I think the thread title should be changed to The UFO Smegma.
The UFO Stigma
- Thread starter Triskelion
- Start date
To be very honest here, your issue relates with parameters, not the scientific method itself, nor the scientific validity of brain study. Psychology deals with the statistical interaction of variables across a population; not individual predictions. While too complex to predict individual behaviors, there is nothing whatsoever to suggest behavior lies beyond the scope of neurophysical stimulus response - save lots and lots of speculation, philosophy, etc. However, this does not support any alternative opinions that individual behavior somehow, miraculously, lies in any other domain beyond the physical - and measurable. Psychology is 100% science. Science is not an authority but a system of questions. Theory changes with new data. Theory has nothing to prove.
Others who don't really get psychology sometimes assume their minds live somehow beyond scientific observation. This is superstition. It is also blind to how their behavior, more often than they may realize, is absolutely predictable, statistically speaking, and certainly in large numbers. For example, in insurance actuarial tables. This is the reality people don't often like to face - that they may not be, in fact, the special snowflakes of the universe. (Like we Trekbbs members).
Hence - debunking anything that may throw that egocentrism into question: Psychology as a science, unusual activity in the sky, and - the very idea of life elsewhere in the universe. To such a person, any evidence that challenged their assumptions would be met with not only healthy doubt and skepticism - but ferocious naysaying, let's face it. But you know what happens when you assume.
Last edited:
Well don't scientologists claim psychiatry is bunkum, and so is psychology?
But then look at that lot they are crazy as crazy can be.
But then look at that lot they are crazy as crazy can be.
I don't know what their cult narrative purports, but it probably has to do with driving members away from other institutions and assorted cults, and into the maw of Vaal, I mean Hubbarf. That's just smart marketing.
I suppose it makes sense to differentiate institution and politics from scientific method for the purpose of discussion....
Also, belief is easy. Science is hard, and often only intellectually rewarding, so - bunkum to some. Like a flat earther who can't be arsed to buy a circumglobal plane ticket to test his faulty intuition.
I suppose it makes sense to differentiate institution and politics from scientific method for the purpose of discussion....
Also, belief is easy. Science is hard, and often only intellectually rewarding, so - bunkum to some. Like a flat earther who can't be arsed to buy a circumglobal plane ticket to test his faulty intuition.
Last edited:
That last part is so true.
Hey how do flat earthers view a globe of the world? Is their version a flat disk with nothing on the bottom?
What IS at the bottom?
I would hope not, because psychiatry isn't a science, it is a field of medicine - one that specializes in mental disorders. Psychiatrists don't need to follow the scientific method because they aren't running experiments. That isn't to say they don't need to apply rational thinking and logic to their cases, but the scope of their inquiry is limited to a single, or a group of patients.
The same applies to every field of medicine. Some people avoid cavities by having a dental exam every year. Some people can't avoid cavities. Some people, such as myself, haven't seen a dentist in years and have never had a cavity. That doesn't mean dentistry isn't a valid medical field that is backed by solid research.
By whom, exactly?
I'm not sure what you mean here. It has always been acknowledged that certain mental illnesses can be caused by illnesses. It's called a differential diagnosis.
Is telekinesis in the DSM?
Here is a question:
What is the proof that no alien life exists nor has visited Earth?
The fact that no alien life has been seen to exist nor has visited Earth?
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Now - how can you be sure, really sure, that alien life doesn't exist nor has visited, nor ever will visit the Earth?
Scientifically, factually - you can't. It is an untested belief, which some claim to abhor. Well? Now what are you standing on?
If our intelligent species did not exist, it would be a more plausible assumption to say that others cannot.
Here's another thought:
They could exist and not live in this universe.
Before dismissing this as baseless speculation - please provide evidence that this is not physicslly possible. We are not sure about multiverses, nor holographic models of the universe, etc. We can't make life nor explain it away. Perhaps we are a fluke. Perhaps a design. Perhaps a random emergence. We do not know what we are, is that fair and reasonable to say? A snapshot of evolution? A finished product? A man, a woman, period? A seed of infinity?
And if you can't provide evidence that life in other universes is not physically possible - maybe it is one's own assumptions which lack the basis of reason.... jus' sayin'.
After all, we know, functionally enough, that this universe both supports and possesses intelligent life. What we don't know is that it has none beyond "us". I submit that it is this assumption that fails logically.
You want evidence? Well boy howdy, I want evidence from you too, that life does not exist out there. And to repeat, absence is not evidence. Science 101, look it up.
What is the proof that no alien life exists nor has visited Earth?
The fact that no alien life has been seen to exist nor has visited Earth?
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Now - how can you be sure, really sure, that alien life doesn't exist nor has visited, nor ever will visit the Earth?
Scientifically, factually - you can't. It is an untested belief, which some claim to abhor. Well? Now what are you standing on?
If our intelligent species did not exist, it would be a more plausible assumption to say that others cannot.
Here's another thought:
They could exist and not live in this universe.
Before dismissing this as baseless speculation - please provide evidence that this is not physicslly possible. We are not sure about multiverses, nor holographic models of the universe, etc. We can't make life nor explain it away. Perhaps we are a fluke. Perhaps a design. Perhaps a random emergence. We do not know what we are, is that fair and reasonable to say? A snapshot of evolution? A finished product? A man, a woman, period? A seed of infinity?
