Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

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!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Myyco.com APE Liquid Culture For Sale   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6  [ show all ]
UFOs and Scientific Research
    #1006265 -

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 12:21 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1006277 -

So what EXACTLY do UFO buffs expect from mainstream science?

An open mind?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1006310 -

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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1006312 -

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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1006459 -

Unfortunately.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1006725 -

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.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1006828 -

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


Edited by TackleBerry (10/30/02 02:48 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: TackleBerry]
    #1006913 -

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









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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: TackleBerry]
    #1007483 -

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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1007486 -

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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1007598 -

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 07:12 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1007616 -

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?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1007639 -

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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1007652 -

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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1007711 -

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.




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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1007782 -

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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1007784 -

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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1008079 -

...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 01:05 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1008626 -

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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomalicious]
    #1009854 -

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?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: ]
    #1009913 -

I think Swami is quite on topic.

As far as the mocking... when you deal with the same shitty arguments and non-evidence for ~20 years (I'm guessing here), wouldn't you become at least a little snide?

Sorry that your belief system has been challenged so...


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: tekramrepus]
    #1009917 -

This post is a bit off topic, but I'd just like to say I myself have seen a UFO.

I have NEVER claimed that people don't see unusual objects. As you and I both say, one cannot come to any conclusions about the nature or purpose of the object. Nor do I see how it is possible for anyone to do any further research whatsoever on your sighting (the point of this thread) other than to get collaboration.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1012089 -


As far as the mocking... when you deal with the same shitty arguments and non-evidence for ~20 years (I'm guessing here), wouldn't you become at least a little snide?
Sorry that your belief system has been challenged so...
Challenged so? what sort of challenge would that be? thats not any kind of 'challenge', wtf.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1014819 -

I agree with you Swami.

You can't make educated decisions without first researching, and you cannot research what is not available.

Is this a concept similiar to the one you propose?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1015012 -

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

That's a limited interpretation of the scientific method. Kepler was theorising about the nature of the universe way before he had any evidence whatsoever to back up his ideas. Einstein's ideas only had any "proof" decades after he thought of them.

The idea that scientists can only address something if the object is laid on a table in front of them is quite frankly ludicrous.

Science is about suggesting possible theories which are based on available evidence, intuition and knowledge. These theories may not become proved for hundreds of years. Most of the currently accepted ideas about the nature of the universe were considered outlandish nonsense the first time they were suggested.



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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1015162 -

my mom being a staight edge person claims to have seen a UFO in rochester NY in ~1978 with a friend of hers in their apt. she looked out the window and saw it hovering at rooftop height maybe 50-100 feet away. frankly i believe her and i think the question should be "who is responcible for UFOs" rather than "are all these people just seeing things?"


--------------------
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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1015228 -

Have you people ever noticed the similarity of an Amanita muscaria and a UFO's landing? (with that light beam coming from the centre representing the stem) Well, often, things are a bit more simple than a shroomer might think... Imagination is not scientific evidence, although its true...its in our head.
Just as the spaceship approaches earth, so does the Amanita.Not only it comes to our world, its able to help humans make intergalactic trips and approach other realityz too , planets and places they have never been to. Dreams.
That come true,or better that we get to know they always where true.
What i want to say by that,is that people think science needs evidence to be science, when our whole lifes are felt and lived without any evidence or at least a reality confirmation.
Todays scientists have failed to achive balance.which is the most important thing in investigating this perfectly balanced universe.Balance between the spiritual and the physical.
We shroomers, do have a bridge tho, a bridge that connects the two worlds, and helps us expand our consciousness.
WE ARE THE SCIENTISTS.


--------------------
The Source Of The Force
Is The Power Of The Mind

"if you don't like what you're doing, you can always pick up your needle and move to another groove." - timothy leary"
Anno: "-I can do anything with those clouds!"
Annos Tek



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Eightball]
    #1015549 -

frankly i believe her and i think the question should be "who is responcible[sic] for UFOs" rather than "are all these people just seeing things?"

And just how do you propose going about answering this question?


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1015561 -

Ask the drivers

Basically, all the studying and scientific research in the world will get you nowhere in finding out where they come from. We just have to wait for them to tell us... and they will. (edit: err...have been... but some people don't pay attention :wink:)


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

Edited by Shroomism (11/02/02 10:36 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1015590 -

Kepler was theorising...

Einstein's ideas...

The idea that scientists can only address...
This is a typical Alex response. First change the relevant word from "research" to "theorize" to "ideation" to "address". Any learned person knows that these four words have quite different connotations.

...something if the object is laid on a table in front of them is quite frankly ludicrous.
Then Alex shifts into the classic "straw-man" argument, by making up a statement that the author did NOT say and then shooting it down. Most areas of scientific research are not done in a laboratory or on a table.

Science is about suggesting possible theories which are based on available evidence, intuition and knowledge.
True, but this is NOT research. This not the gathering of further data and testing these hypotheses.

These theories may not become proved for hundreds of years. Most of the
currently accepted ideas about the nature of the universe were considered outlandish nonsense the first time they were suggested.
...and finally, he finishes with a non sequitur.







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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1018287 -

I'm sorry I don't have any links in front of me right at this moment, but many are available from art bell's site. It seems to me that there are basically three types ufo-related research. there's research into sightings which mostly consists of fuzzy pixelated things, as has been discussed already. Not much 'evidence' there. More interesting is studying abductees. For example Paul Laffoley discovered during a routine brain scan that a metallic object of unknown origin had been implanted in his brain in close proximity to his pineal gland. He claims this object is of extraterrestrial origin and inspires him for his very, um, "unique" paintings. That's the only name I can think of right now, but there are others. IF people have metal things in their brains and/or noses, then that seems pretty objectively testable to me. The third line of reserach, and to me personally the most interesting, is studying evidence of "ancient astronauts." For example there's this rock several hundreds thousands of years old with hexagonal metal pieces of unknown composition imbedded in it. Things like that and, to some people, the Nazca Plains warrant research.

As to your original question of what do believers want out of scientists, I believe they want to be taken seriously. There are doctors and scientists exploring this area, but they're not taken seriously by the mainstream because their ideas are "pseudoscience." Science is all about maintaining the status quo, from early IQ tests and craniology "proving" the inferiority of Africans and Jews to the modern idea that our everyday reality is the only "proper" one. Science is not this impartial, objective instrument of logic, it's carried out by people who have theiur own prejudices and ideas of how the world is. Parapsychologists, cryptozoologists, UFOologists and the like only want their ideas taken seriously as a "real" avenue of inquiry.

In my opinion.
-m


--------------------
(the above was deciphered from phi (~1.62) using an advanced alphanumeric conversion algorhythm and should not be perceived as meaningful.)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: machineelf368]
    #1018339 -

In reply to:
Science is all about maintaining the status quo, from early IQ tests and craniology "proving" the inferiority of Africans and Jews to the modern idea that our everyday reality is the only "proper" one.


Don't confuse pseudo science (craniology) with real science. Just because someone claims that they are using science doesn't mean they are being true to the scientific method.

In reply to:
Science is not this impartial, objective instrument of logic, it's carried out by people who have theiur own prejudices and ideas of how the world is.


Behavior or motivations of people using a tool or system says nothing about the soundess of it. Science is value neutral, what humans do with the knowledge or what they decide to study is another matter. The methods themselves are sound. A good scientist's real agenda is to discover the true nature of things (let the chips fall where they may) for this will allow humans to better adapt themselves to the universe.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Evolving]
    #1018470 -

heres a sighting in te anau, spotted by a group of roving fly-fishermen
*notice the vapor trail, very interesting, at what appears to be this relatively low atmospherical level, it could suggest some form of advanced internal combustion...


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1018683 -

Swami I see where you're coming from.

People say "science needs to look into this SERIOUSLY!"

uhh, what should they look into?


--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Strumpling]
    #1019375 -

http://www.freedomdomain.com/ufo.htm


I don't think REAL aliens are ready to speak or show (for that matter) themselfs to humans yet, except maybe under the influence.


--------------------
And the gameshow host rings the buzzer (brrnnntt) oh and now you get a face full of face!

Edited by johnnyfive (11/03/02 08:49 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1019396 -

...and finally, he finishes with a non sequitur.

:grin: :grin: :grin: :grin:

And by the way, UFO's are real. :tongue:

Cheers, 

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: ]
    #1019429 -

I agree, UFO's are real.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Evolving]
    #1021145 -

I completely disagree... I think every flying object has been identified.
:tongue: 


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Evolving]
    #1022388 -

well you're right, craniology isn't "real science," but IQ tests are, and they're real prejudiced. But what quantum physics has shown us is that there's no separation between observed and observer. The ideal of science is to be impartial, but that can never be truly realized. We can eliminate all known prejudice, but we can't eliminate unknown, institutionalized prejudice. I'm thinking of G. Stanley Hall, one of the founding members of American Psychology, who had scientifically shown that higher education makes women infertile, and that women were less intelligent than men. Or that book The Bell Curve by two scientists who showed statistically that Blacks are inferior to Whites. "Science" may be objective and value neutral, but it can only be utilized by "People," who can be neither. You also assume there is one "The Truth," which is highly debatable, that not's the scope of this thread. Or is it?

They've done studies where, for example, two groups of scientists test a group of rats in a maze. One group is told these rats were bred to do really well at mazes, the other group is told the opposite. The first group finds the rats to do really well at the maze, the second group finds the rats to do poorly. It's the same rats. And there' sno way the experimenters could have biased the rats by verbal or nonverbal cues. It's just that expectations determine the outcome so often. It's not always a matter of interpretation, either. These studies was just timing rats, nothing incredibly hard.
-m
(If anyone cares I have the references for these studies, done in 1961. PM me if you're curious.)


--------------------
(the above was deciphered from phi (~1.62) using an advanced alphanumeric conversion algorhythm and should not be perceived as meaningful.)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1022496 -

There has been some scientific inquiry into the possible antecedants and after effects of UFO experiences. Check out The Omega Project by Kenneth Ring.....

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: machineelf368]
    #1022761 -

In reply to:
well you're right, craniology isn't "real science," but IQ tests are, and they're real prejudiced


When you state that IQ tests are 'real prejudiced' do you mean culturally biased? As sports or music are prejudiced? Do you know that there are now IQ tests specifically designed to get around any cultural bias? IQ tests measure certain select facets of intelligence, not every kind of intelligence. Individual abilites span a broad spectrum of strengths and weaknesses. Do you know there are non-verbal IQ tests that check for such things spacial ability and mathematics? Did you know that orientals score higher than whites on IQ tests (even foreign born orientals)? How do you explain this, are the designers of the tests secretely biased towards orientals?

In reply to:
I'm thinking of G. Stanley Hall, one of the founding members of American Psychology, who had scientifically shown that higher education makes women infertile, and that women were less intelligent than men


Did he scientifically show or did he rationalize, omit certain information and select only those things which backed up his pre-conceived notions? Sloppy work is not an indictment of science but the person who is doing the work.

In reply to:
You also assume there is one "The Truth,"


What do you mean 'one "The Truth?"' This can have quite a few connotations. I am guessing that this is an implication that you deny there is any kind of objective reality external to yourself (not to confuse interpretation of external reality with actual reality). Are you operating under the assumption the the universe is all one big manifestation of your imagination? Are you familiar with the Great Swami's rock on the head reality test? But that's not the scope of this thread...

In reply to:
They've done studies where, for example, two groups of scientists test a group of rats in a maze. One group is told these rats were bred to do really well at mazes, the other group is told the opposite. The first group finds the rats to do really well at the maze, the second group finds the rats to do poorly. It's the same rats. And there' sno way the experimenters could have biased the rats by verbal or nonverbal cues. It's just that expectations determine the outcome so often. It's not always a matter of interpretation, either. These studies was just timing rats, nothing incredibly hard


Could you please just post the references to this study here (that way you won't have to answer multiple PMs)? I am quite curious as to when this study was done and what protocols were used, if the tests were video taped, was the timing done with a stop watch controlled by the experimenters, what kind of nosies were made by or actions performed by the experimenters during the test runs, time of day the tests were run, etc., etc... From your description, it appears that what these studies really illustrate is how not to do experiments or studies and the importance of using double blind methods.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1022828 -

This is a typical Alex response.

Yes, I'm afraid it's a tendency of mine to demolish your arguments.

:grin: :grin:

When Einstein was theorising about the nature of the universe what "research" could he do about the speed of light?

Clearly you would have been saying "What research can you do? Stop thinking about these things Einstein". Progress is made by people who think diametrically opposite to you. 


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1022834 -

In reply to:
I don't think REAL aliens are ready to speak or show (for that matter) themselfs to humans yet, except maybe under the influence.



.....yeah.



--------------------
What if everything around you
Isn't quite as it seems?
What if all the world you think you know,
Is an elaborate dream?
And if you look at your reflection,
Is it all you want it to be?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Murex]
    #1022836 -

Hang on murex, someone else said that.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1022840 -

It was a quote.


--------------------
What if everything around you
Isn't quite as it seems?
What if all the world you think you know,
Is an elaborate dream?
And if you look at your reflection,
Is it all you want it to be?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1023453 -

Same sort of tricks are used by both sides - You made the sweeping generalisatin that no non-native material has ever been found.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Evolving]
    #1023725 -

With the IQ test stuff, I was just saying that when they first came out they were supposed to be scientifically accurate, objective measures of a person's intelligence. The SATs were the same way, they're supposed to be this objective measure of how well you'll do in college, but there are all sorts of prejudices built in to the SAT tests about geographic location and ethnic background and such. Anyway, yes they've improved the IQ tests quite a bit since the 40s when they used those tests to turn away Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi Germany because they 'weren't smart enough.' My point is that at the time those tests were considered objectively scientific. Now we know better. We also know that there are multiple facets of intelligence, as you mentioned. We learn all the time, and the science of one era is expanded upon or downright refuted by the next era. Like Newton, Einstein, and quantum theory. So if scientists today are scientifically discrediting any and all evidence for extraterrestial craft and/or life entering our atmosphere, I just wonder if it's really scientific or not.

People tend to be much more skeptical about a study showing evidence for something 'weird' like depressive realism, telepathy or alien contact than for something not 'weird' that fits snugly into our preconceived notions of how reality works. It took thirty years for physics to admit that reality is nonlocal, for example. Nonlocality is really really weird, and it challenges all our preconceived notions about the structure of reality, so people were really reluctant to admit it nonlocality was more than 'pseudoscience.' maybe something similar with UFO research? maybe not, I don't know.

In reply to:
Did he scientifically show or did he rationalize, omit certain information and select only those things which backed up his pre-conceived notions? Sloppy work is not an indictment of science but the person who is doing the work.


That's an excellent point, and I think that exact question needs to be asked far more than it is today. Are the scientists researching UFOs guilty of sloppy work, or are the scientists debunking UFOs omitting certain information? the original question was "So what EXACTLY do UFO buffs expect from mainstream science?" and I think the answer is that they want the same skeptical treatment you have shown to be applied to the 'anti-UFO' as well as to the 'pro-UFO' research and researchers.

As for the experiments with the rats:
Rosenthal, R., & Fode, K. L. (1963). The effects of experimenter bias on the performance of the albino rat. Behavioral Science, 8(3), 183-189.
Rosenthal, R., & Lawson, R. (1963). A longitudinal study of the effects of experimenter bias on the operant learning of laboratory rats. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 2(2), 61-72.
-m


--------------------
(the above was deciphered from phi (~1.62) using an advanced alphanumeric conversion algorhythm and should not be perceived as meaningful.)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: machineelf368]
    #1024221 -

I don't think REAL aliens are ready to speak or show (for that matter) themselfs to humans yet, except maybe under the influence.

I think it's the other way around. I don't think HUMANS are ready for Aliens to make contact, and I think the Aliens know this.

If aliens contacted humans, (which I think has already happened anyways), We would be so caught up in this idea of life on other planets that we'd want to know so much about them and their technology, we'd start losing track of our own lives. It's like giving a computer to a south-african villager, who hasn't seen something of the sort EVER. They'd be so caught up with the neat things it can do, they'd stop doing the things required for their society to function as a whole. Everything has it's ecosystem, the human economy included. When we tone the war, violence, and get shit organized, THEN maybe they'll make an appearance, but why now? What would they gain?





--------------------
No one knows the worth of innocence till he knows it is gone forever, and that money can't buy it back. Not the saint, but the sinner that repenteth, is he to whom the full length and breadth, and height and depth, of life's meaning is revealed. Good and evil loose all objective meaning and are seen as equally necessary and contrasting elements in the masterpiece that is the universe.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1027011 -

(Before I start - I don't know whether aliens/ufos exist.)

Swami, this question is loaded, you are basically using it as a platform to air your views.
In the question, you also state an opinion which you fail to substantiate:

"I frequently hear of UFO buffs whining about the lack of "serious" scientific research into the subject." (Sounds like a convenient way of setting up your question to me)

Then you ask:

"So what EXACTLY do UFO buffs expect from mainstream science?"

Who is actually doing this expecting? Are you implying all non scientific researchers into UFO's feel this way? Perhaps there is a large number who don't really care about the scientific establishment, at this time.

Basically, you are using this question to single out a very defined group of people i.e - Ufo researchers who want science to take them seriously, who arent willing to do a degree themselves, and, judging by what you say in later posts, do sloppy science and will believe anything. Thats ok if you state it in those terms to begin with but it seems to me that you are saying this describes the whole group of ufo
researchers not just this narrowly defined group.

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

Without explicitly saying so, you are implying this applies to all physical evidence that has ever been examined. Perhaps there were conflicts of opinion in some of these cases? perhaps you dont know the entire canon of ufo research inside and out? (Im not saying I do)

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

What am I to infer from this? Well, they definitely havent shown you a link have they? :grin: Does this mean  one does not/will not exist PERIOD?

I thought Alex's post made a very good point that science has always been about theorising beyond currently available data, and was also relevant to the question you had posed.
Your reply was basically a case of if you cant effectively dismiss the argument, Dismiss the author, dismiss the  style. Obviously, in the absence of an opportunity to do "research" perhaps the UFO people want the science community to theorise beyond the available data, until such time as more data is available. Is this not an answer to your original question?

I think everyone has a gut feeling about the Ufo alien question. Whats your gut feeling swami?

 


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1027024 -

No, the arguments are not the same and a factual statement is not a generalization. Please submit a lab report, article or weblink from a reputable university or scientific journal detailing such a non-native material.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Edited by Swami (11/06/02 04:03 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1027042 -

http://www.webcom.com/sturrock/jse/articles/ufo_reports/vallee_phys/toc.html


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1027070 -

http://cseti.homesite.net:7071/ramgen/sight3009_ht611ss.rm

http://www.hardevidence.com/Analysis.htm

http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/ufo_reports/sturrock/toc.html



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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1027073 -

I'm not attempting to prove or disprove it. I'm just not making sweeping generalisations one way or the other.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1027078 -

"Conclusion:

Reports of unusual metallic residue following the observation of an unexplained aerial phenomenon are detailed enough for a comparative study to be undertaken. This research is hampered, however, by several problems of methodology where lack of money or analytical resources is only a secondary obstacle. The primary concerns have to do with inaccuracies in data gathering, lack of information about exact dates and times, lack of detailed, critical field investigation, and failure to provide an irrefutable chain of evidence in the collection, transportation and examination of the samples. "

That is supposed to be convincing?



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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1027085 -

What is your gut feeling on the Ufo / alien question?


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1027090 -

You are asking a rationalist about a gut feeling?


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1027095 -

I don't think he knew you were a rationalist. Go easy on him, man. It's not cool to shove someone verbally like that in order for you to look big.



--------------------
What if everything around you
Isn't quite as it seems?
What if all the world you think you know,
Is an elaborate dream?
And if you look at your reflection,
Is it all you want it to be?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1027104 -

Here's an interesting law

: XTRA-TERRESTRIAL EXPOSURE LAW
[...]
: On October 5, 1982, Dr. Brain [Brian?] T. Clifford of the Pentagon
: announced at a press conference ("The Star", New York, Oct. 5, 1982)
: that contact between U.S. citizens and extra-terrestrials or their
: vehicles is strictly illegal.
:
: According to a law already on the books:
:
: (Title 14, Section 1211 of the Code of Federal Regulations, adopted
: on July 16, 1969, before the Apollo moon shots), anyone guilty of
: such contact automatically becomes a wanted criminal to be jailed
: for one year and fined $5,000. The NASA administrator is empowered
: to determine with or without a hearing that a person or object has
: been "extraterrestrially exposed" and impose an indeterminate
: quarantine under armed guard, which could not be broken even by
: court order.

This one may tickle your fancy

http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/physicalevidence/ubtatubamagnesium/index.htm


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1027106 -

I myself am a human fiirst. Later i may attach labels like rationalist to myself. But i never forget they are convenient fictions, and dont get caught up in sense of importance generated by a mere word. We all have gut reactions Swami, as you well know.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Murex]
    #1027108 -

Thanks for your concern Murex!  :grin: 


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1027110 -

Ah! Swami I found your site.

http://www.ufoskeptic.org/


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1027115 -

One interpretation of ths law could be that the government are trying to fan the flames to help keep the secret research projects under cover or disguised as UFOs.....but im not pareanoid...really! :grin: 


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1027581 -

Your reply was basically a case of if you cant effectively dismiss the argument, Dismiss the author, dismiss the style.

That's just swami's cheeky way.

Of course there is so much scientific work to be done on aliens and UFO's that the problem is figuring out where to begin rather than any "lack of something to research".


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1028264 -

The links I provided are a good place to start.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1028867 -

I myself am a human fiirst. Later i may attach labels like rationalist to myself.
Later? You have ALREADY attached labels to yourself as we all have.

But i never forget they are convenient fictions, and dont get caught up in sense of importance generated by a mere word.
Most of our labels are not so obvious and are carried at the subconscious level.

We all have gut reactions Swami, as you well know.
Why are you telling me what I know, especially if I do know it so well? Is redundancy important to you?

Gut reactions are useless in identifying scientific truths. Einstein's gut reaction about many aspects of quantuum physics that are widely accepted today, was that the universe could not possibly work that way.

I have zero interest in gut reactions, only confirmable research.



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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1028882 -

Yes, I'm afraid it's a tendency of mine to demolish your arguments.

No, it is typical to violate the basic laws of logical argument as I have clearly pointed out. Instead of responding to my points directly you sidestep with a meaningless sweeping statement.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1028901 -

Clearly you would have been saying "What research can you do? Stop thinking about these things Einstein".

"Thinking about" is not research. Is this too complex an idea for you to grasp? So If I want to research aliens, I just think about them? How profound!

Progress is made by people who think diametrically opposite to you.
Is this the level at which your mind functions?


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1028957 -

Swami, this question is loaded, you are basically using it as a platform to air your views.
Wow! I would be the FIRST EVER person on these message boards to do so!

In the question, you also state an opinion which you fail to substantiate:

"I frequently hear of UFO buffs whining about the lack of "serious" scientific research into the subject."
It is not an opinion. Try reading some MUFON Journals. Go to the UFO sites and message boards. Look back at some old threads here.

Who is actually doing this expecting? Are you implying all non scientific researchers into UFO's feel this way?
Not al, but many proponents are quite vocal on this. Again, look at the threads on Crop CIrcles, Cattle mutilations abduction, etc. The frequent cry si "Why doesn't anyone care? Why is not the govermnet getting involved in protecting it's citizens? Why doesn't mainstream science do more research? Just read even a little bit.

Perhaps there is a large number who don't really care about the scientific establishment, at this time.
Of course many don't care. Who wants their favorite belief to be revealed to be false?

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

Without explicitly saying so, you are implying this applies to all physical evidence that has ever been examined. Perhaps there were conflicts of opinion in some of these cases? perhaps you dont know the entire canon of ufo research inside and out? (Im not saying I do)
The entire cannon? No. But having read several hundred books, magazine articles, websites, I find that the believers cannot come up with ons single piece that can stand up to scrutiny. Even read shroomism's websites. All "evidence" is subject to multiple interpretations and is hardly conclusive.

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

What am I to infer from this? Well, they definitely havent shown you a link have they? Does this mean one does not/will not exist PERIOD?
The ETH is bandied about TODAY by believers (and yesterday) with not one single link to another star system other than a voice-in-the-head.

I thought Alex's post made a very good point that science has always been about theorising beyond currently available data, and was also relevant to the question you had posed.
Theorising is NOT research. This should not be difficult to grasp. Research is field or lab work and not mere manipulation of ideas.

Your reply was basically a case of if you cant effectively dismiss the argument, Dismiss the author, dismiss the style.
Please read up on logic. A strawman type argument is fallacious whether from Alex or Einstein.

I think everyone has a gut feeling about the Ufo alien question. Whats your gut feeling swami?
30 years of research at actual sites, talking to witnesses, viewing videos and in the library has turned up nothing of substance.



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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1030577 -

30 years of research at actual sites, talking to witnesses, viewing videos and in the library has turned up nothing of substance.

Maybe if you ask Shroomism nicely, he'll arrange for the aliens to implant a communicator chip in your neocortex. That way you too will be able to "communicate" with the aliens.

Duh!


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Sclorch]
    #1030595 -

That can be arranged...


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1030701 -

"Thinking about" is not research. Is this too complex an idea for you to grasp? So If I want to research aliens, I just think about them? How profound!

Tell me something. Did Einstein come up with relativity by "thinking about" it or doing research?

Do not limit the scientific method to what you feel comfortable with.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1030720 -

Tell me something. Did Einstein come up with relativity by "thinking about" it or doing research?

Actually, it was through research. His research when he worked in a patent office I believe...


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Sclorch]
    #1030760 -

No, he simply thought about it while at work. Nothing to do with what swami considers "research".


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1031026 -

He didn't just file papers or whatever at the patent office... he had to UNDERSTAND the patents. So he probably spent many many hours reading other people's research... he then compounded and articulated his theory based on THAT hard evidence.

It also didn't happen like it did in the movie Young Einstein. Man was THAT guy sirius...


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1031194 -

So basically you dont believe in aliens! why didnt you just say so at the start! :grin: 


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Sclorch]
    #1031211 -

really? he confirmed his THEORIES of relativity doing RESEARCHin a patent office? are you quite sure Sclorch? :What do you think Swami?  :grin:


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1031290 -

BTW, you may wish to reqd up on your logic as well. I dont believe Alex was using a strawman arguemnt and he definitely didnt finish with a non sequitur.  :grin:

PEACE 


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1031390 -

That can be arranged...

But it won't...



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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1031431 -

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

So basically you dont believe in aliens! why didnt you just say so at the start!

So basically you have a reading disorder. Sorry to hear of it.



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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1031449 -

BTW, you may wish to reqd[sic] up on your logic as well. I dont believe Alex was using a strawman arguemnt[sic]
Do you know what that is? Read the following:

The idea that scientists can only address something if the object is laid on a table in front of them is quite frankly ludicrous.
Of course it is ludicrous, but so what? It has nothing to do with my point.

...and he definitely didnt finish with a non sequitur.

Most of the currently accepted ideas about the nature of the universe were considered outlandish nonsense the first time they were suggested.

So what? Where is the relevance? This does not follow. It has NOTHING to do with anything that he was attempting to respond to. How does that fact that Darwinism was originally rejected relate to the topic of what UFO buffs want science to research?

Nothing!


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1031455 -

Did Einstein come up with relativity by "thinking about" it or doing research?
His hypothesis was validated by research.

So your point is that all that UFO buffs want scientists to do is sit at home and think about the puzzle? When I ponder a reported light in the sky I am doing serious research?







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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1031488 -

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

So basically you dont believe in aliens! why didnt you just say so at the start!

So basically you have a reading disorder. Sorry to hear of it.




Silly Swami, This unstated belief is colouring your whole posistion in this thread so whether you like it or not it is relevant.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1031491 -

Basically, you need to clearly define your terms. Why dont you just say what it is you believe at the start and then let people debate it? Your basically nitpicking over what alex said and he didnt end with a non sequitur.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1031608 -

What terms are incomprehensible to you?


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1031635 -

As far as I'm concerned Scientific Research can apply to Theorising. Theorising always comes before research anyway so the two are intertwined.

I know this is not how you see it but in the scope of your question it is valid.

Look, why ask questions you obviously think you know the answer to?


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1032018 -

His hypothesis was validated by research.

Decades later.

So your point is that all that UFO buffs want scientists to do is sit at home and think about the puzzle?

What are you talking about? An enormous part of the scientific process is theorising. These theories then become proved valid or not over time.

Most of the currently accepted ideas about the nature of the universe were considered outlandish nonsense the first time they were suggested.

So what? Where is the relevance?

The relevance is you have spent the last year dismissing anyone and everyone who has mentioned aliens because there is no "scientific proof" for them. Just like 100 years ago you would have been dismissing Einsteins theories as "Utterly ludicrous" because he had no scientific proof either.

Kapiche?

I have no firm views on aliens either way - i merely suggest we approach the subject with an open mind and that you treat people with opposing viewpoints to yourself with respect.


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

Edited by Alex123 (11/07/02 10:47 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1032083 -

I dont believe Alex was using a strawman arguemnt and he definitely didnt finish with a non sequitur.

Ah don't ruin it Gazz - reading their cock-ups when they try and talk logic makes my day  :grin:


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1032276 -

Decades later.
Your point?

What are you talking about? An enormous part of the scientific process is theorising. These theories then become proved valid or not over time.
The theory has already been proposed. This thread specifically talks about the next step. The ETH (extra-terrestrrial hypothesis) states that the unidentified lights in the sky are from another star system.

The relevance is you have spent the last year
As per usual, what I have or have not been doing for the last year is irrelevant, except in your emotional memory.

you would have been dismissing Einsteins theories
I see. You know what I would or would not have been doing in a past life.

Is is impossible for you to stay on track?



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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1032449 -

The ETH (extra-terrestrrial hypothesis) states that the unidentified lights in the sky are from another star system.

Your knowledge is very limited. Read Jung, Mckenna, Sagan for a basic introduction to the vast number of other theories.

As per usual, what I have or have not been doing for the last year is irrelevant

Do you deny you have been dismissing anyone who raised the subject of aliens for the last year for lack of "scientific proof"? Yes or no.

except in your emotional memory

Sorry, but if you've behaved like a horse's ass for 12 months it does tend to colour how people take your "points".

I see. You know what I would or would not have been doing in a past life.

You yourself have dismissed aliens because there is no scientific proof for them. There was no scientific proof for Relativity either. Ergo, you would have dismissed Relativity.

Is is impossible for you to stay on track?

Is it possible for you to post on-topic rather than making such effeminate remarks?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1032511 -

So let's skip all the semantics and cut to the chase... what is the best way to determine whether a certain UFO is piloted by an extra-terrestrial?

A. Shoot the UFO down, look inside it

B. We've tried shooting down UFOs many times before, and they are too fast

C. Wait for a piece of metal to fall from the sky and then study it for non-native elements

D. Ask the drivers

Now there is quite obviously a UFO situation. Thousands of reports from all over the world come in all the time. Military workers, police officers, farmers, businessmen, housewives, children.. the UFO do not discriminate. There is plenty of video evidence, documented reports and the phenonema associated with UFO sightings (electrical disturbances etc)

So either this is some huge global conspiracy of secret technology that the governments are using for god knows what reason. Or these UFOs are actual spacecraft from outside our own world, and based on their speed and movement, one has to keep that option open. Or all these hundreds of thousands of people are delusional. Or something else, what do you think it is Swami?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1033076 -

Or something else, what do you think it is Swami?

Are you sure there is an "it"? All I see is a large mish-mosh of non-related reports.

Here is what some of my research turned up.

Gulf Breeze - Hoax

Phoenix Lights - military flares

California desert sighting - Vandenburg Air Force base missile test

Las Vegas sighting - FUJI blimp

Yosemite sighting - bolide

Area 51 sightings - military aircraft

Marfa Lights - automobile headlights

Miscellaneous: space debris burn, satellites, commercial aircraft, and yes, a weather balloon (non-Roswell).

