See other Religion Articles
Title: Americans believe in God -- and hell, UFOs, witches, astrology: poll (and miracles - we could use one)
Source:
Raw Story
URL Source: http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Americ ... n_God_and_hell_U_12042007.html
Published: Dec 4, 2007
Author: AFP
Post Date: 2007-12-04 17:15:46 by robin
Keywords: None
Views: 1372
Comments: 110
An overwhelming majority of Americans believe in God and signicant numbers also think that UFOs, the devil and ghosts exist, a poll showed Tuesday. The survey by Harris Online showed that 82 percent of adult Americans believe in God and a slightly smaller percentage -- 79 percent -- believe in miracles. More than 70 percent of the 2,455 adults surveyed between November 7 and 13 said they believe in heaven and angels, while more than six in 10 said they believed in hell and the devil. Almost equal numbers said they believe in Darwin's theory of evolution (42 percent) -- the belief that populations evolve over time through natural selection -- and creationism (39 percent) -- the theory that God created mankind. Seventy percent of Americans said they were very (21 percent) or somewhat (49 percent) religious, while around one-third of those polled also said they believe in UFOs, witches and astrology.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: (#0)
The predilection toward belief in nonsense owes a great deal to both government schools and the church. Neither (especially the church) encourages critical thinking and analysis. Michael Shermer of the Skeptic Society speculated that people ascribe to these kinds of beliefs to give their lives meaning.
Hmmm...It appears that if this believing doesn't work then pill popping and shopping provides that illusive meaning for life.
There's no doubt that people try to give their lives meaning through the acquisition of "stuff." What other explanation is there for celebrities who go bankrupt after raking in hundreds of millions? Intoxication may be a means to deal with life rather than a way to give it meaning.
Indeed, most of "religion" is simply the history of man trying to map out a plan for the meaning of life and the relationship between God and man. My personal experience has been that atheists and highly "skeptical" people tend to be boring, drab, sometimes cold and generally lifeless. Kind of like: What's the point? Show a little creativity.
And yet, when CSICOP was presented with statistically significant evidence of astrology, they refused to acknowledge it and half the board members quit in a huff. Skeptics are just a different type of fanatic.
Shut your whore mouth, Mr. President.
Forgive me, I transposed the two--they go shopping, then partake in pill popping and gorge at the substance abuse buffet. It was a horse before the cart faux pax on my part. I'd bet a high percentage believe that terrorists are lurking behind the bush. They should have asked, so we could assess how successful the MSM propoganda campaign is doing. I envision little old ladies in Podunk, Nebraska, hiding under the bed praying and believing for a miricle. : )
Skeptics count the misses in addition to the hits. They don't count only the hits, discard the misses, and then conclude that the hits constitute compelling evidence. Skeptics use double-blind tests to validate claims. Confusing correlation with causation is a common mistake. For example, take the claim that "strange behavior" takes place during a full moon. It certainly does, but it also takes place when there is no full moon. BTW, there is no statistical evidence than more strange behavior takes place during a full moon. People simply tend to notice it more because they expect to see it. Statistically significant evidence of astrology? Let's see it.
I haven't experienced the same thing as you. The atheists I know tend to be very intelligent, well-read, and sociable. Perhaps the ones you know simply have different interests. Some people call themselves atheists simply because they are rebelling. I don't personally know any like that.
Here ya go. A long read, but interesting. Written by one of the founders of CSICOP. http://cura.free.fr/xv/14starbb.html
Shut your whore mouth, Mr. President.
UFO's? Is that like me and my neighbor talking over the fence and he asks "Is that the 577 from Phoenix?" referring to blinking object moving through sky and I tell him I don't know?
"Most of the trouble in this world has been caused by folks who can't mind their own business, because they have no business of their own to mind, any more than a smallpox virus has." - William S Burroughs
As for me and grandpa, we believe.
My mother worked in an ER for 20 years. I once asked her and a nurse there if there was any difference in patients during a full moon. Both said yes, the nuts came out. BTW, the most humorless fanatics I have never met in my life are people who believe in evolution.
Fortune favors the prepared mind. A zombie, however, prefers it raw.
How about those of us who believe that humans are monkeys cross-bred with alien DNA?
Shut your whore mouth, Mr. President.
I believe while they're so busy getting their minds wrapped around these things, their country is being STOLEN.
My mother worked in an ER for 20 years. I once asked her and a nurse there if there was any difference in patients during a full moon. Both said yes, the nuts came out. Are you sure they weren't simply repeating what they've heard others say, or maybe perpetuating an urban legend, or were they speaking from personal observation? Also, did they take an accounting of odd behavior on nights when there wasn't a full moon or did they only seem to notice when there was a full moon? ...the most humorless fanatics I have never met in my life are people who believe in evolution. That's perfectly understandable. A child observing a conversation between adults might make the same observation.
Oh yeah, like he is a real credible "skeptic". Get back to me when he does some real scientific research on 911.
Mark If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
I read the article. Unfortunately, most of it consists of accusations of a conspiracy rather than a presentation of scientific evidence. The contention revolves around something called the Mars Effect. Advocates of the Mars Effect make the common mistake of concluding that two events that occur together share a causal relation. I could point out that there is more traffic on the roads when the sun occupies certain positions in the sky, but the events aren't causally related. It's just a coincidence. It's quite possible that countless other coincidences could be mistakenly attributed to the Mars Effect. For example, suppose it was shown that there is an increase in the number of pizza deliveries when Mars occupies certain sectors.
More people attend government schools in Europe than in the US, but you don't have hoardes of Bible thumping religious nuts, UFOlogists, and cult members in Europe that you get around here. I think that religion and superstition has always been a big part of American culture, even back in the days when there weren't any government schools.
I think we all know that corellation does not equal causation. To prove causation, we must conduct an experiment and force babies born during those times and control times to become famous athletes, then see which group was more successful in achieving that end. But you asked for an example of statistically significant astrology, so I sent you that. Doubtless you can find the original articles online, but it's probably a lot easier just to dismiss the thing out of hand as "coincidence".
Shut your whore mouth, Mr. President.
I Googled "Mars Effect" after I read the article and didn't find any substantiation, only regurgitation of the original claims and refutation. In order to prove causation it would be necessary to isolate the subjects from countless other potential causal factors which is logistically impossible. What happened is essentially this: somebody observed two events occurring together and concluded that they were causally related. That isn't how science is done. People are, by nature, pattern-seeking animals and the more familiar the pattern the more frequent the recognition. Sightings of Jesus in tree trunks, burnt toast, mortar, etc. are good examples. A person could spend a lifetime charting planets, moons, comets, and asteroids and find all kinds of coincidences which appear to be causalities. Why would a person want to squander his efforts on such foolishness when he could be working on something substantive and legitimate?
I am short on time at the moment so I don't have time for a detailed deconstruction but note the following: By conflating all of these together it is an assertion of equivalence i.e., that UFOs=Witches=Astrology. When you see that kind of false reasoning you can know that the author is dishonest or is working PsyOps. Which of those has a substantial body of objective evidence and credible witnesses? UFOs. Which of those has the government consistently attacked via derision and their various operatives such as Michael Schermer? UFOs. Why? Because it is a world view shifting datum which holds the potential to upset the 1984 society that is being built. The "Septics" Society and others of their ilk, such as the less than amazing Randi, have over and over again been shown to lie, use strawmen, and character assassination to advance their agenda of defending the official paradigm.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
Why? Because it is a world view shifting datum which holds the potential to upset the 1984 society that is being built. Here's one of the reports from the 50's that I find especially interesting.. Is that like me and my neighbor talking over the fence and he asks "Is that the 577 from Phoenix?" referring to blinking object moving through sky and I tell him I don't know? What do you suppose these things are Dak? The "Skeptics" Society and others of their ilk are part of the consensus. Consensus is where scoundrels hide and skulduggery is king. Consensus is not science, and science is not consensus.
Mark If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
There isn't a shred of evidence of visitation by aliens in flying saucers. Even with the proliferation of billions of cameras, camera phones, and video cameras there still isn't any compelling evidence. All of those old b/w photos of flying saucers are nothing but people tossing pie pans and hub caps into the air. Witnesses are always referred to as credible. They're often unsure of what they've seen. Many have conflicting testimony. Michael Shermer is a government operative? That's laughable. He and Randi have done outstanding work exposing charlatans and quacks. I especially like the way Randi exposed Uri Geller, Peter Popoff, and James Hydrick (who later confessed to being a fraud).
Post 23 too far down the thread for you to see? It might pop your little bubble Alan, so proceed with caution if you dare.
