The Questions U.F.O. skeptics can't answer

At first this post will seem to be off topic, but please bear with me for a few paragraphs. It will get to the topic.

For years there have been stories of Black Florida Panthers prowling in our wilderness, but there's never been any official record they exist.

Source

I haven't been able to quickly locate the exact number of years that these big black cats have been being reported in Florida, but I think it's been at least 5 or 6. So, for that long people reported seeing large black felines but no concrete evidence of their existence could be found. Then they caught one. It turned out to be a melanistic (black) bobcat weighing about 20 lbs., and officials now agree that there is a population of them living in Florida.

Witnesses reported:

1. a cat. Yes, it was a cat.
   
2. Black. Yes, it was black
   
3. not a domestic cat. Correct, it was not.
   
4. Very large, panther size. Oops - only a normal sized bobcat.
   

Although witnesses were incorrect about the size of the cats, they got most of it right. And despite years worth of sightings, no credible prints, hair, scat, photos, or video surfaced. So a small group of cats - without technology or superior intelligence - managed to elude the people who were looking for them, and avoid providing any good evidence of their existence, for years.

Why, then, is it so impossible to believe that a group of theoretically intelligent creatures, possibly with advanced technology, manage to prevent leaving concrete evidence of their existence?

And although we know that witnesses are not 100% reliable about what they've seen, our black cat witnesses were mostly correct about what they saw; it was a black cat that wasn't an ordinary domestic cat. Why, then, can we not also believe that all the hundreds (thousands?) of UFO and alien witnesses probably also have it mostly right? They've seen something that isn't a conventional aircraft, bird, Venus, etc.

The melanistic bobcats of Florida are but one example of anomalies which were seen by witnesses for years before they were proven to exist. Cryptozoology is full of examples.

I personally, therefore, conclude that lack of "good evidence" does not mean that UFOs and/or aliens don't exist. All those people are seeing something, and history suggests that, collectively, they are probably at least 'mostly right' about what they are seeing.

In conclusion, I submit that it is not reasonable to assert that all the people who have seen aliens or UFOs can't be seeing something that is a real phenomenon just because there isn't adequate concrete evidence to convince the skeptic, and the skeptic who says otherwise is going against logic, reason, and historical fact in order to decide that they can't be real.

No, I have not proved that they do exist. I have merely made what I think is a good argument against being able to conclusively say that they don't exist.


[edit on 27-7-2008 by Heike]

I don't see why these sceptics can't simply believe in the possibility of alens

Why do you have to be so fundamentlist in your attitude?

Originally posted by AntisepticSkeptic
reply to post by polomontana

 

Here's a question that ET believers can't answer.

Where's the proof?

Give us concrete proof, THEN we take this matter seriously.

Remember the burden of proof is on you. Not us. You are the ones who are supposed to answer questions, since you people force these beliefs down our throats.

"ETs exist!" "It's a coverup!" "The gubbermint knows!" "Everyone's in on it!"

Yadda yadda yadda. All talk but no proof.


[edit on 26-7-2008 by AntisepticSkeptic]

Where is the actual proof of extraterrestrials _NOT_ existing? Could you be so kindly to point me int he direction of that evidence?

Unless you have, in some magic way, been able to travel to every single little corner of the enitre universe you don't have any first hand proof of them not exsiting.


"Remember the burden of proof is on you. Not us."
Heh, the burden of proof is either on everyone or none. If we have the burden of having to find the evidence of their existense, you definitely also have the burden of finding the evidence that is pointed in the direction of their non-existense. There is no concrete proof either way, so until the day comes that we have some concrete and convincing proof that points us one way or the other, at least non of us can discard the even remotest possibility of their exsistens beeing a fact.

challenge for skeptics

prove to me atoms exists

prove to me oxygen exists

prove to me either god or evolution or both or whatever your opposing idea is, prove any one of them

prove to me you are smart enough, learned enough to say for certain aliens do not exist.



