It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Theories, speculation and evidence within the ATS UFO forum

page: 1
36
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+21 more 
posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:11 PM
link   
One thing I've struggled with over the years is : How much evidence should you have before presenting a theory for something in the UFO forum?

From reading a bunch of UFO discussions online, it seems that some people have a pretty low threshold and simply post some speculation without any evidence and see if others can disprove their speculation. That approach has always struck me as, well, idiotic.

Blatant speculation seems to be have become the norm within ufology. As long as that approach is tolerated, we'll never get anywhere.

On the other hand, waiting for apparently conclusive evidence means that the wait may be a long one. In some instances, conclusive evidence will probably never be available.

So, a requirement of having 100% confidence in the evidence for a theory would mean that many theories never get put forward here. Maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing. I'm not sure.

Let's say that, in some instances, I have a confidence level of 60% or 70%. I know that there remain unknowns. I know that there isn't solid proof. But there's some pretty decent evidence.

I've always tended towards the need for pretty _strong_ evidence, particularly in relation to more controversial theories. I'd generally prefer to keep digging if I'm unsure about something. That's worked pretty well for me so far.

But with the potential closure of ATS, I wonder whether I should lower my standards and just post a bunch of theories with relevant evidence (even if that evidence doesn't amount to conclusive proof).

I could then see if others find holes in that evidence or, alternatively, can build on it. But isn't that a bit like the reasoning of the idiots that post blatant speculation without any evidence at all??

So, when do the scales tip for you in favour of posting a theory with the available evidence? A 10% confidence rating? 51%? 90%?



And what do you do when some of the information you have (whether you believe it or not) was given on the basis of confidence, so you can't include it? In particular, what if you disagree with that information, but leaving it out means that you aren't giving a full/balanced picture and also can't explain why you don't accept that confidential information?

www.facebook.com...


www.abovetopsecret.com...


I'm sincerely interested in how others approach the threshold for posting a theory here.




posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: IsaacKoi






I'm sincerely interested in how others approach the threshold for posting a theory here.



I usually don't post theories. I do however comment on my investigations in the 4 corners area, San Luis valley and other places in the American SW.
I have a problem differentiating between UFOs, mind f***s, religious activity, crypids, and other high strangeness. At times it all seems to blend together. I don't know what's really going on; some times it appears malevolent, and other times like trickster off the wall BS. However I don't think mankind's cognitive powers, or 5 senses are capable of understanding the phenomenon.

I don't trust anything coming from the TTSA, NIDS, or the C2C. They all seem loosely tied together with some sort of agenda About the only person
I trust in the investigatory field of woo is David Paulides.

Currently I haven't been posting my experiences on woo on ATS; I don't need the insults from the all pervasive mudpit.
edit on 28-6-2020 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:18 PM
link   
If anyone had solid evidence and not just theories.
It would not only be ATS news.. but world news.



“The four stages of acceptance:
1. This is worthless nonsense.
2. This is an interesting, but perverse, point of view.
3. This is true, but quite unimportant.
4. I always said so."

(Review of The Truth About Death, in: Journal of Genetics 1963, Vol. 58, p.464)”
― J.B.S. Haldane



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: IsaacKoi
But with the potential closure of ATS, I wonder whether I should lower my standards and just post a bunch of theories with relevant evidence (even if that evidence doesn't amount to conclusive proof).



Post what you got, in this day and age 2 duckduckgos are better than one

2nd



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: IsaacKoi

I'd say approach it as you would do a case as a barrister - see whether you can build a compelling argument (one way or another) based upon the evidence you have available to you...




posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: IsaacKoi

A disclaimer and you're good to go. In my opinion.
Let it all out



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: IsaacKoi

I think sometimes speculation can lead us to new avenues of thought. And we might just find some kind of evidence looking in a new direction.

I’d love to read your speculation.




posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I think most discussion and speculation is fine. The key is in maintaining intellectual honesty.

If you have a confidence level of "60% or 70%", then just say so along with the speculation and evidence being presented.

Personally, I think issues mainly arise when speculation is presented as fact. As long as something is presented as speculation with evidence to back it up (even if the evidence is not 100% conclusive), then I think you're covered and safe to take it to discussion.



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: IsaacKoi


Evidence.

The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Two very important words in that definition. Available and indicating.

That is best we are able to do right now. Look at all the evidence and let that indicate how your belief leans.

Then there is personal evidence. Things you have seen, heard, smelled, tasted, and felt. Personal evidence indicates how you lean on a belief.

I believe that enough evidence for unexplained phenomena already exits to the point that to deny it, is simply ignorance of the evidence.



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:43 PM
link   
I'd say posting to ATS about UFOs is an exercise in futility. The atmosphere here is decidedly anti-UFO to the point that any theory is immediately considered "an op," disinformation, or whatever current fancy of the debunkers is. Posting here does not advance the state of the art. EVERYTHING is a friggin' argument. It's not a healthy place to learn.



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

The people with ears to hear will hear it.

It doesn’t really matter if anyone else does or not.




posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
The atmosphere here is decidedly anti-UFO to the point that any theory is immediately considered "an op," disinformation, or whatever current fancy of the debunkers is.


Well, I could deal with that problem by simply selecting one of the well-known UFO stories where it has turned out after quite a bit of digging that the evidence is reasonably strong (but not yet conclusive) in favour of disinformation - or at least a a hoax by people associated with Government agencies.
edit on 28-6-2020 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: IsaacKoi
One thing I've struggled with over the years is : How much evidence should you have before presenting a theory for something in the UFO forum?


