Soldato
- Joined
- 2 May 2011
- Posts
- 12,534
- Location
- Woking
Based on stats and current understanding, yes, but on evidence, not quite...
Do extra terrestrials exist? If so...
- Thread starter airrunner
- Start date
How can it be a fact?
And no, the chances of life might be extremely high that their is life, but it isn't fact.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 58,047
- Location
- Blurton
You really, REALLY can't see the difference?
No, for some reason you are putting them on a pedestal.
Just because you are a pilot or NASA scientist does not mean you see things differently.
Anyway you keep going on about me and my neighbours, we all saw a UFO and only one bloke who was majorly into planes knew exactly what it was.
Who knows, if some pilots and NASA scientists had been standing with us they might have also seen a UFO just like the 2 Policemen did.
Not strictly true. In the case of pilots, they've seen all kinds of aircraft from different angles, in different conditions, etc. Military pilots are trained to identify all manner of things visually. Of course they can't be 100% accurate, but next to the average Joe you have to take their opinion far more seriously. In cases where there are multiple expert witnesses then you have to assume there is something to it. If all the members of Led Zep gave their opinion on a piece of music wouldn't you trust it more than a bunch of average Joes?
Not strictly true. In the case of pilots, they've seen all kinds of aircraft from different angles, in different conditions, etc. Military pilots are trained to identify all manner of things visually. Of course they can't be 100% accurate, but next to the average Joe you have to take their opinion far more seriously. In cases where there are multiple expert witnesses then you have to assume there is something to it. If all the members of Led Zep gave their opinion on a piece of music wouldn't you trust it more than a bunch of average Joes?
Not if they made assumptions about the nature of that piece of music without qualifying why or offering evidence (also I would be more likely to take advice from a friend of mine on Classical music over that of the members of Led Zeppelin.....expert on Aircraft/Atmospherics doesn't make them an expert on every possibility, or to make assumptions based on lack of evidence) The same with anyone to whom who wish to appeal to their authority, if they do not know, then they simply do not know.....it doesn't mean it is x simply because it not y......
Last edited:
Suspended
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 5,722
- Location
- Buckingamshire
I'm sorry but you're not even close to comparing like with like there. The chances of intelligent life existing elsewhere in the Universe are massively more likely than the chances of there being a single omnipotent creator. Religion is just BS designed to control the sheeple and make people think that death isn't the end.
</can open worms everywhere>
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 58,047
- Location
- Blurton
If all the members of Led Zep gave their opinion on a piece of music wouldn't you trust it more than a bunch of average Joes?
No because I wouldn't trust anybody's opinion on a piece of music, I have to listen to it myself.
hahaha, Once again...read the thread and then you might actually understand the difference between possibility and probability and making definitive truth statements.....it is not as if I have not explained it often enough by now, in short it is not about the probability of a subject, but assigning definitive truth statements to subjects without the requisite definitive evidence, so it is about dismissing the possibility, not assessing the probability and in that the comparison is sound.
Oh and btw, God and Religion are not the same.
Last edited:
Suspended
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 5,722
- Location
- Buckingamshire
Being a military pilot means jack all in relation to knowing and identifying things that fly? Things they are trained to identify and engage, or identify and avoid? Way above the common man or even common pilot? Yeah, right Glacius, that means jack all... what an intelligent (cough) post.
Of course they are not above human perception, but to argue against that their perception and judgement of such specific things isnt honed to hyper levels beyond that of normal men is rather strange.
No, im qualifying their expertise in their fields, which involve things that fly in air and space. Last post in response to you now, as im slightly perturbed by your lack of understanding of what are frighteningly simple concepts.
Last edited:
They're qualified to identify top secret craft, ball lightning or other nautrall phenomena, no they really at trained at all in that and they are certainly not trained in the common miss-perceptions of Hunan vision and mind.
How does flying give them expert knowledge of ufos? Which are sometimes naturally phenomena. What in flying gives them that expert knowledge?
Again you are applying one knowledge to an unrelated knowledge. They aren't the same. Expert in one, is not an expert in the other.
How does flying give them expert knowledge of ufos? Which are sometimes naturally phenomena. What in flying gives them that expert knowledge?
Again you are applying one knowledge to an unrelated knowledge. They aren't the same. Expert in one, is not an expert in the other.
Last edited:
I can't believe you are STILL comparing yourself and your neighbours to an Air Force pilot or NASA scientist, even after it has been made more than clear to anyone with an iota of common sense that the situations are COMPLETELY different, ie: they are experts in the aero and space fields, and still cant work out what they saw... whereas you and your neighbours as good as clueless (if that) in comparison to the expert knowledge they possess. I'm not saying they saw aliens, but the fact they have no idea what they were even after careful analysis using their aforementioned expert knowledge speaks volumes and highly suggests that the technology in use in the UFO's they have witnessed is nothing like what is currently in the public domain.
You really, REALLY can't see the difference?
Hehe: Wood for the trees
Not only that, they will be on the direct receiving end of other specialist/ technicians for instant up to date information and orders. Can't get that from your neighbours usually.
Last edited:
I like the way I said it better TBH
if you were actually talking about the same thing you might (or not) have a point....
Its right whatever you believe.
You are being pedantic for the sake of being pedantic, my point stands in the face of any argument you've half-heartedly peddled my way. The FACT is that these experts in their fields cannot identify airborne craft that they have seen with their own two eyes. Again, I am not saying that they are aliens, but that these sightings (some very close-up in daylight according to pilot reports, so obviously not ball lightning or natural phenomena) fly in ways that do not conform to known aerospace physics, and have people for whom identifying airborne craft is their daily bread and butter utterly confused as to what these craft could possible be, is highly intriguing.
Last edited:
Wow they can't identify something great. We know that. That's why they are called UFOs. Now we've established that point, what expertise do they have in identifying UFOs? Zip that's what. It is totally unrelated to their field of knowledge. Even military pilots would not know about top secret tests and nore would those pilots commanders in cheifs. When is identifying top secret aircraft their bread and butter? That's just nonsense.
Current physics? These "crafts" do not break physics at all they fly well within physics. Just outside public/known military spec. That's if they are even craft in the first place.
And you are still missing the other point about perception. it's the way we as humans are wired and pilots are just as susceptible to these illusions as the rest of. Us again these are studied and well known and the logical explanation for many odd occurrences.
Like a pilot saying a field was just a field. So the crop circle must have been made in the space of 5mins. When it's much more likely that due to us being humans you register what you think something should look like, so the crop circle was alleadt there. This is one of many tricks of the mind.
Current physics? These "crafts" do not break physics at all they fly well within physics. Just outside public/known military spec. That's if they are even craft in the first place.
And you are still missing the other point about perception. it's the way we as humans are wired and pilots are just as susceptible to these illusions as the rest of. Us again these are studied and well known and the logical explanation for many odd occurrences.
Like a pilot saying a field was just a field. So the crop circle must have been made in the space of 5mins. When it's much more likely that due to us being humans you register what you think something should look like, so the crop circle was alleadt there. This is one of many tricks of the mind.
Last edited:
.......and how do you know that? I mean you are talking about such things as fact? I've said time and time again that if anything that advanced had an inclination to visit us you would have expected they had the intelligence to contact those who had a need to know, not Tom Dick or Harry. So it wouldn't necessarily trump the "compelling evidence" at all.
Suspended
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 5,722
- Location
- Buckingamshire
Except it isn't. It's one case of affairs or it isn't. There is a 'God' or there's not. Aliens exist or they don't.
and by that you would include our current understanding of science and flight physics would you.
For example round about the time the SR71 Blackbird was being tested there were unidentified objects zipping about the sky that were faster than that, that could do an instant u-turn. The Blackbird, which was considered state-of-the art needed 100 miles to complete a u-turn. I remeber listeniing to a report by someone some years back that one of the major reasons as to why the blackbird was developed was to keep an eye on what was going on in our upper atmosphere. What do we have today, given our current understanding of flight physics that can do an instant u-turn at speed witout killing the occupants?
So who or what do you think could be testing them and who or what do you think would be ordering them to test them? Whilst your argument would work for ball lightning it wouldn't work for manouverable craft like the example given in the "Tehran" Incident.
Last edited:
and by that you would include our current understanding of science and physics would you.
You need to Explain more, these UFO sightings even high speed manoeuvres do not break our understanding of physics.