Why does the U.F.O. skeptic treat all all evidence as equally not evidence?

originally posted by: Jonjonj
Can you name ANY study by mainstream science that has been given the funding, political liberty and international backing that a subject of such magnitude deserves? Even one. Please!!!

Easy. SETI.

a reply to: Jonjonj

Is not this the crux of the matter? Can you name ANY study by mainstream science that has been given the funding, political liberty and international backing that a subject of such magnitude deserves? Even one. Please!!!

You don't mean studies like CSETI, Project Hessdalen, and the various government sponsored projects Sign, Grudge, Bluebook, COMETA, Condign? The magnitude they deserved was probably based on economics rather than our own subjective views on the topic.

Sadly their conclusions all pointed to no significant issues. Ufology has become somewhat stagnant since the 1990s and was never able to prove anything alien.

Meanwhile mainstream science has headed in a different direction for more than a generation and is making progress towards discovering alien life.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: Jonjonj
Can you name ANY study by mainstream science that has been given the funding, political liberty and international backing that a subject of such magnitude deserves? Even one. Please!!!

Easy. SETI.

You seem to have no idea what SETI even is. Can you help me to understand how SETI approaches the subject of UNIDENTIFIED flying objects, or even the unexplained characteristics of such phenomena?

Oh, but there's plenty of evidence.

Let's take the next example:

On an international rally competition in 1978 in Argentina, a Citroen GS 1220, was able to 'jump over' 3 control posts, and arrived to destination about 1:30 to 2 hours before what anybody can expect of such a car.

There's not physical explanation on how a Citroen GS 1220 can tarvel that fast and avoid 3 control points in a nearly straight line road, with NO shorcuts or alternative roads.

Read me again:

There's NO way that could EVER happen.

But it happened.

The 'victims' claims a UFO captured the two of them along with the car and left them close to the destination point.

I read your alternative explanations. Anytime...

a reply to: mirageman

I could go further but I will not. Which of those studies is international, politically unbiased and well funded again?

Please do not use the old data to justify the old methods. We have moved on, both technologically and scientifically, if NOT politically. Or am I wrong here?

originally posted by: Jonjonj
You seem to have no idea what SETI even is. Can you help me to understand how SETI approaches the subject of UNIDENTIFIED flying objects, or even the unexplained characteristics of such phenomena?

I didn't realize we were strictly discussing objects seen within our skies....If that's the case, it's still an easy answer: Project Blue Book.

a reply to: neoholographic

I was pleasantly surprised whilst watching the Hollywood movie 'Race to Witch Mountain' again the other day to see a very well-composed 5 minute selection of some of the best UFO pictures and videos out there - the real legitimate ones too. Some would say it would devalue the evidence by being in a movie, but I believe the intent of the director was showcase real evidence for a wide audience.

The worldview paradigm war seems to go on for centuries. This newer problem of anomalous phenomena involving UFOs is still confronting a materialistic Cartesian paradigm that seems to be especially tenacious. I am not sure how to get around this problem, other than there being more and more anomalous phenomena on a world-wide scale...

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: mirageman

I could go further but I will not. Which of those studies is international, politically unbiased and well funded again?

Please do not use the old data to justify the old methods. We have moved on, both technologically and scientifically, if NOT politically. Or am I wrong here?

Yes, you're wrong. Nobody is disputing that there are unidentified flying objects (unidentified by those who witness them). However, unidentified does not equal extraterrestrial. If they were in fact extraterrestrial in origin, there would likely be no doubts by anyone. As it is, though, there is zero evidence supporting such an idea.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

Oh well, never mind, a true sceptic of the 2nd class you seem to be.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: mirageman

I could go further but I will not. Which of those studies is international, politically unbiased and well funded again?

Please do not use the old data to justify the old methods. We have moved on, both technologically and scientifically, if NOT politically. Or am I wrong here?

Yes, you're wrong. Nobody is disputing that there are unidentified flying objects (unidentified by those who witness them). However, unidentified does not equal extraterrestrial. If they were in fact extraterrestrial in origin, there would likely be no doubts by anyone. As it is, though, there is zero evidence supporting such an idea.

There is Zero evidence for dark energy, yet the modern standard model of physics is based around it, what is your point?

There is plenty of anecdotal evidence (anecdotal through lack of investigation by the way) that there is a phenomena that can not be explained by commonly held views of physics.

Anyway, I have a question for you, are you here simply to say it is pointless to investigate the phenomena? Why are you really here, what is your objective regarding this subject?

Get back to the point of the thread.

Why does the U.F.O. skeptic treat all all evidence as equally not evidence?

I apologise OP for seemingly and unwittingly hijacking your thread.

a reply to: Jonjonj

Unfortunately the UFO problem has for a long time been considered a "fringe" topic by Western governments and even the great UFO pillars of Roswell and Rendlesham have began to wobble under close scrutiny in the current century.

NASA and all the other international space programs can be considered inadequately funded if you aren't happy with any of their findings so far. So I'd be interested to know as a tax payer whether you think "Ufology" deserves a massive cash injection of public funding from various international governments?

a reply to: JackHill

CIte your sources and then we can dissect the evidence.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: JackHill

CIte your sources and then we can dissect the evidence.

Trueman put together a pretty comprehensive thread:

touch me

a reply to: neoholographic

When you look at the evidence it's really voluminous in this area as opposed to theories in some scientific fields of study that don't have anywhere near as much evidence than in this area.

What would you say, in your opinion, is the most convincing evidence of alien visitation to our planet?...I don't count UFO's as alien visitation because it is a totally different topic all together.

As a sceptic....I have seen no irrefutable evidence whatsoever of alien visitation to our planet....convince me otherwise.

a reply to: mirageman

NASA and all the other international space programs can be considered inadequately funded if you aren't happy with any of their findings so far. So I'd be interested to know as a tax payer whether you think "Ufology" deserves a massive cash injection of public funding from various international governments?

To this my opinion is an undeniable and unequivocal yes. Why should we spend trillions on the exploration of asteroids when we can not even explain what has been detected in our own atmosphere. once again, we come back to the idea of...we already know this shizzle? If we DO already know the answer, why the secrecy? If we do not, why the reticence?

Something is not right with this puzzle, and that can not be denied.

originally posted by: Jonjonj
Anyway, I have a question for you, are you here simply to say it is pointless to investigate the phenomena? Why are you really here, what is your objective regarding this subject?

Of course not. Investigating such things is the only way we can ever come to a definitive conclusion. What is pointless, is immediately jumping to the conclusion that UFOs are extraterrestrial in nature, when there is no evidence to support that assertation. We have a word for that sort of blind, unyielding belief: Religion.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

I can help with any questions related to Spanish interpretation if you so need it.

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: Rosinitiate

I can help with any questions related to Spanish interpretation if you so need it.

I'm hispanic.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: Jonjonj
Anyway, I have a question for you, are you here simply to say it is pointless to investigate the phenomena? Why are you really here, what is your objective regarding this subject?

Of course not. Investigating such things is the only way we can ever come to a definitive conclusion. What is pointless, is immediately jumping to the conclusion that UFOs are extraterrestrial in nature, when there is no evidence to support that assertation. We have a word for that sort of blind, unyielding belief: Religion.

I never said extraterrestrial, you did. I never said belief, you did. Stop just hacking onto my statements and step back ok?