Rather than endless lights in the sky, a rather more grey [sic] area within Ufology is Abduction, specifically of the bedroom visitation variety. It has fascinated me more than anything else, but actual evidence is rarely forthcoming other than personal testimony, often leading to conclusions that it is an entirely psychological phenomenon with no merit other than an outstanding imagination connected to vivid dreams and/or wishful thinking.

Some personal accounts on ATS can be immediately thrown into the Hoax Bin, but there are plenty of others that defy easy explanation, reinforced by the trustworthy nature of the individuals involved (I won't name them, but I'm sure many of us are aware of their 'confessions' on ATS, that sometimes take a lot of guts to come forward and recount).

I don't know what to make of such personal accounts, never having had one myself, but they provide provocative food for thought if we are to entertain the notion of 'alien' interaction that perhaps operates on a purely mental level rather than the public's chosen cliche of metallic disks or 'Tic Tacs' flying through the skies.

As I said, evidence in those cases is rare, and the abduction phenomenon is easily mocked for that very reason... and yet the idea of a purely mental rather than physical interaction with other 'species' (whoever they may be, or not be) will continue to tantalise many for decades if not centuries to come.



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spacespider
“The four stages of acceptance:
1. This is worthless nonsense.
2. This is an interesting, but perverse, point of view.
3. This is true, but quite unimportant.
4. I always said so."


I think the first three in your list should be preceeded by the words "I think" because acceptance is a very personal thing. Presuming another person's acceptance isn't truly possible unless you could read what's in their mind.

What many people say and what they think is rarely the same.

I think.



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Like highvein says, it’s also about personal evidence, and how far people are willing to believe them in the absence of any concrete evidence. Concrete evidence that is almost impossible to get after the fact, if indeed it was a fact at all.

Most here are chasing paper trails, audio/visual trails, trails that have passed through the US intelligence infrastructure. Until we take a braver approach and deal with experiencers at face value - most likely within a statistical ‘dump’ - how can we progress by skirting around the tainted edges? It’s those people who have the nuggets of information that can unlock how we understand it.

Some of the most profound breakthroughs have come from dropping science for a moment and engaging with things on a personal level.



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: IsaacKoi

originally posted by: schuyler
The atmosphere here is decidedly anti-UFO to the point that any theory is immediately considered "an op," disinformation, or whatever current fancy of the debunkers is.


Well, I could deal with that problem by simply selecting one of the well-known UFO stories where it has turned out after quite a bit of digging that the evidence is reasonably strong (but not yet conclusive) in favour of disinformation - or at least a a hoax by people associated with Government agencies.



I would imagine that a man with your prestige in the field, and on ATS, would get an audience. I personally would consider it an honor, and it would be a nostalgic reminder of the things that brought me to ATS, all those years ago.

People like you.


edit on 28-6-2020 by highvein because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 03:15 PM
link   
I recon machine learning could figure out if aliens and ufos are real by using ATS as a dataset.



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: IsaacKoi


Well , According to John Leer , there are over 800 Civilizations Living Below the Earths Surface , some Very Scientifically Advanced , and Over 40 Planets in Our Solar System Alone . He has No Proof of that though , just his Hearsay . Oh , and he also mentioned that the Moon is Made Out of Blue Cheese , not Green .............)


edit on 28-6-2020 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: IsaacKoi

100% Gut feeling is the best.

If i want to speak my mind about something i just do so.

Shoot a theory, just something that surfaces on your mind, i would like to read it.



posted on Jun, 28 2020 @ 04:23 PM
link   
For me it's always been:

1- Does the claim sound credible? (the person who reports it doesn't have to be, just the claim it self)

2- Has other people seen or reported the same? (this doesn't have to be friends and family of the person making the report)

3- Is there any evidence to back up the claim? (pictures, videos, any other kind of recording media, or better yet tangible evidence like landing sites or animal remains)

4- Is there any explanation for the claim as it is reported? (finding a basic answer for what may have been a mis-identified or rare event or sighting)

5- Is there any signs of a deliberate HOAX? (is there any signs that the person making the claim is trying to trick others for reasons unknown. These reasons could be disinformation, monetary gains, publicity, even notoriety.)

For me it had always been my personal policy to insist that it pass all five points before making a UAP/UFO claim or report public.

Though you're asking about theories and speculation. I like to have a solid point of view before I present those out there. For instance I think that Aliens that visit Earth are not really smarter then us, but rather just have better technology. My case for this stems from reports about how their craft used to show up (and in some cases still do) on radar, but we here on Earth have found ways to limit that with our own aircraft. Then you have reports of people being abducted and the strange medical procedures conducted on them, leaving many with scars and prolonged health issues, but here on Earth we have MRI, fMRI, CT and CAT scanning technologies. So why are there still reports of Aliens cutting up animals and people?

I mean one thing that's unique about humans is that we are an accident of nature. Had the events of 65million years ago not occurred, we might not have been where we are now. It was through that kind of rough going that forced us to take a very "adapt or die" evolutionary process. If Alien life took a less dramatic evolutionary approach, then they might not have had the same kind of intellect that we have. Sure they may be hundreds of years older than us with better technologies, but they might also be slow of change and invention because of how they evolved.

Again just a theory, but as an example for what I think is needed when presenting one for discussion. You should have a bases for your point of view, a thought out process for why you think such and such, and finally some kind of conclusion that allows for discussion.

So in the end if I want to bring a UAP/OFO report or claim to discussion it needs to meet those five points above, yet if it's a theory or speculation then it need to have a reason for being, a clearly laid out thought process, and a discussable conclusion.



new topics

top topics



 
36
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join