Why MUST we believe? Is it threatening to NOT believe in alien visitation?

reply to post by OldDragger

Nonsense? really? Your response was more than rude it was hostile.
Yes I do know. I won't apologize for that. It certainly was not something I chose.
Ask any of us that have had unpleasant experiences and you will find that you are misguided in your hostility.
I have seen you state furthermore that no evidence exists that is just pure ignorance of the topic you are discussing. There are numerous ancient artifacts as well as documented sightings in the distant past that prove you are incorrect. Unless you consider Christopher Colombus to be an unreliable source or how about Alexander the great? Both have documented UFO sightings. You argue this as if you want to be convinced and then in the same breath you chastise any who rise to the occasion. Should I not state the evidence for fear of fulfilling your original accusations? Should I leave your further claims unanswered? It is a catch 22.
If I didn't know better I would think this thread was a deliberate attempt at trolling the UFO forum, but that is not your intention right?

Originally posted by NephraTari
First of all, not all people who know the truth can be called believers. Believing is something that is done without evidence. Knowing is entirely different and you are sweeping Knowers in with believers and labeling them all the same.

Based on those categories, I'd have to add another one: People who think they know, but don't. An example would be people who "know" how to tell which crop circles are manmade and which aren't.

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by Acidtastic

 

I certainly hope the alien fans have better reading comprehensionin reading "alien' accounts then they have shown in understanding my posts!

I WAS interested for 40 years, I finally came to the conclusion that it all amounted to..nothing!

I wouldn't say it amounts to nothing. There is a lot of evidence, it's just not very conclusive and you hve lots of company of ex-believers who looked at the evidence and found it lacking in proof, but it's still evidence. Just like the glove in the OJ trial was evidence, it's all in how you interpret it. It either shows it wasn't his and proved his innocence, or he put on a good show making it look like it didn't fit in which case maybe he wasn't innocent. Same evidence, two different interpretations. But it doesn't prove anything.

I don't think it's reading comprehension issues, but confirmation bias that believers in paranormal phenomena have:

Confirmation bias

One study showed how selective memory can maintain belief in extrasensory perception (ESP).[29] Believers and disbelievers were each shown descriptions of ESP experiments. Half of each group were told that the experimental results supported the existence of ESP, while the others were told they did not. In a subsequent test, subjects recalled the material accurately, apart from believers who had read the non-supportive evidence. This group remembered significantly less information and some of them incorrectly remembered the results as supporting ESP.

-from Russell, Dan; Warren H. Jones (1980), "When superstition fails: Reactions to disconfirmation of paranormal beliefs", Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (Society for Personality and Social Psychology)

reply to post by OldDragger


I would say that your standards are too high, lower them and voilà

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/71ac5b6dc863.jpg[/atsimg]

This thread is no different than the ones ranting about the supposed evils of skeptics. They are arguments not about facts or evidence but personal belief. They serve no purpose nor provide us with any deeper understanding of the phenomenon.

If you want to live in a make-believe dream world denying reality that is certainly your choice.

It would be interesting to know how much effort and time you have put into the research and exploration of these matters, what information in the topic you have viewed/read, why you did not find the information convincing and what you would require to convince you.