On 2005-01-14 16:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
"ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood
http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_b ... 50114.html
"
Yes, but here is the problem in a nutshell. You keep linking us to articles and suggesting since people are writing and talking about it, somehow it lends legitimacy to the UFO movement. It does not, it only further entrenches it into urban myth.
Take this article for example. A quick read would convince almost any reader that scientist/ physicists are debating the likelihood that UFO visitation has already occured. In fact the title is "scientists see high likelihood".
A "team of american scientists" were mentioned and the inspiration for this article and nothing was said about their credibility or their history in the UFO "movement". That burdens us, the rational reader, into doing a percursory investigation into who these people are. After all, we are looking for the truth, and not just articles that tend to support our notions...right?
First guy quoted is Bernard Haisch, truly a astronomer and scientist. A quick perusal of his website indicates he ONLY believes it possible and he has not evidence of visitation, nor does he ever proclaim it scientific fact.
"Could such things possibly be true? While I am intrigued by what I have learned over the years, I can't be absolutely certain....I propose that true skepticism is called for today: neither the gullible acceptance of true belief nor the closed-minded rejection of the scoffer masquerading as the skeptic."
http://www.ufoskeptic.org/Intersting take, and noted. All we want is some real evidence. He doesn't have it either.
Next we come to have mentioned
James Deardorff..a retired meteorologist...I won't go into this guy to much only to tell you that if you research him on the web, he claims to have proven all types of things such as Jesus lived in India and was Asian, reincarnation, and ancient visitations by UFOs. He is not a serious scientist.
Next we have Bruce Maccabee who has been a UFO researer since the 1960s with many many of his "findings" debunked thruout the years. Even as they are, he continues to present them as fact. Hardly an impartial scientist.
Next,Harold Puthoff, shamed from mainstream science many many years ago by publishing scientific papers professing to prove URi Geller to posess genuine magic powers. His controls and results were laughed out of mainstream science and upon proper controls set up on his experiments, failed miserably in peer review and repetition. Today he goes around on the UFO and astrophysical circuit proclaiming his belief in almost every metaphysical thing known to man. I actually read a book on him some 12 years ago.
here is a paper for you.....
http://www.baskeptics.org/blandonmay98.htmFinally, my point here is this. Not that you should automatically discredit these guys. That is an individual choice. It is what it is and they are who they are...the point is so; this article was written in a way to insinuate mainstream scientists were saying UFOs have likely been here. That is a far cry from the truth. This is the problem with these articles, you get a writer with a common belief, that UFO's have been here, then his/her article is written in a biased format to make you believe subtle things that aren't true, like in this case mainstream scientists support the thesis of this article. You keep reading these articles with various claims and no proof or verification, and the totally of them all put together makes you believe "something is going on".
Meanwhile, back on the reality front, there is not one shred of evidence, not one screw, bolt,crashed alien craft, verified video, nothing. But there are countless events held up as proof that don't undergo scrunity.
It leaves us here....nowhere. The burden of proof has not only not been met, it hasn't been broached.
I would love to see some evidence of alien visitors. It just unfortunately doesn't exist or hasn't been made public.
When you find it, please share it with me..it wil be an exciting event. IN the meanwhile, these articles belong in a periodical fitting to their true investigatorial background...The weekly world news perhaps?
GregFL
