Why does the U.F.O. skeptic treat all all evidence as equally not evidence?

a reply to: Argyll

I'm a skeptic, I want to believe.....go ahead and convince me....show me the money!

Isaakoi has done some work on this front.

Some of my favorites(early, multiple witnesses, clear sightings)

Westall 66 (start in at 9:47, picture at 11:00). Several students observe a small drone like craft levitate up.
Ravenna police chase
Madagascar green ufo, double sighting
Belgium (start in at 4min) ufo wave

2 others recently suggested to me
Minot AFB B-52 incident
Lakenheath-Bentwaters UFO

Very well thought out thread. I think about this often, and the bottom line is I am stunned that anyone who has done extensive research into the phenomenon, could come to the conclusion that nothing out of the ordinary is going on.

Sure we have thousands of eyewitness accounts from normal citizens, but even when you throw all of that out the window, we have the meat of the credible evidence in my opinion, that being the vast amount of government and military eyewitness accounts and reports. We have amassed a mountain of testimony from these officials, and many are corroborated by others, meaning we have many reports that were seen by multiple officials concurrently.

With that said, if you are skeptic ask yourself this.

Is it really wise or even remotely logical to assume that every single account or report of a UFO is a case a mistaken identity, a lie, or a hallucination? If even one report were true, that is all that would matter.

We're talking astronomical odds against you. The chances that this phenomenon is real are extremely high by default, not the other way around.

a reply to: roncoallstar

Is it really wise or even remotely logical to assume that every single account or report of a UFO is a case a mistaken identity, a lie, or a hallucination? If even one report were true, that is all that would matter.

No. It isn't logical to assume that every single account or report of a UFO is a case a mistaken identity, a lie, or a hallucination.

What is logical to assume about them all?

originally posted by: roncoallstar
If even one report were true, that is all that would matter.

We're talking astronomical odds against you. The chances that this phenomenon is real are extremely high...

Exactly. People are just afraid that there is something bigger, more powerful than them....just human insecurity. SO they hide behind swamp gas and chinese lanterns.
Until we have positive contact, as in mass landings, it will be impossible to convince the skeptics....sad thing is skeptic doesn't even fit these people. They are like religious people that will die believing the Earth is 6000 years old ...you just can't convince them...they are just hopeless.

a reply to: Phage

Well, if I were a betting man I would let it ride in favor of at least 1 case being true.

Now whether or not these cases could be attributed to ET or man made objects is an entirely different subject. Although, I would apply the same logic to that as well and say that among the many cases that report these sightings as extra-terrestrial in nature either by close encounter from far, logic would seem to suggest that at least one of them would be true.

At the very least I would certainly not discount the possibility as many skeptics do, seeing as the odds are largely not in my favor.

a reply to: roncoallstar

Now whether or not these cases could be attributed to ET or man made objects is an entirely different subject.

No. That is precisely the subject.

Although, I would apply the same logic to that as well and say that among the many cases that report these sightings as extra-terrestrial in nature either by close encounter from far, logic would seem to suggest that at least one of them would be true.

Why? Why not demons, for example? You'll find that notion is not unheard of. Just as much evidence for demons as ET. Maybe even more.

At the very least I would certainly not discount the possibility as many skeptics do, seeing as the odds are largely not in my favor.

Asking for evidence is not the same as discounting. What's wrong with saying, "That's weird. I don't know what it was."

a reply to: Phage

You said:

Why? Why not demons, for example? You'll find that notion is not unheard of. Just as much evidence for demons as ET. Maybe even more.

Not the case, there's more evidence for aliens tied to the aerial phenomena of U.F.O.'s. You have someone considered one of the brightest minds of our time saying aliens almost certainly exist and countries spending billions looking for life.

Now you can construct a hypothesis that says aliens are demons but we're still talking about....aliens. I see nothing wrong with this but you would have to provide evidence to support your claim. You will have to show why these encounters are demons opposed to aliens. NASA isn't looking for demons, their look for signs of life and looking for biosignatures of life to use as they look at exoplanets. So aliens are more likely based on the available evidence but if you want to say demons are a more likely explanation, let's hear the evidence.