In fact Alan, take a peek at post 22 while you're at it...
You seem like a fairly bright guy Alan, so why can't you understand there's something more than pot covers flying around? We are but one planet of a solar system of eight others. Our solar system is but one of billions of others in this galaxy, and our galaxy is but one of billions of others in THIS universe alone. It is ridiculous to think we are the only ones. Do you think pie plates flew over Washington DC (repeatedly) in 1952? Or that thousands (over 500) of them flew over Farmington, NM, in 1950? Is this a pie plate or pot lid too Alan? Here's another interesting "pie plate" for you to watch.. Is this little guy a pie maker Alan? On June 24, 1947, Kenneth Arnold claimed that he'd seen nine "crescent shaped" aircraft near Mount Rainier. He said they reminded him of saucers skimming over water. An editor of the Eastern Oregonian reported that Arnold saw "round" objects. Other reports noted "disc-shaped" objects. Within a few weeks, there were hundreds of reports nationwide of sightings of flying "saucers." It's interesting how sightings become contagious. The U.S. military built and tested many flying wings during the 1940s. Here's the Northrop N-1M. It's maiden flight was in 1941. The Germans also built flying wings. Where do people know about flying saucers? Why were there a bunch of flying saucer and alien invasion movies made in the 1950s? Science-fiction magazines from the 1920s: Orson Welles' 1938 radio broadcast of War of the Worlds
This one is computer generated. I've seen it before. There are several on YouTube. The b/w is far too fuzzy to make out anything.
Please don't resort to ridiculous swamp gas explanations to explain the 1952 Washington DC sightings (visual AND radar), or the 1950 Farmington mass sighting. The aerial characteristics and flight performance of the objects in those cases are way beyond anything yet produced, so get off the "we had cresent shaped aircraft" kick. In regards to the two videos I posted (post 29 & post 30), are those Northrop N- 1M aircraft being imagined as flying saucers from Mars due to a radio broadcast in 1938?
Not if you watch the entire video.
Concerning the craft flying over the lake, it does APPEAR to be fake, but with the camera moving, going out of focus in parts, and zooming in, it'd have to be one HELL of a computer in order to generate a moving object that stays in perspective throughout the video..
You still have no explanation for the 1952 Washington DC sightings or the 1950 Farmington, NM sighting.
Let me guess, you're going to try to tell me these are migrating birds, right? Right! Or swamp gas. Or the witnesses were all drunk.
Shut your whore mouth, Mr. President.
Looks like the US Army needed some target practice back 1942, since they couldn't knock out of the sky whatever it was that hovered over LA for hours early one February morning.. Or it was the planet Venus, it was a secret US aircraft, it was a weather balloon, etc., etc., etc. ....
I don't know what Farmington residents saw and they apparently don't either. The article says, "Estimates of the number ranged from several to more that 500." It says that 3 people called the newspaper but hundreds were seen in the streets looking skyward. I think only a small handful of people saw "something" and the rest came out to see what the excitement was all about. Soon, everybody was seeing something. It's really no difference than a mass of people all claiming to see a ghost. The video of lights over the capitol isn't evidence of anything except lights over the capitol. Bolling AFB (built 1918) and Reagan National Airport (formerly Washington National Airport, built 1941) are both in the direction in which the lights are moving. They're moving at speed consistent with aircraft and in formation. They also appear to be turning as you can see the top row of lights moving forward in relation to the lights on the bottom.
So US Air Force interceptors didn't know what they were chasing, and three different radar sites didn't know the difference between aircraft in a normal flight pattern and unknowns, eh?
BTW, here's a bit more on 1952 sightings..
Battle of Los Angeles It appears that they may have been firing at nothing at all but they managed to kill several civilians.
You're now trying to twist the story to make it into something more comfortable for you. Here's what the article stated; Clayton J. Boddy, 32, business manager of Farmington Times and a former Army Engineers captain in Italy, was one of those who saw the startling objects. Boddy was on roadway when all of a sudden I noticed a few moving objects high in the sky. "Moments later there appeared what seemed to be about 500 of them," Boddy continued. He could not estimate their size or speed, but said they appeared to be about 15,000 feet high. Boddy's account was confirmed by Joseph C. and Francis C. Kelloff, retail grocers from Antonito, Colo., who were in Farmington to inspect the site of a proposed new store, and by Bob Foutz and John Burrell of Farmington. The Kelloffs said the objects appeared to be flying in formation. One of the most impressive accounts came from Harold F. Thatcher, head of the Farmington unit of the Soil Conservation service. Thatcher made a triangulation on one of a number of flying craft, He said if it had been a B-29 it would have been 2,000 feet high and traveling more than 1000 miles per hour. John Bloomfield, another employee of Smoak's garage, said the objects he saw traveled at a speed that appeared to him to be about 10 times faster than that of jet planes. In addition, he said the objects frequently made right-angle turns. "They appeared to be coming at each other head-on," he related. "At the last second, one would veer at right angles upward, the other at right angles downward. One saucer would pass another and immediately the one to the rear would zoom into the lead." Marlow Webb, another garage employee, said the objects to the naked eye appeared to be about eight inches in diameter as seen from the ground. He described them as about the size of a dinner plate." "They flew sideways, on edge and at every conceivable angle," he said. "This is what made it easy to determine that they were saucer-shaped." None of the scores of reports told of any vapor trail or engine noise. Nor did anyone report any windows or other markings on the craft. Film crew lights bouncing off reflecting pool and onto clouds?
"Most of the trouble in this world has been caused by folks who can't mind their own business, because they have no business of their own to mind, any more than a smallpox virus has." - William S Burroughs
If they couldn't bring down even one of the "slow moving aircraft" with the barrage of anti-aircraft rounds fired that night, it's a good thing Japan never tried to attack the West Coast... Hmmm. Did you read the articles in my post? Three different Washington radars picked up the objects, and jet interceptors were scrambled. This occured on MULTIPLE occasions in July of 1952 over restricted airspace in Washington DC. Even Truman's staff saw the objects.
I did read it, but I don't trust anything I see or read on the internet. Or see on TV or read in books, for that matter. I've decided to write a book on dialectic geometry.
"Most of the trouble in this world has been caused by folks who can't mind their own business, because they have no business of their own to mind, any more than a smallpox virus has." - William S Burroughs
Uh huh.
Birds are precisely what those are, and birds are probably what the folks in Farmington saw. The behavior they witnessed perfectly describes bird behavior.
Birds are precisely what those are Hmmm, round birds without wings that glow and dart around at approximately 10,000 feet. Yep. , and birds are probably what the folks in Farmington saw. The behavior they witnessed perfectly describes bird behavior. According to witnesses, the saucer shaped objects moved at 1000 mph and in right angles, with several apparently engaged in what seemed like a "dog fight". Yeah, birds. Uh huh.
BTW, it's good to know a bit about what you're all about Alan. I'll take what you say with a few grains of salt from now on...
You can tell the altitude of those birds just from watching the video? They look round for several reasons. They're far away and each one takes up only a few pixels in the image. They blur and smear when he zooms in. If you understand the way digital compression works, adjacent pixels are averaged to give a smoother picture and reduce pixelation. It's called anti-aliasing. They're not perfectly spherical. If you look closely you can see that they have greater width than height. They didn't look to me like they were glowing. They looked white like seagulls. According to witnesses, the saucer shaped objects moved at 1000 mph and in right angles, with several apparently engaged in what seemed like a "dog fight". When viewed from the ground, birds may appear to be moving at high speed when passing in front of clouds. Move your hand quickly in front of your face while looking at something in the distance. Wow, your hand must've moved at thousands of miles per hour! Birds can make high speed turns which might look like right angles. They can also ascend very quickly when entering columns of warm air. I think the Farmington residents had too much to drink and took a little creative license when telling their story. You know, the one that got away is always ten times bigger in the imagination than it is in reality.
I think your head is up in the clouds. And I see you're resorting to the "they were drunk" comments. How original. Yeah, the whole town was cocked and thought they saw saucer shaped craft performing instantaneous 90 degree manuevers while flying at extremely high speeds, where it was really just a bunch of birds. I'm GW Bush, but don't tell anyone, as they might be drunk and think I'm Dick Cheney.
BTW, are you one of those that still insists Iraq had WMD in 2003 and that they were working on a nuclear weapon?
