The trap of dogmatic skepticism

[DaveC426913]

My claim was not that "extraterrestrial technological origin" is implied deductively by the content of the reports, merely that it is consistent with the reports.

It is as consistent with extra-terrestrial technological origin as it is with divine origin, or ghostly origin, or any other origin for which we have no exemplar for comparison.

You are giving a free pass to ET that you do not give to other equally un-evidenced causes. It is surely because, unlike them, you a priori believe in ET. That's circular.

 

[DaveC426913]

exchemist I expect Yazata will just not respond. It seems he selectively avoids any challenging issues, presumably by convincing himself instead that the challenger is just not engaging sufficiently in good-faith for him. He does not consider his own transgressions (The Big Lie) to be every bit as bad-faith, and hypocritical to-boot.

 

[Yazata]

It is as consistent with extra-terrestrial technological origin as it is with divine origin, or ghostly origin, or any other origin for which we have no exemplar for comparison.

The assumption that unknown anomalous phenomena are the product of technology might indeed be the product of our currently living in a scientistic machine civilization. The observed phenomena might indeed be the product of something totally unexpected and very different.

Of course much the same complaint can be (and has been) made regarding science's methodological naturalism. It excludes divine or supernatural explanations simply by default, as a heuristic principle.

Those that hypothesize that currently unknown physical and engineering principles might be at work in some of the UAPs, would seem to be employing a very similar heuristic principle.

Keep in mind that these aren't factual claims, it's just hypothesis generation.

 

[foghorn]

The assumption that unknown anomalous phenomena are the product of technology might indeed be the product of our currently living in a scientistic machine civilization. The observed phenomena might indeed be the product of something totally unexpected and very different.

Of course much the same complaint can be (and has been) made regarding science's methodological naturalism. It excludes divine or supernatural explanations simply by default, as a heuristic principle.

Those that hypothesize that currently unknown physical and engineering principles might be at work in some of the UAPs, would seem to be employing a very similar heuristic principle.

Keep in mind that these aren't factual claims, it's just hypothesis generation.

Yazata,
Is that even a new view in uap analysing?
Analysing uap reports to the best of human ability, if result is “can’t make it out”, then the answer is ‘don’t know.’

 

[exchemist]

exchemist I expect Yazata will just not respond. It seems he selectively avoids any challenging issues, presumably by convincing himself instead that the challenger is just not engaging sufficiently in good-faith for him. He does not consider his own transgressions (The Big Lie) to be every bit as bad-faith, and hypocritical to-boot.

He is not always the cool, detached philosopher he presents himself as being, Exhibit A being “conniption fit”.

The mask slips….

 

[foghorn]

It could be Yazata seeding a new big lie, that is sceptics only think in terms of technology for what a uap could be.
Yazata would have it that the following is out of the question in the minds of sceptics...

The idea of manipulation of Nature other than through technology being out the question for sceptics.
But then, the uap might have nothing to do with an intelligence, that too is out of the question for sceptics.
Natural phenomena, that too is out of the question for sceptics.
That is what a sceptic is in Yazata's eyes.

I wonder how these things can be ruled out, lets forget about evidence for building ideas.
Elephants mind controlling matter over very long distances with distant viewing ability.
I'm not saying that's not possible, but I would like to see some evidence.

 

[DaveC426913]

that is sceptics only think in terms of technology for what a uap could be.

Perhaps. He already stated he doesn't believe in ghosts and spirits so in that sense he's already trending away from supernatural explanations. This is my concern, that he as a bias, even though there's no "consistency" to be had for or against any explanation based on the evidence at-hand.

 

[foghorn]

Perhaps. He already stated he doesn't believe in ghosts and spirits so in that sense he's already trending away from supernatural explanations. This is my concern, that he as a bias, even though there's no "consistency" to be had for or against any explanation based on the evidence at-hand.

Bias or he has a bug up his nose because he wants to show how deeply philosophical he is with his thoughts and open minded approaches.
The drawback for him here, is that on the subject of uaps, the sceptics are already in that mode.

 

[Magical Realist]

Well you heard it here first! lol From no less an academic authority than Harvard University!

Aliens may be living among us disguised as humans, Harvard researchers claim

Research scientists at Harvard University wrote a paper suggesting aliens could be living underground or on the moon, or even walking among us and posing as humans.

www.fox7austin.com

"According to the paper, scientific discussion around unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), the official government term for UFOs, has been dominated by two main classifications: human technology (conventional terrestrial origin) or extraterrestrial origin (civilizations arriving from somewhere other than Earth).

Researchers have since considered a more unorthodox set of theories, the "ultraterrestrial" hypothesis. Included in this subset of theories is the cryptoterrestrial hypothesis, which explores the possibility of non-human intelligence living among us, either concealed underground, underwater or disguising themselves as humans.

