Why is sciforums traffic so low now?

[paddoboy]

whom exactly are the " we ?"

Logical thinking people:
Let me say that after the many thousands of "supposed"visitations as proposed by MR and his kind, that one would presume that some non Earthly artifact or physical implement would have by now been left behind: One would also logically presume that after these thousands of visitations, that they [the aliens] would make their visits official by now.

Again, yes, it's possible we may have been visited by Aliens or Interdimensionals, or time travellers, but as of now, we do not have convincing evidence to validate any conjecture.
They simply remain UFO's.

 

[Ophiolite]

It's late. I'm tired. If still relevant I shall try to respond in more detail tomorrow, but here is the Executive Summary.

Several of you are requiring of MR a standard of logic and critical thinking he is not capable of. You are then judging the consequent mish-mash of his posts to reveal dishonesty. He's not dishonest, he's just not very bright.

 

[Russ_Watters]

2. MR disavowed his previous claim: "I have NOT claimed they are aliens." I believe we are also agreed on this.

Actually, there is ano incorporated line of logic here that makes this false either way: his old definition is a subset of his new definition, so it is false to say he hasn't claimed they are aliens because he STILL claims some are aliens.

 

[Magical Realist]

He's not dishonest, he's just not very bright.

If only I had memorized that old "scientific method" chart back in 7th grade! lol!

 

[Russ_Watters]

Note the cherry-picked statement by me back in 2015:

"They exhibit all the characteristics of non-human craft piloted by alien beings."

Now what is an alien being? Is it an "alien" in the sense of a extraterrestrial? Not necessarily. An alien being is simply any entity we are unfamiliar with. "Alien" is being used as an adjective here, not as a noun. It means strange or unfamiliar, not an extraterrestrial.

Did you change your mind again? Here's your chance to rescind that and claim sloppiness, otherwise you'll have to own this new definition as intentional.

 

[Russ_Watters]

Several of you are requiring of MR a standard of logic and critical thinking he is not capable of. You are then judging the consequent mish-mash of his posts to reveal dishonesty. He's not dishonest, he's just not very bright.

Fair enough. I acknowledge that as a possibility - indeed, they can overlap. I just judge differently.

I wonder which is worse?

 

[krash661]

" we do not have convincing evidence to validate any conjecture "

we might if the government's motive were for the betterment of mankind. the government's motive is control. and just as much as they crave control, they fear loss of control. knowledge is power, but power does not necessarily confer competence. the people at the top of these programs are intellectually very average. they are not capable of making proper use of what has been handed to them, but they have no intention in letting anyone else ever get a chance to solve the puzzle. and let's not forget there's also a real possibility that the government is being manipulated by the extraterrestrials for their own purposes. when you're dealing with beings whose intellect is so far beyond your own, i don't think it's safe to assume that they have your best interest at heart. use your own judgement. that's all any of us can do. there's been so much secrecy and disinformation over the last fifty years, that it has become impossible to prove anything in the face of official denial. of course the flip side is nobody really believes anything that the government says. the only vindication i can imagine would be if the government finally revealed all of what they know about these aliens.

 

[krash661]

on an side note,
it is obvious that anyone of you are not actually interested in the actual conversation(especially when using words such as " logic " , " scientific process ", and " evidence" ) but simply interested in ,only, picking on MR, as usual.
logically, none of you can say that there is no evidence due to the scientific process.

 

[krash661]

how many of you that are picking on MR can say you have access to such things in order to confirm that there is no evidence?
i would put 50k on the fact that none of you do.

 

[krash661]

some in the conversation claim they are intelligent, as i ask for evidence for it since i have not seen it-- get it?

 

[krash661]

anyways-- it is interesting of how this topic turned into EBE talks.

 

[Magical Realist]

Did you change your mind again? Here's your chance to rescind that and claim sloppiness, otherwise you'll have to own this new definition as intentional.

Nothing's been changed. It is as it has always been.

 

[paddoboy]

logically, none of you can say, there is no evidence.

I'll agree to that. A small percentage remains unexplained, but again, one would presume that some non Earthly artifact or physical implement would have by now been left behind: One would also logically presume that after these thousands of visitations, that they [the aliens] would make their visits official by now.
My own sighting around 20 years ago, remains unexplained and a UFO.

 

[krash661]

" logically, none of you can say that there is no evidence due to the scientific process. "

but again, one would presume that some non Earthly artifact or physical implement would have by now been left behind

what is to say that there are not?

: One would also logically presume that after these thousands of visitations, that they [the aliens] would make their visits official by now.

what is to say that they have not--people like the ones here ridiculing MR?

 

[krash661]

My own sighting around 20 years ago, remains unexplained and a UFO.

i have read your experience-- according to your other post against MR, you have just contradicted yourself, as you just wrote this little line and the following line:
" we do not have convincing evidence to validate any conjecture "

 

[paddoboy]

" logically, none of you can say that there is no evidence due to the scientific process. "

what is to say that there are not?

what is to say that they have not--people like the ones here ridiculing MR?

Sorry krash, I'm not that much into conspiracies.......Keeping the fact that ETI exist and have visited us secret, would be very hard to do as has been shown many times in attempted government coverups.

 

[paddoboy]

i have read your experience-- according to your other post against MR, you have just contradicted yourself, as you just wrote this little line and the following line:
" we do not have convincing evidence to validate any conjecture "

I havn't contradicted myself....I don't know what it was...It remains simply another vanilla flavoured UFO.
I'm certainly not going to automatically assign it to an Alien visitation.

 

[krash661]

Sorry krash, I'm not that much into conspiracies.

you do not have to be-- it is a matter of accepting reality. (shrugs) for understanding, must come acceptance. the question is meaningless. but anything i state may not be an achievement, considering the mismatch between our intellects.

 

[krash661]

I havn't contradicted myself.....

but you have-- on an obvious level.
and also, it is not just you-- it is that you have replied, unlike the others so far.

 

[paddoboy]

but you have-- on an obvious level.
and also, it is not just you-- it is that you have replied, unlike the others so far.

No I have not. I saw a UFO...I do not immediatly and stupidly claim it is of Alien origin, nor interdimensional, nor time travellers...It was a UFO [Unidentified Flying Object]