blazinkill504
Well-Known Member
when i wrote that it meant if there isnt proof to somethin then it isnt it. dont try and twist my shit. whats silly is the blindness you have when its not somethin you agree with.
Aliens
- Thread starter skunkushybrid
- Start date
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
Once again, I will point out that a mystery does not mean that we don't have some idea, for some structures, there is more than one hypothesis. It's a mystery because all of the clues to the actual methods are gone. It's a mystery only in details, not in the people that are responsible for building them.
So you care nothing for parsimony. For you, wild ass speculation about things is just as valid as sincere, critical examination? Great. I guess I know to just ignore everything you say because you care nothing for reason.
Actually, the idea that a civilization made their own structures should be assumed unless you have compelling reason to believe otherwise.
You obviously haven't studied it enough if you haven't found respectable engineers and archaeologists that have presented possible techniques. I have never come across any structure that doesn't have some sort of earthly, human explanation.
No one is saying it's not possible. People are saying we need good reason to accept a hypothesis that has no support besides conjecture.
My new friend DreamTime has said all that is needed to on this comment.
You confuse open-minded with credulity. Everything that science now believes is true is because of reasonable, rational, objective look at the evidence. We didn't believe in black holes just because someone imagined them, even after the math said they might be possible. We only accepted them as part of reality when we gained evidence they actually exist.
Again, you are mistaking the idea that our modern equipment like a sky crane should somehow be better than thousands of men, sometimes slaves, sometimes citizens. You also seem to forget the timescales in which we expect a building to go up. A king or pharaoh could have decades for his monument to be built. Some structures in history, like Stonehenge have evidence that they were built over many generations, possibly centuries. This doesn't prove that humans created them but it certainly helps us understand how they might have done it without resorting to a deus ex machina.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Blazinkill, proof (and the necessity for it) comes in levels of rigor. When making a scientific claim, the need for proof is fairly strict, and the need for a transparent and consequent chain of evidence is built in.
When making a softer claim, softer sorts of proof or support will do.
For something like suggesting aliens were involved, the premise is extraordinary and would have serious consequences, so it's reasonable to require a supporting story that is more than just plausible ... it should make competing theories or models less plausible. Videos have been posted of one man building megalithic structures out of ten-ton blocks of concrete ... using simplest tools, a sharp mind and a lot of patience.
So for 200 neolithic men working as a team to dress, move and raise a 1000-ton stone enters the realm of the very plausible. And it avoids positing extrahuman help, which runs into the problem of there not having been a single plausible, documentable, testable instance of that happening. Since that really is an extraordinary claim, almost all careful thinkers will handle it with the figurative equivalent of lead-lined gloves - unless/until a truly juicy bit of evidence comes to light, and survives the fact tests ... it's best all around to mark the "alien help" theories as extremely unlikely. cn
When making a softer claim, softer sorts of proof or support will do.
For something like suggesting aliens were involved, the premise is extraordinary and would have serious consequences, so it's reasonable to require a supporting story that is more than just plausible ... it should make competing theories or models less plausible. Videos have been posted of one man building megalithic structures out of ten-ton blocks of concrete ... using simplest tools, a sharp mind and a lot of patience.
So for 200 neolithic men working as a team to dress, move and raise a 1000-ton stone enters the realm of the very plausible. And it avoids positing extrahuman help, which runs into the problem of there not having been a single plausible, documentable, testable instance of that happening. Since that really is an extraordinary claim, almost all careful thinkers will handle it with the figurative equivalent of lead-lined gloves - unless/until a truly juicy bit of evidence comes to light, and survives the fact tests ... it's best all around to mark the "alien help" theories as extremely unlikely. cn
lawless420
Member
i believe there is other life ............ but if there anything like us then they could have already wiped themselfs out 
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
You gotta be fuckin stupid to not think theres other life, you think Earth just happends to be the only lucky planet in the universe to somehow acquire life? You never thought that the government would try there best to hide this stuff because of culture shock?
blazinkill504
Well-Known Member
mindphuk im not gonna talk to you about this anymore because half of the shit you say is answered by what i wrote before. i cant help if you wont take it as evidence.
canna i get that its a reach that why in my first post i said and if it wasnt by aliens i wanna know what kinda lost stuff they used to build them and who did and how did they go about it. i never once said thats what i thought for sure.
canna i get that its a reach that why in my first post i said and if it wasnt by aliens i wanna know what kinda lost stuff they used to build them and who did and how did they go about it. i never once said thats what i thought for sure.
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
Dude, dont even bother with these guys, there not gunna listen to you, they'd rather resort to simple explanations that are easy to cope with and they will try their best to lay out a case infront of you like they are trying to win the approval of a judge. Theres no personality to these people what so ever, its kinda like arguing with a robot then they come at you with the calculated monotone'd scientific facts.
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
Who knows what the possability is that evolution would create intelligent life in other parts of the galaxy? Who knows what processes must happen in order to create life, especially intelligent ones? Um.... no one? To claim something exists without any evidence to support that claim...is the only stupid thing being said.
It would be different if you were to say, well... regardless of there not being any evidence to support my claim, i really like the idea of aleins existing. -Truth
Aleins exist because i have this gut feeling they do. -False
Because of the lack of evidence proving the existence of aliens, by default...i like the idea that aliens dont exist. -Truth
When you believe (claim truth to) in something without any tangable evidence, you are lying to yourself... telling yourself you know something that you really...don't...know.