"First, it is increasingly apparent that UAP are not only aerial but can also move underwater in ways that – per their airborne counterparts – defy explanation," the paper states.


The authors cite retired Air Force Maj. David Grusch and retired Navy Rear Adm. Tim Gallaudet, who have argued there’s a lost list of strange occurrences underwater – "acting in ways that surpass human technology, and even challenge scientific understanding of what is possible underwater."

The researchers also point to the "empirical mystery" around UAP sightings often involving orbs that appear to enter or exit potential underground access points, like volcanoes."

 

[DaveC426913]

"First, it is increasingly apparent that UAP are not only aerial but can also move underwater in ways that – per their airborne counterparts – defy explanation," the paper states.

I still have yet to see a single video of a UAP moving underwater.

 

[Sarkus]

^^ And thus are appeals to authority dismissed as fallacious. i.e. even people from Harvard can talk bollocks.

 

[James R]

Well you heard it here first! lol From no less an academic authority than Harvard University!

Aliens may be living among us disguised as humans, Harvard researchers claim

Research scientists at Harvard University wrote a paper suggesting aliens could be living underground or on the moon, or even walking among us and posing as humans.

www.fox7austin.com

"According to the paper, scientific discussion around unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), the official government term for UFOs, has been dominated by two main classifications: human technology (conventional terrestrial origin) or extraterrestrial origin (civilizations arriving from somewhere other than Earth).

Researchers have since considered a more unorthodox set of theories, the "ultraterrestrial" hypothesis. Included in this subset of theories is the cryptoterrestrial hypothesis, which explores the possibility of non-human intelligence living among us, either concealed underground, underwater or disguising themselves as humans.

"First, it is increasingly apparent that UAP are not only aerial but can also move underwater in ways that – per their airborne counterparts – defy explanation," the paper states.


The authors cite retired Air Force Maj. David Grusch and retired Navy Rear Adm. Tim Gallaudet, who have argued there’s a lost list of strange occurrences underwater – "acting in ways that surpass human technology, and even challenge scientific understanding of what is possible underwater."

The researchers also point to the "empirical mystery" around UAP sightings often involving orbs that appear to enter or exit potential underground access points, like volcanoes."

And here's what Magical Realist left out:

• The paper has not been peer-reviewed.
• The paper was written by researchers with Harvard’s Human Flourishing Program, but a note at the top of the report calls it a "speculative thought piece" that "reflects the authors' own interests and ideas" and emphasises it’s not affiliated with the program at Harvard.
• The authors also state at the top that they want to emphasise that they believe their hypothesis is, in all likelihood, false.

Why did Magical Realist leave out this background information? Why is MR so dishonest all the time?

Was Magical Realist trying to ride on the prestige of Harvard University to try to gain imagined support for his professed beliefs? If so, this is a clear fail.

 

[Yazata]

"According to the paper, scientific discussion around unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), the official government term for UFOs, has been dominated by two main classifications: human technology (conventional terrestrial origin) or extraterrestrial origin (civilizations arriving from somewhere other than Earth).

I agree that if we don't know what they are, then we probably shouldn't be assuming that they have to fall into one or the other of two mutually exclusive classes. They could be something totally unfamiliar to us at this point.

Researchers have since considered a more unorthodox set of theories, the "ultraterrestrial" hypothesis. Included in this subset of theories is the cryptoterrestrial hypothesis, which explores the possibility of non-human intelligence living among us, either concealed underground, underwater or disguising themselves as humans.

Stories of extraordinary things seen in the sky extend back as far as human history extends. So if we hypothesize that these historical accounts are the same phenomenon as is observed today, we would have to say that they have always been with us. Which might suggest (just hypothetically) that whatever it is might be deeply embedded in our history. Certainly as myth, perhaps as more tangible fact as well. (Just a speculation. I remember Jacques Vallee saying much the same thing.)

 

[James R]

Stories of extraordinary things seen in the sky extend back as far as human history extends. So if we hypothesize that these historical accounts are the same phenomenon as is observed today, we would have to say that they have always been with us.

That's a big "if" you have there.

Would it be sensible to hypothesise that all the historical accounts are the "same phenomenon", as you suggest?

Consider, for instance, that contemporary accounts exhibit a wide range of different phenomena. So, why would you want to assume that the past was wildly different from today, when it comes to people seeing things in the sky that they can't immediately identify?

 

[DaveC426913]

I agree that if we don't know what they are, then we probably shouldn't be assuming that they have to fall into one or the other of two mutually exclusive classes.

Luckily, no one here is promulgating that they "have to". Another oblique invocation of Yazata's Big Lie. A strawman to be exact.

