Actually this is what you wrote in #210.
__________________________________________________________ Unlike the UFO question, where there is evidence against alien origin, yet none supporting it.
___________________________________________________________
On one hand you say you have evidence *against* alien origin, but never produced your *evidence*, and in the next breath you say "I never claimed that there was no life elsewhere".
You seem to speak in fragmented riddles, never coming out and saying specifically what you mean or believe. Like a suspect caught on video tape, that just refuses to admit or confess he did wrong. LOL!
It's like pulling teeth with you Kev. But you'll find I am quite experienced in this sort of thing, and have a knack for seeing the red flags of inconsistency.
Lets be clear here. Are you saying there might be life elsewhere, but you don't believe they have craft and they are not capable of traveling through interstellar space?
:o
No, you just misread what is right in front of you. This whole thread was about UFOs seen on Earth, not whether life exists light years away.
But you'll find I am quite experienced in this sort of thing, and have a knack for seeing the red flags of inconsistency.
There's absolutely no inconsistency whatsoever. My points have been the same since my first post.
Lets be clear here. Are you saying there might be life elsewhere, but you don't believe they have craft and they are not capable of traveling through interstellar space?
There is no evidence that UFOs are alien spacecraft. None.
As for life elsewhere, I don't know, don't care, and see no evidence that there is. Although since I lack the ability to travel infinite distances with an infinite amount of time, I do not make it a point of contention, especially to those who have a religious or philosophical predisposition to believe in it.
On one hand you say you have evidence *against* alien origin, but never produced your *evidence*
***And yet, there’s only one book I ask you to read on the subject and you prefer to fall back on classic fallacies such as the horse laugh.
It’s like pulling teeth with you Kev. But you’ll find I am quite experienced in this sort of thing, and have a knack for seeing the red flags of inconsistency.
***Note that your post was to gunner, but you may have intended me. If you have such a knack of seeing red flags of inconsistency, why are you constantly relying upon classic fallacies?
Lets be clear here. Are you saying there might be life elsewhere, but you don’t believe they have craft and they are not capable of traveling through interstellar space?
***Is that a question of Gunner or Kevmo? I have posted what I think. When you say, “might be”, the classic mathematical definition is that anything less than 10^-50 is impossible. It would be like finding an individual random grain of sand that I write down its location somewhere on the earth, doing that several times in a row. Not bloody likely.