They Are Coming - Are You Ready For Disclosure?

reply to post by CynicalM

The words proof and evidence have definite and separate meanings. I don't know how either can be considered a figure of speech except by a sloppy speaker.

I don't know what "dobbed" means. But I did fine in school (when the surf wasn't happening). But we all change a bit over the years, don't we?

reply to post by Phage

Definitions of proof on the Web:

•any factual evidence that helps to establish the truth of something; "if you have any proof for what you say, now is the time to produce it"

The two seem pretty well related...

Dobbing is aussie slang for being a tell tale...
Like you trying to draw attention to my son being banned..
Not sure how that helps you but hey, its your decision to try to get personal...

reply to post by CynicalM

The two seem pretty well related...

Related, of course. But I don't ask for proof. I ask for evidence.

Scientific evidence has no universally accepted definition but generally refers to evidence which serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis.

en.wikipedia.org...

Strange, can't find a definition for scientific proof though.

I'm pointing out (in an oh so subtle manner) that I think you're your son. Of course, that's not even a theory since I have no evidence. It's an opinion. They are allowed I think but this is getting seriously off topic and I expect there will be repercussions.

i could not agree with you more!! i am waiting for the big reveal-and cannot understand why it was not yestrerday!!

reply to post by Phage

The words proof and evidence have definite and separate meanings. I don't know how either can be considered a figure of speech except by a sloppy speaker.

Related, of course. But I don't ask for proof. I ask for evidence.

Proof (truth), sufficient evidence or argument for the truth of a proposition

en.wikipedia.org...

See, you talk proof v's evidence then use the definition of "scientific proof" as an example....

Spot the difference

Now, did you accidently leave the word scientific out of your first post or just found the added word's definition suited your theory better?

reply to post by Phage

I'm pointing out (in an oh so subtle manner) that I think you're your son. Of course, that's not even a theory since I have no evidence. It's an opinion. They are allowed I think but this is getting seriously off topic and I expect there will be repercussions.

Subtle? About as subtle as a sledge hammer..
You have also found it necessary to post such off topic, personal attacks on me in two seperate threads..

I wonder about your motives other than not liking to be questioned and certainly hope there are repercussions for your immoral actions..certainly not the actions of a respected member..

Originally posted by franspeakfree
I personally have not had an interest in Star Trek and Stargate and it has only been via a strange set of coincedences that I have suddenly gained an interest in them. I have just finished watching all 3 movies and I am convinced now more than ever that the show is based around actual events.

I think this post sums up the current state of ATS pretty good.

Originally posted by Phage
Strange, can't find a definition for scientific proof though.

I think this one is somewhat on the spot.
Source

a systematic, ordered approach to the gathering of data and the solving of problems. The basic approach is the statement of the problem followed by the statement of a hypothesis. An experimental method is established to help confirm or negate the hypothesis. The results of the experiment are observed, and conclusions are drawn from observed results. The conclusions may tend to uphold or to refute the hypothesis.

reply to post by CynicalM

Scientific proof:

As I said, scientific proof is a not really in the picture

While the word doesn't appear, it sounds pretty sciencey, don't you agree?

The observation of xrays, which fits the theoretical model for black holes and is very difficult to explain by any other phenomenon is evidence of black holes. It is not the only evidence.

Ditto:

Put theory together with consistent evidence and you have something.

You know me (apparently). What other sort of evidence would I be asking for than that of the scientific sort?

I ask for evidence quite often but proof?

Maybe too subtle. But context should always be a consideration.

Immoral. Oh my. Godless creature I am.

reply to post by Thain Esh Kelch

Yes, that's a nice definition of the scientific method, as your source says.

scientific method
[sī′əntif′ik]
a systematic, ordered approach to the gathering of data and the solving of problems. The basic approach is the statement of the problem followed by the statement of a hypothesis. An experimental method is established to help confirm or negate the hypothesis. The results of the experiment are observed, and conclusions are drawn from observed results. The conclusions may tend to uphold or to refute the hypothesis.

medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

See if you can find a definition of scientific proof. As I said, I didn't see one.

Ah, disclosure. We've heard this song and dance many, many times before. The real meat of this discussion lies in the basic questions of why? and why not?.

The why not argument that seems to always come up mostly deals with the fact that there is a general belief that if it is revealed that there are other intelligent life forms in the universe, whether or not they've visited Earth or not is irrelevant, that society will break down. That there will be chaos, mass suicides, but most importantly that the general status quo will cease to exist.

But, as to the why, well, there are various reasons I believe that we as a species are not only ready, but are hungry and in need of such disclosure.

For one, we as humans are all born into slavery. Yes, every human being that is brought into this world is immediately a slave. To what? To money, and monetary systems. We must work to make monies to survive. Though some are fortunate enough to be born into families where they do not have to do this, for the majority of humans this is most certainly the case. And those humans who control these monetary systems are not ready to give up their power so easily. Are there other ways to survive without being enslaved to such a system? Of course there are. But, our species has been so indoctrinated to believe that this is the only method of survival that exists. This is not by accident. We have been enslaved to this type of system for so long now that at this point in history there is little one can do to change the way in which we are enslaved. There have always been humans who rule other humans through such systems.

And in these modern times, it is perhaps the hardest time of all for those free thinking humans to live and exist as a slave to another human through money while knowing that in the end, it will not matter as we will all eventually die. Every one of us one day will die. And you can't take it with you. This hard truth makes living life to the fullest even harder when we know that we must spend our time on this planet slaving to make money to survive, rather than enjoying our lives without the endless shroud of monetary darkness that enslaves us all.

Imagine a world where electricity is free. Where communication is not a commodity, but rather it is free. Free cell phones. Free cable. Free internet. Free food. Free clean water. These things are all possible given the right situation and technologies, should they be made available to everyone worldwide. Disclosure could possibly offer humanity just that.

A truly free world where humans are no longer slaves to monetary systems, but are free to pursue what makes them happy.

Just a thought. But I'm not going to hold my breath.

reply to post by Phage

Scientific evidence has no universally accepted definition but generally refers to

Dont ya love words like generally, maybe etc...
Makes your job so much easier

reply to post by Phage

See if you can find a definition of scientific proof. As I said, I didn't see one.

Well see if you can find one for scientific evidence.You haven't as yet..

reply to post by CynicalM

Yeah. Lousy scientists. Can't trust 'em. Weasels all.

reply to post by CynicalM

Ok. Here's a really good one. From down under no less.

Scientific evidence
Scientific evidence is the result of objective testing of a theory or hypothesis in a way that can be reproduced by others, such as in an experiment or controlled trial.

www.msakl.org.nz...

Originally posted by Phage
See if you can find a definition of scientific proof. As I said, I didn't see one.

Ah so after all these pages not focused on the topic of disclosure it seems the consensus is that Science has no proof, but only theory and hypothesis until the next better idea comes along...

So at the end of the day that Martian Meteorite... well its really only a guess that it actually came from Mars...

reply to post by zorgon

No.
Not a guess. A hypothesis based on scientific evidence. Very strong evidence which yields a very strong hypothesis.

reply to post by Phage


lol, you had to go to a NZ medical site relating to Multiple Sclerosis ?

How very scientific of you.

Wow, Phage is really out on full force with this one.....

May I ask- what proof are you guys actually asking of each other? I'm not going to go through the whole thread- as the first two pages are pretty tedious on their own.

reply to post by CynicalM

You weren't so picky before.

Well see if you can find one for scientific evidence.You haven't as yet..

It's a very good definition. Are you saying that New Zealand medical science is invalid? Do you have something against Kiwis?