Posted on 01/17/2009 1:52:28 PM PST by JoeProBono
CHAMA, NM - Several meandering V-shaped UFOs near a mountain slope here turned up on a woman's digital photos. Three photos shot with a 21 megapixel camera caught multiple crafts approaching in the first frame, one craft in frame two moving close to the ground while the others take positions in the sky, and then frame three shows all of the crafts moving out of the area.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
“Enjoy the TYPE II error.
It bites just as deadly as a TYPE I error.”
What is a type I and Type II error?
“Maybe not that you know of. But there are plenty of videos of them. “
There are many videos of car accidents on the web, and they are real, not doctored. The reason for no photographs is because a collision takes about a half second to occur, making a shutter release in that split second extremely difficult. UFOs often hand around for a long time it seems, giving anyone with a camera plenty of time to get a clear shot, which we have yet to ever see.
Hmmmmm . . . interesting.
A TYPE I error is assuming the null hypothesis to be FALSE when it is ACTUALLY TRUE.
That is, when the null hypothesis states that NOTHING IS THERE, and one assumes it is FALSE—THAT THERE IS *SOMETHING* THERE—then that
is a TYPE I ERROR.
A TYPE II ERROR is
assuming that the null hypothesis is TRUE when it is ACTUALLY FALSE.
That is, assuming that NOTHING IS THERE
WHEN THERE REALLY IS *SOMETHING* THERE
is a TYPE II ERROR.
EVERY NAYSAYER I’ve ever encountered has an
ILLOGICAL, BLIND-BIAS BASED ADDICTION TO LOVING, COMPULSIVELY DESPERATELY TRYING TO AVOID
A TYPE I ERROR.
One CANNOT lean sooooooooooooooo far over backwards avoiding a TYPE I ERROR
WITHOUT AUTOMATICALLY
BECOMING ENORMOUSLY VULNERABLE TO A TYPE II ERROR.
They are interrelated. There’s NO WAY to stack the deck SO WHOLESALE AGAINST GETTING CAUGHT BY A TYPE I ERROR
WITHOUT
FORCING ONE’S SELF INTO THE LAP OF A TYPE II ERROR.
CAN’T BE DONE OTHERWISE.
It is impossible to EXTREMELY AVOID TYPE I
WITHOUT
BECOMING EXTREMELY LIKELY TO BE SNOOKERED BY A TYPE II . . . AND TYPE II IS EVERY BIT AS DEADLY AS A TYPE II ERROR.
Which part of
ionized laminar air flow
over the surface of a UFO
do you have trouble wrapping your understanding around?
And that doesn’t get into other dimensionality and for real cloaking devices at all.
Nah.
Those are just Shanghai knockoffs used only by hoaxers.
“My understanding is that these visitors are here to help our world.”
Quix, in your research, does it ever occur to you that some people are very troubled and just make this stuff up for attention, or that they are having a good time with it (like the men who made the crop circles), or that they are involved in a sort of mass hysteria and that wishful thinking makes them see what others are claiming to see, so an airplane or a flock of geese takes on a different form?
When I was in Vietnam and it was my time to pull the watch in the jungle I would look at a bush in the distance and over a period of a few minutes it would take on the form of a human and actually move. My heart would race and I would have to divert my eyes and look again to make sure it was just a bush. Talking to others in the platoon I discovered we all experienced the same phenomena. It’s what fear, excitement, or even imagination can do to your brain.
You are convinced that research proves your belief, yet I doubt if you ever seriously research the opposing side. You want to believe so bad you only read and accept what confirms your central belief. Everything else is some sort of black helicopter conspiracy to disprove what you believe in your heart of hearts. It’s not research, quix, it’s just constant reaffirmation of what you already believe.
“Ummm..., you just thought it was Catherine Zeta-Jones. “They” do mind projections on you... You don’t want to know who it really was... LOL...”
I must have been captured by the evil aliens. They made me do it with Janet Reno.
It seems that you doubt the authenticity of UFO photographs just because they aren't razer sharp and close up. I think they look that way because few people have high grade equipment setup and ready for unexpected events.
ionized laminar air flow
over the surface of a UFO
do you have trouble wrapping your understanding around?
I personally
have trouble
with the part about
"ionized laminar air flow"
when a UFO is at rest, or hovering.
But
there's one thing that I
don't have trouble understanding.
The
kooks have an
"answer" for everything.
“And that doesn’t get into other dimensionality and for real cloaking devices at all.”
Yes, they can do all that but are afraid to let us see them. Would be like us inventing a shield so moths couldn’t see us and take offensive measures.
