[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by jammies

The argument is that if you trust people's memories as proof of one claim when no other proof exists then you must accept their memories as proof of any other claim when no other proof exists.

Nice syllogistic fallacy. Also nice twisting of the position I made and trying to extrapolate it in to something not said. The point was made in a discussion about memory, not about specifics to aliens or ghosts or anything specific. It was in relation to an individual's memories and the validity of those memories to the individual. In the absence of contrary evidence or mental defect then you must assume the individual has the memory they are describing.

Your counter-argument is that ghosts aren't aliens. The relevance of this statement seems dubious.

Your argument is a syllogistic fallacy, completely void of nuance or examining the facts. You're also on a runaway train where you're compiling your interpretation of comments and then building a strawman. You're making claims on my behalf that I have not made based on your syllogistic leaps. Here are the positions I've stated in this thread.

1) UFOs are real.
2) The behaviors of these UFOs exceed anything the technology that any nation state has available. These UFOs do not appear to be terrestrial in nature.
3) I believe there is other life in the universe, and I believe there are civilizations that are way ahead of us in technology and evolution.
4) Our understanding of the universe and the constraints on what can be done are in their infancy.
5) Our understanding of the mind and the brain is also in its infancy.
6) Memory is very complex, there are different types of memory, and there are means to validate the existence of memories within each type of memory space.
7) Cognitive function and impairment are critical to the determination of memory efficacy.
8) In the absence of cognitive or physical defect, or evidence to the contrary, we must accept that an individual has the memory they are recalling.
9) Near death experience can be explained through neurophysiology and brain activity.
10) I have not seen any compelling evidence of a ghost/spirit/soul existing, so I do not believe in such entities.
11) I leave myself open to all possibilities should a compelling body of evidence be submitted for review and logical explanations cannot be found.
12) We don't know what we don't know, especially when it comes to physics and the universe around us.

Those are all separate points to very different arguments. You don't get to visit the syllogistic smorgasbord and compile something I never said.

There is no proof that aliens exist. I believe it is likely, nevertheless, that they do, or did, or will, and I also believe it is extremely unlikely that any such aliens visit this planet and give rise to reports of UFOs.

Proof that you are aware of or willing to accept. What evidence would convince you? A functioning craft landing in your front yard? At this point does it still remain a UFO, since you've now identified it, and you can still maintain you don't believe in UFOs (even though they exist)?

The government has been researching this subject matter for decades, and has keep those programs hidden from public view. The most famous of which was a program where their lead astrophysicist changed his tune and became a proponent of UFOs not being terrestrial in nature. These programs have collected data from events around the globe and off planet. This lends a high degree of credibility to the search for the origin of such technologies, whether you care to acknowledge it or not.

The alien factor is a separate issue. Yes, I think there is other life out there. Yes, I think they would be just as curious about us as we would be about them. We've been looking for a very short period of time. If there are other more advanced civilizations out there, with the same level of curiosity as us, then it would make sense for them to observe us in the same way we observe other species. The big question is how would that other intelligence cross the vast expanses of space to reach us? With our current technology, that doesn't seem possible. But we must understand that if these other civilizations are thousands of years more advanced that us, they may have a greater understanding of the universe, of physics, and may be able to do what we may not. Consider that 200 years ago, Charles Babbage proposed the difference engine, which would ultimately become the computer, and the first steel hulled steamboat crossed the English Channel. We've come a very long way in a very short period of time. Now extrapolate that over a tens to hundreds of thousands of years. We as a species have a long way to go, and we don't know what we don't know.

Due to holding this second opinion, I disagree with your opinion on the reality of alien UFOs and further find the arguments you present to justify your opinion risible.

Syllogistic fallacy.

The above is a succinct summary of the arguments I'm making. I thought the second, at least, was readily apparent in previous posts. You are welcome to challenge either or both, however note that it is tedious to winnow through long blocks of text with low information content to reply.

When you say succinct you mean void of detail and argument. What's even more tiresome to read are these contrite no information rebuttals from the intellectually lazy. Complex issues require complex discussions. Sorry if the details and nuance bother you. I really don't care.

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Again you call me stupid but yet you're the one who believes in nonsense and frankly crazy things, have you've been tested for narcissism?

I have not called you stupid. You have called yourself stupid, multiple times, and I have just refused to disagree with you on that point.