Personally, i like the idea that aliens exist... even though i am not certain if they do or not. Someday we may find out, maybe not, but as we all SHOULD know... "Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence"
It would be different if you were to say, well... regardless of there not being any evidence to support my claim, i really like the idea of aleins existing. -Truth
Aleins exist because i have this gut feeling they do. -False
Because of the lack of evidence proving the existence of aliens, by default...i like the idea that aliens dont exist. -Truth
When you believe (claim truth to) in something without any tangable evidence, you are lying to yourself... telling yourself you know something that you really...don't...know.
Personally, i like the idea that aliens exist... even though i am not certain if they do or not. Someday we may find out, maybe not, but as we all SHOULD know... "Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence"
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
That's right. When someone attempts to demonstrate how your claims are not based on reason and rationality, you prefer to just end the discussion because you actually DON'T have the evidence you claim to have. Everything you say amounts to special pleading. If you really had something, you wouldn't run away from someone's criticism just because they are skeptical.
DreamTime
Member
I assure you I will never do that. I’m not into the whole 2 girls 1 cup stuff
But seriously:
I haven't agreed or disagreed with anything in this topic so far. My response to you was my first post in this thread.
However, based on what I've read in the subsequent posts, it sounds like there are two mind sets here. One group that is basically approaching this as a casual conversation amongst friends where some bullshit and hyperbole will be expected and no proof is required. The other group is coming at this from a more academic/scientific perspective where bullshit and hyperbole will get stomped on without mercy.
The outcome of any attempt to exchange ideas between these two groups seems fairly predictable, and bares out in these threads. You can’t have the Harvard debate team walk into a drunken super bowl party and try engage the group in a discussion about free will. The very thought of doing that is comedic…. yet here we are doing just that.
Given the absurdity of the situation I don’t see any point in getting pissed off about what transpires in here. As maddening as it must be for some people, I find this absolutely fascinating.
Farfenugen
Well-Known Member
I heard the Brady Bunch kids were all aliens at one point
tyler.durden
Well-Known Member
I felt the same way when I first stumbled upon this sub-forumI assure you I will never do that. I’m not into the whole 2 girls 1 cup stuff
But seriously:
I haven't agreed or disagreed with anything in this topic so far. My response to you was my first post in this thread.
However, based on what I've read in the subsequent posts, it sounds like there are two mind sets here. One group that is basically approaching this as a casual conversation amongst friends where some bullshit and hyperbole will be expected and no proof is required. The other group is coming at this from a more academic/scientific perspective where bullshit and hyperbole will get stomped on without mercy.
The outcome of any attempt to exchange ideas between these two groups seems fairly predictable, and bares out in these threads. You can’t have the Harvard debate team walk into a drunken super bowl party and try engage the group in a discussion about free will. The very thought of doing that is comedic…. yet here we are doing just that.
Given the absurdity of the situation I don’t see any point in getting pissed off about what transpires in here. As maddening as it must be for some people, I find this absolutely fascinating.
You're funny and I like your style, +rep...
Chief Walkin Eagle
Well-Known Member
Said the fish discussing the existence of land life.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
+1. What I find fascinating is how DreamTime has only 36 posts but already receiving enough reps to put Chief Wankin' Sparrow to shame.I felt the same way when I first stumbled upon this sub-forum
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
I would say there's a third group. The first two you mentioned, the other are the people that drop in on the casual conversation about what-ifs and make declarations of fact about the topic. Most of us hardcore skeptics have no problem with people speculating and ongoing conjecture. What we have a problem with is when people make claims such as -- we have no idea how ancient humans could have done x, y and z. When it's pointed out that is not entirely correct and is something they should really look into if they are actually interested, some of these folks get quite belligerent and misunderstand criticism of a claim as a personal attack and begin turning up the heat.I assure you I will never do that. I’m not into the whole 2 girls 1 cup stuff
But seriously:
I haven't agreed or disagreed with anything in this topic so far. My response to you was my first post in this thread.
However, based on what I've read in the subsequent posts, it sounds like there are two mind sets here. One group that is basically approaching this as a casual conversation amongst friends where some bullshit and hyperbole will be expected and no proof is required. The other group is coming at this from a more academic/scientific perspective where bullshit and hyperbole will get stomped on without mercy.
The outcome of any attempt to exchange ideas between these two groups seems fairly predictable, and bares out in these threads. You can’t have the Harvard debate team walk into a drunken super bowl party and try engage the group in a discussion about free will. The very thought of doing that is comedic…. yet here we are doing just that.
Given the absurdity of the situation I don’t see any point in getting pissed off about what transpires in here. As maddening as it must be for some people, I find this absolutely fascinating.
DreamTime
Member
Apparently I got some rep from post I made that got zapped when everything crash a few months ago... So basically I cheated.
tyler.durden
Well-Known Member
+ rep for honesty
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
i like this^
DreamTime
Member
Yea, I've seen more than a few examples of the 3rd group you describe along with people committing logical fallacies that are both funny and scary at the same time. Reading a discussion between someone who is explaining a logical fallacy to someone who has unwittingly committed one but doesnt understand can be hysterical in a hair-pulling who's-on-first kind of way.