I suppose USAF Captain Ruppelt must be a drunk as well as the F-86 pilot that shot at a UFO, eh? From F-86 intercepts and shoots at saucer-shaped UFO One of the things I've noticed about the hangers on of such as the "Septics" Society, PSICOP, and such is that they are totally unmoved by evidence. That's why I generally don't argue with them (although they are fun to needle by dissecting their illogic and pointing out how closed minded they are). Their mind is made up and they do not want to be confused by no steenking evidence. Regardless of the witness, or any other evidence produced, it is all dismissed preemptorily with a wave of the rhetorical hand, and done so without examination. After all they already know it does not and cannot exist and so there is no reason to make an objective examination of the MOUNTAINS of evidence. It might upset their digestion to be confronted with facts and observations that cannot be summarily dismissed. Of course to use the logic of the septics one could categorically deny the existence of atoms. After all you cannot see them and no one has ever photographed one. We have impact targets in particle accelerators but that is obviously faked since we all know that you cannot see them they therefore do not exist. As, I believe it was you, was commented earlier we live in an Island Galaxy that literally has billions of star systems and likely billions of habitable planets. To think we are alone and at the pinnacle of creation, living in splendid isolation the only inhabited planet in all of the macrocosmic all that has life and the conditions to support it requires a leap of faith greater than someone who finds evidences of the hand of creation in the great evolutionary jumps, which the septics cannot explain, which are evidenced in the known fossil record. As well one might point out that a military pilot that makes a public report of a UFO is subject to a 10,000 dollar fine and ten years in jail. Why would the government put forth such a regulation for something that does not exist? If they do not exist then the pilot must obviously be delusionally insane and should not be allowed anywhere near a high performance aircraft. Yet that is not the tack taken. Instead pilots are told to shut up and not talk about it under threats of draconian punishment. For something that does not exist?
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
A few people HAVE spoken out on matters a bit more serious than simple mass swarms of objects over a town... UFO sightings at ICBM sites and nuclear Weapons Storage Areas
It's sort of like those that insisted the earth was flat because if it were round we'd fall off. It's what they believe, and NO amount of evidence will change their minds.
There is quite a body of evidence that has seeped out from the military. Radar clockings of craft moving as fast as 9,000 mph, and reports of classified crash recovery teams who exist to scoop up the remains of crashed "craft". Also Civilian Air Traffic Controllers are forbidden to talk about UFOs as well. The septics can only maintain their stance by using strawman arguments. They will take an obvious hoax and then falsely imply that because one incident was proven a hoax that it proves that ALL sightings and reports are hoaxes. Their arguments are frequently dishonest and if all else fails they resort to argumentum ad hominem and accuse anyone who speaks of the evidence as a "kook" or a "drunk" etc., ....
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
The town obviously didn't know what they saw. ...are you one of those that still insists Iraq had WMD in 2003 and that they were working on a nuclear weapon? Nope. I strongly opposed the war from the beginning and my many hundreds of posts on various forums attest to it. I never thought Iraq had WMD. A UFO is an unidentified flying object. It means it couldn't be identified.
Exactly - the septics are the modern "Flat Earth Society". I would have less trouble with their antics if they were honest but they are not. They have an agenda that they support with absolute faith and like any fanatic will brook no theories which run contrary to their point of view. They are like the people who closed the Patent Office in the 1880's because everything that could be invented had already been invented. They were the people at Kittyhawk making "catcalls" at those crazy Wright Brothers. "If man were meant to fly God would have given him wings."
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
True, but limited. More accurately we can often rule out what it is NOT e.g., Venus, Swampgas, Drunken Seagulls, the Crazy Professor in his Flivver, etc., ... Science means you look at the evidence and hypothesize based upon the observed phenomena. It is not science to decide something is impossible or cannot exist "a priori". Science is not conducted by fiat or decree.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
Have you ever looked over the MAJESTIC 12 documents?
Not mountains of facts and evidence. Just mountains of bullshit from people who see what they want to see. ... use the logic of the septics one could categorically deny the existence of atoms. After all you cannot see them and no one has ever photographed one. Do some Google searches. Radar clockings of craft moving as fast as 9,000 mph... No, not of craft. Only "something." Meteors have been observed entering the atmosphere at 10 miles/sec. Space craft (from Earth) can reach 5 miles/sec during re-entry. ...reports of classified crash recovery teams who exist to scoop up the remains of crashed "craft". Reports from whom, some caller on the Art Bell show?
Do meteors make 90 degree instanaeous turns, stop and hover, then take off at over 10,000 mph?
No, have not. I am familiar with it but have not read them. Thanks for the link. My late mother was quite a bug on UFOs and so I was exposed to it from an early age - it is not an area I spend a lot of time reading in but do find it interesting. I believe that an objective investigator that actually takes the time to sift through the evidence can reach no other conclusion, after one has eliminated the hoaxes and questionable incidents, that there is a solid core of evidence that suggests that we are, and have been for a long time, being visited by one or more advanced cultures. Probably to come and look at those crazy primitives on Earth.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
From National UFO Reporting Center Mobile quickly answered that a thick cloud layer was obscuring vision, and asked Capt. Hull if he thought the object was in the vicinity of Mobile. "Affirmative," Hull replied. "It is directly ahead of us and at about our altitude or slightly higher. We are right over Jackson and have descended to 10,000 feet..." Immediately after the radio exchange, the UFO began to move. It darted back and forth, rising and falling, making extremely sharp turns, sometimes changing course 90 degrees in an instant. The color and size remained constant. "MacIntosh and I sat there completely flabbergasted at this unnerving exhibition," Capt. Hull reported. After 30 seconds or more, the object ceased its violent maneuvers and again appeared to hover ahead of the plane. About this time Mobile Tower called back: "Capital 77, we are trying to raise the Brookley Air Force Base Tower." At this moment, the UFO began another series of "crazy gyrations, lazy 8’s, square chandelles... and then shot out over the Gulf of Mexico rising at a steep angle. It diminished rapidly to a pinpoint and disappeared in the night. Elapsed time: At least two minutes. "The one thing which I can't get over," Capt. Hull stated, "is the fact that when it came, it came steeply downward; when it departed after its amazing show, it went steeply upward!" Thanks for proving my comment true. Mountains of evidences and reports which you have not read, studied, or investigated but because contentions are made that disagree with your prejudices it is dismissed as "bullshit". Your proof of your thesis is? Thanks for playing. Tilt You lose. Play Again?
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
Probably to come and look at those crazy primitives on Earth. I think there are several possibilities; 1) There are several alien races here from other star systems, each with their own reason for being here, some benevolent, some not. 2) They are time travelers from our future here to observe history, or perhaps even to MODIFY history (if that is even possible given the concept of paradoxes). 3) They are interdimensional travelers, here for unknown reasons. 4) They are from this solar system, where our civilization is a remnant of their own, where a catrostrophic disaster on the planet that used to exist between Mars and Jupiter used to be the home of our ancestors. They settled elsewhere, and we settled here and lost our knowledge over time somehow. 5) Any combination of the above.
I believe, just based on the different reports I've read, as well as directions pointed at by some of our more advanced cosmological thinking, that some combination of 1) and 3) most likely. Given the governments propensity for setting false trails, and use of shills etc., that some of the "hoaxes" were done intentionally to have something to point at. It is like the Crop Circle phenomena - even after the death of the two drunks paraded out as the perps the phenomena continues. So, that either proves life after death, which the septics deny, or that they weren't done by the two drunks.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
While MJ-12 may or may not be a hoax, the Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit certainly did exist... It's quite possible that the Majectic documents are simply false leads placed there to steer attention away from the IPU. Then again, the converse of that idea might be true.
As well we know the Brookings Report exists and was written at NASA's behest.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
I tend to also think 2) might be true, as according to modern physics involving space time, ring singularities could create doorways to past and future universes.
From what I have read and seen hinted at MJ-12 probably did/does exist. Now whether the documents were planted as a false trail to discredit the knowledge of its existence is an open question.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
Here's a link to an interesting site if you're interested in the science behind what I've alluded to...
With my limited knowledge I cannot rule it out. The problem of course with time travel is the paradoxes - as you point out. As well time, as we use the term, is an artificial construct. It is the concept that our linear sequential existence represents some qauntifiable contiguous physical universe phenomena. It is still an ill defined concept. Yes we can measure the ticks on a clock and perceive that they have some duration and we use them as a unit of measure of the progression of events in the physical universe. However, it is yet to be seen if our current understanding and conceptualization can be translated into a principle that can be applied to the construction of a functioning "time machine".
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
Thank you. I will take a look-see.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
Here's a much shorter synopsis on the subject..
Much additional information can be found by looking up the term "ring singularity kerr time travel"
There was a VERY credible sighting at O'Hare Airport in Chicago a couple years ago.
Mark If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
Majestic 12 is likely a hoax and Stanton Friedman is a kook. Even William Cooper denounced him.
