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.

 

For the Skeptics who say "where's your evidence?"

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 05:32 PM
link   
It's no different than the existance of God debate (hmmmm wonder if theres some correlation). Though I think there may be more physical evidence for aliens.
Some belive, some don't but the general populace is probably open to the possability though they may think you are a little "off".




posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by DARREN1976
 


Your quite right. There's no reason to require proof of anything. I know this since I am Overlord of Earth appointed by his majesty Borkor the Third Emperor of the Neo Galactic Cluster Federation.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
"Absence of Proof is not Proof of Absence."

Absence is proof of absence. Absence of evidence is proof that you don't have any evidence. Care to count the number of posts that claim "proof" of one thing or another on this board?


Quite so. Absence of proof isn't proof of anything. It's like Stanton Friedman getting up at a UFO convention and waving his papers around with all the blacked out areas on them. He'll lead you to believe that the blacked out areas are proof of the government hiding information about UFOs. But really, they're just blacked out areas that could have been about anything.

All I can suggest is that considering the huge amount of evidence, along with the continuous, curious lack of good proof might be a piece of evidence, itself. Of what, however, I have no idea. Proof of the incredible 100 percent success rate the government - and by that I mean every government on Earth - has in keeping the "truth" about UFOs a secret? That's something else to be proven.

Otherwise, I don't know. Just don't know nuthin'.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 05:49 PM
link   
This has already been discussed in about 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 threads. The same result happens every time. Can we get passed these skeptic v. believer threads please.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
Can we get passed these skeptic v. believer threads please.


I'm willing to contribute to these threads as long as there's a possibility that the little light bulb will go on in the head of just one more person out there, and they'll see where they're making assumptions and filling in gaps with faith or belief where good evidence doesn't exist.

I'd like them to see that it's not so much about being "skeptical," but more about logical and critical thinking. It's a hard thing to get across -- that it's possible to still be hopeful that something extraordinary might be discovered while still looking as cold and truthfully as possible at the available evidence, and recognizing both its real strengths and its undeniable weaknesses.


[edit on 27-4-2009 by Nohup]



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by DARREN1976
Imagine two people, A and B, getting into an argument, which is witnessed by several people. A goes home, gets his gun. He drives to the home of B, where B's neighbours see him arrive. They hear a gun shot, see A put something, the size of a man, in the boot of his car and drive off. Other witnesses see A throw something, the size of a man, in the river, along with his gun.


Well in this case you also need to add that there is no proof that there is even two people much less a murder. No Gun, No house, no neighbours, no gun shots, no car, no object the size of a man etc....nothing

Well at least this matches the evidence we have for aliens.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
The best evidence we have is in the form of declassified govt documents.
I wonder if people who claim there is zero evidence have done any research outside of the internet ? Try reading a book for a change ?



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Schaden
The best evidence we have is in the form of declassified govt documents.
I wonder if people who claim there is zero evidence have done any research outside of the internet ? Try reading a book for a change ?


Just for fun, what declassified govt documents do you think have "the best evidence"? I've seen a bit of that "evidence" and it's mostly shadow boxing.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
I've seen a bit of that "evidence" and it's mostly shadow boxing.


Do you make a distinction between "evidence" and "proof" ?

Cause you're not going to find any declassified photos of aliens or flying saucers.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


"Absence of Proof is not Proof of Absence."

Absence is proof of absence. Absence of evidence is proof that you don't have any evidence. Care to count the number of posts that claim "proof" of one thing or another on this board?


Apparently you didn't bother to read my post. I need not prove anything since I made no claims. Clearly stated my opinion.

By the way......Are you loved? Prove it.

Regards...KK



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinda kurious
Apparently you didn't bother to read my post. I need not prove anything since I made no claims. Clearly stated my opinion.

By the way......Are you loved? Prove it.

Regards...KK


You're not the only person reading these posts. Just thought I'd point that out.

As for being loved. I can prove I have been loved. Two guys gave their lives for me. If that isn't proof I don't what would satisfy you.

