I was a believer, now skeptic. Believers are wrong.

I fail to see how the op can make such a claim.. I cant think of the thread or the poster.. He had a link to a PD F of an eBook called unconventional flying objects.. I highly recommend the read..
pdfcast.org...
I believe this is the link to the book..

I'm not saying hes spot on.. He sure is thought provoking..

ZetaRediculian
reply to post by tanka418

 

Poker has everything to do with mathematical probability. If you don't understand that, you don't understand probability or basic math.

You speak as if mathematical probability is a sub-set of and explained by poker; which of course is not the case, and quite the opposite. Actually the probabilities that may occur in a deck of 52 cards is rather different than what I'm talking about; mathematically that is.

I employ Bayesian inference, a sort of easy way to maintain overall probabilities over a large sequential sampling.

bottleslingguy


how do you test the untestable? how do you detect things there are no detectors for? you will stay behind the curve as long as you support the "I won't believe it until I can kick it" mindset.

You know it is not there is not enough of evidence, it is that the evidence is totally nonexistent. What we are talking about here is basically faith that aliens are visiting our planet, and I'm not one to use faith as my "proof", so yes, you can't test what is not there.

The disappointing part is everything supports a socially engineered event more than anything else. When I look at the so called proof that is out there I see a lot of cracks in the armor so to speak. Just the idea that this whole alien concept started as an extremely simple idea with simple ships that were shaped for our era not theirs, and all of it has grown, once again, on our pace and linear to what we think they should be like. What we see is not alien at all but only a human creation, and that creation has evolved greatly these last 70 years or so.

As I said it is rather disappointing to say the least. One would think that after 7 billion are alive on our planet with 1/2 of them carrying a camera and close to instant communication with each and everyone one of us we would see an explosion of alien proof, but if anything it has diminish greatly, or just repeats with the same old stuff these last few decades.

Keylogger
I was a believer, now skeptic. Believers are wrong.

I am a skeptic, but telling believers they are "wrong" is just plain ignorant.

You "know" nothing, and your frustration in not finding truth has driven you to that ignorance and a brick wall opposition.

There is no PROOF either way regarding the existance of aliens, UFOs exist, that's a fact.

All the eyewitness accounts of UFO sightings must however be taken with a pinch of salt regardless of the source because we are human, and fallable.

Only personal experience counts for something but it is for the individual and should never be taken as truth by others. Possibility, but not truth.

alienreality
Other people with the same or better levels of aptitude to understand these things will read this and know instantly more about what I have said and in between the lines, than those who have a low aptitude. Yes, this does tend to piss-off those that don't appreciate there being people that are pretty much, a lot smarter than they are, and they will argue against every single thing I have said until they are red faced and spitting, much to the rest of our amusement.

I do agree it is more to do with experience than anything thing else. I have had zero experience even though I have followed many paths of so called proof over the years. I have close to 10,000 flight hours, much of it with the Air Force. I have been involved with a large number of missions over though years, flying everything from nukes to chemical/bio weapons around the world. I flew to area 51, Tonopah, Michael Army air field, Johnston Atoll, McMurdo station and many other sites around the world in over 75 countries. After 28 years of doing that I'm still involved with a lot of projects as a civilian contractor.

And so guess what? Nada, Nothing, Zilch..... It must be my low aptitude I guess...


I don't argue that aliens are not here, I just look at the evidence and ask why do you think it is aliens?

tanka418

I was talking about "starting points". The creation of Hypothesis; which is necessarily speculation, but, is wholly based on current knowledge / evidence.

I agree 100%, but we have been stuck in the speculation phase for the last 6000 years, so if believers understood and accepted that then we would all be on the same page.

Boy ... you sure came out swinging! Personally I feel your approach, opinion, logic and delivery sub-standard for a supposed intellect. We all believe in one thing or another at one time or another. The mathematical possibilities of intelligent life in the universe other than ourselves ( lol ) make it even more tantalizing to ones curiosity and believing in we may have been and / or are still being observed by an alien intelligence. I also feel that does not signify ones level of intelligence as this phenomenon has affected people of all walks of life from housewives to airline pilots to presidents.

tanka418

ZetaRediculian
reply to post by tanka418

 

Poker has everything to do with mathematical probability. If you don't understand that, you don't understand probability or basic math.

You speak as if mathematical probability is a sub-set of and explained by poker; which of course is not the case, and quite the opposite. Actually the probabilities that may occur in a deck of 52 cards is rather different than what I'm talking about; mathematically that is.

I employ Bayesian inference, a sort of easy way to maintain overall probabilities over a large sequential sampling.

again, if you cant get basic math, why would get something more complex? demonstrating the simple math behind a simple 52 deck of cards should be cake compared to the astronomical datasets you are "talking" about. You just want to "talk"...

here are three random links for you that took me less than 5 minutes to find with a quick google search. It is clear you have no idea what you are talking about.

Modeling Texas Hold'em Poker Strategies with
Bayesian Networks

Luck, Bayesian Inference, and Poker Skill

Bayesian Inferences and Developing Information-poker

reply to post by Phage

someone can be right for the wrong reasons ya know, doesn't matter as long as the answer is correct

nerbot


There is no PROOF either way regarding the existance of aliens, UFOs exist, that's a fact.

et voila!

www.starchildproject.com...

reply to post by HooHaa


The poster's name was Karl12. I bumped that thread recently in order to announce that a new edition of that book is out in June 2014.

Double post, sorry

ZetaRediculian
again, if you cant get basic math, why would get something more complex? demonstrating the simple math behind a simple 52 deck of cards should be cake compared to the astronomical datasets you are "talking" about. You just want to "talk"...

probability of 14 random star selection from K, G, and F class stars that match geometrical template: 2.05E-10
error in fish interpretation: 0.07
probability of earth like planets: 0.026

overall Bayesian probability: 0.941889

There are some 68,100,000,000 K, G, and F class stars to select from. virtually all of them will have planets, 2.6% will have Earth's. You may continue to do the math if you wish; but you will soon realize it is rather pointless; there is life elsewhere.

In this case (the "Hill" case) we are seeing confirmation of that life at a specific place other than Earth. Since the map has such high probability, it is logical to predict the existence of both planets around Zeta 1 & 2 Reticuli, and advanced life forms around Zeta 2. This probability is so high, that it would be truly (zeta) ridiculous to think otherwise.

By the way: the "view" on the Hill/ Fish map is from approximately 250 light years away, in the direction of Zeta Reticuli.

RUInsane
reply to post by tanka418

 

Courtrooms use eyewitness testimony, which is the least reliable form of evidence.

Yes, and typically that evidence is corroborated with other data.

You can have only ONE standard for evidence; otherwise it all becomes meaningless.

reply to post by tanka418

probability of 14 random star selection from K, G, and F class stars that match geometrical template: 2.05E-10
error in fish interpretation: 0.07
probability of earth like planets: 0.026

overall Bayesian probability: 0.941889

poker does not demonstrate what I'm talking about, has little to do with knowledge of mathematical probability

I employ Bayesian inference, a sort of easy way to maintain overall probabilities over a large sequential sampling.

here are three random links for you that took me less than 5 minutes to find with a quick google search. It is clear you have no idea what you are talking about.

Modeling Texas Hold'em Poker Strategies with
Bayesian Networks

Luck, Bayesian Inference, and Poker Skill

Bayesian Inferences and Developing Information-poker

"poker has little to do with knowledge of mathematical probability" is still wrong, utterly. This statement alone is testament to your complete lack of understanding of mathematical probability.

Just a cursory glance from anyone can see that. There is no reason to take your numbers at face value or even check your "work" because you demonstrated that you don't grasp the basics. We must conclude your numbers are either fictitious or wrong.

All I see is a failed attempt to dodge the fact you don't actually know what you are talking about.

reply to post by ZetaRediculian


When I was younger I entertained the Hill Map and the Betty and Barney Hill case. Now, I think the hill map is incorrect because even Marjorie Fish later rejected her famous interpretation. I think there're just too many interpretations for the map and it can't qualify as evidence. Beyond that, the Betty and Barney Hill case is all over the place. I think the worst blemish on that case is Betty herself, since it's known she apparently had a history of making these sorts of stories. It's possible something happened, but perhaps Betty persuaded and distorted Barney's perceptions.

There're too many stories like this one to examine them all. Is it possible at least one of them is a genuine alien encounter? Maybe. I don't know. It's hard to say because there're a lot of sightings and most witness reports are going to be in error. For me it's close to home because I've talked to people who said they saw something. For example, I talked to a guy who said he saw a triangular ufo hovering above his house in the 60's. He told his parents, but they dismissed it. I can't tell you how many similar stories are out there - there're too many. I really really mean that because I could share a few more sightings people have disclosed to me. And this is just me and my small little life. There're billions of other people. This doesn't prove anything, though. All these stories do is perpetuate popular myth, since people like good stories. Doesn't life get boring? Some people stir the waters to create excitement.

Between people lying and mass hysteria and popular myth, it's hard to believe in the alien interpretation. Another thing is I am thinking of that game where a group of people form a circle and the game starts when one of them whispers a word into their neighbor's ear and then the neighbor repeats it to the next and so on. When the circle is complete the word will at times be different than the original. Maybe this is how ufology has evolved in some manner, it wouldn't surprise me.

reply to post by Keylogger


So you regressed how (un)fortunate...

Perfect example of a victim of the very efficient strategy of confusion used by the powers that be.

I will say it once but the more dangerous ennemy of Truth in these times is not the skepticism and its various theories trying to explain logically unknown phenomenons, its not even denial of the masses and the common folks or even the denial of the governments. No, the real danger lies in the confusion caused by all these theories and opinions and alternatives. I have watched the web for more than 5years. Most people arent going anywhere. You can have a thousand believe the same story, if its false, its false. Any number of believers dont mean crap if they believe something that is untrue, it will stay that way no matter how strong their beliefs are.

There is so much information and contradictions, everywhere, what best weapon against the Truth but perpetual confusion? Most fell into the trap and aint gonna escape it, ever.

reply to post by jonnywhite


Yes, lots of stories. The Hill case is a great example of modern mythology. You can interpret this story in a number of different ways. Everything from ET to the CIA to just basic psychology can be an explaination. To me, The "star map" is a product of Betty Hills mind. That it matches to any one particular "thing" like a star system is well, ridiculous. Why not a map of Vermont? Or even our solar system? www.kochkyborg.de...

ZetaRediculian
"poker has little to do with knowledge of mathematical probability" is still wrong, utterly. This statement alone is testament to your complete lack of understanding of mathematical probability.

Just a cursory glance from anyone can see that. There is no reason to take your numbers at face value or even check your "work" because you demonstrated that you don't grasp the basics. We must conclude your numbers are either fictitious or wrong.

All I see is a failed attempt to dodge the fact you don't actually know what you are talking about.

I'm sorry the advanced mathematics confuses you; here maybe this will help.

Poker does not define mathematical probability, however many of the "interactions" contained within Poker can be described using mathematics, including the probability of any given hand, at any point in the game.

Poker has as much to do with Mathematical probability as it has to do with Egg salad. However, both can be described by mathematics.

Your assessment of my statements only shows your lack of understanding in mathematics. Your other statements show that you have issues with critical thinking, logic, as well as most of the fundamentals governing the ALL.

Perhaps, if you got off your "high horse", and stopped trying to prove everyone wrong, stopped trying to obfuscate the most important issue in Human history, you could become part of the solution instead of part of the problem.

reply to post by tanka418


Adavance and simple mathematics actually prove that God must exist.

A absolute constant is absolute infinite. How can a absolute constant change mathematically?