It's amazing how people can discern how fast something is traveling just by looking at it from enormous distances. They can just "tell" that it's traveling at 10K/mph. ["Hey Wilbur, how fast you reckon that there flyin' saucer is goin'? Uh, I'd say about 10K/mph, Dilbert."] If you know anything about physics then you know the unlikelihood of something making a 90 degree turn at high velocity. (unless they have inertial dampers installed, right?)
The UFO community frequently describes witnesses as "credible" and then there are all of those "reports."
With our CURRENT understanding it's impossible. That's why craft that exhibit such flight characteristics are NOT made here in the US, or anywhere else on Earth, in this time reference at least..
["Hey Wilbur, how fast you reckon that there flyin' saucer is goin'? Uh, I'd say about 10K/mph, Dilbert."] Hey genius, ever hear of an invention called radar? From Summary Of The UFO Phenomenon You are evading the point again. It is up to the investigator to analyze and judge the credibility of evidence. Sneering comments are NOT evidence. My statement can be checked out and evaluated by anyone caring to look. If one takes the time to dig through some of the better documented and researched evidence in the record there are reams of reports that present an intriguing and thought provoking picture. There are a lot of witness reports from people with solid backgrounds and who have filed affadavits. Their reports, looked at over time, with comparisons made between cases, the similarities over time etc., all add up to a substantial core of evidence which tends to support the contentions that there is some there, there. You are perfectly free to believe whatever you wish, but know that I know, as do you, that when you the proclaim the falsity of evidence which you have neither read nor examined in any fashion that you are simply demonstrating your own personal prejudices and that such assertions have no evidenciary weight whatsoever. It is simply argumentum ad hominem and bluster. It is not a sound argument it is simply "science by decree" which is NOT science. When presented with evidence that cannot be summarily dismissed with ridicule and personal attacks it is simply denied to exist. This is not a reccomendation but is by and large how the septic movement operates and why intelligent, objective, evidence driven individuals grant them no weight and no credence beyond eviscerating their false logic. That is also what clued me in to what the septic movement is about - it is not science it is about shutting down discussion, examination, and reaching conclusions that are contrary to the "approved" paradigm. They are cranks, and government spooks, baying at the moon and complaining about its existence. As well you left unadressed the government's action to penalize and punish people within their authority for making factual reports of their sightings. Again if it was delusion then pilots of high performance aircraft should be removed from their jobs, but intstead they are silenced by threats of punishment and left on duty. Interesting datum that. The same thing applies to Military, and civilian, Air Traffic Controllers - they are forbidden under threat of prosecution from discussing anomalous blips on their scopes. Another interesting data point. In the end you are free to believe in the fuzz in your belly button if you wish, but please do not try to pretend that your voice is authoritative, nor any of the rest of the septic movement, when neither you nor they are willing to examine objectively the available evidence. The exposure of a given hoax does not invalidate any of the evidence that the septic leaders avoid, other than to disparage and deny, the way a Vampire avoids garlic. I have had respect for some of your postings on other issues, here, at LF, and El Pee, so I am disinclined to be nasty, but it does not require of me to avoid pointing out the threadbare tactics and evidences of the septic movement which you seem to grant credibility. The UFO issue is really not that big of an issue for me and I do not spend a lot of time dwelling on it - it is simply that long ago I reached the point where I was convinced by the evidence. It supports overwhelmingly the "we are being visited" hypothesis - one need only remove the blinders and start looking and reading. I don't even feel any overwhelming desire to rub your nose in the evidence because to do so is a pointless exercise in futility. Someone who allows their opinions to be formed by argument from authority, and eschews evidence, is not particularly amenable to reason. Someone who is convinced they already know all the answers is resistant to new information and is in little danger of learning anything new. "When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
With our CURRENT understanding it's impossible. That's why craft that exhibit such flight characteristics are NOT made here in the US, or anywhere else on Earth, in this time reference at least.. The problem one runs into in dealing with the septics is the hidden premise which they will never explicity state i.e., that the technology which we have at this time and place on Planet Earth is the most advanced technology in all of the universe, known and unknown, and that if it is beyond our technical capabilities then it is impossible and that it is inconceivable that any other civilization either exists or could be millions of years ahead of us in their mastery of physical universe principles. That our understanding of the universe is the most complete possible and than anything contrary to the currently accepted theories, which are radically different from the currently accepted theories of even 20 years ago, are the final word on the subject. This is of course highly contrary to the scientific method which, if practiced honestly, requires the theory to change to accomodate any new evidence and if the new evidence is in conflict with the theory then the theory must be changed, or rewritten, to accommodate the new evidence not the evidence thrown out, denied to exist, and the messenger gutted. Thus operating off this hidden, and unsupportable, premise it is easy for them to deny and dismiss any evidence that does not conform to their prejudices. It is not science it is faith in a mythology that they will not allow to be questioned.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
Again we're back to the flat earthers and those that said it was impossible for men to fly. They are so short sighted that anything not yet done HAS to be impossible. It's a good thing that there are those that can think outside the box, otherwise we'd all still be living in caves. "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." ~ Arthur C. Clarke I'm sure aircraft, computers, and automobiles would have been seen as witchcraft by those living in the 1600's.
Exactly - which is why I call them "septics" rather than the skeptics they try to claim they are. As soon as someone takes a position pro or con then one has ceased being a skeptic. The one thread that runs through the so-called "skeptics" crowd is that they are largely advocates of the "con" or "anti" position on most of the subjects they address, but they falsely and dishonestly claim neutrality. They are best viewed as advocates of the authoritarian status quo. To put it direct they ARE advocates NOT skeptics. When they are confronted with evidence that is contrary to their prejudices and their "anti" position they shit a load of the proverbial bricks, start sputtering, and begin with the name calling. That "name-calling" is in and of itself clear evidence of the underlying closed mindset. They simply cannot step back and consider that the other side of a proposition might have some merit. This is no different from the various 'bots one can find infesting political and current events forums. That is why it becomes quickly apparent that some unknown percentage of the so-called "Skeptics" are highly likely forms of Spooks and CoIntelPro agitators. The, less than, Amazing Randi comes readily to mind - he will not say where his funding comes from and is completely closed lipped about it. Absolutely - it would all be "magic". Likely you would be burned at the stake - which is what the septics would like to do to anyone who disagrees with their narrow unimaginative minds. Aircraft of any kind would be "of the Devil", computers completely inscrutable, and automobiles an abomination against God. Take an example from more recent times - the "Cargo Cults" of New Guinea. Aircraft were completely beyond their ken and so the work of God. So, they built effigies to attract them so that God would give them some "cargo" too.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
BTW Alan, these are what geese look like when they migrate. They are dark, and don't appear as glowing orbs under bright clouds. And PS, seagulls don't fly at high altitude nor in huge flocks in formation unless over the ocean at low altitude when following a fishing vessel.. The video I had posted with the bright objects in formation do not display the characteristics of any bird. These are birds Alan. Just because something appears to be moving fast in a video doesn't mean that it is. It's also impossible to tell how high something is without points of reference to triangulate distance. In the other video there are no points of reference. You can't tell how high or fast the objects are moving, or how high the clouds are. The objects are neither glowing, nor orb shaped. They're elliptical and white which is exactly what I'd expect white birds to look like when video taped from a distance. They're also moving in formation consistent with behavior seen in birds.
And since it is absolutely categorically impossible for them to be anything else, and only a retarded slavering drooling kook would think otherwise, it can only be birds. Therefore by decree it is birds. See, I can do Septic Siunce too.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
Don't look much like birds to me. Nope, nope, nope.
"They must find it difficult... Those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority." ~ Gerald Massey
You see flying saucers and aliens everywhere because that's what you want to see. The UFO community has nothing but a bunch of fuzzy photos, blurry videos, and tall tales from attention seekers.
