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.

 

Why oh why do some many on ATS fight against logical explanation?

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 02:19 AM
link   
We all have the same questions, but what differentiates us even more than which answers we choose to accept is how we respond to the difficulty of answering them. It's inherent in our humanity to have control, and control requires knowledge - knowledge of what we are, where we came from, what happens when we die, do others exist beyond our planet, etc. We all desire control and consciously or subconsciously ask these questions.

Some focus exclusively on rejecting possible answers, the "debunkers." They're the ones who know a great deal about what they don't believe and nothing of what they do believe. Their approach gives them a sense of control because they are subconsciously diminishing the importance of answering the questions.

Others cling wholeheartedly to an ideology even though they can't make a clear case for what they believe. They reject any questioning or criticism of their position. To accept and consider criticism would shake their sense of control.

Lastly, there are those who acknowledge the importance of these questions, are willing to listen to and consider the case presented for any possible answer, and most importantly, are never afraid to question whether what they already believe is actually true or not.

If our own history on this planet is any guide, it's the latter who end up finding the answers.




posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpringHeeledJack

Originally posted by Observer99
- because of full-time debunkers who are just as averse to reason and objectivity


Come again?

That's like saying "Because of these Indigo Children who don't venture into the supernatural with delusional fantasies."

Seriously, can you explain that?


Yeah, I can explain it.

"Why do people on ATS fight against 'logical explanation'"?

Because a lot of the time they are not fighting actual logic, but habitual debunkers. Those who refuse to listen to evidence are not logical in any way. Clinging to the "safe, everyday" explanation is just as biased and illogical as someone's flight of fancy.



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhatAliens
We all get that some people so desperately want to believe that they'll believe anything. For the most part (I'm guessing) they are the younger members.

We also get why some christians refuse to except anything not in the bible (I don't want a religious debate here, but we already know why. 6000 years and such - which is fine).

But why, for the most part, is common sense thrown totaly out of the window when it comes to "UFOs"? When a perfectly ordinary explanation is given, why not just except it? I have no viewpoint here - it's just a simple question.

By this I mean why isn't roswell excepted as is? What about rendlesham forest? The Pheonic lights? JAL?

Do those that believe in these have reasons to? Or are they just desperate to prove the most unlikely scenarios?

Again - just a question...

These aren't double sided questions, but just questions.

You mean everyone should believe whatever is the explanation of the government? If we believe the government, everything is just a weather balloon (with some variations of swamp gas and lens flares). What is your explanation for the "Battle of LA" that happened in the 1940's? The government said those are just weather balloons. Do you believe that?



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 03:49 AM
link   
I give up asking the questions or trying to become knowledgeable on most of the world matters 'cause it's usually just a bunch of pointless battles between a bunch of autistic dudes, ones which think their opinion matters.

Seriously, this site and almost ever other site where peope get to express their opinion is just filled with a bunch of aspie victims.



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 04:00 AM
link   
TPTB, as a lot of us have realised, have steadily introduced a "belief" into these last two generations. The belief in "aliens visiting us", "we came from aliens" "New Age" was, and is, a deception upon mankind. How easy is it to do?
1. Spend trillions in advanced aircraft and hide it.
2. Fly them around, yet deny it.
3. Place prophets out there "aliens are bad" "aliens are good"
4. Place testimonies out there "they exist" "fallen angels were ET"
5. Promote films, books, media about the subject.
6. Bash religious texts as phoney beloney. Belief in God? Somethings wrong with you. How can "myths" be right?
7. Create super "fundamentalists" who preach, preach, preach the gospels of UFOs.

Hey, I've just now relegated the belief in God, the Creater of all life, to the back burner - and substituted another belief system. Just as a person of faith knows that God exists, so do many UFO enthusiasts have faith in their aliens.

It was that easy. A "group" didn't want society simply to believe in UFO/alien life visiting this planet for no reason, now did they?



I



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by WhatAliens
 


Former Canadian Defence Minister Paul Hellyer openly talks about how Canada has contacted alien life and that USA is hiding it.

www.youtube.com...

Paul Hellyer is a Canadian engineer, politician, writer and commentator who has had a long and varied career. He is the longest serving current member of the Privy Council, just ahead of Prince Philip.

What is the logical explanation that a respected Defence Minister would believe he has personally contacted aliens while working as the Canadian Defence Minister?



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 06:14 AM
link   
reply to post by WhatAliens
 




It's about entertainment mostly. How boring would life be without any promise of scary plots about to hatch in your face? What a major drag, like Pleasantville (the moovie), it would be to have nothing at all to obsess over. Let us have our moment will you for crying out loud....

