In defence of space aliens

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,325
    But certainly not enough to change the accepted scientific verdict of just another garden variety UFO....or unidentified.
    More apparent nervous laughter? Why? Your continued suggestions of conspiracy nonsense, supposedly supported by, wait for it! U tube videos, has already been discredited by another, and as we all know, the scientifically arrived at verdict remains as is....a UFO.
    What would pass as sufficient evidence? I've mentioned that many times, starting with of course making their visits official. Or if they like they can land in Maroubra Sydney and ask me to take them to our Leader!!!
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,385
    That makes it clear where you fit in as per first and third paras in #2469. Standard committed materialist skeptic. No surprise.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,385
    I see. Worth filing away as reference post. So, (repetitious posts demanding 'real evidence') + (Nah, not interested - in defining 'real evidence') = trolling. Got it!
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,385
    I could repeat for you my response to sideshowbob, but it would be too mild an assessment. We've been through it all countless times.
     
  8. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,606
    Instead of trying to figure out where I fit into your puzzle, why don't you just answer the questions honestly?
     
  9. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,385
    I have. If you can't see it or won't recognize my position there, nothing further to discuss.
     
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,325
    And yet you still ignore the fact that all we have is a UFO as scientifically designated and in the absence of convincing evidence, in place of your U tube videos and conspiracy claims..
     
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,325
    But you havn't got any real evidence! And you chose to ignore what I am continually listing as evidence...quite convenient for your mind set.
     
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,325
    Ahhh wait!!! You did give an answer...referral back to some U tube videos and the usual conspiracy excuses.
     
  13. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,385
    Sigh. Maroubra beach landing, right in front of paddoboy's house. It may not happen. In fact it will never happen. So that would prove 'they' aren't real. Sure. Stick with that pov. It's safe after all.
     
  14. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,325

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You are now going from the sublime to the ridiculous q-reeus. Or perhaps my fault, I should have added a smiley. But hey, I'll bite again....If Earth has been visited by alien controlled craft for so long now, why all the flittering in and flittering out? They have nothing to be afraid of nor would really want for anything, for obvious reasons. So why don't they make their visitations official? But just checking, that is what I said. So why are you deliberately misquoting or selective quoting q-reeus?
    Is it that difficult to admit that you and MR and dmoe are just plain wrong?
    Is it that difficult to admit that, yes, speaking scientifically, and due to the lack of real evidence, the best decision to arrive at, is that it is just a UFO and unidentified. Garden variety if you like, but a UFO, with emphasis on U and unidentified. NB: another little joke there with regard to "garden variety"q-reeus.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,385
    You know what I was getting at. Your insistence on proof of 'genuine UFO's/aliens' requiring direct and open contact for all the world to see. Premise - any 'real' UFO's would be tin cans piloted by interstellar traveling aliens as flesh and blood humanoids. And you know my position, having repeated it many times now. But as a committed materialist you refuse to so much as countenance that imo far more consistent-with-overall-evidence outlook. Well just accept we have fundamentally irreconcilable pov's. But you won't let it rest there. Never have. Too bad.
     
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,325
    All I know is you are straddling the fence and seemingly supportive of the UFO crap so far presented. Other extraordinary evidence of course would be a needle from the medical experiments that some of our impressionables claim to be a victim of, alien blood, alien excreta, an alien tea pot [joke there q-reeus] alien space craft part etc, OK?
    It's not a point of view as such. It simply is asking for the extraordinary evidence to validate an extraordinary claim, that you seem to be straddling the fence with to assist MR. I accept aliens probably exist somewhere, sometime. I also accept the scientific fact that as yet we have no evidence of life off this Earth, let alone paying us visits from time to time.
    Now instead of beating around the bush in your effort not to displease MR, do you accept the scientific fact that all we have is another UFO [garden variety if you like

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ] Now you can rest easy.
     
  17. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,385
    You must have some weird definition for 'straddling the fence'. My best estimate (that's all that's honestly possible regarding nature of UFO's) position is quite clear. Again:
    http://www.sciforums.com/posts/3506955/
    What's new here? Why keep reiterating your narrow committed materialist criteria. Stop boring me with more of the same every time.
    In your mind having common ground with someone you like to bait is 'trying to please'. Nonsense - MR and I have much but not total common ground re nature of UFO's etc., that's it. You, not I, often seek to chum up in order to win over prospective allies, or maintain current ones. I care nothing for such tactics.
    'Scientific fact' is a misplaced term here but that is typical of you. We have multi-witnesses plus multi-state-of-the-art military grade surveillance tech corroborative evidence for extraordinary behavior having no conventional explanation. Like no sonic booms for instance!

    Oh hang on, getting ahead of myself here. As usual you fail to define which 'another UFO' we are supposed to be discussing. But I'm guessing it's the tic tac tracked by ship and aircraft radar and IR and chased by the Super Hornet pilots of 2004 Nimitz incident. Recall there was actually one or two swarms of them tracked beforehand on thoroughly re-checked for reliability ship's radar. So not just 'the UFO'.
     
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,325
    I understand its hard for someone of your ego to be knocked from pillar to post on this matter.
    And I understand even more why you continually fail to answer the question and show me why I am wrong in saying you are not straggling the fence. I'm not checking your link...It is probably a distraction anyway or an example of the fence straddling.
    Again, This is nothing more then a UFO....this meaning the current issue under discussion and/or any other sighting that remains undefined...or a UFO, around 5%....That's it matey, that's the scientific conclusion no matter how much you chose to dance around it. Obviously you disagree...out of the closet on another issue!
     
  19. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,482
    The childish fixations on utter rubbish isn't worth my time. Doesn't mean I won't have fun with them, just that I budget my time more intelligently than UFO nuts.
     
  20. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,385
    Comfort yourself then with that 'I'm terribly scientific' self-image.
     
  21. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,385
    A line entirely in keeping with that aloof and disdainful pose avatar.
     
  22. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,899
    Yeah, reliable radar - the question is how reliable is reliable?
    the Probability of Detection is offset by the resulting increase in the Probability of False Alarms. (Link now dead but originally referenced and discussed here) I.e. ALL radars show false signals at times. And also numerically evaluated here.
    As for the persistent and repeated trope that "expert" and "trained" pilots (etc) "can't possibly be wrong/ should always be believed" I'll just quote some old posts from (much) earlier threads:
    (Here).
    (Here).
    (Here).
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2019
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,325

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Whatever floats your boat q-reeus!

    Let me sign off now, as I understand how childishly desperate you are becoming in wanting that final say to continue to boost that ego.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    This logically and scientifically, is nothing more then a UFO with the emphasis on Unidentified. That's it matey, and nothing you say nor MR, nor any ranting and raving on a forum open to all sorts of Tom's Dick's and Harry's will change that verdict.
    Rest easy anyway!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page