posted on Feb, 3 2010 @ 02:45 PM
Things without proof and therefore not real:
Most of quantum physics,
Dimensions beyond our own,
Cryptozoological anomolies (bigfoot, nessie, etc),
**object flight (proved possible and then true)
**Space travel (proved possible then true)
**Landing on the moon (...)
etc etc etc.
the subjects listed have tons of leads, many whom are experts on the subject both for and against these theories, some interesting "evidence" based
on effects of some aspects, some nutty followers also, etc.
Does this mean that because these subjects and plenty more have yet to truely be panned out and the smoking gun evidence be presented that therefore
none are real? no..some may be more likely than others, but for now, we simply go with what logically sounds about right.
Dismissing any/all of these as nonsense and anyone whom believes in them are delusional is stating a religious statement moreso than any factual based
statement. I may believe the universe is billions of years old based on a number of factors...but I also admit that there is no actual evidence beyond
some observations and interpretations of people I deem more credible than those whom suggest a few thousand year old universe. Doesn't mean that I am
right, just what I am inclined to believe to begin with based on speculative circumstantial evidence.
Who am I also to dismiss the testimony of many...many decorated military veterans, political figures, scientists, top agency employees, etc and their
word that ETs exist. I will trust that moreso than the blanket statement by...(who does actually say blanket statements anymore anyhow) that ETs dont
exist and dont come here to earth.
not saying its true, simply saying I am inclined to believe that overall. I could be wrong of course, and certainly not demanding my belief is the
truth...but like how I believe in a ancient universe, I find it to be a reasonable belief based in some solid leads