I believe that what it comes down to is that essentially what you are insisting on is
that YOUR uniquely biased, flawed, clever, knowledgeable, learned, . . . whatever . . . subjective, imprecise, imperfect,
perceptions, measurements, observations
and the imperfect, biased, flawed, subjective THOUGHTS related thereto
JUST HAPPEN TO BE GREATLY BETTER than what you can collect from the array of ‘others’ out there reporting on the same thing.
. . . or put another way . . .
What when you have what —one? 3? 5? 8? 12?
UFO’s parked in your back yard . . . and an equal number of UFO pilots stiffed in as many freezers in your garage,
THEN you’ll KNOW something compared to knowing virtually nothing now.
I’m saying your criteria for KNOWING is more than a little troublesome, flawed.
And, it sets you up for . . . relatively . . . long periods of
relatively
greatly week degrees of knowing and probably very weak confidence therein.
#######################
Functionaly, in some ways, I’m more like you. I consider a very small number of things to be ABSOLUTELY KNOWN by me in the UFO field. I BELIEVE a larger number of things to be true. I hold very loosely but consider probably true a much larger number of things.
However, I accept confirmation from The Lord on all such in a wider variety of ways that you seem to. I’ve learned at 62 that I do NOT HAVE to EXPERIENCE everything the hard way first hand to accept things as true.
Quix, you seem like a nice enough fellow, but my observation is that you’re waaaaaay out on some orbit beyond rationality, as far as the ET subject goes.
I mean, if you don’t see the difference between something that you KNOW, and something that you simply BELIEVE, then there’s very little meeting ground for our two minds.
I’m really not interested in delving any deeper into this very philosophical discussion with you. I’ve spoken my simple piece in about a dozen different ways, and there’s really nothing else for me to add.
It’s been interesting talking with you, but I’ve got to let this go now.