So where is all the cellphone movie footage if we're visited so often?

My opinion is that too many people are too busy on their phones and not really paying much attention to what is going on in the very world around them, much less the sky.

originally posted by: grainofsand
How does one holding a high standard of evidence in order to believe something indicate that said person is a poor judge of 'legitimate' UFO evidence? I am interested to learn the qualifying requirements for these 'judges' you mention?

Here is how; You characterize your requirements (rules) of evidence as a "high standard". The problem is that it is not anything like the "rules of Evidence" as used in either a scientific context or a court of law. In a court of law there are a rather strict set of rules that define what evidence is and what evidence is even relevant (admissible).

When your rules are in line with those; then and only then will you become a "good judge" of evidence, and until then your expectations, and "treatment" of any evidence soever is unreasonable, and unacceptable, and of course adds nothing to any discussion...

a reply to: Scdfa
Unfortunately some people are told directly by God that the beings these people see are actually demons and not aliens. So they have knowledge also. Some folks know for sure that these things are just hallucinations. Personal knowledge is just that. Personal. Everyone has the right to their own personal beliefs which is the same as personal "knowledge". The phenomenon is based entirely on peoples personal subjective experiences. 2 people can see the same light in the sky and interpret it differently.

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

I'm not sure what the difference is between a demon and an alien, other than the word demon has been used longer. Both words describe beings that are are strange, powerful, malevolent and from somewhere else. Both words may be appropriate, and maybe they have described the same beings all this time. Angels, and gods too, probably. And how tall are leprechauns? And fairies? Just about as tall as the average grey, you might say. Hmmm.

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

Some folks know for sure that these things are just hallucinations. Personal knowledge is just that. Personal. Everyone has the right to their own personal beliefs which is the same as personal "knowledge".

No, knowledge of facts is not the same as a personal belief. Yes, perception affects your understanding of reality. But reality is not a matter of perception. There are physical laws to the universe, our reality is not a matter of opinion.

a reply to: Scdfa
and what's the difference between all that and a hallucination? Machine Elves?

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Scdfa
and what's the difference between all that and a hallucination? Machine Elves?

A hallucination is the perception of things not present, the perception of objects with no reality.

Hallucinations do not show up on radar.

a reply to: Scdfa

No, knowledge of facts is not the same as a personal belief.

Facts are things that can be demonstrated to have actually happened or be the case. Aliens are not facts since they cant be demonstrated to be real.

Yes, perception affects your understanding of reality. But reality is not a matter of perception. There are physical laws to the universe, our reality is not a matter of opinion.

We experience realty through our perception which is a distortion of realty which is entirely in our heads. that is why drugs are all the rage.

a reply to: Scdfa

A hallucination is the perception of things not present, the perception of objects with no reality.

That is not entirely true. If I see a wall breathing, is that a hallucination or does the wall actually breath? People that see machine elves believe or "know" they are real in the same way people that see aliens believe they are real. No difference.

Hallucinations do not show up on radar.

Unless the radar is producing a false return and the radar operator "suggests" that there is something in the air space. Oh yes, that is possible. There are lots of different scenarios to explore!

a reply to: Scdfa
You made assertions in the previous post, and I asked you if your claims referred to all people or some. I also asked if you could provide me with details of the social research you discovered to , or if your claims were based solely on anecdotal evidence or opinion reached through your own personal experiences. Why have you ignored such simple questions and focused on my use of the word believer for those who believe in aliens?
Now, you've had your little rant about the term 'believer' so if you don't mind, I would be grateful to see your response to my valid questions which you appear to have ignored...or are you just here to sidetrack?

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

Facts are things that can be demonstrated to have actually happened or be the case. Aliens are not facts since they cant be demonstrated to be real.

False. It is a fact that the Earth orbits the Sun, and it was a fact long before it could be demonstrated.

a reply to: tanka418
Wow, lots of words but very little substance.
How about instead of flowering around the discussion, maybe explain what this 'evidence' is that supports claims of visiting aliens, and perhaps explain what relevance 'courts of law' have to this discussion?
I am certain that if you presented current 'evidence' of aliens to a judge you would be laughed out of court.
Oh, and while your at it, perhaps explain why my expectations are 'unreasonable, and unacceptable', and be a bit more succinct and to the point because right now I don't really understand what message you are attempting to convey.

