Casual Approach to Evidence (Multi-Thread ST-4)

[Windu Chi]

It's the furry monster under the bed that vanishes when you look for it, of course.

What do you mean of course, I still don't know what hell you are talking about.

 

If there's a trap, it's one of your own devising. I can't manipulate logic. Answer the question, even if only to yourself. Then try applying that same reasoning to other things that are similar.

Your questions are meant to manipulate me in agreeing with you, because if I answer either one of them incorrectly, I will have to logically conclude that I will tell people they are wrong on some of their beliefs, because of inconsistenties or contradictions in my answers to these ridiculous questions of yours.

I specifically was talking about the improbability of government conspiracies involving aliens. I'm sure the government has secrets. I fully expect the government will do what is best for the government, and that might not always align with the good of the people.

IMPROBABILITY!

 

 

1) aliens using mind powers to create a bolt of lightning because it looks cool

Ridiculous!

 

2) muppets that live in the 28th dimension stomped their feet

Ridiculous!

 

3) god wanted to smite a bit of turf (or someone unlucky enough to be in the way)

Ridiculous!

4

) it's a natural weather effect that happens when there is a difference in the electrical charge between the clouds and the earth.

Of course there is.

Still you are being manipulative here.

[Samuel Dravis]

What do you mean of course, I still don't know what hell you are talking about.

That's only to be expected I suppose. They do vanish when you look for them. However, I say they exist!

 

Your questions are meant to manipulate me in agreeing with you, because if I answer either one of them incorrectly, I will have to logicaly agree that I will tell people they are wrong on some of their beliefs, because of inconsistenties or contradictions in my answers to these ridiculous questions of yours.

Very good, although any answer to those questions would likely make it impossible for you to continue with your position as-is. I didn't make you take those positions, though, did I? You took them. Now decide if you will answer or not. It's your position - defend it. If you can't defend it, change it to something more logical.

 

Ridiculous!

 

Ridiculous!

 

Ridiculous!

Again, this is the same situation as the furry monster scenario. Why are these ideas rediculous?

 

 

 

Of course there is.

 

Still you are being manipulative here.

I'm simply attacking your argument. If you don't actually believe something that would follow logically from your answers to these questions, then say so and change your argument so it isn't vulnerable to that point of attack.

 

I note you didn't answer how you'd figure out which one is most correct - will you answer that question? Are you openminded enough to risk having your current ideas challenged and perhaps replaced?

[Windu Chi]

That's only to be expected I suppose. They do vanish when you look for them. However, I say they exist!

You must be joking, you know you don't believe in no damn furry monster, with the arguments you are presenting here.

Very good, although any answer to those questions would likely make it impossible for you to continue with your position as-is. I didn't make you take those positions, though, did I? You took them. Now decide if you will answer or not. It's your position - defend it. If you can't defend it, change it to something more logical.

Defend it, please!

That is the best you can do, try to manipulate me in agreeing with you?

You want me to defend bullsh*t ass questions, I don't think so.

Your attempted manipulation fails, horribly!

Of course, damn I should've figure this out earlier, if no one chooses skepticism, they are always illogical.

Is that the best you got?

Can you do any better?

[Tyrion]

You must be joking, you know you don't believe in no damn furry monster, with the arguments you are presenting here.

Defend it, please!

 

He doesn't need to state he believes in the furry monster, he's just saying that there might as well be a furry monster hiding under your bed as there might be aliens in the sky. The amount of hard evidence for both is the same.

 

That is the best you can do, try to manipulate me in agreeing with you?

You want me to defend bullsh*t ass questions, I don't think so.

Your attempted manipulation fails, horribly!

Of course, damn I should've figure this out earlier, if no one chooses skepticism, they are always illogical.

Is that the best you got?

Can you do any better?

 

His questions are an exercise in thought processing, not in determining an actual answer. Skepticism, by the way, is not a black and white affair like you play it out to be: a healthy dose of skepticism is very useful in nearly everything you do, but it shouldn't be your only judgment of events. It's not like you have to either believe in Skpeticism for everything or you don't.

[Nancy Allen``]

Actually there is considerably more evidence to the existence of UFOs than there is of Bigfoot, for example docuemented reports of strange aircraft. Secret experimental aircraft? I'd buy that, but how come none of our fighters in the past fifty or sixty years have remained the same and never taken such a shape, even VYOL aircraft such as the Harrier and Osprey?

 

I refuse to let go of the possibility that in the universe, which is far too vast in scope for us to explore, we are it. That there is no intelligent life out there. Truth be told we could use it soon if it exists as we are quickly running out of it here.

[Windu Chi]

 

His questions are an exercise in thought processing, not in determining an actual answer. Skepticism, by the way, is not a black and white affair like you play it out to be: a healthy dose of skepticism is very useful in nearly everything you do, but it shouldn't be your only judgment of events. It's not like you have to either believe in Skpeticism for everything or you don't.

Hmm...let me see here...skepticism of global warming.

With the threat of living under the sea and freezing their asses off in a possible Ice Age, some still are skeptical of global warming.

I don't see this skepticism very useful, I can't swim and I despise the cold.

And I definitely don't want to experience a possible Ice Age in the coming decades.

What else?

Ah, yes!

Some believe global warming is a hoax.

Of the all the ridiculous arguments I have ever heard, this one must come from the residents of la la land.

[Tyrion]

Actually there is considerably more evidence to the existence of UFOs than there is of Bigfoot, for example docuemented reports of strange aircraft. Secret experimental aircraft? I'd buy that, but how come none of our fighters in the past fifty or sixty years have remained the same and never taken such a shape, even VYOL aircraft such as the Harrier and Osprey?

 

And there's been constant anecdotal accounts from scared children that there is a monster under their bed. While the analogy isn't fair, considering aircraft pilots probably have a better mind of presence than the aforementioned children, there's still little evidence of aliens in the sky beyond such accounts and blurry homemade videos.

 

I refuse to let go of the possibility that in the universe, which is far too vast in scope for us to explore, we are it. That there is no intelligent life out there. Truth be told we could use it soon if it exists as we are quickly running out of it here.

 

I never doubted that there's intelligent sentient life somewhere in the universe, I'm skeptical though that they ever entered our atmosphere.

 

Hmm...let me see here...skepticism of global warming.

With the threat of living under the sea and freezing their asses off in a possible Ice Age, some still are skeptical of global warming.

I don't see this skepticism very useful, I can't swim and I despise the cold.

And I definitely don't want to experience a possible Ice Age in the coming decades.

What else?

Ah, yes!

Some believe global warming is a hoax.

Of the all the ridiculous arguments I have ever heard, this one must come from the residents of la la land.

 

So wait, because some people are skeptical of things that obviously are occurring...it makes skepticism itself invalid?

[Windu Chi]

And there's been constant anecdotal accounts from scared children that there is a monster under their bed. While the analogy isn't fair, considering aircraft pilots probably have a better mind of presence than the aforementioned children, there's still little evidence of aliens in the sky beyond such accounts and blurry homemade videos.

This never gets old.

 

 

 

 

So wait, because some people are skeptical of things that obviously are occurring...it makes skepticism itself invalid?

I'm not sure; I don't like skepticism, so I'm ass out here.

[SkinWalker]

Okay. I've split some posts from the Why Atheism? and moved them here. Please be civil and stay on the new topic.

[SkinWalker]

Hmm...let me see here...skepticism of global warming.

With the threat of living under the sea and freezing their asses off in a possible Ice Age, some still are skeptical of global warming.

I don't see this skepticism very useful, I can't swim and I despise the cold.

And I definitely don't want to experience a possible Ice Age in the coming decades.

What else?

Ah, yes!

Some believe global warming is a hoax.

Of the all the ridiculous arguments I have ever heard, this one must come from the residents of la la land.

 

Those you mention above are pseudoskeptics, people who pretend to use scientific skepticism to invalidate the overall consensus of science itself. The tactics they use are not accepted by true skeptics since they have clear and preconceived conclusions and the only data they accept is that which supports it. Very often, the pseudoskeptic ignores, irrationally rejects, or is otherwise completely ignorant of data that contradicts their preconceived conclusions.

 

And this is a prime example of a Casual Approach to Evidence along with arguments from ignorance, both of which the pseudoskeptic wallows in.

 

There is no damn "zero evidence" concerning aliens.

 

Then where is the evidence? The universe and this galaxy may be teaming with life, some of it intelligent, but there certainly isn't any "evidence" of it.

 

Skepticism is a disease of the imagination.

I don't want to catch it.

This is a comment that demonstrates that you haven't the first idea of what being skeptical truly means. Educate yourself.

 

You aren't going to convinced me that the governments of this planet isn't keeping secrets of alien contact.

And this is a comment that reveals that you either have some testable evidence that you keep private (unlikely) or you're simply credulous.

[Nancy Allen``]

The strongest evidence, as I've pointed out, is the photos of what appear to be alien spacefraft (I'll stick with the term UFOs because they are Unidentified Flying Objects) and wonders such as the Egyption pyramids. Sure, the photos may be of experimental aircraft at the time, the interesting thing is, and this doesn't prove there are alien UFOs, that no aircraft that has been developed looks anything like in the photographs. To be fair though in World War Two the Nazis were developing a stealth plane, or bomber, cannot remember which, the Ho IX, and only in the past fifteen years have we seen something similar is in the F-117 stealth bomber. With the pyramids I understand that even today we do not have the technology and know how to do them, and the thinking is that they couldn't pull it off themselves. Of course this doesn't prove the existence of aliens, the people who built St Basil's Catedral were blinded so they could never duplicate their efforts, but this is what people are saying.

[SkinWalker]

The strongest evidence, as I've pointed out, is the photos of what appear to be alien spacefraft (I'll stick with the term UFOs because they are Unidentified Flying Objects)

 

Photos? There've been numerous photos of alleged alien spacecraft, but none have been validated and many if not most have been shown to be complete hoaxes.

 

and wonders such as the Egyption pyramids.

 

There are many wonderful things about the ancient Egyptian culture, but as an archaeologist, I can assure you there's nothing evident of space aliens.

 

With the pyramids I understand that even today we do not have the technology and know how to do them, and the thinking is that they couldn't pull it off themselves.

 

That's not the thinking of anyone educated on the subject. It is, however, the thinking of many significance-junkies and mystery-mongers. We have a very good understanding of how the pyramids were built as well as when and by whom. The pyramids and other material remains of ancient Egypt are well worth studying and have many mysteries, but none of them relate to space aliens.

[Nancy Allen``]

Just out of curiosity, the tools that were left behind and what is taken to be the actual methods used, they're pretty much how they're portrayed in film and fiction? I'd say they'd have to be so that their portrayal of ancient Egypt is accurate.

[Windu Chi]

Those you mention above are pseudoskeptics, people who pretend to use scientific skepticism to invalidate the overall consensus of science itself. The tactics they use are not accepted by true skeptics since they have clear and preconceived conclusions and the only data they accept is that which supports it. Very often, the pseudoskeptic ignores, irrationally rejects, or is otherwise completely ignorant of data that contradicts their preconceived conclusions.

I never heard of pseudoskeptics.

Thats a new one.

I think those who believe global warming is a hoax, just don't want to accept the evidence.

 

 

 

Then where is the evidence? The universe and this galaxy may be teaming with life, some of it intelligent, but there certainly isn't any "evidence" of it.

The only evidence that will satisfy you, if you could have a beer with one of the Grays.

The video evidence is bullsh*t, the pictures is bullsh*t, the millions of witnesses is bullsh*t, the governments lying and contradictions for explanations is all bullsh*t, right?

 

 

This is a comment that demonstrates that you haven't the first idea of what being skeptical truly means. Educate yourself.

 

 

And this is a comment that reveals that you either have some testable evidence that you keep private (unlikely) or you're simply credulous.

Skeptic: someone who habitually doubts accepted beliefs.

But I believe a skeptic doubts everything, that they don't experience with all their 5 senses.

But then if that is satisfied, they will probably still question it.

[SkinWalker]

The only evidence that will satisfy you, if you could have a beer with one of the Grays.

 

"Grays?" The very word reveals your credulous nature. You've shown that you have a head on your shoulders through many of your posts, but your personal incredulity is seems to be taken advantage of by your desire for the fantastical to be true.

 

The video evidence is bullsh*t, the pictures is bullsh*t, the millions of witnesses is bullsh*t, the governments lying and contradictions for explanations is all bullsh*t, right?

 

First point, please refrain from using the level of vulgarity that you do. Not only is it offensive to the intellect, but it *is* a rule violation of LF to bypass the auto-censor in the manner you do. Moreover, it detracts from the intellectual portion of the discussion and I may even edit or delete future posts where excessive vulgarity is used. Consider this a warning.

 

I've yet to see visual evidence that had any credibility nor does an appeal to the anecdotal accounts of "millions of witnesses" hold any weight. Lots of people believe lots of things. Eyewitness testimony is among the very worse that can be called "evidence." Governments lie about much -it's in their nature. But I've yet to see the evidence that any governments have lied about space aliens. The fantasy of space aliens has its roots in the science fiction of the 40's and 50's, which deeply seated the notion in the minds of readers and cinema buffs. The meme of space aliens has only lore and mythology surrounding it and not a shred of hard, physical evidence that can withstand testing.

 

Evidence is that which is testable, verifiable or reproducible in such a manner that it supports the hypothesis. It either exits or it doesn't. The skeptic, who can hold that an idea is possible, refuses to accept extraordinary claims that lack appropriate evidence.

 

Skeptic: someone who habitually doubts accepted beliefs.

But I believe a skeptic doubts everything, that they don't experience with all their 5 senses.

But then if that is satisfied, they will probably still question it.

 

Your definition is and under-educated an ignorant opinion that comes no where near being accurate. As a pejorative one, I'm sure it gives you comfort, but it's ignorant and under-educated nonetheless.

 

Please feel free to cite the most convincing evidence for your space aliens. We're all waiting. Start with the most convincing, though. Lets not waste time debunking the silliest.

[Windu Chi]

"Grays?" The very word reveals your credulous nature. You've shown that you have a head on your shoulders through many of your posts, but your personal incredulity is seems to be taken advantage of by your desire for the fantastical to be true.

I don't have no damn, credulous nature.

There is plenty of evidence, you just can't accept that the government is lying their asses off.

Why is it when people ask the government for UFO evidence they become secretive and avoid the question, and say that is classified, or they don't have no information, when later it is found that they do, by way of the flimsy, "freedom of information act"?

Freedom of information, my ass.

Lying, bastards! strongly

If there is nothing there, this behavior should be nullified.

Sith lord master, Dick Cheney himself said, the information was classified.

Hmm...I wonder?

 

Also I guess you said, "your desire for the fantastical to be true", because I want to travel the Milky Way right NOW.

If you want to hear for yourself, what he said, watch the UFO files on the History Channel, the episode is called, UFOs and the White House.

I got that damning evidence on my DVR.

[SkinWalker]

I don't have no damn, credulous nature.

 

I didn't say your credulous nature was "damned," just present. And evident by your very words.

 

There is plenty of evidence, you just can't accept that the government is lying their asses off.

 

I'm asking you to cite it. What's the most convincing?

 

Why is it when people ask the government for UFO evidence they become secretive and avoid the question, and say that is classified, or they don't have no information, when later it is found that they do, by way of the flimsy, "freedom of information act"?

 

This isn't evidence. Nor is it demonstrated to be true. Lets stick to facts we can discuss and examine, shall we. If you make a confidence statement such as this, at least do us the courtesy of citing a supporting text that can be referenced.

 

Freedom of information, my ass.

 

Please curb your vulgarity. This is a family forum.

 

Lying, bastards! strongly

 

Please curb your vulgarity. This is a family forum. And it makes you look immature and silly.

 

If there is nothing there, this behavior should be nullified.

Sith lord master, Dick Cheney himself said, the information was classified.

Hmm...I wonder?

 

I've no idea what this rant has to do with the topic at hand. Do you? Is there any way you can expound upon this? Do you have some evidence that Dick Cheney has information about your space aliens?

