Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

[ProfWag]

[Eteponge]

[ProfWag]

[Eteponge]

[ProfWag]

Let me ask a question. Should I believe testimony from the time of the incident or 30 years later? I know that if I suggest that ol' Jimbo's remarks are a bit...embeleshed...over the years then I'll get told I'm a typical skeptic, but seriously, which one should I believe? At the time of the incident or just before he goes public with his Facebook page?

[Eteponge]

[ciscop]

[ProfWag]

[Eteponge]

[Eteponge]

[ProfWag]

[Indigo Child]

[Eteponge]

[Eteponge]

Something I do find ironic though, Indigo Child, is how much you refer to Michio Kaku in support of things you say regarding string theory and other dimensions, and yet, he is a VERY STRONG supporter of Many-Worlds Interpretation and Time Travel. He's on my side on that, lol.

[Indigo Child]

Eteponge,

I am certainly a great admirer of Kaku, but that does not mean I accept eveything he supports.
I am not averse to the existence of parallel dimensions and timelines, in fact nothing is impossible
in this vast and magical universe, but what I am averse to is many world theory because of the absurdity
of how simply making a choice causes the universe to split into another copy. This was only proposed as
a way to explain Schrodinger's cat paradox where the wavefunction splits into a universe
where the cat is alive and one where the cat is dead. This was simply to get outside of the implications
of the copenhagen interpretation that consciousness is required to collapse the wavefunction. It is clear
if we observe the facts that the wavefunction only collapses on observation. The materialists refuse to
accept this conclusion so they tried every possible theory that would not require consciousness. The
many word interpretation was a desperate attempt.

However, there is another way the many world theory can be true, and that is rather than the universe
splitting into a copy of itself at every choice(which I still find absurd as you know) All universes and timelines
come into being from the beginning itself(big bang) In this model there is no original universe and copies which
branch of at each choice, but rather all timelines begin in parallel. However, this is highly speculative, and I can't
actually think of a good reason why this should be true. Until we do not actually have a solid theory can that can explain
this(not some abstract mathematical formulation) we cannot admit the existence of parallel universes and timelines
as part of our observable universe. Much less use it positively to explain UFO's.