Of course not. You can’t prove a negative. Equally, I can’t disprove that the universe came into existence 5 minutes ago, sneezed out of a intergalactic nose either. Nor can I show conclusive proof that Santa Clause doesn’t exist, or that the Easter Bunny isn’t hippity-hoppiting about having carnal knowledge of Elvis.
No, it’s not about proof, empirical or otherwise. You simply can’t prove a negative. The onus is on the person with extraordinary claims giving extraordinary proofs. Or, well, anything. Saying ‘read this book, it explains all’ isn’t even in the ball park.
I certainly agree with you there. This is the way to troll people and provoke the kinds of reactions he got, not the way to have a discussion. Personally, I doubt Ivan COULD have brought anything meaningful, regardless, but that’s based on what I’ve seen from him in the latest 9/11 thread. Of course, to be honest, I’ve yet to SEE anything remotely convincing on alien visitation, either in the past or today. Mind, I wish there WERE some. I wish they would find alien technology in some tomb from 10k years ago, or a crashed space craft with real alien bodies. sadly, that hasn’t happened.
Amazing that three threads ago (or so) the major consensus was he was trolling, he admitted it, and that he conceded you were intellectuals. WTF is this thread not shut down?
I will have you know SIIIIRRRRRH, for the record, I will say that, with regard to my being a muppet that this claim would be outlandish and, uh, fantastic. I’m just not the muppet type. Clearly. With this laundry list of character defects (drops huge scroll that rolls off into the distance detailing character defects), all the mistakes I’ve made, largely public. The truth is, however…the truth is that…I AM IRON BEAKER!
As for the rest of your presumptions about my decision-making processes, all I was saying was that if Dolan had admitted he was only in it for the money, his credibilty rating would be lessened considerably, but it wouldn’t change the nature of his reports unless he had invented them.
Not everyone. You could write a book about UFOs from a neutral, investigative point of view.
But if your book is about how millions of people have seen UFOs and that there’s just mountains of proof suppressed by the men in black and there’s this massive, massive conspiracy to keep everyone quiet, I’d say there’s about a 99.99999999999999999999999999999% chance you’re a crank.
You said that if you found out the guy was a charlatan, you’d totally reverse your opinion of the book. My conclusion from this is that the book does not feature any sort of evidence - if it did, the evidence could stand on its own. Therefore you are basing your acceptance of this book on the fact that someone you want to believe is weaving you a tale you want to hear. If there were actual evidence, it would be objectively verifiable without having to trust the author, and therefore his credibility wouldn’t be necesary to demonstrate his point. The fact that you’re trying to get us all to read this book as proof of UFOs as if it were some game changing amazing piece of evidence, and yet clearly by your own implicit admission lacks any evidence whatsoever, does not speak well of your ability to rationally evaluate information.
Okay, now here you are illustrating your own ignorance and unwillingness to even take a cursory look at this “evidence”. His focus is on the military and other relevant professional’s experiences and interests in this matter.
Here’s what I said.
It doesn’t exactly state what you are saying, does it? See, revise, not reverse. Bit of a difference.
I’ve seen plenty of supposed evidence for UFOs. It all fits the same pattern of low grade evidence designed for people who will accept anything to confirm the view they want to believe, following the exact same pattern of other woo.
I’d love for there to be actual evidence of UFOs because the idea if fascinating. But what are the odds that one obscure book has uncovered proof of the greatest discovery in mankind’s history and only you know about it? There are probably thousands of books about UFOs, all with the same shitty quality non-evidence. What makes this one so special? Your personal recommendation? You aren’t a person with any sort of credibility.
If you insist that I must read this book before I dismiss it, and another crank insists that I read their recommended book, and then another crank insists I read yet a third book - I would have to read every book ever written on the subject, consuming a significant portion of my life, to examine the evidence to your satisfaction.
You mean like fighter pilots, radar operators, military installation guards, and the like? Are you telling me that there is no-one of sufficient intelligence and judgement who takes this subject at all seriously?