[edit on 7/27/2008 by re22666]

reply to post by re22666

Are you claiming to be more intelligent than skeptics? You do know that there is more than enough proof that atoms and oxygen exist than there are that aliens are here. And if your talking about ufo's than yes they do exist but no proof they are alien controlled only theory.
Time to get off your high horse and maybe open your mind to the possibilty that there are things that may exist and also they may not.


[edit on 27-7-2008 by riggs2099]

If i were to claim that Santa Claus exists, backing it up with a couple interviews with little kids who say they've seen him and a few pictures off of google. And then bitch and complain if you don't believe and call you close minded... would you take me serious?

Cause that's what most people are doing. I'm open to believe, but there is no evidence concrete enough to suggest they exist.

Originally posted by Hamlin
If i were to claim that Santa Claus exists, backing it up with a couple interviews with little kids who say they've seen him and a few pictures off of google. And then bitch and complain if you don't believe and call you close minded... would you take me serious?

Cause that's what most people are doing. I'm open to believe, but there is no evidence concrete enough to suggest they exist.

You can't be serious?

There's tons of evidence that suggest they exist.

www.hyper.net...
www.ufologie.net...
bibleufo.com...
video.google.com...

I can go on and on.

This is a perfect example as to why some skeptics blind themselves from the truth in order to protect there belief system.

In their minds, everyone that accepts things within ufology has to be gullible or living in a fantasy. There are very serious people who study these things and accept these things.

In the skeptics mind, no reasonable individual can come to the conclusion that these things exist so they have to "make believe" that everyone who accepts ufology is gullible.

It goes back to my original point. Some people who claim to be skeptics want to limit anothor persons sphere of knowledge when it comes to these things and they always want to paint people who accept evidence within ufology as following these things blindly. This is so they can feel comfortable in their mind that nobody who is serious or rational accepts these things.

This is truly illogical.

Ok, maybe that should of been "prove" rather than "suggest".

I do actually believe. But none of that was proof. And nothing that I read there would make me feel any stronger.

I believe purely from wanting to believe. When my friends ask me for evidence I have nothing worth showing really. What would you put foward as your most compelling piece of evidence?

reply to post by polomontana


Why give us proof you believe..we already know that it doesn't take much for you to believe. We as skeptics need more than that in order to come to a certain conclusion. What you are believing as fact is strictly hypothetical.

Originally posted by Hamlin
Ok, maybe that should of been "prove" rather than "suggest".

I do actually believe. But none of that was proof. And nothing that I read there would make me feel any stronger.

I believe purely from wanting to believe. When my friends ask me for evidence I have nothing worth showing really. What would you put foward as your most compelling piece of evidence?

I'm glad you made that distinction Hamlin.

The difference between proof and evidence is very important. When someone as you to prove they exist ask them to prove the origin of life or to prove black holes exist.

You can just show evidence that supports the underlying claim. This is why the standard in court is beyond a reasonable doubt and not a shadow of a doubt.

Check out some of the links I posted and there's alot of cases that's evidence to support the conclusion that they exist.

Here's trace evidence cases.
www.ufophysical.com...

Here's information about a peer-reviewed paper that suggests that all crop circles are not man made.
www.swirlednews.com...

Here's a video about Dr. Roger Lier and implants he took out of people that were attached to nerve endings.
youtube.com...

When a skeptic says people are accepting these things blindly, it's a flat out lie. There's circumstantial and direct evidence for things within ufology.

What the skeptic has to do is provide counter evidence if they are making the claim that these things don't exist.

In most cases they can't so they try to keep ufology in the realm of fantasy. This way it's easy for them to dismiss these things out of hand as people following blindly.

With this kind of logic, who is being irrational?

I hope these things help Hamlin.

I`m neither for or against the existence of `aliens`.
But all the so-called proof that I`ve ever seen are either very out of focus photos (very surprising with todays technology) shaky video recordings that show nothing of any significance & therefore prove nothing
Interviews with level-headed people like pilots, police etc. Which means that the rest of us are not level-headed?
If my friend came up to me and said that he witnessed a UFO landing in his garden. I would respect his view, but this does not mean I have to believe him.
People preach that they have seen and spoken to Jesus, do you believe them? If not, would that not make you one of those who you are judging as being skeptical?

