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

[Windu Chi]

 

 

Show that an analogy used to demonstrate underlying reasoning is an appeal to ridicule. I never mocked your argument. I simply demonstrated that, because there is no evidence for either situation, then there is no reason to believe that either hypothetical existed. I'd like you to take the parts of my posts that do so in your opinion and tell me why, exactly, you think they are ridiculing/making your argument look rediculous.

Don't play stupid with me ok, you meant ridicule.

Besides, I'd hardly have to make your arguments look rediculous in order to win any points. By their very nature they already are.

Ah, another fallacy, ad hominem.

I personally have seen the government tell the truth, particularly on reports. There are many government agencies that do so. The GAO is a reliable source, as it has been in the past. If you have reason to doubt their credibility on this statement, then demonstrate the reason. I've never said that ANY source is completely reliable, myself included. In fact, I've explicitly stated otherwise. Perhaps you might want to look at

You personally have seen the government tell the truth.

like I said, appeal to the authority.

 

 

 

Have I ever: claimed to know that your story was true or false?

Well, your arguments seem to show evidence, that you all already believe it is false.

Have I ever: shown that I want one side to be correct and the other not?

Don't give me that bull, you want to believe that you haven't been wash up by the government lies.

So, you want your side to be correct.

Have I ever: declared that I would not believe in the face of actual evidence?

You don't believe in any evidence so, by your arguments here you already made up your mind.

 

Please demonstrate and quote exactly where I have committed any of these fallacies or, of course, any others. I appreciate you attempting to correct my arguments.

I don't need to quote; your blind trust in government:appeal to the authority; your belief that people in the government can't keep secrets this extraordinary, so the UFO phenomenon can't be true from your reasoning:appeal to consequences.

 

 

 

 

I checked that link, and it was a witness account of one person. Also, neither of the links worked at the bottom, so I couldn't investigate further. Nikolay Subbotin, Director of the Russian UFO Research Station, apparently uses geocities to host his sites. That doesn't really add credibility to his account.

You are lying I have check those links, they work.

Present some evidence! All you have given are simply opinions. Pictures of aliens would be great, so long as they appear in a credible source and are documented with other hard evidence. Things are far too easy to photoshop these days - I could easily make a UFO pic myself I felt like it.

Stop asking me to present evidence because I don't have it, I'm giving you internet links to the evidence that exist out there.

[Samuel Dravis]

Don't play stupid with me ok, you meant ridicule.

Show that they were ridiculing your argument. I attacked your claims because they had no evidence behind them.

 

Ah, another fallacy, ad hominem.

I hardly attacked you in my statements about you not having any evidence, did I?

 

You personally have seen the government tell the truth.

like I said, appeal to the authority.

The GOA has been around since 1921. So far its reports have been fairly credible, even so far as to exposing people being exposed to hazardous chemicals by the government. Your reason to doubt their credibility is...?

 

Well, your arguments seem to show evidence, that you all already believe it is false.

I simply don't believe in things that have no evidence to show for them.

 

Don't give me that bull, you want to believe that you haven't been wash up by the government lies.

So I, who am talking on a Star Wars forum, who likes space exploration and loves scifi books, wants there to be no evidence for aliens. Yes, of course.

 

Just give me a reason that makes your conspiracy theory reasonable and I'll accept it.

 

You don't believe in any evidence so, by your arguments here you already made up your mind.

My mind is at the default state - I have no active belief in anything without sufficient evidence. Anything which doesn't produce evidence is effectively non-existent and I can fairly safely ignore it. You haven't provided any evidence, so....

 

 

You are lying I have check those links, they work.

Okay, let's try them together, shall we?

 

Director RUFORS (Russian UFO Research Station)

[http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/6303]

Editor Russian UFO Magazine "Dialog: Earth - Space"

[http://www.cross.ru/dialog]

 

First: Requested page not found.

Second: Translated via google, it's a 404. Page not found.

 

Stop asking me to present evidence because I don't have it, I'm giving you internet links to the evidence that exist out there.

You haven't given links to any credible evidence yet.

[Windu Chi]

The GOA has been around since 1921. So far its reports have been fairly credible, even so far as to exposing people being exposed to hazardous chemicals by the government. Your reason to doubt their credibility is...?

Have you been paying close attention?

I don't trust the government, have I been saying that all this time I don't trust the government, including any part of it, if I forgot to post that info.

Just like you don't trust ANY UFO evidence, I don't trust ANY government evidence.

So, like I have been saying, we have a impasse here.

 

 

Director RUFORS (Russian UFO Research Station)

[http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/6303]

Editor Russian UFO Magazine "Dialog: Earth - Space"

[http://www.cross.ru/dialog]

First: Requested page not found.

Second: Translated via google, it's a 404. Page not found.

Those links don't work, because they wasn't hyperlinked.

You took those web addresses and search a search engine.

 

 

You haven't given links to any credible evidence yet.

Whatever you believe ok, you aren't going to trust any evidence.

Any UFO evidence is not credible to you.

The only evidence you will trust if you could have a beer with the aliens, discuss topics with the aliens, ride on there ships, right?

So, you is not going to trust anything why keep asking for it if you will never believe it as credible?

[SkinWalker]

I might have misunderstood what SkinWalker meant when he referred to strawman posts, but my point is Samuel is spot on about his comment on disproving furry monsters.

 

I think you may have. A Straw Man argument is one that argues against a position which you create specifically to be easy to argue against, rather than the position actually held by those who oppose your point of view.

 

What he did was create an analogy to show the logical structure of windu6's premise and how it didn't logically wash. He did a good job of it too. Particularly since the logical structure is so obviously flawed, even windu6 wasn't ready to embrace it beyond his own pre-conceived conclusions.

 

I covered this, but how about Area 51? For decades this was kept hidden and only recently has the government admitted it's existence. I said how I can accept they tested experimental aircraft there, but was such an explanation ever made? I think all we know for certain is it's existence. So why cover it up for so long?

 

It's a fallacy (a non sequitur, to be exact) to think that because the government, specifically the Department of Defense, has secrets, it must, therefore, be hiding space aliens.

 

A good overview of logical fallacies can be found at: The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe. They also have one of the top podcasts on iTunes.

[Nancy Allen``]

Of course it's a fallacy to believe every conspiracy theory in the book. I'm quite happy to accept that was where experimental aircraft were stored, but still I wonder if maybe there was something there. Was there ever a reason for the government saying 'Area 51 does not exist and if you're smart you'll stop asking questions'? Doesn't really matter, it's not something I'll lose sleep over. I'd be interested if there was an answer though.

[Samuel Dravis]

Of course it's a fallacy to believe every conspiracy theory in the book. I'm quite happy to accept that was where experimental aircraft were stored, but still I wonder if maybe there was something there. Was there ever a reason for the government saying 'Area 51 does not exist and if you're smart you'll stop asking questions'? Doesn't really matter, it's not something I'll lose sleep over. I'd be interested if there was an answer though.

You could read the wiki entry. It's pretty interesting, particularly the bit about testing the U-2 there. I lurves the U-2; it's an awesome plane.

[Windu Chi]

You could read the wiki entry. It's pretty interesting, particularly the bit about testing the U-2 there. I lurves the U-2; it's an awesome plane.

That U-2 is a piece of junk, the F-117 stealth fighter they made there is a piece of junk; it only have a speed of around 600mph, also it is no fighter, it has no guns for defense and it only can carry two bombs, no air to air missiles.

[SkinWalker]

Lets stay on topic. Start a new thread if you want to debate aeronautical superiority of this plane or that.

[Totenkopf]

As I understand it, much of the southwestern US is actually owned by the US government and there are many military bases throughout. Even if you rely on such sources as the history channel, military channel, etc.., it becomes obvious that a lot of classified activities are going on out there. Given that the Roswell incident took place in the early stages of the cold war, it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to conclude that a great deal of classified aerial activity was going on in this region. It would make a lot of sense, from a national security pov, to a) keep such activities top secret and b) misdirect, probably with stories of UFOs, people away from the goings on at these bases. Afterall, it becomes quite easy to marginalize people who claim that UFOs are secretly kept hidden away somewhere, but who can't produce a piece of tangible evidence to prove their case. The whole UFO scenario then becomes an effective mask behind which the govenrment could continue with such projects as the SR71, U2, B2, etc... in relative secrecy. Increasingly sophisticated satellite tech does make this a bit more difficult, but not impossible.

[Nancy Allen``]

You could read the wiki entry. It's pretty interesting, particularly the bit about testing the U-2 there. I lurves the U-2; it's an awesome plane.

 

Yes, U2 is great, but I've always been partial to the B-52s. Every time Love Shack hit the radio...

 

I'm up to discussing fighter planes in another thread, the Black Bird projects were ace, but back on topic. Looking at Groom Lake with the possible exception of the large perimiter deterrence (warning signs and such) there really isn't anything out of the ordinary from other military bases. Deadly force would be autherised on dangerous trespassers from Fort Hood to Camp David, it should be anyway. Area 51 though has that mystique about it, no doubt spurred on by the media and it's representation as having ties to Roswel and aliens in fiction. It's interesting how they raised most of the secrets there were moved and they keep the secrecy to misdirect attention. If that is true it's a great idea, something I'd be proud to think of myself were I involved at all. But the question I am wondering is who played the Rodian in that alien interview?

[Windu Chi]

As I understand it, much of the southwestern US is actually owned by the US government and there are many military bases throughout. Even if you rely on such sources as the history channel, military channel, etc.., it becomes obvious that a lot of classified activities are going on out there. Given that the Roswell incident took place in the early stages of the cold war, it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to conclude that a great deal of classified aerial activity was going on in this region. It would make a lot of sense, from a national security pov, to a) keep such activities top secret and b) misdirect, probably with stories of UFOs, people away from the goings on at these bases.

Maybe they, the air force are building starfighters; small UFOs and the Navy might be building starships; the gigantic UFOs airline pilots reports.

That could be another possibility to explain all the secrecy.

Or, they could be building high power particle beam weapons and high energy plasma weapons, or cold plasma physics application to cloaking jet fighters.

Future weaponry can also explain what the hell is going on there.

I will pick both of these as explanations.

Or, what else the hell could they be hiding there?

 

After the speeds of SR-71 planes, flying multiple times faster than mach 3: 2,224.36471mph will be more effective higher above the atmosphere or in space; higher attitude less dense air, less drag, lower the temperatures experience by air friction in low air density. Or more effective in space with lower g forces; safer negative g forces cause by climbing and maneuvering, operating in space far from Earth lessen the possibility of grayout and have safer positive g forces that is cause by a plane diving, operating in space will of course lessen the possibility of redout. Also operation in space will lower the possibility of dying if far from gravitational influences of Earth and the Moon, lower the possibility of pilots dying or the aircraft or spacecraft itself being destroyed from the very high deadly g forces experience with extreme sharp turns in the process of maneuvering at speeds many multiple times higher than mach 3.

 

Unless they got some sort of antigravitational technology that will have inertia dampers in the aircraft cockpits that will negate pilots from experiencing g forces when maneuvering and allow the secret aircraft or spacecraft to ride a gravitational wave for attitude control and manevering action, but why would they threaten to kill people for coming in Area 51 for that?

 

Anitgravity will solve a lot of problems; lessen the rocket fuel mass for interplanetary travel ; negate gravity or counter it, don't have to have hundred thousands of pounds of rocket fuel of chemical reaction mass as the mass of the cargo goes up, for the potential energy needed to convert in kinetic energy of motion of thrust velocity to reach Earth's gravitational field escape velocity of 6.96mi/s aprox. for interplanetary travel.

 

Also going that fast, 25,053.7mph aprox.(mach 33.79 aprox.) or the hypersonic regime, the lower specific heat capacities of surface material will cause for most aircraft moving at those speeds through the atmosphere to burn up due to atmospheric friction that will ionzie the atmosphere gases to a couple 1000 F* plasma temperatures, if maintain at those hypersonic velocities in the confines atmosphere for long periods of time.

 

Also with antigravity technology, commercial jet aircraft airline planes can fly to space at lower velocities like their 300-600mph velocity ranges and also escape the Earth gravitational field, since gravity is negated or cancel completely, of course if these airplanes are refitted with rocket engines or maybe more powerful thrust ion engines or engines that don't need to breathe in air for operation, also other technical details for successful space operation for commercial jet aircraft.

This antigravity technology will allow easy access to space for civilians.

 

Or, aerospace engineers can use the force of gravity itself for spacecraft propulsion, with antigravity technology that will lower the dependency on very large amount of rocket fuel payloads for interplanetary travel or cancel that dependency completely.

And with antigravity technology we would probably finally make interstellar travel possible and open the Milky Way galaxy up for exploration.

Afterall, it becomes quite easy to marginalize people who claim that UFOs are secretly kept hidden away somewhere, but who can't produce a piece of tangible evidence to prove their case. The whole UFO scenario then becomes an effective mask behind which the govenrment could continue with such projects as the SR71, U2, B2, etc... in relative secrecy. Increasingly sophisticated satellite tech does make this a bit more difficult, but not impossible.

How would you explain all these thousands of people who claim they have been abducted by aliens other then the skeptics explanation; they are crazy, nut cases, delusional; it is in their minds?

Would you say the government is behind alien abductions,

and behind cattle mutilations?