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

Originally posted by SaviorComplex


Criss Angel himself says he is an illusionist. But that doesn't matter! He must be an alien, because even he cannot prove he is not! We can't explain how he does his illusions, so the only rational explanation is that he's either an alien, or employing magic!

LOL. That is my whole point. How easy it is to make a claim like that. I mean, please. Watch the video the OP linked for me. Then put my comment in that context. Its just absolutely ridiculous. I mean, i can make any claim i want and post a link to a video and say, there you go, MY claim+ a video= difinitive evidence.

reply to post by thrashee


Are you saying there are no UFOs?

Originally posted by TruthTellist
Are you saying there are no UFOs?

There is no possible way to read the post you are refering to and infer thrashee is claiming there are no UFOs. And no point has any skeptic in this thread said there are no such things as UFOs. Every single one of us will agree that people will look to the sky and see things they cannot identify.

What we have been saying is that the "unidentified" in "unidentified flying object" does not mean "extraterrestrial." It simply means it is unidentified because of a lack of information. You are the ones assuming that because we acknowledge that lack of information, that somehow we are saying there is not life in the universe or UFOs in the true sense of the acronym.

[edit on 29-7-2008 by SaviorComplex]

I don't understand why "believers" are so aggresive in their approach. Unable to accept that there is no solid proof, and there hasn't been any, ever.

If someone "respected and high ranking" came out and said "No aliens have visited Earth" you would dismiss it. But one pilot comes out and you believe him instantly. These "eye witness" claims would not stand up in court.

I'm glad people are reading this thread.

If you notice, none of the skeptics offer nothing but opinions.

Again, I made the claim that extra-terrestrial/extra-dimensional beings exist beyond a reasonable doubt based on the evidence.

I showed evidence to support the claim.

The skeptics offer nothing but opinions.

It goes back to my original point.

They want to limit a person sphere of knowledge to fit there beliefs on the subject.

They say these things are unexplained and I say they are not based on the evidence and science.

They have no evidence to back there claims but I have evidence to support my claim.

If they say my claim that aliens exists without any reasonable doubt is false, then they have to rebutt my claim if they are saying I'm wrong with evidence not opinion.

If you notice they want to debate things I never said because there used to the same arguments.

I never said in any posts I'm out to prove to them that my claim is the correct one.

I said time and time again, if you have evidence to rebutt the claim then post it and I will listen.

They keep wanting to debate opinion.

I've mentioned Dr. Lier
I've mentioned 62 kids in Zimbabwe
I've mentioned Russia
I've mentioned Trace Evidence cases
I've mentioned the Travis Walton case
I've mentioned the physics of extra-dimensions.

The list goes on.

I will try this again skeptics.

This is my claim.
EXTRA-TERRESTRIALS/EXTRA-DIMENSIONAL BEINGS EXIST BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT BASED ON THE EVIDENCE.

This is what you will get from the skeptics.

General debates about logic lifted from a website.
There opinion
They need undeniable prooof.
It's fantasy
It's a hoax

This is what you will not get from the skeptic

Barely any discussion about actual evidence.

Will a skeptic tell me, if we live in an extra-dimensional universe will these things still be unexplained and why?

Will a skeptic tell me why I and others HAVE to leave these things unexplained if we go by the actual reports and investigations?

At the end of the day, will you debate my claim and not your opinion. I know it's hard to focus because your use to debating in this illogical way but you can try. It's not that hard.

If you don't know the science or math behind extra-dimensions I will explain it to the best I can in laymen's terms.

What about Parallel universes and quantum computing?

I will stop right here. I hope one skeptic here can debate the evidence and not their opinion and not things that nobody claimed.

I never said I was going to prove to you that my conclusion is the correct one. If you thinks it's incorrect, give me evidence that points in a different direction.

Give me evidence that rebutts the claims of the evidence that supports things within ufology.

Give me some science. Are you basing your opinion on a classical physics model of the universe?

It sounds like some here hasn't made it passed Newton.




[edit on 29-7-2008 by polomontana]

reply to post by Hamlin


Here's the first thing I said skeptics would say.

You mentioned "solid proof"

Show me where in any of my post I said solid proof?