Hmmmmm . . . interesting.
A TYPE I error is assuming the null hypothesis to be FALSE when it is ACTUALLY TRUE.
That is, when the null hypothesis states that NOTHING IS THERE, and one assumes it is FALSE—THAT THERE IS *SOMETHING* THERE—then that
is a TYPE I ERROR.
A TYPE II ERROR is
assuming that the null hypothesis is TRUE when it is ACTUALLY FALSE.
That is, assuming that NOTHING IS THERE
“WHEN THERE REALLY IS *SOMETHING* THERE
is a TYPE II ERROR.
EVERY NAYSAYER I’ve ever encountered has an
ILLOGICAL, BLIND-BIAS BASED ADDICTION TO LOVING, COMPULSIVELY DESPERATELY TRYING TO AVOID
A TYPE I ERROR...............”
Could you dumb it down a little?
Your assumptions are quite wrong.
1. I’ve read a lot of naysayers/debunkers materials. They ALWAYS have been mostly grossly flawed and illogical to off the wall stupid and virtually always bear nearly NO relationship to the realities of the case.
2. NO. I actually would prefer that the whole thing just go away. I have NO need for it to be true at all—much more the opposite.
3. However, The Lord has inexorably led me to be persistently and ongoingly well informed on the topic since 1962. Overtime, it became clear that this whole sphere would be an aspect of END TIMES EVENTS and that the Body of Christ would need warned and informed . . . all the more so the closer we got to really dramatic END TIMES EVENTS . . . such, now, as are virtually signed sealed and delivered as witnessed by OThuga’s coronation.
4. You appear to know next to nothing about me nor about my PhD in Clinnical Psychology level of assessment brought to bear on the psychological and other aspects of this field.
5. You clearly seem to be rather ignorant about “mass hysteria.”
6. Of course some folks are troubled and get off into the UFO stuff out of their own compromised psychodynamics. However, it normally does NOT take a PhD in Clinical Psychology to filter those cases out. They are pretty obvious. And, they are WHOLESALE MUCH IN CONTRAST to the authentic cases.
7. The blokes who hoax a minority of the crop circles are humanly INCAPABLE of doing the larger circles in the times that have been involved and most say—period—regardless of how much time they had. It’s just technically impossible with a string and a board to produce some of the larger complicated ones at all—and certainly not with the authentic markers.
8. Authentic crop circles have been verified in several peer reviewed SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL ARTICLES as distinct from the normal crop ground and from hoaxed circles in several respects. One of them is the nodes of the plants have evidently been zapped with something very close or akin to microwave energy extremely briefly. The ground has been dried out extremely dry. Micro-fine iron dust coats much of the plants and ground. There are some other differences I’m not recalling. Also, seeds from within the crop circles sprout and grow differently than those outside of the crop circle. Those from within are persistently more resistent to drought.
9. Yet again, your perceptions, perspective, assumptions, biases are WHOLESALE SIMPLY WRONG.
Basically . . .
A TYPE I ERROR believes SOMETHING IS THERE when, actually, NOTHING is there.
A TYPE II ERROR believes that NOTHING IS THERE
when, actually, SOMETHING *IS* THERE.
I don’t think I can make it any more basic than that.
IIRC
the ionized flow over the surface of the craft can be a fact when it’s sitting still in a hanger on it’s ‘feet.’ Depends on what’s turned on and what’s turned off.
Certainly it’s true when hovering.
It’s somewhat an inherent part of the propulsion etc. IIRC.
BTW, some of us are not the least bit interested in
making stuff up just to have an answer.
Even for a lot of cheeky, mean-spirited, clueless, ill-informed naysayers.
It’s just not our interest nor worth our bother to stoop to such nonsense.
What are the odds that since 1947, (the birth year of this particular New Age kook movement), that there hasn't been even one that's even remotely sharp and discernable?
Pontificating silliness when the facts are available is . . . uhhhh . . . silly.
Of course there have been sharp photos of UFO’s taken . . . depending on the definition of sharpness . . .
Our folks have undoubtedly taken many sharp photos of craft under production in factories.
And, there have been sharp photos of crashed “ET” UFO’s.
Some of the whistleblowers have commented on some of those sharp photos.
Now . . . how many have been allowed into the public domain?
That’s a different issue entirely.
Of course.
In some respects . . . you’re even wrong about the ‘movement’
The craft etc. have been observed for centuries, if not millenia.
Certainly our government knew about them and may have even had a craft in the 1930’s.
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.