Are Extraterrestrials Really Demons?

[Frank Merton]

What's prideful about sharing an experience? There's no guile if they share their encounters in factual ways, not intentionally embellishing facts pertinent to the case.

Well of course it is prideful to think we have special experiences that others don't, and I hate to have to tell you this but a very large portion of such stories are either invented or at least embellished out of a desire to get attention. This does not have to be deliberate dishonesty -- as the person tells the story they convince themselves of it too.

[Frank Merton]

Thanks for the reminder of Percival Lowell, one of the most arrogant astronomers of history. His name would be forgotten except he had the money to invest in telescopes, which, however, he kept for his personal use. He saw all sorts of things on Mars that no one else saw, that he attributed to his better observing techniques, and the press largely reported what he said he saw as fact, even though other astronomers were doubtful. Of course it was all in his head.

I remember in college (at the time I was an astronomy major although I later switched to data processing) being so disappointed when the first radar images from Venus reported the truth of the situation there, and not the steamy Silurian jungle we all expected. I held my breath on the subject until the Russian lander made the truth impossible to deny.

I remember thinking it was kinda like the Odyssey. The Greeks populated unknown places with all sorts of beings. Nowadays we seem to have a tendency to do the same thing.

[ReaperS_ParadoX]

Thanks for that info psyche much appreciated, Iv learned a lot from your posts.

Frank that sounds very reasonable and I agree with you there is nothing you can do with that but leave it alone

[No Censorship]

Well of course it is prideful to think we have special experiences that others don't, and I hate to have to tell you this but a very large portion of such stories are either invented or at least embellished out of a desire to get attention. This does not have to be deliberate dishonesty -- as the person tells the story they convince themselves of it too.

It's just as wrong to be dismissive of all experiences. Frankly, I don't trust many so-called "skeptics" to approach the paranormal in an honest manner. Some of their attempted debunking is as lame and ludicrous as the most outrageous claims of true believers. The "swamp gas" strategy just won't cut it these days.

[DONTEATUS]

Nobody really knows that there are not Alien Demons ! Sleep on that !

[No Censorship]

Well of course it is prideful to think we have special experiences that others don't, and I hate to have to tell you this but a very large portion of such stories are either invented or at least embellished out of a desire to get attention. This does not have to be deliberate dishonesty -- as the person tells the story they convince themselves of it too.

That attitude is the height of arrogance and ignorance. Some people indeed experience unique events that the rest of us don't. Who are we to say that *all* of them were just mistaken in their interpretations of their personal experiences? Now *that's* true hubris.

[psyche101]

That attitude is the height of arrogance and ignorance. Some people indeed experience unique events that the rest of us don't. Who are we to say that *all* of them were just mistaken in their interpretations of their personal experiences? Now *that's* true hubris.

By the same token, who is qualified to verify the supernatural? One thing we do have here is a common denominator, human error. One cannot base conclusions totally on a visual aspect, nor a belief.

Edited April 19, 2013 by psyche101

[ReaperS_ParadoX]

Welll I would think the supernatural would exibit the same kind of things in a lot of peoples minds, if suddenly my comforter started floating in the air would you call that supernatural?

[DONTEATUS]

Welll I would think the supernatural would exibit the same kind of things in a lot of peoples minds, if suddenly my comforter started floating in the air would you call that supernatural?

Unless you live in Texas then it could be a twister,or Explosion next door ! Just saying?

[No Censorship]

By the same token, who is qualified to verify the supernatural? One thing we do have here is a common denominator, human error. One cannot base conclusions totally on a visual aspect, nor a belief.

Some claims are valid. Some claims are invalid. It's not accurate or fair to say that all witnesses are dishonest or mistaken when you have no evidence to do so. Take each case on its own particular merits.

[ReaperS_ParadoX]

Unless you live in Texas then it could be a twister,or Explosion next door ! Just saying?

Do you live in Texas ?

[DBunker]

Some claims are valid. Some claims are invalid. It's not accurate or fair to say that all witnesses are dishonest or mistaken when you have no evidence to do so. Take each case on its own particular merits.

Most people do. But we all know that eyewitnesses are notorious for getting things wrong. And we also know that the internet is smack full of hoaxes and liers.

[No Censorship]

Most people do. But we all know that eyewitnesses are notorious for getting things wrong. And we also know that the internet is smack full of hoaxes and liers.

That's true. It's not fair to reflexively put all claimants in the same category, though.

[DONTEATUS]

Do you live in Texas ?

Ya cuddnt tell Man?

[ReaperS_ParadoX]

Ya cuddnt tell Man?

LOL

[psyche101]

Some claims are valid. Some claims are invalid. It's not accurate or fair to say that all witnesses are dishonest or mistaken when you have no evidence to do so. Take each case on its own particular merits.

Don't physics count?

It's even less accurate to accept an outcome as accurate when based upon a statistic too.

Has any supernatural example ever managed to leave the realm of the supernatural and make it's way into the real world? As such, how is it valid to state that some claims are indeed valid, when not one has ever come close to being proven as factual?

[mcrom901]

they seem to be more frightened than us.... link

[Frank Merton]

Some claims are valid. Some claims are invalid. It's not accurate or fair to say that all witnesses are dishonest or mistaken when you have no evidence to do so. Take each case on its own particular merits.

You make an absurdity sound so sensible. When people are claiming lala, the presumption that they are dishonest or mistaken is valid all the time. Absence of evidence to do so is not needed; evidence not to do so is essential.

[Frank Merton]

That's true. It's not fair to reflexively put all claimants in the same category, though.

It's perfectly fair to put all claimants of the same thing in the same category.

[psyche101]

Welll I would think the supernatural would exibit the same kind of things in a lot of peoples minds, if suddenly my comforter started floating in the air would you call that supernatural?

Not at all, not without a thorough investigation.

Some people might think something like this is supernatural. But it's not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBwiSWkjHlA

[psyche101]

they seem to be more frightened than us.... link

So that is where they found him huh?

[ReaperS_ParadoX]

Not at all, not without a thorough investigation.

Some people might think something like this is supernatural. But it's not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBwiSWkjHlA

So basically if I get the gist of what your saying, is that if it can't be measured scientifically it doesn't exist?

[No Censorship]

Don't physics count?

It's even less accurate to accept an outcome as accurate when based upon a statistic too.

Has any supernatural example ever managed to leave the realm of the supernatural and make it's way into the real world? As such, how is it valid to state that some claims are indeed valid, when not one has ever come close to being proven as factual?

Christianity comes to mind. Of course, you can't prove it with some experiment in a laboratory. As far as all paranormal claims, you and I will never agree on whether or not some of them are valid because we will never agree on acceptable criteria. That's why this exchange is turning into the thread version of a hamster wheel.

[No Censorship]

they seem to be more frightened than us.... link

Maybe they should be. *We* might seem demonic to *them*.

[No Censorship]

You make an absurdity sound so sensible. When people are claiming lala, the presumption that they are dishonest or mistaken is valid all the time. Absence of evidence to do so is not needed; evidence not to do so is essential.

No, it's simply unfair to reflexively put all claims in the same category. It's as wrongheaded as automatically believing all fantastic claims.