{snip} The point of the foregoing quotes is simply that what a person sees in observing any phenomena is highly dependent upon what they know. If someone KNOWS that UFOs are ALWAYS something other than what the evidence suggests they might be then they will fight to preserve their view of the world by interpreting the observation in terms of what they know. Thus all observations become birds, planets, swamp gas etc., ... because based upon the observers view it could not be anything else. It agrees with their world view (paradigm) of how the universe is ordered. This principle has applicability beyond exploring the phenomena of UFOs as it can be seen at play in other realms of exploratory knowledge. The difference between the discoverer of new phenomena and the pedestrian is that the discoverer seems to be able to look, analyze, and reach a conclusion which is at conflict with the “accepted” view. In other words the discoverer of new phenomena is able to look at the evidence and reach a conclusion which is at variance with what he or she has heretofore known to be. The viewpoint is "what does the evidence suggest" not "how do I explain this away within the accepted framework"? So, returning to the beginning of the circle: When someone knows something cannot be when they are presented with evidence contrary to that paradigm they simply cannot see it. As Thomas Kuhn pointed out in “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” when a new datum, observation, or theory is in conflict with the established paradigm then it will be fought, often viciously, by those who view themselves as the gatekeepers of knowledge and by those who accept upon authority the pronouncements of such gatekeepers. Generally such people are insulted, called kooks, etc., .... When the new idea represents a true revolution in how we see the universe it is frequently fought “tooth and nail”, “hammer and tongs”. Some people actually seem to feel personally threatened by new ideas. There are some good examples of this in the history of science. Gregor Mendel who developed the basic idea and theory of the inheritablity of genetic traits was derided as a kook and upon his death his research languished for nearly 100 years before being resurrected. Today it is part of the accepted paradigm. When Alfred Wegner proposed the theory of “Continental Drift” in the 1930's he was called kook and worse. “The solid continents move? Harummmph! Absurd!” In 1958-59 (The International Geophysical Year) his theory was confirmed. We know it today as the established branch of human knowledge called “Plate Tectonics”. I could cite other examples but those suffice for my point here. And the point? That when someone knows something does not exist then they cannot and will not see it regardless of the evidence. What comes to mind as a follow on is the development of the theory of the human circulatory system. The existing paradigm, developed in ancient Greece, was that the blood flowed through the body as a tide not unlike the ocean. In 1628 William Harvey introduced the idea of the circulatory system. This was a complete variance with the accepted view of the ancient Grecian Physician Galen which had been the standard for nearly 2,000 years. One of the common refrains of the day was: “I would rather err with Galen than be right with Harvey.” So, the controversy surrounding UFOs and their nature is one of conflicting world views. On one hand you have those who accept the possibility, even likelihood, that other planets exist, are inhabited by intelligent beings, and may well be technologically well in advance of what is extant on Planet Earth. On the other hand you have the view that humankind on this planet is the only island outpost of intelligence in all the universe, that it occurred uniquely, and only once by pure chance. Thus even if others might, however impossible it is, exist we are at the technologic apex of all that is achievable. The first group is willing to consider and even accept that we are not alone and are being visited by advanced civilizations who, for whatever reason, are observing us on Planet Earth. The other group violently rejects this as even a remote possibility. It is in conflict with their paradigm and they not only reject it but oppose the view violently because it is in fundamental conflict with what they know to the truth. So, in the end those who hold to the “splendid isolation – apex of creation paradigm” cannot see UFOs as anything other than phenomena that is explainable within their framework of what they know. What they see is determined by what they know. Thus glowing orbs become “Seagulls”, a glowing object rising up out of a forested marsh becomes “Swamp Gas”. Of course some observations are misidentification of natural phenomena explainable within the existing paradigm and this is taken, and illogically without foundation extended, to account for ALL observations regardless of evidence. In other words they would rather “Err with Randi than be right with Friedman”. "When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
Please feel free to believe as you wish, but know that when you begin stooping to insult and viturpitude I take the gloves off. Because you are unable to conceive of something outside of your narrow and insular world view does not require me to restrict my thought to the narrow limited restricted boundaries of the confines of your mind. I go where the evidence goes not where I am told to go and I do not accept some authority's pronouncement without reserving the right to examine the evidence, question, and reach an independent conclusion. I believe in doing my thinking for myself and do not allow others to impose their viewpoint, unexamined, upon me. You may now return to your grazing. In fact I think I hear your fellows calling: "Baaaaaaaaaaaa, baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa". Please feel free to try again when you have learned how to think for yourself.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
100
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
This might be a little late in the game, but I don't see why xx% of Americans believing in witches is weird. There are probably 5 million of us in the US, not to mention tribal witches all over the world.
Shut your whore mouth, Mr. President.
Because it is at conflict with their paradigm i.e., world view. At this time we have two warring philosophical views: Materialism and Spiritualism. Philosophically it is a matter of how one views the nature of fundamental existence. Is the ultimate reality the physical universe and the contructs of it? Or Is the ultimate nature of reality the spiritual i.e., that existence extends beyond the dross reality of the physical universe? My viewpoint is rather more of a Buddhist one i.e., that the greatest reality is awareness and that the self exists above and beyond the physical universe. Witchcraft, which I am not a practioner of, is simply nothing more, in my view, than the empirical application of the nature of what we are i.e., spiritual beings, in creating effects in the physical universe. Some of it is simply ritual and some of it is simply calling upon those abilities which we all have in some measure. Some individuals have greater and lesser degrees of ability of what has been termed PSI abilities. Witchcraft, through its rituals, is simply calling upon those PSI abilities and the ability of the Witch to create affects in the physical universe through the use of those talents. Separating the ritual from the actual abilities exercised would be an exploration of no small triviality but would require a considerable amount of research.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
I'd agree with that assessment. Of course, skeptics may say that no matter which type of witch you're talking about, they're all self-deluding and ineffective, so they don't count. In which case I'd like to refer Mr. Skeptic to his local meteorologist.
Shut your whore mouth, Mr. President.
The so-called skeptics, who do not actually practice skepticism, are scared out of their pants by anything which cannot be explained within their narrow Materialist framework. They are inhabiting a self limiting paradigm. If they were not such nasty and ill mannered boors I would probably pity them for that they inhabit such a small world. As well they are under heavy psychological manipulation as some of the prime moooooooooovers in the Septic Community appear to have ties to CoIntelPro type activities. They are agents of a power which would bring a great darkness to be.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
As a follow-up on this point I might point out this is also why the Darwinian versus Creationist debate is so heated. Materialism can brook no opposition. Without expressing a viewpoint of my own - the Darwinian/Evolutionist viewpoint has been shot full of buckshot and the Darwinian Camp is becoming increasingly nasty as their position continues to erode, because it is NOT supported by the available evidence. This becomes clearer if you read some of the arguments presented by the leading lights of the Creationist argument. Even more galling to the Darwinists is that a few well educated Scientists have defected to the Creationist viewpoint. They were convinced by the evidence, or lack thereof, in support of the Darwinist Religion. As well many of the supporters of the Darwinian paradigm are atheists and oppose creationism in any form NOT because of science but because their philosophical materialist viewpoint does not allow them to accept the possibility because they KNOW that God does not exist and therefore creationism is impossible. Again it is the same argument, logically speaking, as the so-called UFO Skeptics, who again do not truly practice skepticism but are in FACT advocates for the existing officially propounded paradigm. Taking this a step further the Darwinians CANNOT, and again they are largely the same septics that are "UFO Skeptics" (i.e., "anti-" advocates for a point of view) accept that some UFOs might be operated by intelligent beings from somewhere else as that violates their world view as well. Remember that part of the septic/Darwinian world view is that: "...the view that humankind on this planet is the only island outpost of intelligence in all the universe, that it occurred uniquely, and only once by pure chance. ..." If they accept that there is intelligent life elsewhere than Island Earth that destroys the Darwinian argument that life is a "chance occurrence that occurred by pure chance and is unique to Planet Earth". Once that is accepted it is bye bye Darwin. As one can see, and I could add another line of argument i.e., the photographs of Mars and the Moon which appear to show artificial structures on the planetary surface, the Materialist viewpoint is eroding and it is being eroded by the accumulating weight of evidence that is contrary to their pronouncements. Of course I might point out that the septics go ballistic over those photographs too - again they do not agree with the viewpoint the septics push and thus since the evidence is contrary it must be shouted down and suppressed. Heaven forbid that it should be objectively examined.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
Bookmark.
"When I die I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather - not screaming in terror like his passengers." - Unk.
I'm coming to the table here late, but this controversy/subject is intriguing. Creationism suffers from not being a provable theory. It is pretty much a "default" theory. That is, it's the theory one may believe when no other option looks attractive, or at least *until* another option becomes attractive at which time it's subject to being abandoned until that alternate theory loses appeal. If it were a provable theory, then it could stand on its own regardless of what other theories abound. I myself believe in a higher power, but I have no problem accepting that evolution was the mechanism of our creation by that power. For me, in fact, it's kinda a cool idea to think that the Creator authored the laws of the universe such that life could arise. As a programmer myself, I see that as the ultimate programming job, if you will, and as one, totally, totally awesome. More awesome in fact than just sitting back and speaking stuff into existence. For me, that's less enthralling. Almost "cheating" if that were applicable but of course God is far beyond such judgments from any of us. In which case they are not true scientists, as a true scientist will not form his conclusions around his preconceived ideas. That's a valid criticism for those doing that, but it's no less what many creationists do who refuse to believe anything other than creationism only because it similarly contradicts their preconceived world. That's not science either. This is the first time I've heard of ET life being used against Evolutionists. I would expect ET life instead to play against creationists insofar as Christ died once for all time, and since he was human, it implies there is no other intelligent life throughout the universe that is in need of the gospel or redemption via the cross. Is it possible that intelligent ET's might exist out there that have neither sin nor knowledge of good and evil, which we humans inherited as per garden of Eden? That's hard to imagine. What the chances are of life arising via random chance is speculation only. Some claim the odds are so ridiculously low that the universe would have to be some 5000 billion years old for it to have a reasonable chance of happening (contrasted to the current belief of it between only 10-15 billion years old), but that assumes the scientists have those odds right which is pure speculation.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
DNA is very much like a binary coded program, in fact it is strikingly similar.