Unlike our local enthusiast, who is currently on break for telling lies, we skeptics never say something has to be mundane. We say "something may be mundane" because we believe extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

James R : when does this Big Lie of Yazata's rise to the level of trolling? Perhaps he could show us a single example , in this entire forum, where any skeptic has said some otherwise unsolved account has to be mundane?


We have two UAP enthusiasts here, both of which need to tell frequent lies to make their cases hold water. That gives the industry a pretty bad name no?

 

[James R]

DaveC:

James R : when does this Big Lie of Yazata's rise to the level of trolling? Perhaps he could show us a single example , in this entire forum, where any skeptic has said some otherwise unsolved account has to be mundane?

Certainly, Yazata has become more dishonest and evasive of late. He won't reply to any of my posts. I don't know whether he even reads them. He continually reposts his false claim that skeptics have essentially all decided that it is impossible that any given UAP could possibly turn out to be the real deal woo, which clearly that have not.

You and I have both asked him to try to support his Big Lie by digging up a few real-world examples of the dishonest skeptics in action on this forum, but he has never produced anything in response. I've asked several times.

Meanwhile, he keeps mashing the "like" button on every one of the troll Magical Realist's posts. I suppose he imagines he's fighting the good fight against an evil establishment or a cabal of closed-minded skeptics when he does that.

For a man who like to pretend he's really open minded and yet properly skeptical in a way that regular skeptics like you and I will never be, he's remarkably resistant to changing his ways, admitting his errors and realising when he's being totally unreasonable and irrational.

I don't know how much of his behaviour is because of a buddy buddy relationship he might have with Magical Realist. Maybe it's more a paternal impulse and MR has succeeded in pulling the wool over his eyes to the extent that he thinks MR needs him as a defender because he believes MR is helpless or stupid and is therefore persecuted unfairly (by the same closed-mind cabal of evil inferior skeptics).

I don't think that Yazata's behaviour has quite crossed the threshold into outright trolling yet, but that line is a bit hazy. I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt until enough evidence accumulates that his intent is actually to troll. A fair bit of evidence has already accumulated.

I think the time is approaching when I might want to start pinging him for repeatedly telling his lie, knowing all the while that it is false and refusing to respond to the people who have told him why it is false. If he is going to keep accusing people of being unreasonably prejudiced about UAPs, when the very people he is accusing have told him directly that they don't hold the views and opinions he claims they hold, and if he never even attempts to demonstrate the truth of his accusations, then it will become reasonable to infer that he is deliberately telling lies with the intent to provoke an angry reaction, which is the sort of behaviour that is characteristic of internet trolls.

I hope that, at some point, Yazata will come to his senses regarding his Big Lie. People with any integrity wouldn't want to hitch their wagon to a troll like Magical Realist, only to have him drag them down with him.

I think that, truth be told, Yazata is probably aware of his own sub-par behaviour and is ashamed of it at some level. He wouldn't be avoiding replying to us if he wasn't shamefaced about his Lie. It's like he can't look us in the face; he wants to keep his distance so he doesn't have to directly answer for his Lie.

It's still not too late for him to do the honourable thing: apologise for telling the lie and just stop telling it. The he can move on from this shameful period of his membership here.

We have two UAP enthusiasts here, both of which need to tell frequent lies to make their cases hold water. That gives the industry a pretty bad name no?

I don't interact with a lot of UFO enthusiasts directly, so I'm not sure if the dishonesty we are seeing here from the pro-UFO crowd is typical of the UFO "community" as a whole, or whether that community simply has its fair share of liars and people who are intellectually dishonest, same as other communities.

Of course, there's a whole industry practically dedicated to putting out propaganda for the belief in alien visitations and the like. Some people no doubt make a lot of money from it, and where there's money to be had there's often an incentive to lie to the pundits who are coughing up the cash.

N.B. I am not suggesting that Yazata or Magical Realist is making any money from their lies.

 

[DaveC426913]

I think that, truth be told, Yazata is probably aware of his own sub-par behaviour and is ashamed of it at some level. He wouldn't be avoiding replying to us if he wasn't shamefaced about his Lie. It's like he can't look us in the face; he wants to keep his distance so he doesn't have to directly answer for his Lie.

Yes. That's what it feels like to me too. He picks and choses what he responds to, convincing himself it is based on his opponent's poor behavior, but in reality, he just hides from any challenge to his own poor behavior. It's odiously hypocritical.

I don't interact with a lot of UFO enthusiasts directly, so I'm not sure if the dishonesty we are seeing here from the pro-UFO crowd is typical of the UFO "community" as a whole, or whether that community simply has its fair share of liars and people who are intellectually dishonest, same as other communities.

Yeah, no. I didn't mean the whole industry. I meant if our little cross-section of it were representative.
They're doing their team dirty.