Best evidence against UFO's.

[lost_shaman]

I thought it might be a good idea to start this thread because the opposite thread is very popular but basically a fiasco!

I wondered if the tides were turned and Skeptics of UFO witnesses were asked to explain why they discount these people who witness UFO's; if we would end up with the same type of interest and interesting discussions.

The point here is basically to see if self proclaimed skeptics are both willing and able to initiate valid arguments to support their skepticism of UFO witnesses and evidence.

If you are a self proclaimed "skeptic" this thread is the place to outline your arguments with the catch being this time the burden of proof is on you.

[Guyver]

I thought it might be a good idea to start this thread because the opposite thread is very popular but basically a fiasco!

If you are a self proclaimed "skeptic" this thread is the place to outline your arguments with the catch being this time the burden of proof is on you.

I'm not much of a skeptic per se. Having seen a UFO myself once, and acknowledging that there is something to the phenomenon. My biggest criticism regarding aliens though, and I'm sure many share this idea, is the vast distances involved in space. Not too long ago I did some calculations regarding the nearest star (cluster) Alpha Centauri (Proxima). Based on the distances in light years, converting those to miles and giving a high rate of speed (200,000 mph i think it was)- it was something like 125 million hours of travel to reach earth. To me, that pretty much eliminates any alien visitations. I will acknowledge the possibility of some sort of technology that could reduce those numbers, but still. The universe is just really big and earth is just comparatively really small.

[lost_shaman]

Based on the distances in light years, converting those to miles and giving a high rate of speed (200,000 mph i think it was)- it was something like 125 million hours of travel to reach earth. To me, that pretty much eliminates any alien visitations. I will acknowledge the possibility of some sort of technology that could reduce those numbers, but still. The universe is just really big and earth is just comparatively really small.

I don't doubt your calculations but if you simply travel faster closer to light speed the time decreases exponentially. The 'relative' distance needed to travel literally shrinks the closer to light speed you get.

[Sabbath]

I'd say the best argument is that the existence of aliens from outer space visiting us, utterly lacks proof. The claim that UFO's are aliens from another planet is exactly that, nothing more but a claim, and an assumption.

Edited May 17, 2010 by Blacksabbath

[lost_shaman]

I'd say the best argument is that the existence of aliens from outer space visiting us, utterly lacks proof. The claim that UFO's are aliens from another planet is exactly that, nothing more but a claim, and an assumption.

There are lots of people who claim to see things that don't claim what they witnessed was "Aliens" visiting. If the burden of proof is in your hands how do you discount any possibility without making any argument that incorporates some form of evidence?

Edit: If your argument lacks evidence, at least the UFO witness actually observed something.

Edited May 17, 2010 by lost_shaman

[Sabbath]

There are lots of people who claim to see things that don't claim what they witnessed was "Aliens" visiting. If the burden of proof is in your hands how do you discount any possibility without making any argument that incorporates some form of evidence?

Edit: If your argument lacks evidence, at least the UFO witness actually observed something.

Exactly. A UFO stays a UFO. But people are hell bent on them being aliens from another planet, which is just an assumption with no proof whatsoever.

[keithisco]

I think the total lack of any indisputable Alien artefacts does not promote the idea of Alien visitation. Eyewitness accounts, backed up by radar traces are, on the other hand, a very strong and persuasive indicator of "something" happening in our skies.

Although hundreds, if not thousands, of people have claimed Alien abduction which resultd in "implants" being inserted, I have yet to see any physical evidence of this in any news media, or reputable scientific journal of investigation.

With more stories and sightings now being based on what has recently been released in mainstream theatres and cinemas (The "Matrix" effect) simply defies credulity.

Their is simply not enough, if any, hard evidence that the Earth is, or has been, visited by Alien peoples

[Sabbath]

I think the total lack of any indisputable Alien artefacts does not promote the idea of Alien visitation. Eyewitness accounts, backed up by radar traces are, on the other hand, a very strong and persuasive indicator of "something" happening in our skies.

Although hundreds, if not thousands, of people have claimed Alien abduction which resultd in "implants" being inserted, I have yet to see any physical evidence of this in any news media, or reputable scientific journal of investigation.

With more stories and sightings now being based on what has recently been released in mainstream theatres and cinemas (The "Matrix" effect) simply defies credulity.

Their is simply not enough, if any, hard evidence that the Earth is, or has been, visited by Alien peoples

Yup something is up in the skies. But are they aliens? There's no proof. But I'm sure we're going to be getting loads of cases and explanations posted here anyway. But the fact still stands, there's no proof as to what those things actually are. Just belief.

[Space Commander Travis]

Indeed, the favourite evidence that's been presented (very often) so far just doesn't seem to go quite far enough to convince the skeptics, or even the neutral. I think that's about the size of it. However, that can't prove that it hasn't happened, or that there are no aliens, of course. That's the difference with the two viewpoints. I don't think anyone tries to insist there there are no extraterrestrials, just that the proof that they've visited us isn't strong enough to convince yet.

[Dimly]

'Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence'

[mcrom901]

failure in recognizing the active role of the authorities in suppression of any 'available' info concerning extraterrestrial intelligence is the main shortcoming of the pseudo-skeptics.... moreover, as far as the burden of proof goes, in all cases where they seem to be resorting to the 'last' prosaic explanation i.e. black-ops craft.... they are very much obligated to provide the relative proofs about same....

[Space Commander Travis]

failure in recognizing the active role of the authorities in suppression of any 'available' info concerning extraterrestrial intelligence is the main shortcoming of the pseudo-skeptics.... moreover, as far as the burden of proof goes, in all cases where they seem to be resorting to the 'last' prosaic explanation i.e. black-ops craft.... they are very much obligated to provide the relative proofs about same....

I think you're true there. Same with crop cirlces; it's easy enough to say "secret aircraft", or that they're done by crop circle artistes, but there seems to be not much proof as yet that these actually exist, or they can do what they claim they do.

[mcrom901]

My biggest criticism regarding aliens though, and I'm sure many share this idea, is the vast distances involved in space. Not too long ago I did some calculations regarding the nearest star (cluster) Alpha Centauri (Proxima).

on what basis have you ruled out the possibility concerning the presence of et in our very own solar system?

[mcrom901]

But the fact still stands, there's no proof as to what those things actually are. Just belief.

any and all understandings are 'beliefs'....

the term 'scientific proof' is a misnomer.... scientific theories can never be conclusively verified but only conclusively falsified... the term 'proof' implies 'a result that is final and beyond doubt'..... whereas scientific theories by default are vulnerable to being replaced by newer and improved theories....

Edited May 17, 2010 by mcrom901

[mcrom901]

Exactly. A UFO stays a UFO. But people are hell bent on them being aliens from another planet, which is just an assumption with no proof whatsoever.

what do you call this?

'unidentified aerial phenomena'?

[Sabbath]

what do you call this?

'unidentified aerial phenomena'?

It is exactly what I stated. A UFO. An Unidentified Flying Object. And it will stay a UFO, because no one knows what it is. So it is a UFO. There is no proof of it being an alien spaceship, a government craft, or anything. It is Unidentified.

But yet people are hell bent that they are aliens from outer space. There is no proof. Therefore it is unidentified.

Always have to repeat myself here

Edited May 17, 2010 by Blacksabbath

[mcrom901]

There is no proof of it being an alien spaceship, a government craft, or anything. It is Unidentified.

appeal to belief?

terrestrial aircraft are not unidentified..... we simply do not have anything identifiable which could exhibit such flight characteristics.....

Edited May 17, 2010 by mcrom901

[Sabbath]

terrestrial aircraft are not unidentified.....

appeal to belief?

So, according to you, a human made aircraft cannot be unidentified?

[mcrom901]

So, according to you, a human made aircraft cannot be unidentified?

its more about as to what the evidence says..... if you wish to believe that those 'unidentified' are identifiable as terrestrial... you need to provide the corroborating data...

edited to add....

don't quote me out of context.... read the rest....

Edited May 17, 2010 by mcrom901

[Robbo]

I would consider myself to be sceptical about the whole subject - that is to say; I don't think everything unidentified is alien.

I have seen something that I cannot identify, on a number of occasions. They were merely lights in the sky. I've said it loads of times; but there are numerous explanations as to what it was I saw - only one of those explanations are aliens, therefore its far more logical to assume it was of a more terrestrial origin, no matter how "alien" it seems.

I don't deny that there is a lot of evidence to support this subject, there is however, not one shred of undeniable proof (no matter how many YouTube videos claim). I certainly think that there is other life 'out there' and it probably exist in our own galaxy, maybe even in every galaxy. If you look at the Ultra Deep Field from Hubble - The furthest galaxies have a 14 billion year head start on us, so I think life is pretty likely.

I think technology probably exists that would allow other life to travel faster than light. I think its rather closed minded of us to assume we know everything about physics. What I take issue with is the fact that many think we're playing host on a regular occasion to alien visitors. Why the hell would anyone want to visit Earth? We're not special, we're not all meant to evolve onto some higher BS plain of existence - we live in the suburbs of our galaxy, orbiting an ordinary star that has a very ordinary solar system.

The subject is far too full of ridiculous theories to be taken seriously. Hollow Earth - We've observed stars and planets being created, we know the molten mass ejected from a star's birth will not be hollow - on a smaller scale, molten rocks ejected from volcanoes; when cooled are not hollow...none of them. Channelling, no one can talk to aliens through the power of their mind. There isn't even any evidence let alone proof that this has ever happened.

I'm not sure if this thread is going to go anywhere - you cannot deny "UFOs" exist, simply because of definition. I'm not sure what the thread is trying to prove, UFO means unidentified - and unidentified objects certainly exist. I'm pretty sure alien life exists too - I just don't think every UFO is ET.

[S2F]

I thought it might be a good idea to start this thread because the opposite thread is very popular but basically a fiasco!

I wondered if the tides were turned and Skeptics of UFO witnesses were asked to explain why they discount these people who witness UFO's; if we would end up with the same type of interest and interesting discussions.

The point here is basically to see if self proclaimed skeptics are both willing and able to initiate valid arguments to support their skepticism of UFO witnesses and evidence.

If you are a self proclaimed "skeptic" this thread is the place to outline your arguments with the catch being this time the burden of proof is on you.

I don't think any of the skeptics here have said that alien visitation is impossible, only that it is unlikely. Even if FTL travel is common throughout the universe you have to consider that we (Earth) are a grain of sand on a very large beach. Also these 'advanced civilizations' may or may not exist in our timeline, meaning that they may have already existed and gone the way of the dodo, or they may have yet to come to prominence. This is only in regards to our own galaxy of course, travel between galaxies (as opposed to interstellar travel) wouldn't be feasible even if the technology existed in my opinion.

It would seem to me that if aliens did find we were here and decided to pay us a visit then they would almost assuredly have a specific goal in mind. Flitting about in our skies and confounding skeptic and believers alike seems like a great waste of time, energy and resources. While it is true that alien motives may be, well...alien, it doesn't necessarily mean they would be totally unknowable.

To be totally honest there are no individuals that have the credibility to state that we are being visited by aliens without some form of corroborating evidence. If Stephen Hawking were to tell me to my face that he knew aliens were here and I only had his word on it, my first thought would be 'he's finally gone off the deep end'. For me personally it would take a group of scientific minded people (with supporting evidence of course) to convince me that aliens are visiting us. A group not unlike NASA for example.

There is also the current state of UFOlogy to consider. It seems filled to overflowing with crackpots, frauds and charlatans looking to sign a book deal. Make no mistake, UFO's/aliens are good business. It is difficult to take the field seriously when it's inundated with a bunch of sensationalist science fiction being peddled to anyone with money in their hands.

These are a few of my reasons for having doubts about alien visitation. My stand has never been that alien visitation is impossible. In fact I concede that it is a possibility however for me it is still very unlikely. In the end all we have (skeptic and believer alike) are our opinions on the matter after reviewing the evidence.

On a side note, if you're looking for 'proof' that alien visitation can't happen then you are going to be disappointed. The only thing I can think of at the moment that may fall into that category is E=mc².

[mcrom901]

I would consider myself to be sceptical about the whole subject - that is to say; I don't think everything unidentified is alien.

*snip*

I just don't think every UFO is ET.

in other words... you believe some of the ufos are alien?

[Hazzard]

I don't think any of the skeptics here have said that alien visitation is impossible, only that it is unlikely. Even if FTL travel is common throughout the universe you have to consider that we (Earth) are a grain of sand on a very large beach. Also these 'advanced civilizations' may or may not exist in our timeline, meaning that they may have already existed and gone the way of the dodo, or they may have yet to come to prominence. This is only in regards to our own galaxy of course, travel between galaxies (as opposed to interstellar travel) wouldn't be feasible even if the technology existed in my opinion.

It would seem to me that if aliens did find we were here and decided to pay us a visit then they would almost assuredly have a specific goal in mind. Flitting about in our skies and confounding skeptic and believers alike seems like a great waste of time, energy and resources. While it is true that alien motives may be, well...alien, it doesn't necessarily mean they would be totally unknowable.

To be totally honest there are no individuals that have the credibility to state that we are being visited by aliens without some form of corroborating evidence. If Stephen Hawking were to tell me to my face that he knew aliens were here and I only had his word on it, my first thought would be 'he's finally gone off the deep end'. For me personally it would take a group of scientific minded people (with supporting evidence of course) to convince me that aliens are visiting us. A group not unlike NASA for example.

There is also the current state of UFOlogy to consider. It seems filled to overflowing with crackpots, frauds and charlatans looking to sign a book deal. Make no mistake, UFO's/aliens are good business. It is difficult to take the field seriously when it's inundated with a bunch of sensationalist science fiction being peddled to anyone with money in their hands.

These are a few of my reasons for having doubts about alien visitation. My stand has never been that alien visitation is impossible. In fact I concede that it is a possibility however for me it is still very unlikely. In the end all we have (skeptic and believer alike) are our opinions on the matter after reviewing the evidence.

On a side note, if you're looking for 'proof' that alien visitation can't happen then you are going to be disappointed. The only thing I can think of at the moment that may fall into that category is E=mc².

Well said, S2F,... Thats exactly where I stand on this.

Edited May 17, 2010 by Hazzard

[Sabbath]

its more about as to what the evidence says..... if you wish to believe that those 'unidentified' are identifiable as terrestrial... you need to provide the corroborating data...

edited to add....

don't quote me out of context.... read the rest....

I don't know what it is. It isn't my job to bring forth proof, seeing as you're the one making the far fetched claim that they're aliens.

[mcrom901]

The only thing I can think of at the moment that may fall into that category is E=mc².

regular matter accounts for only 4%..... the remaining 96% of the universe consists of dark matter and dark energy...