Posted on 06/09/2024 7:39:37 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
The burden of proof lies with the person(s) making the assertion. In this case, it is the people writing the report who are claiming extraterrestrial aliens exist. Such proof would only have to show evidence of one other planet having such intelligent life.
Attempting to put the burden of proof on those who claim extraterrestrial aliens are not real is actually forcing such burden of proof to cover every single planet in the galaxy or even the universe, which is essentially impossible.
That is why those who doubt that extraterrestrial aliens exist define their argument as probabilistic, rather than absolute.
Carl Sagan's statement (which has been stated by others even back into the 19th century) deals with evidence for an absolute (positive or negative) claim.
“Until there is incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, we are alone in the universe.”
The ants in my yard say the same thing about humans.
No verifiable evidence.
None.
;-)
The most famous election year “distraction” was in 1952:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952_Washington,_D.C.,_UFO_incident
It had much more media coverage than any UFO story today.
One of the themes of the “Aliens are visiting us” crowd has always been an anti-nuclear agenda. I think such folks were first anti-nuclear and after they “discovered UFOs” they claimed the anti-nuclear agenda came from the aliens.
Again it’s a stalemate or a circular argument.
You claim there is no extraterrestrial aliens so..
The burden of proof lies with the person(s) making the assertion.
You stated: Attempting to put the burden of proof on those who claim extraterrestrial aliens are not real is actually forcing such burden of proof to cover every single planet in the galaxy or even the universe, which is essentially impossible.
Based on that statement alone, that it’s impossible prove life doesn’t exist on every single planet in the universe then by probability, randomness, or chance... life could exist even if only on one other planet.
I just look up at the stars and say we can’t be the only life out there in an infinite universe.
The haunting connection between UFOs and America’s nuclear weapons.
If UFO’s existed any creature that could come this far wouldn’t need to worry about any stinking nuclear weapons.
People are losing their minds about things that don’t exist.
The aliens have lived here and live here now.
That is why they don’t like nuclear weapons.
Science is stunningly bad at studying stuff that is smarter than the scientists.
When they stop pushing their nutty articles.
I notice that seems to be the only thing that caught your attention. Thus proving my point.
No swearing, no threats. Just a polite request to stop littering the forum with stuff from crazy people without even a smidgen of proof.
That is totally harmless.
I was beginning to despair.
That is the dreamer way of looking at things.
The realistic way is to ask if there is any actual proof. When there is not it can be dismissed as bogus.
For example you could be a typing dog. But lacking any actual proof that is bogus.
You take evidence and build to a conclusion not the other way around.
The key is deciding what counts as “evidence”.
Folks who say “nothing there” tend to discount evidence that does not meet their criteria on what is allowed and not allowed as “evidence”.
No, I stated: "That is why those who doubt that extraterrestrial aliens exist define their argument as probabilistic, rather than absolute." A probabililstic claim against extraterrestrial aliens is that the probability of aliens is very small. It is not that the probability is absolutely zero.
"I just look up at the stars and say we can’t be the only life out there in an infinite universe."
First, where is the proof for your absolute claim that the universe is infinite rather than just being extremely large. Second, even the existence of an extremely large number of stars does not prove your claim that "we can’t be the only life out there".
BTW, to begin with, proving the claim that the universe is infinite requires evidence that the universe exists a few billion light-years beyond Earth (which is so easy that I will concede that point). But then, next, you need to prove the universe exists a trillion light-year beyond that, and then a trillion light-years beyond that, and a trillion light-years beyond that, and so on, ad infinitum. Even a trilliontrillion light-years is nowhere near infinite.
“Folks who say “nothing there” tend to discount evidence that does not meet their criteria on what is allowed and not allowed as “evidence”.
Exactly. Bacteria did not exist until the microscope was invented to view and study bacteria.
Up until 1993, the usual skeptics claimed that exoplanets didn’t exist.
“It’s a stalemate until one or the other is proven.”
If I said you were a bot we would be at a stalemate?
Trying to help us or deciding whether or not to cull us?
Modern science has an additional handicap that is not often discussed—the rise of the nation state and modern technology has meant that much of science is classified and compartmentalized.
That means that “public science” is a subset of “secret science”.
It may well be that the Deep State is well aware of physics, chemistry, biology that is not “public information” and therefore there is “no evidence” in the public domain.
Aliens all right but their not from space it’s the only ones.
If there were such a thing we wouldn’t be alive if they can make it here they don’t need us for anything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.