Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Fallible · **#201** by **Fallible** » Feb 22, 2019 4:37 pm

Ahhh...my fault, I can't find my reading specs.

Cito di Pense · **#202** by **Cito di Pense** » Feb 22, 2019 4:41 pm

Fila wrote:I'm just asking.., seeing as you speak with such authority on the subject.., what YOU would consider.

I don't claim UFOs exist, so it's not my job to invent projects for people chasing figments of their imaginations. If they're making observations of something, well let them keep submitting their 'evidence'. I would consider that they are chasing figments of their imaginations until such time as they show they aren't.

Fila wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:There aren't any examples of what anyone is "meant" to look for. This criterion of "better evidence" is entirely up to the UFO community to establish

Thank you for your answer.
Images, and statements are all witnesses can provide.

If you're an authority on the matter, then surely you will be able to say that some of the evidence is better than the rest; you'll consequently be able to cite it, and you won't insist that every scrap of evidence is worth investigating further. That should tell you what I would consider. Before I would consider any of that, I would consider that you're trolling an internet forum.

Destroyer · **#203** by **Destroyer** » Feb 23, 2019 8:50 am

I don't think Fila is trolling, but he/she is conflating investigating claims of personal matters, where evidence is available, with scientific investigations where only evidence of substantial and objective occurrences are taken into account.

Edit: spelling

LucidFlight · **#204** by **LucidFlight** » Feb 23, 2019 11:07 am

Thommo wrote:
Fallible wrote:False dichotomy! Could be both!

I used my "inclusive or" font, not my "exclusive or" font.

It was either one "or" or the other. 50/50 chance, really.

Cito di Pense · **#205** by **Cito di Pense** » Feb 23, 2019 12:12 pm

LucidFlight wrote:
Thommo wrote:
Fallible wrote:False dichotomy! Could be both!

I used my "inclusive or" font, not my "exclusive or" font.

It was either one "or" or the other. 50/50 chance, really.

https://cinema-fanatic.com/2014/08/03/m ... hn-landis/

Ed: Are we under arrest, or what?
Federal Agent: I’d say you fall into the “or what” category.

Thommo · **#206** by **Thommo** » Feb 23, 2019 4:14 pm

LucidFlight wrote:
Thommo wrote:
Fallible wrote:False dichotomy! Could be both!

I used my "inclusive or" font, not my "exclusive or" font.

It was either one "or" or the other. 50/50 chance, really.

I see.

It was indeed or or or. :nod:

.

Destroyer · **#207** by **Destroyer** » Feb 23, 2019 5:02 pm

Deleted

proudfootz · **#208** by **proudfootz** » Feb 25, 2019 12:11 pm

BlackBart wrote:
Thommo wrote:
Sendraks wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/21/what-is-behind-the-decline-in-ufo-sightings

Before I read the article, I'm going to speculate: Less Unidentified Flying Objects due to better identification?

Pretty much. Plus nobody cares anymore.

I think maybe the aliens have given up on us. :ask:

Hermit · **#209** by **Hermit** » Feb 25, 2019 3:50 pm

proudfootz wrote:
BlackBart wrote:
Thommo wrote:
Sendraks wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/21/what-is-behind-the-decline-in-ufo-sightings

Before I read the article, I'm going to speculate: Less Unidentified Flying Objects due to better identification?

Pretty much. Plus nobody cares anymore.

I think maybe the aliens have given up on us.

Nah. We've made landing on the planet too difficult for them. Aliens have visited this planet for thousands of years. Initially they arrive in small craft somewhere near the river Nile, and set to building huge platforms suitable to land larger craft on. The surface of those platforms was square and even. Because the location was extremely windy, they constructed those square platforms out of very, very heavy rocks, and buried them deep into the sand. For economic reasons these deeply buried platforms were tapered, so the most deeply buried part was just a tip.

This went well until the pharaohs got sick of the noise and light caused by spaceships arriving and leaving all day and all night too. They ordered their subjects to dig those platforms out of the ground and turn them upside down. Which is what said subjects did quite willingly, for they were sick of the traffic too. All of the sudden the aliens were confronted with huge stone structures, square at the bottom and tipped at the top, instead of the landing platforms they expected and needed. With nowhere to land, they decided to grace the inhabitants of a planet orbiting nearby Alpha Centauri A and B with their presence instead.

You must believe me. I have evidence: Someone who is very confident and sincere told me this is what happened.

Macdoc · **#210** by **Macdoc** » Feb 25, 2019 8:08 pm

maybe the aliens got bored....Earth over touristed and too many guns :coffee:

theropod · **#211** by **theropod** » Feb 26, 2019 11:22 pm

...and yet not enough nerf guns.