Life could be very common across the Universe. In fact, every single star might have at least one planet with life on it.
#2. To: Alan Chapman (#1)
Michael Shermer of the Skeptic Society speculated that people ascribe to these kinds of beliefs to give their lives meaning.
#3. To: abraxas (#2)
#4. To: Alan Chapman (#1)
Michael Shermer of the Skeptic Society speculated that people ascribe to these kinds of beliefs to give their lives meaning.
#5. To: Alan Chapman (#1)
Michael Shermer of the Skeptic Society speculated that people ascribe to these kinds of beliefs to give their lives meaning.
#6. To: Alan Chapman (#3)
Intoxication may be a means to deal with life rather than a way to give it meaning.
#7. To: Indrid Cold (#5)
#8. To: Vitamin Z (#4)
#9. To: Alan Chapman (#7)
Statistically significant evidence of astrology? Let's see it.
#10. To: robin (#0)
#11. To: Dakmar (#10)
I've already said too much.
#12. To: Alan Chapman (#7)
BTW, there is no statistical evidence than more strange behavior takes place during a full moon.
#13. To: YertleTurtle (#12)
BTW, the most humorless fanatics I have never met in my life are people who believe in evolution.
#14. To: robin (#0)
#15. To: YertleTurtle (#12)
#16. To: Alan Chapman (#1)
.....Michael Shermer of the Skeptic....
#17. To: Indrid Cold (#9)
#18. To: Alan Chapman (#1)
The predilection toward belief in nonsense owes a great deal to both government schools and the church. Neither (especially the church) encourages critical thinking and analysis.
#19. To: Alan Chapman (#17)
Advocates of the Mars Effect make the common mistake of concluding that two events that occur together share a causal relation.
#20. To: Indrid Cold (#19)
#21. To: robin, Alan Chapman, TwentyTwelve, all (#0)
"...while around one-third of those polled also said they believe in UFOs, witches and astrology."
#22. To: Original_Intent (#21)
Which of those has the government consistently attacked via derision and their various operatives such as Michael Schermer? UFOs.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#23. To: Dakmar (#10)
UFO's?
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#24. To: Original_Intent (#21)
#25. To: Original_Intent (#21)
#26. To: Alan Chapman (#25)
There isn't a shred of evidence of visitation by aliens in flying saucers. Even with the proliferation of billions of cameras, camera phones, and video cameras there still isn't any compelling evidence. All of those old b/w photos of flying saucers are nothing but people tossing pie pans and hub caps into the air.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#27. To: Alan Chapman, Original_Intent (#25)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#28. To: FormerLurker (#27)
#29. To: Alan Chapman (#28)
(Edited)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#30. To: Alan Chapman (#28)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#31. To: Alan Chapman (#28)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#32. To: FormerLurker (#27)
#33. To: FormerLurker (#30)
#34. To: Alan Chapman (#32)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#35. To: Alan Chapman (#33)
The b/w is far too fuzzy to make out anything.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#36. To: Alan Chapman (#33)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#37. To: Alan Chapman (#33)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#38. To: Alan Chapman (#32)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#39. To: FormerLurker (#38)
Let me guess, you're going to try to tell me these are migrating birds, right?
#40. To: Alan Chapman (#32)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#41. To: Indrid Cold (#39)
Right! Or swamp gas. Or the witnesses were all drunk.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#42. To: FormerLurker (#34)
#43. To: Alan Chapman (#42)
The video of lights over the capitol isn't evidence of anything except lights over the capitol. Bolling AFB (built 1918) and Reagan National Airport (formerly Washington National Airport, built 1941) are both in the direction in which the lights are moving. They're moving at speed consistent with aircraft and in formation. They also appear to be turning as you can see the top row of lights moving forward in relation to the lights on the bottom.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#44. To: Alan Chapman (#42)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#45. To: FormerLurker (#40)
#46. To: Alan Chapman (#42)
(Edited)
I think only a small handful of people saw "something" and the rest came out to see what the excitement was all about. Soon, everybody was seeing something. It's really no difference than a mass of people all claiming to see a ghost.
Fully half of this town's population still is certain today that it saw space ships or some strange aircraft -- hundreds of them zooming through the skies yesterday. Estimates of the number ranged from several to more that 500. Whatever they were, they caused a major sensation in this community, which lies only 110 air miles northwest of the huge Los Alamos Atomic installation.
Scores described the objects as silvery discs. A number agreed they saw one that was red in color -- bigger and faster, and apparently the leader.
Brooks, a B-29 tail gunner during the war, said he was positive the objects sighted were not airplanes. "The very maneuvering of the things couldn't be that of modern aircraft," he said.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#47. To: FormerLurker (#23)
What do you suppose these things are Dak?
#48. To: Alan Chapman (#45)
Battle of Los Angeles It appears that they may have been firing at nothing at all but they managed to kill several civilians.
Editor Peter Jenkins of the Los Angeles Herald Examiner reported, "I could clearly see the V formation of about 25 silvery planes overhead moving slowly across the sky toward Long Beach." Long Beach Police Chief J.H. McClelland said [4] "I watched what was described as the second wave of planes from atop the seven-story Long Beach City Hall. I did not see any planes but the younger men with me said they could. An experienced Navy observer with powerful Carl Zeiss binoculars said he counted nine planes in the cone of the searchlight. He said they were silver in color. The group passed along from one battery of searchlights to another, and under fire from the anti-aircraft guns, flew from the direction of Redondo Beach and Inglewood on the land side of Fort MacArthur, and continued toward Santa Ana and Huntington Beach. Anti-aircraft fire was so heavy we could not hear the motors of the planes."[5]
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#49. To: Dakmar (#47)
Film crew lights bouncing off reflecting pool and onto clouds?
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#50. To: FormerLurker (#49)
#51. To: Dakmar (#50)
I did read it, but I don't trust anything I see or read on the internet. Or see on TV or read in books, for that matter. I've decided to write a book on dialectic geometry.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#52. To: FormerLurker (#38)
#53. To: Alan Chapman (#52)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#54. To: Alan Chapman (#52)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#55. To: FormerLurker (#53)
#56. To: Alan Chapman (#55)
(Edited)
When viewed from the ground, birds may appear to be moving at high speed when passing in front of clouds.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#57. To: Alan Chapman (#55)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#58. To: Alan Chapman (#55)
In the summer of 1952 a United States Air Force F-86 jet interceptor shot at a flying saucer. This fact, like so many others that make up the full flying saucer story has never before been told. I know the full story about flying saucers and I know that it has never before been told because I organized and was chief of the Air Force Project Blue Book, the special project set up to investigate and analyze unidentified flying object, or UFO reports. (UFO is the official term that I created to replace the words 'flying saucers.")
There is a fighter base in the United States which I used to visit frequently because, during 1951, 1952, and 1953, it got more than its share of good UFO reports. The commanding officer of the fighter group, a full colonel and command pilot, believed that UFO's were real. The colonel believed in UFO's because he had a lot of faith in his pilots - and they had chased UFO's in their F-86's. He had seen UFO's on the scopes of his radar sets, and he knew radar. The colonel's intelligence officer, a captain, didn't exactly believe that UFO's were real, but he did think that they warranted careful investigation. The logic the intelligence officer used in investigating UFO reports - and in getting answers to many of them - made me wish many times that he worked for me on Project Blue Book.
One day the intelligence officer called me at my base in Dayton, Ohio. He wanted to know if I was planning to make a trip his way soon. When I told him I expected to be in his area in about a week, he asked me to be sure to look him up. There was no special hurry, he added, but he had something very interesting to show me. When we got wind of a good story, Project Blue Book liked to start working on it at once, so I asked the intelligence officer to tell me what he had. But nothing doing. He didn't want to discuss it over the phone. He even vetoed the idea of putting it into a secret wire. Such extreme caution really stopped me, because anything can be coded and put in a wire.
