Home | Community | Message Board


Zamnesia.com
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
UFOs and Scientific Research
    #1006265 - 10/30/02 02:01 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Note: In this thread I don't want to get directly into the UFO question per se.

I frequently hear of UFO buffs whining about the lack of "serious" scientific research into the subject. My question is twofold:

1. Why don't these lazy asses get a degree, become a scientist and do "the research" if it interests them so much?

2. What exactly do they expect the scientist (which scientist: computer scientist, marine biologist?) to do? There is no physical evidence to examine. There is no way to repeat the experience. All an academic researcher can do is to speculate as to the cause. Even with the "best" video evidence, the object(s) only occupy a handful of pixels making it impossible to do any in-depth analysis. Anecdotes are interesting, but do not provide a handhold for any real research.

And when some scientists do actually get involved, the UFO buffs are not satisfied with the analysis and call it biased because it does not support the ET hypothesis.

So what EXACTLY do UFO buffs expect from mainstream science?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Edited by Swami (10/30/02 02:21 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1006277 - 10/30/02 02:04 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

So what EXACTLY do UFO buffs expect from mainstream science?

An open mind?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCleverName
the cloudsshould know meby now...

Registered: 08/26/02
Posts: 1,121
Loc: red earth painted with mi...
Last seen: 11 years, 13 days
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1006310 - 10/30/02 02:11 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

i dunno, maybe they want nasa to do something. seriously though, if they are so into it they should become scientists.


--------------------
if you can't find the truth right where you are, where else do you expect to find it?

this is the purpose


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1006312 - 10/30/02 02:12 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

And when someone researches the Phoenix Lights and proves them to be military flares, then they no longer have an open mind?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1006459 - 10/30/02 02:55 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Unfortunately.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleShroomismM
Space Travellin
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 64,424
Loc: 9th Dimension
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1006725 - 10/30/02 04:14 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

If they appeared in skies all over the world and did mass landings in major cities we wouldn't need to search very hard for clues.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1006828 - 10/30/02 04:45 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

And these were military flares too right? Better close that mind I hate it when it gets so open.



Edited by Anonymous (10/30/02 04:48 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleShroomismM
Space Travellin
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 64,424
Loc: 9th Dimension
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: TackleBerry]
    #1006913 - 10/30/02 05:06 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

These are part of the "Super Flare" Project, top secret Military Classified. (The latest in flare technology).









Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: TackleBerry]
    #1007483 - 10/30/02 08:30 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

What would make you think that the '50s sightings over Washington D.C. were military flares or were in any way related to the 1996 Phoenix sighting?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1007486 - 10/30/02 08:32 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Can no one stay on topic? Why NOT actually respond to my primary question here and honor my disclaimer note for just a short period before replaying all your favorite tapes?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleShroomismM
Space Travellin
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 64,424
Loc: 9th Dimension
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1007598 - 10/30/02 09:05 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

So what EXACTLY do UFO buffs expect from mainstream science?

Acknowledgement of the massive amount of evidence, past and present, of UFOs and their impact on humanity. A serious look at the thousands of "contactees" who claim to have been visited by the pilots of these UFOs. A serious look into the mass sightings, which continue to this day even becoming more frequent and more reported. Basically, an overall cooperation with the "believers" to uncover the truth and nature of these sightings and experiences from an objective standpoint. To work in harmony with each other to uncover the truth behind the mystery. Not endless struggles of semantics and personal vendettas.
Basically, to open up a bit... step back... look at the big picture... and entertain any possibility...


Edited by Shroomism (10/30/02 09:12 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleShroomismM
Space Travellin
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 64,424
Loc: 9th Dimension
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1007616 - 10/30/02 09:14 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Basically I'm saying you can only gather so much scientific data about UFOs. After a certain point, one needs to step back and examine the whys. Look at the physical evidence, then look at the mental evidence. Connect the two. What impact has UFOs had on our culture and development?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1007639 - 10/30/02 09:24 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

What SPECIFICALLY do you want researched? And why are UFO buffs INCAPABLE of doing it?

Mass sightings and anecdotes are for investigative reporters, not scientific researchers.

Physical "evidence" has been examined and not shown to be non-native to this planet.

Veterinarians have examined cattle mutilations and found them consistent with predation, popular mythology notwithstanding.

The impact on culture is for sociology which is not a "pure" science.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineEightball
whore consumer
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/21/01
Posts: 3,013
Last seen: 2 years, 4 months
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1007652 - 10/30/02 09:29 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

i don't think UFOs are the physical craft we think they are. i think it might be sort of a visible piece of some kind of energy beam being reflective and emitting light and capable of incredible manuvers.