These were all pretty much confirmed.


Unidentified:

Friend had a fuzzy photo of a saucer from a Kodak Brownie automatic camera in an Iowan cornfield circa 1958.

Girlfriend saw a large glowing red orb when she was 8 years old.

Another girlfriend saw an alien in her room upon waking up who promptly disappeared. (Sounds like a hypnagogic state to me.)

Miscellaneous stories from strangers about weird glowing lights.

Insufficient data to come to any possible conclusion.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1034409 -

Here is what some of my research turned up.

So this is what you call research?  :grin:

Doing a google search for 2 minutes?

What real research have you ever done? 


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1035017 -

You drag up  a few carefully selected (by you!) reports to backup your argument? Now this IS a strawman arguement :grin: Shroomism had already provided numerous links to much stronger evidence that that which you give.

Its so funny watching you pose under the guise of a ratinalist when you are just as biased and prejudiced as those you attack.  How much faith does it take for you to summarily dismiss any evidence that comes your way? And if you seriously believe that all UFO phenomena, footage, eyewitness reports etc has categorically been proven to be false or fake then im afraid you are wrong.

I remain skeptical about the whole thing. A few years back I was convinced they were already here etc but I then realised nothing had ever proved conclusively this to be the case. I now really dont know but I know that some of the debunkers are just as deluded as some of the UFO buffs. The sheer scale of this phenomena means something worthy of study is happening. If it offends your notions of logic and rationalism just ignore it. Im sure you have more important things to be doing. Or even better debunk the whole thing yourself, lor are you like these lazy ass UFO buffs who wont put the time in? 


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1036361 -

einstein was a theoretical physiist. basically he didn't experiment to come up with his theories.


--------------------
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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1036456 -

You drag up a few carefully selected (by you!) reports to backup your argument? Now this IS a strawman arguement Shroomism had already provided numerous links to much stronger evidence that that which you give.

These are ones that I PERSONALLY RESEARCHED. Went to the physical sites, read the reports from both, sides talked to witnesses etc.

Does that make them carefully selected? This was not some google search as Alex falsely accuses (yet again).


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Edited by Swami (11/08/02 11:01 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1037666 -

In reply to:
Now there is quite obviously a UFO situation. Thousands of reports from all over the world come in all the time. Military workers, police officers, farmers, businessmen, housewives, children.. the UFO do not discriminate. There is plenty of video evidence, documented reports and the phenonema associated with UFO sightings (electrical disturbances etc)

So either this is some huge global conspiracy of secret technology that the governments are using for god knows what reason. Or these UFOs are actual spacecraft from outside our own world, and based on their speed and movement, one has to keep that option open. Or all these hundreds of thousands of people are delusional. Or something else, what do you think it is Swami?





Cool shroomism, let me begin here.

What are these things these Unidentifyed Flying Saucers?

It the most indigenious aircraft desgin, the all-wing aircraft (thats not the name, but its a design name) The all-wing aircraft is more efficant in push/pull, lift, and drag than any other aircraft. The Air/ground/planetary defense (or offense), of the new age or coming millenium. It works by the basis of a perpolusion engine never before seen, works on the basis of earth magnetic fields. Anti-gravitational technologies created LONG ago.

Why is it secret?

Many reasons, first they plan to use it agianst humanity. What a better way to unite a world under a world goverment than an crippliing fear of wars of the worlds. Think about it, why would humanity NEED a world goverment, in the first place. Goverments are only needed to protect agianst force, THATS IT! So never let the citizens EVER have peace (the united states hasn't left the state of war since the 1900's) or there no need for a goverment. Why would the world need a world goverment; well if a TRUE aggressive alien race bent on world domination, where to attack earth, than we would need a world goverment. Nations can't fight amongst each other anymore in the face of a alien invasion. Well since there are no aggressive alien races, a group of people diecide to make an alien invasion. Second, the new perpolusion engine in these vechicles would make human life sooo easy, and best of all theres NO POLLUTION. It would break oil monopolys.

Are they aliens?

No, i guess i kinda answered that one in the last paragraph. No there not aliens, (im not saying there ARE no aliens, just these ufo vehicales aren't aliens) they would like you to believe that (espeically if one day millions of billions of these vehicles start attacking shit with UNBEATABLE technology); so you would accept the NEW WORLD ORDER / ONE WORLD GOVERMENT.

Why don't goverments go ahead and tell them aliens (ufo's) exist, wouldn't that help the forging of the NWO, if theres more fear??

Well i believe that one day (right before the fake alien invasion happens) they will tell us, but only like in the style of the movie "Signs". Remember there money in fear too. If the goverment admitts theres E.Ts then the people will demand info on it. Its better to hint at it, and say "the masses aren't ready for such infomation", it reduces the people state to a child's like state of mind, that the goverments our parents to watch over us? Goverments are spending millions of dollars to Propagandize the public to death regarding this issue. This is what you
would call "MIND CONTROL AT IT'S FINEST"

Can these vehicles go the speed of light, and go outerspace?

I personally don't think so, there fast, yes there very fast. Only because of the a mix of anti-gravitational technology and push/pull of the north and south poles magnetic fields. I dought they can go the speed of light, or go outerspace, im sure they can really really high in the atmosphere, but not outerspace!


