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.
Originally posted by platosallegory
The answer is, you don't have to have physical evidence of something to weigh it within reason.
Why isn't dark matter/energy labled supernatural. What about extra dimensions, parallel universes and the universe as a quantum computer. All things that some have accepted without it being proven.
You don't need extraordinary evidence just evidence.
I should be able to look into ufology and the paranormal the same way I study extra dimensions or parallel universes and the skeptics doesn't require extraordinary evidence for those things.
elves, hellhounds, goblins, trolls, lake monsters, Bigfoot, Mothman, the Dover Demon, flying witches, pterodactyls, thunderbirds, ghosts, vampires, werewolves, demons, the Jersey Devil
Originally posted by MarrsAttax
reply to post by Heike
elves, hellhounds, goblins, trolls, lake monsters, Bigfoot, Mothman, the Dover Demon, flying witches, pterodactyls, thunderbirds, ghosts, vampires, werewolves, demons, the Jersey Devil
None of these things have been captured on radar at the same time as being witnessed on the ground.
None of these things have been reported as being engaged by military aircraft and officially documented in government files.
None of these things have been seen simultaneously from multiple viewpoints by trained observers.
None of these things have sustained a barrage of artillery fire for an hour over a major city.
None of these things have caused medically documented deleterious effects on the people who witnessed them.
The evidence for the UFO phenomenon puts it in a different class from all these things.
Name one "thing" that collectively humanity has accepted the existence of based on witness testimony and pictures.
People see elves, hellhounds, goblins, trolls, lake monsters, Bigfoot, Mothman, the Dover Demon, flying witches, pterodactyls, thunderbirds, ghosts, vampires, werewolves, demons, the Jersey Devil, and UFOs and "aliens." These other phenomena are very similar to the phenomenon of UFOs/ETs and these are what it must be compared to, not to theories which evolved from scientific experiments and research.
We always weigh the credibility of the witness.
Originally posted by Heike
Furthermore, you are still comparing apples to oranges.
Okay. Name one thing that was accepted as being real before there was physical evidence. Not scientific theories or hypotheses, those are something entirely different.
Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Phage
The extraterrestrial hypothesis is no different. It is not falsifiable. It does require extraordinary evidence to be proven.
Huh? Extra dimensions and dark matter are things we would never be able to touch, were as an extraterrestrial we would if they do exist and are here. Well, they were to reveal themselves and allow us to touch them.
Apples and oranges my friends apples and oranges.
Originally posted by Malcram
Originally posted by Heike
Furthermore, you are still comparing apples to oranges.
Hi Heike.
With all due respect, I think it is you who is "comparing apples to oranges", in that your attempt to liken the ET/UFO phenomenon to the things on your list pretty much completely unravels as soon as the the quality and range of evidence for both is compared as well as by considering the very nature of the phenomenon itself.
And why did you set the parameters at the beginning of you last post in this way:
Okay. Name one thing that was accepted as being real before there was physical evidence. Not scientific theories or hypotheses, those are something entirely different.
First of all, there is physical evidence. However, there is no reason why there can't be a "scientific theory or hypothesis" that there at ET's visiting earth and accounting, in many cases, for the UFO phenomena, is there? Further, there is no reason why this could not become accepted as "true" even without physical evidence, just as many other theories become accepted "fact". Why rule out that scenario when asking the question?
Originally posted by Phage
A falsifiable hypothesis one which can be proven false. The extraterrestrial hypothesis is not falsifiable. It cannot be proven that extraterrestrials do not exist. Conversely, the only way to prove they do is by "touching" one or by means of similarly extraordinary evidence.
Originally posted by Malcram
1)
A falsifiable hypothesis one which can be proven false. The extraterrestrial hypothesis is not falsifiable. It cannot be proven that extraterrestrials do not exist. Conversely, the only way to prove they do is by "touching" one or by means of similarly extraordinary evidence.
2)
How would touching and ET provide "proof" of ET's? How do you know it's not a human mutant? How do you know it's not an advanced robot? How do you know it wasn't an hallucination? Touch proves nothing. And say I did touch one and it really was an ET, what use is that "proof"? No one would believe me.
[edit on 20-3-2009 by Malcram]
Originally posted by Malcram
However, there is no reason why there can't be a "scientific theory or hypothesis" that there at ET's visiting earth and accounting, in many cases, for the UFO phenomena, is there?
Originally posted by platosallegory
So bigfoot, ufology, the paranormal, all eyewitness accounts, all pictures, all video, fairies, goblins, the easter bunny, santa, elves, the great pumpkin are all lumped together.
We can't weigh these things within reason. Ufology has the same evidence as the great pumpkin according to them.
It's truly illogical.
Originally posted by Heike
How can you not see that all you are doing now is insulting the witnesses of other phenomena just as you claim the "bogus skeptics" are doing to you?
By insulting every other "fringe" science except the one you ascribe to, you make your own mindset and closed mindedness painfully obvious.
[edit on 20-3-2009 by Heike]
Originally posted by Heike
Originally posted by Malcram
However, there is no reason why there can't be a "scientific theory or hypothesis" that there at ET's visiting earth and accounting, in many cases, for the UFO phenomena, is there?
No, it's not the same thing...
What set of consistent, observed facts does an "ET theory" explain? What experiment can you do that requires the presence of an alien spacecraft or an alien to make sense? What results or data can you produce to support this theory and remember, they must be data that are reproducible by anyone given the same circumstances.
If you are proposing an "ET theory," what experiments can we do to get measurable results which support your theory?