You Have No Idea What Happened (We get many details wrong when recalling past memories)

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Entire history of universe is "observed" by us eyewitnesses. Can we than stand to reason by your remarks that it's most likely flawed ?

Not much of the history of the universe has been observed by us but yes, eyewitness reports are inevitably flawed. That does not mean that observation is of no value but it does mean that eyewitness reports cannot be taken at face value without corroborating evidence. And the longer the interval between the observation and the report, the more problematic it becomes.

a reply to: Phage

We observe light and extrapolate history. Its all pretty much accepted dogma these days.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

I guess you missed the part about corroborating evidence.

a reply to: Phage

There is no corroborating evidence for age of the universe or the sun...or earth for that matter. It's all based on "observation", math...and a teaspoon of conjecture.

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: Phage

There is no corroborating evidence for age of the universe or the sun...or earth for that matter. It's all based on "observation", math...and a teaspoon of conjecture.

math would be the corroborating evidence. What is the point you are trying to make?

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

I think brother, Phage meant corroborating evidence to a witness report , say a big chunk of ufo matter, an alien menu with an exotic unknown dish or perhaps an alien chef in the flesh..

how did this end up in the ageless universe ?

funbox

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: Phage

There is no corroborating evidence for age of the universe or the sun...or earth for that matter. It's all based on "observation", math...and a teaspoon of conjecture.

math would be the corroborating evidence. What is the point you are trying to make?

math is not corroborating evidence. Never was. It's good for postulating theories. The confirmation is always done empirically and ultimately through observation...if done right. Without confirmation through observation, the math is just a theory.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly
The observations along with the math would be repeatable by others?

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

not by the blind though , how are blind people supposed to get conformation ? aliens with brail placards?

funbox

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly
The observations along with the math would be repeatable by others?

plenty of repeated UFO observations...form really credible eyewitnesses...yet our math tells us that's impossible. In this case you'll go with math...I'll go with people's eyes.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

hmmm you just made me wonder if any blind people have ever reported an abduction event..

going to have a nose ..

funbox

a reply to: funbox

I think brother, Phage meant corroborating evidence to a witness report , say a big chunk of ufo matter, an alien menu with an exotic unknown dish or perhaps an alien chef in the flesh..

That wouldn't hurt but if we are trying to compare observations of celestial bodies to observations of UFOs, its completely different. celestial bodies are predictable, UFOs are not. observations of UFO's are shown to be something else like 98% of the time while my observations of the moon are usually the moon, except for that one time but I don't want to talk about that.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

plenty of repeated UFO observations

Fair enough, let me know when the next UFO should appear and I will take a look.

a reply to: ZetaRediculian

yes yes Brother , but my continued search for any abductees reports from the blind is turning up nothing so far , have also extended it to the handicapped and the disabled, nothing as of yet. do you know of any reports from these people ?

would they even make them , or is this evidence of exclusion?

funbox

originally posted by: funbox
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

yes yes Brother , but my continued search for any abductees reports from the blind is turning up nothing so far , have also extended it to the handicapped and the disabled, nothing as of yet. do you know of any reports from these people ?

would they even make them , or is this evidence of exclusion?

funbox

There is no reason to exclude such people. I think you are on to something.

originally posted by: funbox
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

hmmm you just made me wonder if any blind people have ever reported an abduction event..

going to have a nose ..

funbox

that would be rather interesting. But than again...could a blind person know if it was aliens that abducted him/her? Than we would most likely complain...that the person didn't make a visual observation and therefore their experience is not really credible.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

I suppose somehow they would have an inkling , given the reports from abductee's , would a blind person know if they were floating , or in a strange place , when once they were in bed ?

does this ever happen ?



funbox

a reply to: Arbitrageur


"You have no idea what happened"......going back to the original statement.... sounds a lot stronger than the idea that folks may have detail problems over time.

originally posted by: [post=19401581]ZetaRediculian

yes yes Brother , but my continued search for any abductees reports from the blind is turning up nothing so far , have also extended it to the handicapped and the disabled, nothing as of yet. do you know of any reports from these people ?

would they even make them , or is this evidence of exclusion?

funbox

I have more than a few pages of abductees research here and according to the folks that looked into cases there is a discouraging amount of bad conflicting and contradicting memory. But then again a lot of abductees cases don't sound like strictly UFO events. I could name some cases that sound like poltergeist events ect. Cases maybe most of us have some familiarity with.

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
Entire history of universe is "observed" by us eyewitnesses. Can we than stand to reason by your remarks that it's most likely flawed ?

Not based on my remarks, but based on the evidence, of course it's flawed.

For an entertaining view of how flawed it can be, try reading all the different eyewitness accounts of the 1942 "Battle of Los Angeles". There are many different, and conflicting accounts and recollections of what eyewitnesses saw, so regardless of what really happened, we have no choice but to conclude that most eyewitnesses of that event have to be wrong, simply because there are so many conflicting accounts that can't all be right.

originally posted by: Logarock
"You have no idea what happened"......going back to the original statement.... sounds a lot stronger than the idea that folks may have detail problems over time.

Exactly. That's why I didn't feel copying the title of the article I cited was adequate, and added my interpretation to the title in parentheses. However I would add that not remembering where you were is a pretty big "detail". In fact the comparison of these two recalls is described as having "barely any similarities", and these subjects are young students, not seniors with "memory problems":

From the OP story link:

In the fall of 1988, two and a half years later, the questionnaire was given a second time to the same students. It was then that R. T. recalled, with absolute confidence, her dorm-room experience. But when Neisser and Harsch compared the two sets of answers, they found barely any similarities. According to R. T.’s first recounting, she’d been in her religion class when she heard some students begin to talk about an explosion. She didn’t know any details of what had happened, “except that it had exploded and the schoolteacher’s students had all been watching, which I thought was sad.” After class, she went to her room, where she watched the news on TV, by herself, and learned more about the tragedy.

When there are "barely any similarities" between two recalls, saying "you have no idea what happened" is only a slight exaggeration, isn't it?