The Logical Trickery of the UFO Skeptic

No, your certainty in what you don't know for sure is absurd.

Point out were I state a position. Point it out!

I am certain that there is no compelling evidence.

First of all, 'No evidence'? well look around you, have you read any real cases regarding unidentified aircraft or are you speaking through your A**? - The present evidence is enough to be open for possibilities, and it is hell a lot.

Dude, I have been into this topic for 20 years. The only one talking through their ass, seems to be you.

And on the matter of not proving anything is true - of course, where did you see me claiming it is true and I am certain that the stories are true?

As I stated earlier, you cannot prove any of the stories are true, YET, you want people to entertain the possibility that they are.
That is all you have. And, its absurd.

I am not certain even based on the observation I've done, however, I think it is possible. Do you all ever make a difference between believing which I do not, and being open for possibilities when there are enough accounts to suggest it

I am open to possibilities.
Appealing to possibilities because I have nothing else is an entirely different matter.

If you don't make the difference, your problem... Also I gave the example with having private facility, let's say you've got the same evidence about it that you have about aliens, some vague, mixed with fake things, does this change the fact that it exists

Does what exist? Your analogy is assinine.

Do you never think behind some rumors or vague stories there may be somethign true? Hello, meet OBJECTIVITY where the things you are not certain about (when there is some evidence of them even if not enough) is possible.

Objectively speaking, I would not rely on rumours in order to establish a belief. It would be subjective to allow rumours to form a bias like the one you present. It would simply be a bias for me to wonder that because a rumour exists there must be some truth to it.

You obviously have no idea what objectivity is, who is talking out of their ass now? Huh!

Sure, it could all be some military tech, but what's wrong in thinking not all when some of the physics, abilities they've shown defy any craft that would logically be made by humans

Prove it.

Do you know how much more documents in secret may be out there? Including meeting with Eisenhower etc, etc? Why exclude?

edit on 8-2-2013 by ImpactoR because: (no reason given)

What a stupid question!
If I knew how many secret docs were out there they wouldn't be secret, would they?

What if there is no such secrets?

Hmmmmm?

Do you entertain the possibility that there never has been alien contact?

Not into that possibility I bet.

Originally posted by atlasastro
No, your certainty in what you don't know for sure is absurd. Point out were I state a position. Point it out!

I am certain that there is no compelling evidence.
As I stated earlier, you cannot prove any of the stories are true, YET, you want people to entertain the possibility that they are.
That is all you have. And, its absurd.

Sooo the compelling evidence!!!! That COMPELLING EVIDENCE! You have no compelling evidence of secret aircraft developed by the military though you can be sure such are made!! NO WAIT there is no such thing since the military didn't make a presentation or put it right under your nose! Therefore IT DOESNT EXIST!

You obviously have no idea what objectivity is, who is talking out of their ass now? Huh!

Indeed you do not have objectivity, not me. I would not be objective if I was like believers to believe that aliens are indeed here and that the evidence is enough, No it's not enough for me. But it is enough to not be certain that there is no such thing, since many cases remain unexplained. So who is talking out of their ass? yes you

What if there is no such secrets?

WHAT if? If all were a lie, such as aliens, I would say - well I wasn't ever saying I am certain but I accepted it as possible because the lie was well made, while it's not that you were smarter why you turned out to be correct but because you bet randomly on one side (the side of skeptics) and it became the winning side. BUT

"What if" doesn't work here... because if you fail at admitting there are secret projects, secret aircraft, then stop posting at all to look smarter. Now documents of secret projects and aircraft is enough to say, yes they do secret weapons and vehicles, etc etc.

Do you entertain the possibility that there never has been alien contact?

YES! And Like I said above, I make a possibility out of all the alien story being a lie, and even intelligent and advanced beings to not exist anywhere else, ones with whom you can communicate.

And since I can accept both, there may be visitation and there may not be - all may be a lie, while you all who argue here fail to accept the other possibility call me again biased and not objective? That's pure idiocy by you all who argue here.

