Image of the day

From the
ATWB Customer Gallery

M101 (Pinwheel Galaxy)

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

UFO claims and credibility

Started by Alex McConahay, 07/30/2008 06:46AM
Posted 07/30/2008 06:46AM Opening Post
It is interesting to see the argument going on about Edgar Mitchell, and it brings up an interesting thing about "proving UFO's."

I want to hear your opinion on a few things.

It seems that "credibility" is defined among other things as related to whether the claim is mainstream. In other words, people may be "credible" until they make a "crackpot" claim. Then they are loony and not credible. Hardly seems a good way to establish credibility.

"First hand experience" does not seem credible even though there have been hundreds of people who claim to have been "abducted." These witnesses/abductees are generally in the category of "not credible." But for most people they only got into the category of not credible when they made their claim.

It seems a circular thing--Claims are considered credible by the credibility of their witnesses. But credibility of the witnesses is defined by the claims.

UFO claimants are going to lose this battle no matter which way they go. Claim the sighting, and lose your credibility.

So--just what information is needed to establish "proof" that we have been visited by others?

Alex
Posted 07/30/2008 08:26AM #1
Alex McConahay said:

It is interesting to see the argument going on about Edgar Mitchell, and it brings up an interesting thing about "proving UFO's."

I want to hear your opinion on a few things.

It seems that "credibility" is defined among other things as related to whether the claim is mainstream. In other words, people may be "credible" until they make a "crackpot" claim. Then they are loony and not credible. Hardly seems a good way to establish credibility.

"First hand experience" does not seem credible even though there have been hundreds of people who claim to have been "abducted." These witnesses/abductees are generally in the category of "not credible." But for most people they only got into the category of not credible when they made their claim.

It seems a circular thing--Claims are considered credible by the credibility of their witnesses. But credibility of the witnesses is defined by the claims.

UFO claimants are going to lose this battle no matter which way they go. Claim the sighting, and lose your credibility.

So--just what information is needed to establish "proof" that we have been visited by others?

Alex
The Air Force didn't do itself any favors either (during the mid 1960s) with thier silly explainations ( Orions' belt in july, swamp gas, etc...) and they lost alot of credibility in the publics' eye...
CB

There's something on the Moon! 8O
Posted 07/31/2008 06:05PM #2
Hmmm,,, I once took an art class with one of the Alagash Four. Really.

In any case, I think the problem is that most of the folks who claim to have seen or been abducted by aliens just seem so stifled and stilted. They usually come off as wierdos who no one would pay credence to for anything, let alone anything regarding this subject.