--------------------
If you're frightened of dying and you're holding on.you'll see devils tearing your life away.
But...if you've made your peace, then the devils are really angels
Freeing you from the earth.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleShroomismM
Space Travellin
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 64,424
Loc: 9th Dimension
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1007711 - 10/30/02 09:54 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

Physical "evidence" has been examined and not shown to be non-native to this planet.

Russian Reseracher Says
UFO Crashed In Siberia
From Scott Corrales
lornis1@juno.com
6-1-1

Moscow, May 31 (ANSA) - A mysterious spherical object and built with technology that does not exist on our planet was discovered some time ago in the vicinity of Dalnegorsk in Siberia's Primorye Region, according to Lyudmila Tselina, a researcher with the Russian space center.

Tselina, who has been studying the UFO phenomenon for quite some time and has been engaged in collecting documents and amterial, told the Russian newspaper Trud that the object "fell at a velocity fo 15 meters per second over Mount Isumrudnaia," proving that it was not a meteorite.

The object, whose function is unknown and whose diameter and present whereabouts are not known, was made of materials unknown on Earth and which resisted the action of all known chemicals.

Tselina confirmed other sightings and UFO discoveries, among them the landing of one measuring 3 meters in diameter between Moscow and St. Petersburg.

Translation (C) 2001 S. Corrales, Institute of Hispanic Ufology. Special Thanks to Gloria Coluchi

When UFOs land

[url=http://www.rense.com/general10/metal.htm]Strange Space Metal Found
On Farm - Billions Of Years Old
[/url]

Aliens Perform Tracheotomy on Woman

Take a look at those, I'll present some more later.

I also found this article quite interesting.

UFO Debunkers Have To Get It
Right Every Time
By Ives Lewis
Iveslewis@yahoo.com
3-15-2

How do we know something to be true or to exist? It is perhaps the most vexing of questions, with even philosopher Rene Descartes concluding that at a minimum, he knew he existed, because he knew he was thinking about the question. That he in fact existed was about all Descartes could establish for himself. The waters between science and philosophy become muddy as we think about this question and when it comes right down to it, we know very few facts as true absolutes. With absolute truths being rare, we instead usually deal with the practical "facts" that are relevant to our daily lives. Over time, we have tried to construct procedures for fact verification in various fields of human activity. The UFO mystery provides a good subject for examining how we decide we "know" something, as opposed to simply believing something. A little time reading the UFO literature and perusing the Internet establishes that while there are countless belief systems about UFOs, overall there seem to be two basic camps of people who spend some time contemplating the subject:

1. The proponents, who believe that there is enough evidence to conclude that the Earth is being visited by some kind of unknown craft, and

2. Those who maintain that the proof for the unknown craft hypothesis is lacking. Not satisfied with merely rebuking the claims of the proponents, this camp actively tries to color the entire subject as a fringe topic.

Ironically, the goal of my work is somewhat parallel to that of the debunker. As a criminal defense attorney, I am presented in each case with an allegation or theory. It is my job to challenge that theory. I must try to "debunk" it; show how the witnesses might be unreliable, or the forensic evidence tainted. I may have to show how the obvious, easy conclusion arising from a fact pattern doesn,t look so obvious after careful thought and analysis. It sure sounds like debunking!

Both the debunker and the defense attorney are faced with allegations or a hypothesis, and it is their job to defend the "status quo". For the debunker, that status quo is a worldview skeptical of visits from presumably interstellar travelers, and for the defense attorney the status quo is represented by the presumption of innocence.

There are some profound differences. My "debunking" work happens in a context designed for dispute resolution. First, there are rules that control what evidence is admitted into the debate. These are called the Rules of Evidence which were designed and modified over centuries with the goal of admitting only the more reliable, credible evidence.

Second, there is a "trier of fact"; either a judge or a jury that will make the final decision on the proposition.

We should note a dynamic that exists in criminal justice that may also be at work in the UFO debate. In reality, good defense lawyers make for good police work. Lawyers sometimes win cases because police work was sloppy, or records not kept, assumptions made, or shortcuts taken. For example, perhaps the police entered a house and found evidence of a crime, but failed to obtain a search warrant. The case gets dismissed on a defense motion to suppress the evidence. How does this lead to better police work?

That cop, and probably many others, will not make that mistake again. Their next case will be fully documented, and they will obtain a search warrant before they enter the next house. The police know that the defense attorney will carefully scrutinize their case. Ultimately, this leads to more convictions as police polish their skills at careful case building. The same dynamic exists in UFOLOGY. Investigators know that debunkers are waiting to look for weaknesses. In may be that good debunking will eventually lead to the carefully investigated case for UFOs that will establish their reality for the world.

The UFO dispute exists in the absence of a trier of fact or rules of evidence. Many debates on the subject are never resolved because of these absences. We struggle to demonstrate that this or that fact is sufficiently proved; there is little resolution because there is little structure for the debate, no agreement on the standard of proof and there is no judge; no one to make the final call. The debunkers take full advantage of this by assuming that they should set the standards of proof, and that they adhere to them. They pretend that this is a purely scientific question and that there are two acceptable levels of proof:

1) a level of "proof" sufficient for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and 2) absolute physical proof, preferably in artifact form. The data that exists is then often summarily dismissed as failing to meet either standard. Out of all the areas of human endeavors and quests, the debunkers "premiered" the "absolute proof" test for the UFO phenomena. A brilliant move, really, to somehow establish that absolute proof must be attained before a topic gains enough respectability to be seriously discussed.

The very nature of the UFO phenomenon renders the standards espoused by the debunkers inappropriate; an elusive and unpredictable phenomenon that appears to value its own unknown status, and a government with a proven history of lies, secrecy and hypocrisy on the subject. Does the nature of the UFO phenomenon lend itself to the scientific method as traditionally applied, ala laboratory test? Can we perform experiments and then have others try to duplicate the work? Most often not, and we all knew that going in. The cry from the debunkers about the lack of such an approach has a hollow, circular ring; they claim the evidence isn't verified scientifically, while likewise claiming that the existing data doesn't warrant a scientific approach. They can't have it both ways, and common sense dictates that the advancement by the debunkers of the absolute proof and peer-reviewed standards is a bit disingenuous. It appears designed to further an erroneous public impression that there is no credible data supporting the existence of UFOs.

As a side note, the claim of lack of evidence of manipulation or conspiracy by the government is also galling. It is hardly unreasonable to assert that somewhere, in the deepest, most secret rooms of the Pentagon, attempts to manipulate public belief on this issue are undertaken. Especially in a context of a government that refuses to declassify documents about UFOs while claiming they are of no significance. It is unrealistic to expect a standardized dispute resolution system for the UFO debate anytime soon. We can, however, take the first steps towards much needed structure for the discussion. Above I wrote about the debunkers, posture that only absolute proof would bestow legitimacy upon the UFO discussion.

Let's agree to settle that question. What exactly does constitute enough evidence to legitimize the subject and deem it fit for national discussion and study? What is the standard of proof? Who shall be the trier of fact? Sadly, there is no entity available to serve as a neutral trier of fact. For now, we shall have to settle with the court of public opinion. We can set a standard of proof, though. The "reasonable doubt" test, sufficient enough for human executions, is appropriate for the UFO debate. The debunkers may cry foul and claim that there is no substitute for the scientific method. Remember, we are establishing whether the subject is fit for national debate and study, not resolving the question in the ultimate sense. I'm also proposing that the burden of proof be placed on the UFO proponents, so any debunker arguments that this is a way out of the scientific method are not well taken. The reasonable doubt test is the most demanding test available from the justice system. If debunkers and UFO proponents could agree on a standard of proof, both parties would have taken a good step towards the establishment of protocols for UFO study.

There are rough times ahead for the debunkers. Let,s look at the pretend standards they have espoused. The fatal flaw is that the facts must adhere to their theories 100% of the time, or their entire worldview crumbles completely. There are no exceptions to this. They must argue, that in every case there was a misidentification, or fraud. Every single case. Every UFO with double rows of windows, sighted by pilots. Every UFO at a nuclear base. The dogfight over Iran. Paul Hill,s sighting. The military helicopter in Ohio bathed in green light and controlled by a UFO, corroborated by ground witnesses. Every single one of the unexplained incidents in Blue Book and Condon. The Brazilian cases. Every single abduction.

Bentwaters. Lonnie Zamora. Every single pilot, citizen, astronomer, astronaut, air-traffic controller, from every country in the world. Each incident ever reported in any manner anywhere. In each and every incident in which a human being observed what appeared to be a non-human, intelligently controlled craft, the observer was wrong, says the debunker. The debunker maintains that UFO sightings that appear to be unknown craft, have a 100% error rate, without fail.

That's a tough, one might say impossible burden for the debunkers. To have a worldview that demands to be correct 100% of the time, or else it all falls apart. To cover the bases, debunkers give unsolved cases labels like "leftovers" and "residue". This is intended to signal that they are just a small, expectable percentage of sightings with prosaic explanations that we just haven't figured out yet. To claim that the unsolved cases are simply the "residue" of all sightings is really a statistical sleight of hand used to make their worldview appear to have a stronger foundation than it really does. It arbitrarily chooses to include the unknowns as part of a category that includes all things humans see moving in the sky. Who made that decision? Those unknowns should be studied as a category in their own right, not dismissed as a statistical aberration of all sightings.

