The overwhelming majority of the world has lived since the beginning of time without ever being able to explain anything, having never heard of the scientific method.

WAIT !!!! HOLD THE PHONE !!!

When we were discussing the science found in the Qur'an, the argument was that they had lots and lots of scientific knowledge back then, but now that we aren't discussing the Qur'an, we make statements such as these?

So much for consistency... ;)

The overwhelming majority of the world has lived since the beginning of time without ever being able to explain anything, having never heard of the scientific method.

WAIT !!!! HOLD THE PHONE !!!

When we were discussing the science found in the Qur'an, the argument was that they had lots and lots of scientific knowledge back then, but now that we aren't discussing the Qur'an, we make statements such as these?

So much for consistency... ;)

It's called blind arrogance. Consistency has nothing to do with it.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Mindset is not a process for problem solving i agree, but it certainly has an impact on the outcome as skeptics have proven may times that they cannot be objective (or even close) and do not apply scientific process.

Sure. For some skeptics that is true. Overwhelmingly it is not, as any peer reviewed study shows.

The other factor is laziness. Both skeptic and believer could not be bothered to get of their back-side and do some homework and hence just simply concede one side belief or disbelief with equally bogus explanations.

When this happens, the science community is grasping at claws but so are the believers.

But again, the entire scientific community isn't grasping at straws. Just the few that are no different than believers.

Now how does this picture look if the "believers" (lets say believers are people who don't buy the ICE CRYSTAL or equivalent explanation) provide significantly BETTER evidence or theories than the 'scientific community'???

I've asked KM this a number of times. How would you know? What method would you use to determine which explanation is most effective? How does one decide which ideas are "significantly BETTER evidence or theories?"

Yet the 'sceintific community' still stick to their guns - ICE CRYSTALS and will not budge!? Stubborn, blind, dogmatic, fools (are the words that come to mind).

This is the failure of the 'scientific community' and scientific process viewed from either side.

I would say that the vast vast majority of the scientific community has no opinion whatsoever about those videos. The few that might may have no explanation and they have no emotional attachment to whatever the explanation turns out to be. My personal opinion is that the videos aren't of high enough quality to come to any real conclusion. Were I to speculate on what is more likely, let's just say that alien hot-rodders wouldn't be part it.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

Unfortunately for you and your arrogance, I am not going to concede anything. What I am going to do is not aknowledge your presence any further.

More empty rhetoric, eh? Remember this: "What I AM going to do from this point on is completely ignore any further postings from you Rush."

I will not sit and read posts from some pompous, arrogant fool who decides that it would be prudent to insult my intelligence with a completely unnecessary remark.

You again, read far more than what is there. You are creating a picture in your head that is not representative of my intent. Had you actually addressed the point of the discussion none of this extraneous Barbra Streisand would be necessary.

Read back to the very FIRST post I put in this thread and you will definitely see the words " light hearted discussion ". There is NOTHING at all light hearted in the posts that Rush is putting forth. There is nothing more than sheer, obnoxious arrogance.

I'm not posting light-heartedly--it's just a discussion. There's no arrogance, I'm presenting arguments--nothing more.

So, how about back to this:
Here is the statement: Ya know.....(sic) one of the things that bothers me is the fact that Relativity is accepted as stone fact, when in actuality, there are no real ways ( with the tools available today )(sic) to PROVE it. It remains, to this day, a THEORY.

Here is the counter: Special and General Relativity have more experimental proof between them than likely any other idea in all of human history. Some examples: Particle accelerators, CERN, Gravity Probe B, Argonne National Laboratory and Fermilab.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

WAIT !!!! HOLD THE PHONE !!!

When we were discussing the science found in the Qur'an, the argument was that they had lots and lots of scientific knowledge back then, but now that we aren't discussing the Qur'an, we make statements such as these?

So much for consistency... ;)

Who is "we?" This isn't some collective entity having a discussion.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

You simply don't seem to get it Rush. The term " light hearted " was in reference to the SPIRIT of the thread. You know...FUNNY....HUMOROUS. You are taking yourself FAR too seriously.

I created THIS thread to deal with the LIGHTER side of the issues at hand. Look back at the first post. I said that the more scientific discussions of things would have it's OWN HOME in the OTHER thread I created.

I guess it's MY turn to ask if YOU can read.

As far as John's " echo chamber " comment....YES....that is exactly why I created this thread. To give people a place to come and discuss the things they want to discuss and not have to worry about the arrogance that has managed to rear it's ugly head once again.