Conclusions:

I believe that once the invasion happens, LATER this same technology will be demed angel technologys, along with a tiny-implantation chip.


--------------------
And the gameshow host rings the buzzer (brrnnntt) oh and now you get a face full of face!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1038083 -

These are ones that I PERSONALLY RESEARCHED. Went to the physical sites

You went to Area 51 and PERSONALLY RESEARCHED everything there?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1038321 -

No, but when I lived in Las Vegas, I went up there on two overnight field trips with binoculars and camera before they expanded the security zone. Saw some unusual lights, but nothing to give the slightest indication that they were not military aircarft.

I talked a few times to Glenn Campbell (not the singer) who published an Area 51 newsletter called someting like the "Desert Rat" for several years. He initially believed that there was more to the story, but later changed his mind

Now this "proves" nothing except that I am not an airchair researcher.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1038336 -

I try to stay away from those inflatable chairs too...  I'd inevitably burn a hole in it somehow (incense maybe) or pop a hole in it somehow.  So I'm stuck with my armchair... oh well. :wink: 


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Sclorch]
    #1038341 -

No, not the chairs filled with air, but one that floats on air like a hovercraft. :smile:
 


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1038750 -

No, but when I lived in Las Vegas, I went up there on two overnight field trips with binoculars and camera before they expanded the security zone

I don't think we can really call that research. It's anecdote at best.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1040255 -

It's more research than you have done watching the X-Files. Sorry that I did not risk getting shot by actually breaking into the base and snapping pictures of captured saucers...


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1040394 -

I'm sorry but driving out and looking at a miliatary base through a pair of binoculars for 10 minutes and thinking you are a secret agent isn't going to impress the scientific community  :grin:


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1040435 -

First you condemn me for doing an google search, then you condemn me for actually doing something. You can't even get your verbal attacks to make sense. No secret agent, just an ordinary curious human being.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1040492 -

Oh please. Are you trying to suggest looking at a military base through a pair of binoculars is research into aliens?

Give it a rest man.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1040507 -

Trying to verify UFO sightings is not research into aliens by any stretch of the imagination. This has not been stated nor implied.

It is impossible to do research on aliens without artifacts, which is the large part of the point of this thread.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1040604 -

It is impossible to do research on aliens without artifacts

I explained this to you many posts ago. Please try and understand. It is possible to do scientific research without something being on the table in front of you. We can do research into the nature of many things without having "artifacts" in front of us.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1040619 -

You only explained that you haven't a clue about the difference between research and hypothesizing.

Please explain in SPECIFIC detail so my poor Swami brain can understand what kind of "research" that you may do in your home to confirm the existence of aliens.

And leave out the taking of mushrooms...



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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1040623 -

Reconnaissance is better than nothing, as long as you don't base too much on it. Alien artifacts aren't often delivered to your door, so you might as well go out and take a look around a military facility or two. :laugh:


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1040918 -

I research aliens by talking with them and asking questions


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Shroomism]
    #1041113 -

Shroomism... just take your meds and let Alex123 and Swami talk it out. :wink:

hehehe


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1041174 -

In reply to:
These are ones that I PERSONALLY RESEARCHED. Went to the physical sites, read the reports from both, sides talked to witnesses etc.




If that is the case my humblest apologies. Although It is still a small section of a massive field of evidence.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: GazzBut]
    #1041284 -

Although It is still a small section of a massive field of evidence

I would change it to read "...massive field of interest."


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1042161 -

Swami, please explain how looking at a military base through a pair of binoculars qualifies as scientific research into the nature of aliens.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Sclorch]
    #1042584 -

evidence in the neutral sense - as in unconfirmed veracity and reliability.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Xlea321]
    #1042721 -

Swami, please explain how looking at a military base through a pair of binoculars qualifies as scientific research into the nature of aliens.

It must be embarassing to repeatedly demonstrate your poor reading skills as this was covered in the response several posts ago. Check your local college. I am sure they offer remedial classes.

Trying to verify UFO sightings is not research into aliens by any stretch of the imagination.



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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: UFOs and Scientific Research [Re: Swami]
    #1043008 -

Here is what some of my research turned up: Area 51 military aircraft

You said it swami.

Please tell us how this constitutes research.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Myyco.com APE Liquid Culture For Sale   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Scientific Research Showing Thought's Affect on Matter
( 1 2 all )		 dmtrypr 3,181 32 01/23/05 02:36 AM
by relativexistance
* The best site for an unbiased overview of the UFO phenomena
( 1 2 3 all )		 Ego Death 3,624 45 10/13/05 10:54 AM
by Ego Death
* Russian Cosmonauts and Generals Confirm.. UFOs Anonymous 923 2 04/02/02 03:08 PM
by In(di)go
* I want to debate a "creation scientist".
( 1 2 3 4 ... 11 12 all )		 Phluck 16,627 232 12/01/04 04:26 PM
by Diploid
* Guess Swami's Sign
( 1 2 3 all )		 Swami 5,349 43 03/06/02 11:04 PM
by saturnalone
* Diploid, here are the incidents that you have not researched and can't account for...
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Ego Death 5,527 78 09/28/05 05:08 PM
by Silversoul
* Clinton aide slams Pentagon's UFO secrecy mantis 1,244 16 12/31/03 11:54 PM
by timetravel
* Archeologists Look for UFO at Famed Roswell Site LearyfanS 1,322 14 11/19/02 06:53 PM
by Anonymous

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
13,313 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.069 seconds spending 0.012 seconds on 16 queries.