posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 01:12 PM
I agree that the lens flare was weakest and quickly resolved. But if we maintain weak thinking we will hit a barrier where we incorrectly identify the
harder stuff. We need to keep things organized and keep our thinking clear.
It would be a crime to tell people to not voice their beliefs here. But people like me , in the sciences, will take yall more seriously if you very
careafully spell out your reasons. (Unlike me, who can't spell worth a darn.)
And then, if you receive criticism, respond to it directly.
For example, there are people here using the tether incident as an example (In which there are very many interesting things happening, such as
lengthwise tether traversal.) Yet the skeptics get to ignore the things they have trouble explaining by clearly demonstrating the very weak thinking
made in proporting alien UFOs.
Example: Tether Incident.
The tether is very thin and 80 km away when "The Smoking Gun" claims mile-wide fluffy discs with notches are passing behind the tether.
Any scientist could show you that the tether is too thin to have a shadow projected as one or more pixel on the camera image, that the tether shadow
is more likely a CCD saturation artefact, and that the discs are out of focus point sources artefacting the camera aperature.
So because we focus on the weak arguments, JimO, for example, gets to spend 50 pages proving that people are irrational, chosing an improbable
explanation over a probable one. Any scientist who comes here will see 50 pages of people failing to undertand basics of CCDs and cameras.
They will never know that the objects float around the length of the tether in an oblong pattern that can't be explained by simple sources, and look
like they must be 80 km away interacting with the tether.
The community kicks itself in the arse and buries the good arguments all by itself.
No professional disinformation is required. The public provides it for itself.
So rather than make these same mistakes over again, with the loose thinkers providing the community with all of the disinfo debunkers will ever need,
could we please rationally, carefully, assess the results and not jump to conclusions?
That's all I ask. Well thought out arguments of any type and hypothesis are welcome. And time will tell what holds up or not. Not how many times
someone spams it on the ATS boards.
I'm looking forward to careful analysis of the new events by the UFO community. Lets not let the NASA folks just shrug and tell us to go away.
[edit on 21-9-2006 by Ectoterrestrial]