UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

[RoboTimbo]

Paul,

Well you've got my attention ... where do you guys come up with those expressions? Lord love a duck! That's great. I can hardly wait until rush hour tomorrow when I can incorporate it into my road rage.

Anyway ... you still haven't answered my question, but I'll answer yours anyway. You asked if I agree with the following:

The claim that has more evidence and the better evidence is the one we accept between mutually conflicting claims.

A.<cowardly dodging snipped>

So you're changing your stance from believing in your Alien Space Ship religion to believing that UFOs ( witches ) exist. After all, there has never been an Alien Space Ship while there have been hundreds of courts cases finding UFOs ( witches ) guilty of witchcraft. Courts are triers of fact. UFOs ( witches ) are proven to exist in fact.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Actually I do know I saw an alien craft. What I can't do is prove it to you, and we've been through that enough times already.

But you could easily prove how you know that what you saw was an alien craft. Unfortunately, you continue to cowardly dodge the questions that would clear it up.

 

[RoboTimbo]

And if you go back and read my original post I had qualified it by saying that claims "requiring evidence" only require sufficient evidence. So for example if you had lost your lunch box and it looked like everyone else's except for your rather unique cheese sandwich inside, then the cheese sandwich might be sufficient evidence of your ownership.

We have sufficient evidence that you perpetrated the J Randall Murphy VolksUFO ( firefly ) Hoax. Is that sufficient for you, also? Or would you require extraordinary evidence that you perpetrated the J Randall Murphy VolksUFO ( firefly ) Hoax?

Would you prefer sufficient evidence over extraordinary evidence in that case? Why or why not?

 

[Resume]

Actually I do know I saw an alien craft. What I can't do is prove it to you, and we've been through that enough times already.

How could you prove your bare assertion? Maybe with evidence. Maybe with some kind of evidence that would match your world-altering claim. Such evidence would be, well, extraordinary!

 

[Marduk]

How do you know you're not a witch? I'm sure you can prove it to us somehow right?

obviously he weighs more than a duck,

 

[RoboTimbo]

Sure there is ... look up the definition of the word "know". What I can't do is prove to you that what I know is true.

What you can't do is prove it even to yourself. That's why you are so desperate to avoid the hard questions.

How do you know you're not a witch? I'm sure you can prove it to us somehow right?

You do understand that you are attempting to switch the burden of proof, right? This illustrates how you fail to comprehend your own J Randall Murphy null hypothesis which is:

"All UFOs are of mundane origin"​

Can you falsify that with even just one Alien Space Ship?

 

[Paul2]

Anyway ... you still haven't answered my question, but I'll answer yours anyway.

Sorry, link to the question or re-state it again (not sure which question you're talking about).

You asked if I agree with the following:

The claim that has more evidence and the better evidence is the one we accept between mutually conflicting claims.

A. This is not a "yes" or "no" issue because even though one claim may have more and/or better evidence than the other, both may still possess insufficient evidence to accept either claim, in which case we would be dealing with what seems to be the best choice between the two in terms of probabilities.

That is a valid point, allow me to refocus:

I laid out two mutually contradictory claims. By definition, one of them has to be true and the other false. So if our evidence for the more well supported claim is still not sufficient on its own, we can still choose between the two and *provisionally* and *tentatively* and [any other similar qualifier you'd like] accept its claim ("It looks like A might be true, and it looks like not-A might be false;" "the odds are that A is true and the odds are that not-A is false," etc.

So, in such a case, we would "accept" (with qualification) the claim with the greater evidence, correct?

 

[Astrophotographer]

Watching this whole argument play out reminds me of one of my favorite movies. One of Humphrey Bogart's best roles had to do with him playing Captain Queeg in "The Caine Mutiny". There is one scene that I find appropriate here. I have to set the stage, who are not familiar with the story. Captain Queeg is the new commanding officer, who has a rather interesting way at looking at a problem and seeing things that are not there. The most interesting incident had to do with a missing quart of strawberries from the wardroom icebox. He discovered this when he desired a "midnight snack". As a result, he immediately convened a gathering of the wardroom officers and ordered them to investigate the matter to discover what happened to the strawberries. The next morning, the executive officer gave a report stating they could not determine where the strawberries went.


XO (Lt Maryk): We kept the messboys and the cook most of the night. They may be lying but it's a dead end.

LT. Keefer: We couldn't keep covering the same ground endlessly sir.

Captain Queeg: Gentlemen, you spent the entire night and accomplished nothing, while I have thought the whole thing out very clearly. Did it ever occur to you that some "bright boy" might have made a duplicate key to the wardroom ice box?

XO: Sir...there is no indication.....

Captain Queeg: There are some things we must assume Mr. Maryk in order to become a good officer...

Captain Queeg never found his "duplicate key" even though he did a thorough search of the ship including strip searching the men. Eventually one of his officers discovered that the messboys had eaten the quart of strawberries as they originally suspected. When he told the Captain this, Queeg ignored him and continued his search for the "duplicate key".

Now let's play a little of role substitution here:

USAF/Skeptics: We kept looking into these thousands of reports and we could not solve all of them. The witnesses may be lying or just misperceived events so bad that we can not resolve the remaining cases. It's a dead end. We are just covering the same ground endlessly.

UFOlogist: Gentlemen, you spent all this time investigating these reports and accomplished nothing. I have thought this thing out and the reason you can't solve the case is because there are forces here we do not understand and the most likely source for these reports are "intelligently controlled exotic craft of origins not of this earth".

USAF/SKeptics: But we have no indication that there are any "intelligently controlled exotic craft of origins not of this earth"....

UFOlogist: There are some things we must assume in order to come up with the predetermined conclusion.

Despite being told that some of the cases that are part of the "unsolved" cases were actually solved indicating that many of these cases probably do have solutions, the UFOlogist continued his search for these "intelligently controlled exotic craft of origins not of this earth".

Now back to the movie, which reaches its conclusion with a trial of two of the Caine's officers for mutiny when they relieved Captain Queeg in the middle of the typhoon. Captain Queeg eventually takes the stand and, under cross-examination, reveals his true colors. After a rant about various incidents he reaches the point about discussing the strawberries:


Captain Queeg: Ahh, but the strawberries that's... that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with... geometric logic... that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist, and I'd have produced that key if they hadn't of pulled the Caine out of action. I, I, I know now they were only trying to protect some fellow officers...

Once again, the role reversal:

UFOlogist: Ahhhh, but the (insert favorite UFO case here - Roswell, Washington DC 1952, Stephenville, Battelle study, etc), that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond a shadow of a doubt and with.....geometric logic (in the case of the Battelle study - statistics)...that these UFOs were "intelligently controlled exotic craft of origins not of this earth" and I would have produced the evidence if the AF and debunkers hadn't come up with explanations for these incidents. I know now that there is a conspiracy to hide the truth from the public......

At the end of the movie, Captain Queeg comes across as a pathetic character, who just could not help himself. The real villan turned out to be one of the officers, Lt. Keefer, who did not stand trial and inspired the XO that the captain was sick and needed to be relieved. Can one say the same about UFOlogists? Are they all Captain Queegs wanting to believe certain things no matter how unlikely they seem or are there Lt. Keefers out there, who, for their own personal reasons, profit off the whole UFO paranoia business?

 

[Jocce]

Sure there is ... look up the definition of the word "know". What I can't do is prove to you that what I know is true.

Your personal beliefs are completely irrelevant to this thread. It's about research and evidence. Try the philosophy and religion subforum.They are more appropriate for you at this point.

 

[John Albert]

I believe alien craft have visited Earth because I've seen one.

The thing is, you don't know that you've seen an alien craft; you just believe you did. You saw what you saw—whatever it was—and assumed it was an alien spacecraft, when the simple fact is you have no possible way of knowing that whatever you saw was alien, or even a "craft" as such.

Actually I do know I saw an alien craft. What I can't do is prove it to you, and we've been through that enough times already.

NO, you don't. You just believe you do. There's no possible way for you to actually know what you're claiming to know.

Sure there is ... look up the definition of the word "know". What I can't do is prove to you that what I know is true.

I don't need to look up definitions for words I already know. I'm not the guy trying to convince everyone that the word "unknown" means "extraterrestrial." Quit trying to sidetrack this discussion with semantic nonsense.

You saw an apparent moving light in the sky and just assumed it was an alien spacecraft because of the way it apparently moved. But the fact is, it was just as likely to have been a flying witch, a fairy, a will 'o' the wisp, a portal to Hell or anything else that has never been proven to exist. Or it might have been some strange, unidentified atmospheric phenomenon (perhaps some kind of plasma effect, "ball-lightning" or whatnot). But most likely, it was simply a mundane earthly object, phenomenon, and/or optical illusion that you mistook for a flying object and assumed to be something extraterrestrial.

Seeing something which you cannot identify does not constitute evidence that you've seen an alien spacecraft, no matter how much obtuse wordplay you try to perform. Without any physical evidence for scientists to examine for clues as to its origin, you simply have no way of knowing what the "thing" you saw was. Your insistence that it was "alien" all comes down to your own credulity and nothing else.

So you don't know you've seen an alien craft. You just think you know, in the same way that a Christian might think he knows that Jesus is his "Personal Lord and Savior." In other words, you don't really know; you simply believe. Your belief is unshakable, and is not supported by a single shred of evidence, therefore it's taken on faith. You have faith that what you saw was extraterrestrial craft, based solely on personal experience, the word of popular folklore, and your own subjective feelings on the matter.

 

[ufology]

Watching this whole argument play out reminds me of one of my favorite movies. One of Humphrey Bogart's best roles had to do with him playing Captain Queeg in "The Caine Mutiny". There is one scene that I find appropriate here. I have to set the stage, who are not familiar with the story. Captain Queeg is the new commanding officer, who has a rather interesting way at looking at a problem and seeing things that are not there. The most interesting incident had to do with a missing quart of strawberries from the wardroom icebox. He discovered this when he desired a "midnight snack". As a result, he immediately convened a gathering of the wardroom officers and ordered them to investigate the matter to discover what happened to the strawberries. The next morning, the executive officer gave a report stating they could not determine where the strawberries went.


XO (Lt Maryk): We kept the messboys and the cook most of the night. They may be lying but it's a dead end.

LT. Keefer: We couldn't keep covering the same ground endlessly sir.

Captain Queeg: Gentlemen, you spent the entire night and accomplished nothing, while I have thought the whole thing out very clearly. Did it ever occur to you that some "bright boy" might have made a duplicate key to the wardroom ice box?

XO: Sir...there is no indication.....

Captain Queeg: There are some things we must assume Mr. Maryk in order to become a good officer...

Captain Queeg never found his "duplicate key" even though he did a thorough search of the ship including strip searching the men. Eventually one of his officers discovered that the messboys had eaten the quart of strawberries as they originally suspected. When he told the Captain this, Queeg ignored him and continued his search for the "duplicate key".

Now let's play a little of role substitution here:

USAF/Skeptics: We kept looking into these thousands of reports and we could not solve all of them. The witnesses may be lying or just misperceived events so bad that we can not resolve the remaining cases. It's a dead end. We are just covering the same ground endlessly.

UFOlogist: Gentlemen, you spent all this time investigating these reports and accomplished nothing. I have thought this thing out and the reason you can't solve the case is because there are forces here we do not understand and the most likely source for these reports are "intelligently controlled exotic craft of origins not of this earth".

USAF/SKeptics: But we have no indication that there are any "intelligently controlled exotic craft of origins not of this earth"....

UFOlogist: There are some things we must assume in order to come up with the predetermined conclusion.

Despite being told that some of the cases that are part of the "unsolved" cases were actually solved indicating that many of these cases probably do have solutions, the UFOlogist continued his search for these "intelligently controlled exotic craft of origins not of this earth".

Now back to the movie, which reaches its conclusion with a trial of two of the Caine's officers for mutiny when they relieved Captain Queeg in the middle of the typhoon. Captain Queeg eventually takes the stand and, under cross-examination, reveals his true colors. After a rant about various incidents he reaches the point about discussing the strawberries:


Captain Queeg: Ahh, but the strawberries that's... that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with... geometric logic... that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist, and I'd have produced that key if they hadn't of pulled the Caine out of action. I, I, I know now they were only trying to protect some fellow officers...