When I left Dayton about a week later I decided to go straight to the fighter base, planning to arrive there in midmorning. But while I was changing airlines my reservations got fouled up, and I was faced with waiting until evening to get to the base. I called the intelligence officer and told him about the mix-up. He told me to hang on right there and he would fly over and pick me up in a T-33 jet. As soon as we were in the air, on the return trip, I called the intelligence officer on the interphone and asked him what was going on. What did he have? Why all the mystery? He tried to tell me, but the interphone wasn't working too well and I couldn't understand what he was saying. Finally he told me to wait until we returned to his office and I could read the report myself. Report! If he had a UFO report why hadn't he sent it in to Project Blue Book as he usually did?
We landed at the fighter base, checked in our parachutes, Mae Wests, and helmets, and drove over to his office. There were several other people in the office, and they greeted me with the usual question, "What's new on the flying saucer front?" I talked with them for a while, but was getting impatient to find out what was on the intelligence officer's mind. I was just about to ask him about the mysterious report when he took me to one side and quietly asked me not to mention it until everybody had gone. Once we were alone, the intelligence officer shut the door, went over to his safe, and dug out a big, thick report. It was the standard Air Force reporting form that is used for all intelligence reports, including UFO reports. The intelligence officer told me that this was the only existing copy. He said that he had been told to destroy all copies, but had saved one for me to read. With great curiosity, I took the report and started to read. What had happened at this fighter base?
About ten o'clock in the morning, one day a few weeks before, a radar near the base had picked up an unidentified target. It was an odd target in that it came in very fast - about 700 miles per hour - and then slowed down to about 100 miles per hour. The radar showed that it was located northeast of the airfield, over a sparsely settled area. Unfortunately the radar station didn't have any height finding equipment. The operators knew the direction of the target and its distance from the station but they didn't know its altitude. They reported the target, and two F-86's were scrambled. The radar picked up the F-86's soon after they were airborne, and had begun to direct them into the target when the target started to fade on the radarscope. At the time several of the operators thought that this fade was caused by the target's losing altitude rapidly and getting below the radar's beam. Some of the other operators thought that it was a high flying target and that it was fading just because it was so high. In the debate which followed, the proponents of the high flying theory won out, and the F-86's were told to go up to 40,000 feet. But before the aircraft could get to that altitude, the target had been completely lost on the radarscope. The F-86's continued to search the area at 40,000 feet, but could see nothing. After a few minutes the aircraft ground controller called the F-86's and told one to come down to 20,000 feet, the other to 5,000 feet, and continue the search, The two jets made a quick letdown, with one pilot stopping at 20,000 feet and the other heading for the deck.
The second pilot, who was going down to 5,000 feet, was just beginning to pull out when he noticed a flash below and ahead of him. He flattened out his dive a little and headed toward the spot where he had seen the light. As he closed on the spot he suddenly noticed what he first thought was a weather balloon. A few seconds later be realized that it couldn't be a balloon because it was staying ahead of him. Quite an achievement for a balloon, since he had built up a lot of speed in his dive and now was flying almost straight and level at 3,000 feet and was traveling "at the Mach." Again the pilot pushed the nose of the F-86 down and started after the object. He closed fairly fast, until he came to within an estimated 1,000 yards. Now he could get a good look at the object. Although it had looked like a balloon from above, a closer view showed that it was definitely round and flat saucer shaped. The pilot described it as being "like a doughnut without a hole." As his rate of closure began to drop off, the pilot knew that the object was picking up speed. But he pulled in behind it and started to follow. Now he was right on the deck. About this time the pilot began to get a little worried. What should he do? He tried to call his buddy, who was flying above him somewhere in the area at 20,000 feet. He called two or three times but could get no answer. Next he tried to call the ground controller but he was too low for his radio to carry that far. Once more he tried his buddy at 20,000 feet, but again no luck. By now he had been following the object for about two minutes and during this time had closed the gap between them to approximately 500 yards. But this was only momentary. Suddenly the object began to pull away, slowly at first, then faster. The pilot, realizing that he couldn't catch it, wondered what to do next. When the object traveled out about 1,000 yards, the pilot suddenly made up his mind - he did the only thing that he could do to stop the UFO. It was like a David about to do battle with a Goliath, but he had to take a chance. Quickly charging his guns, he started shooting. . . . A moment later the object pulled up into a climb and in a few seconds it was gone. The pilot climbed to 10,000 feet, called the other F-86, and now was able to contact his buddy. They joined up and went back to their base.
As soon as he had landed and parked, the F-86 pilot went into operations to tell his story to his squadron commander. The mere fact that he had fired his guns was enough to require a detailed report, as a matter of routine. But the circumstances under which the guns actually were fired created a major disturbance at the fighter base that day.
After the squadron commander had heard his pilot's story, he called the group commander, the colonel, and the intelligence officer. They heard the pilot's story. For some obscure reason there was a "personality clash," the intelligence officer's term, between the pilot and the squadron commander. This was obvious, according to the report I was reading, because the squadron commander immediately began to tear the story apart and accuse the pilot of "cracking up," or of just "shooting his guns for the hell of it and using the wild story as a cover-up." Other pilots in the squadron, friends of the accused pilot - including the intelligence officer and a flight surgeon - were called in to "testify." All of these men were aware of the fact that in certain instances a pilot can "flip" for no good reason, but none of them said that he had noticed any symptoms of mental crack-up in the unhappy pilot. None, except the squadron commander. He kept pounding home has idea - that the pilot was "psycho" - and used a few examples of what the report called "minor incidents" to justify his stand.
Finally the pilot who had been flying with the "accused" man was called in. He said that he had been monitoring the tactical radio channel but that he hadn't heard any calls from his buddy's low flying F-86. The squadron commander triumphantly jumped on this point, but the accused pilot tended to refute it by admitting he was so jumpy that he might not have been on the right channel. But when he was asked if he had checked or changed channels after he had lost the object and before he had finally contacted the other F-86, he couldn't remember. So ended the pilot's story and his interrogation.
The intelligence officer wrote up his report of a UFO sighting, but at the last minute, just before sending it, he was told to hold it back. He was a little unhappy about this turn of events, so he went in to see why the group commander had decided to delay sending the report to Project Blue Book. They talked over the possible reactions to the report. If it went out it would cause a lot of excitement, maybe unnecessarily. Yet, if the pilot actually had seen what he claimed, it was vitally important to get the report in to ATIC immediately. The group commander said that he would make his decision after a talk with his executive officer. They decided not to send the report and ordered it destroyed.
When I finished reading, the intelligence officer's first comment was, "What do you think?" Since the evaluation of the report seemed to hinge upon conflicts between personalities I didn't know, I could venture no opinion, except that the incident made up the most fascinating UFO report I'd ever seen. So I batted the intelligence officer's question back to him. "I know the people involved," he replied, "and I don't think the pilot was nuts. I can't give you the report, because Colonel told me to destroy it. But I did think you should know about it." Later he burned the report.
The problems involved in this report are typical. There are certain definite facts that can be gleaned from it; the pilot did see something and he did shoot at something, but no matter how thoroughly you investigate the incident that something can never be positively identified. It might have been a hallucination or it might have been some vehicle from outer space; no one will ever know. It was a UFO.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#59. To: FormerLurker, Alan Chapman, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, all (#56)
#60. To: Original_Intent (#59)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#61. To: Original_Intent (#59)
As, I believe it was you, was commented earlier we live in an Island Galaxy that literally has billions of star systems and likely billions of habitable planets. To think we are alone and at the pinnacle of creation, living in splendid isolation the only inhabited planet in all of the macrocosmic all that has life and the conditions to support it requires a leap of faith greater than someone who finds evidences of the hand of creation in the great evolutionary jumps, which the septics cannot explain, which are evidenced in the known fossil record.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#62. To: FormerLurker (#60)
A few people HAVE spoken out on matters a bit more serious than simple mass swarms of objects over a town...
#63. To: FormerLurker (#56)
#64. To: FormerLurker (#61)
It's sort of like those that insisted the earth was flat because if it were round we'd fall off. It's what they believe, and NO amount of evidence will change their minds.
#65. To: Alan Chapman, FormerLurker (#63)
A UFO is an unidentified flying object. It means it couldn't be identified.
#66. To: Original_Intent (#64)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#67. To: Original_Intent (#59)
#68. To: Alan Chapman (#67)
Meteors have been observed entering the atmosphere at 10 miles/sec
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#69. To: FormerLurker (#66)
#70. To: Alan Chapman, Original_Intent (#67)
Meteors have been observed entering the atmosphere at 10 miles/sec.
