Philosophy Now Forum

I hold the belief that disbelieving and ridiculing the existence of Aliens is irrational.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpfvhdmhQy4

The government is trying to spread the notion that aliens are credible, releasing documents that talk about UFO's and videos of Buzz Aldrin talking about aliens.

But since the government is not trustworthy, and the government implies aliens are real, that does not prove aliens are real. Leading us back to square one.

But what if aliens ARE real? I mean, can you see yourself from an outside perspective? Do you know how stupid you would look to the aliens, denying aliens? I mean, if the aliens were real? The aliens would be laughing at you, like as if you were putting your head in the sand.

Thus, irrationally denying aliens, due to your emotional and social beliefs, because society deems it "ridiculous", is quite ridiculous, and sensationalist. One should allow for the possibility of aliens, and not be too foolish.

You may believe what you want about aliens, it is not my goal to get you to believe, only to have an open mind. However, I should warn you that modern science, specifically NASA, are not to be trusted. So if NASA says aliens are real, they are not to be trusted. If NASA says aliens are fake they are not to be trusted. I will explain why, and refer you to the moon landing thread for further information.

All I ask is that you keep an open mind, and refrain from posting tedious babble about how "wacko" I am for having an open mind about aliens. That is, if you are even capable of such a thing.

Why not a belief in the UK Queen as a lizard while you're at it?

Pluto wrote:Why not a belief in the UK Queen as a lizard while you're at it?

Reptilian? Hmm. The source of that belief, how it came to be founded, is where it causes some cloudiness.

It seems the belief stemmed from the attitude that the British government, is some inhuman, horrible entity with nefarious motives and agendas. That may be true, but that just makes them human. The desire for "Reptilians" is to boost the human race on a pedastal, to seperate one's self from the enemy. But the enemy is in the mirror. There is no need for a "reptilian" explanation for common human behaviors.

Aliens on the other hand, well lets just say I've doing some reading and watching and I've weighed the pros and cons, it seems a more serious, less superstitious and more scientific pursuit than the reptilian club. Though Reptilians may exist, the reptilian pushers seem to go hog wild over every little thing, almost like an inside joke, calling Lady Gaga a demon overlord because she was crosseyed in a couple videos.

It depends on what you mean by aliens. It's important to understand the difference between science and pseudo-science. Maybe there are aliens watching us, but there is no evidence to support this, certainly not photos of flying rubbish bin lids, or videos of 'real alien autopsies' lol. 'UFOlogists' are so in love with the idea of alien visitors that they ignore perfectly logical explanations and only opt for the whackiest ones. Take those crop circles. The two guys who started it confessed and DEMONSTRATED how they did it. But of course that's not enough for the nutters. They don't want to hear it. They still make their pilgrimages to crop-circle sites, with their special 'alien life force detectors' and tin hats. When there is some real evidence of alien visitors then I'm sure everyone will know about it.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:It depends on what you mean by aliens. It's important to understand the difference between science and pseudo-science. Maybe there are aliens watching us, but there is no evidence to support this, certainly not photos of flying rubbish bin lids, or videos of 'real alien autopsies' lol. 'UFOlogists' are so in love with the idea of alien visitors that they ignore perfectly logical explanations and only opt for the whackiest ones. Take those crop circles. The two guys who started it confessed and DEMONSTRATED how they did it. But of course that's not enough for the nutters. They don't want to hear it. They still make their pilgrimages to crop-circle sites, with their special 'alien life force detectors' and tin hats. When there is some real evidence of alien visitors then I'm sure everyone will know about it.

In the video I posted, Buzz Aldrin (the man on the Moon) claims to have footage of a UFO. But since the NASA moonlanding is fake...well you do the math. NASA is not a reputable source, so their "ufo" footage has just as much chance of being as legit as joe blow's ufo footage.

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:It depends on what you mean by aliens. It's important to understand the difference between science and pseudo-science. Maybe there are aliens watching us, but there is no evidence to support this, certainly not photos of flying rubbish bin lids, or videos of 'real alien autopsies' lol. 'UFOlogists' are so in love with the idea of alien visitors that they ignore perfectly logical explanations and only opt for the whackiest ones. Take those crop circles. The two guys who started it confessed and DEMONSTRATED how they did it. But of course that's not enough for the nutters. They don't want to hear it. They still make their pilgrimages to crop-circle sites, with their special 'alien life force detectors' and tin hats. When there is some real evidence of alien visitors then I'm sure everyone will know about it.

In the video I posted, Buzz Aldrin (the man on the Moon) claims to have footage of a UFO. But since the NASA moonlanding is fake...well you do the math. NASA is not a reputable source, so their "ufo" footage has just as much chance of being as legit as joe blow's ufo footage.

Which moonlanding is fake? All of them? Why would you cite Buzz Aldrin then if you think he's a liar?

