Esoterica,
Thank you for the focused reply.
No, but way too many people here present their 'theory' as fact. If you disagree with them, the disinformation agents have obviously gotten to you.
Gets annoying.
I personally welcome all points of view. I think diverse viewpoints are the rewarding nature of belonging to a discussion-based community. While I
think it is plausible that some members of ATS are government employees, this would not necessarily invalidate their opinions (even if their task was
to spread propaganda). Propaganda/disinformation can even be comforting to some types of people.
I've asked this before and I will continue to ask the question: What will it take to show sufficient evidence that this call is true or
false?
And people (at least myself) have answered you, it just doesn't seem to have any effect
What effect do you expect to see? Hopefully my reply in this message will shed some insights.
quote: I understand that ATS' motto is "deny ignorance", and lately anything that can't be proven 100% is being debunked. However, a
theory does not necessarily represent ignorance. A theory represents available information in the absence of both truth as well as ignorance.
Thing is, most theories here have NO evidence behind them. Heresay at best, ramblings as usual.
As I understand your point, you're attempting to prevent against a theory that produces a false positive? Certainly acceptable within the empirical
approach. In many different fields of study, the only evidence that many theories have behind them are the observations (of certain phenomena) that
provoke the development of such a theory to begin forming. In any empirical method the validity of these observations
should be questioned
(obviously). A false positive can be devastating. Such is the reason for replication of results, for example.
My viewpoint is that theories are essential because they generate ideas/hypotheses that can guide further research- which can illuminate (or discolor)
the phenomenon in question. If we prematurely "close the book" on the development of a theory due to non-credible evidence (or ramblings, or
heresay), then we *may* have committed a similar type of error: a false negative (saying something is false when in reality it is true).
I'm going to break it to you as painlessly as possible- There is no, and I repeat, NO, verifiable or testable evidence that ET's have
contacted Earth. That's the problem. You can only go so far on faith, which is what the belief in ET's is. Not saying it's a bad thing, but it's
the truth.
I agree with the above statement, given the available evidence that we have examined on this discussion forum. Its not a bad thing- it is the most
accurate representation of reality. We just don't have the means to verify anything.
quote: If we wish to ever get beyond the "its true" vs. "its bogus" discussions, then at some point we will have to agree that it is often
impossible to unconditionally deny or accept anything that comes from another person's experiences. Ultimately, we are not going to prove squat about
this call, so why not work together to contribute theoretical implications?
MK
I personally don't want to becasue msot people around here are extremely gullible. The sort of person who turns on "Unexplained Mysteries" and take
it as gospel truth. Anything wee say will seep into their midns and eventually become UFO lore "Fact". And I really do want to get to the facts of
the matter, so I don't want to contribute to it's clouding.
I respect your position and agree with your assessment of the high frequency of gullibility/suggestibility. An empirical collection of verifiable
facts will ultimately lead to a more refined theory that has a strong foundation. My approach is a bit different, as I have experienced rare
instances/anomalies (in science) where theoretical discussions lead to a discovery of facts that can then be verified through further empirical
inquiry. Ultimately we may both arrive at similar conclusions, even though we take distinctly different paths.
Now- do you think the man on Art Bell's radio show claiming to be a former employee of Area 51 is a complete lunatic? What is your opinion?
Kind regards,
MK