You said:

Asking for evidence is not the same as discounting. What's wrong with saying, "That's weird. I don't know what it was."

What's wrong with saying,"That's weird and based on the available evidence the most likely explanation is extraterrestrial visitation."

You don't have to agree with it but you can't say there isn't any evidence to base this on. All eyewitness accounts aren't equally unreliable. All evidence in this area isn't equally not evidence. That's the point.

a reply to: neoholographic

Not the case, there's more evidence for aliens tied to the aerial phenomena of U.F.O.'s. You have someone considered one of the brightest minds of our time saying aliens almost certainly exist and countries spending billions looking for life.

Saying that aliens almost certainly exist is not evidence that UFOs represent extraterrestrial evidence.

You will have to show why these encounters are demons opposed to aliens.

I didn't say that they are demons.

So aliens are more likely based on the available evidence but if you want to say demons are a more likely explanation, let's hear the evidence.

I didn't say either is more likely.

All evidence in this area isn't equally not evidence. That's the point.

Seeing as how the statement is semantically null...ok.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

Yes there is. Perhaps you don't know the actual difference between proof and evidence or different kinds of evidence.

There is literally mountains of all kinds of evidence. I find the scientific community incredibly naive and narrow-minded, even on the verge of being retarded for not putting two and two together and realizing the actual weight of all the evidence. The military industrial complex and the intelligence agencies certainly have, they deal with intelligence work and their intelligence work would be sorely lacking if conspiracy theorists on the internet beat them to the punch.

It's a matter of zooming out and viewing the evidence collectively instead of focusing in on each case and and viewing them completely separately. I really hate to use the word but the lack of holistic thinking is almost pathological. "A person is smart. People are dumb." The propensity for herd behaviour and conformity in humanity is simply startling and underestimating it in this situation where media and governments have ridiculed the idea for decades is a big mistake. That's how you get the politics we have, that along with ignorance is how you get "US Political Madness". That's how you get a squadron of flying saucers buzzing the white house and largely being ignored, with the immense implications of it just being ignored, explained away and denied in various ways. That's how you get thousands of similar situations of grave consideration simply ignored by a supposedly informed population.
If you think someone in the army or the CIA didn't pay attention to that as well as millions of people reportedly experiencing contact and contact being described in various ways all throughout history then I've got a bridge to sell you.

The black project types probably can't stop laughing. It's embarrassing for science and it's embarrassing for humanity. Stop embarrassing us science! It's time to put on your big boy pants and stop playing around in the sandbox.

It's refreshing to see scientists willing and able to think outside of the box Neoholographic. You know what they say:

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
- Max Planck

Great man I hear.

Why does the U.F.O. skeptic treat all all evidence as equally not evidence?

Why do you allow yourself to care what they think? I would imagine that what would be important to you is that you believe as you do.

Sometimes life is not about what one believes but that one believes.

The Tibetans have a saying - when the student is ready the master will appear and for what its worth. Its' not for student to determine when they are ready either.

Also FWIW, its wrong to try and persuade others to believe as you do. Religions are some of the worst offenders for this. but don't you fall into the trap of doing that yourself.

We are all works in progress, otherwise we would not be here.

Different strokes for different folks. In the fullness of time we walk the same path.

a reply to: Phage

Even if it were demons, they would still be aliens by the very definition of the term.

There is nothing wrong at all with saying you don't know what you saw, and as far as I know that is what most people say, hence the term UFO. However, we have many levels of and types of encounters, some closer or more detailed than than others. Some people claim they know what they have seen, others don't.

I would never claim to know the truth one way or another without seeing the truth with my own eyes. However I am a man of common sense, and my common sense tells me after the vast amount of evidence I have researched on the subject, there is something happening. I would be very surprised if there wasn't something to it.

a reply to: neoholographic


The skeptic and not really the skeptic but the cynical, the cynic, are always moved to the front lines of debate when the preponderance of evidence is so great that logical analysis does not favor the "official" line.

At this point I consider most hard cynics to be really professional keepers of the lid from coming off, trolls, hacks, ect. Thats their mission, their purpose, their assignment. They are also cohorts of disinfo to embarrass folks, false info feeders ect.

Neoholographic

As a Theoretical Physicist, it get's under my skin the way people use this term whenever they want to look like they're being scientific.

You are not a theoretical physicist. It is clear from your posts that you have not even studied physics formally.

You don't get to go about calling yourself a theoretical physicist till other physicists say you are, okay?

On topic, there is not a shred of reliable evidence to show that aliens are visiting our planet. The fact that you think there is proves the falsity of your boastful claim. Theoretical physicists know what evidence is, and what it isn't.

a reply to: Jonjonj

There is Zero evidence for dark energy, yet the modern standard model of physics is based around it

There is irrefutable evidence for the existence of what we call dark energy.

Dark energy has absolutely nothing to do with the Standard Model of physics.

You do not have the basic knowledge you need to participate in this argument. But please don't stop -- you're very funny!

I'm believe in the possibility of life on other planets.

I want to believe in aliens too.

I came to ATS for proof but if anything, all it's done is re-enforce my belief in hoaxers.

All I've seen here is unprovable stories and lights in the sky.

It's a fricken light in the sky, it moves, OMG ALIENZ!!!!

Tape a torch to a kids toy and you've got the same thing. People lie for attention.

We live in a world where people have video cameras in their pockets at all times, yet we still don't have anything credible. Nothing.

Millennium Falcons or it didn't happen.

a reply to: roncoallstar

Even if it were demons, they would still be aliens by the very definition of the term.

That's really grasping at straws!

How flexible is this definition of yours? How about if they were talking doughnuts, would they still be aliens by the very definition of the term?

a reply to: Astyanax

I am glad you find me funny.
I prefer not to sneer though so...whatever.
By the way, any "evidence" for dark energy is anecdotal right? Or have you personally shown it to exist, categorized it, put it in a book somewhere?

Oh and this discussion, in which I am participating, is not about physics.
Perhaps you are over qualified here?

a reply to: Logarock

That's right, everyone who disagrees with you has got to be working for the government.

Actually, that's just the thin edge of the wedge. The truth is, everybody except the UFO true believers is working for the government. The whole world is secretly conspiring to hide the truth from a few thousand UFO cultists.

My thanks to the OP for such an entertaining thread. Flag (but no star)!

When dealing with the UFO skeptic you have to realize something about human nature that is perfectly summed up in the following story that was conveyed to me over a long foot soaking session by someone who is well known in circles that don't actually exist.

Jeremy was a huge fan of leather working because he really liked the way the leather smelled. It wasn't the leather so much as it was the oil used on the leather. He stored large quantities of leather as well as the oil used on the leather that he liked the smell of. Often times he would make beautiful well crafted gifts for friends and family during the holidays. One year he made everyone their own popcicle-stick christmas tree ornaments. Another year he knitted mittens for everyone's kittens.

Sadly after the holidays he was fired by his employer where he worked as an industrial waste model, evidently he had been spending much time at work fiddling with crafts for his family and wasn't spending enough time doing his job so it's justified that he was fired but unfortunate nonetheless. Jeremy's favorite soda if he had to say would probably be root beer. After jeremy was fired he became angry with his family because somehow he warped it in his mind that his family was forcing him to make them crafts. And then he complained how he didn't even get to work with leather much anymore because his family demanded so many crafts. Although secretly he thought it wasn't that big of a deal because he still got to smell the leather oil which was his main drive behind leather work in the first place, this also caused some problems because the crafts he gave to his family would sometimes be soaked in the leather oil because jeremy would have bottles laying all over that he would smell and sometimes they would spill and get on the crafts he was in the process of making and he gave those ones to his family anyway.

Jeremy was a pretty nice guy but the whole issues over crafts got to him and he decided to stop making crafts. Sometimes his old friend from college, fred, comes over and demands that jeremy make him crafts. The first time he did it it was just because he wanted crafts but then when he saw how mad it made jeremy he kept doing it and really fred probably isn't the best friend to begin with.

a reply to: JackHill

I'm superman and I did it.

Well you believed their bull, why not mine?