Oops... I gotta go. The voices are angry again.
edit on 2-8-2011 by trailertrash because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhatAliens
We also get why some christians refuse to except anything not in the bible (I don't want a religious debate here, but we already know why. 6000 years and such - which is fine).


Do you mean that you think that Christians don't believe in ETs because it's "not in the Bible"? The absence of information about something does not mean that it doesn't exist. IE, the Bible is silent on the matter of ETs. It doesn't say that they exist and it doesn't say they don't exist. It's also silent on the matter of giraffes, nowhere in the Bible is a giraffe mentioned. Can we therefore conclude that giraffes don't exist?
There was a recent thread in which someone asked why atheists believe in ETs but not God (since believing in ETs basically requires faith without obvious evidence similar to a belief in God) and surprisingly most of the atheists replied that they DON'T believe in ETs. There's probably a higher percentage of Christians that believe in ETs than atheists.


Originally posted by WhatAliens
But why, for the most part, is common sense thrown totaly out of the window when it comes to "UFOs"? When a perfectly ordinary explanation is given, why not just except it? I have no viewpoint here - it's just a simple question.


The answer should be obvious, it's because people WANT to believe in ETs and most are willing to dismiss logic in the interest of clinging to that hope that ETs are real. I can sympathize to an extent, I too want to believe we're not alone and that there is a great mystery in this world waiting to be solved. But I'm also a skeptic at heart and I want REAL proof, not shaky videos of blurry lights in the sky and anecdotal stories of uncle Bob's abduction.



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhatAliens
reply to post by Forevever
 


My own feelings suggest that there is no god, but a chance of aliens.

I thank you for your straight forward reply!


@Why oh why do some many on ATS fight against logical explanation?

[color=cyan] Because the above statements is not logical to some. How can there be Et/ aliens and nothing to CREATE THEM??? This is not logic to 1.


Be well



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Many people can only view the 'unknown' with their own imaginations. It's not suprising that their monsters and aliens and God(s)...etc, are mostly man-like and possess human attributes.. the rest is usually always modeled after something in the plant/animal kingdom. Death is a good example. The thought of your death not having meaning (and thus life having no real meaning beyond survival and reproduction) is so frightening to many people that they imagine 'afterlives', where you walk around golden streets of 'heaven' and everyone is happy, or you're rewarded your virgins, or you even keep all the power and toys you collected in life to possess in the afterlife (after all... it's a horrifying thought to think that all the work you put into collecting that junk might be meaningless, huh?)... and etc. Of course, this is all just my opinion. It reminds me of a verse from a favorite band of mine:

"If I could catch a glimpse of the grand design,
I'd see the truth and be repelled..."



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   
The average IQ is 100, and small minds are great with logic.

Still, many do believe what they see - perhaps they see it wrong OR perhaps they are right. Logic might tell you not to believe in God, but if you saw a miracle happen, you might have a different take on the matter. Logic might tell you not to believe in UFO's, but if an alien stepped out of your closet, well...



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13

Originally posted by WhatAliens
reply to post by Forevever
 


My own feelings suggest that there is no god, but a chance of aliens.

I thank you for your straight forward reply!


@Why oh why do some many on ATS fight against logical explanation?

[color=cyan] Because the above statements is not logical to some. How can there be Et/ aliens and nothing to CREATE THEM??? This is not logic to 1.


Be well


How can there be a God with nothing to create it?



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by humphreysjim
 


I knew this was comming. I guess you gotta have FAITH my friend.



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13
reply to post by humphreysjim
 


I knew this was comming. I guess you gotta have FAITH my friend.


Okay!

I put my faith in..........this teacup on my desk. What do I win??



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zeer0
People fight because not everything is Chinese Lanterns and CGI. And all these 'Debunkers' claim every sighting can explained by those means and its not a good way to think.


I respectfully disagree. Admittedly, about eight or nine out of ten pieces of "evidence" I disagree with, as there is generally a much more logical explanation. I feel that makes the one or two that I can't explain all the more interesting. Its an unfair generalization to say that all debunkers claim that EVERYTHING can be explained. For the most part, a lot of sightings can be explained as natural or man made occurrences. Some of them however, cannot. It's those sightings that warrant much closer investigation. It is the attitude of the people who consider every light in the sky to be an extraterrestrial that defeats any attempt for rational discussion of the phenomenon much more so than those who will debunk most of them.

Just my two cents...



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by humphreysjim
 


Freedom in Eternity
with MEMORY all your memory.



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 11:07 AM
link   

By this I mean why isn't roswell excepted as is? What about rendlesham forest? The Pheonic lights? JAL?


What do you mean by "as is?" Do you mean the "official" explanation? So in the case of Roswell, which of the 5 official explanations are you going with? With the Phoenix Lights, I don't think anyone who has done minimum research, denies that the lights seen near Phoenix proper were military flares. How do you explain the sightings earlier and later in the same evening? Why did they drop flares in a V pattern for the first and last time in sight of Phoenix, the same night a huge triangle shaped craft was reported elsewhere? Just vast amazing cooincidence? So for JAL, you know for a fact that what the pilots saw that actually lit up the cockpit and created heat on their faces where what.. runway lights from 100+ miles away?

Why are you so accepting of the "official" explanations, even when they border on the ludicrous. They make more sense to you? So Tehran in 1976, you accept what.. the explanations that two fighter pilots were chasing Jupiter, that the radar control and a general on the ground (and civilian witnesses) were seeing things, and that all this cooincided with two aircraft failures at the same time? Why would you accept such a ridiculous and fanciful tale? Because it's easier to accept than something we can't explain perhaps?

The # of solid sightings has not really changed over the year. Just the sheer # of reports, due to the advent of cameras, video, etc. However, there are still very solid sightings that happen - such as in Texas. I suppose a rancher that saw a huge ship over his head was what.. attention seeking? Delusional?

Believe what you will... but in my opinion, it's just as bad to summarily accept "official" explanations because they happen to fit with your UFO mindset. Not very analytical. If you really WERE being logical, you wouldn't just blindly accept any explanation as long as it is safely mundane.



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhatAliens
But why, for the most part, is common sense thrown totaly out of the window when it comes to "UFOs"?


WhatAliens, it realy does work both ways mate - especialy when considering many 'official' UFO explanations:


USAF Force-Fit Debunks


Cheers.



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Let me give you an example: Roswell, explanations over time

1. Flying Discs

2. Weather Balloons

3. Project Mogul - which involved high altitude balloons meant to detect sound waves generated by Soviet atomic bomb tests and ballistic missiles

4. Recovered alien bodies - were likely a combination of innocently transformed memories of military accidents involving injured or killed personnel, innocently transformed memories of the recovery of anthropomorphic dummies in military programs like Project High Dive conducted in the 1950s

The "alien bodies" from a crash in July 1947 came from a project not started until the 1950's, this is FAR from logical, no?


How about the case in Rendlesham Forest, the first group actually walked up and physically touched the UFO. Then were told that they only saw the lighthouse reflecting through the trees, really?


Then there is Dr. J Allen Hynick, was a member of Project Blue, who debunked UFO sightings for the US government. In 1979 he gave an interview stating why debunking was the official government position.

www.youtube.com...

When an organization charged with investigating a particular subject fails to do just that and then proceeds to tell the public that what they saw was nothing more than swamp gas, Venus, a lantern, or car headlights; that organization tends to lose credibility. In this case that organization is the US Air Force.

The reason ATS fights "logical" explanations is the answers seem only to be logical if you want to accept the ridiculous.



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by bphi1908
Let me give you an example: Roswell, explanations over time

1. Flying Discs

2. Weather Balloons

3. Project Mogul - which involved high altitude balloons meant to detect sound waves generated by Soviet atomic bomb tests and ballistic missiles

4. Recovered alien bodies - were likely a combination of innocently transformed memories of military accidents involving injured or killed personnel, innocently transformed memories of the recovery of anthropomorphic dummies in military programs like Project High Dive conducted in the 1950s

The "alien bodies" from a crash in July 1947 came from a project not started until the 1950's, this is FAR from logical, no?


How about the case in Rendlesham Forest, the first group actually walked up and physically touched the UFO. Then were told that they only saw the lighthouse reflecting through the trees, really?


Then there is Dr. J Allen Hynick, was a member of Project Blue, who debunked UFO sightings for the US government. In 1979 he gave an interview stating why debunking was the official government position.

www.youtube.com...

When an organization charged with investigating a particular subject fails to do just that and then proceeds to tell the public that what they saw was nothing more than swamp gas, Venus, a lantern, or car headlights; that organization tends to lose credibility. In this case that organization is the US Air Force.

The reason ATS fights "logical" explanations is the answers seem only to be logical if you want to accept the ridiculous.



Jimmy Carter UFO - official explanation, the planet Venus, Phoenixs lights - official explanation, military flares (even though hundreds of witnesses reported a large black triangle), there's a hundred more cases with ridiculous explanations.



new topics




 
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join