Discuss General Topics.
Interestingly enough, there was a wave of triangle UFO sightings in North Carolina in the late 1980s to early 1990s. (Which is where mine took place in 1991.)
And guess what I found, another Triangle UFO case in NC where the UFO looked *exactly* (100%) like the one I personally saw and described ...
http://www.examiner.com/x-2363-UFO-Exam ... iangle-UFO
"I think Eteponge's Blog is a pretty cool guy. eh debates Skeptics and doesnt afraid of anything."
Yes, exactly the same thing I saw twice, except both times, mine flew maybe 10 mph over my head. The first one I saw had a spotlight shining down from the center, moving back and forth over the houses as if it was looking for something. Keep in mind that the Aurora picture is an artists rendition, there are no official photographs but that doesn't mean a US Spy plane like the ones we saw doesn't exist. Of course, we could have seen an alien spacecraft also.
BTW, first sighting was in Indiana, circa 1991 and the second was in Wyoming, circa 1998.
My first sighting of an UFO took place way back in 8/69. Saw three that night in about five minutes.
Why are we talking UFOs in this thread?
"It is proper for you to doubt ... do not go upon report ... do not go upon tradition ... do not go upon hear-say." ~ Buddha
Good catch Canis.
Thank you for pointing that out.
Well, they were events that turned me into a believer, but after doing some research, I realized that there could very well be an explanation which turned me into a skeptic.
Sounds good anyway.
I guess if there's any more discussion, we can start a new thread...
The null hypothesis is not proven itself, that is why it is a hypothesis.
The null hypothesis is not science, it is basically an arbitrary human law, that
anomolos data must be statistically significant before an old hypothesis is thrown
out, else you simply reject the anomolus data - brush it under the carpet.
I separate scientific politics from science, and null hypothesis is one of those
things I reject. Translated, it simply means that if an accepted theory does not
work, rather than throwing away the theory, you away the data that does not work
This is not how science works. Science is about collecting empirical data and then best
explaining that data by testing various hypothesis. If a hypothesis does not work, then
you do away with it, and try one that does. The problem, however, is since the past century
science has been turned into a religion with human commandments, and as a result many scientific
discoveries have been brushed under the carpet just because the scientific religion does not like it.
Do you know that initially quantum theory was not accepted, and the anamolous data was rejected
for several decades, before the data became so strong that it could no longer be denied.
We can save ourselves a lot of time in science by getting rid of these arbitrary human rules like
null hypothesis, which are constantly used to deny empirical evidence that does not comply with
The fact is clear to anybody who sees a UFO. If they see a massive spaceship right above them,
a few metres above them, dart at impossible speed into the sky. They are not going to say, "Hang
on, this does not fit with the null hypothesis that it was an aeroplane, therefore I will pretend I did
not see that"
Regarding atheism. In atheism you are choosing to believe in god not existing, when he may well
exist. This is not reasonable. What would be reasonable is saying I don't know if god exists, so you
allow for the possibility of finding out. The atheist on the other has shut that possibility off.
The more data you have the more hypothesis you can eliminate, until you can be definitive. It is like
playing cluedo. You collect clues and then begin to eliminate possibilities that cannot be true and finally
you can conclude.
Clue 1. I saw a massive spaceship just a few metres above me, hovering in the air, and then it darted up into
the sky at an impossible speed.
1. It is a spaceship
2. The witness is lying
3. The witness is halluncinating
4. The witness is mistaken
Clue 2. Another unrelated person around the same time saw the spaceship, hovering in the air and darting into the sky
at an impossible speed.
Clue 3. A radar report confirms an object in the location the witnesses saw the spaceship, moving at an impossible speed
Eliminate 2, 4
Clue 4. A pilot confirms that he saw an object that in the location the witnesses saw the spaceship, and the radar reported
the spaceship fly past it, causing EMF effects on the plane.
Do you accept that 1 is the best conclusion here? If not, why?
By the way I have just come the conclusion that skeptics should play Cludeo
That is the definition of the null hypothesis. You need the null hypothesis along with an alternative hypothesis to test against.
Frankly I've not ever since I've joined this forum seen you use the null hypothesis. What I have seen is you state such and such has been proven.
Is it a spaceship? What about, is it a spaceship with humans, an experimental spaceship without humans, or is it from another planet?
The rest of what you said does not warrant comment.
This is where good ole's occams razor comes in.
The simplest explanation that fits the data is good.
The simplest explanation is it is a craft that does not belong to us
and defies all our laws of physics, it therefore is not a human craft.
All other explanations require multiplication of variables. If it a secret governmental craft,
then why spend billions on obsolete techology like rocketry and still use obsolete science.
The reports of these UFO's go back several decades, when we had propeller-driven planes.
If they really belonged to us, why did we keep them secret all this time, and why not use them
The explanation does not fly(pun intended)
Sooooooo you're saying the simplest explanation is that an alien spacecraft that would have to travel light-years or through some unknown dimension to reach us, evade our radar, and remain mostly undetectable but to a few people rather than it being a US aircraft from Skunkworks that has a proven history of hiding planes? Uhhhhhhhh, yea, you go with that.
Your last paragraph/question would take a day to answer, but I'll give you the abbreviated version. There were a few UFOs spotted before 1947, but that is when the sightings became more commonplace. Jets had already been invented by then, but they were a strange sight to many. Over the next half century, planes that were kept hidden since then include the A-12, SR71, the Aurora, the U2, the RQ3, the F117, and the B2 to name just a few.
The simplest explanation, that fits the data
Come on face it, you cannot deny the ETH given the data,
so you deny the data.
All of the secret US planes you mentioned are consistent with
our human physics and they do not match the descriptions given
of UFO's and their flight.
You really need to break this habit of forcing explanations that
do not fit.
Believing in UFOs doesn't do much harm to society so if you'd like to believe that without using critical thinking skills, then by all means, believe away.
The point here is, it is you are who are not using critical thinking by forcing explanations that do not fit.
On the contrary, all of us who are are arriving at the conclusions that UFO's exist, are doing so by looking at
the data and accepting the simplest explanation that fits the data.
Like I said, face it, you cannot deny the ETH given the data, so you deny the data.
You're the believer here, not us.
The data fits perfectly with the UFOs I saw being American made aircraft. The data also fits perfectly with many of the triangular shaped UFOs seen in the past 20 years or so. The simplest explanation is that the triangular shaped UFOs are American made aircraft. In retrospect, it's not only the simplest, it's the right one.
You are a believer in UFOs. Again, that's fine. You are denying the simple piece of information that there are planes you are unaware of. Sorry 'bout that. You are attempting to convince readers that airplanes (that fit the description no-less) are not as simple of an answer as spacecraft from far-away places that would have had to travel at speeds and dimensions that are quite unlikely. As I said somewhere else, yea, you go with that.
I used to live in England. The Mildenhall Air Fete (when I was there) would attract hundreds of thousands of people because of two things: American beer and strange planes. It has since quit putting on an annual show, but should it come back, perhaps you should go. You might learn something.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests