Keosen Posted July 28, 2011 #76 Share Posted July 28, 2011 (edited) One distinct difference between pathological skepticism (attitude-based skepticism) and true skepticism, is that pseudo-skeptics will take refuge in arbitrary attitudes i.e. sit on their hands and demand you do work for them. Haha i love it Typical response from someone who has nothing to say beside a random image. Is the rest of your 2,770 posts in the same attitude? Well i guess i'll dive to your level and answer likewise Here is a unicorn Edited July 28, 2011 by Keosen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quillius Posted July 28, 2011 #77 Share Posted July 28, 2011 Typical response from someone who has nothing to say beside a random image. Is the rest of your 2,770 posts in the same attitude? Well i guess i'll dive to your level and answer likewise Here is a unicorn Fair to assume you think those images are faked then (the ones posted by SolarP) ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keosen Posted July 28, 2011 #78 Share Posted July 28, 2011 No i asked what they suppose to be and what is their source because i'm seeing them for first time and i don;t even know the "story" behind them. But of course it would be far more logical to wrote "haha take this NASA got ya while trying to cover the alienz" instead of questioning.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quillius Posted July 28, 2011 #79 Share Posted July 28, 2011 No i asked what they suppose to be and what is their source because i'm seeing them for first time and i don;t even know the "story" behind them. But of course it would be far more logical to wrote "haha take this NASA got ya while trying to cover the alienz" instead of questioning.... ok, however if you post an obviously fake picture, I do not see how this is similar to SP's post. I am sure I have seen these images floating around before but cant remember the official explanation, or even if it has been debunked. Hopefully someone will soon explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randym23 Posted July 28, 2011 #80 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I'm not saying it can't be a hoax, but what verification does he have of this. People confess to murders that they never committed just to get attention, so how do we know that he's not doing the same. Does he actually have the model to prove it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentalcase Posted July 28, 2011 #81 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I never bought into the triangle UFOs for some reason. I would think they are less aerodynamic? I would love to see something offical with thos NASA pics as well SP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolarPlexus Posted July 28, 2011 #82 Share Posted July 28, 2011 (edited) ok, however if you post an obviously fake picture, I do not see how this is similar to SP's post. I am sure I have seen these images floating around before but cant remember the official explanation, or even if it has been debunked. Hopefully someone will soon explain. I already said the two pictures are hosted on NASA servers... more specifically the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. AFAIK the pictures are from one of many STS missions... Keosen acts like he is a scientific reviewer of evidence... im not his dog to fetch data for him.... if you cant do right click properties then you are just here to project your pathological attitude Edited July 28, 2011 by SolarPlexus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentalcase Posted July 28, 2011 #83 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I already said the two pictures are hosted on NASA servers... more specifically the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. AFAIK the pictures are from one of many STS missions... Keosen acts like he is a scientific reviewer of evidence... im not his dog to fetch data for him.... if you cant do right click properties then you are just here to project your pathological attitude I don't blame you SP. Attitudes speak for themselves sometimes. Interesting data comes from these STS missions. Some have been debunked, others are still unexplained, even by NASA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted July 28, 2011 #84 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I never bought into the triangle UFOs for some reason. I would think they are less aerodynamic? I would love to see something offical with thos NASA pics as well SP. I thought it was to travel faster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike G Posted July 28, 2011 #85 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I don't understand why people think that this was intended to debunk the whole wave in the first place. Clearly it is just about the photo. ^ Attributable to a lack of critical thinking/reading skills, which really pervades much of society today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13thDarkOne Posted July 28, 2011 #86 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I believe in aliens simply becuase the universe is too big. And if aliens are watching us or whatever one thing is certain They don't have to worry about hiding them selfs in a world full of closed minded people. I bet if a real one would walk on the streets in a big city like NY everyone would look in awe and some film it and later it would be shown how it isn't real and a hoax and thus considering it debunked. Even though it was very real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badeskov Posted July 28, 2011 #87 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I already said the two pictures are hosted on NASA servers... more specifically the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. AFAIK the pictures are from one of many STS missions... Keosen acts like he is a scientific reviewer of evidence... im not his dog to fetch data for him.... if you cant do right click properties then you are just here to project your pathological attitude I am sorry SP, but you are completely wrong. You are the one to fetch the data, which is not his, but yours. If you want to use images (or other outside sources), it is indeed your job to source them in detail. Not anybody's else's job. If you can't do that, well, then your images are completely irrelevant to your argument and will be dismissed. And, no, some vague reference to NASA servers and JPL, which hosts millions of images is not referencing at all. Unfortunately it is this intellectual laziness that permeates this whole field and makes it the freak show it really is. Cheers, Badeskov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazzard Posted July 28, 2011 #88 Share Posted July 28, 2011 (edited) Nah, it's this one: I cant even begin to imagine how people (Skyeagle) who have been pushing this picture as the "photo of the century" are taking this... Made of polystyrene in a matter of hours!!? But then again, he is probably telling himself that the hoaxer is just another one of those nasty MIB desinformation agents. Edited July 28, 2011 by Hazzard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike G Posted July 28, 2011 #89 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I believe in aliens simply becuase the universe is too big. I always wonder about this perspective. In light of absolutely zero evidence, this faith-based notion persists. In the end, they are either out there or they are not. Whether the universe extends for eternity or ends at our own solar system is irrelevant. I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badeskov Posted July 28, 2011 #90 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I already said the two pictures are hosted on NASA servers... more specifically the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. AFAIK the pictures are from one of many STS missions... Keosen acts like he is a scientific reviewer of evidence... im not his dog to fetch data for him.... if you cant do right click properties then you are just here to project your pathological attitude OK, now I went ahead and did your work for you anyways. Here is the actual image page with all the associated data and this is what it says as a description a little down the page: Identification Mission: STS61C Roll: 31 Frame: 3 Mission ID on the Film or image: 61-C Country or Geographic Name: ATLANTIC OCEAN Features: SPACE DEBRIS Center Point Latitude: Center Point Longitude: (Negative numbers indicate south for latitude and west for longitude) Stereo: No (Yes indicates there is an adjacent picture of the same area) ONC Map ID: JNC Map ID: Guess you didn't even bother to look at that. Did you just copy the link from some believer website without any critical assessment of what you were looking at? It is identified as space debris, which doesn't exactly come as a surprise as LEO is abundant with it. Cheers, Badeskov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyeagle409 Posted July 29, 2011 #91 Share Posted July 29, 2011 I cant even begin to imagine how people (Skyeagle) who have been pushing this picture as the "photo of the century" are taking this... Made of polystyrene in a matter of hours!!? But then again, he is probably telling himself that the hoaxer is just another one of those nasty MIB desinformation agents. I sure have, in much the same way as those who were pushing Kevin Corde's hoaxed storied, where he claimed that he hoaxed the Rendlesham incident of 1980. Eventually, he admitted that his hoaxed story was false, and the rest is now history. Let's sit this one out as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keosen Posted July 29, 2011 #92 Share Posted July 29, 2011 (edited) Haha they say it's a hoax but look what's hosted on NASA servers... OK, now I went ahead and did your work for you anyways. Here is the actual image page with all the associated data and this is what it says as a description a little down the page: Guess you didn't even bother to look at that. Did you just copy the link from some believer website without any critical assessment of what you were looking at? It is identified as space debris, which doesn't exactly come as a surprise as LEO is abundant with it. Cheers, Badeskov See that's what i'm talking about. Net is full of this, random images with no background,no story,no evidence, a believer just post a link and expect everybody too believe at it. Some people should really stop to be that naive, your theory can be summed up in the below lines. - NASA is working with USA government to hide the truth that aliens is already on Earth. - NASA spends billions of dollars for dozen of missions to discover at least a single microbe in our solar system but yeah we got alien's spacecraft in Area-51 bunkers. - NASA got some of the brightest minds working for her and while they could send a spaceship to the edge of the solar system they cannot remove an image from their servers that clearly show an alien spaceship. Sense...the above makes none. There is a lot of unexplained pictures out there, just don't accept any single stupid image as a proof that would satisfy your thirst. And i repeat once more unexplained does not mean explained by aliens. Edited July 29, 2011 by Keosen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazzard Posted July 29, 2011 #93 Share Posted July 29, 2011 (edited) I sure have, in much the same way as those who were pushing Kevin Corde's hoaxed storied, where he claimed that he hoaxed the Rendlesham incident of 1980. Eventually, he admitted that his hoaxed story was false, and the rest is now history. Let's sit this one out as well. So, what would it take for you to understand that one or more of these cases where/could have been hoaxed, where lies or misinterpretations of something mundane? Edited July 29, 2011 by Hazzard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolarPlexus Posted July 29, 2011 #94 Share Posted July 29, 2011 I am sorry SP, but you are completely wrong. You are the one to fetch the data, which is not his, but yours. I would agree - if this was an academic debate. Burden of proof and all that. But this is just a forum about the unexplained and you people are taking it way too serious Unfortunately it is this intellectual laziness that permeates this whole field and makes it the freak show it really is. Irony of the century .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolarPlexus Posted July 29, 2011 #95 Share Posted July 29, 2011 (edited) OK, now I went ahead and did your work for you anyways. Guess you didn't even bother to look at that. No need to be so assumptive, Im very familiar with the images. Ive found them on NASA JPL server by typing in random numbers in the STS photo url... and I know how NASA classified them Cheers, Badeskov Cheers, Solar Edited July 29, 2011 by SolarPlexus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keosen Posted July 29, 2011 #96 Share Posted July 29, 2011 Haha they say it's a hoax but look what's hosted on NASA servers... Im very familiar with the images. Ive brought them up many times before years ago and I know how NASA clasifies them ("space debris"). When you decide what your opinion finally is let us know because all i see is you contradicting yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolarPlexus Posted July 29, 2011 #97 Share Posted July 29, 2011 Not sure what you mean. Where is the contradiction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keosen Posted July 29, 2011 #98 Share Posted July 29, 2011 (edited) Not sure what you mean. Where is the contradiction? You posted the photos by adding an ironic comment "Haha they say it's a hoax but look what's hosted on NASA servers..." obviously implying that NASA got triangular UFO photos on their servers (which yeah makes a lot of sense) and then you admitting that you already knew that his is classified as space debri. So you claim that NASA has UFO photos on their servers by accident and at the same time that you know this photos are space debris. Definition of contradiction Edited July 29, 2011 by Keosen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolarPlexus Posted July 29, 2011 #99 Share Posted July 29, 2011 obviously implying that NASA got triangular UFO photos on their servers (which yeah makes a lot of sense) and then you admitting that you already knew that his is classified as space debri. This is a question of whether you believe NASA, not contradiction. I dont believe NASA. They can classify it as a space donut but im still gonna think for myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazzard Posted July 29, 2011 #100 Share Posted July 29, 2011 This is a question of whether you believe NASA, not contradiction. I dont believe NASA. They can classify it as a space donut but im still gonna think for myself Same old nonsense from the conspiracy nuts. Tell me, why would you not trust NASA when it comes to reporting news about space exploration? *Hint* They arent the only space agency on the planet you know!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now