
edit on 3/14/2014 by
unb3k44n7 because: (no reason given)