Maybe I should just create one that says " Crackpots Welcome...Who Needs Science? " Maybe then the arrogant and utterly close minded would stay the heck out of it and let some of the conspiracy theorists have a little fun for a change.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

4. Do not flame your fellow forumite.

---

4. Do not flame your fellow forumite.

Who's flaming? That seems to be a rather vague rule....lol.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

[quote]Mindset is not a process for problem solving i agree, but it certainly has an impact on the outcome as skeptics have proven may times that they cannot be objective (or even close) and do not apply scientific process.

Sure. For some skeptics that is true. Overwhelmingly it is not, as any peer reviewed study shows.

This would be relevant if any scientific explanation and peer review was actually done in the many unexplained cases of UFO phenomena. I think you are missing the point, it comes down to this

"If you arern't interested (scientist) in doing a proper job then you can just bugger-off." (this is not directed at you Rush).

However some kinds of UFO phenomena are very difficult to test with science, due to the requirement of "experimental evidence", "repeat observable behavior". Although these two items are very relevant to experimental process, not all phenomena fits into this nice 'framework'.

Too bad for this kind of phenomena, and humanity... science may NEVER explain it. Perhaps science needs to be 'adjusted'.

The other factor is laziness. Both skeptic and believer could not be bothered to get of their back-side and do some homework and hence just simply concede one side belief or disbelief with equally bogus explanations.

When this happens, the science community is grasping at claws but so are the believers.

But again, the entire scientific community isn't grasping at straws. Just the few that are no different than believers.

I disagree. Unless it is pointed out in b/w that the opinion expressed is the personal opinion of this particular scientist, professor or whatever, it is implied that he speaks for the field of science (whatever discipline).

The media have a habit of forgetting the importance of this and just spew out opinions willy nilly. How is this perceived by the average person??

Now how does this picture look if the "believers" (lets say believers are people who don't buy the ICE CRYSTAL or equivalent explanation) provide significantly BETTER evidence or theories than the 'scientific community'???

I've asked KM this a number of times. How would you know? What method would you use to determine which explanation is most effective? How does one decide which ideas are "significantly BETTER evidence or theories?"

I have already explained in my earlier post how one theory succeeds another.

If you look at the 'ice crystal' theory there is not a shred of evidence, physical, experimental or other. How in gods name could NASA make this statement, its embarrasing (for NASA) and it only proves that they (NASA) think the general public are a bunch of imbeciles.

Yet the 'scientific community' still stick to their guns - ICE CRYSTALS and will not budge!? Stubborn, blind, dogmatic, fools (are the words that come to mind).

This is the failure of the 'scientific community' and scientific process viewed from either side.

I would say that the vast vast majority of the scientific community has no opinion whatsoever about those videos. The few that might may have no explanation and they have no emotional attachment to whatever the explanation turns out to be. My personal opinion is that the videos aren't of high enough quality to come to any real conclusion. Were I to speculate on what is more likely, let's just say that alien hot-rodders wouldn't be part it.

For a true sceptic that can practice scepticism with true impartiality it is never about emotions, its about data. For the minorty of scientists (as you say) that do have an opinion they should simply say "we are not really sure", we need more data. But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooo they shout "ice crystals! ice crystals.... yes..yes...!!

There must be some special 'mental indoctrination' to become a scientist whereby the statement "I don't know" is removed from their 'sphere or reasoning' equivalent to a religious zealots "Divine Word".

---

Belief gets in the way of learning

There must be some special 'mental indoctrination' to become a scientist whereby the statement "I don't know" is removed from their 'sphere or reasoning' equivalent to a religious zealots "Divine Word".

It really DOES sound like that doesn't it? They can't possibly NOT know. They HAVE to come up with SOMETHING.

I must admit though, I have actually heard a couple of scientists admit that they needed more data. Just not in ANY UFO case. They will say that they need more data on why the Yellow Bellied Bungle Bug of New Ginea ( facetious name ) excretes something oddly like honey from it's front legs, but as far as saying that in a UFO case?????? Heaven ( if there is one ) FORBID.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

This would be relevant if any scientific explanation and peer review was actually done in the many unexplained cases of UFO phenomena. I think you are missing the point, it comes down to this

"If you arern't interested (scientist) in doing a proper job then you can just bugger-off." (this is not directed at you Rush).