Consider: for the believers, they only have to get it right once. Every other incident in history can be a fraud or mistake.

For the debunkers, well. . . . they only have to get it right every time.




Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibletekramrepus
Female User Gallery
Registered: 02/20/02
Posts: 2,229
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1007782 - 10/30/02 10:19 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

This post is a bit off topic, but I'd just like to say I myself have seen a UFO. Alien or not, I have no idea. But it was about 75 feet away, and two others friends with me saw it perfectly. It flew in a circular motion, had a red trail behind it, and then dissappeared behind some trees.

Call me a liar, nut whatever, doesn't offend me. I know what I saw.

Again, sorry this post is irrelevant.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineEightball
whore consumer
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/21/01
Posts: 3,013
Last seen: 2 years, 4 months
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1007784 - 10/30/02 10:19 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

might be interested, i heard this was good

Incredible but True?
History Channel
8:00 PM (60mins) Wednesday, Oct 30
Area 51: Beyond Top Secret Area 51 becomes a symbol of everything sneaky about the U.S. military-industrial-intelligence complex.


--------------------
If you're frightened of dying and you're holding on.you'll see devils tearing your life away.
But...if you've made your peace, then the devils are really angels
Freeing you from the earth.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1008079 - 10/30/02 11:40 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

...and present whereabouts are not known...
That just about sums up that fictitious case.

Not satisfied with merely rebuking the claims of the proponents, this camp actively tries to color the entire subject as a fringe topic.
This is a blatantly false generalization trying to make skeptics out as "bad guys".

...and it is their (skeptics) job to defend the "status quo".
*yawn* Yet another falsehood. I care about the truth, not the status quo!

This guy is more biased than the people he tries to paint as biased.

Since when do we have to wax philosophical about physical objects? When we see and touch a Boeing 747, no one brings up judges, juries, existentialism and the nature of reality - only with ephemeral UFOs.

As I have stated many, many times - even UFO believers cannot show any link from a mysterious light in the sky to civilzations from another world. PERIOD.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Edited by Swami (10/31/02 03:05 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineShroomalicious
You may say I'ma dreamer...

Registered: 06/20/02
Posts: 319
Loc: The Shire
Last seen: 13 years, 11 months
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1008626 - 10/31/02 02:11 AM (14 years, 1 month ago)

1. Why don't these lazy asses get a degree, become a scientist and do "the research" if it interests them so much?

I think whenever scientists admit their beliefs in UFOs they are suddenly not creditable scientists. Sometimes those guys do get degrees and then they are discredited because of their beliefs.

2. What exactly do they expect the scientist (which scientist: computer scientist, marine biologist?) to do? There is no physical evidence to examine.

Once again, any evidence has been deemed, "not creditable".

Is it because it is crappy evidence? Is it because some people just don't want to believe? Who knows...


--------------------
Shroomalicious - :smile: I love you and in doing so I love myself, because we ARE all one :smile: - "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves the whole world blind and toothless". - Mahatma Ghandi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomalicious]
    #1009854 - 10/31/02 12:35 PM (14 years, 1 month ago)

You yourself swami can't stay on this sort of topic unless you're the one starting the thread. All you do is make feeble attempts at making fun or mocking believers who post here.
Why would you deserve everyone staying on topic?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next >  [ show all ]

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Scientific Research Showing Thought's Affect on Matter
( 1 2 all )
dmtrypr 2,163 32 01/23/05 04:36 AM
by relativexistance
* Russian Cosmonauts and Generals Confirm.. UFOs Anonymous 679 2 04/02/02 05:08 PM
by In(di)go
* Guess Swami's Sign
( 1 2 3 all )
Swami 3,053 43 03/07/02 01:04 AM
by saturnalone
* Why evolution isn't a scientific theory.
( 1 2 3 4 ... 13 14 all )
Mr. Mushrooms 10,012 267 04/20/09 05:22 PM
by zouden
* Why the scientific method is fundamentally flawed.
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
deCypher 4,906 100 11/07/08 06:11 PM
by Icelander
* chakras: scientific evidence?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
x7x_x7x 7,569 114 08/15/08 02:14 PM
by ChiefGreenLeaf
* Diploid, here are the incidents that you have not researched and can't account for...
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Ego Death 3,945 78 09/28/05 07:08 PM
by Silversoul
* The best site for an unbiased overview of the UFO phenomena
( 1 2 3 all )
Ego Death 2,546 45 10/13/05 12:54 PM
by Ego Death

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, Jokeshopbeard, DividedQuantum
7,288 topic views. 2 members, 7 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
SoulSpeciosa Kratom
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.094 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 17 queries.