I'm not saying it was Aliens ...

Post Reply New Topic

Its rather curious that taxpayers money has been spent on researching remote viewing and UFOs despite the US government already making up its mind it's pseudoscience.

US congress funded a parapsychology program for 20 years

Heck they even made a movie about it
https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/psych ... id=9032019

Hilarious

What's more funny is that steadfast straight face that officials from various US agencies, military and airforce use when they tell the press there's no truth to this.

What's most hilarious of all is how many Americans are still patriotic after all of this declassified money burning by the military industrial complex while most of us are essentially living in a third world country with no healthcare and zero realistic options to turn hard work into fair pay... Of course, if one looks at how we Americans under 40 years old feel, the picture isn't exactly all "Yankee Doodle Dandy".... most of us are imagining what a guillotine would look like in D.C. near the Capitol and the Pentagon.

Yes the US military industry complex was on the rise in Eisenhower's time (he famously warned the US public it would grow to become a power unto itself)
https://www.npr.org/2011/01/17/13294224 ... ears-later

His projections have come to pass.

It would be best to describe the military-industry complex as part of the umbrella of the national security state which was given unfettered powers on Sept 12 2001. Trillions have gone of black money has vanished into this deep state.

I thought you were going to link "The Man Who Stares at Goats"

Yes I am an ex-scientist also (former geologist), but I'm much more free-thinking than most. I think that "Occam's Razor" is an oversimplification and causes many scientists to be too close-minded. The simplest explanation is NOT always the correct one. Although it's fine to go with the simplest explanation until evidence comes along to contradict it, to completely write off any alternative ideas as BS just makes no sense to me. Some things simply have so much evidence against them that they can be pretty much written off (such as the Earth being flat). But other theories that are at least plausible, I feel, deserve to at least be considered. I'm not sure who said this, but I remember a quote that says "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".
I have said before that "facts" are often biased, so I always take any "evidence" with a grain of salt anyway. I agree that modern science gets most things right, but not everything.

And I'm also an Rh negative blood type! According to "Ancient Aliens", that could mean I'm more closely related to aliens than people who are not. In my case, that would make sense. On one website I went to I read a list of traits that Rh negative people are supposed to have, and I have literally every one. It gave me CHILLS!
Maybe I'm on the "wrong planet" for more reason than one.
Not saying it was aliens, but.....

Gross misstatement.

Occam's razor is NOT "go with the simplest explanation". Its "go with the simplest explanation that accounts for the evidence". Not the same thing. Believing Earth is flat is not using "occams razor". Quite the contrary. Given the evidence they had even 2000 years ago belief in the earth being sphere was already using Occam's Razor, and arguing that it was flat took special pleading that violated Occam's Razor. More so with the greater evidence for Earth's roundness we have today in the space age.

Facts maybe biased. But that cuts both ways. The...corrupt, establishment conspiracy, that wants you to buy round globes may indeed offer facts that slant toward their thoroughly whacked belief that the Earth is round. But your facts that you offer to the country could also be slanted the other way.

Even the "simplest explanation that accounts for the evidence" (and yes that's what I meant originally, I know full well what Occam's Razor is) is not ALWAYS the correct explanation.
Here's an example to show how Occam's Razor is flawed:
Tom has a pencil on his desk. He comes back the next day and the pencil is in the same place he left it. The simplest explanation is that it hasn't been moved. However, if we find out that someone borrowed his pencil and left it in the same place on his desk that they found it, that too is plausible.
I will agree that it's hard to know who to trust these days. So much bias, everywhere you look. So I just trust my own instincts. If I'm wrong, whatever.

Exactly. I remember one [literally, just one] Islamic extremist who was netted in a sting operation for intent to deploy a weapon of mass destruction in Portland, Oregon years ago since this whole federal poli¢e $tate thing began [laws which were drafted before 9/10/01 when the Pentagon reported the mysterious loss of billions of dollars {the day before 9-11, make of that what you will...}], meanwhile homegrown terrorism and murders of people of color and those of the LGBT community seems to have achieved new highs not seen since the Jim Crow era [non-specific threats?], to say nothing of our mass shooting rates still occurring during the pandemic. Seems a blank check for law enforcement didn't make us safer, nor the erosion of our civil rights, nor an average of eight privately owned guns per US citizen. They told us that the terrorists attacked us because they envied our freedom and lifestyle, seems as if the terrorists have won.



Honestly, I did too....



We need more scientists like this. It seems to me that particularly those scientists who specialize in the experimental variety of studies of their respective field ought to be more open to new ideas and concepts for those things which are theorized, yet not thoroughly observed. Archeologists always seem to be pushing back the "earliest dates" for human migration and/or civilization. When I was a kid, ball lightening had yet to be fully accepted as a genuine phenomena, yet now it's apparently just an accepted occurrence which merits further research. Biologists once balked at the idea of giant squids and gorillas until specimens were obtained for classification, which makes sense for sure. Gravity is indeed an unprovable theory, yet it is not flaunted by those who seek to disprove it by jumping from a great height and simply not falling.



Ah yes, I've known quite a few people like this from all over the nation. While I can offer a basic explanation for how the curvature of the earth limits the line of sight to the horizon, they can offer no explanation as to why we cannot see Alaska or Russia from tallest mountain peaks in the Appalachians, or WHY there is a conspiracy to "cover up" the fact that the earth is flat [or what exactly is being achieved by the coverup, the sale of globes to classrooms?]. One of these folks, a former friend and roommate, tried not only to convince his brothers and I that the earth was flat, but that "the Mississippi River is running dry". I immediately responded, "Where exactly did you hear this, from that awful Hank Williams Jr. song...?" and proceeded to show him both the US Geological survey's river depth maps and even live webcam footage from Minnesota, Memphis, and New Orleans. [spoiler alert: he heard it from a co-worker who listens to Alex Jones] He is the only flat earther I have ever met who has flown cross country in an airplane, yet he cannot explain how that allowed him to see much farther than he could on a mountain peak [or across a large body of water]. He blamed it on the biological limitations of human ocular performance....

Honestly when I was between nine and twelve years old, and quite offput by the celebrated ignorance of my classmates, I literally worried that those sort of kids would grow up to be adults who would call the earth flat and deny the value of western medicine since they either couldn't grasp the science behind it, or simply just chose not to understand how it works. Adults at the time told me that I "was too young to understand how the world works"... Au contrarie.... My biggest pet peeve is the many folks who believe that hurricanes and tornadic cyclone storms are "generated by HAARP under the US government for the insurance money". Generally, my response to this is that they neither understand meteorology nor the insurance industry. I grew up in New Orleans, have personally witnessed several hurricanes and tornadoes, and I can safely say that while weather is indeed impacted by human activity, it is a natural occurrence [on this and other observable planets]; and that the Great Lakes and the oceans themselves would begin to "go dry" long before the Mississippi River ceased to flow at all.



Well said.



My mother told me on several occasions that while her mother was Rh negative, her father was not, and as a result there were several precautions taken when both she and her older brother were born. She [and I] are both Rh positive, yet we both exhibit several of those interesting traits of those of the Rh negative variety. According to our genealogy, we likely have direct ancestors from the Basque region of France, near Spain, the inhabitants of which apparently experience a higher average of Rh negative blood types than anywhere else on earth. Full disclosure, we're both fans of the Ancient Aliens program as well, and while they have done many episodes which are laughable, most of them present quite interesting hypothesis which I feel deserve more research and/or study. As I've said before, we clearly do now know everything about early humans [science will often be quite honest about this], and much of the paranormal physics they present [i.e. pyramid/geological energy, particle physics studies, etc.] are indeed being researched by mainstream research scientists. It's television, there's bound to be some fantastical stuff added for dramatic effect, but much of what they discuss is literally gleamed from genuine scientific research. Since I began to watch it, I read more science articles [from university research and mainstream science journals], than I ever have before.



I dig the context [and Latin translation], but isn't that line originally from a song by The Toasters...?



Dang ol' AMEN, main.
--Boomhauer, King of the Hill

So.... could Occam's razor be applied to the idea that Occam's razor is too often used to oversimplify complex hypothesis...? Asking from an 80% mathematical perspective, 20% facetious.



[sarcasm]I mean, the biggest globe manufacturer ever is Rand McNally. RAND McNally... RAND corporation.... coincidence? I THINK NOT!![/sarcasm]

Some years ago a WP member would post UTube vids made by modern flat earthers and started a running debate. As his flat earth case began to go down in flames a number of us asked him "but just WHY would the powers that be lie to us about the shape of the earth anyway?" He replied "for the same reason they would lie to us that the solar system is centered on the Sun (when it's "really" centered on the Earth), and about Evolution. To undermine our faith in God!". Obviously!

So there ya have it. Every major advance in science in the last five centuries was really a lie promulgated by the Illumanatti to undermine the church!

The basic principle of occam's razor is a "simplest explanation for an observable phenomena". Even the flat earth theory could be debunked long before our planet was observed from space. Simply observing a ship vanish on the horizon debunks the flat earth especially since most ancient civilisations knew the earth was round.

Yes cryptozoologists often cite the coelacanth as evidence that you can't assume that if you can't see an animal it must be extinct.

The appearance of large monsters or bigfoot to people might seem counterintuitive given that for a breeding population to exist there would be evidence left around to be found. However it's not impossible (perhaps unlikely) that such creatures might resonate from an alternate dimension and appear temporarily in our dimension through inter dimensional portals. These might also explain ghosts.

Precisely correct, the scientific method actually requires that to close the door on a theory that an alternate explanation must prove the phenomena. For UFOs there is no viable alternate theory and this makes most scientists uncomfortable because it threatens their paradigm of how things "should exist".

The late Stanton Friedman in his book on the "Science of UFOs" makes a valid point that if scientists aren't willing to take the available data seriously and automatically discount a phenomena without investigation then that act is basically unscientific.

My point exactly. Two thousand years ago they could observe they way ships vanish on the horizon. And a Greek Egyptian guy even measured the circumference of the earth by measuring shadows when only one percent of the Earth's surface was even known to him.