Quote:
Originally Posted by Dion
Ignorance to you maybe but not to me. I would think that person quoted who makes crop circles would have a bit more knowladge of this than you or myself. I'm also pretty sure he knows of the tools people use to make them plus the time involved.
|
That's a lot of "pretty sure" and "would think". One person doesn't represent everyone who's made a crop circle and doesn't have all the knowledge. Different magicians compete fiercely to come up with acts to outdo the others, not every magician knows all the tricks, the same thing would apply here.
Quote:
|
I have an open mind to these things and am willing to accept the possibilty the one he refered to was not man made and maybe others. I also don't need the same burden of proof that you are spouting. All that i've read on the subject suggests to me that not all are man made. The evidence, while not concrete proof, is very compelling and cannot be dismissed in my mind.
|
What "burden of proof am I spouting"? Burden of proof simply means that the person making the claim has the burden of substantiating that claim, it doesn't say anything about the amount of evidence required.
Concrete proof is better reserved for math, evidence is what's important. Think of the kind of evidence that would be admissible in court. What evidence is there that's so compelling about non-human origins of crop circles? Real evidence I mean, not hearsay and "some guy said he measured".