The Skeptic says - "I want to believe"
- Thread starter sargentlard
- Start date
If they claimed the murdered was an albino elephant, then no. Once again, the bigger the claim, the more evidence needed. We know murder happens. To claim that a person did it isn't a very improbable claim.Tononi6 said:
These two cases are VERY different, and I wonder why you made the comparison. Do you believe Elvis is still alive. Thousands have claimed seeing him. How about bigfoot, the lockness monster, the Jersey Devel, a talking horse, time travelers, angels, the devil, etc, etc, etc. Claims do not make for proof in cases of extraordinary claims.
Persol said:
I understand. A higher level of expertise is required when the claims are 'extraordinary' compared with the 'normal' level required for your average high street murder. Fair enough. I agree.
Would the verbal evidence of, say, a Brigadier General, or an Admiral of the Fleet and Chief of General Staff meet the said requirements for evidential credibility?
If they are claiming the equivalent of pink flying elephants or bigfoot, then no. Even more so, as these are people who should be better able to get actual evidence.
Also, I'm assuming that you are talking about the people on the disclosure project website. They don't hold much credibility, even within UFO circles. You can't expect each claim they make to be debunked (due to shear number), but a good number have been.
Also, I'm assuming that you are talking about the people on the disclosure project website. They don't hold much credibility, even within UFO circles. You can't expect each claim they make to be debunked (due to shear number), but a good number have been.
Lemming3k said:I think what you say about pink flying elephants explains it all, i think it proves your point very well persol, you state something that may/may not be true, but dont back it up with fact, demonstrating exactly what crazymikey did. I really hope crazymikey posts his evidence as i would very much like to see it.
Also any evidence on pink flying elephants is welcome.
No evidence/proof? I suggest you stop by in Proof for ETI.
1. what was so hard about posting that here a few days ago when it was first asked for?
2. it proves nothing, a bunch of people claim they have something to do with aliens, people have claimed to see elvis since he died, i suppose he isnt actually dead because these people say so?
3. lets try an example shall we?? 2 years ago i went in search of a pink elephant, i had a team of 10 top scientists and high ranking officials with me, i testify i saw one, they all testify the same, do you believe us purely on what we say with no physical evidence? (if not would you believe if several other people did the same thing?)
Now you see my situation, i agree there is a VERY high chance that there is life out there somewhere, and personally feel its there to be found, i have yet to see proof of it though. I have searched your entire thread and all links for evidence to support your claims, and all evidence that is offered is purely what somebody says, and thats hardly evidence.
2. it proves nothing, a bunch of people claim they have something to do with aliens, people have claimed to see elvis since he died, i suppose he isnt actually dead because these people say so?
3. lets try an example shall we?? 2 years ago i went in search of a pink elephant, i had a team of 10 top scientists and high ranking officials with me, i testify i saw one, they all testify the same, do you believe us purely on what we say with no physical evidence? (if not would you believe if several other people did the same thing?)
Now you see my situation, i agree there is a VERY high chance that there is life out there somewhere, and personally feel its there to be found, i have yet to see proof of it though. I have searched your entire thread and all links for evidence to support your claims, and all evidence that is offered is purely what somebody says, and thats hardly evidence.
The argument of Disclosure project, is not the only proof I am providing. Nothing was hard, it was just the atmosphere was not conductive enough for further discussion on the matter. Take a few minutes, and read the topic, before you dismiss it presumptiously. If this is true, which I believe it is, the most benefited, is YOU.
Nor, did I wait a few days. I started the topic, the same day, I started discussing in here.
Nor, did I wait a few days. I started the topic, the same day, I started discussing in here.
If you read my post you'll find i did read the topic, the entire thread, and all the links, and i see no evidence other than heresay. As for the topic i meant you could have posted the link here or mentioned it a few days ago and i would have gladly read it, believe me i am very curious about ET's and i dont dispute their existence, especially if you consider the probabilities of them being out there. What i dispute is that there is no proof we have met them, a government coverup is perfectly possable, likewise them visiting is possable, but that is that proof that it happened or is happening, likewise someone saying it did is not proof. I do look forward to decent proof becoming public if it has happened, or them visiting and making first contact if it hasnt. I apologise if i had a part in the hostile atmosphere created in this thread, my intention was to see decent proof, not to be hostile in any way.