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:It depends on what you mean by aliens. It's important to understand the difference between science and pseudo-science. Maybe there are aliens watching us, but there is no evidence to support this, certainly not photos of flying rubbish bin lids, or videos of 'real alien autopsies' lol. 'UFOlogists' are so in love with the idea of alien visitors that they ignore perfectly logical explanations and only opt for the whackiest ones. Take those crop circles. The two guys who started it confessed and DEMONSTRATED how they did it. But of course that's not enough for the nutters. They don't want to hear it. They still make their pilgrimages to crop-circle sites, with their special 'alien life force detectors' and tin hats. When there is some real evidence of alien visitors then I'm sure everyone will know about it.

In the video I posted, Buzz Aldrin (the man on the Moon) claims to have footage of a UFO. But since the NASA moonlanding is fake...well you do the math. NASA is not a reputable source, so their "ufo" footage has just as much chance of being as legit as joe blow's ufo footage.

Which moonlanding is fake? All of them? Why would you cite Buzz Aldrin then if you think he's a liar?

Because people like to believe things if they have a shiny label on them, whether it be "NASA", "Government", or "Teacher." I suppose the video was an excersise of "Nasa doesn't find alien's taboo, why should you?"

I'd be willing to bet all of them were fake. Apparently they fire lasers at a mirror on the moon, so maybe one of the landings were real, but I doubt it. Tell me which one of the landings seems the most real.

How they calibrate these lasers from more than 250,000 miles away, accounting for parallax distortion, atmospheric distortion, orbital rotations and moon rotations to hit a small 2 meter wide mirror on the moon is truly the cutting edge of science indeed. I'd say putting 2 photon torpedos in the death star has a higher margin of error.

The likelihood of there being other intelligent species in the universe is basically nill. Most people don't understand how much empty space there is in the solar system, let alone the galaxy, and even if other species existed, the odds of that occurring close by (in both space and time) are vanishingly small. Races as intelligent as ours have probably occurred at most 4 or 5 times in the entire history of the universe, but unfortunately there is no way for them to know about us or vice versa.

Melchior wrote:The likelihood of there being other intelligent species in the universe is basically nill. Most people don't understand how much empty space there is in the solar system, let alone the galaxy, and even if other species existed, the odds of that occurring close by (in both space and time) are vanishingly small. Races as intelligent as ours have probably occurred at most 4 or 5 times in the entire history of the universe, but unfortunately there is no way for them to know about us or vice versa.

Them coming into existence close by? Probably not. Them never advancing past the stone age before blowing themselves up? Most probably blew themselves up, but some managed to learn from their mistakes. With that out of the way, Them reaching enlightenment and uniting their efforts to advance science and understanding, and after 4.5 billion years of developing their science and wisdom haven't discovered Earth? Unlikely.

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:

Melchior wrote:The likelihood of there being other intelligent species in the universe is basically nill. Most people don't understand how much empty space there is in the solar system, let alone the galaxy, and even if other species existed, the odds of that occurring close by (in both space and time) are vanishingly small. Races as intelligent as ours have probably occurred at most 4 or 5 times in the entire history of the universe, but unfortunately there is no way for them to know about us or vice versa.

Them coming into existence close by? Probably not. Them never advancing past the stone age before blowing themselves up? Most probably blew themselves up, but some managed to learn from their mistakes. With that out of the way, Them reaching enlightenment and uniting their efforts to advance science and understanding, and after 4.5 billion years of developing their science and wisdom haven't discovered Earth? Unlikely.

For them to possess intelligence as we understand it, they must be very much like us, and that is basically impossible. There are too many 'accidents' in our evolution for exactly the same sequence to have happened elsewhere, and that is basically what would be required. 'Intelligence' is closely associated with successfully reproducing given the specific demands of the environment that a species lives in. On Earth, there are no species with three sexes, which is logically possible, but biology does not find any advantage to such an arrangement.

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote: In the video I posted, Buzz Aldrin (the man on the Moon) claims to have footage of a UFO. But since the NASA moonlanding is fake...well you do the math. NASA is not a reputable source, so their "ufo" footage has just as much chance of being as legit as joe blow's ufo footage.

It's funny how short a time it takes for people to show their true colours. At first I wouldn't have had you pegged as a conspiracy theorist nut-job. You believe Buzz Aldrin's 'alien' photos, but you don't believe he went to the moon? Where were these 'alien' photos taken then? You should watch 'mythbusters' on the fake moon landings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0

It's very entertaining as well as informative.

Btw, your link lost any smidgen of credibility as soon as the narrator said 'It could only be ONE thing, a UFO'. Oh really? His insinuation is obvious. UFO means only 'unidentified flying object'. UFO means something completely different to conspiracy-theorists. Yes, he saw a UFO, but only because he didn't know what it was!

"I observed a light out the window that appeared to be moving alongside us. There were many explanations of what that could be, other than another spacecraft from another country or another world - it was either the rocket we had separated from, or the 4 panels that moved away when we extracted the lander from the rocket and we were nose to nose with the two spacecraft. So in the close vicinity, moving away, were 4 panels. And I feel absolutely convinced that we were looking at the Sun reflected off of one of these panels. Which one? I don't know. So technically, the definition could be 'unidentified'."

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote: In the video I posted, Buzz Aldrin (the man on the Moon) claims to have footage of a UFO. But since the NASA moonlanding is fake...well you do the math. NASA is not a reputable source, so their "ufo" footage has just as much chance of being as legit as joe blow's ufo footage.

It's funny how short a time it takes for people to show their true colours. At first I wouldn't have had you pegged as a conspiracy theorist nut-job. You believe Buzz Aldrin's 'alien' photos, but you don't believe he went to the moon? Where were these 'alien' photos taken then? You should watch 'mythbusters' on the fake moon landings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0

It's very entertaining as well as informative.

Btw, your link lost any smidgen of credibility as soon as the narrator said 'It could only be ONE thing, a UFO'. Oh really? His insinuation is obvious. UFO means only 'unidentified flying object'. UFO means something completely different to conspiracy-theorists.

You learned nothing from my post. My post was intended to promote rational, objective thought, without reactionary responses. Leave it to a human, it's just not possible for them to.

Did I say I believed Buzz Aldrin's video? Never said I did. Must of missed the part where I said why I posted it. You call them photos, but the more accurate term is video, the video I linked is most likely interlaced so not exactly a series of photos.

What the narrator said should not lose him credibility, it's an inside joke and what he said was true. He could not identify the flying object, by definition it can only be one thing, an unidentified flying object. What would you prefer him to say? That he knows what precise alien homeworld the ship came from, that it is a class X starship, and ran by reptilians?

Also that video you posted about mythbusters is bullshit. They didn't disprove the reasoning behind why the moonlanding is faked, they focused on a petty slideshow. They disproved one of the weakest conspiracy theoriest argument's, but they didn't disprove the main deal, next time show me something better.

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote: In the video I posted, Buzz Aldrin (the man on the Moon) claims to have footage of a UFO. But since the NASA moonlanding is fake...well you do the math. NASA is not a reputable source, so their "ufo" footage has just as much chance of being as legit as joe blow's ufo footage.

It's funny how short a time it takes for people to show their true colours. At first I wouldn't have had you pegged as a conspiracy theorist nut-job. You believe Buzz Aldrin's 'alien' photos, but you don't believe he went to the moon? Where were these 'alien' photos taken then? You should watch 'mythbusters' on the fake moon landings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0

It's very entertaining as well as informative.

Btw, your link lost any smidgen of credibility as soon as the narrator said 'It could only be ONE thing, a UFO'. Oh really? His insinuation is obvious. UFO means only 'unidentified flying object'. UFO means something completely different to conspiracy-theorists.

You learned nothing from my post. My post was intended to promote rational, objective thought, without reactionary responses. Leave it to a human, it's just not possible for them to.

Did I say I believed Buzz Aldrin's video? Never said I did. Must of missed the part where I said why I posted it. You call them photos, but the more accurate term is video, the video I linked is most likely interlaced so not exactly a series of photos.

What the narrator said should not lose him credibility, it's an inside joke and what he said was true. He could not identify the flying object, by definition it can only be one thing, an unidentified flying object. What would you prefer him to say? That he knows what precise alien homeworld the ship came from, that it is a class X starship, and ran by reptilians?

Also that video you posted about mythbusters is bullshit. They didn't disprove the reasoning behind why the moonlanding is faked, they focused on a petty slideshow. They disproved one of the weakest conspiracy theoriest argument's, but they didn't disprove the main deal, next time show me something better.

Just the response I would expect from someone who wants to believe the unbelievable. The dramatic voiceover in your link was not intended to be ironic. It was intended to satisfy gullible idiots and 'mysteryphiles'.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Just the response I would expect from someone who wants to believe the unbelievable. The dramatic voiceover in your link was not intended to be ironic. It was intended to satisfy gullible idiots and 'mysteryphiles'.

Did you even read what I wrote? I never said I believed the video. Jesus Christ, learn to read. You learn nothing, just human reflex speak without careful thought. Completely ignored the point of this post, just a babbling human.

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Just the response I would expect from someone who wants to believe the unbelievable. The dramatic voiceover in your link was not intended to be ironic. It was intended to satisfy gullible idiots and 'mysteryphiles'.

Did you even read what I wrote? I never said I believed the video. Jesus Christ, learn to read. You learn nothing, just human reflex speak without careful thought. Completely ignored the point of this post, just a babbling human.

Then perhaps you should say what your point is, instead of relying on the psychic abilities of others.