On November 14th, a major UFO incident occurred over the state of Alabama. Capt. W.J. Hull, veteran Capital Airlines pilot was a UFO skeptic. He had written an article entitled, "The Obituary of The Flying Saucers," for the Airline Pilot magazine. At 10:10 p.m. on the l4th, Capt. Hull was the pilot of Capital Flight No. 77, approaching Mobile, Alabama, enroute from New York City. Suddenly, he and his co-pilot, Peter MacIntosh, noticed a bright light through the upper part of the windshield. The plane was on a southwesterly course, and the object, looking like a meteor, was railing across their path from left to right. But, instead of burning out, the 'meteor' halted abruptly directly in front of the plane. "What the hell is it, a jet?" MacIntosh shouted. As the UFO remained a constant distance in front of the plane, Capt. Hull grabbed his microphone and called Mobile Tower. "Bates Tower, this is Capital 77. Look out toward the north and east and see if you can see a strange white light hovering in the sky."
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#71. To: Alan Chapman (#67)
Not mountains of facts and evidence. Just mountains of bullshit from people who see what they want to see.
#72. To: Original_Intent (#69)
...there is a solid core of evidence that suggests that we are, and have been for a long time, being visited by one or more advanced cultures.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#73. To: FormerLurker (#72)
#74. To: Original_Intent (#73)
(Edited)
Given the governments propensity for setting false trails, and use of shills etc., that some of the "hoaxes" were done intentionally to have something to point at.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#75. To: FormerLurker (#74)
#76. To: Original_Intent (#73)
I believe, just based on the different reports I've read, as well as directions pointed at by some of our more advanced cosmological thinking, that some combination of 1) and 3) most likely.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#77. To: FormerLurker (#74)
#78. To: Original_Intent (#73)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#79. To: FormerLurker (#76)
I tend to also think 2) might be true, as according to modern physics involving space time, ring singularities could create doorways to past and future universes.
#80. To: FormerLurker (#78)
#81. To: Original_Intent (#80)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#82. To: Original_Intent (#79)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#83. To: FormerLurker (#57)
#84. To: FormerLurker (#66)
#85. To: FormerLurker (#68)
#86. To: Original_Intent (#71)
#87. To: Alan Chapman (#85)
If you know anything about physics then you know the unlikelihood of something making a 90 degree turn at high velocity. (unless they have inertial dampers installed, right?)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#88. To: Alan Chapman (#85)
It's amazing how people can discern how fast something is traveling just by looking at it from enormous distances. They can just "tell" that it's traveling at 10K/mph.
All UFOs are capable of incredible speeds. Reliable radar observations (in some cases with multiple sets at multiple frequencies) have documented speeds as high as 10,000 mph within the atmosphere, as long ago as the 1950s. High speeds alone do not distinguish the UFO, since such objects as meteors can attain similar speeds. But profiles of speed and altitude based on radar measurements and backed up by visual observations indicate that UFOs can and do undergo radical changes in both speed and altitude simultaneously. Other observations indicate a disregard for normal orientations, where the UFO is observed to hover on edge, flip upside down, or spin while hovering. A particularly characteristic maneuver is the "falling leaf", where the object swings like a pendulum from side to side while descending. This maneuver to lose altitude was first used in human flight by Paul Hill, the NASA engineer who invented the flying platform.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#89. To: Alan Chapman, FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, robin, all (#86)
(Edited)
The UFO community frequently describes witnesses as "credible" and then there are all of those "reports."
"The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is." ~ Winston Churchill
#90. To: FormerLurker, Alan Chapman, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, robin, all (#87)
(Edited)
If you know anything about physics then you know the unlikelihood of something making a 90 degree turn at high velocity. (unless they have inertial dampers installed, right?)
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." ~ Arthur C. Clarke
#91. To: Original_Intent (#90)
The problem one runs into in dealing with the septics is the hidden premise which they will never explicity state i.e., that the technology which we have at this time and place on Planet Earth is the most advanced technology in all of the universe, known and unknown, and that if it is beyond our technical capabilities then it is impossible and that it is inconceivable that any other civilization either exists or could be millions of years ahead of us in their mastery of physical universe principles.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#92. To: FormerLurker, Alan Chapman, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, robin, all (#91)
(Edited)
Again we're back to the flat earthers and those that said it was impossible for men to fly. They are so short sighted that anything not yet done HAS to be impossible.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." ~ Arthur C. Clarke
I'm sure aircraft, computers, and automobiles would have been seen as witchcraft by those living in the 1600's.
#93. To: Alan Chapman (#55)
They're not perfectly spherical. If you look closely you can see that they have greater width than height. They didn't look to me like they were glowing. They looked white like seagulls.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#94. To: FormerLurker (#93)
#95. To: Alan Chapman, FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, robin, all (#94)
(Edited)
They're elliptical and white which is exactly what I'd expect white birds to look like when video taped from a distance. They're also moving in formation consistent with behavior seen in birds.
#96. To: Original_Intent, FormerLurker, Alan Chapman, TwentyTwelve, Wudidizzlemynizzle, robin, all (#90)
#97. To: Original_Intent (#95)
#98. To: Alan Chapman, FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, christine, robin, all (#97)
(Edited)
Somebody once observed to the eminent philosopher Wittgenstein how stupid medieval Europeans living before the time of Copernicus must have been that they could have looked at the sky and thought that the sun was circling the earth. Surely a modicum of astronomical good sense would have told them that the reverse was true. Wittgenstein is sad to have replied: "I agree, but I wonder what it would have looked like if the sun had been circling the earth."i
”This view of the universe permeates all aspects of our life. All communities in all places at all times manifest their own view of reality in what they do. The entire culture reflects the contemporary model of reality. We are what we know. And when that body of knowledge changes so do we.”ii
i. Burke, James, The Day The Universe Changed Pg 11, (Little, Brown and Company, 1985)
ii. Ibid., Pg 11
#99. To: Alan Chapman (#97)
#100. To: All (#99)
#101. To: Original_Intent (#100)
#102. To: Indrid Cold (#101)
This might be a little late in the game, but I don't see why xx% of Americans believing in witches is weird. There are probably 5 million of us in the US, not to mention tribal witches all over the world.
#103. To: Original_Intent (#102)
is simply nothing more, in my view, than the empirical application of the nature of what we are i.e., spiritual beings, in creating effects in the physical universe. Some of it is simply ritual and some of it is simply calling upon those abilities which we all have in some measure. Some individuals have greater and lesser degrees of ability of what has been termed PSI abilities. Witchcraft, through its rituals, is simply calling upon those PSI abilities and the ability of the Witch to create affects in the physical universe through the use of those talents.
#104. To: Indrid Cold (#103)
I'd agree with that assessment. Of course, skeptics may say that no matter which type of witch you're talking about, they're all self-deluding and ineffective, so they don't count.
#105. To: Alan Chapman, FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, christine, robin, Indrid Cold, All (#98)
#106. To: All FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, christine, robin, Alan Chapman, Indrid Cold, Pinguinite, Zipporah, FOH (#98)
So, the controversy surrounding UFOs and their nature is one of conflicting world views. On one hand you have those who accept the possibility, even likelihood, that other planets exist, are inhabited by intelligent beings, and may well be technologically well in advance of what is extant on Planet Earth. On the other hand you have the view that humankind on this planet is the only island outpost of intelligence in all the universe, that it occurred uniquely, and only once by pure chance. Thus even if others might, however impossible it is, exist we are at the technologic apex of all that is achievable.
#107. To: Original_Intent (#106)
#108. To: Original_Intent (#106)
This becomes clearer if you read some of the arguments presented by the leading lights of the Creationist argument.
As well many of the supporters of the Darwinian paradigm are atheists and oppose creationism in any form NOT because of science but because their philosophical materialist viewpoint does not allow them to accept the possibility
Taking this a step further the Darwinians CANNOT, and again they are largely the same septics that are "UFO Skeptics" (i.e., "anti-" advocates for a point of view) accept that some UFOs might be operated by intelligent beings from somewhere else as that violates their world view as well.
#109. To: Pinguinite (#108)
As a programmer myself, I see that as the ultimate programming job, if you will, and as one, totally, totally awesome.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#110. To: Pinguinite (#108)
What the chances are of life arising via random chance is speculation only. Some claim the odds are so ridiculously low that the universe would have to be some 5000 billion years old for it to have a reasonable chance of happening (contrasted to the current belief of it between only 10-15 billion years old), but that assumes the scientists have those odds right which is pure speculation.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest