“How exactly is ignoring the scientific protocol and interpreting random things as “scientific evidence” something reasonable?”

it isn’t, as I’ve stayed in multiple times. your irrational fear of scientific evidence as something “unreasonable” is one of your problems.

“…those are your proofs?”

nnnope, those sound like more things you’re making up in your head.

“None of those hold to scientific standard”

you not understanding how radar, video and photos work doesn’t mean that radar, video and photo evidence isn’t real.

you are just ignorant.

“It has nothing to do with Galileo or made-up statistics.”

and yet you consistently bring them up for no reason.

weird.

“conspiracist…”

again, radar is not a conspiracy. video is not a conspiracy. these are simple recording and measurement tools that you are ignorant of.

radiation is not a conspiracy. it occurs all around you all the time.

“Not a single record on earth made it past the scientific protocol”

…you should definitely try to explain this.

I am laughing at everything you write, but I expect you trying to prove that there’s never been a “single record on Earth that made it past the scientific protocol” should be hilarious.

“If it did, it would be admitted by science.”

you doubt that video, photo and radar have been admitted by science?

are you ancient or perhaps 3 years old?

boy are you in for a surprise.

those technologies, and many others, are well documented and scientifically accepted.

what methodology do you think the screen you’re staring at right now is a product of If not the scientific process?

magic?

guesswork?

that’s great, I didn’t know about any of the other heathcliff edits.

That’s a good point about seeing the edit first allowing you to view the content from outside of the box.

thanks for answering, I appreciate it, and I look forward to not seeing heathcliff some more.

have a good one.

"definitely no point in debating "

…proceeds to continue debating

“bad faith argumentation.”

again, it’s nice you learned buzzwords, but they don’t change the content of what has been said.

“You didn’t compare the situation to Galileo’s”

correct.

“but were just pointing out the similarities between the situations”

not at all. I was pointing out that you are acting the same as one of the masses who ridiculed and disbelieved Galileo despite his scientific reasoning, and if you were around one Galileo was showing people scientific equations supporting heliocentrism, you would have vilified him rather than looking at those scary numbers.

literally the same thing I’ve been saying from the beginning.

there is evidence, you don’t believe in scientific evidence, and The evidence makes you upset for some reason.

as anyone can see back in my first comment, I’m in the “disclosure happened and nobody cares” phase.

“That’s some mental gymnastics.”

at this point, I’m no longer surprised that a direct 1-to-1 comparison confuses you or seems like some sort of phenomenal mental feat.

“I didn’t admit being ignorant about evidence,”

hang on just one sentence…

“I said that I am not aware of any”

there it is, the definition of ignorance and your admission thereof.

“because there is none that is valid.”

being ignorant of the evidence, there’s no way you can conclusively determine its validity.

not to mention your willful disregard of scientific evidence in general.

“evidence, what is it?”

again, radar, telemetry, radiological data, video, photos from defense departments and aerial surveillance, trained witnesses and observers, and credible witness testimony.

this was all said 10 comments ago, and you said you didn’t believe in telemetry, radiological data, radar and other types of scientific evidence.

The national press club conference in 2007 is a great resource to get started, but it’s 6 hours long, so if you watch “I know what I saw” they’ll go over of a couple of the highlights regarding intelligently designed and maneuvered craft that you should be able to follow and can look further into.

“wordplay and theatrics”

conflating your ignorance with scientific evidence is the only way you can think radar, photography, hard data or video is some sort of wordplay or theatrics.

it looks like in the end you’ve mistaken my earlier statistical metaphor of sand on a beach with concrete scientific evidence of lichen existing on multiple interstellar grains of sand.

try scrolling up to remember what this thread is even about and what you are so hysterically refusing to engage with.

Why that particular comic, though?

and why do you highlight the “without heathcliff” comics rather than post the heathcliff-full comics and keep the withouts in the comments?

I like what you’re doing. I’m just curious.

what inspires you to so consistently share these heathcliff without heathcliff comics?

Is it something about the comics themselves?

“How is it incorrect?”

Let us count the ways.

"You quote Galileo "

incorrect, I did not quote Galileo.

“as a way to support the idea that despite no consensus on the existence of alien life…”

incorrect. I am not supporting this.

“you are convinced that you know better.”

incorrect again, I have not stated that I know better, I have stated that you are ignorant of the scientific evidence, as you have admitted.

“Are you really so dishonest that you’ll now argue that you mentioned him out of nowhere, and not to compare your situation to his?”

this is going to apparently wreck your worldview, but telling the truth is the opposite of being dishonest.

incorrect a fourth time and a fifth, as I had no intention of comparing my situation to his, but rather pointing out your tendency to ignore evidence that disproves your believies, just as the masses ignored scientific evidence while Galileo presented them with it

as I’ve said from the beginning, you are one of the blind masses.

dang, you are behind.

“And all you manage to do is pile some random bullshit to try to discredit me”

by some random bullshit, do you mean the exact things that you said?

you don’t believe in evidence, you prefer believies.

That’s your problem.

it doesn’t mean the evidence doesn’t exist, that the telemetry doesn’t exist or that radiological data doesn’t exist or that radar and credible witnesses don’t exist.

it just means that your beliefs are stronger than your intellect.

“I don’t even know how you managed to insert gaslighting into this”

unsurprising.

you keep crying wolf pretending that I am using logical fallacies even though you have incorrectly used each logical fallacy so far, including your accusation of me using the “Galileo Gambit”, which apparently after I pointed it out is why you are pretending that you we’re making a simple comparison to Galileo rather than mistakenly regurgitating the logical fallacy correlated with his name.

did you even know Galileo was a scientist before you used your little buzzword incorrectly?

I don’t really care, that was retortical.

so I don’t know those are examples of you being incorrect what seven, eight times?

that, as a whole, is how you are incorrect, to answer your plaintive cry.

always the people that refuse to read urging others to read for them.

you are aware that just because you learned some buzzwords recently, applying them incorrectly does not suddenly make them applicable?

You’re just incorrectly using buzzword after buzzword without context.

have you tried “gaslighting” yet?

That’s probably another reason you don’t need to look at any evidence related to the topic you are ignorant about.

because I’m “gsslighting” you.

they use dollar bills instead of gold coins, you can get a cushy landing and swim through it pretty well.

you should definitely try to explain how Galileo, who Is widely recognized as having provided rational scientific evidence for heliocentrism despite people like you calling him a witch because you don’t believe in evidence, was a “conspiracy theorist”.

If you’re going to make things up rather than look at any evidence, there’s definitely no point in continuing your rant.

Good faith?

you have admitted that you are unaware of existing evidence for UFOs that is freely available, but you are extrapolating from your own ignorance that there can be no evidence.

I can only respond to the level of your lack of understanding, that may be why this well seems to have run dry for you.

you’ll probably learn about the significance of evidence one day, but too late, and apologize to Galileo on your death bed.

“My “made-up stat” was to point out that it’s absurd to try to make one”

Trust me, you didn’t need to come up with an example to prove the absurdity of your argument.

your argument is: if you’re standing on a beach, and you find lichen growing out of the microcosm of one grain of sand, your assumption is that that grain of sand is the only life on the beach, before taking the time to even look at any other grain of sand on the beach.

That’s about as goofy as it gets.

You’re a zealot.

You’d burn Galileo at the stake for demonstrating his “magic space glass” if you had the chance.

“I have yet to see such evidence…”

yet you’re extrapolating off of your ignorance.

again, if you haven’t even looked at any of the other grains of sand, your believies are just that.

I’m convinced based on scientific evidence, you believe in as you say, your “circular logic”:

by not looking at any evidence, by covering your eyes with your own hands, you’ve convinced yourself that no evidence of extraterrestrial life exists.

you are incorrect.

the nazi is you in this meme?

“we only have a sample size of 1 living planet”

arguably.

“a star system full of dead ones”

there’s no evidence for this.

“if we go by statistics, people having hallucinations is more likely than having non-human made devices operating on Earth.”

on which basis are you assuming this?

The basis of you being unaware of non-human-made devices operating on Earth?

or more made up statistics?

" regarding the nimits, we don’t have telemetry".

The Nimitz incident is not the only telemetry-supported ufo incident by a long shot.

I know I sound dismissive of your criticisms, but you have to understand that on one side, there is radar data, credible witnesses, radiological data, photos and videos from multiple governments around the world, and the statistical unlikelihood of one bubble being “the only special bubble” where intelligent life can occur, and on the other side there is you and one other guy insisting that since neither of you personally believe in radar, video evidence, trained observers or credible witnesses, then that evidence isn’t real.

That’s simply incorrect.

you not believing or being ignorant of telemetry doesn’t invalidate telemetry.

again, this is the “disclosure has happened but people don’t want to believe it yet”.

as an example:

you probably think that anti-vax arguments sound silly?

me too.

anti-vaxxers are denying readily available evidence while relying on an insufficient pool of assumptions that do not hold up to scrutiny.

that’s where UFO deniers are at this point.

“But you’re still making up a stat from nowhere”

incorrect, I’m responding to your made-up statistics of 50% or 1%.

We know microbial life has developed on other planets, We know microbial life has evolved into intelligent life before.

your correlation of the literally uncountable locations and moments in which life can develop into intelligent life (as you understand it) with said intelligent life not having occurred and presented itself to you personally as some sort of evidence against intelligent life existing outside of the human understanding belies your misunderstanding of the statistical scale we are talking about.

“There is no proof that alien life doesn’t exist.”

that is because we have evidence that alien life exists.

“There is no proof that god doesn’t exist.”

We have much less evidence that God exists than we have of alien life existing.

“You can’t prove the inexistence of something so the argument is void.”

nobody is trying to prove a negative except for you, and I agree you’re failing in that admittedly futile argument.

“What I’m saying is equivalent to not believing that a subspecies of humans with gills live under the sea because we never found one.”

no, what you are saying is despite having found evidence of humans with gills, and you having access to evidence, you don’t believe in the evidence of humans with gills.

Your hard-fought disbelief in statistics and evidence is much less credible than the actual evidence and statistics.

Your incredulous attitude is exactly what I mean by I’m in the " disclosure has happened and nobody cares" phase.

You’re waiting for everybody else to tell you that the evidence is correct instead of accepting the evidence yourself.

if the percentage is even .000000000000001%, then intelligent life must have developed elsewhere millions of times.

and that’s ignoring intelligent life possibly developing on stars rather than planets or in interstellar space rather than on discrete objects, it’s statistically ridiculous to think the slightly clever monkeys on this bubble are the only form of intelligent life.

there are simply too many avenues for intelligent life to arise to assume that because you personally haven’t seen it or a teacher didn’t explain to you that extraterrestrial life exists because we wrote about it in a textbook, that extraterrestrial life doesn’t exist.

there’s too much evidence and too much statistical probability of intelligent life arising to simply assume that it can’t exist.

That’s like assuming there are no fish in the sea because you can’t see beneath the surface of the water.

“foreign” planets?

we know one planet developed intelligent life.

and there are what? a trillion trillion trillion planets?

makes a good amount of sense to expect intelligent, or at least space-faring life developed somewhere else, even ignoring all the evidence.

https://archive.is/zswVa

I’m more in the “disclosure already happened and people don’t care” phase.

The dod accidentally released the Nimitz video, Said yeah that was a weird UFO video we weren’t going to release, The pilots all said it looked like a manufactured craft and it stayed stationary and also moved in ways that human-made crafts can’t, and there were a dozen more of them very clearly visible.

with all the testimony, telemetry and video evidence, I’m content to wait for the next step.

The hallucination hypothesis doesn’t stand up at all to the size of the universe and the absurdly minuscule unlikelihood that no other intelligent life ever evolved, coupled with all of the evidence we already have in such a short time.

I’ve car camped for a few months with a memory foam mattress in the back, it was a lot less confining than it seemed for me.

I like it personally, and understand where he’s coming from, but I also loved living with the added convenienceances of a full-size mobile home.

huh, never heard of these. thanks