How to stop alien abductions

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by James R, Nov 30, 2007.

  1. Ripley Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,411
    No, Cosmos, the idea for wearing the caps is to prevent aliens from homing in on a triggered "beacon" that would isolate and incapacitate a person in a semi-conscious/unconscious state, which is how a subject is "prepared" for transport prior to abduction—it has nothing to do with preventing aliens from reading thoughts. Needless to say, this "invention" is just as ridiculed in the UFO community.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2007
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    I doubt that anything I present would be considered as having merit.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    I'M abstracting to absurdity, eh? Well, then, what are you doing by minimizing your former statement about light and all that?

    No, I don't know it.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. darksidZz Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,924
    I actually talked to it's inventor through e-mail, he explained he had no idea how it worked but that obviously the material he uses somehow blocks the telepathic signals coming from these Greys. He wanted to have the stuff tested for some possible clues why it works but said it was to expensive so gave up :-(

    I believe it does work and that it is a useful thing.
     
  8. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    Show me some footage of a UFO that ws taken during the day, that is in focus, and isn't a blob of light, then you may have a point. But, no, that's not your angle, you are trying to prove that UFOlogy has merit because you think you have found a crack in a counter argument. That is really desperate.


    Then you just have low standards, or are gullible.
     
  9. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    I don't think the study of a phenomenon seen and reported by thousands and thousands of people over the years that has a core of very good and unexplained cases constitutes a waste of time. Not really sorry that you disagree, and not really surprised.

    The UFO phenomenon has resisted biased debunkery thus far. I don't see that changing anytime soon, and I don't merely think that I have merit because of flaws in any counter argument. Those perceived flaws could easily be ascribed to your own approach (or more likely, non-approach) to the subject.

    That is really desperate.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    'A core of very good ... cases', but not one shred of hard evidence.

    Here we get into semantics. UFO's, well, yes, people see stuff they cannot identify. Often planets that are brighter than usual, aircraft, meteorites, satellites, etc etc. Does that make Venus a UFO? No. Many of the reported sightings do not actually exhibit the 'F', flying, mostly footage shows no controlled flight, but camera shake, and sometimes deliberate manual panning.

    Some people hide behind the term UFO to soften their opinion, when they really mean extra terrestrial vehicles. Are you doing that?

    It's telling that you think debunking UFO's is biased. Show me one case where there is not contention, where the evidence is truly inexplicable by mundane means, and maybe you can make a case that debunking in the light of this is biased. But while there are mundane explanations, there is no mystery.


    No, just true. You seem to have a lower standard of what constitutes evidence. You seem to think that you can convolve disparate pieces of poor evidence into something larger and more reliable. I however think each piece must stand on it's own.

    No, evidence, show me some of this 'core' of good cases.
     
  11. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    what constitutes hard evidence?
    be very specific and cover all angles

    i shall see if i can satisfy some or all of your criteria
    also understand that no one here is gonna mail you shit
    i insist on honesty
     
  12. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    I'll have to quote Gusto here...
    You seem to be going by a very strict definition of not only "evidence" but the entire method of ascertaining what qualifies as valid evidence.
    If I remember correctly, my current dialogue with you started when I dared to state that ufology was a mere valid study of a currently unexplained phenomenon, one that I believe remains inadequately explained today.

    Yes, don't we EVER?!?!?

    P. Klass would be proud.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Not a whole lot, no. ETV???
    I believe very sincerely that the possibility of non-humans being responsible for at least some of the UFO sightings in the history of those recorded sightings is extremely high.
    And you obviously strongly believe in the opposite direction, so it looks like we're pretty even.

    It's also quite telling that you think this sentence proves me wrong in some way. Who said that having a skeptical mind when confronting the UFO question was wrong? Maybe I was talking about specific instances?
    However, I have never been convinced by so-called skeptics in every case.


    Contention
    is entirely subjective, as you well know. There are always those who have a theory and an answer for this and that, mundane explanation or otherwise.




    I don't think that every incidence is as poor as you describe. I at least realise that fallible or not, humans can and do see things and events accurately, and that they aren't making observations of Venus or what have you into visions of motherships.

    Is this "think" on YOUR part imperative to the scientific method?
    Just wondering.
    I think that each case should stand on its own, but that they should also be examined as a whole. Repeating patterns and all that. You don't just segregate similar incidents for the sake of segregation. Or maybe YOU do. I however say, that if someone says they saw this, and another person reports the same thing, one shouldn't automatically conclude that they saw completely separate things, or that neither saw anything of note at all.

    I don't think you'll ever accept anything as valid evidence (other than your own insistence that it doesn't exist) but I shall endeavour to post things that I consider to be good evidence.
     
  13. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    "...despite the fact that we humans are great collectors of souvenirs, not one of these persons [claiming to have been aboard a flying saucer] has brought back so much as an extraterrestrial tool or artifact, which could, once and for all, resolve the UFO mystery." Philip Klass
     
  14. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    OK, hard evidence; something physical that can be examined, or some solid data from radar, or some good footage on film. A mass sighting where there is good agreement about what was witnessed.

    Not a light in the sky. Not an abduction report, but something that can actually be investigated.

    So, you got that, or not?
     
  15. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    hmm
    fair enough
    lemme google some terms and see if the crackpots got anything worthwhile
     
  16. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    oh phlog
    do you not know of any spacefaring creatures in this universe?
     
  17. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    yeah you.
     
  18. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    fuck off bitch
    shouldda nuked you russkies long time ago
     
  19. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    that kind of language will tear you apart.
     
  20. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    dragon after nukeattack

    /happy/exults
     
  21. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    /lobs rotten eggs
     
  22. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    suffering of others makes you happy?
    Are you suffering yourself of such?
     
  23. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    A Type C Gray if I've ever seen one. Cute!
     

Share This Page