The point is, there are enough cases to raise the possibility, if it were 1 case, we could all say, all why even accept such possibility, but there is a lot of info, a lot of data and probably even more kept in secrfert to be a good reason to accept such possibility (of aliens)

The part with the base I gave as an example, I was saying, you don't have evidence of the base but it exists, so how do you prove me that your claim 'I dont have enough evidence, therefore it is a lie' is correct when the base exists,,,

Do you think everything that exists you have to know about it or else it doesnt?? There are probably a lot of military bases you dont even know exist, but someone you will see a document, CRY FAKE!! and so much for the valdity of your point.

And with such thinking i ask you again what makes you believe in aliens existing in the universe somewhere and yet you think it is impossible to have come here when the data about that is more than the data of aliens existing anywhere based on Space Exploration - hypocritic much?

So you accept the other side of non-existence of such things, you believe in aliens existing somewhere and yet you dismiss UNEXPLAINED cases as all made up, I call your arguments nonsense!

Not to say the majority of you here lack own opinion and thoughts must if you are repeating like some ducks *QUACK QUACK* what some skeptic told you or what scientists tell you 'Of course we believe there is alien somewhere in the unvierse' but you are laughable. At least I have my own, objective thoughts.

Originally posted by ImpactoR

Sooo the compelling evidence!!!! That COMPELLING EVIDENCE! You have no compelling evidence of secret aircraft developed by the military though you can be sure such are made!!

I don't think this was the best possible analogy... not only is there compelling evidence that the military secretly develops aircraft, but there is absolute proof that they have.

reply to post by ImpactoR

Not understood by YOU... stop right there, when you don't understand a word, don't speak from the name of all, do you understand? You are from the 10 out of 500+ people that can understand me, that speaks bad for YOU.

You showed you lack reading comprehension and you stilll post garbage...

I am a writer and editor. The language I work in is English. I have published books of my own authorship and dozens of magazine articles and short stories. This has been my profession for thirty years. Such are my qualifications to judge your English.

Your response to my request for clarification about a statement you made was to interpret it as an attack and mount a hysterical, flailing counter-attack. In fact, your response to anything anyone tells you seems to be rage and a flood of barely coherent repudiation. Instead of thrashing about like a hooked fish, why don't you calmly and reasonably address the objections people are making?

If you can, that is.

reply to post by Astyanax


And yet, you are the only one talking about my writing. Well, look at UFOlogy, full of 'writers' like the ones selling books, doesn't make you any more credible, knowledgable or correct. I do address everyone's posts as you can see and at least they know what I am saying,

I am on a forum, not writing a book to carefully follow every word and word order, so quit being a grammar nazi. I give absolute logical failures of how the lack of evidence for YOU does not mean it doesn't exist. Absolute, logical examples. If you all can't see that, then you are what ATS is supposedly against - you are arrogant, ignorant and biased.

Also stop going offtopic, I am explaining passionately where I can see their cry for evidence is wrong. This is not 'criticize me on my writing and my style' thread. And with that said, I do not mean that something exists for sure, just learn to say 'I don't know' not try to give explanations to unexplained cases. Like more knowledgable people can't explain something but someone comes to give explanations here, must be valid..

Is it aliens? I am not sure
Is there technology covered up? Almost certainly, if not the entire alien stories
Is it possible to have been visited, and some of the meetings to have happened? Based on the many accounts, plus gawd knows what else is kept secret, yes it's possible

And there, any claim of non-existence unless a case has been shown clearly and thoroughly to be a HOAX, you cannot label things as non-existent.

Originally posted by ImpactoR

Sooo the compelling evidence!!!! That COMPELLING EVIDENCE! You have no compelling evidence of secret aircraft developed by the military though you can be sure such are made!! NO WAIT there is no such thing since the military didn't make a presentation or put it right under your nose! Therefore IT DOESNT EXIST!

What on earth are you talking about?

The military have secrets, sure.
Stating they are alien in nature is simply a claim.

I can see "secret" military aircraft.
Simply show the alien connection, and then you have compelling evidence.

But we both know you cannot do that, all you can do is state that its possible.