I understand, no worries. 8^]

I have no real problem with this. However, what happens when people do do a proper job? Take for example the McMinnville photos. Are the McMinnville pics legit because Bruce Maccabee says they are? Or are they fake because Phil Klass says they are? Which position do they physically prove: the hoax, or the EBEs? How would you know? Are Maccabee's errors in reporting exactly what he was told on tape by eyewitnesses sufficient to cast doubt on his re-telling of the story? What about witnesses (Mrs. Trent) that change their stories significantly over a month between two interviews-- telling stories that contradict each other? If Maccabee is making simple errors such as these, what others is he making? Does it make sense the he didn't bother to track down other living witnesses before they died? Oops? Is it more likely that there were EBEs, or that the Trent's were skrewing around and didn't wish to be called liars or hoaxers? Do we take into account that the negatives of the first physical proof of EBEs were found under the couch where the children had been playing with them? I mean, if I had that kind of proof, as a child's plaything (smudgie, smudgie) under a couch would not be my first choice for storage.

Since so many of these things can be easily explained by so many different aspects of the human condition, generally they really aren't worth some expensive, peer-reviewed study.

However some kinds of UFO phenomena are very difficult to test with science, due to the requirement of "experimental evidence", "repeat observable behavior". Although these two items are very relevant to experimental process, not all phenomena fits into this nice 'framework'.

Too bad for this kind of phenomena, and humanity... science may NEVER explain it. Perhaps science needs to be 'adjusted'.

I've asked KM this a number of times. How would you adjust it? What method would you use to determine which explanation is most effective? Say, for example, you came up with some way to adjust the scientific method. 1) That would likely be a philosophical change, and 2) by definition it would become the scientific method. There would still be claims made that the new method could not "explain"--simply because so often there simply isn't enough information. That, however, does not mean it must be extra-terrestrial in origin.

I disagree. Unless it is pointed out in b/w that the opinion expressed is the personal opinion of this particular scientist, professor or whatever, it is implied that he speaks for the field of science (whatever discipline).

The media have a habit of forgetting the importance of this and just spew out opinions willy nilly. How is this perceived by the average person??

Eh, your problem here then is with the popular media.

I have already explained in my earlier post how one theory succeeds another.[/quote}
I'm sorry, I missed it. But if one idea succeeds another, do you think that happens because of dogma or reason?

[quote]If you look at the 'ice crystal' theory there is not a shred of evidence, physical, experimental or other. How in gods name could NASA make this statement, its embarrasing (for NASA) and it only proves that they (NASA) think the general public are a bunch of imbeciles.

Any scientists at NASA that studied those films may have the evidence that it is ice crystals. That seems most likely to me. But rest assured, they don't consider it embarrassing, frankly, they don't care what believers think, any more than they care about Dick Hoaxland's ideas about Horus.

For a true sceptic that can practice scepticism with true impartiality it is never about emotions, its about data. For the minorty of scientists (as you say) that do have an opinion they should simply say "we are not really sure", we need more data. But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooo they shout "ice crystals! ice crystals.... yes..yes...!!

There must be some special 'mental indoctrination' to become a scientist whereby the statement "I don't know" is removed from their 'sphere or reasoning' equivalent to a religious zealots "Divine Word".

This is just human nature, regardless of the topic at hand.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

I've asked KM this a number of times. How would you adjust it? What method would you use to determine which explanation is most effective? Say, for example, you came up with some way to adjust the scientific method. 1) That would likely be a philosophical change, and 2) by definition it would become the scientific method. There would still be claims made that the new method could not "explain"--simply because so often there simply isn't enough information. That, however, does not mean it must be extra-terrestrial in origin.

Ok Rush, in this particular case I am not trying to be argumentive. Take them as you will. I am simply trying to clarify my perspective a bit.

How would you adjust it?

That is something that I honestly do not know. I am not a scientist.

What method would you use to determine which explanation is most effective?

Again, not being a scientist, I can't say exactly what the proper method would be.

Say, for example, you came up with some way to adjust the scientific method. 1) That would likely be a philosophical change, and 2) by definition it would become the scientific method.

This is where I ahve the biggest problem with things. There is no reason that someone with a different philosophy shouldn't suggest a refinement of the method, as long as it would be a reasonable refinement. However, it sems that the scientific community would have a knee jerk reaction of doing everything it could to debase and completely disregard any change in method based on philosophy. Saying, in effect, that the method is perfect the way it is and doesn't NEED any changes.

There would still be claims made that the new method could not "explain"--simply because so often there simply isn't enough information. That, however, does not mean it must be extra-terrestrial in origin.

This is correct. There WOULD still be claims of things that weren't explained. And those claims would also be correct. There simply ISN'T enough information in a lot of the cases. However, " not enough information available " is something that isn't heard from the scientific community when it comes to UFO cases. There always seems to be enough information for them to throw out some " explanation " . Someone using the same information comes up with a phenomena, someone else comes up with ball lightning.

I believe you are correct in saying that it basically boils down to the philosophy of the person doing the investigating. But that, in and of itself, is what presents the main problem in investigating any " unexplained " phenomena.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

I though science wasn't supposed to be part of this thread? What are the people in here referring to science for?
You either apply science fully or you don't.
Why else haven't I said anything in here?

