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
If you have another explanation then present it but to try and lump all these things together to try and belittle the evidence for things within ufology is illogical.
Again, there is a set of facts to build a hypothesis on. You are just debating against a point that was never made.
Originally posted by MarrsAttax
Also, it may be that we can circumvent this problem. I have a new theory called the NETH - the No Extra Terrestrial Hypothesis. This is most definitely falsifiable. I have already cited evidence in my previous posts that supports the view that the theory is false
[edit on 20/3/2009 by MarrsAttax]
Originally posted by Heike
A scientific theory explains something that happens all the time, over and over again, repeatedly and predictably. None of that is true about UFOs/ETs!
Originally posted by platosallegory
Again, you keep trying to debate a point that was never made.
Nobody compared the E.T. Hypothesis to gravity.
It would be silly and illogical of me, based on this set of data, to exclude the E.T. hypothesis as the most likely explanation for these things.
You said that ET theories have as much or more evidence going for them as theories about dark matter and parallel universes and so forth. I was using the theory of gravity to point out to you why they are not the same thing and are not directly comparable. Apples and oranges.
The ET theory does not explain a set of observed data that can be reproduced at will such as an object falling due to gravity. You can't conduct an experiment on a UFO - because you don't have one. You can't analyze an EBE to see where it is from - because you don't have one. Thus the repeated request for PHYSICAL evidence. Only when we have something physical to test and analyze can we have a valid scientific theory of its origin.
No. It would be silly and illogical to exclude the ET hypothesis. It is not silly or illogical to conclude that an Earth based civilization living in our deepest oceans is just as likely - more likely since we eliminate the travel distance problem. It is not silly or illogical to consider that some animal species sort of like a jellyfish lives in our atmosphere and is seldom seen due to excellent camouflage. This would explain the many sightings of "morphing" and appearing/disappearing UFOs.
There's alot of evidence to look at that supports extra-terrestials or extra-dimensional beings.
So when you try to equate some fairy with the evidence that supports extra-terrestrials or extra-dimensional beings it's just being intellectually dishonest
I never said it was proven when it comes to extra-dimensional or extra-terrestrial beings. I said it was the most likely answer within reason.
There's a set of facts to support the E.T. hypothesis.
There's eyewitness accounts from police, pilots, military and more. Video's, pictures, abduction cases, trace evidence, radar and more.
I said when I weigh these things within reason the E.T. hypothesis is the most likely explanation for these things.