Originally posted by harryhaller
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaulr
A "fail" is to insist that they do work without evidence to back up your claim. Persisting in such a claim when the continual lack of evidence it is
pointed out, reduces the claim to drivel (IMO of course )
I'm sorry i cannot accept that. Go back to the origional OP, that's a very well presented summary of "evidence", much of the follow up comments
include various anecdotal and other evidence to support the initial ideas.
By simply sitting here and claiming that there is no evidence is woefully inaccurate. Similarly sitting here and expecting evidence to be presented
for your pleasure is also unacceptable.
My apologies - after having similar discussions about many theories, I tend to use shorthand.
Clearly there is evidence - merely saying that something exists is evidence.
The question is how good is the evidence, so when I say "evidence" I am invariably meaning "credible evidence" - clearly there is no way you would
know that as we have not had this conversation before.
So please allow me to restate - if cloudbusters were effective there would be credible evidence - repeatable, quantifiable, and objective.
But all there is is anecdotal, undocumented, unmeasureable and unrepeatable assertions.
Obviously your standards differ - but for me someone saying "it works" is not sufficient evidence for me to believe it is real in a world full of
charlatans, misconceptions, errors, and all sorts of deceptions - both deliberate and otherwise.
I am not prepared to accept the existence or orgone, or the effectiveness of cloudbusters on faith alone.
so if you come to me and say "it is real, it exists" I am goign to ask you for your evidence, and when you can only provide the sort of evidence that
you do I am going to say it is not enough, and here's why it is not enough and in fact here's evidence that it is actually false.
And when you reject to good evidence that you proposal is false in favour of bad evidence that it is true, I am going to clonclude that you are
talking about drivel - whethe it be cloud busters, chemtrails, reptiloids or anythign else - rejection of real evidence in favour of faith-based
belief is what characterises drivel for me.
edit on 14-7-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)