It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Leibolmai
Its called science. You say the word "debunking" as if it were only about attacking the UFO phenomena.
Providing "proof" of something is built up over time. You need to throw out the extraneous, incorrect data. There are tons of folks out there who get their fun from making fun, tricking, or hoaxing people that research UFOs.
Originally posted by lakewoodrealtor
If there are so many people here that believe in UFO's why then does it seem the main objective is to debunk all new and old information. Shouldn't the believers and non believers be putting the same amount of energy into providing proof??
Originally posted by lakewoodrealtor
I have been a happy member of this site for sometime now. One of my more favorite topics is the UFO section. I would like to ask a simple question to everyone on this forum. If there are so many people here that believe in UFO's why then does it seem the main objective is to debunk all new and old information. Shouldn't the believers and non believers be putting the same amount of energy into providing proof?? Now i know and understand that the amount of hoaxes out there are great but shouldn't there be a few genuine encounters.
I believe if people continue to debunk or believe a case to be bunk right from the get go we will never get to disclosure.
Is it easier to prove something false than to prove it real???
Lakewood
I don't think that will happen, at least judging from some of the cases that have appeared here in the last year or so.
Originally posted by lakewoodrealtor
One day we may have Joe cool from Alabama post actual footage of a UFO. When it does happen we just might miss the boat because it very well could be labeled a HOAX by status quo.
Originally posted by lakewoodrealtor
If there are so many people here that believe in UFO's why then does it seem the main objective is to debunk all new and old information.
Shouldn't the believers and non believers be putting the same amount of energy into providing proof??
Is it easier to prove something false than to prove it real???
Originally posted by lakewoodrealtor
I have been a happy member of this site for sometime now. One of my more favorite topics is the UFO section. I would like to ask a simple question to everyone on this forum. If there are so many people here that believe in UFO's why then does it seem the main objective is to debunk all new and old information. Shouldn't the believers and non believers be putting the same amount of energy into providing proof?? Now i know and understand that the amount of hoaxes out there are great but shouldn't there be a few genuine encounters.
I believe if people continue to debunk or believe a case to be bunk right from the get go we will never get to disclosure.
Is it easier to prove something false than to prove it real???
Lakewood
Originally posted by chickeneater
Limitations of Science: It doesn't explain everything. And it will never.
3. Science: The Art of naming, measuring and observing mysterious phenomenons.
Originally posted by schuyler
Originally posted by chickeneater
Limitations of Science: It doesn't explain everything. And it will never.
Although this one-liner is irrelevant to the topic here you might want to take it to the science and technology forum and see how it flies there. Should be interesting.
3. Science: The Art of naming, measuring and observing mysterious phenomenons.
Is that what they teach at Harvard?
Originally posted by chickeneater
Can we make peace? I mean, I love starwars too! Maybe not as much as you do
No, they don't "teach" at Harvard, they make you think for yourself, and that my friend, you may never get.