That is interesting, as there is no heresay there, but actual testimonies, and testimonies have a lot of weight, as recognised by historians and in a court of law. If you can believe in historical testimonies that you, yourself have not witnessed, then logically, you can believe in the testimonies of today. There's 400 of them, by well established and respected people. Ignoring their evidence is irrationality. It is your choice, to ignore, but you would only be ignoring at the expense of your reasoning.
Furthermore, can you actual post in the topic, rather than discussing it here. I do not have to post the link here, and you can quite easily navigate to it.
Last edited:
Skeptics are just people that have been thoroughly indoctrinated by public education. They never questioned whether or not it is possible that what they were being taught (force fed) could be anything other than the final truth and at the same time whatever amount of free individual thought they did have was stamped out so they are incapable of envisioning an alternate paradigm to the ones they had forced on them since they were children.
Yes, Grover, that is exactly it. However, being skeptical, is not wrong, it's just when it becomes stupid, that it's wrong. The skeptics we encounter, are nothing more than glorified idiots. That just don't have the intelligence to break the boundaries of the mental box they are trapped in.
It's a bit like, a creationist, or a religious person, they are trapped in a mental box, and regardless of much evidence you produce for them, they are unable to grasp it, because it lies outside of their box.
This is not their fault, they just lack the intelligence. For instance, if I were to try and teach an average child whose been brought up to believe in Santa Clause, that Santa Clause is not real, I will most probably not succeed. As those neural pathways have been rigidly established, and would require sustained reconditioning and intelligence on the part of the child, to establish new, correct ones. Simiarily, any fanatic, especially an adult one, whose been conditioned to believe something, it would be very difficult, to change their thinking. It would require something drastic.
Hence, why the anti-UFO fanatics here, are continuely demanding, some amazing evidence. However, anything we will provide them, is just not sufficient to get them out of the box. They really need to see it for themselves, and that we cannot provide them.
So, leave them at their condition, and just ignore their rants. The same could be said however, for those UFO fanatics, who blindly believe in everything about UFOs and Aliens. They too are in a mental box. And they too should be ignored.
It's a bit like, a creationist, or a religious person, they are trapped in a mental box, and regardless of much evidence you produce for them, they are unable to grasp it, because it lies outside of their box.
This is not their fault, they just lack the intelligence. For instance, if I were to try and teach an average child whose been brought up to believe in Santa Clause, that Santa Clause is not real, I will most probably not succeed. As those neural pathways have been rigidly established, and would require sustained reconditioning and intelligence on the part of the child, to establish new, correct ones. Simiarily, any fanatic, especially an adult one, whose been conditioned to believe something, it would be very difficult, to change their thinking. It would require something drastic.
Hence, why the anti-UFO fanatics here, are continuely demanding, some amazing evidence. However, anything we will provide them, is just not sufficient to get them out of the box. They really need to see it for themselves, and that we cannot provide them.
So, leave them at their condition, and just ignore their rants. The same could be said however, for those UFO fanatics, who blindly believe in everything about UFOs and Aliens. They too are in a mental box. And they too should be ignored.
Last edited:
Hmm? I haven't been paying attention to this thread after my one reply but this caught my eye. Why would skeptics be glorified idiots? I am skepitical about ideas like us being visited by aliens but does that make me a glorified idiot? I think it's the other way around... too many people on this branch of the forums are too willing to believe everything that is presented to them. One little picture will win them over into believing what you want them to believe...In fact after reading your thread I come to realize that you too would be won over by a simple picture being presented to you...If i were to sign on as a different nickname and present fake photos of ufo's circling around the globe you people would probably believe in it. But that is the point! I will not believe in something because of photo graphs. Today's technologies have made it so a 2 year old can make a convinving picture out of nothing. Yes we need more evidence that a Picture. We are not gullible fools like you, I'm sorry.
You ask questions, and answer it yourself. Then why ask the question? Look at all these assumptions you've made:
I am sorry to make you look stupid, but I honestly, would not, be convinced with one picture. In fact, there is thread here, with pictures of alleged aliens. If you see my responses in it, you will see how I severely debunk it, and rejected it outright, despite how others were praising how convincing it was.
If you have paid attention, I have said in my thread, how Bob Lazar testimomy itself the guy who claimed to work in Area 51, with crashed flying sauchers, , is not enough to convince me, and how I do not support his story.