And if you can't provide evidence that life in other universes is not physically possible - maybe it is one's own assumptions which lack the basis of reason.... jus' sayin'.
After all, we know, functionally enough, that this universe both supports and possesses intelligent life. What we don't know is that it has none beyond "us". I submit that it is this assumption that fails logically.
You want evidence? Well boy howdy, I want evidence from you too, that life does not exist out there. And to repeat, absence is not evidence. Science 101, look it up.
Last edited:
What sojourner said. I also can't prove that we're not surrounded by ghost unicorns who watch us when we're taking a shower.
Doesn't mean I'm going to start claiming they exist.
Doesn't mean I'm going to start claiming they exist.
Proposition: If something exists, then, at some point, there must be evidence of its existence.
Proposition: For something that resists any display of evidence of its existence, it may as well not exist at all.
Proposition: For something that resists any display of evidence of its existence, it may as well not exist at all.
@TremblingBluStar: If you haven't seen a dentist in years...how do you know you don't have a cavity?
@CorporalCaptain: Plus, of course, The Kiri-kin-tha's first law of metaphysics 
Nothing unreal exists.
As if you didn't now that.
As if you didn't now that.
You cant prove a negative. Well I think that's my point. "Life does not exist." Clearly we can exist, to ask the question. Prove to me that others cant. I can prove there are no purple unicorn ghosts in the shower, because they may as well not exist. (Some feel that way about germs, but they do exist). We exist, yet we could not contact most of the universe if we wanted to, currently. Have you looked to the farthest reaches of this universe? Or beyond? No, you havent. Your logical basis rests on anecdotal assumption.
Perhaps good enough for human needs, I can be reasonable; but not the final word on the subject as some might have us believe. (And also, lots of crazy claims out there, sure). No, logic and science have room for new information.
Do you?
Last edited:
I think you're confused. Most here have said that life may exist out there (I think it's highly probable). We just haven't seen any evidence to prove it and certainly none to prove that it's visited us.
Not sure where this absolutist "life does not exist" bit came from. Certainly not from me.
Not sure where this absolutist "life does not exist" bit came from. Certainly not from me.
If you needed to label counterarguments to support the more extreme claim that other life cannot exist, ok; but it would be a logical capitulation, since that argument would not be supported by fact, only a subjective label which could just as easily be applied to you; except for my own unwillingness to turn a discussion into a barking contest (ie, broadcasting only).
I'm not singling anyone out, BTW. My points are pretty much abstracted here, and since you, Sojourner, are open to new information, my point doesn't really apply to you.
Please excuse my distractedness, I'm riding an elephant in Thailand.
I'm not singling anyone out, BTW. My points are pretty much abstracted here, and since you, Sojourner, are open to new information, my point doesn't really apply to you.
Please excuse my distractedness, I'm riding an elephant in Thailand.
Last edited:
Where is the UFO evidence that has this sort of quality? The Chelyabinsk meteor: Meteor Hits Russia Feb 15, 2013 - Event Archive - YouTube
It turned out to be yet another extraterrestrial rock, but you ought to get a picture of how high-quality it was. Several witnesses saw it from different vantage points, enough to make it be at very different relative positions. That has proven valuable for reconstructing the parent object's orbit, and not surprisingly, that orbit extends into the asteroid belt.
Historically, this is what established the extraterrestrial-rock hypothesis: <The Meteorite Report by Jean-Baptiste Biot translated by Anne-Marie de Grazia> noting Whodunit? The fall of meteorite on 6th Floreal of the year 11 in L'Aigle (has a link to a PDF file with a translation)
It's a nicely-written report. JBB found numerous witnesses and lots of physical evidence: odd rocks, broken branches, and the like. The odd rocks were pretty much alike, and very different from rocks commonly found near L'Aigle. JBB concluded that a rock arrived from outer space, and broke up as it fell.
Some UFOlogists cite meteorites as proof that skepticism about extraterrestrial spacecraft is as unwarranted as skepticism about extraterrestrial rocks, but I've yet to see a L'Aigle of UFOlogy, let alone a Chelyabinsk of UFOlogy.
It turned out to be yet another extraterrestrial rock, but you ought to get a picture of how high-quality it was. Several witnesses saw it from different vantage points, enough to make it be at very different relative positions. That has proven valuable for reconstructing the parent object's orbit, and not surprisingly, that orbit extends into the asteroid belt.
Historically, this is what established the extraterrestrial-rock hypothesis: <The Meteorite Report by Jean-Baptiste Biot translated by Anne-Marie de Grazia> noting Whodunit? The fall of meteorite on 6th Floreal of the year 11 in L'Aigle (has a link to a PDF file with a translation)
It's a nicely-written report. JBB found numerous witnesses and lots of physical evidence: odd rocks, broken branches, and the like. The odd rocks were pretty much alike, and very different from rocks commonly found near L'Aigle. JBB concluded that a rock arrived from outer space, and broke up as it fell.
Some UFOlogists cite meteorites as proof that skepticism about extraterrestrial spacecraft is as unwarranted as skepticism about extraterrestrial rocks, but I've yet to see a L'Aigle of UFOlogy, let alone a Chelyabinsk of UFOlogy.
