The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
Hi EN,
Again, I just posted a quote from Carl. I didn't say I agreed with his assessment in toto. There are a few problems with any evidence.
Also, people keep confusing 'evidence' with 'proof'. There's only one science that entails PROOF and that's pure mathematics. We're just
talking about solid
evidence. For just about any scenario it's not difficult to come up with problems which would lead to a dispute of the
evidence, so due care and diligence is a requirement.
But just about anything along the lines of valid trace, or valid math theorem proofs or physics theory would be acceptable
evidence.
All the evidence we have now consists of stories, some corroborated with radar tracking, or with multiple witnesses. BUT, we all know that human
perception can be fooled - so as far as solid documentation, witness testimony, I don't care if 1,000 people witness and video a light in the sky
performing seemingly possible aerobatics, it does not rise to the level of solid evidence of non-terrestrial, non-human visitation (though it might be
evidence of 'high strangeness). (holograms or RPV could potentially duplicate it, both terrestrial and within current technology).
So, again, solid evidence of a theoretical or informational or physical trace not found on Earth would be a good start.
Uh, putting a giant 'thought' in people's heads is not evidence of alien visitation. We already have the ability to beam sound waves at people such
that they feel as though there are external thoughts being put in their minds - (in fact, it's being used for advertising in some places).
We have have to be very careful and introspective about what we accept as solid evidence.
AND, it doesn't mean that 'skeptics' are hard to convince - it just shows a good understanding of how apparent information can be hoaxed or
misunderstood or misinterpreted, especially the way human perception works.
To recap:
1. Pick specific verifiable information such as a math proof, or technology that is just beyond our means (maybe a few 100 years);
2. Realize it's all evidence, not proof;
3. Understand the limits of human perception;
4. Discern between 'high-strangeness' and 'solid evidence' of non-human, non-terrestrial visitation, right now.
Hope this clarifies my position.
As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.