So what if off planet intelligence has, is and will continue to be classified differently by exobiologist than Area 51 nutbuckets?

Can someone please explain to me the exact point of this thread, in a condensed and clear manner?

RS

Hermit · **#212** by **Hermit** » Feb 26, 2019 11:32 pm

theropod wrote:Can someone please explain to me the exact point of this thread, in a condensed and clear manner?

Why can't we just accept eyewitness accounts as evidence that aliens keep visiting earth?

The answer is of course simple: Because they are untestable, but since Fila did not get it after 200 posts in ten days I doubt the penny will drop any time soon.

SafeAsMilk · **#213** by **SafeAsMilk** » Feb 27, 2019 3:40 am

Actually, I think it's more like "scientists should spend their incredibly limited time and resources searching for aliens based on unverifiable eyewitness accounts." How they're supposed to do that, Fila hasn't explained yet. He also hasn't explained why I couldn't just claim something like "Beezelbub lives in my basement", and have scientists investigate that too.

BlackBart · **#214** by **BlackBart** » Feb 27, 2019 7:11 am

Take a dinner plate and with a Sharpie draw a single point on it about an inch or so from the edge and about five hundredth the size of it's radius. That single point is how far our radio waves have travelled into our Galaxy in the last one hundred years. It would take more energy in that's available in the entire universe in order for a grain of sand to travel that distance in the same amount of time. And what do these extraterrestrials do with the glittering technology capable moving tons of mass greater distances in a fraction of that time? Scare the shit of some hillbillies, draw some giant graffiti in Chile and go joyriding over Belgium. Yeah, right.

Destroyer · **#215** by **Destroyer** » Feb 27, 2019 12:18 pm

theropod wrote:
Can someone please explain to me the exact point of this thread, in a condensed and clear manner?

RS

Fila wants to know what level of evidence is required to make a claim worthy of scientific investigation. He/she seems to be convinced that a substantial amount of corroborative eyewitness UFO reports ought to warrant scientific analysis. But that is not how science works. Scientific study has its basis in substantial evidence, not substantial corroborative personal claims i.e., only what can be empirically tested repeatedly due to its constancy is scientific. Whereas, no matter the quantity of intersubjective claims it is always the constancy of the object (that which has independence of all subjects), and therefore its ability to be repeatedly tested, that constitutes substantial scientific evidence.

zulumoose · **#216** by **zulumoose** » Feb 27, 2019 12:23 pm

Fila wants to know what level of evidence is required to make a claim worthy of scientific investigation. He/she seems to be convinced that a substantial amount of corroborative eyewitness UFO reports ought to warrant scientific analysis

I am of the opinion that Fila can't seem to get over the perceived injustice, that someone can witness something and not be taken seriously. He seems to be convinced that if you have seen something incredible, you are MEANT to be able to achieve credibility, and something is wrong with "science" if you can't.

Destroyer · **#217** by **Destroyer** » Feb 27, 2019 12:36 pm

zulumoose wrote:
Fila wants to know what level of evidence is required to make a claim worthy of scientific investigation. He/she seems to be convinced that a substantial amount of corroborative eyewitness UFO reports ought to warrant scientific analysis

I am of the opinion that Fila can't seem to get over the perceived injustice, that someone can witness something and not be taken seriously. He seems to be convinced that if you have seen something incredible, you are MEANT to be able to achieve credibility, and something is wrong with "science" if you can't.

His emphasis seems to be on the quantity of eyewitness reports. He seems to think that to discount so many is an injustice.

tuco · **#218** by **tuco** » Feb 27, 2019 1:50 pm

Fila was asking questions nobody, obviously, can answer in the first place. How many witnesses .. ? I tell you. If they land on Time Square there will be scientific investigation. Happy? Not happy .. That is this thread. Doomed to fail from the title, some being patient trying to explain basics and all we got .. just answer the questions! Alright.

Cito di Pense · **#219** by **Cito di Pense** » Feb 27, 2019 1:51 pm

Destroyer wrote:He seems to think that to discount so many is an injustice.

Injustice? To whom? And why? You don't know, do you? See also, "argument from popularity".

Destroyer · **#220** by **Destroyer** » Feb 27, 2019 4:12 pm

Cito di Pense wrote:
Destroyer wrote:He seems to think that to discount so many is an injustice.

Injustice? To whom? And why? You don't know, do you? See also, "argument from popularity".

Obviously Fila considers that for so many eye witnesses to be dismissed, and not thought of as worthy to have their claims scientifically investigated, is an injustice. Many here have explained to him why it is not.

Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Re: Why are aliens considered "paranormal"?

Who is online