NSA has released extraterrestrial messages

[Absurd]

I don't see what the problem is, it's in a non socionics subforum. Your aggression indicates that this topic upsets you. Some of us are able to have an interest in these kinds of subjects, without throwing away our sanity.

It doesn't upset me, it's hilarious, there was astrology, then psychic mind readers and after that glorious UFOs. Before all this I've been frequenting a horoscope forum for a laugh or two, someone posted a link to an MBTI test, I took it, then found some MBTI forum, been there for a month or so just to find another link, this time a socionics test, I think it was Rick's test, never mind.

The point is I never left that first forum in the first place, it seems.

Pseudoskeptic

Produce some evidence to the contrary, like a message written by yourself in which you're having discussion with aliens on socionics, for instance. Throw lizards in while you're at it.

[Bluenoir]

there was astrology, then psychic mind readers and after that glorious UFOs

Why is the mere discussion of these things hilarious? You can discuss a topic without taking it at face value. I would agree, you would be very stupid to do so.

My point is. I know of no rules that determine that the mentioned topics are out of bounds in this sub section of this fourm. If you don't like the topic, leave it alone and let thoes who are interested discuss it.

Produce some evidence to the contrary, like a message written by yourself in which you're having discussion with aliens on socionics, for instance. Throw lizards in while you're at it.

I'm not making any claims here, you are. "It does not exist" The burden of proof in this case, is on you.

When it comes to this issue, my position is that there MAY be something to it. We should not dismiss it outright simply beacuse it is not the status quo. The fact that people are continuing to have these experiences, whatever they may be, means that it's open for investigation.

As for your demand for evidence. Have you ever actually read anything at all about this subject? How can you say there is no evidence if you refuse to even look?

I make no assertions for or against. All I'm saying is don't be so quick to reject out of hand.

I guess I just hate dogmatism. When you make absolute statements into what the "truth" is, you are being dogmatic.

[Absurd]

Why is the mere discussion of these things hilarious? You can discuss a topic without taking it at face value. I would agree, you would be very stupid to do so.

Following your logic or the lack of it, I don't take it at face value, I didn't start this thread blindly believing in something I never saw before and I won't believe it until I see it on my own eyes. And yea, don't call people participating in this thread stupid, that's rude as DirectorAbbie would say, and you don't want to, you know, get Jarno on your bad side, this guy saw it all: angels, aliens, dishwashers, etc., so it foolish to do so.

My point is. I know of no rules that determine that the mentioned topics are out of bounds in this sub section of this fourm. If you don't like the topic, leave it alone and let thoes who are interested discuss it.

I don't very much care about rules and, please take note, you're the one talking about rules not me. What you're proposing is a masturbatory community composed of people who blindly believe in everything they are told even it is so dumb and, yes, hilarious that other party can't participate in because one or two of them have a different opinion. Thank god, you didn't call me close minded.

I'm not making any claims here, you are. "It does not exist" The burden of proof in this case, is on you.

Oh really, tell me o wise one, how does one prove something that can't be proved ?

When it comes to this issue, my position is that there MAY be something to it. We should not dismiss it outright simply beacuse it is not the status quo. The fact that people are continuing to have these experiences, whatever they may be, means that it's open for investigation.

1. There is no possible way to disprove the existence of UFOs as defined by ufologists, them saying it is out there, but it is camouflaged or something,

2. It follows from point 1 that there is likewise no possible way to prove the existence of UFOs for the same reasons given, there can be no empirical evidence whatsoever about UFOs, and the notion that UFOs exist comes to us only by the words and writings of other people,

3. If UFOs can be said to exist on the basis that we can not know whether or not UFOs exist, then it can also be said not to exist by the merits of the same logic. Evidence for the existence of UFOs is equal to the evidence against the existence of UFOs,

4. Points 1 through 3 being established, we can now say that all statements about UFOs are necessarily self-negating by their own nature.

As for your demand for evidence. Have you ever actually read anything at all about this subject? How can you say there is no evidence if you refuse to even look?

Yes, I did, I read a few books on it and it doesn't sound like evidence to me, only far-fetched claims of some guru, be it Dalai Lama who wrote about extensively or someone else.

I make no assertions for or against. All I'm saying is don't be so quick to reject out of hand.

Point taken.

I guess I just hate dogmatism. When you make absolute statements into what the "truth" is, you are being dogmatic.

I think dogma requires a lot more on my part, I didn't invent anything, no laws, no rules for you to adhere to, and for you to attack or rebel against

[Bluenoir]

I didn't start this thread blindly believing in something I never saw before and I won't believe it until I see it on my own eyes.

I never said to believe in anything. Here is the thing, there is a phenomenon, (people are claiming to have seen it) be it aliens/demons/imaginings/hoaxes ect. I am open to the disscussion of the phenomenon without spouting the but I haven't seen anything mantra. True skepticism is to take the agnostic position, regardless of what your personal inclination may be towards the subject.

What you're proposing is a masturbatory community composed of people who blindly believe in everything they are told even it is so dumb and, yes, hilarious that other party can't participate in because one or two of them have a different opinion. Thank god, you didn't call me close minded.

I never said to take anything at face value. Where have I said ufos are the prouduct of anything paranormal. You would have a hard time convincing me of that too. What I have a problem with, is blanket true/untrue mentallity. You are in no position to declare what is likely.

Oh really, tell me o wise one, how does one prove something that can't be proved ?

You miss the whole point.

You are making a positive claim. If I said ufos are the prouduct of aliens, then the burden is on me, for that claim. If I said ufos/abductions are all bogus, then I would have the burden for THAT claim.

I can't prove it's bogus, nor can I prove aliens. Therefore untill more infomation comes to light, agnosticism is the positions to take. Even If I never in my lifetime, get that information.

there can be no empirical evidence whatsoever about UFOs, and the notion that UFOs exist comes to us only by the words and writings of other people

You don't know that. There is footage, landsite raidiation trace materials ect. Sure, there are other explanations for the mentioned, but thats what the whole disscussion is about!

If UFOs can be said to exist on the basis that we can not know whether or not UFOs exist, then it can also be said not to exist by the merits of the same logic. Evidence for the existence of UFOs is equal to the evidence against the existence of UFOs,

It's called agnosticism. Not believing in ufos is not the same thing as saying they do not exist as a point of fact. I don't belive in it at face value myself, but I recognize that I could be wrong. I'm open to explore the topic a bit.

Points 1 through 3 being established

You haven't established squat.

I think dogma requires a lot more on my part, I didn't invent anything, no laws, no rules for you to adhere to, and for you to attack or rebel against

I don't believe in alien spacecraft due to the lack of compelling evidence, is not dogmatic. I'm with you here.

Ufo, aliens do not exist, there is no debate or disscussion to be had here. This is dogma.

I'm tired at the moment, I'm out for tonight. Lighten up and have a bit of fun. I don't think it's stupid or moronic to disscuss a fringe topic, only to take what is said as a point of fact.

[Jarno]

You're a nut, a Christmas cracker.

At least I don't believe in God '-)

[Simon Ssmall]

At least I don't believe in God '-)

He does not either.

[Absurd]

True skepticism is to take the agnostic position, regardless of what your personal inclination may be towards the subject.

Alright, I'm not agnostic though.

What I have a problem with, is blanket true/untrue mentallity. You are in no position to declare what is likely.

That's what I've been trying to say, you got someone telling you it is true and someone saying it's quite the contrary, and what do you do ? You come in telling me about rules I don't follow and at the same time focus on me for saying what I said, I can only assume you're in agreement with other party.

I don't know what's the point in you telling me about agnosticism whatsoever, I think you think I am someone you think I am, but I'm not.

I can't prove it's bogus, nor can I prove aliens. Therefore untill more infomation comes to light, agnosticism is the positions to take. Even If I never in my lifetime, get that information.

In other words you will never know but you feel quite qualified to take part in it. It's like driving a car not knowing where you want to go or turn.

You don't know that. There is footage, landsite raidiation trace materials ect. Sure, there are other explanations for the mentioned, but thats what the whole disscussion is about!

Of course it can be explained as something entirely else but what's the point when you "know that you know nothing" ? I'm not trying to thwart this discussion, hell, just look what it has become, you and me posting. Damn, I'm really sorry for ending this on first page.

It's called agnosticism. Not believing in ufos is not the same thing as saying they do not exist as a point of fact.

Yea, I know it is called agnosticism, you said for third time I think, I'm not very convertible, though. Read gullible.

I don't belive in it at face value myself, but I recognize that I could be wrong. I'm open to explore the topic a bit.

Thanks for support, then. I'm waiting patiently for new info as well.

You haven't established squat.

I'm not great in Ti magic, so sorry for that

I don't believe in alien spacecraft due to the lack of compelling evidence, is not dogmatic. I'm with you here.

Bed and breakfast, then.

Ufo, aliens do not exist, there is no debate or disscussion to be had here. This is dogma.

UFOs and aliens exist is not dogma, then. I get it and rest my case.

[Capitalist Pig]

He does not either.

YOU RUINED THE ENDING.

[Absurd]

At least I don't believe in God '-)

At least I'm not stupid, if you know what I mean.

He does not either.

YOU RUINED THE ENDING.

That Ssmall, always there at the right time, in the right place

[The Ineffable]

Of course aliens exist people... you do understand how big the universe is, yes?

...

The Earth is probably just 1 of 100,000+ planets with intelligent life. The race is still on to see who can develop the best mathematics/science required to efficiently travel to other planets, stage attacks, gather resources, transport them back and/or set up colonies, etc. Everyone is limited by the number of resources present on their planet, as well as by the time required to travel.

Of course life exists besides us, I think it's more irrational to think we're an exception, in our Milky Way Galaxy. The question isn't *if* it exists, it's how far away is it, and how advanced it is.

But there's at least one more factor: time. So instead of using only "is", you'd want to add "was" and "will be" to the equation. Really, nothing is static, civilizations may appear and disappear in terms of possibly as low as thousands of years, while information from all the stars in our galaxy to travel to earth can take up to 75,000 years (at light speed). I imagine a contemporary advanced civilization as 25k LY, if say we discover close-to-lightspeed locomotion at year 3k AD, we'll have to wait 24k more years just to get aware of them to be able to depart for their solar system... and take sufficient toilet paper, as there's no guarantee the shop will still be open at the destination, 25k years later.

Like you said, the existence of extraterrestrial life is rather a certainy; then I'd add that intelligent life is a great possibility, but contact happening in our age is very hard to believe, unless one believes in faster-than-light travel speed, or simply in the "somehow" Swiss army knife.

[rat1]

At least I don't believe in God '-)

Religious belief is not really a matter of intelligence. But if it was, gnostic atheism would be just as stupid.

[Bluenoir]

Religious belief is not really a matter of intelligence. But if it was, gnostic atheism would be just as stupid.

Yes and no. There have been some studies done that show that there may be some correlation.



The full article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religio...belief_and_I.Q

Granted, I would take this with salt, there is so many other variables at play here too.

[rat1]

Granted, I would take this with salt, there is so many other variables at play here too.

All I see is a correlation at the near retard level. I'm really not interested in the opinions of retarded folk. At normal IQs and above it looks pretty even, though that is way too small of a sample size to matter.

[1981slater]

Assuming Obi-Wan Kenobi is an Alien, the expression "Use the Force, Luke" has been widely wnown for decades.