---

Never Forget a Friend. Or an Enemy.

I though science wasn't supposed to be part of this thread? What are the people in here referring to science for?
You either apply science fully or you don't.
Why else haven't I said anything in here?

It wasn't SUPPOSED to be. This was supposed to be an " echo chamber " as John put it a while ago. I guess some people chose to ignore the opening post.

I created this thread to be a place where we didn't HAVE to apply science. Somewhere for people to come and be frivolous ( sp ). Where some could play the part of " conspiracy theorist ". Some can't deal with that.

I don't know why you haven't said anything Chuck.....lol Maybe you don't want to discuss these topics without having science involved??

I don't know....maybe it was pointless to create this thread since some don't feel that the setup of it wasn't proper.

Maybe things will turn in favor of the spirit of the thread....maybe not.

Anyway, once again I am going to state that scientific discussion of the topics brought up in this thread has it's own home.

If someone insists on speaking to the science of things, please do so in the thread Myth? Legend? Science?

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Well, no, I don't see the point in shutting down my brain to discuss something! Why would I want to do that?

---

Never Forget a Friend. Or an Enemy.

Well, no, I don't see the point in shutting down my brain to discuss something! Why would I want to do that?

Oh for crying out loud. Enough is enough. I have had it with all the crap people spew in these threads about how we are all ( except for THEM ) mindless twits who have a severly distorted philosophy on life. if you have no interest in what is being talked about here, then DON'T COME HERE. SOME of us want to be able to mess around with different ideas without all the psychobabble.

I placed this thread here for the folks who MAY believe in things that others don't. Either deal with it or go away.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Well now. This thread has been created as a companion to the Myth, Legend, Science thread. I want to keep things light hearted here. Any talk about a persons Philosophy or mode of thinking, or statements on why science says that none of the things talked about here are real, will be directed to the other thread.

This is a place where ANYONE can speak about experiences they have had with the unknown...something they have read about and find interesting...anything that has to do with Unexplained Phenomena.

Bigfoot...Nessie...Electronic Voice Phenomena...Ghosts. All are within the realms of this thread.

We can have serious discussions about these and other things, but it has to remain civil.

Again...the science of things is important, but it now has it's own home. I will be monitoring both threads so that the other just doesn't fade away, unless it is dictated by a lack of postings, or otherwise indicated by the folks who frequent it.

Let's all have fun with this one folks.

Now.....I REPOSTED this for the benefit of those of you who have decided to either completely ignore it or just didn't happen to see it in the first place. If you want to talk about philosophy, fine, do it in the OTHER THREAD. THAT is what it is there for. I did not make THIS thread to be a TWIN of the other. THIS thread is an ALTERNATIVE for the people who wanted to get away from all the arrogance of those who feel we are inferior for not thinking the way they do.

If you can't deal with the thought that people may not accept EVERYTHING out of hand just because you think they should...or because " science " says so...GO TO THE OTHER THREAD....this is NOT the place for you.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Well, no, I don't see the point in shutting down my brain to discuss something! Why would I want to do that?

Because it needs recharged? ;)

Well my opening comments are..
I do science as a life, I can see chucks point.. {even though I know he's just stirring for the hell of it}
I take concepts and play with them, or mold them or sometimes just punch them silly to bend them around and get a result, its science aimed at making something work...sometimes delicate and accurate... sometimes rough and ready..


I used to have a realy realy hard time dealing with "airy-fairy" stuff, it just didnt jell........... until one day I had a problem that had been stopping me for 6 months... no progress... no way of gaining ground. and then someone siad something to me that made me stop and think

"what about reversing the problem, what about looking at it from the outside not the inside, what about taking it apart instead of building it so carefull from the middle"

that was almost a year ago, my immediate reaction was -rubbish- cant be done..
however time has ways of working on you.. today this simple statement made as a kind and gentle nudge has grown into a project that is..errrr ..big

Knightmare.... I want to say to you..... this thread has merit,
everyone else reading this..... be big enough to explore... do some brainstorming... leave behind the ideals and misconceptions.. afterall they absolutely truthfully knew the earth was FLAT 1000 years ago.

I sincerely hope that someone here will make a comment that will hit someone-else right between the eyes, that it will create the germ of a seed of an idea that grows into a big concept... that has potential.

Thank you Enzed. Your comments are appreciated. Too many look at things only one way and say that is the absolute correct way.

Welcome to the thread...unless you have posted before....in which case...welcome back....lol

Nice to have you as part of the discussion.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome