UFO; Friend or Foe?

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by HawkI, Oct 12, 2020.

?

UFO; Friend or Foe?

  1. Friend

    1 vote(s)
    50.0%
  2. Foe

    1 vote(s)
    50.0%
  1. river

    Messages:
    15,403
    DaveC426913 said:

    Hawki

    Never mind either of them , they are grounded in misinformation , willingly .
     
    HawkI likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,805

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    I would ask you for evidence and/or proof of our misinformation, but obviously would just get more one liner nonsensical, unsupported claims and

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    allegations.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. river

    Messages:
    15,403


    The evidence is in your mindset .
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,805
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/theo.12271?af=R

    Bullshit, Pseudoscience and Pseudophilosophy:

    Abstract
    In this article I give a unified account of three phenomena: bullshit, pseudoscience and pseudophilosophy. My aims are partly conceptual, partly evaluative. Drawing on Harry Frankfurt's seminal analysis of bullshit, I give an account of the three phenomena and of how they are related, and I use this account to explain what is bad about all three. More specifically, I argue that what is defective about pseudoscience and pseudophilosophy is precisely that they are special cases of bullshit. Apart from raising interesting philosophical issues, gaining a clearer understanding of these phenomena is also of practical importance, in that it bears on how best to tackle the threat that they pose.

    Concluding Remarks
    In this article I have argued that pseudoscience and pseudophilosophy should be seen as special cases of bullshit, where bullshit is understood in terms of a culpable lack of epistemic conscientiousness. Apart from providing conceptual unification, the analysis also explains what is defective about all three phenomena. This matters not just philosophically but also practically, in that the analysis puts certain constraints on the important task of criticizing and exposing pseudoscience and pseudophilosophy. Let me end by briefly highlighting three such constraints.

    First, the analysis shows us that the defining feature of pseudoscience and pseudophilosophy is not falsity. Since their practitioners might on occasion get things right, focusing on the falsity of the claims may backfire. Instead, our focus should be on the epistemic unconscientiousness that is always present.

    Second, the analysis shows us that what is bad about pseudoscience and pseudophilosophy is not that they are unscientific. Since there are non‐bullshit forms of non‐science, such as philosophy, we need to make sure that our critique of pseudoscience and pseudophilosophy does not indiscriminately apply to anything that is not scientific.

    Third, and relatedly, the analysis shows us that what is characteristic of pseudoscience is not lack of empirical content. Thus, if we focus on the unfalsifiability of pseudoscientific claims, we need to make sure that we have the right kind of unfalsifiability in mind. As I have emphasized, pseudoscience is indeed unfalsifiable in the sense that its practitioners tend to bullshit their way around falsifying evidence. But if we put our critique in terms of empirical vacuity, our case against pseudoscience will not only miss its target, but will also rest on far‐reaching and highly unpersuasive empiricist assumptions.
    ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::


    Not much that doesn't apply to you there river.....bullshit, pseudoscience, vagueness and ignorance.
     
  8. HawkI Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    279
    Israel blew up the UFO. Kaboom!
     
  9. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,805
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,805
  11. river

    Messages:
    15,403
    Pathetic pad .
     
  12. HawkI Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    279
    The "Ü" Umlaut U, stands for 'Unidentified'
    I'm sure that exploded UFO over Israel is just as unidentifiable now, as it was before.
     
  13. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,805
    Great! So no convincing silly Alien stories....it's unidentified.
    I'll address this to you rather then other ratbags that make silly unsupported claims.....
    Or simply some fake crap you have dug up somewhere.
    Again, as I have explained to other silly people here that claim we have been visited. Most scientists accept that we are not alone, for reasons of the near infinite extent and content of the universe we inhabit, and the stuff of life being everywhere we look.
    But they also accept that so far we have no convincing, extraordinary evidence to support the existence of life off this Earth. A great educator and scientist [Carl Sagan] once said, éxtraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence.
    The evidence that life exists beyond Earth, would be a ground breaking answer to mankind's most asked question...are we alone. To answer that question we need more then UFO's that maybe a result of trickery and pranks, atmospheric disturbances, cloud formations, Venus, or whatever. We need physical evidence...excreta or some alien artifact, or a body or ssomething concrete, not just the silly emotional claims of UFO's that continually flitter in and flitter out again.
    If they were as advanced as you say, they would also be able to see that we are also if to a lesser extent. Why then don't they land in Canberra on the Parliament house lawns? or in front of Big Ben? or on the White House lawns? Why all the silly claims of kidnappings and anal probings.
    Let me add that some scientists expect we may have evidence, proper evidence of life off this Earth within the next decade or two......probably simple bacterial microscopic life, but life.
     
  14. HawkI Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    279
    The Aliens are Piloting the Unidentified Craft. (Or at least set the Drone technology to auto Pilot)

    You want Physical evidence, ok. That's considerably harder to show you. But I don't need physical evidence, every other evidence is catered for, physical evidence is just one evidence.

    They don't land in front of Big Ben and such because they are not interested in communicating with us.

    It is flattering to know that Nuclear Power is something they are interested in. Humanity should definitely do more Nuclear stuff with that 'Glowing' seal of approval.

