View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:15 pm Post subject: Two common themes of the UFO people |
|
|
In all my time on Usenet reading groups like alt.alien.visitor, I noticed two common themes among UFO believers there.
1) Every year the UFO community was seized by a rumor that some major event was about to happen. The government was about to come out with a major UFO related revelation or the saucer people were about reveal themselves. Nothing ever happened, of course. It's a darn good conspiracy that can suppress these major revelations every year. It seemed to me that the UFO community always needed some hope to keep them going.
2) Because the UFO community had no scientific evidence, they wanted science to redefine what constituted proof. For example, every legitimate science out there is held to the same standard of proof: publish your evidence in a reputable scientific journal, wait for others to repeat your findings, and then wait patiently for your ideas to filter through the scientific marketplace.
If your hypothesis isn't supported by any of the evidence, then you don't scream conspiracy. You either go "I guess I was wrong" or figure out why your experiment failed and try again.
The UFO types would argue vigorously since a) space aliens are very smart and don't make it easy to get the evidence on them b) there is such a huge, effective conspiracy against them, science should bend the rules and accept the paltry evidence they offered. So, if you were claiming to have found a new, highly elusive bacteria that can live in stomach acid and cause ulcers, then you work hard and offer good evidence. But if you were claiming to have found a new form of life that can build invisible interstellar space crafts, then you should be able to offer crap and expect science to go "ah yes, of course." |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
tomato

Joined: 31 Jan 2003 Location: I get so little foreign language experience, I must be in Koreatown, Los Angeles.
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
If I ever met a group of space aliens, my first question would be
"How did you get here?"
If there is any way to build a vehicle capable of interstellar flight,
I am sure the rocket scientists here would be interested.
Out of all the hundreds of persons claiming close encounters,
I wonder why none of them have ever come up with such a blueprint.
That would do us far more good than all these take-care-of-the-earth and love-each-other platitudes. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
I wonder why none of them have ever come up with such a blueprint. |
Not to mention something even easier to come by, like a spoon or a piece of cloth...anything from a UFO.
I have the sneaking suspicion that the ancestors of today's UFO fans were the ones sitting around the caves 15 or 20 thousand years ago dreaming up wacky religions. [/quote] |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Porter_Goss

Joined: 26 Mar 2006 Location: The Wrong Side of Right
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 5:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
I wonder why none of them have ever come up with such a blueprint. |
If someone throws me in their trunk, I won't be able to draw you a blueprint of their car's engine.
That being said... the UFO abductees are total nuts. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RACETRAITOR
Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 5:34 pm Post subject: Re: Two common themes of the UFO people |
|
|
Just wait until Creationists change the definition of science to include gibberish you read in 3000-year-old books.
Then maybe the UFO people will be able to bend the new rules. Then again the Bible specifically doesn't say that God created aliens, so I guess they're out of luck. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 9:59 pm Post subject: Re: Two common themes of the UFO people |
|
|
RACETRAITOR wrote: |
Just wait until Creationists change the definition of science to include gibberish you read in 3000-year-old books. |
Actually that's exactly what they're trying to do. Didn't Kansas redefine what science is so ID can be taught in schools? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|