[Tom Bishop]

I suppose it depends on how empirical you would like to be. If you are going to believe someone like the Ancient Aliens guy, James Randi, Tycho Brahe or this collection of Brazilians without seeing what they have seen first-hand, why wouldn't you believe NASA, SpaceX or Albert Einstein?

I generally did believe NASA and Co to be telling the truth. But when I saw some of the bubbles in space videos and sneaker prints on the moon pictures, then I didn't believe NASA as much.

[Frocious]

I suppose it depends on how empirical you would like to be. If you are going to believe someone like the Ancient Aliens guy, James Randi, Tycho Brahe or this collection of Brazilians without seeing what they have seen first-hand, why wouldn't you believe NASA, SpaceX or Albert Einstein?

I generally did believe NASA and Co. But when I saw some of the bubbles in space videos and sneaker prints on the moon pictures, then I didn't believe NASA as much.

All right. And the others? How about the Japanese Space Agency? I'm trying to figure out where you draw your line here.

[Edgar Alan Hoe]

None of that sounds much different than what is seen on Ancient Aliens by The History Channel.

So? What do entertainment channels have to do with it?

The 'History' Channel is not offering itself up as a scientific research center.

More importantly you weren't defending the History Channel as being a legit source of scientific research a few posts back.

Anyway this is all good, I don't engage with obvious woo merchants, life's too short.

Bye!

[StinkyOne]

I don't see the word "aliens" on either of those pages.

I clicked on the documentary about ancient technologies and found a segment about flutes in Bolivia.

I clicked on the second link and it appears to be a bio of one of the founders, who was inspired to create the institution based on some odd experiences he had as a child where he saw some lights, experienced missing time, and a feeling that he was abducted. He explains that "one of the main goals of Dakila Research is to explain unknown phenomena that are often attributed to ufology".

Do you have something against an organization trying to explain mysterious phenomena that people in Brazil will often attribute to ufology?

Is there something bad about flutes in Bolivia?

From the ufology link - "In the beginning they were voices, I heard them without knowing where they came from, it started at the age of nine. I also felt the presence of someone next to me, sometimes I saw some figures."

Soooo yeah, the guy that is going to prove there is another continent and that the Earth is convex is probably nothing more than your run of the mill schizo.

So? The Ancient Aliens guy claims to have seen UFOs. A lot of the UFO authors claim to have personal experience, or know someone with personal experience, in some manner. That makes sense. Why else would they be motivated to study such mysteries?

James Randi, of the James Randi Education Foundation, was a stage magician, and literally tricked and deceived people for a living. His history in the subject is what inspired him to study magic and the paranormal seriously. We generally have trust in his organization to study the truth. Why should we believe James Randi, who has a history of deceiving people, over someone like this guy, who does not have a history of deceiving people, and says that he just wants to explain his experiences?

Seeing something you can't explain in the sky is not the same as hearing voices. There is no logical or natural reason aliens can't exist and believing in them isn't the issue. Hearing voices is the sign of an altered state or mental illness. Since I doubt he was tripping at 9, I'm going to go with mental illness.

If you believe show like Ancient Aliens, then I can see why your standard of proof is so low when it comes to FEH. It is an entertainment show. It isn't real.

I don't know who James Randi is. If he is a con-man, I wouldn't believe him. Then again, he literally has nothing to do with this. I'm saying your source has stated he hears and sees things that aren't actually there. He is not a reliable source and I do not believe him, nor should you. This is one of those posts you should have admitted you didn't do enough vetting on and let it go. We all make mistakes and post things that we later regret.

[Tom Bishop]

Seeing something you can't explain in the sky is not the same as hearing voices. There is no logical or natural reason aliens can't exist and believing in them isn't the issue. Hearing voices is the sign of an altered state or mental illness. Since I doubt he was tripping at 9, I'm going to go with mental illness.

Actually, a lot of children hear voices.

http://www.intervoiceonline.org/2577/young-people/parents/dont-panic-if-your-child-is-hearing-voices.html

First things first, From the research that we have carried out into the experience of adults and children who hear voices it has became apparent that:

-    To hear voices is in itself is a normal though unusual experience

-    However, it is possible that you can become ill as a result of hearing voices when you cannot cope with them

-   For most children (60%) the voices will disappear over time as the child develops and as they learn to cope with the life’s problems (and the emotions and feelings involved with these problems) that led to the voices starting in the first place

It doesn't mean that he is a LIAR.

If you believe show like Ancient Aliens, then I can see why your standard of proof is so low when it comes to FEH. It is an entertainment show. It isn't real.

What do you mean it isn't real? Have you even watched it? They just point out mysteries such as why the ancients painted pictures of UFOs and had stories of chariots in the sky, and speculate on whether the pyramids were built with the help of such creatures. They don't LIE to us.

I don't know who James Randi is. If he is a con-man, I wouldn't believe him. Then again, he literally has nothing to do with this. I'm saying your source has stated he hears and sees things that aren't actually there. He is not a reliable source and I do not believe him, nor should you. This is one of those posts you should have admitted you didn't do enough vetting on and let it go. We all make mistakes and post things that we later regret.

Well, then I would suggest looking more into who James Randi and his society is if you are at all interested in the validity of alternative science.

[AATW]

I do know who James Randi is and it is disingenuous to say that he tricked and deceived people for a living. In fact he has spent a lot of time debunking those who do. Randi has spent much of his time debunking psychics and other flim flam and part of doing that is showing how he can reproduce their “abilities” using stage magic techniques. But when you go to see a magician you know that they are tricking you, that’s pretty much why you go. No one goes to a magic show thinking that the person performing has actual magical powers.

[Tom Bishop]

I do know who James Randi is and it is disingenuous to say that he tricked and deceived people for a living. In fact he has spent a lot of time debunking those who do. Randi has spent much of his time debunking psychics and other flim flam and part of doing that is showing how he can reproduce their “abilities” using stage magic techniques. But when you go to see a magician you know that they are tricking you, that’s pretty much why you go. No one goes to a magic show thinking that the person performing has actual magical powers.

That was pretty much my point. You can't cherry pick something about a person's past and say that it discredits them forever in the future.

This guy's past just involves an odd childhood experience he had, that got him interested in studying unexplained phenomena. It doesn't even have anything to do with deceit.

[Tumeni]

I generally did believe NASA and Co to be telling the truth. But when I saw some of the bubbles in space videos and sneaker prints on the moon pictures, then I didn't believe NASA as much.

Who's in the category of "and Co"?  The other space agencies? Anyone else?

[Frocious]

I generally did believe NASA and Co to be telling the truth. But when I saw some of the bubbles in space videos and sneaker prints on the moon pictures, then I didn't believe NASA as much.

Who's in the category of "and Co"?  The other space agencies? Anyone else?

I'm still very curious about this. How does Tom determine who to listen to? Why listen to this Brazilian guy, for example, instead of deGrasse Tyson? Is the Japanese space agency trustworthy, but NASA and SpaceX aren't?

[StinkyOne]

Seeing something you can't explain in the sky is not the same as hearing voices. There is no logical or natural reason aliens can't exist and believing in them isn't the issue. Hearing voices is the sign of an altered state or mental illness. Since I doubt he was tripping at 9, I'm going to go with mental illness.

Actually, a lot of children hear voices.

http://www.intervoiceonline.org/2577/young-people/parents/dont-panic-if-your-child-is-hearing-voices.html

First things first, From the research that we have carried out into the experience of adults and children who hear voices it has became apparent that:

-    To hear voices is in itself is a normal though unusual experience

-    However, it is possible that you can become ill as a result of hearing voices when you cannot cope with them

-   For most children (60%) the voices will disappear over time as the child develops and as they learn to cope with the life’s problems (and the emotions and feelings involved with these problems) that led to the voices starting in the first place

It doesn't mean that he is a LIAR.

If you believe show like Ancient Aliens, then I can see why your standard of proof is so low when it comes to FEH. It is an entertainment show. It isn't real.

What do you mean it isn't real? Have you even watched it? They just point out mysteries such as why the ancients painted pictures of UFOs and had stories of chariots in the sky, and speculate on whether the pyramids were built with the help of such creatures. They don't LIE to us.

I don't know who James Randi is. If he is a con-man, I wouldn't believe him. Then again, he literally has nothing to do with this. I'm saying your source has stated he hears and sees things that aren't actually there. He is not a reliable source and I do not believe him, nor should you. This is one of those posts you should have admitted you didn't do enough vetting on and let it go. We all make mistakes and post things that we later regret.

Well, then I would suggest looking more into who James Randi and his society is if you are at all interested in the validity of alternative science.

The International Hearing Voices Network??? Does that also explain the interference he could cause on appliances or the cutlery that bent into his hands? I suppose you'll pull up some random site about that, too.

During his childhood, Urandir coexisted situations that went unnoticed, but that continued to happen during his adolescence, being his initiation in ufology . - "In the beginning they were voices, I heard them without knowing where they came from, it started at the age of nine. I also felt the presence of someone next to me, sometimes I saw some figures. "These events were repeated again throughout his childhood.

Over time, Urandir may realize that his emotional condition would also be capable of generating events, hitherto unexplained - "depending on my emotional state, when I came near an appliance, there was some interference, for example, in the tuning of the radio or television "reports. There were also the cutlery that bent into his hands, which helped him to realize that these facts only happened to him, since no one in the family could do the same. As these events were marking his life, Urandir always treated the facts with normality. "It was normal for me, it did not bother me," he says.

Yeah, every space faring nation is lying and all those satellite services are faked, but this guy, he is telling the truth. M'kay...

[Edgar Alan Hoe]

I generally did believe NASA and Co to be telling the truth. But when I saw some of the bubbles in space videos and sneaker prints on the moon pictures, then I didn't believe NASA as much.

Who's in the category of "and Co"?  The other space agencies? Anyone else?

I'm still very curious about this. How does Tom determine who to listen to? Why listen to this Brazilian guy, for example, instead of deGrasse Tyson? Is the Japanese space agency trustworthy, but NASA and SpaceX aren't?

He has a very thought out method for determining who to listen to, it's a method known as confirmation bias. If someone says something he already thinks, they must be trustworthy.

It's a method we all have, but most of us are silly and try to suppress it.

[AATW]

He has a very thought out method for determining who to listen to, it's a method known as confirmation bias. If someone says something he already thinks, they must be trustworthy.

Pretty much summed up in this Wiki page:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Place_of_the_Conspiracy_in_FET

P1) If personally unverifiable evidence contradicts an obvious truth then the evidence is fabricated

P2) The Flat Earth is an obvious truth

So even though P2 is not backed up by any evidence, just declared to be true, they can dismiss the tsunami of evidence showing it to be wrong.
So there has been no actual response to Elon Musk's launch, no evidence that it was faked, for example.
But if the earth is flat and space travel must therefore be faked (not quite sure how those two things are connected, even if the earth were flat surely we could still develop the technology to leave it, but given that all space travel shows a globe earth it's declared to be fake) so the launch must have been faked somehow.

It's easy to prove oneself right about anything if one dismisses all the evidence showing one is wrong.

[Edgar Alan Hoe]

He has a very thought out method for determining who to listen to, it's a method known as confirmation bias. If someone says something he already thinks, they must be trustworthy.

Pretty much summed up in this Wiki page:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Place_of_the_Conspiracy_in_FET

P1) If personally unverifiable evidence contradicts an obvious truth then the evidence is fabricated

P2) The Flat Earth is an obvious truth

So even though P2 is not backed up by any evidence, just declared to be true, they can dismiss the tsunami of evidence showing it to be wrong.
So there has been no actual response to Elon Musk's launch, no evidence that it was faked, for example.
But if the earth is flat and space travel must therefore be faked (not quite sure how those two things are connected, even if the earth were flat surely we could still develop the technology to leave it, but given that all space travel shows a globe earth it's declared to be fake) so the launch must have been faked somehow.

It's easy to prove oneself right about anything if one dismisses all the evidence showing one is wrong.

It was always the attempted hijacking of the rational high ground by certain FE believers that really stuck in my throat.

So Tom, thank you for showing your hand, for finally giving me solid evidence that you are neither particularly rational nor scientific in your beliefs.

But even more than that, thanks for showing us that you will support and argue for even the most ludicrous of nonsense rather than admit to being wrong.

[Tom Bishop]

I generally did believe NASA and Co to be telling the truth. But when I saw some of the bubbles in space videos and sneaker prints on the moon pictures, then I didn't believe NASA as much.

Who's in the category of "and Co"?  The other space agencies? Anyone else?

I'm still very curious about this. How does Tom determine who to listen to? Why listen to this Brazilian guy, for example, instead of deGrasse Tyson? Is the Japanese space agency trustworthy, but NASA and SpaceX aren't?

Its pretty simple. There is evidence that NASA is lying, but not evidence that this Brazilian guy is lying.

Per others like deGrasse Tyson, I don't call Tyson a liar. There is no evidence that he is a liar. I see what he has to say and address his points.

[Tom Bishop]

I generally did believe NASA and Co to be telling the truth. But when I saw some of the bubbles in space videos and sneaker prints on the moon pictures, then I didn't believe NASA as much.

Who's in the category of "and Co"?  The other space agencies? Anyone else?

I'm still very curious about this. How does Tom determine who to listen to? Why listen to this Brazilian guy, for example, instead of deGrasse Tyson? Is the Japanese space agency trustworthy, but NASA and SpaceX aren't?

He has a very thought out method for determining who to listen to, it's a method known as confirmation bias. If someone says something he already thinks, they must be trustworthy.

It's a method we all have, but most of us are silly and try to suppress it.

Its a matter of honesty vs dishonesty. In order to discredit this Brazilian guy, you will need to produce evidence of him lying, like evidence has been produced against NASA.

So Tom, thank you for showing your hand, for finally giving me solid evidence that you are neither particularly rational nor scientific in your beliefs.

Because its sooo rational to trust the word of an organization which has produced fake content over the word of an organization which has not.

Because its sooo rational to discredit someone and brand them a LIAR because of an odd experience they had as a child.

THAT is irrational. Do you guys even listen to yourselves?

[Frocious]

I generally did believe NASA and Co to be telling the truth. But when I saw some of the bubbles in space videos and sneaker prints on the moon pictures, then I didn't believe NASA as much.

Who's in the category of "and Co"?  The other space agencies? Anyone else?

I'm still very curious about this. How does Tom determine who to listen to? Why listen to this Brazilian guy, for example, instead of deGrasse Tyson? Is the Japanese space agency trustworthy, but NASA and SpaceX aren't?

Its pretty simple. There is evidence that NASA is lying, but not evidence that this Brazilian guy is lying.

Per others like deGrasse Tyson, I don't call Tyson a liar. There is no evidence that he is a liar. I see what he has to say and address his points.

You're avoiding one: the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency. Have they been caught lying too?

[Tom Bishop]

You're avoiding one: the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency. Have they been caught lying too?

They don't publish a whole lot of content like NASA does, and there have been several critiques of their work online, but they claim that they got a lot of their technology from NASA and work jointly with them, so that puts them in the same circle.

[Edgar Alan Hoe]

I generally did believe NASA and Co to be telling the truth. But when I saw some of the bubbles in space videos and sneaker prints on the moon pictures, then I didn't believe NASA as much.

Who's in the category of "and Co"?  The other space agencies? Anyone else?

I'm still very curious about this. How does Tom determine who to listen to? Why listen to this Brazilian guy, for example, instead of deGrasse Tyson? Is the Japanese space agency trustworthy, but NASA and SpaceX aren't?

He has a very thought out method for determining who to listen to, it's a method known as confirmation bias. If someone says something he already thinks, they must be trustworthy.

It's a method we all have, but most of us are silly and try to suppress it.

Its a matter of honesty vs dishonesty. In order to discredit this Brazilian guy, you will need to produce evidence of him lying, like evidence has been produced against NASA.

So Tom, thank you for showing your hand, for finally giving me solid evidence that you are neither particularly rational nor scientific in your beliefs.

Because its sooo rational to trust the word of an organization which has produced fake content over the word of an organization which has not.

Because its sooo rational to discredit someone and brand them a LIAR because of an odd experience they had as a child.

THAT is irrational. Do you guys even listen to yourselves?

I'm sorry Tom, but I will not debate fantasy.

Time traveling ancient astronaughts, ancient Egyptian artifacts that realign human cells, teleportation devices and ancient Bolivian flutes that can manipulate human brainwaves are fantasy.

This is deeply silly stuff and, again, I'm surprised your need to avoid admitting to an error in judgement is pushing you to associate Zeteticism and FE with them.

[Curious Squirrel]

You're avoiding one: the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency. Have they been caught lying too?

They don't publish a whole lot of content like NASA does, and there have been several critiques of their work online, but they claim that they got their technology from NASA and work jointly with them, so that puts them in the same circle.

Ah yes, the old guilt by association fallacy in full effect. Just who were these 'critiques' by if I may ask? Anyone already biased against them due to prior 'critiques' against NASA? Or someone else? Don't forget the Himawari 8 sat. That's quite a bit of 'content' I would think.

[Tom Bishop]

I'm sorry Tom, but I will not debate fantasy.

Time traveling ancient astronaughts, ancient Egyptian artifacts that realign human cells, teleportation devices and ancient Bolivian flutes that can manipulate human brainwaves are fantasy.

This is deeply silly stuff and, again, I'm surprised your need to avoid admitting to an error in judgement is pushing you to associate Zeteticism and FE with them.

All musical instruments "manipulate brainwaves". Quantum teleportation does exist. Certain vibrations and resonances do affect cell cultures.

If you actually have anything that shows them to be LIARS let us know.