Axxman300
Philosopher
Because airplanes have green running lights on their wing tips.
Because airplanes have green running lights on their wing tips.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
LOL.
"Cross-examined". My whole point is that it's not worth interrogating someone about their memory of the details of a UFO sighting fifty years on.
STEVE: Here's a curious thing I remember from fifty years ago.
ME: Speaking of which, one of the curious thing about human perception and memory is that we can't even be sure that happened the way you describe it.
STEVE: How dare you question my memory?
ARTH: Nobody questioned my memory!
Arth, I missed your story, but I'll happily cross-examine you about it. I don't even need to see it. Here's how it'll go: Do you remember seeing something inexplicable once? The further back that memory goes, the less it makes sense to put any effort into trying to explain it. Because we have no way of knowing if the details we're trying to explain are details that actually belong to that event. Because of how human memory works over time. The end.
Last edited:
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena, Pronouns: he/him
I agree.
Thor 2
Philosopher
Well I don't agree!
The quality of the memorised event is very much influenced by the impact of the event and how front and centre it was for the rememberer. Because someone does not remember the detail of some peripheral stuff does not necessarily mean the the memory of the other is suspect.
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena, Pronouns: he/him
I just said that to get him off my case. Of course what you say is true. At the extreme end, PTSD sufferers can experience vivid flashbacks which include very graphic memories.
This doesn't mean that these memories are 100% reliable replays of actual events, though. The accuracy is variable, and as theprestige suggested, the further back in time they are, the less accurate they become. But it is not completely pointless to ask someone about events that occurred in the past. Imagine that!
"Hey, did you see that show last night?"
"I think so, but I can't be sure because memory is unreliable."
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
I do.
The more impactful the event, the more likely it is to be remembered and re-examined multiple times. Memory is not like a filing system, where the file stays the same no matter how many times you read it. Every time the memory is retrieved and rehearsed there's a chance it will be altered, and it's the altered version that is then put back.
All memory is suspect.
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena, Pronouns: he/him
But that doesn't mean that it is useless.
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
Indeed. It's like our tendency to see patterns even when they're not there - it doesn't mean we should ignore all the patterns we think we see. It just means that we should be aware of the possibility of error, and double check before jumping to conclusions.
StillSleepy
Muse
MohamedTaqi
Thinker
I don't know about other countries, but in Morocco, we have Shamharosh (the king of Djinn), and all that nonsense, some fanatics even worship these entities, and can be easily deceived...
Here's an interesting common scam : a Faqih walks into a villa still under constuction, burries some random stuff (leather with talismans and secret words written on it..etc) in different parts in walls and floor of the villa without anyone noticing. Then disappears for about 5 - 10 years, waiting for someone to buy it.
Of course only a wealthy person can buy a villa, the Faqih shows up, tells them that there is a treasure guarded by the Djinn in the villa, and that they need very expensive and special bakhoor (incense) and special sacrifices and large sums of money to dig it out.
Then the Faqih shows them the signs that he already hid years ago in the floor and the walls, which would be very convincing especially if they believe in Djinns and hidden treasures, these stories often end by a victim losing millions (Moroccan millions) to charlatans (the last I heard of is a wealthy old man who sold 2 shops in spain so that he can cover the expenses to dig out a treasure in his villa...)
I don't know how could such an idiot make a lot of money. I am a software engineer and 10 years of work, I still can't buy an appartement.
Last edited:
Thor 2
Philosopher
Best of luck in getting the prestige of your case.
Yes I agree with what you said but would add the proviso that the accuracy of the recollection of the event in question, is also dependent on the complexity of the event. The adding and subtracting of bits and pieces must be limited if the event is uncomplicated.
"I saw a guy run out in front of a car and get run over a few years ago."
"what colour sox was he wearing?"
"I have no recollection off that."
"Your memory is unreliable."
Thor 2
Philosopher
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Nobody said all memory is useless.
Somebody did say: " The further back that memory goes, the less it makes sense to put any effort into trying to explain it. Because we have no way of knowing if the details we're trying to explain are details that actually belong to that event. Because of how human memory works over time."
And then you lied and said you agreed with that. Even though you don't agree.
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
That is a gross misrepresentation of the well established scientific understanding of how memory works.Best of luck in getting the prestige of your case.
Yes I agree with what you said but would add the proviso that the accuracy of the recollection of the event in question, is also dependent on the complexity of the event. The adding and subtracting of bits and pieces must be limited if the event is uncomplicated.
"I saw a guy run out in front of a car and get run over a few years ago."
"what colour sox was he wearing?"
"I have no recollection off that."
"Your memory is unreliable."
Simple memories can be altered too. In extreme cases, even manufactured entirely.
Oh I don't know, I think I've done pretty well.
Going through life with the conviction that your memory is 100% accurate, OTOH, can have all sorts of unfortunate consequences, e.g. believing in nonsense like ghosts.
Last edited:
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena, Pronouns: he/him
Look, what you said is not completely untrue. Memory does get less reliable the further back you go. I've already said that I agree with that part of what you said. But I do not agree with all of what you said, for the reasons that I agreed with Thor2 over.
You said "it's not worth interrogating someone about their memory of the details of a UFO sighting fifty years on". And I don't agree with that. It can be quite instructive to enquire about old memories.
That was an interesting story. I did not know that scammers would make long term investments like that in order to return years later and reap the profits.
Is this scam public knowledge?
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
How so?
Look, what you said is not completely untrue. Memory does get less reliable the further back you go. I've already said that I agree with that part of what you said. But I do not agree with all of what you said, for the reasons that I agreed with Thor2 over.
You said "it's not worth interrogating someone about their memory of the details of a UFO sighting fifty years on". And I don't agree with that. It can be quite instructive to enquire about old memories.
Therefore are you certain you witnessed someone getting run over? Under many circumstances such as ghost hunting people are primed with anticipation. In my case I was doing normal things without anticipating something out of the ordinary. In the first case a was naked eye stargazing. In the orange light I was playing catch. My reaction was not jumpin' Jehoshaphat, it's an ***** alien spaceship!, my reaction was, huh, that's odd. In both cases I had time too observe leisurely.Best of luck in getting the prestige of your case.
Yes I agree with what you said but would add the proviso that the accuracy of the recollection of the event in question, is also dependent on the complexity of the event. The adding and subtracting of bits and pieces must be limited if the event is uncomplicated.
"I saw a guy run out in front of a car and get run over a few years ago."
"what colour sox was he wearing?"
"I have no recollection off that."
"Your memory is unreliable."
Last edited:
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
One way to try to identify an unidentified flying object is to study the details of the circumstances in which it was seen.
If a pilot, in the moment or shortly thereafter, logs a sighting at a certain time, altitude, heading, etc., and that's all corroborated by flight recorders, radars, weather reports, etc., then we can reasonably start hypothesizing about possible explanations like Venus, other planes, etc.
On the other hand, if the pilot says he remembers seeing something fifty years ago, and there's no corroboration, just his memory, we can't reasonably start hypothesizing anything at all. We have no way of knowing which of the remembered details actually belong to that event. We have good reason to assume that at least some of the details are misremembered.
I'm not saying you didn't see what you remember seeing. I'm saying that because of what we know about human memory over time, we have no way to choose between any of the possible explanations. And I'm saying that it's a waste of time to try.
This isn't an issue with your anecdote as such - you're not trying to attribute the sightings to a paranormal cause. But it is an issue with paranormal UFO claims generally: The reports often lack enough reliably-corroborated detail to even attempt a mundane explanation.
You took this a lot more personally than I intended.
My point was simply that inability to attribute a mundane explanation to a UFO sighting does not open the door to paranormal explanations. It simply means that the sighting doesn't include enough facts to even attempt an explanation.
Not that you were making any such claim. Your sighting was simply a good example - in my opinion - of the kind of sighting that isn't worth trying to explain: It's a fifty year old memory. Who knows what really happened or what that thing really was?
(And yes, even to the point of misremembering something as supposedly memorable as seeing someone run over.)
Anyway, the bottom line is, I'm not saying you didn't see it. I'm saying there's no point in trying to explain it.
Last edited:
MohamedTaqi
Thinker
Yes, in Morocco, they do .. a Faqih would invest in many houses and villas under construction, and wait for someone to buy it.
Look what they find in newly constructed villas, it's from a documentary where a man lost 80 millions (about $ 80,000 ) to guarded treasure scammers :
https://youtu.be/6uGBYqH61mo?t=142