WHAT if? If all were a lie, such as aliens, I would say - well I wasn't ever saying I am certain but I accepted it as possible because the lie was well made, while it's not that you were smarter why you turned out to be correct but because you bet randomly on one side (the side of skeptics) and it became the winning side.

Well, given that you have no compelling evidence the logical thing to do would simply be to not bother with entertaining what "is possible".
That means any stance would be that even though it is possible that aliens exists, humans have had no contact with them.
There is no random process involved but an opinion based on evidence and not on what "might be possible".

If you some how think people are skeptical due to a reliance on random chance, you are an idiot.

"What if" doesn't work here... because if you fail at admitting there are secret projects, secret aircraft, then stop posting at all to look smarter. Now documents of secret projects and aircraft is enough to say, yes they do secret weapons and vehicles, etc etc.

Absurd.

You're whole argument is based on what if's.

And since I can accept both, there may be visitation and there may not be - all may be a lie, while you all who argue here fail to accept the other possibility call me again biased and not objective? That's pure idiocy by you all who argue here.

Point out where I state that it is not possible.
Point it out.

Go on.

You're argument is a pure lie.

The point is, there are enough cases to raise the possibility, if it were 1 case, we could all say, all why even accept such possibility, but there is a lot of info, a lot of data and probably even more kept in secrfert to be a good reason to accept such possibility (of aliens)

Using your analogy, there has been enough fraud and lies to argue the exact opposite.

The part with the base I gave as an example, I was saying, you don't have evidence of the base but it exists, so how do you prove me that your claim 'I dont have enough evidence, therefore it is a lie' is correct when the base exists,,,

I don't need to make any claim. So why do I have to convince you that it doesn't exist.
You're argument it stupid!

I am simply saying that based on the evidence, I am not prepared to accept that aliens have visited and interacted with humans. I am skeptical of the claims made suggesting or inferring that contact has been made.
Sure its possible, but who cares what is possible.

Do you think everything that exists you have to know about it or else it doesnt??

No. I don't.

There are probably a lot of military bases you dont even know exist, but someone you will see a document, CRY FAKE!! and so much for the valdity of your point.

Possible, possible, possible. Thats all you have. Whatever dude.

what makes you believe in aliens existing in the universe somewhere and yet you think it is impossible to have come here when the data about that is more than the data of aliens existing anywhere based on Space Exploration - hypocritic much?

Point out were I state it is impossible.
Point it out.

You keep making statements on my behalf, and then arguing against it.
Its stupid.

So you accept the other side of non-existence of such things, you believe in aliens existing somewhere and yet you dismiss UNEXPLAINED cases as all made up, I call your arguments nonsense!

You don't even have an argument.

You simply have appeals to what is possible whilst continuously stating that I need to ponder secrets (secrets that you state I would not know about) as evidence I need to consider.

Absurd.

At least I have my own, objective thoughts.

Objectively, there is no compelling evidence that shows aliens have been in contact with humans.

If there was, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

And you know it.

I'll leave you to indulge yourself to ponder what is possible, inspiring yourself with imagining secret bases that you don't know about because they are secret.

Originally posted by ImpactoR
reply to post by ZetaRediculian

 

The thread isn't exactly about SETI signal, it is about the general thinking of skeptics or those close-minded skeptics, SETI was just an example. I was arguing the general thinking of those and how 'not having it in straight sight for you' does not guarantee its non-existence aka empircal evidence when someone else may have it and never went public... something wrong with that? I don't think so.

edit on 4-2-2013 by ImpactoR because: (no reason given)

I think there is something wrong with that statement since no one actually says the things that you say they say.

reply to post by ImpactoR

You showed you lack reading comprehension and you stilll post garbage - my message is: When you don't know what kind of things are kept secret, don't make claims what exists and what does not including human-alien encounters, also do not think they exist for sure without better evidence

I am quite certain that this is a very difficult statement to follow for even the most gifted.

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
reply to post by ImpactoR

 

You showed you lack reading comprehension and you stilll post garbage - my message is: When you don't know what kind of things are kept secret, don't make claims what exists and what does not including human-alien encounters, also do not think they exist for sure without better evidence

I am quite certain that this is a very difficult statement to follow for even the most gifted.

Everyone needs to relax. Sceptics are people who have feelings just like you and me.
Why would anyone want to spend a bunch of time researching topics that are obviously true, due to the fact of all the attention surrounding it, whether its from a sceptic or a believer, which is genuine proof of truth from that particular topic. This is a perfect method to use when searching for undeniable proof which is to be considered important, which also serves as a warning to any sceptic about to commit the act of "debate".
Aliens are real, you fool. Why would there be thousands of people talking about it and posting thousands of videos everyday if its NOT real. Until they decide to use their brains, sceptics and their treasured opinions are to be considered useless, uneducated,deficient, unintelligent and rude. Leave the research for us smart people.

Originally posted by xszawe
]
For instance, if SETI receives an anomalous repeating signal with intelligent content such as a
mathematical constant, and rules out all known causes of terrestrial and deep-space interference,
do they need a chunk of the alien radio dish or a dead alien to attribute it to alien origin?

The big word in your statement is "IF" and when that "IF" becomes factual then the vast majority of skeptics will say ET is real. The only reason I'm a skeptic is I need real proof, and you most likely don't.

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by xszawe
]
For instance, if SETI receives an anomalous repeating signal with intelligent content such as a
mathematical constant, and rules out all known causes of terrestrial and deep-space interference,
do they need a chunk of the alien radio dish or a dead alien to attribute it to alien origin?

The big word in your statement is "IF" and when that "IF" becomes factual then the vast majority of skeptics will say ET is real. The only reason I'm a skeptic is I need real proof, and you most likely don't.

The only reason you're a sceptic is because your lack of intelligence and logic is not allowing you to achieve anything. Why do you need proof if you already have it?
How many people are reading and discussing this topic?
Need i say more?

reply to post by atlasastro


It looks like some enjoy digging deep and don't know where to stop. Fine, go with your dellusion, continue thinking that something has to be in plain sight for you to exist, or else, it doesn't... And wonder why you are pseudoscentific.

I am pointing out a major failure in the logic of all of you to think that something isn't there because you don't see it in flesh and blood... And don't tell me that according to that logic all exists because there is no evidence it doesn't. This is not my logic in case you didn't get the memo. I am saying - there are UNPROVEN cases even those that went public, there probably could be even bigger cases kept away from public.

I am basing possibility on unproven incidents including ones that defy human or sometimes natural explanations NOT on IMAGINATION, if you ALL can't nail that down, I will just ignore you, you are just pseudoscientific

The reason why I am not pseudo like you and I am actually objective is, I am making theories, possibilities, I do not take anything as a fact, unlike believers. In fact, shutting up unlike you, saying 'could be anything even aliens
makes me at the RIGHT PLACE unlike you all scoffers that give what something is not, while you yourself don't know what from all the stories might be true.

Well, given that you have no compelling evidence the logical thing to do would simply be to not bother with entertaining what "is possible".

So pseudoscientific. If you don;t test it, how will you know? You have to bother with what's possible, try it, compare it, or wait until someone else does it as in the current case. Until there is CONCLUSIVE evidence DO NOT EXCLUDE, based on existing data.

I am simply saying that based on the evidence, I am not prepared to accept that aliens have visited and interacted with humans. I am skeptical of the claims made suggesting or inferring that contact has been made.

Skeptical is fine, denying without knowing what else as evidence exists to suggest it, is wrong. I am uncertain too, the point is, I accept it as possible, I am not certain of it, do you make a diffence between those two? I do not conclude based on the current evidence, I just remain open for any possibilities... Close-mindness doesn't make you more credible.

IMAGINING? I was giving an example, instead of bases, I could tell you, about anything I have, you have to see it or, it doesn't exist!!

Exactly because there is no conclusive evidence , I am not certain aliens or other beings were/are here. However, stop there, evidence as in clues are enough TO PONDER. And this is where you go wrong, being certain when so many cases make it uncertain what we deal with.

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by xszawe
]
For instance, if SETI receives an anomalous repeating signal with intelligent content such as a
mathematical constant, and rules out all known causes of terrestrial and deep-space interference,
do they need a chunk of the alien radio dish or a dead alien to attribute it to alien origin?

The big word in your statement is "IF" and when that "IF" becomes factual then the vast majority of skeptics will say ET is real. The only reason I'm a skeptic is I need real proof, and you most likely don't.

Since when did providing you with information become the worlds number one emergency. You clearly have zero respect for the individuals trying to bring forth evidence and i doubt you have any respect for your own self. You should be ashamed of yourself. How dare you ask questions regarding a topic if the answers or evidence are not to be provided to you specifically. You know what i'm talking about. You're just not smart enough.

reply to post by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
I am quite certain that this is a very difficult statement to follow for even the most gifted.

Whenever there is enough evidence to make you wonder, don't act like you know for sure all is fake and just stories, stay open for anything until conclusive evidence comes.

^ If that wasn't clear enough for you, wow, learn Reading Comprehension. Come on! Even the fewer cases are credible, deny all and dismiss as lies will you?? Where is your evidence of all being lies?

Even the best cases cannot convince me there are aliens but they are enough to remain open for possibilities, do you understand??

I will let you know I've been taught critical thinking a lot, as well as staying neutral and objective, many if you lack it.

Oh and how is that with accepting possibility of aliens SOMEWHERE in the universe? What makes you think there are aliens? So aliens absolutely cannot have come here BUT You Believe Alien Beings Exist Somewhere In The Universe

No, you do not believe, you just repeat like a parrot what SCEINTIST X SAID ON TV,. you don't even have theories or analyses of your own! And the same goes for all of you.

Originally posted by maximumprecision

The only reason you're a sceptic is because your lack of intelligence and logic is not allowing you to achieve anything. Why do you need proof if you already have it?
How many people are reading and discussing this topic?
Need i say more?

edit on 16-2-2013 by maximumprecision because: 123

edit on 16-2-2013 by maximumprecision because: (no reason given)

Talk about flawed logic!
Because how many people are discussing the subject there must be a grain of truth to it?

Really?

Perhaps you'd like to familiarize yourself with the rhetorical fallacy Appeal to Popular Belief among many others?

As matters of beliefs go, how many millions of Ancient Egyptians worshiped those fantastic ancient Egyptian gods? Millions, right?
Where's that religion now?
Hinduism touts 1.08 BILLION adherents worldwide.
Can over a BILLION people be wrong?
oh, wait. Christianity through the same link has 2.33 Billion adherents, while Buddhism follow in a close second with 1.92 Billion adherents.
That's BILLIONS of people, however which way you slice it. Which BILLIONS of people are wrong and which BILLIONS of people are right?

In contrast, zealots of the UFO/aliens belief might, maybe, perhaps, on a really good day number in the 100,000s, a near microscopic demographic by comparison where if any set of BILLIONS of believers of any faith, whether it be modern Christians, or the long lost and dead adherents to Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Aztec, Norse, or any other basically dead and gone religion could be wrong, certainly by the same reasoning, and statistical juggling or fumblings the entirety of the UFO community that places stock in it as a reality could very well be entirely wrong, self deluding, and completely wasting their time; just like the Egyptians, the Aztecs, the Romans, and on and on.

See how that works?

X number of people just can't be wrong?
Some tiny fraction of X number of people just HAS to be true?
Think again.

Which Norse heroes actually made it to Valhalla? All of them? None of them? Some of them?
What about Islamic Paradise?

Methinks this is the game of "Because I happen to hold stock in a belief, it must be right" game.
Cute.
Keep hugging that teddy bear.

What religion did the inhabitants of Thera keep faith in?
Didn't work out for them did it?
Not every last one of them following that faith could have been wrong could they?
Hmmm. Actually, yes.

Originally posted by Druscilla

Originally posted by maximumprecision

The only reason you're a sceptic is because your lack of intelligence and logic is not allowing you to achieve anything. Why do you need proof if you already have it?
How many people are reading and discussing this topic?
Need i say more?

edit on 16-2-2013 by maximumprecision because: 123

edit on 16-2-2013 by maximumprecision because: (no reason given)

Talk about flawed logic!
Because how many people are discussing the subject there must be a grain of truth to it?

Really?

Perhaps you'd like to familiarize yourself with the rhetorical fallacy Appeal to Popular Belief among many others?

As matters of beliefs go, how many millions of Ancient Egyptians worshiped those fantastic ancient Egyptian gods? Millions, right?
Where's that religion now?
Hinduism touts 1.08 BILLION adherents worldwide.
Can over a BILLION people be wrong?
oh, wait. Christianity through the same link has 2.33 Billion adherents, while Buddhism follow in a close second with 1.92 Billion adherents.
That's BILLIONS of people, however which way you slice it. Which BILLIONS of people are wrong and which BILLIONS of people are right?

In contrast, zealots of the UFO/aliens belief might, maybe, perhaps, on a really good day number in the 100,000s, a near microscopic demographic by comparison where if any set of BILLIONS of believers of any faith, whether it be modern Christians, or the long lost and dead adherents to Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Aztec, Norse, or any other basically dead and gone religion could be wrong, certainly by the same reasoning, and statistical juggling or fumblings the entirety of the UFO community that places stock in it as a reality could very well be entirely wrong, self deluding, and completely wasting their time; just like the Egyptians, the Aztecs, the Romans, and on and on.

See how that works?

X number of people just can't be wrong?
Some tiny fraction of X number of people just HAS to be true?
Think again.

Which Norse heroes actually made it to Valhalla? All of them? None of them? Some of them?
What about Islamic Paradise?

Methinks this is the game of "Because I happen to hold stock in a belief, it must be right" game.
Cute.
Keep hugging that teddy bear.

edit on 16-2-2013 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)

Yes it means that due to the attention its definitely real.
Stop with your confusing definitions like rhetorical fallacy and popular belief and flawed logic because nobody is going to understand what you're talking about. You require help immediately. I certainly dont understand these things because they dont make any sense. Sorry.
Next, you start throwing in random irrelevant things like the Egyptians, Aztecs, Roman and Horse civilizations, which i've never heard of. Horse people made it to Valhalla. What's Valhalla? The country where Horse people are made? Either way its a new one for me and serves as an example of your delusions which require the help of a psychiatrist, as i already mentioned. Egyptians had nothing to do with aliens or god, they just built the Pyramids. Also, horses are incapable of travelling through space.
Right when you were talking about the millions of people and then mentioned Christianity and Buddhism, i just lost you completely. It was so painfully confusing. Had no clue what you were trying there.
From what i did read, the only thing that became clear is the fact that there isnt a shred of info in your statements that should be considered important to anyone. It will not help if you continue to provide your opinion, due to the reason explained in the previous sentence. You go deep with stories that make no sense and that will cause some people to form beliefs of their own about you. Theres nothing there that makes sense. Sorry.

***Attention***

Enough is enough is enough is ENOUGH. Further personal jabs, ad hominem attacks, or lack of decorum will result in a loss of posting abilities.

It's done. It's over. Move past it.

reply to post by ImpactoR


You have lost me. I have repeatedly pointed out where you argue with someone by stating their false view point and then try to show how that view is wrong. It is logical trickery. I honestly believe that you are not aware that you do this as you are very passionate about your arguments even though they are only between you and an imaginary viewpoint.

You also seem to go on and on about some other topic but completely avoid the discussion about your continued blatant use of the straw man tactic.

I don't think this was the best possible analogy... not only is there compelling evidence that the military secretly develops aircraft, but there is absolute proof that they have.

And while that is very true, I think the "black project" is a huge excuse. It's the last bastion of defense for a debunker who has nothing left to fall back on. When nothing else fits, use the military aircraft excuse - it's impossible to prove it wasn't, so it's a great last ditch attempt to explain a sighting away.

Skeptics are fine. I am very skeptical myself. But there are many people who say they are skeptics, but who are actually debunkers. These are people that have already made up their mind that UFO visitation is impossible, and they approach every sighting from that angle, instead of basing it on its own merits, in an unbiased manner. I've seen a lot of people here who say they are skeptics, but they are not.. they are debunkers. They will never admit something might be unexplainable - they have an excuse for every sighting, even if it's a ludicrous theory.