    Based on what I've seen of UFOs, I see them as foes.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2020
  15. river

    Messages:
    15,403
    UFO's have advanced propulsion . Its not by chemical means . But by anti-gravity or the like . That's what these advanced craft are showing . Fantastic Acceleration , and manovers , well beyond the g-forces that a Pilot could survive .

    That is what your missing , and Frankly many are missing . The fanstastic accelerations and speeds .
     
    HawkI likes this.
  16. river

    Messages:
    15,403
    Highlighted

    Why ? What have UFO's done for you to see them as foes ?
     
  17. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,805
    Ahh, so, now I get it...you two are Aliens? I mean you both know so much about how they operate, that's the only conclusion one can make.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Where from? Our solar system? elsewhere in the galaxy? Intergalactic Aliens?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    Holy Mary Mother of God!!! How delusional and silly can two people really be!!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  18. river

    Messages:
    15,403




    Ben Rich , Skunk Works ,

    " We have the ability to take ET home " .
     
  19. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,805
    More examples of river being vague, dishonest or ignorant, and obtuse to boot.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Rich#Career
    Lockheed[edit]
    Upon graduation Rich was hired by Lockheed as a thermodynamicist. There he worked on a variety of projects - he was awarded a patent for designing a nichrome heating system which prevented Navy patrol plane crew members' penises from freezing to their urine elimination pipes. He designed inlet ducts for the F-104 Starfighter, the C-130 transport aircraft, and the F-90 fighter.

    The Skunk Works[edit]
    In December 1954 Rich was transferred to the Skunk Works, the secret research and development section run by Lockheed's Chief Engineer, Clarence "Kelly" Johnson. There he designed the inlet ducts for the U-2 spy plane, then next led the effort to design and build a large-scale hydrogen liquefaction plant for project Suntan, a proposed hydrogen-powered supersonic very high-altitude aircraft meant to replace the U-2. After Suntan was canceled, hydrogen proving to be impractical for a number of reasons, Rich became propulsion systems program manager for the U-2's successors, the A-12 and the SR-71 Blackbird. Rich was chief aerodynamicist for the projects, designer of the complex translating shock cones inlet design, air conditioning and heat management systems, and the specification of the aircraft's black skin coatings which optimized heat dissipation of their tremendous aerodynamic heating as well as incorporating materials to reduce radar signature – the aircraft incorporated a number of features of what would later be referred to as low observables or stealth technology.

    When SR-71 crews became upset that engineers were not putting enough effort into solving a constant problem with violent engine unstarts in flight, Rich considered taking a flight in the SR-71 to experience the phenomenon himself, which included having to go through the same flight physical as pilots. He did not go through with the flight. He did, however, eventually manage the problem by installing automatic controllers to keep the aircraft in control during unstarts.

    He briefly worked on a program that used ionizing radiation to help absorb radar coming from ahead of the aircraft. The radiation proved to be excessive and the test pilot disliked the heavy radiation shielding he was forced to wear. The project was cancelled when the military decided the radar signature was already low enough without the ionizing equipment. The concept was proven to work, but unfeasible.[4]

    Later, as Johnson's successor as leader of the Skunk Works, Rich championed and directed the early experimental prototypes of stealth technology and led the development of the F-117 stealth fighter.
    ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    Nice and all acceptable with absolutely nothing confirming, or supporting in any way the very dubious claims of river.
    Some more on " We have the ability to take ET home "
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ben_Rich
    Unattributed quote about black projects[edit]
    There is a quote of Ben Rich making its rounds on the internet. Apparantly in a lecture shortly before he died he revealed that - quote:

    "We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects and it would take an act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity.... Anything you can imagine, we already know how to do."

    Does anyone know if this quote is confirmed by reliable sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.227.153.175 (talk) 02:28, May 4, 2006 (UTC)

    That quote is now in the article without a source. Should it be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.243.34.6 (talk) 01:44, March 10, 2007 (UTC)
    Removed dubious quote again for lack of citation. The quote appears on fringe sites throughout the internet with no citation (or in some cases citing to this article at Wikipedia). It is very poorly sourced, dubiously credits UFOs, and meets neither the attribution standards for quotations nor for biographical facts.NavinWP 16:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Again, river at his best...vague, one liners, no elaboration, no reliable source, just the usual nonsense to help support his pseudoscience phobia and anti mainstream science fanaticism.
     
  20. river

    Messages:
    15,403
    Think of speed into , miles per hour , miles per minute , then miles per second .

    2000mph , per minute is , 60 minutes into 2000mph . 33.33 miles per minute .

    33.33 miles per minute divided by 60 seconds equals = 0.5 miles per second .
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2020
  21. river

    Messages:
    15,403
    That is just at 2000mph . UFO craft have been clocked at much higher mph twice 2000mph and far more .
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2020
  22. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,789
    And of course, when you say Government, you'd have to be talking about every government in every country on the planet who must be doing an absolute bang up job of covering them up because the mass population of the world has yet to see them.

    That would be your personal opinion?

    Funny how no Aliens have ever been spotted in dense, heavily populated cities. At night, there are usually armies of amateur astronomers gazing up in the sky every night, yet they see no Aliens buzzing their areas. This, despite the fact you claim they don't care about being spotted.

    Do you see how your poorly thought out explanations are sinking your claims?
     
  23. river

    Messages:
    15,403
    Oh the World sees them .
     

Share This Page