 

Also I guess you said, "your desire for the fantastical to be true", because I want to travel the Milky Way right NOW.

 

I applaud your imagination. I'd like to do this myself. It doesn't make space aliens any more real on our world.

 

If you want to heard for yourself, what he said, watch the UFO files on the History Channel, the episode is called, UFOs and the White House.

I got that damning evidence on my DVR.

 

I fail to see how anything presented on the so-called "History" channel can be cited as evidence, since they barely qualify as tertiary sources. Do you have a primary source of evidence that you can cite?

 

What is the most convincing evidence of your space aliens?

[Windu Chi]

I'm asking you to cite it. What's the most convincing?

The info they gave up, of course is not all of it.

And the info is nothing but UFO reports, witness interviews from, Project Blue Book, or Project Bull**** and military investigations; the good info is still classified.

But once again this fails as evidence.

So, pointless!

This isn't evidence. Nor is it demonstrated to be true. Lets stick to facts we can discuss and examine, shall we. If you make a confidence statement such as this, at least do us the courtesy of citing a supporting text that can be referenced.

Then what the hell is evidence, SkinWalker?

You don't trust nothing, unless your 5 senses is satified.

Cite it, you is not going to trust no internet, C'mon.

 

 

Please curb your vulgarity. This is a family forum. And it makes you look immature and silly.

Ok, I will talk to you without cursing, since it scares you so much.

 

C'mon you think I'm silly anyways, you must think I'm a fool, that I don't realize that.

I want to travel the galaxy right NOW, how silly is that?

I think my adversaries will called that silly.

And for immature, I'm 22 years of age.

Wow, if you curse a lot you must be a child and really stupid, I heard that crap before.

I don't care what people think of me.

 

I've no idea what this rant has to do with the topic at hand. Do you? Is there any way you can expound upon this? Do you have some evidence that Dick Cheney has information about your space aliens?

If you don't trust the History Channel, you won't trust the news if they had evidence, of course you won't trust the newspaper.

You won't ever trust nothing, unless you were there to experience it yourself, but with your skeptical nature you will probably still have doubt.

There is no satisfying you.

Stop being so suspicious and look at the program and then come back and comment on it.

[Tyrion]

The info they gave up, of course is not all of it.

 

Then what the hell is evidence, SkinWalker?

You don't trust nothing, unless your 5 senses is satified.

Cite it, you is not going to trust no internet, C'mon.

 

You're not doing very well at avoiding his question. Just bring up some actual evidence that supports the idea that aliens have visited the Earth. You can't say that because we distrust the pseudo-axiom "because the government is silent, that means it is true" we're total skeptics about anything and everything, because that is not the case. I'm certainly willing to believe, so long as I have a concrete bridge of evidence to walk across.

 

C'mon you think I'm silly anyways, you must think I'm a fool, that I don't realize that.

I want to travel the galaxy right NOW, how silly is that?

I think my adversaries will called that silly.

 

It is quite silly to believe that right now you can travel the galaxy, when we have enough trouble as it getting to the moon and back in one round trip and in whole shape. I understand you'd want to travel the universe and see all the wonders within right now, but that doesn't mean gasping at every conceivable straw will make it come quicker.

 

As an aside, I've noticed that in a good portion of your posts you always strike the debaters on the other side of your arguments as your adversaries and foes. Why is that? Why do you think we boast some sort of hatred or ill-desire for you and not that we merely are showing contempt for your arguments?

 

If you don't trust the History Channel, you won't trust the news if they had evidence, of course you won't trust the newspaper.

You won't ever trust nothing, unless you was there to experience yourself, but with your skeptical nature you will probably still have doubt.

There is no satisfying you.

Stop being so suspicious and look at the program and then come back and comment on it.

 

I believe Americans had landed on the moon in 1969, and I was neither on the moon nor even born then. All I have is volumes of official reports, videos, materials, and what not to sway my belief about the subject, and that is enough to sway me. Subsequently, that is all the evidence I would need to prove to me that aliens have visited Earth, which has not been nearly fulfilled at all.

