Stephen wrote:
> Or
>
> There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
> Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
>


Possibility yes, logic indicates is not probable.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> On 10/25/2011 22:43, Saul Luizaga wrote:
>> The point being: there are indications of some things out there that are
>> suspicious, and can't be explained
>
> Good so far...
>
>> but the logical conclusions are this and that... etc.
>
> If they can't be explained, how can you call your conclusions "logical"?

Well all the recollection of testimonials, scientific testing of samples 
taken on sites and ufologist analysis, some ufologists with a background 
of decades and they having normal jobs, so I assume you don't hire crazy 
people so I think they reasoning is sound, they don't do it for a 
living, they are thinking normal people that dedicate their time and 
resources to find out the truth of course they must get money from their 
help but I doubt is big. Ufologists are far more scientific than you 
might think.

Post a reply to this message

I see what you mean and a "crazy" person obsessed is different from a 
respected ufologist, check the series, is not like that at all.

Post a reply to this message

Fair enough, I've even seen such particles in space videos in YouTube 
and even teenagers can say is not UFOs, so with all the technology & 
knowledge available now is not easy to fool people, those video are 
obvious hoaxes and ufologist know better than that.

The ufologist in the series are not newage hippies, you write out of 
ignorance again, you try to demonstrate they're a bunch of delusional 
losers when you haven't even see much evidence of the series or other 
ufologists research, you are referencing to some bad experiences you had 
in the past, with an obvious bias to avoid what I tried to show you.

>   When you say "you're like the ignorant which hunters, only seeing what
> you want to see, science and nothings else", it certainly sounds like you
> adamantly want me to accept what you believe.

That is your opinion not reality, is also reality that you like science 
a lot and you're not willing to see things any other way with the same 
attitude: "Give me facts or give me death!", that's what I meant. I like 
Astrophysics too and some day UFO & astrophysics probably will be the 
same, but OK you don't want to have anything to do with UFO/ghost/etc I 
respect your opinion.

Post a reply to this message

:) well I meant if possible, why not? let's do it.

Post a reply to this message

yeah, you know every possible outcome and you know everything there is 
to it and for a fact you can demonstrate there can't be anything else, 
sure... your opinion hardly could be more biased, but OK, I see now how 
difficult is to reason when the people don't want to and find some 
intellectual pretext to not do so. But is your opinion and I respect it.

Post a reply to this message

On 27/10/2011 7:06 AM, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> so I assume you don't hire crazy people

I'm gobsmacked that anyone who has ever worked can say that. The last 
job I was on there were at least two fully paid up members the raving 
loony party, who needed minders when they went out and one that was so 
delusional she regularly dined with the Princess Royal and her family. 
Being crazy dies not bar you from holding down a job.

> so I think they reasoning is sound

I don't think that yours is.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 10/26/2011 23:31, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> :) well I meant if possible, why not? let's do it.

The "let's do it" part is difficult if we don't even think it's possible.

"Hey, if it's possible to fly by flapping your arms, why not? Let's do it!"

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   People tell me I am the counter-example.

Post a reply to this message

On 10/26/2011 23:06, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Well all the recollection of testimonials, scientific testing of samples
> taken on sites and ufologist analysis,

Here's the thing. You call people who believe in ufo's and study them 
believing them to be alien space ships "ufologists". However, there are 
hundreds of times as many people who study UFOs and come to the conclusion 
that they are mundane.

It's like seeing 1000's of fakes scammed "crying statue" and "bleeding 
painting" type religious miracles, and listening only to the people who 
think they're probably all true.

I.e., by not calling (say) air force investigators who come to the 
conclusion that those lights are actually russian fighter jets "ufologists", 
you are of course amplifying how much evidence you think they have.

> they having normal jobs, so I assume you don't hire crazy people

We have people here who believe the universe is a dream, who believe 
Mohammad flew into the air on a flying horse, who believe Jesus is an outer 
space alien, who believe that space aliens came millions of years ago to get 
sealed into a volcano to watch movies, and who believe people are made out 
of dust magicked to life. Yet these are all perfectly sane people, other 
than their religious convictions, holding normal jobs.

> so I think they reasoning is sound,

This is argument from authority.  "They seem like nice people, so they must 
be right."  That isn't how it works.

> Ufologists are far more scientific than you might think.

I think you don't understand how science works. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   People tell me I am the counter-example.

Post a reply to this message

On 10/26/2011 21:21, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Interesting - but what was the case about?

I don't remember. Something where believing in UFOs was relevant. Maybe 
something like an air force pilot in trouble for having leaked classified 
information by telling someone where he was when he saw space ships or 
something?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   People tell me I am the counter-example.

Post a reply to this message