What's even funnier, I have not produced one picture of a UFO as evidence, despite having access to them, and even knowing some UFO photos are unexplained.
More importantly so, have you seen me once, talk about crop circles? Crop circles is now days synonymous with UFO', and there is so many speculative theories, proposed by mathmaticans to suggest, they are extraordinary. If I was so gullible, I would have mentioned them. You know why I have not mentioned them, because I am not gullible at all, and I of extreme analytical nature, and have no reason to believe they are of ETI origin. In fact, in another forum, I severely debunked the Milky hill 6 arm design crop circle, that is praised for its sophisticated design.
Have you seen me quote from fanatical UFO web sites, like Zetatalk, or the ones that list the various aliens? In fact, the first post I made on this web site, was to ask people to debunk the story of the nuclear war story, that I, did not believe in.
What do you know about me and my beliefs, to accuse me of being gullible. Dude, I do not believe in God, any religion, the soul, ghosts, demons, time-travel. Not very gullible, eh
I am a very rational, unbiased, and analytical type of person. I never believe blindly, I always demand proof. I started not believing in ETI and aliens, but unlike you "skeptic" in-the-box-thinkers, I did not deny the evidence, I read into it, and I found mountains of it, I found merit in them, and in some I didn't, I proceeded to analyse the evidence, and I became more and more convinced. Now I am completely convinced. I can say it without any hesitation whatsoever, that ETI exists, and they are visiting us.
I think you owe me an apology. If anyone is a true skeptic out of, me and the others who abuse that term here, that's me. As I said, the so called skeptics here, are not skeptics, they're fanatics - in skeptics clothing.
Last edited:
Crazymikey, if testimonies hold such weight for you, why are you so selective in your beliefs? You say you're not religious, don't believe in a soul, ghosts, etc., but why discount the HUGE number of testimonies regarding these things?
Also, don't you think the accounts of those you cite are undermined by their beliefs? You will gladly accept that they speak the truth about ETs and alien technology and sinister conspiracies, but wouldn't their views on religious matters hold just as much water?
On a different note, what's that about an economic summit in Switzerland? I'd love to hear about that.
Also, don't you think the accounts of those you cite are undermined by their beliefs? You will gladly accept that they speak the truth about ETs and alien technology and sinister conspiracies, but wouldn't their views on religious matters hold just as much water?
On a different note, what's that about an economic summit in Switzerland? I'd love to hear about that.
Faulty, it's not the testimonial evidence alone, that I am considering. If you review the topic, that is not the only argument I am arguing for. The reason, I do not believe in the soul, ghosts, and god, crop circles,is simply because the evidence is not conclusive or compelling. I treat each case, on a case by case basis.
You said the accounts of the ones I cited are undermined by their beliefs? It's makes sense to me, if you claim something, you'll believe in it. Right?
The economic summit held in Switzerland: The article is written in a tongue in cheek manner, it's somewhat confusing. I'm somewhat skeptical of it.
http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=552&fArticleId=331918
You said the accounts of the ones I cited are undermined by their beliefs? It's makes sense to me, if you claim something, you'll believe in it. Right?
The economic summit held in Switzerland: The article is written in a tongue in cheek manner, it's somewhat confusing. I'm somewhat skeptical of it.
http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=552&fArticleId=331918
Crazymikey, I've just been reading the proof of ETI thread now. I'm not sure I read anything other than what you posted about that disclosure thing.
I do believe that there is intelligent life elsewhere - and I wouldn't even discount the idea that something might have passed this way (Fermi paradox and Von Neumann machines and all that). But... 58 different alien species? Collaborating with the US government? On the basis of testimonials? I really can't believe it.
Spaceships that crash into the Earth, spaceships with flashing lights on them(?!), incredibly anthropomorphic aliens. It'd be so exciting to believe it was real, that we were on the verge of some technological golden age but... no sorry.
I do believe that there is intelligent life elsewhere - and I wouldn't even discount the idea that something might have passed this way (Fermi paradox and Von Neumann machines and all that). But... 58 different alien species? Collaborating with the US government? On the basis of testimonials? I really can't believe it.
Spaceships that crash into the Earth, spaceships with flashing lights on them(?!), incredibly anthropomorphic aliens. It'd be so exciting to believe it was real, that we were on the verge of some technological golden age but... no sorry.