[edit on 27-4-2009 by Gawdzilla]



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
This has already been discussed in about 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 threads. The same result happens every time. Can we get passed these skeptic v. believer threads please.


Dude you've been on board for less than 5 months and so now you're an expert. Hilarious. I suggest you read on or if this thread doesn't suit you move on. How many new topics can exist? There is no such thing as a stupid question. The OP made a compelling argument, why must you bash him? I suggest you check back in when you return from your ego trip.

KK




[edit on 27-4-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


And we are to believe you because you say so? Pot calls kettle black.

KK



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinda kurious
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


And we are to believe you because you say so? Pot calls kettle black.

KK

I can "dig up" a few witnesses if you wish. Otherwise, sorry about that. You asked. Nothing I said would have produced a different response from you, would it.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla

Originally posted by kinda kurious
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


And we are to believe you because you say so? Pot calls kettle black.

KK

I can "dig up" a few witnesses if you wish. Otherwise, sorry about that. You asked. Nothing I said would have produced a different response from you, would it.


Oh witnesses. That could vouch that two guys purportedly gave their life because they loved you? How would a witness know that?

And why aren't witnesses to UFO's good enough? You seem to infer "witnesses" will support your claim without any "proof" yet hold those who believe in Aliens / UFO's to a higher standard. Like any good skeptic I suppose.

Thanks for illustrating my point. One can believe something to be true despite "proof."

KK




[edit on 27-4-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinda kurious
Oh witnesses. That could vouch that two guys purportedly gave their life because they loved you? How would a witness know that?

And why aren't witnesses to UFO's good enough? You seem to infer "witnesses" will support your claim without any "proof" yet hold those who believe to a higher standard. Like any good skeptic I suppose.

Thanks for illustrating my point. One can believe something to be true despite "proof."

KK




You don't have to accept my proof. I certainly don't accept eyewitnesses for UFOs.

As for my case, the guys in question both got killed hauling me out of a poo-poo storm. They didn't have to do that. They both got nice medals, their Mom's got a flag.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


That is truly heart-warming and I sincerely commend the bravery of your comrades.

However back to this topic / thread:

I don't require proof to believe that Higher Life Forms exist. Skeptics seem to demand "proof" but not provide any for their own beliefs.

Since you are admittedly a skeptic. It must be safe to assume you:

1. Don't believe in GOD / Religion.
2. Don't believe in Ghosts / Afterlife.
3. Don't believe Man walked on the Moon.

If I'm wrong, I kindly request you supply proof.

Regards...KK



[edit on 27-4-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


"3. Don't believe Man walked on the Moon. "

Have you devolved into silliness or just take leave of reality? Shall I also prove Hong Kong exists? How about Mt. Everest.

I'll see if you're making more sense in the morning.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


It's called logic my friend. I am dead serious. Many skeptics believe that Man did NOT Walk on the Moon. What is the "proof?" NASA? B/W TV Images? Moon Rocks?

You seem to offer convenient opinion and nothing more. I would think even a Junior-Skeptic would be leery of the plausibility of the Moon landings.

KK

[edit on 27-4-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 10:45 PM
link   
So can I assume in this example murder is the metaphor for Aliens?

So we have witnesses (believers) out there who say there was a murder (a UFO).

They bring this story before the courts (ATS). The court (ATS) says lets hear your case (story). The defense (sceptics) says prove there was a murder (ufo).

The burden has just been put on the prosecution/witnesses (believers) to prove there was a murder. As in any case, the more witnesses there are and the more credible they are, the greater chance of proving there was a murder. Add other evidence ie. pics or vids and the case becomes even greater.

All the defense has to do at this point is refute what ever evidence is provided. If done well, then it will leave reasonable doubt in the eyes of the court. However if done poorly, then no reasonable doubt has been attained.

So with reasonable doubt the UFO/murder becomes unproven in the eyes of the court/ATS

And then we can assume without reasonable doubt the UFO/murder becomes proven

But that is not what happens here. Everything is tagged with reasonable doubt in the eyes of the defense, so no UFO/murder can be classified as proven by the court/ATS



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join