How to deal with gullible believers?

[Fila]

On 16/12/2017 at 0:25 PM, XenoFish said:

Doesn't work that way. If you do not make an actual effort to research this subject, your wasting our time and your own. 

Who said I wasn't going to make an actual effort to research? I just said (to the point of spamming) that I am not going to form a conclusion based on a lack of evidence.

[XenoFish]

3 minutes ago, Fila said:

Again.., this is your opinion unless you add more substance to your posts. I can only see it as a weak assumption based on nothing.

Which is exactly what you've given us. Thread after thread, post after post of nothing.

Edited December 16, 2017 by XenoFish

[XenoFish]

Just now, Fila said:

Who said I wasn't going to make an actual effort to research? I just said (to the point of spamming) that I am not going to form a conclusion based on a lack of evidence.

Then you'll remain gullible.

[Fila]

On 16/12/2017 at 0:29 PM, XenoFish said:

Which is exactly what you've given use. Thread after thread, post after post of nothing.

Yes! You provide nothing to back up anything you say... exactly what you've given me.

I haven't had a chance to post much UFO stuff. My entire time has been this. What we are doing right now. Talking rubbish.., you accusing me of stuff.., and me having to calmly explain how its untrue.

Edited December 16, 2017 by Fila

[XenoFish]

Just now, Fila said:

I haven't had a chance. My entire time has been this. What we are doing right now. Talking rubbish.., you accusing me of stuff.., and me having to calmly explain how its untrue.

Then go and actually do something. Come back with your finding. You know make an effort. I know it can be scary when you have to form an opinion about something, but you'll do fine kid. 

[Fila]

On 16/12/2017 at 0:29 PM, XenoFish said:

Then you'll remain gullible.

Gullible: easily persuaded to believe something; credulous

Unbiased: showing no prejudice for or against something; impartial.

Very different.., and I cannot see how you link the 2 together.

[XenoFish]

4 minutes ago, Fila said:

Gullible: easily persuaded to believe something; credulous

Unbiased: showing no prejudice for or against something; impartial.

Very different.., and I cannot see how you link the 2 together.

You make it so easy. Now quit bothering me and go do your ufo research. 

Edited December 16, 2017 by XenoFish

[Dejarma]

9 minutes ago, Fila said:

Who said I wasn't going to make an actual effort to research? I just said (to the point of spamming) that I am not going to form a conclusion based on a lack of evidence.

OK seriously now:

Doesn't the lack of evidence form a conclusion for you? It has for me! There is no solid evidence= as in something science can work with.

Science can not work with stories= which in the real logical world I live in is the only evidence we all have!

So now what-- what would you suggest?

Edited December 16, 2017 by Dejarma

[Fila]

On 16/12/2017 at 0:34 PM, XenoFish said:

Then go and actually do something. Come back with your finding. You know make an effort. I know it can be scary when you have to form an opinion about something, but you'll do fine kid. 

I am not scared of anything . Fear is the mind killer.

Please stop ordering me around, telling me what to do.., and what not to do.

I am currently reading credible documents in the background as we are talking rubbish.., but I really do need to come back and defend myself at the same time. I cannot let you keep claiming I am something.., when its untrue.

[Fila]

On 16/12/2017 at 0:36 PM, XenoFish said:

You make it so easy. Now quit bothering me and go do your ufo research. 

I know I do. Its my strong point.

My presence and stance should not bother you. If it does.., its not my problem.

[Fila]

On 16/12/2017 at 0:38 PM, Dejarma said:

OK seriously now:

Doesn't the lack of evidence form a conclusion for you?

Wrong conclusions are usually formed by a lack of comprehensive analysis.

On 16/12/2017 at 0:38 PM, Dejarma said:

Science can not work with stories= which in the real logical world I live in is the only evidence we all have!

So now what-- what would you suggest?

I agree 100%. I am in the initial "research" stage.., gathering background information.

This is what I am attempting to discuss on this thread

http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/scientific_method.html

_________________________________________________________________________________

OBSERVATION is first step, so that you know how you want to go about your research.

This step could also be called "research." It is the first stage in understanding the problem.

After you decide on topic, and narrow it down to a specific question, you will need to research everything that you can find about it. You can collect information from your own experiences, books, the internet, or even smaller "unofficial" experiments.

For this stage of the Scientific Method, it's important to use as many sources as you can find. The more information you have on your topic, the better the design of your experiment is going to be, and the better your science fair project is going to be overall.

HYPOTHESIS is the answer you think you'll find. (You want me to form a conclusion instead. This is wrong)

PREDICTION is your specific belief about the scientific idea: (People are confusing this with conclusion)

EXPERIMENT is the tool that you invent to answer the question (No one is even attempting this)

CONCLUSION 

Edited December 16, 2017 by Fila

[Dejarma]

2 minutes ago, Fila said:

Wrong conclusions are usually formed by a lack of comprehensive analysis.

I've come to the conclusion after 45+ years of interest in this enigma that going by the evidence put forward so far:

it's highly unlikely that aliens are here on this planet...

Are you seriously suggesting that my personal conclusion is wrong because I haven't comprehensively analyzed the data over the years!?!?

So you are a believer then! At last you've told us all where you stand.. Well done == though you didn't mean to of course because you didn't think before typing..

But there you go- what do I know

[Merc14]

4 hours ago, Fila said:

The conjecture would be the 2nd part highlighted in bold (below).

Merc:  "Now, what would you call a person who, after be shown that the link they have put forward to back up their claim is fraudulent, denies it is a fraud based solely and their innate skill at judging a person''s character...over the internet no less (no personal contact)? "

That you don't see the problem here speaks volumes. 

Quote

Like cheque and identity fraud. Yes. I don't think people go to prison for "lying about seeing an alien" or whatever. There's different levels of fraud.

Fraud is fraud, that you are willing to draw distinctions based on your personal beliefs is also very telling.

Quote

And you can argue against the fraudulent persons evidence and reasoning.

If you can't argue that a fraud is a liar and win then you are pretty much a moron, delusional or incredibly gullible, with a touch of the moron and delusional mixed in.   I don't think you are that but maybe you can enlighten me.

Quote

 

I'm really not sure. I learnt I need to be careful around here because words can be taken so literally and precise, whereas I tend to use them loosely.

if I really think about it.., perhaps they believe the fraudulent person because they are easily persuaded. Gullible.

 

Spot on mate and yes, this is a tough crowd and we eat our own.  If I screw up then I get nailed as hard as anyone else, keeps you on your toes and you said you wanted to learn how to research so stand by, there are some very accomplished folks here that I am still far behind on the learning curve.  Honestly, one of the best aspects f this place is how much you can learn and no, you won't get away with anything.

Quote

But that could be relative to the individual, and the fraudulent claim.

A fraud is a fraud, no need to give them any amount of trust.

Quote

Perhaps they believe the fraudulant person because they did (what they think) is enough research (which is relative to the researcher, as everyone seems to think they personally have done enough research on a topic.., only to be proven wrong as I have shown many times myself with other members here)

Yet some people will ignore anything BUT their fraudulent "evidence".

Quote

Look.., I'll just say YES. So we can move onto me being right / wrong and you can tell me what your point is.

Right or wrong about what?  You have not stated a position here yet to challenge.

Edited December 16, 2017 by Merc14

[Dejarma]

30 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Rightor wrong about what?  You have not stated a position here yet to challenge.

yep agree

[GlitterRose]

On 12/14/2017 at 4:46 PM, XenoFish said:

They are so much fun to mess with though.

Don't I know it.

Apparently, I am now a Reptilian, so my avatar had to oblige.

[GlitterRose]

Trussssst in meeeeee......

jussssst in meeeee....

Edited December 16, 2017 by ChaosRose

[DebDandelion]

7 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Right, but you must also be open-minded to the possibility that they may very well rebut sensibly.

‘Closed-minded’ and ‘gullible’ are both bad. Fair and neutral open-minded reasoning is the way

The thing is papa...open minded Is much easier than fair and neutral for our own bias influences our thought patterns 

[Area201]

7 hours ago, seeder said:

 

provide a link to that image please

and once again,  read this

 

 

I read the historical reference from wiki on the greys, with some authors writing novels. Obviously those authors had there own encounters with the Greys!  jk 

There is a place in Armenia called Karahundj or "Armenia’s Stonehenge" http://www.armeniapedia.org/wiki/Karahunj that shows a rock on the right side of the pic I uploaded. This was actually a screenshot I took from a video I was watching. I looked further into it and could find source for the one on the right, the one on left I'm still looking into. 

Now we are getting into ancient aliens, there seemed to be depictions of similar type of being back then. There's some compelling ones shown in caves in Australia going back thousands of years. Granted, they could have been like the authors imagination(s) but it's a bit strange when you find similar looking depictions spanning thousands of years. 

Look if I was shown only these depictions shown on Ancient Aliens show I would not believe in such beings "Greys" existed. They are but one piece that helps form a conclusion. 

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 2017 by Area201

[Area201]

7 hours ago, Merc14 said:

The ancient aliens myth has been debunked and discussed here countless times but if you are truly interested you can consult this rather lengthy documentary on the subject.   Skip around to where they address your particular image or similar.  To dismiss all of man's creations and myths as monkey see monkey do is not only a weak argument and a lazy one, it is an insult to our species.  Same with the  body modification were because we saw aliens with long heads question offered by Fila.  If he cared enough about the subject he would research it yet he simply says "Prove it is not."   

Cranial deformation predates written history so we may never know but the least likely answer is ancient aliens with elongated skulls visited earth.  Why?  Because we have absolutely zero evidence of aliens ever visiting tis planet. The most likely answer, IMHO, is status based on children born with the deformation.  Likely a child born with this deformation would have been seen as touched by the Gods which leads to a desire to emulate that deformation with future children.   I have no proof this is the cause but what is more likely, my explanation or visiting, big headed aliens?

 

I agree with your assessment of the elongated skulls. We got into a discussion here on how the so called "greys" came about in popular culture and when they first came up. Member seeder argued that alleged contactees got the idea from authors and films, etc, they must have heard and seen which gave the idea to them. I argued the term "little green men" and other very negative man-eating depictions in popular movies is actually totally different visual than the Greys. So we have various influences. 

The concept of "ancient aliens" or some extraterrestrials visiting Earth in the past, mostly is based on the Sumarian tablets and depicts human-like ETs referred to by some as the "Annunaki" this is a separate discussion from the concept of Greys which obviously are uniquely different in visual whether you think they are myths, ETs or whatever is the positon. Then there is the theory of another human-like race sometimes referred to as "Nordics" due to their similar resemblance. This goes back to tales of lost continents and city states such as "Atlantis" going back hundreds of thousands of years. This is yet another theory about the possible origins of modern day homo sapiens, as an alternate explanation or at least complementary explanation of the "missing link" in human evolutionary fossil evidence recovered. That's another discussion on its own. 

All these present their own challenges - even evolutionary Darwin theory is challenged by lack of, or weak fossil record and has further competing arguments for intelligent design, along with ancient alien theory(ies). 

Edited December 16, 2017 by Area201

[papageorge1]

1 hour ago, DebDandelion said:

The thing is papa...open minded Is much easier than fair and neutral for our own bias influences our thought patterns 

your point?.......also....closed minded Is much easier than fair and neutral for our own bias influences our thought patterns 

[seeder]

11 minutes ago, Area201 said:

All these present their own challenges - even evolutionary Darwin theory is challenged by lack of, or weak fossil record and has further competing arguments for intelligent design, along with ancient alien theory(ies). 

 

Oh Boy you should stop now and REALLY think about what you are saying....we had two infamous threads here years ago...one got be about 700 pages before the mods closed it.....I was a key player in that convo and debunked just about every post made..

And Darwins theory is sound...we can SEE evolutionary change TODAY......

[Area201]

Just now, seeder said:

and debunked just about every post made..

Yeah okay. At least in your mind you debunked it. Do we switch to darwin theory debate now here? No, I think it's too much diversion from OPs original post.

[seeder]

Just now, Area201 said:

Yeah okay. At least in your mind you debunked it. Do we switch to darwin theory debate now here? No, I think it's too much diversion from OPs original post.

 

what dont you agree with about Darwin?

[seeder]

Its not a diversion from the OP....the OP is about gullible people on the subject of ET and UFO.......not one topic in particular...and Ancient Aliens, from now on referred to as the AA..... promote a lot of crap that GULLIBLE people fell for

[Area201]

4 minutes ago, seeder said:

Its not a diversion from the OP....the OP is about gullible people on the subject of ET and UFO.......not one topic in particular...and Ancient Aliens, from now on referred to as the AA..... promote a lot of crap that GULLIBLE people fell for

I think a lot of the AA material presented is crap. But not all. 

Edited December 16, 2017 by Area201