Where did I say I was going to prove anything to you or any skeptic?

Originally posted by TruthTellist
reply to post by thrashee

 

Are you saying there are no UFOs?

No, sir.

I'm saying that the evidence Montana has provided does not support his claim that there are. If, by UFOs, you mean extraterrestrial objects. Because that was his claim.

Again, skeptics make these arguments about things you never said.

My claim

"Extra-terrestrial/extra-dimensional beings exist beyond any reasonable doubt based on the evidence."

I never said this was the correct claim, if you have evidence then present it.

I never said anything about solid proof or proving anything to anyone.

Please try to stay focused.

reply to post by polomontana


Maybe, Greys are from our future. That being they are indeed evolved from Humans and have developed a level of technology that allows them to travel back through time to ensure their own survival.

That would be where the Novelty comes in, and the Universe is a novelty-conserving engine. Therefore should we assume that intergalactic travels is possible, we must also then presuppose that time travel is also possible as both are ideas so far removed from Levels of Novelty currently allowed withing the limitations of our Space/Time.

We currently do not know whether or not Artificial intelligence is possible, but surely when it comes into existence a New period of novelty will have been entered. We could then rightly assume that both the problems of time and space travel will be solved with the aid of this new Entity.

The AI will then create advanced simulations of the Universe and Calculate that 'Human' Time travelers are indeed responsible for the inexplicable changes in the Humanoids on this planet over the past 500 000 years - changes pointing towards an unavoidable conclusion.... That Mankind is a Genetic Experiment perpetually conducting itself as a Direct Result of the Laws of the Inverse Square and the Conservation of novelty

The Proof of Genetic Engineering with our Genome is evident in the number of genetic flaws Humans have that no afflict no other species - including the Primates. The evidence for my theory is abundant. Just look at as chromosomes;

This is the most inexplicable difference of all. Primates have 48 chromosomes. Humans are considered vastly superior to them in a wide array of areas, yet somehow we have only 46 chromosomes! This begs the question of how could we lose two full chromosomes, which represents a lot of DNA, in the first place? And in the process, how could we become so much better? Nothing about it makes logical sense.

...and we're forgetting genetic Disorders. As with all wild animals (plants, too), primates have relatively few genetic disorders spread throughout their gene pools. Albinism is one that is common to many animal groups, as well as humans. But albinism does not stop an animal with it from growing up and passing the gene for it into the gene pool. Mostly, though, serious defects are quickly weeded out in the wild. Often parents or others in a group will do the job swiftly and surely. So wild gene pools stay relatively clear. In contrast, humans have over 4,000 genetic disorders, and several of those will absolutely kill every victim before reproduction is possible. This begs the question of how such defects could possibly get into the human gene pool in the first place, much less how do they remain widespread?

reply to post by polomontana


Montana, I'm not even going to bother wasting attempts at logic anymore with you, because time after time you've done nothing but resort to faulty logic and claims when it's been demonstrated to you--over and over and still over again--that your claims don't support your evidence.

When you want to start playing on an equal logical level, then maybe we can further discuss this. Until then, since you're just repeating yourself, you can go back over the more than 10 pages of posts that clearly state where you're off.

Originally posted by polomontana
Again, skeptics make these arguments about things you never said.

My claim

"Extra-terrestrial/extra-dimensional beings exist beyond any reasonable doubt based on the evidence."

I never said this was the correct claim, if you have evidence then present it.

I never said anything about solid proof or proving anything to anyone.

Please try to stay focused.

This just demonstrates the foolishness I've been wasting my time with. First you make a claim that is beyond any reasonable doubt, and then you state that you never said your claim was correct.

Jesus. H. Christ.

Originally posted by thrashee

Originally posted by TruthTellist
reply to post by thrashee

 

Are you saying there are no UFOs?

No, sir.

I'm saying that the evidence Montana has provided does not support his claim that there are. If, by UFOs, you mean extraterrestrial objects. Because that was his claim.

Exactly my point,

If your saying the evidence does not support my claim, then present some evidence that shows that it doesn't.

62 kids in Zimbabwe.
Here's the video

My claim is based on their testimony and Harvard Professor John Macks investigation.

This is not my opinion.
This is not my belief

This is evidence they provided.

If your going to say my claim is not supported by the evidence, this is exactly what the evidence says.
youtube.com...

You will not hear any evidence from the skeptic. WATCH.




[edit on 29-7-2008 by polomontana]

Originally posted by thrashee

Originally posted by polomontana
Again, skeptics make these arguments about things you never said.

My claim

"Extra-terrestrial/extra-dimensional beings exist beyond any reasonable doubt based on the evidence."

I never said this was the correct claim, if you have evidence then present it.

I never said anything about solid proof or proving anything to anyone.

Please try to stay focused.

This just demonstrates the foolishness I've been wasting my time with. First you make a claim that is beyond any reasonable doubt, and then you state that you never said your claim was correct.

.

Another good example of a skeptic trying to debate something I never said.

I said, I never said my claim was the correct one. Did you even read what I said?

This is just saying I'm open to other possibilities if you present any evidence. Didn't your website tell you this?

You better go back and brush up.







[edit on 29-7-2008 by polomontana]

Originally posted by polomontana

If your saying the evidence does not support my claim, then present some evidence that shows that it doesn't.

62 kids in Zimbabwe.
Here's the video

My claim is based on their testimony and Harvard Professor John Macks investigation.

This is not my opinion.
This is not my belief

This is evidence they provided.

For the last time, because you absolutely cannot get it through your thick skull, I don't have to provide EVIDENCE for anything. The ONLY thing I have to do is demonstrate why YOUR EVIDENCE does not support your claim.

And I will do so right here, and right now.

Your evidence is all hear say. It's based upon 62 children as eye witnesses.

That's not scientific evidence, you dolt. That doesn't hold up to scientific scrutiny. Do you honestly think you could march 62 children into NASA headquarters and expect NASA to issue a press release that alien life has been PROVEN based upon the TESTIMONY of 62 CHILDREN?

Eye witness accounts may be EVIDENCE, but it's NOT EVIDENCE that PROVES, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, THAT ALIENS EXIST.

This is not opinion, this is not a belief. Eye witness testimony ALONE is not enough to PROVE ANYTHING BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

Why, you say?

It's eye witness testimony. This isn't a court, it's science. Eye witness testimony alone is not scientifically enough. Period. If you think that it is, plain and simple, you're an idiot. I know I'm being rude right now, but you've exhausted my patience at this point.

Now. I've demonstrated and explained QUITE RATIONALLY why your evidence does not support your claim. My reasoning behind this is NOT based upon opinion OR belief. If you think it is, then seriously, take this little video of yours from the UPN network and shuttle your behind over to NASA for the biggest news of mankind. And then whine about how all of NASA is just using opinion and belief to rebuke you.

Originally posted by TruthTellist
reply to post by polomontana

 

Maybe, Greys are from our future. That being they are indeed evolved from Humans and have developed a level of technology that allows them to travel back through time to ensure their own survival.

That would be where the Novelty comes in, and the Universe is a novelty-conserving engine. Therefore should we assume that intergalactic travels is possible, we must also then presuppose that time travel is also possible as both are ideas so far removed from Levels of Novelty currently allowed withing the limitations of our Space/Time.

We currently do not know whether or not Artificial intelligence is possible, but surely when it comes into existence a New period of novelty will have been entered. We could then rightly assume that both the problems of time and space travel will be solved with the aid of this new Entity.

The AI will then create advanced simulations of the Universe and Calculate that 'Human' Time travelers are indeed responsible for the inexplicable changes in the Humanoids on this planet over the past 500 000 years - changes pointing towards an unavoidable conclusion.... That Mankind is a Genetic Experiment perpetually conducting itself as a Direct Result of the Laws of the Inverse Square and the Conservation of novelty

The Proof of Genetic Engineering with our Genome is evident in the number of genetic flaws Humans have that no afflict no other species - including the Primates. The evidence for my theory is abundant. Just look at as chromosomes;

This is the most inexplicable difference of all. Primates have 48 chromosomes. Humans are considered vastly superior to them in a wide array of areas, yet somehow we have only 46 chromosomes! This begs the question of how could we lose two full chromosomes, which represents a lot of DNA, in the first place? And in the process, how could we become so much better? Nothing about it makes logical sense.

...and we're forgetting genetic Disorders. As with all wild animals (plants, too), primates have relatively few genetic disorders spread throughout their gene pools. Albinism is one that is common to many animal groups, as well as humans. But albinism does not stop an animal with it from growing up and passing the gene for it into the gene pool. Mostly, though, serious defects are quickly weeded out in the wild. Often parents or others in a group will do the job swiftly and surely. So wild gene pools stay relatively clear. In contrast, humans have over 4,000 genetic disorders, and several of those will absolutely kill every victim before reproduction is possible. This begs the question of how such defects could possibly get into the human gene pool in the first place, much less how do they remain widespread?

You make some good points.

I also know a scientist that says we have to look to junk DNA for an extra-terrestrial message.

Professor Paul Davies, from the Australian Centre for Astrobiology at Macquarie University in Sydney, believes a cosmic greeting card could have been left in every human cell.

The coded message would only be discovered once the human race had the technology to read and understand it.

Writing in New Scientist magazine, Davies said the idea should be considered seriously.

For more than 40 years astronomers have been sweeping the skies with radio telescopes hoping to catch a signal from an alien civilisation.

So far the search has been in vain. But Davies believes it is wrong to assume that extraterrestrials who may be hundreds of millions of years ahead of us technologically will have chosen to communicate by radio.

www.iol.co.za...

I think it's interesting as well.

"Junk DNA" is actually the "software" that allowed complex organisms to evolve, according to an Australian molecular biologist.

www.abc.net.au...

Originally posted by polomontana
Another good example of a skeptic trying to debate something I never said.
[edit on 29-7-2008 by polomontana]

Seriously, at this point, I don't know if you are really sad, or really funny. Perhaps a bit of both.

reply to post by thrashee


"That's not scientific evidence, you dolt. That doesn't hold up to scientific scrutiny. Do you honestly think you could march 62 children into NASA headquarters and expect NASA to issue a press release that alien life has been PROVEN based upon the TESTIMONY of 62 CHILDREN?"

Yet another example of thrashee arguing a point that I never made.

When did I say this was scientific evidence?

The only science I have mentioned is extra-dimensions, quantum computing and parallel worlds.

I never said the case was scientific evidence.

I said it's evidence beyond any reasonable doubt.

You do know that we can come to know the truth through reason?

We do it in courts everyday. We put people in jail based on the reason of 12 individuals.

So yet another example of a skeptic trying to debate a point that I never made.

You really need that website thrashee, you must have skipped some pages.

Please focus on what I said in my post.

There's more ways to come to know the truth skeptics.

You can come to know the truth through the scientific method.

or

You can come to know the truth through reason.

Has any of the skeptics ever heard of Plato and Philosophy?

Has anyone hear ever heard of metaphysics?

Do people come to know the truth about things in there everyday lives through the scientific method or reason?

Originally posted by polomontana
I never said the case was scientific evidence.

I said it's evidence beyond any reasonable doubt.

Whatever, man. However you want to define evidence or beyond any reasonable doubt, because as you just stated, even if you had evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, you're still apparently not claiming that that makes your claim correct.

So. Seriously. Whatever. You failed in your argument because your evidence failed to support your claim. Period. Now do what you've done for the last 10 pages and claim that I didn't provide "counter" evidence, that I just argued from pre-existing beliefs, that I was just a big meanie. Just. Whatever. You failed, and you know you've failed, because every time we get to this point, you start backing out of your claims and then trying to shift the burden of proof onto me.

It's pathetic.

reply to post by thrashee


I sense frustration thrashee,

It's okay, I know it's hard to actually debate what I said and not what you hoped that I had said.

Do you come to know the truth in your everyday life thru the scientific method?

Our you in a lab testing every aspect of your life, or do you use reason?

If you noticed the skeptics have followed my points to a tee.

They have tried to make up non existent arguments based on things I never said.

They have offered zero evidence as I said they would not.

Please stay focused on what I said skeptics.