Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
Lol don't be so dramatic. Your argument of course is meaningless, you can same the same thing for everything else. Angels and demons must exist right? Ghosts. Astral projection. Telepathy.
Otherwise everyone who has come forward must be mistaken! Appeal to authority, argumentum ad populum, etc may sway some, but again they aren't actual evidence.
I of course didn't conclude anything; I don't conclude things without proper evidence. There's just the probabilities. I may not know exactly who put the gift under my Christmas tree, but it's more likely to be my son than Santa.
|
Come on photon, that's quite the display of arrogance. You don't conclude "anything," "without proof," but have that audacity to dismiss the experience of the individuals involved in the events AND the evidence submitted in support of them, because you don't like their evidence. And HIS argument is meaningless? Wow! This is one of the things I laugh at when it comes to the skeptic community. They have become so entrenched in their disbelief of anything that they will only alter their opinions - and that is all they have to counter these events, is their opinion - if they have first hand experience with the subject matter, or the evidence is proven/disproven by a body of their liking, often stacking the decks against the potential of any actual fair evaluation. It is bordering on the very edge of religiosity and doesn't further the cause of examination.
I fully believe in people being skeptical, but when individuals are willing to put themselves out there, with nothing to gain but ridicule and attack, they obviously have something they believe to be important and worthy of disclosure and conversation. When they come with documents or video from the event, they are worth listening to. You can dismiss Lazar all you like, as the decades long smear campaign has been quite effective, but Cmdr. Fravor is a well respected and decorated aviator who had nothing to gain from this this. In fact, neither Lazar nor Fravor have sought out the attention they have received. They had to be convinced to appear at most of these events to share their experience. And in Lazar's case, he refuses to take any money or use his infamy to profit in any shape or fashion. Be skeptical, but make sure you weigh the evidence and know the story over the years, and the lengths the government has gone to keep this stuff under the rug.
Now you can think your five minutes of google-foo gives you the unique ability to be judge, jury, and ultimate authority on these events, and people buying the decades long smear campaign against some of these people who have had experiences and were brave enough to come forward, but you do yourself and the subject a disservice. I mean, the United States government has admitted they had a program in place to discredit and ridicule anyone who spoke on the topic of UFOs. You become the sheeple that the very people who perpetuate these smears are hoping you to be. But I get it. We want and need order in our lives, and we want and need to think we are the apex being on this planet and universe, it is human nature and part and parcel of our psychological makeup. The thought that we may not be the top banana and master of our domain is too much for a lot of people to consider. It's sad, but the vast majority of people just don't have it in them to think we might now be the smartest or best thing around.
Me? I honestly don't know. I originally viewed Lazar as a disinformation agent. But as I followed the work of Knapp I quickly found there was some credibility to what he was saying and he, as a third party, was finding data to support the claims made. Lazar may not have any credibility, but as a journalist, Knapp's credentials are pretty impressive. The work of Knapp and Corbell together provide a compelling case that there is a disinformation campaign at work here, but it is more focused on making Lazar disappear and discrediting him than actually discrediting his claims. Knapp convinced me more than Lazar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownInFlames
I don't know about best, but Mick West does a great job responding to Fravor.
|
Don't know Mick West, but after watching this video I would say he's a professional ####### who hides behind the persona of being a "skeptic." This clown is trying to play word games and discredit what the witness claims, not acknowledging that the event had secondary and tertiary witnesses and data to provide triangulation data to support the claims of the witness. Like, how big a clown do you have to be to try and play the game of you said you had eyes on it at all times, but then you admit you took your eyes off it to check instrumentation? What as idiot. Pilots have HUDs so they can check instrumentation and keep eyes on target. But what a skeptic! Amiright? And yes, Cmdr. Fravor is right on target when he laughs and says West doesn't know what he's talking about. West proves it time and time again, but to the skeptic community, those who get of on disbelieving everything, they get all juiced up by this condescending comments and ridiculous questions. West doesn't know #### about flying jets, doesn't know #### about the optical systems in these aircraft, but is certain he knows the precise precision of the optic stabilization and the rate by which the tic tac left the tracking system, and it being very slow? Really? And that is more credible than the guy who was there and had millions of dollars of hardware and sensors at his disposal? God bless the skeptic community. They are consistent as they are stupid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownInFlames
Unidentified Flying Objects could be anything, including a balloon. Fravor is conflating his training to identify a known aircraft with an ability to identify an unknown airborne object. Perspective, parallax, and any other optical illusion can make you unable to understand what you're seeing.
|
It's not just what Fravor saw. It's what his second saw. It's what his wingman and his second saw. It was what the radar operators on the ships saw. It is multiple people with multiple perspectives and a ton of data saw. West is a clown because he seems to ignore this fact. Don't fall into that same trap.