Now some so called skeptics are saying accounts from people like Pilots doesn't matter.

Now if you only had these reports from people that were not pilots, the skeptics would say,"Why havn't any pilots seen these things if they exist."

This again shows the logical fallacy in there arguments.

They ask for proof.

Prove to me Pluto exists. Have you ever seen Pluto? Any pics of Pluto could have been taken in the basement of NASA.

Prove that you have an objective existence. I can show through simulation theory that your just a simulation.

My point is, if you follow the logic of some of these skeptics, you will find yourself down a deep rabbit hole of NONSENSE.

Originally posted by polomontana

Originally posted by Hamlin
Here's a video about Dr. Roger Lier and implants he took out of people that were attached to nerve endings.
youtube.com...

Cool video. Leaves me with a good reason to believe.

Originally posted by TheOracle
I want the skeptics to explain the
Nazca lines


thats all

What would you like explained about them, Ms. Oracle?

Contrary to popular belief, and the claims of those forwarding an extraterrestrial explanation for the lines, one need not be thousands of feet in the air to properly observe them. They can easily be seen from nearby hills.

Using simple math and technologies that would have been available to the Nazca, Dr. Nickell of the University of Kentucky proved it would have just taken a matter of days to construct the largest of the geoglyphs. They are created by a simple scraping away of the thin surface of the desert, exposing the light-colored ground beneath.

maybe skeptics are just jealous that they have never encountered aliens before

Originally posted by re22666
prove to me atoms exsists

Is this proof enough?

Originally posted by re22666
prove to me you are smart enough, learned enough to say for certain aliens do not exsist.

You are confusing a skepticism of extraterrestrial visitation with a disbelief in extraterrestrials. The two thoughts are not mutually inclusive.

By the by, before you insult someone's intelligence in the future, you might want to run a spell-check.

reply to post by polomontana


I see you have finally realized when to use the word pseudo and when not to...lol. For one thing to say that crop circles are alien is just plain old stupid..a very intelligent race comes to earth and decides to flatten our wheats thinking that would be the best way to communicate..kind of lame wouldn't you think, but then again your just going to say well we don't think like them because when confronted with logic that may show your arguments to be riduculous and you have nothing else to say, you will run to the same things over and over. Three famous arguments used by believers when logic is used against them....government took or is hiding vital information, we don't think like them or prove that something else does not exist.
As for the so-called implants, let's say thier true...where is the evidence that says they are alien made...did they leave a sign like something that said made in zeta reticula? You will continue to shove evidence that only points to theory and not fact...when will you find something shows something that says undeniable alien. Since there are other possibilties that something other than aliens made these they can not be overlooked.

Trace evidence also does not prove nothing just says that something was there not that an alien species has landed in thier spacecraft.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by riggs2099]

[edit on 27-7-2008 by riggs2099]

reply to post by Nirujarocks


We are totally jealous that we have never been in contact with something we believe does not exist. I am sorry you get disappointed every year waiting for santa to show that is not our fault.

Originally posted by polomontana
Now some so called skeptics are saying accounts from people like Pilots doesn't matter.

Now if you only had these reports from people that were not pilots, the skeptics would say,"Why havn't any pilots seen these things if they exist."

This again shows the logical fallacy in there arguments.

They ask for proof.

Prove to me Pluto exists. Have you ever seen Pluto? Any pics of Pluto could have been taken in the basement of NASA.

Prove that you have an objective existence. I can show through simulation theory that your just a simulation.

My point is, if you follow the logic of some of these skeptics, you will find yourself down a deep rabbit hole of NONSENSE.

We are asking for proof that shows there are aliens here. All you give is is crap that shows us something may have left something or that something was in the sky or whatever...you are only proving that theoretically they MAY exist not that they DO exist.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by riggs2099]

... This computer seems to have a mind of it's own...Maybe it a "conspiracy"... Haw!

[edit on 27-7-2008 by cosmokatt7]