Once again, the role reversal:

UFOlogist: Ahhhh, but the (insert favorite UFO case here - Roswell, Washington DC 1952, Stephenville, Battelle study, etc), that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond a shadow of a doubt and with.....geometric logic (in the case of the Battelle study - statistics)...that these UFOs were "intelligently controlled exotic craft of origins not of this earth" and I would have produced the evidence if the AF and debunkers hadn't come up with explanations for these incidents. I know now that there is a conspiracy to hide the truth from the public......

At the end of the movie, Captain Queeg comes across as a pathetic character, who just could not help himself. The real villan turned out to be one of the officers, Lt. Keefer, who did not stand trial and inspired the XO that the captain was sick and needed to be relieved. Can one say the same about UFOlogists? Are they all Captain Queegs wanting to believe certain things no matter how unlikely they seem or are there Lt. Keefers out there, who, for their own personal reasons, profit off the whole UFO paranoia business?

An entertaining, but false analogy. Apart from the fact that we're not talking about strawberries, The USAF investigations for a certain number of sightings were able to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that misperceptions, hoaxes and such were not the cause. So this part, "The witnesses may be lying or just misperceived events so bad that we can not resolve the remaining cases." doesn't apply to those cases. The reason, if any that continued investigation hasn't produced any material evidence is because the craft are so much further advanced that they have complete impunity, and given this state of affairs, even if one were captured by some freak of circumstance ( like a crash ) the secretive nature of the DoD and advanced weaponry would never facilitate public scrutiny. All we would have are rumors, and as you know they abound.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Mr Ufology has seen more than vague lights in the sky though. He has seen a Caddy full of MiB cut him off and vanish into thin air, been visited by Caddy driving MiB posing as Jehova witnesses, experienced lost time and levitation, and seen talking rabbits. He knows aliens exist.

 

[RoboTimbo]

An entertaining, but false analogy. Apart from the fact that we're not talking about strawberries, The USAF investigations for a certain number of sightings were able to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that misperceptions, hoaxes and such were not the cause. So this part, "The witnesses may be lying or just misperceived events so bad that we can not resolve the remaining cases." doesn't apply to those cases.

Name some cases that are similar to the 1952 Washington DC one so that we may see that you are not employing the fallacy of special pleading.

The reason, if any that continued investigation hasn't produced any material evidence is because the craft are so much further advanced that they have complete impunity, and given this state of affairs, even if one were captured by some freak of circumstance ( like a crash ) the secretive nature of the DoD and advanced weaponry would never facilitate public scrutiny. All we would have are rumors, and as you know they abound.

Can you link to where in the Condon report where it was concluded that Alien Space Ships were involved? Otherwise you are using the fallacy of equivocation.

Do you have anything other than fallacies to try to make your case with?

 

[23_Tauri]

The USAF investigations for a certain number of sightings were able to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that misperceptions, hoaxes and such were not the cause.

Could you list these sightings please? Right here, in the 'UFOs, The Research, The Evidence' thread, and then we can discuss them.

Thank you.

Oh yes, and also could you link to where someone from the USAF used those words "beyond reasonable doubt" to describe these sightings, in the context in which you referred to in your post.

 

[ufology]

I don't need to look up definitions for words I already know. I'm not the guy trying to convince everyone that the word "unknown" means "extraterrestrial." Quit trying to sidetrack this discussion with semantic nonsense.

More misrepresentation above. I'm not trying trying to "convince everyone that the word 'unknown' means 'extraterrestrial.'" If you actually read my posts I've consistently said that alien does not necessitate ET. By continuing to spout misinformation you are only undermining your cause.

 

[RoboTimbo]

More misrepresentation above. I'm not trying trying to "convince everyone that the word 'unknown' means 'extraterrestrial.'" If you actually read my posts I've consistently said that alien does not necessitate ET. By continuing to spout misinformation you are only undermining your cause.

But that is exactly what you're doing. You used the fallacy of Rredefinition to equivocate the word unknown to mean alien. You were shown that unknown means alien only in the context of human beings, not UFOs ( witches ). Are you stating that NO UFOs ( witches ) are Alien Space Ships now?

You need to do this to keep your religion alive for yourself.

You're only fooling yourself. Do you believe in UFOs ( witches ), YES or NO?

 

[John Albert]

More misrepresentation above. I'm not trying trying to "convince everyone that the word 'unknown' means 'extraterrestrial.'" If you actually read my posts I've consistently said that alien does not necessitate ET. By continuing to spout misinformation you are only undermining your cause.

Now you're really splitting hairs. You tried to equate "unknown" with "not of human manufacture," which is an incorrect usage of the word. My point still stands.

Now will you please quit sidetracking the discussion with semantic niggling and just address the substance of my argument:

You saw an apparent moving light in the sky and just assumed it was an alien spacecraft because of the way it apparently moved. But the fact is, it was just as likely to have been a flying witch, a fairy, a will 'o' the wisp, a portal to Hell or anything else that has never been proven to exist. Or it might have been some strange, unidentified atmospheric phenomenon (perhaps some kind of plasma effect, "ball-lightning" or whatnot). But most likely, it was simply a mundane earthly object, phenomenon, and/or optical illusion that you mistook for a flying object and assumed to be something extraterrestrial.

Seeing something which you cannot identify does not constitute evidence that you've seen an alien spacecraft, no matter how much obtuse wordplay you try to perform. Without any physical evidence for scientists to examine for clues as to its origin, you simply have no way of knowing what the "thing" you saw was. Your insistence that it was "alien" all comes down to your own credulity and nothing else.

So you don't know you've seen an alien craft. You just think you know, in the same way that a Christian might think he knows that Jesus is his "Personal Lord and Savior." In other words, you don't really know; you simply believe. Your belief is unshakable, and is not supported by a single shred of evidence, therefore it's taken on faith. You have faith that what you saw was extraterrestrial craft, based solely on personal experience, the word of popular folklore, and your own subjective feelings on the matter.

 

[Stray Cat]

More misrepresentation above. I'm not trying trying to "convince everyone that the word 'unknown' means 'extraterrestrial.'" If you actually read my posts I've consistently said that alien does not necessitate ET. By continuing to spout misinformation you are only undermining your cause.

No, you are being completely dishonest.
You first claim that when you say "alien" you mean "unknown" and then go on to state that as these "craft" (what craft I've no idea as non have ever been proven to be crafts) have capablities beyond our knowledge, and that as physics doesn't rule out interstellar travel that they come from somewhere else in the universe... So extraterrestrial then?

 

[23_Tauri]

More misrepresentation above. I'm not trying trying to "convince everyone that the word 'unknown' means 'extraterrestrial.'" If you actually read my posts I've consistently said that alien does not necessitate ET. By continuing to spout misinformation you are only undermining your cause.

Hmmm... you've said this before, fug. What evidence have you got that suggests there is some secret alien race living somewhere here alongside us on planet Earth? Just how plausible is that, considering how decisively we've explored and colonised this planet over last 10,000 years? Think how many satellites we have up orbiting the planet, every minute of every day, mapping remote regions and such like. Where are these aliens that called Earth home?

Because if you're saying they're aliens, but they're not extraterrestrial, then you're saying that they're terrestrial aliens. Is that what you are saying? The last time we had terrestrial aliens foreign to our known culture Christopher Columbus was sailing to America.

 

[ufology]

Could you list these sightings please? Right here, in the 'UFOs, The Research, The Evidence' thread, and then we can discuss them.

Thank you.

Oh yes, and also could you link to where someone from the USAF used those words "beyond reasonable doubt" to describe these sightings, in the context in which your referred to in your post.

There are plenty of cases out there and I've got my own website to maintain so I'm not going to start posting them all here. I've already referenced the Battelle Memorial Institute study of thousands of cases, a percentage of which were already determined by investigators with more training and credentials than me ( and probably anyone else here ) to be "unknown" ... cases in which hoaxes and misperceptions were not considered to be the cause. And apart from the ones that government agencies have investigated, there are thousands more from civilians. Lastly, by looking through enough of these cases for yourself you can come to your own conclusions. You won't need me or anyone else to tell you that hoaxes and misperceptions are a poor explanation for all cases classed as "unknown". All that being said, documentation and case studies still don't provide conclusive evidence for alien visitation. But it does provide sufficient information to take the possibility seriously enough to continue investigation and study, which is part of what we ufologists do.