The point is neither of us are certain. The science speaks for itself, or not. What it's really not about is the science itself, it's about personal points of view.
Yes, and a point of view is not a fact. The issue is presenting a point of view as a fact, and using science as a justification when science has effectively nothing certain to say on the topic.
Of course it does. How could it not? The likelyhood is 'no evidence'.the question to me is whether the improbability has a commensurate effect on the ability to gather evidence of the thing itself.
Circa 800 people in Phoenix witnessing (and some of them video-documenting) something unidentified and the response being that they must have misidentified something fairly common, despite the strange circumstances and few (if any) of these witnesses being interviewed.
The certainty is that they were all incorrect, because mass delusion is a thing. Or something.
This is only one example.
The certainty is that they were all incorrect, because mass delusion is a thing. Or something.
This is only one example.
Okay, so where's the dispute?
Who's claiming certainty?
Not me. Check back at the many posts in this thread. You will find several.
Of course it does. How could it not? The likelyhood is 'no evidence'.
Yeah I guess I don’t think that’s necessarily an inherent part of “improbability”. For instance, life evolving on earth is fundamentally “improbable” due to the complexity and the lack of extraterrestrial examples of such things yet here we are with plenty of evidence to show for ourselves; Cogito ergo sum and all that.
Last edited:
I have not seen any declarations, only statements of 'belief'.Not me. Check back at the many posts in this thread. You will find several.
Would that be complete, incomplete or limited evidence?Frankly, when scientists say it is highly probable, based on the evidence of how life arose on this planet, that advanced alien civilizations are extremely rare, I’m more inclined to believe them than you.
What some of us think we know and others blindly follow.Would that be complete, incomplete or limited evidence?
If something is unidentified, can it also be misidentified? It can't be both.
That post is... how you say... loaded.
And I think I'm the one that brought in the mass delusion concept.
That concept is fairly well researched and documented. That doesn't mean all circa 800 fall into that category, and that's not what I meant either when I brought it up. I'm sure some people saw something strange.
My quick research only yeilded an artist's depiction of the giant boomerang and the info I posted earlier. It's unclear to me what the strange circumstances were other than the thing itself.
That post is... how you say... loaded.
And I think I'm the one that brought in the mass delusion concept.
That concept is fairly well researched and documented. That doesn't mean all circa 800 fall into that category, and that's not what I meant either when I brought it up. I'm sure some people saw something strange.
My quick research only yeilded an artist's depiction of the giant boomerang and the info I posted earlier. It's unclear to me what the strange circumstances were other than the thing itself.
It wasn’t directed at you fwiw. Mass Delusion of Crowds et al was brought up earlier.
You posit a philosophical question but when events such as the Phoenix lights are discussed, it is the witnesses maintaining the former and skeptics maintaining the latter. The latter requires 100% of the witnesses to be in error.
If something is unidentified, can it also be misidentified? It can't be both.
You posit a philosophical question but when events such as the Phoenix lights are discussed, it is the witnesses maintaining the former and skeptics maintaining the latter. The latter requires 100% of the witnesses to be in error.
Last edited:
I saw something in the sky when I was about 19 years old.(around 1973) I have only told a handful of people about it over the years, including my wife. I was sitting on a beach in New Jersey in the off season. I saw only one other person on the beach, my friend with whom I had gone there. I looked up and saw what looked like a giant alligator made out of clouds walking across the sky, out over the ocean. It was huge! His mouth kept opening an shutting as he passed across the sky in front of me. I was transfixed and speechless. I tried to get my friend to look up, but he was focused on some grains of sand. I will never forget this. It is as real in my memory today as the day it happened. I have been reading this thread and wondering if I should share this.
I probably should mention that we both took LSD about 3 hours before this event. I don't believe the alligator (or was it a crocodile?) was real. But my senses told me it was real. This is why I don't give much credence to reports of what people say they saw. We don't experience "reality". We experience what our brains create out of external stimulus and who knows what else.
I probably should mention that we both took LSD about 3 hours before this event. I don't believe the alligator (or was it a crocodile?) was real. But my senses told me it was real. This is why I don't give much credence to reports of what people say they saw. We don't experience "reality". We experience what our brains create out of external stimulus and who knows what else.
Well the oxymoronic nature of your statement lends credence to the opposite, does it not? Where is the evidence of "fundamental improbability" other than cumulative opinions on unproven science?Honestly, on what premise?
Are you still on that trip?I probably should mention that we both took LSD about 3 hours before this event.
seriously

I just took them as adjectives; I kinda shied away from the epistomology banter.
I'm a bit confused again. You said the witnesses hadn't been interviewed, but apparently they've all said something, and were all in agreement. "Unidentified."
The military identified one of the two events as flares dropped from airplanes. They must be a portion of the skeptics you mention.
I'm a bit confused again. You said the witnesses hadn't been interviewed, but apparently they've all said something, and were all in agreement. "Unidentified."
The military identified one of the two events as flares dropped from airplanes. They must be a portion of the skeptics you mention.
The “flare” event is a second event that is very possibly what is described but ultimately distinct from the first event and quite possibly a response to it.
The “flare” event is the more videographed event and often conflated with the first but is in fact, according to witnesses and other videography, a distinct event.
The “flare” event is the more videographed event and often conflated with the first but is in fact, according to witnesses and other videography, a distinct event.
Last edited:
I probably should mention that we both took LSD about 3 hours before this event. I don't believe the alligator (or was it a crocodile?) was real. But my senses told me it was real. This is why I don't give much credence to reports of what people say they saw. We don't experience "reality". We experience what our brains create out of external stimulus and who knows what else.
I pretty sure drug testing is regularly conducted on fighter pilots; nonetheless, it’s a hell of a feat to psychically trick a radar into a false positive corroborating what one sees with their eyes.
I watched a (shaky) video. The silhouette video shows parachute shapes. The lights look like flares, but after seeing their parachutes it's hard not to be biased.
The woman was so excited (22 years after the fact) that she wrote a "we are not alone" book.
Pardon me but "pffffft." The Marfa Lights are just as intriguing.
The woman was so excited (22 years after the fact) that she wrote a "we are not alone" book.
Pardon me but "pffffft." The Marfa Lights are just as intriguing.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Member Areas
- The Lounge
- UFO's- Please help me process