[SkinWalker]

C'mon you think I'm silly anyways, you must think I'm a fool, that I don't realize that.

I want to travel the galaxy right NOW, how silly is that?

 

I don't think either of those things of you. I'm simply pointing out that one's vernacular goes a long way in creating impressions. It's also a rules violation, but I care more about how you're perceived even if you don't.

 

I think my adversaries will called that silly.

And for immature, I'm 22 years of age.

 

Age doesn't automatically imply maturity. But, again, I don't think you're immature. I think you're very bright but credulous on some things. Wanting to travel the stars is neither silly nor immature, so please don't think I'm criticizing that.

 

Wow, if you curse a lot you must be a child and really stupid, I heard that crap before.

I don't care what people think of me.

 

Perhaps others care what people think of you. Regardless, its infinitely easier for me to have a discussion with someone who doesn't find the need to resort to needless profanity every third word. I suspect others find it easier as well. It also impedes your ability to make your point clearly and concisely. There's no harm in calling something bull**** from time to time, but like a good spice, such terms are best used sparingly so as to bring out flavor not overpower the senses.

 

If you don't trust the History Channel, you won't trust the news if they had evidence, of course you won't trust the newspaper.

 

The history channel is hardly on par with the news, but you're right. I am skeptical about some things I see on the news. I don't reject everything out of hand, but I find it healthy to question what I see, hear and read in the various news media.

 

You won't ever trust nothing, unless you were there to experience it yourself, but with your skeptical nature you will probably still have doubt.

There is no satisfying you.

Stop being so suspicious and look at the program and then come back and comment on it.

 

I trust a lot of things. Indeed, I was once very credulous like yourself. I bought into the whole UFO/space alien thing hook, line, and sinker back in the 80's and 90's. I wasn't much older than you. I read books like Communion and Alien Agenda and a few others and thought there was a grand conspiracy. Then I began a study in the sciences and developed the methods used in science to discover and examine the world. Interestingly enough, I found that when I encountered the lore of the UFO culture again, I had questions. Questions that the UFO movement couldn't answer. I had questions that religions couldn't answer. And questions that alternative medicine proponents couldn't answer. Questions that all sorts of incredible claims simply couldn't answer. I used to buy into each of them.

 

And, like you, I thought "skeptics" were fanatics who couldn't see the truth. I suppose "truth" is relative on some level, but in science and with true skeptics, an objective truth exists, even if we can't discern it.

 

I don't get the History channel. In fact, I rarely watch any television with exception to a few shows I regularly record from my rabbit ears or catch on PBS (Nova, The History Detectives, and the like). I read books. Watch documentaries that are produced based on scholarly sources rather than popular anecdotes (Guns, Germs & Steel).

 

I'm not saying I don't like to be entertained. I'm only saying that it is vital that, if you're interested in truth, to be able to separate fantasy from reality. I'll never reject fantasy, but I will endeavor to not confuse it with reality as best I'm able. I do this by asking questions. And not just the questions I hope I know the answers to.

[Windu Chi]

You're not doing very well at avoiding his question. Just bring up some actual evidence that supports the idea that aliens have visited the Earth. You can't say that because we distrust the pseudo-axiom "because the government is silent, that means it is true" we're total skeptics about anything and everything, because that is not the case. I'm certainly willing to believe, so long as I have a concrete bridge of evidence to walk across.

Hey I'm not the answer man, ok.

If I had evidence the world would know.

The government and military secrecy for something that supposedly "didn't happen"; Roswell, is what got me interested in this.

As I will say again, I haven't seen no UFOs or been visited by aliens.

But I will believe in aliens until I'm a rotten corpse and infested with maggots.

I be damn I'm going to believe our society only, is it.

It is quite silly to believe that right now you can travel the galaxy, when we have enough trouble as it getting to the moon and back in one round trip and in whole shape. I understand you'd want to travel the universe and see all the wonders within right now, but that doesn't mean gasping at every conceivable straw will make it come quicker.

Then it's silly now, but the sudden closure of the Breakthough Propulsion Physics Project, that was run by NASA Glenn Research Center, is very suspicious(conspiracy maybe), they may have discover something, but it's funding was shut down by the Bush administration in 2003.

As an aside, I've noticed that in a good portion of your posts you always strike the debaters on the other side of your arguments as your adversaries and foes. Why is that? Why do you think we boast some sort of hatred or ill-desire for you and not that we merely are showing contempt for your arguments?

I must forgot to take my pills.

I always expect enemies, that is my nature.

But when I mean adversaries, I meant opponents of the opposition, on the debate.

[Samuel Dravis]

Thanks for splitting the thread, Skin. I was a little worried it might be considered too off-topic, but I felt the underlying idea was the same, so anyway.. it took longer than I expected.

 

You must be joking, you know you don't believe in no damn furry monster, with the arguments you are presenting here.

Okay, try this: why do you think I don't believe in that furry monster?

 

Defend it, please!

That is the best you can do, try to manipulate me in agreeing with you?

You want me to defend bullsh*t ass questions, I don't think so.

Your attempted manipulation fails, horribly!

I asked you to defend your position, not the questions. Your position being your stance on aliens, the government, etc etc. I asked you to answer the questions because I think they would reveal that you are not taking your reasoning to its logical conclusion. I asked you specifically, "why is xxx considered rediculous?" because I am sure that you either cannot answer in a logical manner - i.e., you'd say something like "I don't think it works that way" (which is not a logical answer, to be sure) or you'd have to agree with me that some ideas have more merit than others. Those ideas with more merit are the ones with some degree of evidence behind them, and the more evidence the better and more reliable the idea is. Clearly, you rejected all of the ideas that fail that test of evidence, so I believe you already agree with me on that point.

 

Getting you to apply this logic to your own ideas, such as aliens, government conspiracies and other similar things, is much harder for me because I cannot force you to give such a belief up. I can't make you see how it applies. I can only show you. So, you have a choice: you can either choose to believe in things irrationally, or you can realize that I am not some sort of skeptical grinch stealing your alien ideas. I'm simply doing the exact same thing you yourself have done in this thread and applying it to a belief you haven't yet been skeptical about.

 

I'm very sorry if I manipulated or distorted any facts or if my reasoning was incorrect. If you could point out where this supposedly happened, I'd be grateful. Thanks.

 

 

Of course, damn I should've figure this out earlier, if no one chooses skepticism, they are always illogical.

Is that the best you got?

Can you do any better?

I didn't say that. I said (paraphrasing a bit): "If you're not skeptical of some things with no evidence behind them, you're credulous." Which is true.

[Windu Chi]

Here we go again!

 

 

Okay, try this: why do you think I don't believe in that furry monster?

I don't know what the hell you believe in and I don't care.

I just keep a open-mind and I believe absolutely nothing is impossible.

 

I asked you to defend your position, not the questions. Your position being your stance on aliens, the government

I think I have done that.

I asked you to answer the questions because I think they would reveal that you are not taking your reasoning to its logical conclusion.

A obvious conclusion to ridiculous questions, that is

obvious again, manipulation questions.

I asked you specifically, "why is xxx considered rediculous?" because I am sure that you either cannot answer in a logical manner - i.e., you'd say something like "I don't think it works that way" (which is not a logical answer, to be sure) or you'd have to agree with me that some ideas have more merit than others.

What you want me to say that lightning is cause by aliens, or muppets that live in the 28th dimension stomping their feet, all this [Expletive(s) Were Deleted] is obviously a damn trap.

 

Getting you to apply this logic to your own ideas, such as aliens, government conspiracies and other similar things, is much harder for me because I cannot force you to give such a belief up. I can't make you see how it applies. I can only show you. So, you have a choice: you can either choose to believe in things irrationally, or you can realize that I am not some sort of skeptical grinch stealing your alien ideas. I'm simply doing the exact same thing you yourself have done in this thread and applying it to a belief you haven't yet been skeptical about.

Whatever you say, ok.

I believe nothing is impossible so, throw I dice and see what's the outcome,

if I'm wrong or people can proven me wrong, then I'm just wrong, I'm not the answer man.

