reply to post by InfaRedMan
however to spare us pages and pages of circular arguments that never really bring us closer to any one truth, what can we do? How do we
proceed?
Do we accept the argument that carries the higher probability of being true, or can we use a tool such as occams razor? Do we just leave it as a gray
area and prevent those from either side making proclamations?
Hey
InfaRedMan! Good to see you my friend.
I think we must take a
multi-faceted approach in this area, as we do with mechanical UFO cases. At this point all we can do is investigate the
cases based on what little evidence is available. We will always be able to come to probabilities based upon what cases appear to be
more
likely true to those that appear to be
least likely true (this is of course of the cases that have not been proven to be a hoax or
something mundane). Occam's Razor is a good tool to use but can get paradoxical at times, so it must be used with consideration.
Right now there is not enough evidence to make any "proclamations" in my opinion. There is quite a few cases that do appear to point towards ET
abduction, etc. But there is just not enough evidence to be sure, so thus
logic and probability must be used. But we must be careful
with that, some like to make these proclamations based upon that formula, but that is erroneous and can't happen.
So while it does
appear that indeed some cases are ET related, according to the witnesses, peripheral evidence, observations, and logic, we
also must stay open to any and all other likely possibilities (even if it is 80% in favor of ETs, there is still that 20% that could disprove
that).
In my opinion the only thing we can do is present these cases to the public (to make more people aware and interested in this science), investigate
them, and use them as reference for the big picture, which is to find out "what or who is behind the whole UFO phenomena". So to summarize what I
just said (cause I know I tend to ramble on at times, lol), I think when stating such cases we can only say "based on the most likely probability",
anything else is erroneous and misleading.
This also goes for those who are MUCH more "empirical minded" (which is a quickly vanishing ideology as we are now finding out some things, due to
our lack of understanding and/or technology may elude any empirical proof for sometime or may NEVER have such a strict presentation), some are quick
to to use the "probability and logic argument"
in their favor, but fail to utilize it when it may go against their argument or ideology.
We are still unfortunately in the early stages of ufology, basically due to the lack of solid evidence and lack of interest. So yes, we must keep (for
now) within the dreaded "grey area" of probability and assumptions. This is unfortunate since humans like definites, we are not to fond of
"maybes" or 'likely".