Double post, apologies

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

People that see machine elves believe or "know" they are real in the same way people that see aliens believe they are real. No difference.

False. This statement is based on the proposition that aliens do not exist. And putting parenthesis around the word "know" does not change its definition.

a reply to: Scdfa
So how do you 'know' aliens visit the Earth then?
I note in this thread you have made many claims but have not explained how you reached such a conclusion.

a reply to: grainofsand

How about instead of flowering around discussion, maybe explain what this 'evidence' is that supports claims of visiting aliens, and perhaps explain what relevance 'courts of law' have to this discussion?

Flowering around discussion? This is poor use of the English language at best. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's a typo or simply bad grammar.

So it's our job to reiterate the past half-century of alien contact? Perhaps you should be less lazy-minded about a topic you wish to discuss intelligently.

I am certain that if you presented current 'evidence' of aliens to a judge you would be laughed out of court.

I'm certain you're incorrect. But I must inform you that in a court of law it is a panel of citizens called a "jury" that determine a verdict, not a judge. And it is a grand jury that is impaneled to determine if a case is to be heard.

Again, familiarize yourself with a topic before discussing it or you run the risk of sounding uneducated.

a reply to: Scdfa
I wasn't replying to your post and I'm sure tanka can respond for his /herself.
Now Scdfa, are you going to continue ignoring the replies I directed to your goodself or are you just here to troll and whine about my grammar, or imply I am lazy/uneducated?

If you continue to ignore my previous valid questions I shall just consider your intentions as trolling.

a reply to: Scdfa

False. It is a fact that the Earth orbits the Sun, and it was a fact long before it could be demonstrated.

www.thefreedictionary.com...

fact
(făkt)
n.
1. Knowledge or information based on real occurrences

According to the definition, if there is no knowledge of something, its not a fact.

False. This statement is based on the proposition that aliens do not exist.

No it is not. Its based on the actual fact that people hallucinate beings that are very similar if not identical to aliens. Many people who have seen these entities believe them to be real. Its pretty well documented. Are you saying that these beings are not real? Isn't that hypocritical?

Interesting is that the chemical that causes these folks to see these beings occurs naturally in our bodies and is chemically related to sleep hormones. It hasn't been shown to be responsible for abduction experiences yet so its not a fact that this has occurred. Once it can be demonstrated, it will become a fact. Until then, we are free to believe and speculate. If I use your definition, I could just declare it as a fact I suppose.

...and to stay on topic, you can't photograph hallucinations too well.

And putting parenthesis around the word "know" does not change its definition.

Sure it does. ...and they are quotation marks?

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: tanka418
Wow, lots of words but very little substance.
How about instead of flowering around the discussion, maybe explain what this 'evidence' is that supports claims of visiting aliens, and perhaps explain what relevance 'courts of law' have to this discussion?

The "relevance" you seek is in the "rules"; the methods, procedures, definitions, etc. that the legal system applies to "objects". It defines what is, and is not acceptable evidence.

Evidence is typically said to be "probative", and in the legal system this usually means that it tends to "prove" a hypothesis. However, thee is another quality, property to this kind of evidence. It is testable...in that we can examine the evidence and make intelligent decisions based on a "testable" reality.

This same concept holds in science.

I am certain that if you presented current 'evidence' of aliens to a judge you would be laughed out of court.
Oh, and while your at it, perhaps explain why my expectations are 'unreasonable, and unacceptable', and be a bit more succinct and to the point because right now I don't really understand what message you are attempting to convey.

Actually, evidence typically isn't presented to a judge; he is there only to insure the rules are followed. The final decision is from a panel of supposedly dis-interested individuals.

Your expectations are "unreasonable, and unacceptable" simply because they do not follow, nor apply any accepted convention for evidence...i.e. "Rules of Evidence"...as they apply to the legal system for now, but you will find out quickly that the same rules apply to all sciences.

a reply to: tanka418
Again lots of words but you appear to avoid sharing your perception of evidence with regard to aliens and such like.
I am interested to learn what your benchmark standard of evidence is for such claims?