But I don't believe I'm wrong on the UFO phenomenon; the government is lying, the military is lying and the news media I suspect in the U.S.A. aren't doing enough to investigate UFOs and the Roswell incident or pressuring the U.S. government for the truth, so I don't trust the news media either.

Conspiracy nut, then I'm a conspiracy nut.

 

I'm very sorry if I manipulated or distorted any facts or if my reasoning was incorrect. If you could point out where this supposedly happened, I'd be grateful. Thanks.

Don't give me that [Expletive(s) Were Deleted], you plan this strategy all a long, I understand logic and no how it can be use in tactical ways.

 

I didn't say that. I said (paraphrasing a bit): "If you're not skeptical of some things with no evidence behind them, you're credulous." Which is true.

Only thing I'm skeptical about , as I hate to say that, is that existence comes from nothing.

Conundrum that is!

[Samuel Dravis]

I don't know what the hell you believe in and I don't care.

I just keep a open-mind and I believe absolutely nothing is impossible.

You're avoiding the question. Why wouldn't I believe in furry monsters? Because I have no reason to believe in them other than anecdotal evidence, which really is just opinions.

 

I think I have done that.

Show me the facts you have brought up for any of your points. Show that your points are logically supportable. Show that it is rational to believe in something without evidence.

 

A obvious conclusion to ridiculous questions, that is

obvious again, manipulation questions.

Thing about those questions is that they have something in common with your own ideas. They all are not supported by evidence. Guess what? Just because an idea is held by you doesn't mean it should be treated differently than another just like it. All of those questions are rediculous because there is no reason to believe in them. I find your belief in aliens, government conspiracies etc to be equally rediculous for the exact same reason you think my questions were.

 

What you want me to say that lightning is cause by aliens, or muppets that live in the 28th dimension stomping their feet, all this bulls**t is obviously a damn trap.

Why is it so stupid to believe in it? Because there is no evidence. There is no reason to believe in it. I was trying to get that across to you, and you absolutely refuse to even entertain the idea or answer a simple question. You have so far provided zero (0) points that support your belief in aliens, and you haven't even bothered to try. You claim I'm trying to 'manipulate' you into agreeing with me, when I'm actually simply demonstrating the flaws in your own beliefs. If that leads you to my position, all the better.

 

Whatever you say, ok.

 

I believe nothing is impossible so, throw I dice and see what's the outcome,

if I'm wrong or people can proven me wrong, then I'm just wrong, I'm not the answer man.

You're attempting to avoid responsibility for the logical outcome of your arguments. It's not helping you.

 

But I don't believe I'm wrong on the UFO phenomenon; the government is lying, the military is lying and the news media I suspect in the U.S.A. aren't doing enough to investigate UFOs and the Roswell incident or pressuring the U.S. government for the truth, so I don't trust the news media either.

Conspiracy nut, then I'm a conspiracy nut.

Yeah, by that definition I suppose you are. You refuse to accept any evidence, or lack of evidence. You absolutely will not accept that you're wrong, that people aren't lying to you continuously, however unlikely that may be. Yes, I agree you are completely and totally irrational on that subject.

 

 

Don't give me that bulls**t, you plan this strategy all a long, I understand logic and no how it can be use in tactical ways.

Then demonstrate you know how to use logic and carry my question to its conclusion. If you're correct then there is some real reason to believe in aliens. Is there? Show us. Show me.

[SkinWalker]

Believing that nothing is impossible and refusing to accept that some things are simply highly improbable are separate modalities of thought. One is reasonable (generally speaking), the other is irrational and credulous.

 

What you deem "a trap" is a logical analogy, which Samuel Dravis has presented for discussion. You clearly reject his analogy and refuse to discuss it. Yes, it is "a trap." That's the point. To corner you into using logic and reason rather than the unreasoned and credulous belief of space aliens.

 

My question again: what is the most compelling evidence for space aliens visiting our world?

 

My warning again: avoid the consistent use of profanity, even with the asterisk. I dislike editing posts as above and find it far more easy to click the delete button. The latter option is unfair to you, but the expletives in your post are unfair to the rest of us who prefer not to wade through them.